The name if this thread is: MFMP: 18 steps to LENR excess heat (BasE-Cat recipe) - But it is heavily contaminated with irrelevant posts. To get it back on track I copy a current summary from Bob Greenyer from a DISCUS post a way down at this link:
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016…on-part-1-new-mfmp-video/
"Our GS experiment have shown evidence of COP consistently above 1 - we are very cautious in our reporting - note we have only ever got really excited when seeing emissions - not COP. We would get excited similarly if we saw statistically significant isotopic shifts.
What is interesting, our Celani cells never reached the promise of Celani's own NI-Week / ICCF-17 data - it took two years, but we found out why, and the adjustment was to Celani's data to come in line with ours. Ours was a replication of the actual results he had achieved before then and during those events when adjusting for control system errors.
It is interesting that Parkhomov's most recently reported data with mass flow calorimetry is in line with our consistently above COP 1 but not earth shattering 1.1 - 1.2 results. His previous data was far more exciting, but with the more accurate method used, his data matches our calibrated active and control / Optris PI160 data. Again we find that bold claims by a third party iterate to our findings.
Moreover, the levels of excess are similar between Celani wire and our "Rossi formulae" experiments. Have we been consistently lucky? have other researchers been consistently unlucky.
It is simply not accurate to suggest that our findings have not been replicated - the most striking example was in late 2013, when we had repeatedly self-replicated the detection of gamma from our leaking Celani wire cells when re-charging with fresh H2 - Jean-Paul Biberian replicated the observation in his own lab, following the same temperatures and profiles / procedure within 24 hours.
We replicated our GS5.2 experiment as best we could and there was one inconclusive burst - however, for the first time in GS 5.3 we had neutron bubble detectors and we observed thermal neutron production within a low temperature range. This means two out of two experiments following a published protocol produced evidence of nuclear reactions. Brian Albiston following the same protocol saw increases in gamma counts also. me356 reported (without sharing data) that he two had observed Neutrons from his bubble detectors from Rossi fuel reactions (amongst others), and he had no lead in play (by that I mean no lead brick cave surrounding a NaI scintillator.
No one has seen me356s recent data, but his claims came after an examination of the Canon patent that I alerted him to on Nov. 11th 2015.
...
We would all love the solution, handed to us on a plate - in an easily digestible form that we can learn with trivial effort. I believe that with such a complex thing as the New Fire, a stepwise progression of learning and application of the scientific method is all we can do when there isn't someone offering us the future simply because we demand it."
With thanks to Bob and MFMP.