New Energy Times, November 10, 2005 -- Issue #13

7. Newcomers to Condensed Matter Nuclear Science Rock the Boat, Part 2

Widom-Larsen Theory Portal

Dr. Allan Widom

On the theoretical side, the work of Allan Widom, a condensed matter physicist with Northeastern University, and Lewis Larsen, Chief Executive Officer of Lattice Energy LLC. has stirred up a tempest in a teapot in the condensed matter nuclear science community.

Widom and Larsen appear to be relative newcomers to the condensed matter nuclear science community. The only known presentation of the theory so far was at an Italian conference, "Coherence 2005," organized by Vincenzo Valenzi, a researcher with the Biometeorology Study Center of Rome on May 25. The conference was held at the University of Rome 3.

Lino Daddi, a physics professor with the Italian Naval Academy in Livorno was inspired by the Widom/Larsen theory.

"Perhaps we have a theory that explains all the anomalous phenomena. The transmutation observed from Yasuhiro Iwamura [Mitsubishi Heavy Industries] are explained without the problematic multiple reactions of Takahashi," Daddi wrote.

Neither Widom or Larsen granted interview requests at this time. However, a few Internet searches provided some limited information. Widom has a significant list of published physics papers, and the mysterious Larsen is listed as presenting a paper on a device with a "nuclear heat source" at a joint Department of Energy and Electric Power Research Institute meeting in February 2004.

Professor David J. Nagel, of the George Washington University, was the first to bring

the Widom/Larsen paper to our attention. Nagel, a physicist who worked for 36 years at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, considers the Widom/Larsen paper worthy of serious attention.

The controversial new theory appears to explain most, if not all, of the experimental anomalies observed in cold fusion experiments. The theory says it's not a fusion reaction, which would involve the strong force, but other low energy nuclear reactions that involve weak interactions, namely neutron formation from electrons and protons/deuterons, followed by local neutron absorption and subsequent beta-decay processes.

Physics Nobel laureate Brian Josephson reviewed the first Widom/Larson paper and considers their work “highly significant, since the physics may well be sound.”

Several cold fusion researchers have expressed their opinions privately to New Energy Times that the Widom/Larsen theory is wrong.

The theory appears to resolve the "three miracles of cold fusion."

The three "miracles" of cold fusion are 1) the lack of strong neutron emissions, 2) the mystery of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated and 3) that no strong emission of gamma rays or x-rays occur.

John Huizenga, who chaired the 1989 Department of Energy cold fusion review, labeled these factors miracles. Huizenga had made up his mind quickly about cold fusion. His use of the term "miracles" reflected his cynicism and difficulty in considering this new paradigm in condensed matter physics.

Widom and Larsen's theory also has accomplished a feat that, so far, has been unprecedented for cold fusion papers. It has made an entry into the mainstream physics community.

Two papers are now available which explain their theory, and they are listed on the Cornell University physics preprint server. The first paper, posted on May 2, 2005, is titled "Ultra Low Momentum Neutron Catalyzed Nuclear Reactions on Metallic Hydride Surfaces." It can be downloaded from http://www.arxiv.org/PS_cache/cond-mat/pdf/0505/0505026.pdf. A second paper was posted on Sept. 10 and is titled "Absorption of Nuclear Gamma Radiation by Heavy Electrons on Metallic Hydride Surfaces." This can be downloaded at http://www.arXiv.org/PS_cache/cond-mat/pdf/0509/0509269.pdf.

The only public comment we found from either of these authors was from a curious letter to the editor of Make magazine, by Larsen:

"Our theory, if verified experimentally by other laboratories: (a) falls solidly within the established laws of physics; and (b) does not involve any D-D or D-D-like fusion."

A cold fusion theory that falls within established laws of physics? How will mainstream

science be able to dismiss this? A cold fusion theory that contradicts nearly every other cold fusion theory? How will the current cold fusion community be able to accept this?

The papers have been submitted to a prominent physics journal, but he does not know any further details. If the papers do get accepted for publication, the event may be a milestone in condensed matter nuclear science and its subset of low energy nuclear reactions. On the other hand, if the theory doesn't hold water, then this will be another sad chapter in cold fusion's long incubation period.

New Energy Times, March 10, 2006 -- Issue #159. Widom-Larsen Low Energy Nuclear Reaction Theory, Part 3

Widom-Larsen Theory Portal

New Energy Times first reported theoretical developments from Allan Widom, a condensed matter physicist with Northeastern University, and Lewis Larsen, chief executive officer of Lattice Energy LLC in issue #13 on Nov. 10, 2005.

That story reported two papers which had been submitted to prominent peer-review physics journals.

On Feb. 20, Widom and Larsen introduced a third paper, "Nuclear Abundances in Metallic Hydride Electrodes of Electrolytic Chemical Cells," available on the arXiv pre-print server at http://www.arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0602472 and at New Energy Times at http://newenergytimes.com/library/2006WidomA-NuclearAbundancesInMetallicHydride.pdf.

Despite some dissenting opinions on these theories from some researchers within the low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) field, professor David J. Nagel, of the George Washington University, a longtime cold fusion observer, considers this paper "worthy of serious attention."

The paper references a significant set of experiments performed by George H. Miley et al. at the Department of Nuclear, Plasma and Radiological Engineering of the University of Illinois.

New Energy Times contacted Miley for his perspective on the paper.

"I've taken a brief look at it so far," Miley said, "and from a first look, this theory agrees with the distinctive multipeak reaction product data from my experiments amazingly well. Testing against experimental data is an essential step that any serious theory in this field must face up to, but very few have to date."

Miley commented on how effectively the Widom-Larsen supports his experimental data as compared to other LENR theories. "Only four others have seriously tried, to my

memory," he said.

"Compared to these other models," Miley said, "the Widom-Larsen model has much more in-depth development and a more detailed comparison with the rather complex features of the data. To address the full data set, one must consider a complicated spectrum of products for several different electrode materials. Several of the prior attempts are somewhat incomplete developments using arbitrary fitting parameters and assumptions."

Miley noted that a few other well-known LENR theories were developed explicitly for deuterium-deuterium alpha-type fusion reactions and, therefore, are not applicable to the broader set of reactions such as those involved with his experiments.

----------------------

Larsen and Widom have provided a summary of the paper for New Energy Times:

BackgroundThis paper contains a new explanation for anomalous patterns of nuclear abundances experimentally observed in metallic hydride cathodes of electrolytic chemical cells. These experimental transmuted nuclear abundances have been something of a scientific enigma since they were first published by G. H. Miley et al. starting in 1996.

Earlier attempts by other researchers to explain the experimental distinctive multipeak patterns of nuclear abundances employed a two-body fission spectrum. However, no sensible physical mechanism has been proposed that plausibly could create the required large quantities of very massive fissionable nuclei capable of producing such a spectrum.

Highlights of the Attached PaperWhen we apply the theory cited previously, a new explanation is provided for the experimental nuclear transmutation data that we regard as both plausible and consistent with known science. There are no new physical laws assumed. We do not see any evidence in the experimental data for fusion processes with their implied low energy Coulomb barrier penetration.

In contrast to earlier explanations, the data is described as primarily the result of a neutron absorption spectrum. Ultra-low momentum neutrons are produced (along with virtually inert neutrinos) by the weak interaction annihilation of electrons and protons when the chemical cell is driven strongly out of equilibrium. Large quantities of these neutrons are produced on the surface of a metal hydride cathode in an electrolytic cell. The ultra-low momentum of these nuclei implies extremely large cross-sections for absorption by various "seed" nuclei present on or near the surface of a cathode in a chemical cell, increasing their nuclear masses. The increasing masses eventually lead to

instabilities relieved by beta decay processes, thereby increasing the nuclear charge. As stated in the paper, in this manner, "most of the periodic table of chemical elements may be produced, at least to some extent." 

The experimentally observed pattern of distinctive peaks and valleys in the transmuted nuclear mass-spectrum reflects the neutron absorption resonance peaks as theoretically computed employing a simple and conventional neutron optical model potential well.

An intriguing possibility is briefly noted in the paper. The varieties of different elements and isotopes that we find in the world around us were thought to arise exclusively from nuclear reactions in stars and supernova explosions. Recent astrophysical calculations have indicated some weaknesses in the above picture regarding the strengths of the neutron flux created in a supernova. Our paper asserts, "It appears entirely possible that ultra-low momentum neutron absorption may have an important role to play in the nuclear abundances not only in chemical cells but also in our local solar system and galaxy."

----------------------

Nagel also provided New Energy Times with a review of the latest as well as the two earlier Widom-Larsen papers:

"The first paper by Widom and Larsen provided a multistep theory for the occurrence of many different nuclear reactions (not fusion!) on the surfaces of hydrides. It postulated the creation of very high electric fields and, because of the fields, very heavy electrons. The mass renormalized electrons could then react via the weak interaction with available protons to form very slow neutrons, which could next participate in further nuclear reactions. Neither of the two nuclear reaction steps requires surmounting (tunneling through) the Coulomb barrier. The paper did not take the next steps of computing rates for each of the involved steps and thence excess power or energies. However, it did offer a few candidate nuclear reactions that has plausible energetics. This paper has been accepted for publication in a respected physics journal.

The second paper by the same authors addressed the lack of energetic gamma rays from condensed matter nuclear reaction experiments. They computed that gamma rays in the range from 0.5 to 10 MeV would be absorbed in amazingly short distances by the heavy electrons that are present where the gamma rays are born. Again, there is a need for much further work to quantify the rates of both the generation and the absorption of the gamma rays, with due attention to the geometry of these processes. This mechanism might have interesting possibilities for totally new and efficient forms of gamma ray shielding.

The third paper from Widom and Larsen addressed the transmutation part of the field of condensed matter nuclear science. Thus, it is comparable to the first paper, which laid the foundation for understanding the excess heat part of the field.

The new paper has two components. The first presents a simple model for the production of new elements in CMNS experiments. It involves the absorption of the ultra-low-momentum neutrons postulated in the first paper by nuclei of widely varying masses. A basic optical model is used to compute the absorption as a function of atomic mass. Peaks are found when small integral numbers of wavelengths of the very slow neutrons inside the nucleus match the size of the nucleus. The spacings between the five peaks found from the new theory are dictated by the wavelengths of the neutrons added to nuclei (about 2 femtometers).

The model is a "wave in a well" picture, which should be familiar to students of basic quantum mechanics. The second part of the paper compares the predictions of the new model with the nuclear production rates vs. atomic mass that were found in electrochemical experiments. The measurements were performed with light water and nickel cathodes by Miley and his collaborators.

It was found that the atomic masses, at which the theoretical nuclear production rates are highest, are well matched to the mass dependence of the generation rates that was found experimentally, even though the experimental data have considerable scatter. Computation of absolute rates of nuclear production as a function of mass using the new theory are needed."

New Energy Times, Sept. 10, 2006 -- Issue #1810. Fourth Widom-Larsen LENR Theory Paper Released

[Editor's note: New Energy Times first reported theoretical developments from Allan Widom, a condensed matter physicist with Northeastern University, and Lewis Larsen, chief executive officer of Lattice Energy LLC in issue #13 on Nov. 10, 2005.

We also reported further developments of their theory in issue #15 on March 10, 2006.

New Energy Times does not peer-review papers, and thus, has no means by which to validate or assess the viability of the Widom-Larsen theory. The following text is provided by Lew Larsen for the interest of the reader, at the discretion of the reader. New Energy Times makes no endorsement.

We do, however, find an interesting apparent relationship between the theoretical discussion of applied electric fields and the application of electric fields in the Szpak at al. experimental work at the Navy's SPAWAR San Diego laboratory. We like seeing an apparent answer to the historical questions "Where are the neutrons?" and "Where's the dead graduate student?"]

Text provided by Lew Larsen and Alan Widom: "Theoretical Standard Model Rates of Proton to Neutron Conversions Near Metallic

Hydride Surfaces" by A. Widom and L. Larsen soon will be submitted to a refereed journal and is preceded by three related publications by us that are referenced and briefly summarized below.

This paper aims to answer an important question posed by many astute readers of our earlier publications on this subject. Assuming that one accepts the rest of our physics, can we show computations demonstrating that these claimed proton to ultra low momentum neutron conversions can take place at the substantial rates observed in the laboratory?

In the attached paper, we discuss how to compute low energy nuclear reaction rates for the process of radiation-induced electron capture by protons or deuterons producing new ultra low momentum neutrons and neutrinos.

For protons or deuterons in the neighborhoods of surfaces of condensed matter metallic hydride chemical cell cathodes, the radiation energy required for such nuclear reactions may be supplied by the applied voltage required to push a strong charged electric currents through certain chemical cells.

The rates of the resulting ultra low momentum neutron production are computed from the standard electroweak theory in satisfactory agreement with the available experimental data.

We think our theory can explain all of the major features exhibited in many seemingly anomalous experiments (historical and collectively known as cold fusion) that have been regarded by many nuclear physicists as theoretically inexplicable.

In contrast to other earlier theories, involving penetration of Coulomb barriers, our new theory of low energy nuclear reactions uses the well-accepted standard model of electroweak interaction physics. We think that the key process responsible for producing most of the experimentally observed anomalies is not a form of fusion.

On the contrary, we believe that the key processes driving the behavior of these systems are weak interactions. In that regard, our work extends well-accepted Standard Model physics to include collective effects in condensed matter. No new microscopic physics is assumed or is necessary to explain the data.

Prior Related Widom-Larsen Publications

Text provided by Lew Larsen:1. "Ultra Low Momentum Neutron Catalyzed Nuclear Reactions on Metallic Hydride Surfaces," published in March 2006 in The European Physical Journal C - Particles and Fields.

The mass of electrons embedded in collectively oscillating surface plasma oscillations can be markedly increased (renormalized) by the extremely high electric fields (> 10*11 volt/meter) occurring in surface layers of protons or deuterons of loaded metallic hydrides. The resulting "heavy" electrons can react spontaneously with local protons or

deuterons to produce neutrons and neutrinos.

Neutrons created collectively under these conditions have almost virtually zero momentum or equivalently very long quantum mechanical wavelengths which dramatically increase neutron absorption in the neighborhood of condensed matter surfaces. These ultra low momentum neutrons can catalyze local nuclear reaction networks. Examples of such reactions are provided.

2. "Nuclear Abundances in Metallic Hydride Electrodes of Electrolytic Chemical Cells" [Cornell arXiv physics preprint server - arXiv:cond-mat/0602472 v1 20 February 2006, also submitted to a peer-reviewed journal]

This preprint discusses a model for the anomalous patterns of nuclear abundances experimentally observed in metallic hydride cathodes of electrolytic chemical cells. These experimental transmuted nuclear abundances have been something of a scientific enigma since they were first published by George H. Miley. The data is interpreted as primarily the result of a neutron absorption spectrum.

Ultra low momentum neutrons are produced (along with virtually inert neutrinos) by the weak interaction annihilation of electrons and protons when the chemical cell is driven strongly out of equilibrium. Appreciable quantities of these neutrons are produced on the surface of a metal hydride cathode in an electrolytic cell. The ultra low momentum of these neutrons implies extremely large cross sections for absorption by various "seed" nuclei present on or near the surface of a cathode in a chemical cell, increasing their nuclear masses. The increasing masses eventually lead to instabilities relieved by beta decay processes, thereby increasing the nuclear charge. In this manner most of the periodic table of chemical elements may be produced, at least to some extent.

The experimentally observed pattern of distinctive peaks and valleys in the transmuted nuclear mass-spectrum reflects the neutron absorption resonance peaks as theoretically computed employing a simple and conventional neutron optical model potential well.

An intriguing possibility is briefly noted in the paper. The varieties of different elements and isotopes that we find in the world around us were thought to arise exclusively from nuclear reactions in stars and supernova explosions.

However, recent astrophysical calculations have indicated some weaknesses in the above picture regarding the strengths of the neutron flux created in a supernova.

Our paper says, "It appears entirely possible that ultra low momentum neutron absorption may have an important role to play in the nuclear abundances not only in chemical cells but also in our local solar system and galaxy."

3. "Absorption of Nuclear Gamma Radiation by Heavy Electrons on Metallic Hydride Surfaces," [Cornell arXiv physics preprint server - arXiv:cond-mat/0509269 v1 10 September 2005, also submitted to a peer-reviewed journal]

This preprint provides a theoretical explanation for effective suppression of gamma

radiation and efficient absorption of ultra low momentum neutrons in LENR systems. It explains why neutron absorption by nearby nuclei in LENR systems do not result in the external release of large, easily observable fluxes of hard energetic gammas and X-rays. Specifically, we show that surface electrons bathed in already soft radiation can convert the hard gamma radiation into soft radiation. The number of gammas in the energetic region from 0.5 MeV to 10.0 MeV is strongly suppressed at the condensed matter surface, and the energy appears as softer (less energetic) heat radiation. The short mean free paths of both ultra low momentum neutrons and hard gamma radiation are computed in the neighborhood of condensed matter surfaces. In LENR systems, the gamma absorbing layer of surface electrons already bathed in soft radiation has the ability to stop a very dangerous ~5 MeV gamma ray in less than two nanometers -- two-billionths of a meter. With existing materials technologies, it would take ~10 cm of lead, ~25 cm of steel, or ~1 meter of very heavy concrete to accomplish the same degree of shielding.

____________________________________

New Energy Times, January 31, 2011 -- Issue #36

Weak Interaction Theory Paper Published with Acknowledgement to Chidambaram

By Steven B. Krivit

Allan Widom, Lewis Larsen and their collaborator, Yogendra Srivastava, have published another peer-reviewed paper on their ultra-low-momentum neutron-catalyzed theory of LENR.

Rajagopala Chidambaram, the principal scientific adviser to the government of India and the chairman of the committee that advises the Indian cabinet on science matters, was mentioned in the acknowledgement section at the end of the paper.

For open-minded scientists, "cold fusion" was a reasonable hypothesis to begin with in 1989, but as the experimental evidence piled up, it began to look less like a fusion process. For more-conservative scientists, "cold fusion" was a disgrace.

As the experimental evidence grew, it became clearer that low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) are more likely to be explained by weak interactions than by fusion, as the authors show.The paper is an overview of the Widom-Larsen theory and explains its relevance to LENR, exploding wires and the solar corona.

The group's paper came out electronically in October in Pramana – Journal of Physics, published by the Indian Academy of Sciences in collaboration with the Indian National Science Academy and the Indian Physics Association.

A similar peer-reviewed paper published in the American Chemical Society Symposium Series: Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions and New Energy Technologies Sourcebook (Vol. 2), edited by Marwan and Krivit.

Chidambaram clearly makes the distinction between LENR and "cold fusion." He told the Deccan Chronicle in October that he had no intentions of being associated with "cold fusion."“I am not convinced about the feasibility of cold fusion," Chidambaram said. "I do not intend to take up cold fusion experiments. Anybody interested in pursuing the same is welcome to do it on their own.”

 

NASA and Widom-Larsen Theory: Inside Story

Posted on May 24, 2012 by Steven B. Krivit

Yesterday, the NASA Langley Future Innovation Department uploaded a short video clip in which NASA said that it wants to test and confirm the Widom-Larsen ultra-low-momentum neutron theory of low-energy nuclear reactions.

New Energy Times made some inquiries, and the inside story suggests a very different picture.

First, let’s review some background information, most of which appears on the main New Energy Times Web site.

For the last 23 years, researchers around the world have attempted to perform LENR experiments to either demonstrate nuclear-scale excess heat or obtain other more-direct nuclear signatures. Most of the researchers who started this inquiry in 1989 thought the underlying process was some kind of “cold fusion.”

But a careful study of the experiments and a comprehensive theory published in 2006 by Allan Widom, a condensed matter physicist with Northeastern University, and Lewis Larsen, chief executive officer of Lattice Energy LLC, showed that LENRs have almost nothing to do with fusion.

However, the cold fusion believers strongly resisted giving up their old paradigm. They knew that LENR heavy-element transmutations disproved the idea of “cold fusion,” and many of them explicitly avoided searching for these signatures.

In 2006, when Widom and Larsen published their theory, the pair became persona non grata among the older group of cold fusion believers. But people outside of the field, at NASA, IBM, CERN, and Johns Hopkins University, were very supportive. The Widom-Larsen theory proposes a novel method for enhancement of surface plasmon polaritons to initiate and sustain LENRs.

NASA, in particular, was attracted to LENRs because of their potential for an ideal energy source for aerospace: high fuel density, high power rate and lack of need for radiation shielding.

In September 2011, NASA held a LENR Innovation Forum workshop at its Glenn Research Center. In fact, NASA had explored LENRs many years earlier, as the Fralick slides from the workshop show.

Bring the clock forward to Jan. 12, 2012. NASA released a short promotional video titled “Method for Enhancement of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to Initiate and Sustain LENR” on NASA’s Technology Gateway Web site. Some of the statements made in the video were peculiar, and we ran a short news story on it on Jan. 13.

Here are some key points excerpted from our story:

****************Two scientists at NASA’s Langley Research Center, Dennis Bushnell and Joseph Zawodny, saw the promise of the Widom-Larsen ultra-low-momentum neutron theory of LENRs.

For several years, Bushnell and Zawodny spoke favorably and enthusiastically about the Widom-Larsen theory as well as LENR in general.

[On Jan. 12], Larsen told New Energy Times that he spoke with both NASA employees by phone to help them learn about LENRs and his theory.

“I spent six months tutoring Zawodny so he had the basics of the theory,” Larsen said.

Larsen told New Energy Times that Bushnell and Zawodny also led [Larsen] to believe that NASA might provide some funding for his company [Lattice Energy LLC].

“In a series of telephone calls I had during the spring and summer of 2008 with Zawodny and Bushnell, they dangled a carrot - the possibly of significant funding from NASA,” Larsen said. “I told them that I was wiling to teach them the basic physics but I would not transfer Lattice’s proprietary knowledge about how to use nanotechnology to improve the reliability of LENRs without having a contract.

“I told them, ‘Under contract, I will show you how to make transmutations every time, but I will not show you how to reliably make large amounts of heat.’

“In January 2009, after an internal NASA meeting, Bushnell and Zawodny informed Lattice that they would not be funding us but they would welcome any free advice we wanted to offer NASA. We declined.”

****************

The core of the Widom-Larsen theory is that it describes a novel method for producing heavy electrons, which then are used to produce neutrons. Larsen filed a patent application based on the theory in 2005, and the application published in 2007. On Feb. 22, 2011, the U.S. Patent and Trademark office issued patent 7,893,414 to Lattice Energy.

But in March 2010, 14 months after NASA told Larsen it would not offer Lattice any funding, Zawodny, on behalf of the U.S. government, filed a provisional U.S. patent application for a “Method for Producing Heavy Electrons.” Zawodny cited the pending Lattice patent as well as the Widom-Larsen theory in his application. Remember that Lattice’s patent application went public in 2007, but Lattice’s patent had not yet been granted.

Now let’s come back to the Jan. 12, 2012, video produced and published by NASA. At the end of the video, the narrator restates the title as “NASA’s Method for Enhancement of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to Initiate and Sustain LENR in Metal Hydride Systems.”

Even though the NASA video states the essential aspect of the Widom-Larsen theory, when Zawodny appears in this video, he mentions nothing of the Widom-Larsen theory or Larsen’s concept of how surface plasmon polaritons are a primary key to initiate LENRs. In fact, NASA’s video states that the idea is theirs.

At the time, we sent Zawodny an e-mail and asked for an explanation of the omission. He responded and said that the intended audience was not interested in that level of detail.

The next day, on Jan. 14, 2012, Zawodny posted an article on his blog with a more detailed explanation about why NASA’s video failed to credit and recognize the Widom-Larsen theory.

“When I talk to my family, friends, or neighbors about some of my work,” Zawodny wrote, “I do not cite Widom-Larsen Theory or any of their papers. There would be little point in doing so.”

But NASA’s video is not directed at Zawodny’s family, friends, or neighbors.

In his blog article, Zawodny reiterated, as he had done in several public presentations in earlier years, his enthusiasm and optimism for the Widom-Larsen theory.

Zawodny’s article also contained an unusual disclaimer.

“While I do work for NASA, I do not speak for them,’ Zawodny wrote. “They employ me for my professional capabilities and on occasion my professional opinion. Nothing I say should ever be construed as anything other than my personal opinion.”

Oddly, the video was published on a NASA Web site, contained NASA’s logo, discussed NASA, and was produced by NASA.

In the new video, which prominently mentions the Widom-Larsen theory, Zawodny states that he “had been working with Larsen.”

New Energy Times sent an e-mail to Zawodny today and asked whether he would agree to a short phone interview.

“Nope,” Zawodny wrote.

Larsen, however, did agree to a phone interview.

Larsen told New Energy Times today that neither Larsen nor his company, Lattice Energy LLC, ever had a formal relationship with either NASA or Zawodny. Larsen went into more detail about his history with NASA.

“Around December 2008, after I had spent months tutoring Zawodny,” Larsen said, “Zawodny called me up and said, ‘I finally feel like I’ve got a grasp on all the basic physics. The physics are correct as far as I can tell. We’ve met with NASA management about all this and it went very well.  They have instructed me to get the lawyers involved to draw up a contract on this at best speed.’”

Around that time, Bushnell got more involved, Larsen said.

Larsen reiterated that NASA told him in 2008 that it would be in a position to fund Lattice and give his company credibility if Larsen gave NASA the basic physics.

“Bushnell said, ‘We can give Lattice the Good Housekeeping seal of approval,’” Larsen said.

He said NASA made multiple attempts to get him to divulge sensitive engineering details that he intends to use in the development of commercial LENR devices as heat sources. But Larsen refused.

“I told them that I would not give them engineering details about how to make a heat-producing device that was optimized for heat production,” he said, “but I would be happy to tell them how to make transmutations repeatedly.”

But NASA wasn’t interested in learning how to use LENR transmutation experiments as a way to test the theory, Larsen said.

In January 2009, Zawodny contacted Larsen and, to Larsen’s great surprise, told him that NASA was not, in fact, going to offer Lattice any funding.

Zawodny said that NASA was, however, going to do an experiment within three to six months that would attempt to confirm the theory and that NASA would attempt to publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal.

Zawodny told Larsen that Lattice could advise NASA for free if it wished but that Larsen would have no control over the design or execution of the experiments.

Two years later, Zawodny’s Sept. 22, 2011, workshop slides show that NASA designed and set up an experiment in August 2011. NASA has yet to report whether it ran such an

experiment and, if so, what result it found.

In the May 23, 2012, video from NASA, Zawodny states that he and NASA are trying to perform a physics experiment to confirm the Widom-Larsen theory. He mentions nothing about the laboratory work that NASA may have performed in August 2011. Larsen told New Energy Times his opinion about this new video.

“NASA’s implication that their claimed experimental work or plans for such work might be in any way a definitive test of the Widom-Larsen theory is nonsense,” Larsen said.

“The moment NASA filed a competing patent, it disqualified itself as a credible independent evaluator of the Widom-Larsen theory,” he said. “Lattice Energy is a small, privately held company in Chicago funded by insiders and two angel investors, and we have proprietary knowledge.

“NASA offered us nothing, and now, backed by the nearly unlimited resources of the federal government, NASA is clearly eager to get into the LENR business any way it can.”

New Energy Times asked Larsen for his thoughts about the potential outcome of any NASA experiment to test the theory, assuming details are ever released.

“NASA is behaving no differently than a private-sector commercial competitor,” Larsen said. “If NASA were a private-sector company, why would anyone believe anything that it says about a competitor?”