Nature Prepares
A month earlier, Reich had started on her quest to find fraud. She had pressured Tsoukalas to publish his allegedly negative results.

On March 2, 2006, Tsoukalas got a confirmation of his submission to Nuclear Technology, and he let Reich know immediately. He also prepared to leave the country for two weeks.

“That is great, congratulations,” Reich wrote. “Also good to have it before my story posts — either today or tomorrow. At the moment, I am trying to wait and coordinate so that I can link thru to Naranjo and Putterman’s note, which is still not online but should be soon. Have a lovely holiday in Greece, and please update me how you are when you get back.”

Five days later, on March 7, Reich sent copies of the stories to Tsoukalas. While traveling, Tsoukalas sent them to his colleague and personal friend Tatjana Jevremovic.

“Lefteri,” Jevremovic wrote, “I am trying to have her change some of the parts that are not accurate and are not good for anyone. Could you contact her as well? Please let me know. Should I call her?”

The Purdue news service got wind of the forthcoming articles on March 7 and notified Dean Katehi and other administrators. Taleyarkhan told New Energy Times that Katehi’s assistant, Edgar Martinez, called him.

“Edgar called and talked with me to alert me and indicated that Mason would like to convene a meeting the next day in the morning,” Taleyarkhan wrote. “I was shaken and downright surprised at the turn of events so rapidly after the March 1, 2006, meeting, which I believed was a successful program review.” Continue reading »

More Accusations
Tsoukalas contacted Adams on Sept. 1, 2008, according to additional FOIA-obtained e-mails, and requested that she visit Purdue. He told her that the faculty of the school thought the sanctions against Taleyarkhan were too light and that professors in the school wanted to talk to her.

“I know that retaliations are not within the IG’s area,” Tsoukalas wrote, “and hence do not know if this is appropriate, or even possible, but maybe something to discuss, no?”

Adams replied the next day.

“Let me have a day to catch up here, and let’s talk,” Adams wrote. “There may be some strategies available that we haven’t explored.” Continue reading »

Dec. 17, 2013 – By Steven B. Krivit –

New Energy Times has just found a massive 1962 Department of Defense bibliography on exploding wires. It is the third such edition by these authors.

The document is “A Bibliography of the Electrically Exploded Conductor Phenomenon,” by William G. Chace and Eleanor M. Watson, published by the Armed Services Technical Information Agency.

Exploding wire phenomena in low-energy nuclear reactions (LENRs) have been reported for nearly a century:  Wendt, Gerald L. and Irion, Clarence E, “The Decomposition of Tungsten to Helium,” Journal of the American Chemical Society, 44(9), pg. 1887-1894 (September 1922)

(Excerpt from Preface of the Third Edition of the Chace and Watson bibliography)
The accelerating interest in exploding wires, foils, and films and the resultant appearance of many publications, has made a third edition of the E. W. P. [exploding wire phenomena] bibliography highly desirable. The field has broadened to include exploding foils and films as well as wires, hence the new title.

(Excerpt from Preface of the First Edition of the Chace and Watson bibliography)
In connection with a fundamental study of the Exploding Wire Phenomenon (E. W. P. ) being conducted by this laboratory, a search of the literature was undertaken. It was originally intended purely as background for our work. However, conversations with others working on E. W. P. and related problems indicated so much interest, that arrangements were made for this informal publication of the bibliography before the research paper to which it would normally be an appendix.