This book is an account of the journey of one life-long nuclear scientist as he discovered that the power of supernova to re-organise matter can be induced in simple experiments.

"Far in the universe, nuclear collapses very often take place by the gravitational force after stars consume their fuel. Since the electromagnetic force is about 40 orders stronger than the gravitational force, it should be easy to induce similar nuclear collapses by the electromagnetic force in laboratory. But we never knew until now how to do that.

I started writing about low-energy nuclear reactions (LENRs) after attending the 10th International Conference on Cold Fusion in August 2003 in Cambridge, Massachusetts. As a former computer network engineer, I knew very little about the science behind LENRs at the time. In Cambridge, I met more than 100 researchers from around the world and realized that they were observing real phenomena, albeit poorly understood at that time. They were convinced that they were dealing with a "cold fusion" process. At that point, I wasn't familiar enough with the research to question their interpretation of the experimental results.

When I first learned about the Widom-Larsen theory of LENRs in 2006, the large body of experimental results began to make much more sense. The underlying reactions clearly had nothing to do with room-temperature fusion. Instead, the experimental data provided strong evidence for processes that were neither fusion nor fission, but rather a new, third type of nuclear phenomena, LENRs. By 2008, I realized the crucial distinction between the erroneous idea of "cold fusion" and LENRs. I knew then I had to begin writing my next book.

Lost History, written for scientists and science historians, covers the period from 1912 to 1927, and explores the story of forgotten chemical transmutation research, a precursor to modern low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) research. The book tells the story of century-old research that has been absent from the scientific dialogue for a hundred years — research that is surprisingly similar to events in the modern era.

Fusion Fiasco, written for scientists and non-scientists alike, covers the period from 1989 to 1990 and tells the most accurate and complete story of the 1989 to 1990 "cold fusion" conflict. Relying heavily on archival records, the book documents one of the most divisive scientific controversies in recent history. The book explains why credible experimental LENR research emerged from the erroneous idea of room-temperature fusion, as claimed by Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons at the University of Utah.

Offering the prospect of clean, safe, and unlimited energy, nuclear fusion has long been the shining hope for a world disastrously dependent on dwindling supplies of fossil fuels. Two generations of the brightest scientific minds and billions of dollars have been devoted to designing and building experimental reactors that mimic the unimaginably extreme temperatures and pressures needed to produce nuclear reactions akin to those that power the Sun and the stars.

Then, suddenly, in the spring of 1989, Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, research chemists at the University of Utah, made an announcement that rocked the scientific world and made front-page news for months to follow. Their claim to have achieved nuclear fusion in a simple tabletop experiment and at room temperature defied sacrosanct conventional physical theories. And the scientific establishment would not take that challenge of cold fusion lying down. Within hours, even as the press was proclaiming a possible new era of unlimited clean energy, cries of disbelief and accusations of scientific misconduct and even fraud were heard from within professional circles.

Undead Science examines the story of cold fusion, one of the most publicized scientific controversies of the late twentieth century. In 1989 two Utah-based “discoverers” claimed to have developed an electrochemical process that produced more energy than was required to initiate the process. Finding no other explanation, the researchers described their findings as some kind of nuclear reaction. If they were correct, an important new energy source would have been found. Objections surfaced quickly, and in the year that followed, hundreds of scientists worldwide attempted to reproduce these results. Most, though not all, failed, and the controversy became increasingly antagonistic. By 1990, general scientific opinion favored the skeptics and experimental work went into a steep decline. Nevertheless, many scientists continue to do research in what Bart Simon calls this “undead science.”