LENRs Versus “Cold Fusion” and the Search for Scientific ‘Truth’
A Philosophical Comment for 2012
by Lewis G. Larsen, Lattice Energy LLC
Dec 212011
sbkrivit
Dec 202011
[Note for new readers: We performed extensive reporting and videotaped documentation on the Rossi Energy Catalyzer topic in 2011. Please see http://rossiportal.com/
This blog is part of the New Energy Times Web site and News Service. Readers can find out much more about LENR from our home page.]
Low-energy nuclear reactions are certainly real, I have investigated and written about this research for the last twelve years. Recently I gave an interview for the U.S. intelligence community on LENR.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/Intel/Krivit-LENR-Interview-IARP…
The Rossi and Defkalion claims, however, are dubious.
One of Rossi’s biggest supporters, Edmund Storms, thinks that Rossi faked it – but only once.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3737appendixstorms.shtml
Beyond the trivial puffs of steam coming out of the device, many New Energy Times readers think Rossi’s trick in his first design was obvious: he designed it to allow for unvaporized water to flow out the top of the E-Cat, down through the opaque hose and into the hidden wall drain. Therefore, our readers didn’t even pay attention to Rossi’s second design.
The videotape I shot of Rossi’s device is very hard to argue with.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-8QdVwY98E
The scientific analysis in our subsequent 200-page report is very difficult to argue with as well.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/NET370.shtml
Enthusiasm for LENR is entirely appropriate and we are about to enter a wild period in the LENR field. Wisdom and judiciousness by fans and investors will never be more crucial.
Steven B. Krivit
Senior Editor, New Energy Times
Editor-In-Chief, Wiley Nuclear Energy Encyclopedia
Share this:
Dec 192011
A Letter from Greg in Tennessee
Dear Mr. Krivit,
Please forgive me if I use some incorrect scientific terminology or if I link terms to the wrong concepts. I have no background in physics or chemistry. I am reading from your site and other sites to get a basic understanding of the field as quickly as possible, so that I may have a better understanding in the two different philosophies regarding LENR research.
I have become fascinated with you and the information on your Web site, particularly with regard to your claims about the traditional, cold fusion researchers and their actions to stifle any interest regarding weak interactions and transmutations.
From what I’ve seen from the cold fusion researchers’ side of the argument, they ignore weak interactions and transmutations as much as possible. They seem to ignore your belief that cold fusion has been disproved. They seem to include weak interactions as one of the new, unproven theories that have only a few followers. They only defend their research when directly attacked by your writings, but they don’t counterattack to specifically show how the Widom-Larsen theory is wrong.
From your side, it seems completely different. From everything I’ve seen and read so far, it seems like your Web site and your writings depict a huge fracture in theory (weak interactions versus cold fusion). You depict deliberate and specific attempts to stifle information about weak interactions: behind closed-door meetings to discredit Widom and Larsen; delaying visas for Russian scientists; deliberately altering their own results; etc.
Letter Continues in News Section
Share this:
Dec 162011
On Dec. 4, we published several sets of Slides From Sept. 22 NASA LENR Innovation Forum Workshop.
Today, New Energy Times reader W.H found one more set on the NASA Glenn Web site from Gustave C. Fralick and colleagues.
On Dec. 12, we uploaded a fresh copy of the Nelson slides. He provided us with a copy that included source attributions and that also corrected the spelling of Piantelli’s name.
Here is our full index of the NASA slides:
Zawodny Slides
Nelson Slides
Bushnell Slides
Fralick Slides
The NASA Glenn Web site provides a brief summary of its LENR research:
“Tests conducted at NASA Glenn Research Center in 1989 and elsewhere consistently show evidence of anomalous heat during gaseous loading and unloading of deuterium into and out of bulk palladium. At one time called “cold fusion,” now called “low-energy nuclear reactions” (LENR), such effects are now published in peer-reviewed journals and are gaining attention and mainstream respectability. The instrumentation expertise of NASA GRC is applied to improve the diagnostics for investigating the anomalous heat in LENR.”
Share this:
Dec 162011
By Steven B. Krivit
Dec. 16, 2011
Shell’s Interest Indicates Major Shift for LENR
Royal Dutch Shell, plc, one of the largest energy companies in the world, is interested in exploring low-energy nuclear reaction research as a possible game-changer in the energy business.
Two Shell scientists, Anitha Sarkar and Gilles Buchs, with the backing of the Shell GameChanger program, are looking for opportunities to work actively with LENR experts, according to a brief introduction the researchers prepared.
Edward Beardsworth, a venture capitalist at Jane Capital Partners in San Francisco, introduced the researchers to the field in a message to the CMNS e-mail list today.
“At my request, they prepared the attached biographical sketches and description of what they bring to the group. They are both located at the company’s research and development offices in the Netherlands,” Beardsworth wrote. “I believe their fresh and enthusiastic approach will lead to good contributions to the field.”
According to its Web site, Shell GameChanger “helps move ideas to reality by sponsoring entrepreneurs to develop their ideas into a product that can be introduced to the marketplace.”
“Specifically,” the site says, “we look for innovative ideas that address a demand or significant problem in the energy industry and have the potential to change the game.”
The Shell researchers, according to the document provided by Beardsworth, offer the following to the field:
– Broad expertise in wide variety of energy conversion systems
– Access to significant group of Shell surface science and catalysis experts
– Access to key related disciplines: thermodynamics, physics, electrochemistry, computational chemistry, heat exchange, etc.
– Shell GameChanger program, (www.shell.com/gamechanger) rapidly funds initial proof of concept testing for revolutionary innovation
– Significant expertise and track record of development and scaling-up and from lab-scale to commercial unit of a wide range of complex energy technologies.
This is not the first time Shell has looked into LENR research. In 1995, Shell sponsored LENR research at the French laboratory Laboratoire des Sciences Nucléaires at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers (CNAM). This research showed high-quality LENR work, and the research paper provided the expected level of professionalism in a scientific communication.
The researchers found a small ratio of excess heat compared to the input electrical power in both light- and heavy-hydrogen experiments. However, the experiments demonstrated a sustained period of steady excess-heat production. The hydrogen experiment produced 16 megajoules during a 39-day run, with a mean excess-heat production of 4.7 Watts from a 150 Watt electrical input.
Consistent with the extensive body of LENR research, the CNAM researchers found no significant levels of dangerous radiation from neutrons, X-rays or gamma rays. The researchers failed to find nuclear signatures consistent with the amount of excess energy produced. They did not, however, check for isotopic shifts or transmutations, and they did not use solid-state nuclear track detectors to look for alphas or bursts of spallation neutrons.
