FacebookTwitterDiggStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditTechnoratiLinkedin

The Kickstarter Pitch - help us get the message right [UPDATE#1 - Collaborate on pitch]

on .

Hi All,

We thank you immensely for taking part in the debate over the past several days on our suggested strategic thinking for the imminent full-scale fundraising through KickStarter.

We hope that the revised goals presented below are something everyone can agree with, please speak up if you think we can do better.

The purpose of this blog entry is to show the suggested introductory text that will be on the KickStarter. We need you to take your critical eye to it and suggest things we should add, delete or phrase better. If there are any budding wordsmiths out there that feel they can make bits clearer, please help if you can but we only have days to finalise this.

Oooo and if you are interested in being in the draw for the powder cell, there are not many days left to make a donation.

Thanks in advance.

The goal of this project is to show the world there is a safe, cheap way to harness energy from the atom without harmful emissions or residue.

It will achieve this for £50,000 by successfully concluding our replications of a leading scientists recent experiments, publishing them Live at QuantumHeat.org.

Stretch Goal 1: If we can raise £150,000, we will then produce a minimum of 3 complete set-ups and send them to internationally respected competent institutions. When there, they will run a live web connected experiment, over a few weeks, that anyone can follow, analyse and be confident in. Subsequently, the institutions will be free to extend the experiment in any way they choose. The more money we raise, the more experiments we can distribute and the better we can publicise them.

Stretch Goal 2: If we can raise over £350,000 we will ship out and support a minimum of 10 experiments and use any spare funds to start work on complete open source energy generators and associated control and data logging software and hardware.

So why should I care?

Safe abundant energy will allow us to turn the deserts green, stop destruction of forests, provide water where it is lacking, 24/367 vertical farming of all climates crops within cities, long distance guilt free travel, end of the acceleration of climate change, the list is endless. Most importantly, it gives our children and the flora and fauna of our home a future.

So what is the experiment?

An experiment to demonstrate the releasing of energy from the mass of hydrogen by use of a special nano material under thermal and other changes.

It is a relatively simple piece of precision engineering combined with active elements designed to show power excess higher than any known chemical process could explain. It is connected to the internet in independent locations and published live so that data can not be cherry picked or controlled by a vested interest and is free to be analysed and challenged by anyone. The exact same experiments will be run first and afterwards the participating organisations will be free take the science wherever the data and their skillset leads them.

The purpose is to provide incontrovertible evidence of the effect so that the world then has a real choice as to how to invests its time and effort moving forward. 

To produce the multiple replications, ship media teams, do legal, build a better site, handle the aftermath will all take significant funds and we would love it if you could help.

Tell me more!

It seams that extremely small amounts of common safe input material can result in vast amounts of excess heat by weight and minute amounts of harmless contained ash. That is the power of E = (MC^2) X (Open Minds)

Because it does the useful heating bit that fire does much better and avoids the nasty emissions, it is definitely an upgrade, so we call it the New FireWe believe it is the most important thing man has ever invented. So what is the New Fire?

The New Fire involves a selection of safe elements interacting in such a way that they can release energy from themselves as they change to other harmless elements.

Whilst we are open and independent, an amazing scientist called Professor Francesco Celani, has been working very closely with us, this affable guy was invited early last year to CERN to represent the state of the art for the whole community of researchers in this field. His presentation can be read here:

Celani's Cern Presentation

Since this presentation, Toyota has replicated Mitsubishi Industrial's experiment. This is independent proof from top Japanese industry that you can turn Tungsten into Platinum without needing a tame supernovae. There is also good evidence to suggest that mercury is transmuting in common fluorescent lightbulbs. This means that there is much more to learn about the structure of matter and how it can be made to interact - but then we know that you always knew that humans didn't know everything already!

Celani himself made great strides since giving that presentation and for the first time, showed an experiment publicly that he claimed produced significant excess heat in both National Instruments Week in Texas where NI showcased their support for Celani as they did for the emerging field in general. He then re-ran the experiment with positive results a few days later at ICCF-17 in Daejeon, South Korea.

It was at ICCF-17 that the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project (MFMP) at QuantumHeat.org was born and where, along with many others, Celani encouraged us to take this project Social. Check out our channel for some of the people that spurred us on. 

The primary goal of the MFMP has always been stated here as:

Show to the world there is a new practical primary energy source we call the New Fire

There were several candidate experimental routes and we explored several but in the end we where struck by the openness of Celani and his willingness to work with us. The beauty of the Celani cell as presented was that it was simply driven by thermal, pressure and power changes and had a reportedly significant excess heat (revealing an incredible underlying energy density), this means that if it did work as claimed, it would make it easy to extend the experiment in many ways. Additionally, the cell was attractive and it could be clearly seen by the observer that there was no trickery, the active component and cell specifics were not hidden in any way. We therefore set about the Celani replication plan.

Before we could really ask anyone else to get involved, we had to be sure for ourselves that the effect was real. So having obtained assurances Celani would supply the active wire to us, we set out to build replicas of the Celani cell and to go through a process of meticulous LIVE testing in the full glare and critique of the scientific community. Here is the blog of the on-going work. 

This work has involved many thousands of hours of work from the facilitators and their own private company resources and cash. In addition very generous donations were made on the site which have made a real difference to our work. Special thanks goes Paul Hunt who has fronted a good chunk of the engineering costs, here is an early video of his operation.

There were setbacks but we persevered and after a partial success in the US, the EU set up, when it went to an active run, seamed to show something positive.

At around the same time ST Microelectronics (huge multi-national electronics firm) reported that they had successfully shown significant excess heat with Celani supplied wires.

This fact, Nasa's comments at the end of the year (8mins in), and our own research has given us the confidence to ask you all to help us light the New FireWe have not stopped experimenting, indeed in the next few weeks there will be between 2 and 4 cells running and publishing live on our site and we encourage you to look at the data and suggest ways we can improve the cells that are sent out after this Kickstarter. In recent weeks we have had some real heavy weights like Dr Edmond Storms in this space join the other leading scientists that are advising us. In early April, the Naval Research Laboratories will be holding a colloquium, why not pop along and ask questions!

How is the New Fire different from LENR?

The New Fire is a subset of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR). Specifically, the New Fire is those LENR reactions that produce excess thermal heat from safe and abundant source elements, creates no emissions during the reaction and leaves no long term harmful waste.

Live Open Science

During the course of carrying out our work, we believe we have stumbled upon a new way of pursuing science. Rather than designing and using secret apparatus behind closed doors in secret locations and running experiments first, collecting the data, selecting data, treating the data, publishing reports to closed groups and then, later, publishing to the public. We are publishing our apparatus designs, experiment procedure to the web and LIVE publishing our experiment data RAW as it is generated and analysis tools to the web for anyone to pick holes in and analyse. It has meant that we have benefitted from a huge number of active participants to the MFMP and we are expanding this type of collaboration into many related areas of the project and its support. 

We are calling this Live Open Science (LOS) it is a process everyone can be a part of - we believe their are millions of minds out there that can make a real difference to science - intuition and reasoned direction comes to us all. We hope that this kickstarter means that our vision of live science for the people and by the people can come to other projects soon. One of our collaborators put this piece together to summarise his feelings for the project.

Whilst it was necessary for us to do the internal replications. We do not feel it is sufficient for the world to either know or believe that there is a real alternative for humanities future. We have been advised by scientists that we need to do at least 3 exact successful replications at respected independent locations for it to be accepted. We need a minimum net of £105,000 to achieve that, but we would like to raise more and get 5 or more out there, maybe as many as 10 would be awesome and then any extra money could go to full on publicity of the Live experiments - say through media blitzes and social web promotion. If we could get cells into top institutions in US, EU, Japan, India, China, South Korea for starters that would be awesome - why? Look here!

The Mayan's were Right, the old world ended in 2012, the world of the New Fire is here and according to Nasa, it may enable us to leave the planet.

But my science professor says different...

Well, say, that you appreciate his opinion but could he go and study QuantumHeat.orgthis site and this paper from 2007 (before much of the recent research) and come back with justifications for his stance.

Some say that the only way to achieve something is to copy the way the rest of the universe does it naturally. That is plain bonkers, by using what is there in the universe and engaging the brain, humans have created the microwave oven for instance that makes power specifically shake water molecules in a tuned cavity to heat food.

Many of the human races greatest advancements come from learning how we can make novel stuff that will react in a specific way when energy of one form or another is applied and the basis for the New Fire is no different.


- The New Fire is real and has the potential to profoundly change humanity
- Multiple international internet based live replications of an experiment demonstrating this will Kickstart public and private investment into this space
- Much of the world issues will be mitigated
- It will allow us to ultimately leave this rock
- More information and many additional links available here

This work is dedicated to the great British electrochemist Pr. Martin Fleischmann


UPDATE#1 - Collaborate on pitch

If you want to help on the pitch document - it is live in the collaborate section and we are taking on board much of the discussions of the previous weeks

Go here

Add comment

Security code


0 #25 Robert Greenyer 2013-04-05 16:05
Thanks to Peter Roe, Pekka Janhunen, Julian Saunders, Robert Ellefson who have been working with me to improve the pitch document.

See here

0 #24 Robert Greenyer 2013-04-03 11:20
@Lukas Zeller

Yes, a more cautious presentation that encourages others to join the testing is the current way we are thinking.

0 #23 Lukas Zeller 2013-04-03 07:53
@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.
0 #22 Robert Greenyer 2013-04-02 17:19
@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!


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!
0 #21 Dieter Seeliger 2013-04-02 11:47
Perfekt :-)
+1 #20 Martin 2013-04-02 10:42
I was about to donate a small sum a few weeks ago, but what stopped me then was the need to go through Paypal. Since then I think this site has drifted in a very disturbing way. From having a scientific goal of being curious, to show what aspects of LERN that was true and which weren’t true, it has increasingly become a sales pitch FOR the “new fire” (with cartoons an all). I think the guys in the lab would do a better pitch for the kickstarter based on cautious good old fashion science methodology. You must go back to being curious and cautious, not convinced. I think your presented approach for the kickstarter will not work. Sorry (but I still love the project).
0 #19 Lukas Zeller 2013-04-02 08:46
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.
0 #18 James Bryant 2013-04-01 22:55
@ Andreas Van Rooijen

Thank you for the heads-up on the Wired article. www.wired.co.uk/.../rossi

Hopefully, everyone here will read it...and leave a post to thank David, and Wired, for doing it.
+1 #17 Doug Cutler 2013-04-01 16:02
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.
+1 #16 Robert Greenyer 2013-03-31 19:02

We have had a policy of avoiding this language where appropriate because it works against the safe nature of the kind of experiments we are doing.

Also, since there is still no accepted theories, then a generic and easy to translate name is, simply, better. We use New Fire because it does imply some level of risk but no more than is accepted everyday the world over - and being new - one would hope it is better in some way.
0 #15 clovis 2013-03-31 17:53
hi, guys.
I have a suggestion, that with the confirmation of lenr. and all the many many applications for it use that transmutation, is one of the most desirable functions , and security is a most desirable property, because if everyone had a unit in their homes there would be no hacking of the electricity grid, ever, but be very careful of using the word nuclear, or reactor,radiati on, anything along those lines , it just makes the people nervous, but you can mention that through transmutation all the dangerous nuclear waste could be safely recycled to green and useful materials. good luck, and may god guide your thoughts and hands. for the betterment of mankind, and not just the few.---clovis
0 #14 Andreas Van Rooijen 2013-03-31 08:32
Congrats Bob!

We got an article in Wire!


Regarding the Pitch, I am not a marketing person. But I think these pitches should reach the audience on an emotional level. And that is not easy with such a scientific topic. But what emotion? The longing for knowledge? The desire to "avenge" Martin Fleischman? The hope for a better world. Take your pick. This is not easy. Personally, this project reminds me of the 1981 movie "quest for fire". Here is a trailer on youtube. www.youtube.com/.../ So I connect to this project as a modern quest for fire. I am not sure this is helpful. Like I said, I am not a marketing expert.
0 #13 Doug Cutler 2013-03-31 05:38
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.
+1 #12 Robert Greenyer 2013-03-30 22:55

Thanks for the input, keep it coming, we have a lot to digest here - but digest it we shall.

+3 #11 Robert Ellefson 2013-03-30 18:33
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.
0 #10 Robert Ellefson 2013-03-30 18:12
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.
+3 #9 Mitch Trachtenberg 2013-03-30 17:27
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.
0 #8 Drew 2013-03-30 16:18
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
+2 #7 AlexRa 2013-03-30 15:47
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.
0 #6 AlexRa 2013-03-30 15:27
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...

Here is your generous contributions so far towards our $500,000 target, thanks everyone! : $45,020   Please Donate
See the current state of our booked costs here