Last week at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Electrical Engineering Prof. Peter Hagelstein taught an Independent Activities Period course titled “Cold Fusion 101: Introduction to Excess Power in Fleischmann-Pons Experiments.”  For many, the news that an MIT professor holding a cold fusion class at MIT is astonishing because decades ago former MIT people went to extreme lengths to discredit cold fusion and denigrate the careers of interested researchers. Times have changed.

The capstone of the class was when Dr. Mitchell Swartz, of JET Energy presented experimental results showing excess power in Palladium/Deuterium and Nickel/Hydrogen systems, with a particular focus on experiments he himself has conducted.

The news reported is Dr. Swartz and Prof. Hagelstein demonstrated cold fusion openly for the attending scientists and engineers.  Using the Jet Energy NANOR device they demonstrated a significant energy gain, greater than 10, much larger than the previous open demonstration back in 2003 with a 2.3 yield.  The demonstration was for the class, meaning no attempt was made to assuage skeptics.  Add the Jet Energy NANOR to the things to watch.

For the highly literate, Dr. Swartz is going to firm ground on the technical description of cold fusion or Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR), as least as far as his perception is concerned.  Swartz says, “The name should be LANR, for “lattice assisted nuclear reactions”.  That is a valid point concerning his technology.

Drs. Fleischmann and Pons actually described their work as “electrochemical experiments” that had produced more energy (“excess energy”) than could be accounted for by input energy and available chemical reactions.  Where “Cold Fusion” came from is due some research – if anyone cares.  Over the media explosion that bombed Fleischmann and Pons and the failures of others to replicate their work the Cold Fusion moniker has acquired an undeserved dubious reputation.

Then came LENR for low energy nuclear reactions.  The phrase and term work fine, but in reality now, with the nickel based work and the increasing improvement of the palladium work, the idea these are low energy is getting to be a vast understatement.

However the moniker battle shapes up, it hardly matters.  The research field’s events are definitely running temperatures lots cooler than any of the big money fusion projects and the energy outputs just keep on climbing.  Depending on the skill set of the experiment replicators, lattice based reactions are getting better and those with well-engineered experiments are showing good returns on the energy input.

It seems that after 5 (about 2 hour classes each day) days of Prof. Hagelstein sharing his breakthrough explanatory theory, the demonstration had the desired effect.  Perhaps the class will encourage the participants to continue their research and more improvement can come over time.

This week also has Defkalion back in the news.  The firm has a short video on YouTube of some testing taking place on one of their “bare” reactors.  This comes soon after the firm offered qualified testing opportunities to worthy scientists and industrial concerns.

The company commented on the firm’s website forum about the video saying, “As you can notice, this is a setup with one Hyperion “bare” reactor testing. The setup of the third party independent tests is with two identical reactors (one active, one not-active) working/tested in parallel, as described in our latest Press Release.”

At another posting the firm (translated) says, “. . . this video . . . is not suitable “tool” for the interpretation of phenomena or the calculation of the performance of reactors or for any other conclusion, and the duration of but also because of deliberately “scattered” content. Consider it as an honest view of some of the places where they work every day our people.”

Before you hit the comment link or email your humble writer, please consider this:

Forty years ago only a visionary could imagine fields free of weeds, only the crop growing.  Twenty years ago the technology was common across the developed world.

Roundup combined with genetically modified crops revolutionized food production.

By about ten years ago the extremists had decided that the genetically modified crops would poison or kill them and law was established where extremists held sway to restrict and eliminate the new crops use.

Over a generation has passed and not a single bit or any evidence, study or proof exists that roundup resistant crops hurt anyone.  But the human resistance has killed tens millions of people by starvation and millions more will die from the denial of technical potential, facts based in experience and human nature’s tendency to be fearful.

Let the visionaries run their courses as best they can and hope that one at least gets to the market with something great for all of us.  Then be on guard for the extremists who will try to take it away from you.


Comments

13 Comments so far

  1. Craig Binns on February 2, 2012 1:42 AM

    You point out that “Forty years ago only a visionary could imagine fields free of weeds, only the crop growing.  Twenty years ago the technology was common across the developed world. Roundup combined with genetically modified crops revolutionized food production.” In other words, people could see with their own eyes whether this technology worked or not.

    Now let Defkalion or Rossi allow inspection of what is going on with regard to CF devices. But they haven’t so far, in any independent context. From Defklion merely more bleating that their video is “not a suitable tool for the interpretation of phenomena”.

    Well, don’t bother showing it, then. Smoke and mirrors. Let us see the outcome of the long-promised testing by “worthy scientists”.

    In short, and for the nth time: put up or shut up.

  2. Alessandro on February 2, 2012 3:04 AM

    Maybe I’m foolish but I’m waiting for the Biggest April Fish of the History:

    E-Cat: What E(ats) the Cat? Fish!!!
    Hyperion: “Fish in the unruffled lakes” Song by Benjamin Britten (1913-1976) Labeled by Hyperion (is an independent British classical label)
    Defkalion: Defkalion (DEUKALION) and PYRRHA were the first king and queen of Northern Greece, the only survivors of the big Flood. Only but with the FISH!!!!

    I hope I am wrong but we will see!!!

  3. Craig Binns on February 2, 2012 5:17 AM

    A less enthusiastic account of the demonstration at MIT is published in Cold Fusion USA

    http://cold-fusion.us/ “Once again, the slow drip-feed of news surrounding cold fusion and similar technologies leaves us clutching at straws, hoping to find something substantial to settle the argument. As usual, this particular item is lacking in any real substance and will be more cannon fodder to the skeptics. Nonetheless, the very association of MIT with Cold Fusion is sure to rattle a few cages.”

    Quite right. A report with no real substance, like all the others we have been offered over the years. As to the association with MIT: we’ll see how “close” that really is in due course. A similar demonstration was made there in 2003, as noted in the article. What came of it? A nine year wait and then more substance free reports. That’s all folks!

  4. Dario de Judicibus on February 2, 2012 7:04 AM

    No mention about the experiment and prototype (E-Cat) of Rossi and Focardi?

  5. Matt Musson on February 2, 2012 7:49 AM

    “Who are you going to believe? Me or you own lying eyes?”

    Goucho Marx
    Duck Soup 1932

    I am hopeful this stuff works. I’ll wait until I see some proof. I would not bet a $100 that LANR works. But, I would not be against it – just because I cannot understand it.

  6. Benjamin Cole on February 2, 2012 12:54 PM

    If LENR “works,” then the proponents have the queerest habits imaginable.

    Why not open up to the world? The royalties would be huge, the fame alone to ensure lifelong riches and cruises with cute girlfriends.

    I smell fraud.

  7. A Lien Intel on February 2, 2012 7:31 PM

    Heh heh, “We demonstrated the phenomena and the primitives cowered, peeing their loin cloths, and fleeing to the back of their caves.”

    Prof Hegelstein & Doc Swartz on another planet

  8. BFast on February 3, 2012 7:02 PM

    New Energy, thanks for keeping abreast of LENR (or whatever you want to call it.) Unfortunately you commenters aren’t the most receptive bunch. No worries, the dissenters will be quieted in reasonably short order. Some of these folks from MIT are bound to get this technology heard above the noise of the mindless yelling “scam”.

  9. Craig Binns on February 4, 2012 3:35 AM

    Hi Bfast

    You tell us – by no means for the first time: “the dissenters will be quieted in reasonably short order. Some of these folks from MIT are bound to get this technology heard above the noise of the mindless yelling ‘scam’.”

    But by now we’ve been waiting for “unreasonably long order” and we’re still not quieted. When, oh when, we wonder. (By the way, why didn’t the MIT folks get heard after the 2003 demonstration?)

    Mindless that we are, here’s something we forgot to ask. What was the power level measured at MIT, following the tenfold enhancement by Hagelstein’s “LANR” process? Steven “The Snake” Krivit informs us at http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/02/03/swartz-makes-misleading-claim-of-lenr-excess-heat/#comments .

    “However, Swartz did not reveal the power level of this demonstration. Another LENR researcher did. The researcher, who learned about the demonstration from Swartz, told New Energy Times that the peak power output Swartz measured in that experiment was 18 milliWatts.”

    This modest power output is no problem. Rossi’s contraption could scale that up to a megawatt, or any other level, depending only on the strength of the local power supply.

  10. BFast on February 6, 2012 10:54 PM

    Oh, and Dr. Swartz’s response: http://world.std.com/~mica/krivit02052012.html
    Ouch!

  11. Craig Binns on February 8, 2012 12:16 AM

    Ouch indeed! The usual torrent of invective: “Even a non-technical writer could have shown  this alleged “journalist” that his innuendo was NOT TRUE and that every single bit of information  that disingenuous Krivit had  falsely claimed was not “provide(d)” was actually  in the graph — right in front of his nose, on the very same page, right before Mr. Krivit’s lying eyes.   Mr. Krivit knew his statements were untrue, and his back peddling
    is unsubstantial.”

    I’m surprised he doesn’t accuse “the snake” of being in the pay of Big Energy!

    Here’s the lying-eyed snake’s rejoinder. http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/02/06/swartz-responds-to-our-reports-about-his-claims/ Alas, no “ouch”, no snakes, no lying eyes, no lurid invective, insult or abuse. Boring, this science stuff …

  12. Now a Little Controversy Involving Cold Fusion | New Energy and Fuel on February 9, 2012 1:05 AM

    [...] addthis_share = [];}It’s enough to make one smile with the silliness of the thing.  As noted here last week Electrical Engineering Prof. Peter Hagelstein at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) [...]

  13. Kassie on November 12, 2013 4:59 AM

    I am in fact pleased to glance at this blog posts which includes plenty of useful
    facts, thanks for providing such data.

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind

css.php