<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>QuantumHeat.org</title>
		<description>Discuss QuantumHeat.org</description>
		<link>http://www.quantumheat.org</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 13:49:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/de/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/224" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2626</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thanks to Peter Roe, Pekka Janhunen, Julian Saunders, Robert Ellefson who have been working with me to improve the pitch document. See here https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hOwlNmT8vdPA8YmajDFyK_92V3T_iA9YBgyOL0ECDbI/edit]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 2013 16:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2626</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2615</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Lukas Zeller Yes, a more cautious presentation that encourages others to join the testing is the current way we are thinking. B]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 11:20:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2615</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Lukas Zeller says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2614</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer don't get me wrong, of course you need and deserve funding for your work! But like @Mitch Trachtenberg, @AlexRa and @Martin I think it's extremely important the Kickstarter pitch remains cautious and scientific. Now it sounds too much like you're selling the new fire. You have something to sell, but it's not "mitigating much of the world issues" or "leaving that rock" (yet), but solid, careful, scientific and reproducable efforts to replicate Celani's experiment. I have little doubts you'll be able to collect the funds, but you don't want to collect it from the wrong audience. If you attract too many confused Sci-Fi fans hoping to leave to the stars next year, and not enough curious scientific minds, the damage to the cause could be more than gained in terms of money. I mentioned opensource patterns as an established, modern "style" how to do world-wide open collaboration - quite easy to adopt, and supporting credibility.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Lukas Zeller</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2013 07:53:07 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2614</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2612</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Lukas Zeller We are trying to do something in a way that has not been done before and we are having to pay time and money into a project that is still the subject of ridicule for others. Our focus is and has always has been the Celani Replications and there are many that would not like us to succeed, but we battle on all the same. We have stuff on github, but we need to build an area of the site that makes the published diagrams for reactors and software easy to find and we have such limited personell resources. Hopefully we will be able to justify spending more time on the project to our families when our expenses are covered! @Martin I spent my own personal money and put over my own staff for producing something fun (the character) that non-scientific people could have an option to pledge to the project and that would return money to the project to achieve its goals. This was pledge - 3D print cost (imaterialise.c om) for those that wanted it. I was shocked that a donated effort without any advertising of my own company but purely provided by it could be seen so negatively, but I have taken that on board. We are being open with every part of our thinking on our KS pitch and have taken on board the comments raised - the way you are advising is kind of where we are likely to be when the final pitch is produced. Follow the scientific method in an open way. We are listening and learning, we wish their was a guide book for this!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:19:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2612</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2611</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Perfekt :-)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 11:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2611</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Lukas Zeller says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2609</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I'm just starting to dig trough what the web has to offer about LENR. Frankly, it is a sad experience as most stories end at a point where paranoia or money hides any real information and makes it indistinguishab le from scam. So I am very glad that MFMP takes a radically open approach. I'm convinced that openness is *the* key in a matter as delicate as this. You cannot afford to give way to the slightest doubts that there could be a hidden agenda. Big congratulation to your efforts doing this in the open! However, for Kickstarter I'd recommend to position "live science" more closely to well known open source patterns. In particular, the complete docs & software should be in a versioned repository e.g. on github. This would make people having the skills and tools confident they *could* replicate all this from day one, and follow progress made. Such confidence makes it easy to pay others (you) to actually work on it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Lukas Zeller</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 08:46:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2609</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>James Bryant says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2608</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Andreas Van Rooijen Thank you for the heads-up on the Wired article. http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-03/30/rossi Hopefully, everyone here will read it...and leave a post to thank David, and Wired, for doing it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>James Bryant</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2608</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Doug Cutler says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2606</link>
			<description><![CDATA[More suggestions: You face a difficult task. Some projects worthy on the face of it have failed to reach their targets on Kickstarter. Default position for the less informed public will be self-deception or outright fraud. Your main task will be to persuade them otherwise. In this the perceived credibility of participants and/or endorsers may count for more than technical points of the presentation which must themselves be powerful and clear. Try for the most prestigious endorsement possible. Otherwise, demo how you've systematically eliminated all other possible explanations for xs heat such as ambient heat contamination etc. I agree with statements made below not to dwell upon potential social benefits and transformations . Make this point quickly then move on as most of your potential support will already be aware of these matters. Also harping on "the grand promise" may be seen as a fraudster's trick of distraction. Rather defend the heart of your claims.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Doug Cutler</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2013 16:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2606</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Doug Cutler says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2599</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Very early on in pitch hit hard with best possible evidence to date made in concise, laymen-friendly terms. Display your expertise but take care not to be over-technical. Take pains to differentiate yourselves from the many potential hucksters on the scene. If possible, cite as many names as possible from the many respected and prestigious scientists who endorse LENR and/or LENR research. If Kickstarter has vetted your recent research somehow, cite that if its allowed. All obvious suugestions. Good luck - or to be more scientific about it - Good Skill.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Doug Cutler</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 31 Mar 2013 05:38:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2599</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2596</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All Thanks for the input, keep it coming, we have a lot to digest here - but digest it we shall. B]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 22:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2596</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2595</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Instead of spending as much early time discussing the (valid) promises of a brighter future that LENR will bring, I would suggest making a simple but significant statement of fact concerning the potential of LENR to displace existing energy sources for low marginal cost and low environmental impact. Leave the utopian portraits for the optimistic reader to paint themselves, and for the scornful pseudo-skeptic to not have so readily available for ridicule of our proposals. I would also suggest a more direct up-front literal description of the specific experiments being conducted, namely prepared samples of activated bulk or powdered nickel with hydrogen gas loading and thermal, electromagnetic , or whatever other stimulation source (surface plasmon generation?) is appropriate. When you stay to meta-vague for too long, dynamic credibility ratings start to drop, IMHO.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 18:33:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2595</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2594</link>
			<description><![CDATA[My initial reaction was much the same as that of Mitch and AlexRa - you seem to be sidestepping around the "cold-fusion" association, and this will raise the hackles of skeptical minds who do not understand the long history of real positive scientific results, but who have read many lunatic-ramblin gs about free energy. I think Mitch worded it well, in approaching this directly as an offshoot of the famed P&F experiments, but with real history of solid, sane scientific research backing it up. Otherwise, I think the opening paragraphs are likely to cause most readers to reflexively dismiss the whole project as a bunch of pie-in-the-sky kooks who have no clue about the real world. Perhaps you should beef up the references section into a concise but powerful set of observed experimental result citations to provide enough evidence of LENR for the open-minded reader to continue consideration of our proposal. This would be a key element in my evaluation, as a newcomer.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 18:12:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2594</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mitch Trachtenberg says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2593</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I agree with AlexRa at #8, and offer this: Our goal is to publicly replicate experiments by Francesco Celani that show an effect that may provide the world with a new and safe power source. Prof. Celani and others have provided evidence that an effect earlier discovered by Prof. Martin Fleischmann and Prof. Stanley Pons is real, though difficult to reliably replicate. The effect is sometimes called "cold fusion," and is based on possible localized high pressures generated by electrochemical operations on materials whose nanostructures allow micro-environme nts to achieve these normally "impossible" pressures. We are using a unique "live science" approach in an attempt to solve the credibility problems faced by this field; problems that result from many early failed attempts at reproduction, and which have left many people assuming the field is phony.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mitch Trachtenberg</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 17:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2593</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Drew says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2591</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I at least would like to see why these experimental kits are costing $35,000 each. Also agree with the others, especially the too soon bit, as far as I can tell you have possibly achieved a consistent 7% excess, If I'm reading that wrong that needs explanation too]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Drew</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 16:18:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2591</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlexRa says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2590</link>
			<description><![CDATA[And I wonder if you need to be so shy in mentioning the rich history of the "cold fusion" and Fleischmann & Pons' role in it? Your pitch sounds somewhat like it is some weird "free energy" idea, rather than a novel "live open science" approach to the field of LENR, where quite a number of scientists worked for the last 20+ years. As to "How New Fire is different from LENR": having an extra proof of *any* aspect of LENR (be it excess heat, transmutations or radiations) seems equally important at this stage. It may not be such a good idea to invent a catchy name for a subset of LENR, when the whole field may benefit from your efforts.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlexRa</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 15:47:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2590</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlexRa says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2589</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think it's very important to be clear and fair in the KS pitch: You need the funds for the *ongoing R&D efforts* to reproduce LENR excess heat (which involves showing beyond doubts that (a) there is excess heat and (b) it must be LENR due to its power density, duration, emissions, etc), using Celani's as one of many possible approaches. The 1st and most important goal would be to have a clear and incontrovertibl e in-house replication of Celani's or, *if that fails*, of any other of the known approaches, in your famous "live open science" style. Your Kickstarter contributors must understand this is a scientific experiment and have to be prepared to any outcome. A more accurate experiment may happen to show that there *no* excess heat from Celani's wire, but that need not be the failure / the end of the MFMP project! Once a replication is accomplished, you can extend the goals to manufacture multiple replications...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlexRa</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 15:27:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2589</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Peter Roe says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2588</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I'll get it right eventually! I blame lack of coffee. http://www.health-answers.co.uk/mfmp/MFMP.zip]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Peter Roe</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 12:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2588</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2587</link>
			<description><![CDATA[My opinion is, Keep the text clear and simple ! Our goal is, to proof that there is excess energy which could be harvested from this effect. Don`t mix this up with papers pointing to transmutation or some other LENR effects which are hard to understand. We are going to get money from people which are not that firm with the field of CF research and we should not confuse them with terms that could be understood as "Alchemy". (We know, that these other effects exist as a part of the process, but the guys out there with the money are no elaborated physicists) Let us focus on the core of what we want to proof and we should only use terms and links which do not leed to any missunderstandi ng. my 2cent, Dieter]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 11:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2587</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Kapytanhook says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2584</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If i where you id explain the actual experiment that was most convincing. How you have a prepped isotan wire, in hydrogen, ad a current and presto excess energy! Every person in the world know when cheap energy means, it seems like something a scammer would say. Imagine all the cool stuff you can with cheap energy :P It seems a bit early to go kickstarting just yet, if it turns out that you flunked a measurement you are back at square 1. And people might not take you serious after that. It would not be the first time that happened in cold fusion. Please repeat the experiments with high fidelity for just a little longer. Just my opinion, I support the cause in any case, I also understand this stuff is not cheap to do and money is needed to make this work. Good luck]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Kapytanhook</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:50:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2584</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Paul Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2583</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Bob, We are excited at HUG. We wouldn't be investing all this time, energy and money if we didn't think LENR is possible and that we can play a part. Perhaps this pitch oversells the solidity of LENR. Lately I have been telling people that the proof is not as easy as we hoped. We are tantalized by what we see, but we have not yet thoroughly convinced ourselves that we are seeing excess energy. We have to be transparent about that. At HUG we are preparing ourselves for the likelihood that this could be a long and winding road. I state our goals in this order... 1) Prove it to ourselves. 2) Make it reliable. (History says this may be the most difficult part) 3) Design useful products from it. :]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Paul Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 05:08:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2583</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
