Category Archives: Politics

Davids vs. Goliath In A Race to Replace Hydrocarbons With Nuclear Fusion As The World’s Dominant Energy Source

Davids vs. Goliath
In A Race to Replace Hydrocarbons With Nuclear Fusion As The World’s Dominant Energy Source
by Douglas A. Pinnow, Ph.D.

There is only so much oil, coal, and natural gas remaining to supply the energy needs for humanity. What to do when it runs out? And perhaps more relevant: What should be done if a disruptive alternative energy source takes everyone, including the entrenched hydrocarbon industries, by surprise?

It’s unlikely that nuclear fission will become the replacement energy source of choice with the negative legacy of Chernobyl, Three-Mile Island, and Fukushima along with a limited supply of uranium that many view as analogous to limited oil supplies. Perhaps renewable energy sources like wind and solar will evolve to fill the gap when oil runs out. But, these are still “fair weather” sources because the energy that they produce cannot yet be economically stored on the vast scale required to supply the needs of the entire civilized world after dark and on windless days.

The another possibility on the horizon is fusion energy that might be produced by taming the power of the sun and by using plentiful fuel available from the seas – specifically, an isotope of hydrogen, known as deuterium, which can be extracted from normal water. However, recreating the sun in a box on earth has proven to be very problematic. This article is to report on a rather exciting race to be the first to commercialize the fusion energy alternative. The race participants include a well-funded but slow moving international consortium, the Goliath, and a number of nimble companies, the Davids, which are financed primarily by venture capital.

While fusion energy is not a hot daily topic for the publishing and broadcast media, it is, nevertheless, impressive that the world’s most expensive machine (presently projected to cost $16 billion) is currently being built in Cadarache, France to advance the prospects for fusion energy. This machine is called the ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) and, as can be seen in Figure 1, it is really big – the Goliath of the fusion energy research efforts

Figure 1. Construction site for the $16 billion ITER located in Cadarache, France (near Monaco) that is sponsored by seven participants; the European Union, India, Japan, China, Russia, South Korea, and the United States. The circular structure in the center-right is the footing for a 500 Megawatt hot fusion plasma reactor that is projected to become operational around 2027.

This massive project was launched as a Reagan-Gorbachev initiative in 1985 to consolidate the efforts being conducted by thousands of scientists around the globe to harness fusion energy using extremely hot gas plasmas contained in a large donut shaped reactor vessel. The temperatures in the plasma must reach approximately 100 million degrees Centigrade to duplicate the fusion reactions in the sun. This is so hot that it would melt all known materials. So, the strategy is to contain the plasma inside of an intense magnetic field that is suspended in free space within the donut.

The “E” in the ITER name clearly establishes this machine as an Experimental project. Its goal is limited – to sustain a fusion reaction for only eight minutes! If successful, there will still be years, if not decades of research required to perfect a viable power producing machine. To put this all into perspective, the French Nobel laureate in physics Pierre-Gilles de Gennes said of nuclear fusion, “We say that we will put the sun into a box. The idea is pretty. The problem is, we don’t know how to make the box.”

If this Goliath were the only contender in the race to replace hydrocarbons as the world’s preferred energy source, the race would, indeed, be a slow-motion event that might work to the benefit of established global energy and financial interests. No one would be concerned about the Goliath introducing a disruptive technology with an early and unexpected success.

But, things changed in 1989 when two chemistry professors at the University of Utah, Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, held a press conference and announced to the world that they had succeeded in producing useful fusion energy inside of an inexpensive glass jar in their laboratory. The jar contained a rod of palladium metal with a surrounding platinum wire and both were immersed in heavy water (deuterium oxide, D2O). The palladium rod was connected to the negative terminal of a 12 Volt car battery and the platinum wire was connected to the positive terminal. It was reported that this simple set-up produced four times more energy than the electrical input from the car battery for sufficiently long periods that the only viable explanation could be a nuclear reaction.

Not surprisingly, such a potentially transformative and disruptive technology was attacked very hard from many quarters, including established energy and banking interests, and many scientists who were convinced that their hot plasma fusion approach (that is well funded by government agencies) is the only scientifically viable approach. The press dubbed the work of Professors Pons and Fleischmann “cold fusion”, and within a relatively short period of time (1992) a book was published by one of the most vocal opponents, John Huizenga, titled Cold Fusion: The Scientific Fiasco of the Century. He persuasively attacked cold fusion on the basis that Pons and Fleischmann’s work was difficult to reproduce and it didn’t result in the harmful radiation from energetic neutrons that was expected based on known results from hot plasma fusion reactions.

By the way, elimination of harmful radiation would be a wonderful result if it could be achieved. But, character assassination by discrediting those who reported positive results was a stronger factor during the early years after the press conference announcing cold fusion. A good example to convey the flavor of those times can be gleaned from the title of an article that appeared in the April 15, 1992 issue of the Wall Street Journal, “Physicist to Report Cold Fusion Findings from Japan at MIT’s Bastion of Skeptics”. The Japanese visitor, Professor Takahashi, was not well received but he stuck to his guns saying “I will say what I observed, …That is the only thing I can do.”

Discrediting of cold fusion was so thorough during those early days that even the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office announced that no patents would be granted to inventions in the field of cold fusion because it was too speculative. Cold fusion was relegated to the same category as a “perpetual motion machine” that everyone knows is nonsense.

As a consequence, legitimate scientists who might otherwise have been interested in conducting research in cold fusion realized that they would likely lose their government support, become ostracized by their colleagues, and not even be able to benefit by the grant of a patent if they did make a breakthrough.

But, in spite of all of this, work in cold fusion continued around the world for the past 26 years by a small group of dedicated scientists – and convincing progress has been made. So convincing, in fact, that politicians in Washington are actively in process of ditching the name “cold fusion” because it has been so thoroughly discredited. Now, it is more acceptable to call the technology by a new name ‘Low Energy Nuclear Reaction’ or just LENR. Apparently, it is no longer important to Washington’s elite if the reaction is cold, tepid, or warm.

In 2009, an unclassified assessment was made by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency in their report DIA-08-0911-003. Quoting from this report:

Although much skepticism remains, LENR programs are receiving increased support worldwide, including state sponsorship and funding from major corporations. DIA assesses that Japan and Italy are leaders in the field, although Russia, China, Israel, and India are devoting significant resources to this work in the hope of finding a new clean energy source. Scientists worldwide have been reporting anomalous excess heat production [for years], as well as evidence of nuclear particles and transmutations.

The dedicated scientists who did brave the stigma of the ‘cold fusion’ name and related consequences proudly held their 19th International Conference on Cold Fusion (19-ICCF) in Padua, Italy in mid-April, 2015. And they plan to meet again next year in Sendai, Japan. Figure 2 is a photo of some of the attendees in the main conference hall. Take a close look at this picture and see if it appears to be a group of individuals gathered to advance the “nonsense” that the patent office has branded their science.

Figure 2. Photograph of some of the attendees at the 19th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF) held April 13-17, 2015 in Padua, Italy.

Perhaps, the most intriguing aspect of the cold fusion (LENR) work is that there appears to be a number of different processes involved in a growing number of reported successful experiments. However, there is not yet an accepted theory that encompasses this work. Nevertheless, young companies are emerging with names like Brillouin Energy Corp. and Industrial Heat that are receiving venture capital support with hopes of becoming the ‘Davids’ who might slay the ‘hot fusion Goliath’ in spite of the U.S. Patent Office’s continued reluctance to grant cold fusion patents.

It’s too early to tell if the Davids will win or even survive. It is also too early to tell if the name change to LENR will work any magic at the patent office. But pressure is building there. A ‘cold fusion’ patent titled FLUID HEATER was actually issued to Andre Rossi (U.S. 9,115,913) on August 25, 2015 using the subterfuge of totally avoiding the use of the words ‘fusion’ and ‘isotope’ that might otherwise raise a red flag leading to rejection. And a patent application (U.S. 14/696423) titled SPONTANEOUS ALPHA PARTICLE EMITTING METAL ALLOYS AND METHOD FOR REACTION OF DEUTERIDES was filed earlier this year by the present author who is a patent agent as well as a Ph.D. physicist. This patent application addresses the reluctance of the patent office to grant cold fusion patents head-on by making a solid case for granting patents on the basis of advancing the state-of-the-art in this field even if an application does not disclose a fully working apparatus.*

And now, eager young students at MIT can take an introductory course in Cold Fusion presented by highly respected faculty members. The chemistry and physics are intriguing, but the secrets of the sun have not yet been fully revealed. So, the big question is will LENR become that disruptive and transforming fusion energy technology or just remain the ‘fiasco of the century’? I believe that it will be big – but stay tuned.

* PERSPECTIVE [Extracted from patent application U.S. 14/696,423]

The inventor is well aware that the subject matter in a patent application must be ‘useful’ and satisfy the requirement of utility. Further, as stated by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, “the term ‘useful’ in this connection refers to the condition that the subject matter has a useful purpose and also includes operativeness, that is, a machine which will not operate to perform the intended purpose would not be called useful, and therefor would not be granted a patent”.

In this regard, the inventor makes no claim that the subject matter in this patent application will solve or mitigate the present or future energy problems facing humanity. Nor does the inventor represent that the subject matter in this patent application can be used to produce any commercially useful amounts of energy. Rather, the subject matter is “useful” for two reasons, (1) it would be generally agreed by persons of normal skill in nuclear arts and also based on the teachings of conventional physics that purposely triggering a LENR by employing the subject matter in this patent application would enhance the reaction rate (thereby making the subject matter operative) – even though the magnitude of the enhancement is not presently known, and (2) the subject matter is expected to contribute to a better understanding of the LENR process that will likely continue to be explored by researchers throughout the world for years to come. In this regard, the availability and use of spontaneous alpha particle emitting metal alloys, encouraged by this invention, should be useful in advancing the understanding of LENRs and may also lead to possible future commercial applications. These factors are considered to be more than sufficient to satisfy the criteria of utility.
Douglas A. Pinnow, Ph.D. Contact

Indian institutions to collaborate on LENR

This is a re-post of “Scientists warming up to ‘cold fusion’, see potential in ‘other nuclear’ energy” by M Ramesh originally on Hindu BusinessLine. Links to relevant institutions and emphasis has been added.

Chennai, April 9:

About thirty scientists from all over India met in Bengaluru on Tuesday to discuss ‘the way forward’ in an emerging cheap and clean source of energy, called ‘low energy nuclear reactions’, or simply ‘cold fusion’. The meeting was chaired by Dr Anil Kakodkar, former Chairman of the Department of Atomic Energy.

The meeting was held at the instance of the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, said Dr Baldev Raj, Director, National Institute of Advanced Studies, who co-chaired the meeting.

Dr Raj did not give details of the meeting—he feels it is up to the Ministry to do so—but he said that the basic message that came out of the meeting was that there was a need to study ‘low energy nuclear reactions’ more.

The objective of the meeting was to further study the phenomenon of ‘cold fusion’, devices based on which are beginning to be commercialized elsewhere in the world.

Dr. Mahadeva SrinivasanSome experts, such as Dr Mahadeva Srinivasan, a scientist who worked for the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), believe that cold fusion has the potential to become the primary source of energy in the not-so-distant future.

Dr Srinivasan, who attended the Bengaluru meeting, said that one of the decisions taken at the meeting was that four groups of institutions and scientists would get into cold fusion research and there would be an informal oversight committee. Some of the institutions involved are the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research (IGCAR), which, incidentally, was once headed by Dr Baldev Raj, the IIT-Madras, and the Indian Institute of Chemical Technology.

What is ‘cold fusion’?

Just as energy (heat) is produced when a nucleus splits in the nuclear power plants that we have, energy gets generated also when two nuclei merge. But it requires enormous input energy to get them to merge, as they contain positively charged particles—protons—and same charge tend to move away, not to come close. Therefore, to get nuclear happen at room temperatures—cold fusion—has been thought to be impossible.

In 1989, two American scientists—Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons—conducted some experiments and observed more heat given out than they could explain and inferred that the excess heat was due to nuclear fusion reactions. They became instant celebrities in the scientific world, but in a matter of weeks they got branded as incompetent scientists, or even frauds, after thousands of others tried their experiment and got no excess heat. ‘Cold fusion’ was practically buried.

But the subject was roused again in 2011, when an Italian engineer called Andrea Rossi unveiled his invention—a fist-sized device that produced more energy than it consumed, using only nickel powder spiked with some chemical, and hydrogen as raw materials. He kept the name of the chemical secret.

An outraged scientific community branded Rossi a charlatan, but the engineer proceeded regardless and started selling his ‘E-Cat’ machines and has scaled up their capacity to 1 MW.

But lately the world is being less cold towards cold fusion, thanks to a number of experiments that proved that E-Cat-like devices work, though nobody, including Rossi, knows how.

For instance, a group of scientists performed “independent third party tests” on the E-CAT in February-March 2014 at Lugano, Switzerland and the results were announced in October. Their report said that the devices produced more heat than can be explained by chemical burning and conceded that they had “no convincing theoretical explanation”. But the report also said that the results were “too conspicuous not to be followed up.”

Another scientist, Alexander Parkhimov of Russia, also conducted experiments using E-Cat-like devices and said that they produced energy.

Furthermore, several universities (Texas Tech University of the US and the Tohoku University of Japan, to name two examples) are opening research divisions or forming committees to look into cold fusion.

Next week, the 19th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-19) will take place in Italy. The ICCFs have been generally dismissed as ‘meeting of believers’ but this time around many potential investors, notably the Bill Gates Foundation is taking part in it.

It is learnt that after the Power Minister, Piyush Goyal, was briefed about these developments, he personally requested Dr Kakodkar to look into the matter—which culminated in the Bengaluru meeting.

Read the original article here.

Related Links

Current Science stimulates Indian interest in LENR

Special LENR issue of Current Science available now

Dr. Sally Goerner Discusses Chaos, Complexity & Social Transition — Interview

This is an interview I recently conducted w/ general systems theorist Dr. Sally J. Goerner. While not focusing on Cold Fusion-LENR per se, it does focus on how a society might transition (aka self-organize) during a time of tumultuous change. It seems to me that CF-LENR, as well as the hope & uncertainty that accompanies it, is undoubtedly part of this complex “bifurcation point” in planetary history. I think the success of CF-LENR depends as much on humanity discovering innovative and/or “emergent” social arrangements, aka “cooperative modes” — and the two technologies will mutually reinforce one another through feedback. The dialogue is rather long, so I have provided an outline below. Thanks for taking an interest:

0.min-10.min: Dr. Goerner’s eclectic background; general systems theory; studying under Ralph Abraham; patterns & strange attractors; physical vs. spiritual; order-producing universe; energy network science vs. chaos theory; popular misconceptions surrounding chaos theory; lost meaning & lost science

10.min-20.min: Energy flow networks; self-organization vs. classical mechanization; basic elements of chaos theory; complementarity & chaos; boiling water & hydrodynamic self-organization; autopoetic cycles; bifurcation points

20.min-30.min: Orders & David Bohm; entropy as a subtle form of order; quantum chaos; fractal orders; particles as localized energy flow; linear vs. non-linear systems; importance of coupling; determinism

30.min-40.min: Reconceptualizing evolution; information & self-organization produce evolution; adapting to information & crises; co-evolution & stages of consciousness; fractal hierarchy & panarchy; distributed power & learning to listen; autopoetic genesis of DNA; Freeman Dyson’s energy accident

40.min-50.min: Holographic DNA; Stephen Jay Gould; aperiodic evolutionary jumps; Darwinism & elite politics; fallacy of Social-Darwinism; Dawkins & free-market society; How the Leopard Changed Its Spots; development of the prefrontal cortex; reforming economics & finance; economics as a complex metabolism; appealing to power-brokers; bio-mimicry & development; needs hierarchies & dysfunction

50.min-60.min: Necessary conditions for self-organization; corruption; focus on what energizes you; thinking outside the box; reading & synthesizing; the politics of resignation; transition from medieval worldview to modern age; distortion of society’s root metaphor; After the Clockwork Universe

60.min-69.min: Bifurcations & social change; Jean Gebser & integral society; solutions & education; local order & global order; restoring integrity; reciprocity & the science of cooperation; time-banking; beyond charity; banking reform; international development of networks vs. GDP growth; constraining metrics & NGOs

Also see:

Dr. Edmund Storms Explains LENR Theory — Interview

Dr. Brian Ahern Explains Non-Linear LENR — Interview

UK Ministry of Defence Global Strategic Trends Report, Winston Churchill, and Cold Fusion


Global Strategic Trends – Out to 2040
– UK Ministry of Defence [.pdf]


  • Global Strategic Trends is a comprehensive view of the future produced by a research team at the Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre (DCDC).
  • This edition of Global Strategic Trends is benchmarked at 12 January 2010.
  • DCDC’s Strategic Trends Programme aims to provide a detailed analysis of the future strategic context for defence out to 2040.
  • This will be an essential input into policy and concept development.

Cold Fusion – A Disruptive Energy Source – UK Defence Report – pg 92

A novel, efficient form of energy generation could be developed that rapidly lowers demand for hydrocarbons.

For example, the development of commercially available cold fusion reactors could result in the rapid economic marginalization of oil-rich states.

This loss of status and income in undiversified economies could lead to state-failure and provide opportunities for extremist groups to rise in influence.

Cold Fusion Now Begs An Alternate View

What is the thinking behind the UK report, which warns of threats that commercially available cold fusion reactors may bring?

  • rapid economic marginalization of oil-rich states
  • rapidly lowers demand for hydrocarbons
  • could lead to state-failure
  • extremist groups to rise in influence

Adopt a Noble Defence Strategy

The UK Ministry of Defence should question itself and its’ thinking. Meta-consciousness requires, “Why am I thinking what I’m thinking and are there faulty premises leading me astray?”

The UK Ministry of Defence would benefit by reading Jed Rothwell’s Cold Fusion May Have Revolutionary Potential [.pdf]. They will find how Winston Churchill’s thought processes differed from theirs, and then, after much deliberation, the Ministry will most likely consider adopting their esteemed countryman’s outlook on the potential (benefits not threats) of clean abundant hydrogen fusion for securing our global, national, and environmental future; a ‘Noble Defence Strategy’ out to 2040 and beyond.

Winston Churchill – Daydreaming About Fusion in 1932

“Nuclear energy is incomparably greater than the molecular energy which we use today.”

“If the hydrogen atoms in a pound of water could be prevailed upon to combine together and form helium, they would suffice to drive a thousand-horsepower engine for a whole year…”

“There is no question among scientists that this gigantic source of energy exists…”

“The discovery and control of such sources of power would cause changes in human affairs incomparably greater than those produced by the steam-engine four generations ago. Schemes of cosmic magnitude would become feasible. Geography and climate would obey our orders. Fifty thousand tons of water, the amount displaced by the Berengaria, would, if exploited as described, suffice to shift Ireland to the middle of the Atlantic…

“Communications and transport by land, water and air would take unimaginable forms, if, as is in principle possible, we could make an engine of 600 horse-power, weighing 20 lb and carrying fuel for a thousand hours in a tank the size of a fountain-pen. Wireless telephones and television, following naturally upon their present path of development, would enable their owner to connect up with any room similarly installed, and hear and take part in the conversation as well as if he put his head in through the window. The congregation of men in cities would become superfluous…”

“If the gigantic new sources of power become available, food will be produced without recourse to sunlight. Vast cellars in which artificial radiation is generated may replace the cornfields or potato-patches of the world. Parks and gardens will cover our pastures and ploughed fields…”

 “The cities and the countryside would become indistinguishable. Every home would have its garden and its glade…”

Improved Insight

The UK Ministry of Defence would also improve its’ outlook by reading the NASA Future Strategic Issues (circa 2025) report and begin thinking how we can use this technology to every ones advantage, creating universal wealth and prosperity, thereby removing most of the reasons nations go to war. It is imperative for the Defence Ministry to have an improved insight into the causes of strife in the world, and solutions, in order to prevent the horrors of future forms of warfare.

NASA: Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025] Page 22 [.pdf]

“In this [Worldwide] economy our ability to create wealth is not bounded by physical limits/resources but by our ability to come up with new ideas.”

However, even “universal wealth” will not obviate the other causes of warfare which include Politics, ”Face” (which include) Religion, Megalomania, and Territorial Disputes.


LENR energy will prove to be a boon for both oil rich and not-so-oil rich states, for both the haves and the have-nots. The energetics of cold fusion should bring more solutions than problems, and when applied correctly, all the world will benefit.

It’s time for the U.K Ministry of Defence to think along different lines. Only by envisioning the true potential of cold fusion will they begin applying it beneficently, creating a world that has greater security for all, a world that does not feel the need to ever go to war again. A ‘Noble Defence Strategy’ is required out to 2040 and beyond. Winston Churchill would approve and lead them in this if he were alive today.


I would like to thank Jed Rothwell for his excellent essay, which is where I found the Winston Churchill quotes.

Also, thanks extended to my friend A for sending me the UK Ministry of Defence report.

Cold Fusion May Have Revolutionary Potential –  Jed Rothwell

Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare [Circa 2025] – NASA

Global Strategic Trends – Out to 2040 – UK Ministry of Defence

Appeal to Putin on cold fusion countered with ‘nothing new’

A message from Dr. Edward Tsyganov:

Dear colleagues!

In early February 2014, I sent an appeal to the President of the Russian Federation on the so-called “cold fusion.” The realization that, in this case, we have encountered a completely new and epoch-making event in nuclear physics prompted me to do so. Cold fusion is an unusual phenomenon, which does not contradict any of the fundamental laws of nature, which inevitably will change the entire course of human history in the near future. The transition from oil and gas to safe, cold nuclear fusion energy with its truly inexhaustible opportunities will give to the hands of mankind a fantastic jump in energy, by seven orders of magnitude. We must be ready for the radical transformation of our entire way of life and try to avoid undesirable social turbulences associated with this transition.

The phenomenon of cold fusion was discovered by chemists Fleischmann and Pons about 25 years ago. It happened quite by accident. Currently, this phenomenon is reliably confirmed by experimentation, but each group of researchers interprets the nature of it in their own way. Cold fusion is at the junction of atomic and nuclear physics, elementary particle physics, chemistry, catalysis, and solid state physics. Quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, and the Standard Model of elementary particles and their interactions are the necessary components for this symbiosis of natural sciences. A specialization in science has currently gone so far, and quite a few scientists hold the required multidisciplinary scientific apparatus. It turns out that in such a well-studied area as modern nuclear physics, there are still areas that do not fit into traditional recipes and phenomenological rules. I am lucky that in the course of my academic career I have gained some experience in virtually all of these divergent fields.

Ministry-Science-Education-Russian-FederationMy appeal to the President of the Russian Federation on cold fusion was sent for review to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, who forwarded it for response to the Scientific Research Center “Kurchatov Institute.” My appeal to the President of the Russian Federation was also transmitted to the Russian Academy of Sciences.

In the attached web page

contains the information I gathered on the problems of cold fusion, under the Russia section, where I present copies of the documents that I have received from the reception of the President of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, and the Kurchatov Institute in Section Blog R.

Kurchatov Institute
Kurchatov Institute
My answer to the review of Dr. Yu.V. Martynenko of the Kurchatov Institute is also provided, where I point out of the weaknesses of his negative conclusion.

I look forward to the continuation of this scientific debate with supporters of traditional thermonuclear fusion. I still know nothing about my appeal that was sent for the review to the Russian Academy of Sciences.

It is interesting that in the Communications of International Thermonuclear ITER Project a reference to the memories of current Dean of the University of Utah Prof. David Kieda appears recently about those times when Fleischmann and Pons have claimed the discovery of cold fusion. ”I believe they really wanted it to be true. It would have been fantastic if it was. But the universe is what it is. You have to bend to the rules of the universe. And just because you want something to happen doesn’t mean it’s going to happen”. The reference to these memories and on the authority of Prof. D. Kieda, it seems to me, is designed to strengthen the weakening determination of the ITER physicists that they have selected the correct directions. Interesting details about the memories of Prof. D. Kieda are here:

We have a long way to go in the near future.

Truly yours,

E.N. Tsyganov

Cold Fusion Now here reproduces a google translate of the Ministry’s response to the appeal:

Response from Kurchatov Institute google translate:
( Ministry of Education RUSSIA )
Department of Science and Technology
Tverskaya st. , 11, Moscow, 125993
Tel. (495) 629-03-64 . Fax (495) 629-50-75
E – TAP : < 114 ( a) EN TSYGANOVA Dear Edward N. The Department of Science and Technology considered your appeal, received from the Office of President of the Russian Federation to work with appeals of citizens and organizations to the Russian Ministry of Education on the so-called cold fusion, and reports. From the response of the National Research Center "Kurchatov Institute " (hereinafter - the NRC "Kurchatov Institute") at the request of the Russian Ministry that your message does not contain any new information, in addition to published in the press ( Nuclear Physics ) and accessible the scientific community. Department directs you to review the scientific work on "Cold nuclear synthesis". Appendix: 1 l . Deputy Director of the AM Poles VG Drozhenko 8 (495) Read Tsyganov's letter to the Kurchatov Institute here.

Related Links

Deformation of electron outer shells important for Hyperion too, says Tsyganov

‘Cold Nuclear Fusion’ at RASA

A Physicist’s Formula

Kurchatov Institute Wikipedia

Kurchatov Institute Home

Russian Academy of Sciences Home