FacebookTwitterDiggStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditTechnoratiLinkedin

Paper Tigers?

on .

We are extremely happy with the start of 2014. A little over 3 weeks into the year and the field of energy derived from reforming matter is bursting with news and announcements. Like a chain reaction, the revelations are exploding into our consciousness like firecrackers will be in this weeks Asian new year celebrations.

One cannot ignore the fact that Andrea Rossi, with his claimed E-Cat technology was bold and courageous in making that first live demonstration a little over 3 years ago. He can surely lay claim to having re-focussed previously parked research by many players into similar technologies and re-invigorating others in a field that had originally inspired and informed Rossis’ own work. This is how the modern world advances, one idea sparks the next and so we advance.

The MFMP was born out of a desire to help move this science forward and to openly test the claims made in a radically new way. We have learnt so much with your help in such a short time. We feel we are close, but despite repeated signs of upto 12.5% excess heat and recently signs of gamma, we are sticking to our principle, that of not moving on to worldwide distribution until we have an incontrovertible, repeatable experiment to share. When the gamma spectra solution is fully realised and the mass flow calorimeter experiment ready, we have a good shot of addressing all outstanding criticism. The nominal excess may not be glamorous, but if certain, we will be very satisfied. We thank you.

Escaping the cage

Since our focus is to make this space real, tangible and accessible for the masses, external highlights for us last year included:

  1. The report published into the HT ECAT, where Rossi had seemingly started to let 3rd parties test and freely report on a version of his technology. Regardless of opinions about the paper published and the controlled non-contact nature of the testing, this was the first major player in the field since Francesco Celani to allow external investigators to attach metrics to a technology using their own tools.

  2. Defkalions live test was the next big highlight of the year, sadly it appeared that invited scientists/sceptics were no shows, but Mats Lewin was there and we were able to connect with him live which gave us much confidence in the live nature of the test and DGT answered all the questions we posed from ICCF18 clearly. Whilst there has been some debate, such as flow rate, vaporisation and short active run time for the test etc. they did several things very right in their experiment and approach and kept their word.

  • They announced their experiment well in advance

  • They detailed all but proprietary elements of equipment used

  • They published their protocol well in advance

  • The experiment was based on a system that produced useful heat

  • They invited a range of people (only one turned up, a journalist knowledgeable in the field)

  • They video streamed the experiment with no restrictions on who could view it

  • They accepted all independently collated questions live and answered them clearly

  • They allowed the independent observer to use his own equipment

  • They answered questions post event

  • They published raw/edited recordings of the event on YouTube post event for fine analysis

  • They published a full report of results obtained

This brings us back to the Black Light Power (BLP) demonstration to be held 28/1/2014. Whilst we are excited about the claims, we reflect on the demands rightly made on our research, by you all, to address every minute question about our data and design out doubt from our work. These, extraordinary 10MW in 1ft^3 claims should require extraordinary proof especially for anyone entrusted with due diligence.

We  are disappointed that much of the progress in better presentation and access to live experiments demonstrated in the tests detailed above seems to be absent in this BLP test. We are also confused, because there really is little explanation for it to be this way. Firstly, they seem to have been very well funded, they seem to really know their technology, and presumably they know what they are going to show. If the MFMP can publish detailed protocols prior to an experiment on pocket change budgets...

  1. Why have we not seen something that surpasses the detailed advance document that was commendably provided by DGT?

  2. Why are they not showing a complete system when they say they could do it in a few weeks time?

  3. Most importantly, why is it not live streamed?

  4. Why is there no live Q&A with an independent question aggregator?

On points 3 & 4 there is simply NO excuse. If BLP happens to have a laptop or tablet and either a 3 or 4G or broadband connection, they could head over to


And set up an account in minutes. Watchers of the event could ask questions through the livestream viewer to be aggregated by an independent party that could be presented by a second channel, say Skype to the staff of BLP for live answers. Recordings from livestream can be placed online later.

Should we praise the light?

Having done our own primitive but flashy Mizuno inspired plasma demo, we know that no one should take this kind of theatrics as evidence of excess energy.


It is only when you start taking the subject very seriously as Mathieu Valat has done in France with his deep collaboration with Jean-Paul Biberian (one of the worlds foremost experts in this type of experiment) do you begin to understand what it takes to determine what excess power may be derived.


We wish BLP all the success in the world, if they can deliver on their stunning claims, the future will indeed be much brighter. We therefore hope that the test on the 28th is not just another meaningless flashy plasma show.

Who wants a tiger?

Right now we have, Rossi, DGT, BLP and Brillouin all tending to the same market, that of high energy process heat and central generation. This is understandable, bigger single investing parties, less regulatory overhead. The problem is this maintains the us and them status quo that these new technologies could free us from. Will the generators and manufacturers pass on the savings?

The members of the MFMP have the same dreams we believe our followers do, that of personal, off-grid solutions to our home energy needs and a neat power plant for our choice of transport. The main players, possibly with the exception of DGT, don’t seem to be moving in that direction which is unfortunate. That is why we will stay the course. If we can conclusively and incontrovertibly verify Francesco Celanis’ approach, then we have a technology that, if it could be made self-sustaining, might provide small 2-3kw units for the home or for continuous generation in novel transport drive trains. The only other technology we see that might readily scale to small safe levels of power is the NANOR, and we are still keen to take up Mitchell Schwartz’ offer to test a last generation unit.

Taming the beast

We hope that this year we all see for sure that humans now have a new way of accessing energy from matter and the cosmos and that as the curtain is removed from this human ingenuity levered natural phenomena, we find humans can safely control it. We will play our part and we hope that others are fair and just in their proclamations and motives.

Add comment

Security code


0 #12 MaryJuicy 2018-09-29 01:22
Hi. I see that you don't update your blog too often. I
know that writing articles is time consuming and boring.

But did you know that there is a tool that allows you to create
new articles using existing content (from article directories or other pages
from your niche)? And it does it very well.

The new posts are high quality and pass the copyscape test.
Search in google and try: miftolo's tools
0 #11 XClarissa 2018-08-31 18:05
Hello buddy. It was hard to find this site in google.
It's not even in top 10. You should focus on hq backlinks from high authority websites in your niche.
I know of a very effective free method to get strong backlinks and instant traffic.
The best thing about this method is that you start getting traffic right away.
For more info search in google for; masitsu's tricks
+1 #10 Eric Walker 2014-02-16 06:07
I have not been through in a while and am very happy to see you guys continuing in your effort. Best of luck. I hope you guys make great strides this year.
+1 #9 Vladov 2014-02-01 20:38

see diagram at 6.48 min, You should get one for simmilar Ni-H system . It tells you a lot of how to get good loading ratio, which is (some people think) prerequisite for LENR reactions to occur.
Loading rations 0.9 outside equlibrium are just temporary phenomena. It also sugest, that you should take experiments at LOW temperature, not 200 deg.C.
+1 #8 Robert Greenyer 2014-01-30 21:40

We are aware of this work and it is really awesome to see people inspired to test things, this is the way things are discovered - the more the merrier. We are unsure that it could be considered/clai med to be a replication when it is unclear that the experimentalist s showing their valuable work know what Rossi is actually doing. Additionally, if we have learnt one thing above anything else during the history of the MFMP, that is that it is not easy to categorically say we are seeing excess heat, but we persist to resolve the outstanding criticisms.
+1 #7 sky 2014-01-30 07:42
LENR by using Catalytic Combustion part2

+1 #6 sky 2014-01-30 07:20
This one is Awesome

LENR by using Catalytic Combustion (plasma formation )

+1 #5 sky 2014-01-30 03:53
E-CAT replication by using Catalytic Combustion (look like patterson cell )

Another replication by someone else

This is their forum
+1 #4 Robert Greenyer 2014-01-28 09:36
@Roderick Vos

His patents were some of the first applied for in this space, they are just embargoed - stuck in a sensitive limbo. He still has the priority date.

The kind of black box tests you suggest are the only ones we would propose. We have no interest to take this apart nor do we have the resources to. As you say, power in/out for a time / maximum possible chemical energy for the volume would do it it showed a positive beyond doubt.
+2 #3 Roderick Vos 2014-01-27 22:48
@ Robert Greenyer

Don't think it will be possible to get an LENR reactor on the domestic market any time soon. A lot of experience and performance data will be need before regulators will allow, if they will ever, small nuclear reactors in peoples houses. Industrial applications seem to the only short-mid term option for this tech. And besides, since when are we dreaming about commercial applications? Think we first need to proof in an open way that LENR is indeed real beyond any reasonable doubt.

His last generation tech is fine by me but the problem is that he still has no patents? Cant we then just do a 'black box' test. Get one in the lab and measure the in and output. I don't care to much what it is made of as long as it works as claimed. Electricity goes in more heat come out, that's all i need to know for now. We can open it up as soon as he has patents.
+1 #2 Robert Greenyer 2014-01-27 21:58
@Roderick Vos

Our schedule and resources last year did not give us the right window to do the offer justice. We particularly like the NANOR, because it has the potential to be used in small and embedded systems and also scaled to the all important domestic levels like Celanis' tech. We have thought for some time that it is all very well having MW of power - but that is way out of the call of most peoples needs.

Though he offered last generation tech, that does not bother US. We shall revisit the offer.

We understand that his patents weren't rejected as such, they were frozen - so they could neither be published or awarded. We understand that this has given him the advantage of being able to update them and hold the prior art date, but having patents in limbo indefinitely is not conducive to wide scale publishing or the raising of finance.
+1 #1 Roderick Vos 2014-01-27 19:24
What, what, what you got an offer from Mitchell Schwartz’ to test a NANOR, now that is what i call great news!

I say do it a.s.a.p. i think he is one of the best experimenters working on LENR. In discussion with skeptics on forums i often point to Schwartz experiments, carefully done and good results. However, skeptics always say, nah with such small power levels it is likely the result of flawed experiments. Why has he not been able to publish the results in a peer review journal? If it works as claims, why hasn't he got a Nobel prize yet?

It would help a lot if the the MFMP would be able to demonstrate once and for all that Schwartz is not an idiot and knows what he is doing. Ohh the joy it would bring to me to rub your results, if successful, in the noses of the skeptics. It think I would not be able to get a smile of my face for at least a month. I know, not very scientific, but can't help it, part of me still seems to be human.

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