Tag Archives: LENR

LENR Research Documentation Project

A massive compilation of the experiments, notebooks, papers, presentations, and library of Edmund Storms was conducted by Dr. Thomas Grimshaw of the Energy Institute at University of Texas Austin. The intent was to preserve the earliest data sets of ground-breaking research in cold fusion/LENR for future review.

Since 1989, the field of condensed matter nuclear science has generated a host of experimental results without the benefit of mainstream support. Banned from publishing in science journals, many CMNS data sets have not been archived. Now, after three-decades of work, original LENR scientists are getting older, and there is an effort to preserve and archive their work for future review.

Thomas Grimshaw, Director of the LENR Research Documentation Project says, “Ed and I had been working on an initiative to open a new LENR laboratory in Santa Fe. As I was preparing a proposal for the lab and building a case for its support, I observed the depth and breath of Ed’s research materials. At that time funding was not available for the lab, so I approached Ed about doing a project to document his extensive LENR research record.”

“We both came to consider the initiative a “pilot project” for future efforts for other researchers. That’s the way we presented it at ICCF-21 last June. ”

A poster about the LENR Research Documentation Project was presented at ICCF-21 and a paper describing the process will be published in the Proceedings. See the article 29 Years of Cold Fusion Research

“It was a large effort, given the size of Ed’s research record,” says Grimshaw, “so we approached the task in a stepwise manner. First we collected the information, then we organized it using a LENR career timeline, and finally we documented each piece with memos and reports. “

The results became both historical record, and active research material.

” Well it was a revelation to me!” says Edmund Storms, a co-archivist in the project. “Tom made me realize that there may be some nuggets of gold in these mill tailings I’ve left behind.”

For many independent researchers in the CMNS field, the three-decades of work was conducted with little, if any, support. Research assistants and secretaries are still a rarity. Thus career-long experiments are often in scattered forms, some written files, data stored in old program formats – the digital revolution has changed data storage technologies several times over since 1989.

All of that disconnected media becomes intelligible when coalesced, and pictures can become patterns when seen with new eyes.

“It’s always true that when you’re doing research, you’re doing it in the the context of what you know at the time,” says Edmund Storms, “but over a period of time, your understanding changes, and it improves. “

“If you don’t go back and look at what you’ve gotten from nature in the past, and re-evaluate it, that new knowledge is not really being put to good use.”

“So the idea was, based upon what we understand today, go back through, and see if something that I saw in the past and ignored because I didn’t understand it, might be understandable today.”

Cold Fusion Research: Experiments, Explanations, and Related Scientific Contributions Draft Summary by Dr. Thomas Grimshaw Energy Institute The University of Texas at Austin and Dr. Edmund Storms Kiva Labs are listed in .pdfs here (minus primary data sets):

Projects such as these bring old data to the light of new perspective, but they also preserve a historical timeline in a unique field of science that might have easily disappeared before ever getting started, and Edmund Storms’ LENR work is just the first record to be made.

Thomas Grimshaw says, “I realized while working with Ed that he was perhaps the most knowledgeable and creative researcher in the field. It was also easy to see that if Ed left the field, the loss of this large research record would be a major blow not only to the field, but also potentially for humankind, given the importance of realizing the benefits of LENR as a clean, abundant, and cheap energy source.”

“Similar documentation projects are now underway with four other LENR investigators. And a generous grant has been received to support the effort with other researchers in the future.”

Dr. Thomas Grimshaw of LENR Research Documentation Project at ICCF-21. Photo: Ruby Carat

Now, as breakthrough nears, the story of cold fusion will be re-written with the words and record of the scientists who lived it, and projects like this one will provide the authoritative and irrefutable proof of their success.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditby feather

HYDROTON A Model of Cold Fusion

Ruby Carat and the Cold Fusion Now! collective have released a new video documentary, this time tackling cold fusion theory with Edmund Storms HYDROTON A Model of Cold Fusion.

The 28-minute science special continues where the book The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction left off. It features Dr. Edmund Storms describing his theory of the cold fusion/LENR reaction that focuses on the unusual form of hydrogen that can form in the nano-spaces of materials.

Nano-cracks in materials will have a high negative-charge along the walls of the space, allowing positively-charged hydrogen nuclei to be closer than they normally could.

Subject to resonance, the hypothesis proposes a linear array of hydrogen nuclei and electrons in the nano-crack that can engage in a “slow fusion” process, whereby the smaller bits of mass turn to energy by releasing coherent photons.

If true, the mechanism would be an extension of conventional nuclear models which only describes fusion in a hot plasma, where nuclei collide violently to fuse.

The action is animated by artist Jasen Chambers who modeled all the isotopes of hydrogen in the unique LENR process.

Ruby Carat has had multiple interviews with Dr. Storms since 2011, most recently in the offices of Cold Fusion Now! in Eureka, California, US. That video composite describes the Nano-gap Hydroton Model and its development.

Hypotheses of the Nano-gap Hydroton model are currently being tested for confirmation.

See Edmund Storms HYDROTON A Model of Cold Fusion on the Cold Fusion Now! Youtube page here https://youtu.be/D4BPtwzsgiw

Get Edmund Storms’ book The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction: An Examination of the Relationship between Observation and Explanation from his website http://www.lenrexplained.com

Dr. Edmund Storms website http://www.lenrexplained.com

Edmund Storms HYDROTON A Model of Cold Fusion

HYDROTON animation by Jasen Chambers http://jasenlux.com

Title animation by Augustus Clark and Mike Harris http://augustusclark.com

Music by Esa Ruoho a.k.a. lackluster https://lackluster.bandcamp.com

ICCF-18 video by Eli Elliott http://www.elienation.com

Filmed, edited and narrated by Ruby Carat https://twitter.com/ColdFusionNow

Our work supports Cold Fusion Now! and Eugene Mallove’s Infinite Energy Foundation. We hope you will too.

http://www.coldfusionnow.org

http://infinite-energy.comFacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditby feather

JCMNS Vol. 20 publishes two Storms papers

JCMNSlogo

The Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science JCMNS Vol. 20 [.pdf] has published Anomalous Energy Produced by PdD and How Basic Behavior Can Guide A Search for an Explanation both by Edmund Storms, LENERGY, LLC.

Anomalous Energy Produced by PdD on pages 81-99 reports on the “production of anomalous energy using two different samples and the behavior of this energy when temperature, deuterium content of the material, and applied current are changed.

“The observed response gives additional insight into the possible mechanism and corrects some previously incorrect conclusions about this behavior.”

Storms has determined that high-loading is not a necessary condition to initiate the reaction, and that the single greatest factor is temperature.

The second paper How Basic Behavior Can Guide A Search for an Explanation pages 100-138 is a systematic narrowing of LENR models as examined by their assumptions and logical consequences. Jettisoning all ideas that rely on imagined events, the theoretical field is pared down with only the most robust theoretical elements surviving.

An attempt to provide a reasoned approach to an explanation continues the further evolution of Nanocrack Theory, where experimental evidence is supreme.

Download JCMNS Vol. 20 from the lenr-canr.org JCMNS library page here:
http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1495

or download the .pdf directly here:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondenseds.pdf

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditby feather

LENR theory paper revised with more detail

Edmund StormsHow basic behavior of LENR can guide a search for an explanation [.pdf] has been revised with more details.

Download [.pdf]

Fig-8

How basic behavior of LENR can guide a search
for an explanation
[.pdf] by Edmund Storms

ABSTRACT
The LENR effect was identified 27 years ago by Profs. Fleischmann and Pons as production of extra energy in a normal chemical structure, in this case PdD. Over a thousand published papers now support the discovery and the energy is shown to result from fusion of hydrogen isotopes without the need to apply energy and without energetic radiation being produced. By conventional standards, the claims are impossible. Nevertheless, a new phenomenon has been discovered requiring acceptance and understanding. The major behaviors and their present understanding are described in this paper and are used to suggest how an effective explanation might be constructed. Once again, science has been forced to either reject the obvious or accept the impossible. In this case, the normal skepticism needs to be ignored in order to determine if this promised energy source is real and can provide the ideal energy so critically
needed.

INTRODUCTION
Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) or Cold Fusion was introduced to the world 27 years ago by Fleischmann and Pons(1), Univ. Utah, with expectation of great benefit to mankind. Instead, their claim for a new kind of fusion was quickly rejected (2), an attitude that continues even today. Over the years, several thousand papers addressed the subject with a large fraction supporting the claim(3). Mastery of about 1000 papers is now required to understand the effect.

A description of all the known behaviors and all proposed explanations would require much more than a single review paper. Here, only the tip of the large iceberg will be examined along with some original results not published elsewhere. The selection of behaviors is designed to focus attention on only the essential conditions required to cause the LENR effect. Limits will be set using observed behavior in order to evaluate proposed explanations. The new kind of nuclear interaction needed to explain LENR is expected to fall within these limits. In other words, boundaries need to be identified to keep the imagination from running wild. The LENR effect is assumed consistent with all rules normally applied to conventional chemical and nuclear behavior. Nevertheless, a novel mechanism is clearly operating and needs to be acknowledged.

Many conditions needing consideration are not quantitative or lend themselves to mathematical analysis. While frustrating to conventional scientists, these unique behaviors must be made part of a successful explanation. Quantitative behaviors can be used to expand understanding once the basic process is understood.

An effective explanation needs to solve several difficult problems. The Coulomb barrier needs to be overcome without using more energy than is normally available in a chemical structure at room temperature. Neutron formation, which has been suggested by several theoreticians (4, 5), is prohibited because the required energy of 0.78 MeV and the required neutrino can not be expected to be available at the same site at the same time. Once fusion has occurred, the mechanism must then dissipate the huge nuclear energy released by the process without producing local destruction of the chemical structure or energetic radiation. The mechanism must also account for various transmutation reactions known to occur. Failure to combine these events in a way that is consistent with known chemical and nuclear behavior dooms most efforts to explain the process. In contrast, a single mechanism is proposed in this paper to cause all observed behavior while being consistent with known chemical and nuclear behavior.

This paper has two parts, with the first describing the important observations on which an explanation must be based. The second part uses a few assumptions combined with these chosen behaviors to provide an explanation about how LENR can be initiated using a proposed mechanism. This mechanism is clearly much different from that causingn the conventional hot fusion process. Ironically, this conflict is used to reject the claims for LENR rather than guiding a search for the cause of the difference. Consequently, this difference must be clearly understood before the novel features of LENR can be explored.

Unlike hot fusion, LENR takes place in and requires a chemical structure to operate. The role of this structure must be understood before physics is applied to understanding subsequent nuclear process. Clearly, a unique and rare condition must form in the structure in which a nuclear process can function. The nature of this condition is discussed following the discussion of hot fusion.

Continue reading How basic behavior of LENR can guide a search for an explanation – Revised here.
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditby feather

Storms on The Space Show

Edmund Storms was the guest on the Space Show Tuesday March 15. The hour-long discussion with live call-in question and answer is here:

http://www.thespaceshow.com/show/15-mar-2016/broadcast-2666-dr.-edmund-storms

We welcomed back to the show Dr. Edmund Storms to discuss updates LENR R&D. During the first segment of our 62 minute discussion, Dr. Storms started us off with a brief historical overview of the Low Energy Nuclear Reaction -cold fusion energy research and development efforts. We discussed the use of the term cold fusion as compared to LENR, the work of Andrea Rossi and his E-Cat LENR generator, and the need for secrecy given the patent laws applicable to LENR designs and products.

In addition, Dr. Storms talked at length about the various chemical reactions that were being studied to produce LENR fusion, explaining why the experiments were challenging due to the difficulty in their being repeatable and dependable. He explained the different approaches being used and the “secret” seemingly known only to Rossi regarding his E-Cat device. During this discussion, Dr. Storms talked extensively about nuclear reactions, fuel, hydrogen isotopes, light hydrogen, nickel, and palladium.

Later in the segment, Dr. Storms was asked if the research for LENR was organized and centralized or decentralized. Our guest said the research was very dispersed and decentralized. Much of it was actually taking place in small private labs. He talked about research funding needs which could range from about a million dollars for a small lab to tens of millions of dollars for a large scale multi-lab research effort. Since he was making potential “save the world” type claims for this type of energy, I asked him about other energy forms discussed on The Space Show that make the same type of “save the world “claims. Don’t miss what Dr. Storm had to say in response to my question.

John in Ft. Worth called to talk about the original Pons and Fleishman cold fusion experiments. In responding, Dr. Storms introduced us to the concept of Nanoracks. Dr. Storms believes LENR has something to do with Nanoracks which he explained in detail with John and in the balance of the first segment.

BJohn asked about LENR applications for spaceflight. Sandra asked about the size of LENR generators and if they would be individual or industrial in scope. Don’t miss the vision Dr. Storm explained to us regarding LENR usage, starting at the industrial scale but working toward individual usage. He talked about the problems & challenges in accomplishing the transition from industrial to personal.

In the second segment, Dr. Storms was asked about the methodology and game plan for developing and bringing to commercial operation LENER. Our guest talked at length about the need for a varied multi-discipline set of studies including nuclear physics and chemistry. He explained why this was an unlikely academic mix. Also during this segment, he stressed over and over again that there were no academic classes in LENR anywhere plus there were no text books on the subject. In fact, John from Ft. Worth even inquired as to why so much of conventional science was opposed to LENR.

Later in the segment, I asked for Dr. Storm’s plan to accelerate LENR R&D. He suggested putting the effort and money into the national labs research programs which a more sympathetic to LENR research. He said the work from the labs would be highly credible and would then be useful in helping to start academic programs facilitating the study of the subject. As the program was nearing its end, Larry asked about crowd funding programs to support this research. Don’t miss Dr. Storm’s concluding comments.

Please post your comments/questions in the comments section for this archived program on The Space Show website. You can reach Dr. Edmund Storms through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditby feather