Rossi Blog Reader

This website tracks recent postings to Andrea Rossi's Journal of Nuclear Physics, sorting the entries with priority to Rossi's answers, which appear under each question.

• Need more context? We also have Rossi's entire blog on a single page.
• You can also keep an eye on Defkalion's latest postings to their forums.
• Website comments to the Webmaster (who has no contact or connection with Rossi).
• Email to Andrea Rossi - Journal Of Nuclear Physics

  1. orsobubu

    Dear Andrea,

    according to Argon’s thoughtful LMAO translation machine, not only you are very near to “your labor exhaustion”, but it seems that, because “your investors need result of your work”, in the effort of “increase your work team” you’re starting a very discutible practice of “delegate …etc” Please clarify urgently this point because this is not what we intend here as a permanent social evolution.

  2. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    I did not publish your comment because “that” word has not right of citizenship in this blog.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  3. Francesco

    Hi, I can’t understand how you can accept the hypothesis of a negative result of the independent report if you are sure that the so called “Rossi effect” is real and so evident (COP6).
    I don’t want to be polemic but for me is impossible to understand how you can continue to say that the results can be negative although you have worked on this system for so long and you have a so deep comprehension of the phenomena.

    Thank you for you answer.

  4. Andrea Rossi

    Francesco:
    We must wait for thr report of the ITP and the operation of at least one year of the 1 MW plant before considering consolidated the technology. In the meantime a huge R&D work will have to be performed.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  5. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 30th, 2014 at 5:15 PM

    Wlad,
    Why do you keep insisting that the only photons in the Dirac theory are the annihilation photons of an epo(511 KeV for the electron, 511KeV for the positron)? In his theory he accounts for the production of all frequencies of the spectrum and only in special cases, for the annihilation of the epos. Why do you think that only those photons are allowed?
    ———————————————

    Dear Eernie,
    an acceptable model of photon must be able to explain the entire electromagnetic spectrum.

    According to the Dirac theory, the photons of the luminous spectrum have energy in the magnitude of 1MeV.

    1MeV is the energy of the gamma rays.

    Therefore, according to Dirac theory, all animals and the human specie would have to be blind, since the energy of the positron-electron photon would destroy the eyes of the whole live beings.

    But the energy of the positron-electron photon would destroy not only the eyes of all alive beings.
    The photons positron-electron with the energy of the gamma rays would destroy the whole life in the planet.

    Dirac theory of the photon is absurd and stupid, and I dont want to talk about anymore.

    You are trying desperately to save the Dirac theory, because you use it in your LERN theory.
    But the science does not work in such a way.
    If a theory is unable to describe a phenomenon, the theory must be discarded, because the phenomenon cannot be discarded (as you are suggesting), since the phenomenon belongs to the range of phenomena existing in the Nature.

    regards
    wlad

  6. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    I do not know how the consume of electricity has been measured by the Independent Third Party, but I imagine it will be described in detail in the report.
    I know, because they told me before the test, that they have treasured the experience and the critics made after the test made in 2013.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S.
    As per your request, I did not publish your comment.

  7. Andrea Rossi

    Timycelyn:
    In our Team there are specialists of the necessary fields and when we need support we ask it from external specialists of our trust. Obviously the control system are a vital part of the plant and your Group can be sure we have top level engineers that have designed it. Obviously we work only with persons who got the necessary clearance, beside the necessary professionality.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  8. orsobubu

    When Steven N. Karels reads Andrea Rossi saying RCPN (Report Could be Positive or Negative), he LOLs. But when I read Steven N. Karels trying every subtle trick to know the nickel particle size from Rossi, I ROTFL. LOL.

  9. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    I agree with you. What we are doing is a team work. A strong team work. Read again the comment of Argon… and my answer to him.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  10. timycelyn1

    Dear Andrea,
    We have been discussing the 1MW plant you have installed at IH’s first E-cat customer, and the experts in our group who have background in the relevant industry and disciplines are stressing the challenge and difficulty of ganging up 100 – odd heat producing units in a heat excanger type situation, and keeping them all within acceptable performance parameters.

    Apparently it is a substantial control systems challenge, even for something as mundane as a gas burner, that could take many months to perfect.

    Our concern was that we knew the World’s ECAT experts were taking care of the ECAT modules at the heart of he 1MW device, but we wondered (no insult meant!!) to what extent you had / had access to the very best experts in these complex control system problems. One of our number summed this up with something like “They shouldn’t try to do everything themselves. They are the ultimate experts when it comes to the ECATs, but they need to get in equivalent experts for the non-ECAT parts of the project.” How do you feel about this worry – have we a point?

    Best wishes and hopes

    Tim

  11. Andrea Rossi

    Rodney Nicholson:
    nice!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  12. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels,
    You have imagined the bright side of the moon. I should have to imagine the dark side of the moon. The consequences of a failure would be devastating.
    In both cases, I will continue, as always, to pray God every morning and then get down to work, because in both cases much work will have to be done by our team. First of all, we want to see the 1 MW plant work well for a long, long time, and make profits for the company of our Customer. I have to focus on this, not on the sides of the moon.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  13. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    When the independent report is published and IF IT IS POSITIVE!, A big if, yes we know it can be either positive or negative, but if it is very positive, this could be very troubling for you and your firm. Think of the enormous pressure to produce, to protect your Intellectual property, the increased amount of scams and fake investments which will arise, the enormity of the opposition now becoming competition, etc. You will have awakened many sleeping giants.

    I understand you have taken provisions to obtain a patent and, perhaps, the report, IF POSITIVE, will aid in a successful outcome. But, I suspect, literally billions will flood into corporate and perhaps government research projects into this technology area. And there is the problem of industrial espionage (and perhaps state-sponsored espionage too). I trust your security (IT and personal) are good enough. I hope you are ready to ride the Wave of Success, if the report is very positive. Success can be very difficult in ways you may not have imagined. It seems you have a good Management team, seasoned and strong. And a good technology team. Your thoughts?

  14. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Thank you.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  15. Argon

    Sorry my english is a machine translation. Dear Dr. Rossi! You have a lot of months of hard work up to 16 hours a day. But the timing of the sale of E-cat and remain unclear. It is normal for the industry difficult birth of new products. Thus, the typical cars and planes are still developing teams of dozens of people, and build their thousands. And work of one person does not replace the work of the collective. May be worth more to delegate to the your slaves, increase your work team? It is doubtful that your investors need result of your works your labor exhaustion :) )). I am personally as your little client need a real product – E-cat :) ))
    After the imminent release of the report you will be throwing questions – where e-cat? when the e-cat? What that it is necessary to accelerate the production of e-cat? :) ))

  16. Andrea Rossi

    Argon:
    It is not very easy to understand what you mean, but I try.
    About domestic E-Cats: we will not put them for sale for the time being. It will take time to make it possible, for many reasons I already explained.
    About the other issues: my duty is to continue my R&D work, whatever the results of the ITP report.
    By the way: I am not exhausted, I am used to work hard.
    Suggestion: please write short phrases, so you can take under control what you say… and avoid to write stupidities as the one I cancelled from your comment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  17. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I think Argon’s suggestion was towards the thought of developing different applications, given you understand the input and output characteristics of the eCat reactor. A suitable simulator could be developed to exercise the heat transfer and/or application.

    Personally, I would think it would divert you from your primary goal of producing a production version of eCats. The industrial companies that want your eCat know best how to convert the output power into their particular application. Having an “army” of support means Management and that takes time and energy (from you). You are doing it right… keep on doing it.

  18. eernie1

    Wlad,
    Why do you keep insisting that the only photons in the Dirac theory are the annihilation photons of an epo(511 KeV for the electron, 511KeV for the positron)? In his theory he accounts for the production of all frequencies of the spectrum and only in special cases, for the annihilation of the epos. Why do you think that only those photons are allowed?

  19. Argon

    Dear dr.Rossi!
    You will need to work not thirty people, but many dozens of groups and thousands of experienced people. You can have labor subcontractors without loss of your know-how. For this you may give yous future subcontractors a full-featured simulator E-Cat.
    To save your know-how you need to give subcontractors not real E-cat, but its full-featured simulator. Having the same external characteristics. Identical dimensions, capacity, load schedule and everything else like a real E-cat. But without the contents of the active Ni-H nucleus. To put it simply, an electric boiler in the corpus of E-Cat with the electronic control circuit. With big label ‘model emulator E-cat’
    In doing so you will be able to hired your contractors other entire teams and firms. Specialists in steam turbines, energy, power electrics. Specialists in Stirling engines and heating systems of buildings, etc. etc.

  20. Andrea Rossi

    Argon:
    Sorry, but I do not see the point.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  21. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 30th, 2014 at 11:13 AM

    Wlad,
    You must be kidding that the absorption of Dirac photons by a black surface is indicative of violating the conservation of energy. The total absorption is only for the visible portion of the energy spectrum which is a very small part of the energy realm. Even so you agree that, that part of the absorption is completely accounted for and no violation of energy conservation occurs.
    ——————————————-

    No, I am not kidding.

    The energy of a photon in the visible spectrum is between 1,24eV to 12,4eV.

    The energy of a photon composed by electron-positron moving with the speed c of light is:

    E = 2.m.c² = 2x(0,5×10^6 eV/c²).c² = 10^6 eV

    Therefore the energy of the Dirac’s photon is at least 10^5 times larger than the photon of the visible spectrum.

    There is only one way to save the Dirac theory: we have to consider that the visible spectrum does not exist.
    But in this case I dont understand how can I read the comments posted here in the JoNP.

    regards
    wlad

  22. eernie1

    Wlad,
    You must be kidding that the absorption of Dirac photons by a black surface is indicative of violating the conservation of energy. The total absorption is only for the visible portion of the energy spectrum which is a very small part of the energy realm. Even so you agree that, that part of the absorption is completely accounted for and no violation of energy conservation occurs.
    As for Pamela- Boss, there are so many ways 10 MeV neutrons can be generated in nuclear transmutations and nucleus rearrangements your guess is as good as mine. Feynman diagrams will tell you the same thing. Pamela hit her solutions with a sledge hammer and like lightening produced some neutrons of varying energy.

  23. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    There is nothing that can’t be discussed with respect. This is why we will continue to spam any comment that is disrespectful toward anybody, independently from the issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  24. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in September 30th, 2014 at 8:34 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    As you know, I publish all your comments, even when I do not agree with your opinions. The sole comments of you that we spam are the ones in which appear phrases that we deem offensive against scientists that adhere to the Standard Model. Any comment is welcome, independently from the text, so far it does not show lack of respect for anybody who works seriously in the field. We spam as well comments that insult you.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    ————————————-

    Dear Andrea
    when a scientist betrays the scientific method, neglecting or rejecting some experiments which deny the Standard Model in which he believes, the lack of respect is of the own scientist against himself and against to the scientific method.

    I dont think to reject scientific experiments can be considered a serious attitude

    The serious and acceptable attitude is to be loyal to the scientific method, being honest, in order to recognize when the Standard Model is denied by some experiment, and to confess it.

    So, when a scientist refuses to accept any experiment which denies the Standard Model, the lack of respect is not mine when I call him a betrayer.

    regards
    wlad

  25. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    As you know, I publish all your comments, even when I do not agree with your opinions. The sole comments of you that we spam are the ones in which appear phrases that we deem offensive against scientists that adhere to the Standard Model. Any comment is welcome, independently from the text, so far it does not show lack of respect for anybody who works seriously in the field. We spam as well comments that insult you.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  26. Wladimir Guglinski

    Eric Ashworth wrote in September 28th, 2014 at 2:02 PM

    Wladimir,
    Do you ever wonder why your theories are rejected when they do make sense and why paid physicists will not answer your questions.
    ———————————-

    Dear Eric,
    the eCat is being tested by academicians, and if I comment here my opinion on the reason why the physicists do not answer my questions, my comment will not be aproved for publication here.

    Some years in the future the scientific community will realize that I am right, and the physicists in the name of the Science will ask me forgiveness, as the Pope in the name of the Church asked pardon to Galileo, 400 years after his death.

    regards
    wlad

  27. eernie1

    Wlad,
    I agree completely with you when you state there are numerous methods to obtain cold fusion. However I would change it a little to say there are numerous methods to obtain energy from the nucleus and I have so stated in a number of previous blogs. We have already succeeded through hot fusion of Hydrogen and cold fission of Uranium, Plutonium and Thorium. Nature does it many ways through radioactivity. I think it is easy to predict that through insight provided by people like you and other researchers, other investigators will succeed in the future to uncover other methods. Success always unlocks the door to further success by providing incentives.

  28. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 29th, 2014 at 3:31 PM

    Dear Wlad,
    I do not understand your argument about the violation of the energy-mass relationship. Dirac accounts for all the energy waves resulting from mass conversion produced by epo interactions. By the way, many experiments show that photons can be divided, enhanced(doubled in frequency)changed in polarization character, reflected and otherwise manipulated without annihilation. What do you mean when you say it strikes a surface? This will be my last comment on this subject.
    —————————————————

    Eernie,
    when the light bits a black surface, the photon is 100% annihilated, all its energy is absorbed by the surface and converted to heat.

    And from Dirac’s theory the energy of the positron-electron photon is several times biggest than the energy of the light converted to heat.

    regards
    wlad

  29. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    I lost your comment for a mistake, it is gone lost in the spam when I forwarded it for publication. Sorry for that. Anyway: you asked which kind of support the Professors of the ITP asked to Prof of other institutions.
    Answer: I do not know, but we will read on the report, I think. It is totally futile to make suppositions, let’s wait for the report and eventually read it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  30. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Eric,
    a new paper suggests that the Universe can be like a Swiss Cheese, as I said some days ago.

    The name the physicists are calling such Swiss Cheese is “multiple universes”.
    See figure in the link:
    http://www.inovacaotecnologica.com.br/noticias/noticia.php?artigo=inflacao-cosmica-balanca-multiverso-ganha-firmeza&id=010130140929#.VCnGcRYUpbE

    The original paper is published here:
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.6530
    The new astronomical observation is eliminating the hypothesis of inflationary universe, and therefore it disproves the Big-Bang theory.

    .

    Now,
    if the physisists will finally realize that light can move with speed very lower than c=300.000km/s in the dark matter existing in the space between the multiple universes, they will conclude that the system for measuring the distance between the galaxies is wrong, and this is the reason why from the current theories the galaxies would have to be expelled under the action of the centripetal force.

    regards
    wlad

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.6530

  31. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 29th, 2014 at 11:03 AM

    Wlad,
    My theory of LENR depends greatly on some of the principals of the Dirac theory. One aspect considers that the electrons that make up the electron sphere of an atom originate from the epos contained within one of the neutrons in the nucleus. This creates a proton within the nucleus and the remaining positron of the epo gives the nucleus its + charge. The electron, depending upon the number of nucleons and their make up(ratio of neutrons to protons) remains external to the nucleus sphere within a specific distance and with an equilibrium energy. If the external electron is then forced back into the nucleus(electron capture)the result is generation of a Beta+- emission with the subsequent ejection of the captured electron and either the formation of an isotope or transmutation to another atom dependent on the ratio of neutrons to protons in a specific atomic nucleus along with a neutrino+- and a photon of various energies dependent upon the angle with which the electron approaches the nucleon inside the nucleus. Forcing the electron(most likely a 1s electron) back into the nucleus can be accomplished by applying a negative field to the exterior of the atom’s electron sphere which transmits its effect to the inner electrons through field effects. I call this the Fermi-Alvarez effect since they both were involved with formulating the theory and performing tests to verify the phenomena.
    ——————————————–

    Eernie,

    1- I think there are several different mechanisms for cold fusion, instead of only one. Each mechanism depends on the conditions used in the experiment

    2- How do you explain the emission of neutrons with energy 10MeV in Pamela Mosier-Boss experiment?

    In his paper Neutron Emission in the Cold Fusion Phenomenon, Hideo Kozima eliminates one of the d-d fusion as possible explanation for cold fusion:

    “The neutron energy spectra extending up to about 10 MeV and the existence of the CFP in protium systems exclude the CFP in protium systems exclude the d-d fusion from fundamental nuclear reactions responsible for events in this phenomenon.”
    http://www.google.com.br/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEMQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.jp%2Fhjrfq930%2FPapers%2Fpaperr%2Fpaperr28.pdf&ei=g7spVNaiAYqF8gG90IHQCA&usg=AFQjCNGHDYJjh5hIgwj-t2VRXD6euoKMew&sig2=lfbBJ8S2pNeT2Hx61pJyng&bvm=bv.76247554,d.b2U

    In the Discussion and Conclusion Kozima says:
    The occurrence of the nuclear reactions resulting in neutron emission in protium and deuterium systems is a decisive evidence of new mechanisms other than d-d reactions supposed to be a cause of the CPF by the pioneers of this wonderful field

    However,
    such conclusion can be wrong, because perhaps the excess energy of the neutrons emitted can be due to the energy of the helical trajectory of the electron, not considered in the standard theories, as I show in the article available in Peswiki:
    How zitterbewegung contributes for cold fusion in Pamela Mosier-Boss experiment
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:_How_zitterbewegung_contributes_for_cold_fusion_in_Pamela_Mosier-Boss_experiment

    See the Fig. 9, where the electron loses its helical trajectory when occurs the fusion p+e=n:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:AAAfig9-coldFUSION-pamelaMOSIERboss.gif

    As you may realize,
    to solve such question of the emission of neutrons with 10MeV is fundamental for the understanding of several experiments in the field of cold fusion.

    regards
    wlad

  32. eernie1

    Dear Wlad,
    You continue to misrepresent or read something into my remarks that are not there. You are the one insisting upon the annihilation of the epos as a function of the process and the annihilation of any subsequence photons. You criticize Dirac’s theory based on his relativistic treatment of the Schrodinger equation. Since you insist on not reading into his theories, how can you criticize them? He hardly compares them or can they be compared to any religious form since they are deterministic rather than philosophic.
    I do not understand your argument about the violation of the energy-mass relationship. Dirac accounts for all the energy waves resulting from mass conversion produced by epo interactions. By the way, many experiments show that photons can be divided, enhanced(doubled in frequency)changed in polarization character, reflected and otherwise manipulated without annihilation. What do you mean when you say it strikes a surface? This will be my last comment on this subject.

  33. Dear Andrea and Readers,

    Warning for fraudulent websites claiming ECAT partnership
    29 Sep 2014/in ECAT News/by ECAT
    It has come to our knowledge that a fraudulent website “Pulsodream” has surfaced on the Internet. They are illegally seeking investments related to ECAT products by Leonardo Corporation. “Pulsodream” do NOT have any licenses or rights to sell or market the ECAT under Leonardo Corporation, NOR representing any other Licensee of Leonardo Corporation.

    “Pulsodream” is a total fraud and has been reported to the appropriate authorities.

    Please be aware.

    /The ECAT Team

    - See more at: http://ecat.com/news/warning-for-fraudulent-websites-claiming-ecat-partnership

    Yours Sincerely,
    Magnus Holm,
    Hydro Fusion Ltd

  34. Andrea Rossi

    Magnus:
    Thank you for the repetition. Our specialists have discovered that the Pulso Dream website, apparently from Russia, is in reality directed from Greece. We are continuing to investigate the real source to file a suit.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  35. eernie1

    Wlad,
    My theory of LENR depends greatly on some of the principals of the Dirac theory. One aspect considers that the electrons that make up the electron sphere of an atom originate from the epos contained within one of the neutrons in the nucleus. This creates a proton within the nucleus and the remaining positron of the epo gives the nucleus its + charge. The electron, depending upon the number of nucleons and their make up(ratio of neutrons to protons) remains external to the nucleus sphere within a specific distance and with an equilibrium energy. If the external electron is then forced back into the nucleus(electron capture)the result is generation of a Beta+- emission with the subsequent ejection of the captured electron and either the formation of an isotope or transmutation to another atom dependent on the ratio of neutrons to protons in a specific atomic nucleus along with a neutrino+- and a photon of various energies dependent upon the angle with which the electron approaches the nucleon inside the nucleus. Forcing the electron(most likely a 1s electron) back into the nucleus can be accomplished by applying a negative field to the exterior of the atom’s electron sphere which transmits its effect to the inner electrons through field effects. I call this the Fermi-Alvarez effect since they both were involved with formulating the theory and performing tests to verify the phenomena.
    Regards.

  36. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 28th, 2014 at 10:51 PM

    1)———————
    Wlad,
    We are not talking about electron positron annihilation where the combination mass is converted to energy. It is well known that it results in photons of 1MeV. You didn’t have to calculate it. Are you trying to dazzle me with your knowledge of math?
    —————————————–

    No, dear Eernie.
    I am speaking about the energy-mass conservation law

    When a photon formed by electron-positron hits a surface and is annihilated due to to the collision, all the energy of the photon is transfered to the surface.

    Therefore,
    the Dirac’s photon composed by electron-positron violates the energy-mass conservation law.

    .

    2)——————————–
    I was talking about the results of epo interactions within a physical system where the relationship of electron wave to positron wave produced a wave of a frequency which depended upon all the characteristics of the system.
    ———————————-

    And I am not interested in a theory which works only in those conditions interested to the author (Dirac) and his followers, but it fails in others fundamental aspect, as for instance the conservation of the energy-mass.

    .

    3)——————————
    If you insist that only complete annihilation is the only outcome of epo reactions, we cannot continue discussion.
    ——————————–

    And I cannot bamboozle myself by supposing that the photon does not suffer complete annihllation when it hits a surface, since it is stopped due to the collision and its velocity becomes zero.

    Dirac theory would be very good if the photons were not annihilated with he hits a surface (when they do not have reflection, refraction, etc).

    Unfortunatelly,
    dear Eernie,
    the photon has total annihilation. And I can not pretend it does not happen, just to please the followers of the Dirac theory.]

    I can believe in phantasies, but not when they belong to the field of the science.

    .

    4)—————————–
    If you want to get into a math contest, don’t start with basic relationships. You can get them in any first year physics manual. I don’t appreciate spending time reading perhaps your misinterpretation of my statements. Where do you think those frequencies you mentioned came from. When I was doing electron spin absorption studies in free radicals with magnetic alignments one of the prominent absorption bands was in the 300 GHz region of the spectrum. Please read Dirac’s theory.
    ——————————–

    I cannot waste my time reading a theory proposed by an author who pretends that some phenomena of the Nature do not exist.

    What Dirac proposed is not a scientific theory. Instead of, he actually proposed something like a religious dogma.
    He believed that Nature works only with four particles, because, as you said, “he also believed that the smallest number of proposed particles was the best approach to describing a physical system( Four fundamental particles in his analogy)”.

    Unfortunatelly,
    the Nature does not shares the Dirac belief, and she uses more than four particles (probably because she came to the conclusion that it is impossible to produce all the phenomena by the use of only four particles).
    If the Dirac’s dream would be possible, be yourself sure that the Nature would use it, since she always uses the most simple solutions.

    Regarding to your other words: “He would not be to happy with your use of all the different forms you use to describe your analogy”, I am not interested if Dirac would be happy, or not.
    I have concluded that it is the unique way so that to explain all the phenomena.

    The best would be if Dirac would complain to the Nature, saying: “I am not happy with your use of all those different forms you use to produce the phenomena”

    And she would simply reply to him:
    “Sorry, dear Dirac, I cannot produce all the phenomena I need with only four particles, as you did”

    regards
    wlad

  37. eernie1

    Wlad,
    We are not talking about electron positron annihilation where the combination mass is converted to energy. It is well known that it results in photons of 1MeV. You didn’t have to calculate it. Are you trying to dazzle me with your knowledge of math? I was talking about the results of epo interactions within a physical system where the relationship of electron wave to positron wave produced a wave of a frequency which depended upon all the characteristics of the system. If you insist that only complete annihilation is the only outcome of epo reactions, we cannot continue discussion. If you want to get into a math contest, don’t start with basic relationships. You can get them in any first year physics manual. I don’t appreciate spending time reading perhaps your misinterpretation of my statements. Where do you think those frequencies you mentioned came from. When I was doing electron spin absorption studies in free radicals with magnetic alignments one of the prominent absorption bands was in the 300 GHz region of the spectrum. Please read Dirac’s theory.

  38. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in Sep eernie1
    September 28th, 2014 at 11:24 AM

    Wlad,

    For your other inquiry, Is this a trick question? Of course the spectrum between 3KHZ and 300GHZ can be generated by the epos.
    ————————————————–

    The mass of the electron and positron is m= 0,5×10^6 eV/c²
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_rest_mass

    The energy of a photon composed by electron-positron moving with the speed c of light is:

    E = 2.m.c² = 2x(0,5×10^6 eV/c²).c² = 10^6 eV

    The energy of the electromagnetic wave with frequence 3Kz is 12,4peV = 12,4×10^-12 e/V = 10^-11eV

    So, the energy of a photon composed by positron-electron is 10^6/10^-11 = 10^17 times larger then the photon with frequence 3Kz.

    .

    The situation is worst with photons with extremelly low frequence, with 3Hz, which energy is 12,4feV.

    Their energy is E = 12,4×10^-15eV = 10^-14eV
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum

    So, the relation between the energy of the positron-electron photon and the photon with extremely low energy is:

    10^6 / 10^-14 = 10^20

    regards
    wlad

  39. Andrea Rossi

    DEAR READERS:
    WE HAVE DISCOVERED WHO ARE THE FRAUDSTERS OF “PULSODREAMS”: IS A GANG WHO MADE A CORPORATION IN THE SEYCHELLE ISLANDS; THEIR REPRESENTATIVE IS A PAVEL ASIMOV. THE SOURCE OF THEIR WEBSITE IS IN RUSSIA, BUT WE ARE DISCOVERING THE REAL LOCATION OF THIS GANG. OUR ATTORNEYS ARE PREPARING ACTION. PLEASE DISREGARD WHATEVER THEY OFFER, BECAUSE IS A TOTAL, UNDISPUTABLE, FRAUD AND WHATEVER MONEY YOU WILL GIVE THEM, IT WILL BE LOST, BECAUSE WE NEVER GAVE AND NEVER WILL GIVE TO THESE CRIMINALS ANY RIGHT REGARDING OUR PRODUCTS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY UNDER EITHER AN INDUSTRIAL OR FINANCIAL POINT OF VIEW.
    NOW YOU HAVE BEEN DULY INFORMED, BEYOND ANY POSSIBLE DOUBT.
    WARM REGARDS,
    DR. ANDREA ROSSI, CEO OF LEONARDO CORP.

  40. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    He,he,he..
    A.R.

  41. Alessandro Coppi

    Hi Andrea, I was waiting for a message with capital letters, but not this one!

    …ch’anco tardi a venir non ti sia grave.

    Alessandro Coppi

  42. Eric Ashworth

    Wladimir, Thanks for your reply regarding my thoughts and your comment about having no time to dwell upon that which you are unable to prove as I know you are busy. I find your comments interesting and food for thought. As for Dirac I was unaware that he distilled physics down to four particles. My simple understanding is that there are only four major densities within nature. Solid-Liquid-Gas-Aether. Three of them being comprised of Aether substance which has the least density when as an unstructured mass. To me the figuer four runs throughout nature. As an after thought and I am curious. Do you ever wonder why your theories are rejected when they do make sense and why paid physicists will not answer your questions. I was once asked in a discussion what’s the difference between a secret and a mystery I said “very little” with no further comment. Best Regards Eric Ashworth.

  43. eernie1

    Wlad,
    Dirac believed he could explain the laws of Nature with his four particles. IMO he did a good job. HE thought that adding more would only over complicate the issues.
    For your other inquiry, Is this a trick question? Of course the spectrum between 3KHZ and 300GHZ can be generated by the epos. Superconductivity and semiconductors are explained by electron-positive holes and pairing of entangled electrons which are a manifestation of epo interactions as a pipeline for electron-positive hole movement without environmental interaction(resistance).Do you have a reason to believe this cannot be accomplished? By the way, have we beaten this subject to death yet?

  44. Andrea Rossi

    ITALO R.:
    I THANK YOU FOR THIS INFORMATION AND I REPEAT AGAIN THAT PULSODREAM IS A FRAUD. THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY LICENSE, WE DO NOT EVEN KNOW WHO THEY ARE AND THEIR IS AN ATTEMPT TO STEAL MONEY FROM YOU. IT IS A FRAUD AGAINST WHICH OUR ATTORNEYS ARE ALREADY WORKING. WE DO NOT EVEN YET KNOW WHO THESE CLOWNS ARE !!!
    WARM REGARDS,
    DR ANDREA ROSSI, CEO OF LEONARDO CORPORATION

  45. Andrea Rossi

    PIETRO F.:
    THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION: AS I ALREADY ANSWERED TO PIERO MONGIOJ, THIS IS A FRAUD. EVERYBODY BE AWARE NOT TO PAY TO THESE CLOWNS ANY SUM OF MONEY, BECAUSE WE DO NOT EVEN KNOW THEM AND THEY ARE TRYING TO STEAL MONEY FROM YOU. IT IS A TOTAL FRAUD, THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORIZATION AND ALL THEY PUBLISHED IS ABUSIVE.
    PLEASE NEVER PAY MONEY TO ANYBODY THAT OFFERS YOU OUR PRODUCTS WITHOUT FIRST ASKING US IF THEY ARE AUTHORIZED LICENCED SELLERS.
    YOU MAY ASK US WRITING TO INFO@LEONARDOCORP1996.COM
    WARM REGARDS,
    DR ANDREA ROSSI, CEO OF LEONARDO CORPORATION

  46. Andrea Rossi

    Piero Mongioj:
    THANK YOU FOR YOUR INFORMATION: DEAR READERS: IT IS A TOTAL FRAUD.
    PULSODREAM IS TOTALLY UNKNOWN TO US, THEY HAVE USED OUR NAME, MY PHOTOGRAPHY, THE PHOTOS AND EMBODIMENTS OF OUR E-CATS WITHOUT ANY AUTHORIZATION. THEY ARE TRYING TO SELL INVESTMENTS RELATED TO OUR PRODUCTS WITHOUT HAVING EVER CONTACTED US OR OBTAINED ANY AUTHORIZATION.
    THEIR OFFER OF INVESTMENT IS A TOTAL CLOWNERY.
    PLEASE BE EXTREMELY AWARE TO PAY THEM ANY SUM, BECAUSE IT IS A FRAUD AND YOUR MONEY WILL BE TOTALLY LOST.
    OUR LEGAL STAFF IS ALREADY WORKING ON THIS ISSUE.
    AGAIN: DO NOT GIVE ANY SUM OF MONEY TO “PULSODREAM” BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE OUR PRODUCTS, THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY LICENSE, THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORIZATION OF SORT TO DEAL WITH ANY OF OUR PRODUCTS.
    I REPEAT: IT IS A TOTAL FRAUD.
    WARM REGARDS
    DR. ANDREA ROSSI, CEO OF LEONARDO CORPORATION

  47. Piero Mongioj

    Dear Andrea,
    Are they concerned with you?

    https://pulsodream.com/en/index.html

    Un caro saluto,
    Piergiorgio

  48. Pietro F.

    .. se nessuno l’ha ancora informata:
    https://pulsodream.com/en/index.html

    Buon lavoro

    Pietro F.

  49. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, have you already seen this site?

    https://pulsodream.com/en/index.html

    If you have already been informed, discard please this mine.

    Ragards,
    Italo R.

  50. Wladimir Guglinski

    UVS.Seshavatharam wrote in September 24th, 2014 at 8:16 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski Sir

    Please let me have a couple of days. I will forward the mail to my professor: lnsrirama@gmail.com

    yours sincerely,
    UVS.Seshavatharam
    ——————————————

    COMMENT:

    Two couple of days have gone, and nobody did come here to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero, according to the Standard Nuclear Physics

    The nuclear physicist Dr S.Lakshminarayana did not come.
    And also did not come the professor invited by Dr Seshavatharam.

    Dear Mr Jr:
    you use to claim that current Theoretical Modern Physics is able to explain all the physical phenomena

    So,
    may you tell to us why the nuclear physicist Dr S.Lakshminarayana and the professor invited by Dr Seshavatharam did not come here to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero ?

    Perhaps they did not come because they do not know that your stupid definition of nuclear magnetic moment which violates a fundamental law of Physics, according to which the magnetic moment of the even-even nuclei with Z=N is, BY DEFINITION, equal to zero

    Mr JR
    please invite them to come here to share the solution proposed by you

    regards
    wlad

  51. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 27th, 2014 at 11:03 AM

    he also believed that the smallest number of proposed particles was the best approach to describing a physical system( Four fundamental particles in his analogy). He would not be to happy with your use of all the different forms you use to describe your analogy.
    —————————-

    Eernie,
    science is not a question of taste

    A theoretical model must be able to describe the physical phenomena

    If the smallest number of proposed particles is not able to describe what we observe in the Nature, then we cannot keep our believe that “the smallest number of proposed particles was the best approach to describing a physical system”

    You did not respond to my question:

    The electromagnetic radio waves (frequence between 12,4 feV to 1,24meV) are also formed by positron-electron?

    regards
    wlad

  52. hrabal

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    first of all, thank you for what you did so far, it’s simply wonderful.

    Then a question:

    Could the 1M plant be used to give electricity power to houses or residential buildings?
    I wonder if it may be or will be suitable for giving power to small villages or other different kinds of communities.
    I believe the e-cat’s actual revolutionary strength lies in the use of single domestic units, but, as you said, it needs time for certifications, so I’m eager to see it working even in not a perfect situation to let it speak by itself and give impulse to others in spreading it’s use.

    high regards

    riccardo

  53. Andrea Rossi

    Hrabal:
    So far we are making industrial plants to make heat. One of the main goals of our R&D process is the production of electric energy. About domestic application, you already gave the answer. We are working also in that direction.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  54. eernie1

    Wlad,
    One other thought. You seem to be working in a 4 dimensional relativistic Riemann system space with only time as a non Abelian dimension. Since in such a space the geometry is spherically oriented, and is highly dependent on the velocity factors in the particle(massive or massless) motion, I think many of the values such as magnetic moments can vary continuously with time and what we measure is average or statistical values. This is the basis of many of the theories proposed in SQM, QED, QCD and Relativity. The interpretation of these effects IMO is what leads to the disagreements between scientists.

  55. eernie1

    Wlad,
    Dirac did use the phase differential among other considerations to explain why the electron did not fall into the nucleus. I don’t want to get into a discussion of fundamental criteria, but of course frequency is the number of times the fields of the particles(massive or massless)go from maximum to minimum per second. The variance can be achieved in a number of ways such as the amount of phase difference between interacting entities, angle of approach, dipole length, and many more physical relationships between various particles or waves. Dirac treated all systems as waves stating they all wave. All the above situations of course have been observed and investigated through multiple scientific programs and can explain all the observed frequencies. he also believed that the smallest number of proposed particles was the best approach to describing a physical system( Four fundamental particles in his analogy). He would not be to happy with your use of all the different forms you use to describe your analogy. Dirac was attacked by mainstream scientists(Heisenburg, Plank) using the same arguments you have presented to me. As you know mass and energy are interchangeable and can assume either form at different phases of existence. Please do not become as narrow minded as them?

  56. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    I cannot answer to questions related to what happens inside the E-Cats, in positive or in negative. Nevertheless, I can answer to your question independently from the E-Cat operation.
    Electrical current is a flow of electrons through a medium plus a transmission of vibration induced by electrons bouncing against each other. This fact produces also a resistance, as if you kick many balls inside a pipe and they proceed in disorder making reciprocal obstacle : this of course makes their path less easy, which means that this produces a resistance, due to the mass od electrons, which are fermions, therefore carry matter ( while bosons carry only force). But: at very low temperatures electrons can team up in pairs so that their spin sums up to an integer number ( electrons have spin never integer, but always plus or minus 1/2, and electrons have spin 1/2): once they combine an integer spin they are turned into bosons ( bosons have spin integer) and bosons do not carry matter, so that their new status allows them to proceed in the condensed matter of the conductor without encountering resistance.
    If you want to understand better, can Google ” BCS Theory”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  57. Curiosone

    Dear George:
    Excuse me for my late answer, but I read only now your comment of 22 september that answered to my comment regarding the “5 Stelle” position on the LENR.
    I am sorry to have misunderstood your position and I understand your reaction. I want also to say that I have given to your movement my vote, because I think that you are the sole political force not rooted by corruption. So I never intended to damage you, I just wanted to ask to Andrea Rossi his opinion about the financing of LENR by the government. What I wrote ( erroneously, as you explained) has been caused by the fact that in the internet ( please sdo not ask me where, because I do not remember) has been written in a journal that in the list of the waste of money spent by the government there were also 4 million euros given to somebody ( not specified) for R&D on the LENR that produced nothing. So I was curious to ask Andrea Rossi’s opinion, that’s all; I never wanted to damage you. Please go ahead with your good work,
    W.G.

  58. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    We are patiently fixing the problems step by step, improving the situation day by day. “Non mollare mai” ( Never give up).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  59. JCRenoir

    Another question: how is going on the work on the 1 MW plant?
    ICRenoir

  60. JCRenoir

    How can you explain that electrons do not find resistance in a superconductor ? Is this related to the Rossi Effect?
    JCRenoir

  61. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 25th, 2014 at 9:36 PM

    Wlad,
    Dirac explained that the spins(1/2) of the two particles were out of phase in the string and thereby could not combine.
    —————————

    Eernie,
    there is not in Theoretical Physics an explanation for the reason why the electron does not fall down within the proton

    If the solution proposed by Dirac based on the spins out of phase was acceptable, the theorists would also apply it as explanation why the electron does not falls down within the proton

    ,

    eernie1 wrote in September 26th, 2014 at 10:51 AM

    1) ——————-
    Of course the energy of the generated photon is dependent on its frequency(hv) The frequency of the emitted photon is dependent upon the method of interaction with the external force causing the phase transformation.
    —————————

    Eernie,
    this is the sort of phantasmagoric solution based on the Heisenberg phantasmagoric scientific criterium

    What would be the PHYSICAL MECHANISM capable to produce different frequencies in a photon composed by two corpuscles with the same mass???

    What is the physical mechanism reponsible for the frequency of such a photon??

    What is frequency ??

    Two particles with the same mass, moving always with the same speed c, cannot have different frequencies

    Dirac model of the photon is absurd, it makes no sence from the PHYSICAL VIEWPOINT

    But obviously, from the MATHEMATICAL viewpoint, one can propose any sort of nonsenses (from the PHYSICAL viewpoint), as Heisenberg did

    2) —————————–
    This allows photons to be created throughout the spectrum.
    ———————————

    No, it does not allow it
    The spectrum is possible only if the particle-antiparticle of a photon A have DIFFERENT masses of a particle-antiparticle of a photon B

    The frequency of a photon depends on the mass of the particle-antiparicle

    3) ———————
    All this can be derived by using the Dirac wave equation. Dirac was a quantum rebel since his theory disrupted many of the cornerstone ideas of the leading scientists and he was attacked often. But many of the observed atomic values were able to be derived using his formulas.
    ————————-

    Dirac supposed the aether formed by positron-electron because experiments showed that positrons are created in some reactions

    His theory can work better by considering that aether is formed by elementary particles of the aether (electricitons, magnetons, gravitions, etc)

    ,

    Eernie,
    1- as Dirac suppoosed the photon as a particle, how did he explain the wave feature of the photon?

    2- How did he explain the polarization of light following statistical laws?

    3- What about the electromagnetic waves with very low energy, in the infrared, microwave, and radio?

    The electromagnetic radio waves (frequence between 12,4 feV to 1,24meV) are also formed by positron-electron?

    regards
    wlad

  62. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    As you correctly say, it is impossible that an important plant does not have an initial period of assessment. Our plant is a very complex thing and we are making all the necessary work to deliver it respecting all the guarantees we gave to our Customer. Obviously this work is not public and in due time we will give the due information regarding the operation of the plant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  63. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    In my 40+ years of working in engineering, I have rarely seen a new installation go without problems. Would you characterize the more significant problems as:

    1. Failure by the developer to consider how the eCat was to preform in the customer’s environment?
    2. The Customer not clearly expressing his requirements and needs?
    3. Operator error?
    4. Installation errors?
    5. Performance problems?
    6. A rush to deliver the unit before it was completely tested?
    7. Combinations of the above?

  64. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    The report, I suppose, will define exactly the protocol of the test. I am not allowed to give any related information before the publication.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  65. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Is the reluctance of the customer to allow observation of his production setup related to perhaps his not wanting to reveal some of his intellectual property involved in his program?

  66. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    The industry of the Customer is not a theater, nor a show room…it is an industry, with specific issues regarding safety, production and confidentiality. When visits will be allowed and at which conditions will be decided exclusively by the Customer, for obvious reasons and only when all will have been stabilized and consolidated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  67. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    does the ITP have the optimized control systems and, if so, do they have access to the software, or did they just receive a basic drive ?
    Are they allowed to tamper with everything ?

    You continue to answer and comment everyday on this blog. You do this very strictly, even when there is not so much news. It is as if the world is pregnant and we can listen daily only to the heartbeat of the baby.
    I think lots of us are longing to see her/his face and hear the first cry.

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  68. eernie1

    Wlad, Since the epo of Dirac is in the form of EM spinor fields, they can move as a massless unit such as the photon. Of course the energy of the generated photon is dependent on its frequency(hv) The frequency of the emitted photon is dependent upon the method of interaction with the external force causing the phase transformation. This allows photons to be created throughout the spectrum. All this can be derived by using the Dirac wave equation. Dirac was a quantum rebel since his theory disrupted many of the cornerstone ideas of the leading scientists and he was attacked often. But many of the observed atomic values were able to be derived using his formulas.

  69. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    Our Customer is a manufacturer, and uses the 1 MW plant for his production.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  70. Pietro F.

    Buongiorno ing. Rossi,

    il vostro cliente é un fornitore di servizi (tipo riscaldamento) o un produttore industriale?
    Your client is a provider of services (such as heating) or an industrial manufacturer?

    Buon lavoro

    Pietro F.

  71. Andrea Rossi

    H-G Branzell:
    You may be right. Anyway, the report will be published by the ITP independently from the fact that it can be positive or negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  72. Andrea Rossi

    Andreas Moraitis:
    Of course. Also is provided a solution in case of malfunction of the 1 MW plant, by means of a back up made using the traditional energy source.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  73. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Surely in due time and situations we will give due information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  74. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I understand that you believe my previous comment about “poisons” was another attempt to extract information that you do not want to reveal — which it was. The question came up when I saw a video on Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR)which claims to be much more efficient (compared to uranium reactors) at using the available nuclear energy, that it is inherently safe and, if true, it might be a serious competitor to the Rossi Effect reactors for large scale energy production.

    In the video, the thorium is consumed, releasing the energy. At some point in time, you will reveal how the energy is generated with the Rossi Effect. Why not now?

    In the future, I suspect, you will describe what is required in the reconditioning process to recycle the fuel and to ensure it can be done in a safe and environmentally responsible manner. These actions will be required before the Rossi Effect reactors will be publically accepted as being among the viable energy production technologies. So you will answer the questions, it is only a matter of when.

    And of course, I must comment that my reaction to your response could have been either positive or negative. (LOL)

  75. Andreas Moraitis

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    What would happen if the customer were forced to stop his production suddenly by some reason, so that the 1 MW plant would have to go in idle mode, without prior warning? Is there already a solution for such a scenario?

    Best regards,
    Andreas Moraitis

  76. H-G Branzell

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    You say that a negative third party report will encounter no obstacles to be published by a reputable scientific journal. I beg to differ with that opinion. You have told us that a negative report would be one that finds a COP < 1 + error margins. Considering the very low interest that the established scientific community has shown in the Rossi effect I think that a negative report will meet with the same interest from the scientific journals as a report stating that apples are still falling to the ground in the autumn.
    Kind regards, H-G Branzell

  77. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 25th, 2014 at 9:36 PM

    Wlad,
    Dirac explained that the spins(1/2) of the two particles were out of phase in the string and thereby could not combine. When they were in phase(Caused by an external force)the spins added and formed a photon(spin 1) which then traveled at the velocity of light down the connected strings.
    —————————

    Eernie
    then all the photons would have to have the same energy, since the electron and the positron have always the same mass, and they always move with the speed of light.
    But each photon has a different energy.

    In QRT the particle is formed by the agglutination of positive electricitons. The more quantity is of electricitions, heavier is the energy of the photon. While the antiparticle is formed by the glue of negative electricitons.

    2)
    This is why the photon always assumes the velocity of light with respect to the position of the observer since the rotation of the EM fields in the strings was at the speed of light. He would say your photon was the combined fields of a positron and an electron.
    —————————–

    As the electron and the positron have mass, having the speed of light they would have infinite mass, according to the Einstein’s equation.

    Besides, an aether formed by positron-electron would be detecable by experiments

    regards
    wlad

  78. eernie1

    Wlad,
    Dirac explained that the spins(1/2) of the two particles were out of phase in the string and thereby could not combine. When they were in phase(Caused by an external force)the spins added and formed a photon(spin 1) which then traveled at the velocity of light down the connected strings. This is why the photon always assumes the velocity of light with respect to the position of the observer since the rotation of the EM fields in the strings was at the speed of light. He would say your photon was the combined fields of a positron and an electron.

  79. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Do you understand that this comment of yours ( and my answer) can make of Orsobubu a permanent LOL- contortionist ?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S.: Steve, my friend: I am not laughing at you, I am laughing WITH you. You understand why, I’m sure.

  80. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    Maybe.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  81. Andrea Rossi

    Daniel G. Zavela:
    I do not know.
    Thank you for your kind wishes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  82. eernie1

    Wlad,
    My question was based on your claim to have proposed a particle antiparticle structure for space. That is what Dirac proposed when he suggested space was comprised by the electron(particle) positron(antiparticle)combined in an EM field string. Can you elaborate on how this is different from your proposal?

  83. Wladimir Guglinski

    Wladimir Guglinski
    September 25th, 2014 at 3:55 PM

    eernie1 wrote in September 25th, 2014 at 10:43 AM

    Dear Wlad,
    How does your theory of the aether differ from that of Dirac. He proposed that the aether consists of strings composed of a positron and an electron whose form is an electromagnetic wave(epo) rotating at the speed of light.
    —————————————–

    eernie,
    but the main difference between my theory of aether and that of Dirac is because his theory is impossible.
    Because an electron and a positron have fusion when they meet together, producing pure energy. The Universe filled by the aether conceived by Dirac would instantaneously explode in a big bang.

    In my model of aether the particle and antiparticle have no fusion, because the repulsive gravitons avoid them to fuse together.

    Thanks to the repulsive gravitons the particle and antiparticle of the photon do not have fusion.

    Such a question was not solved by the authors of the paper published in 2013 by the European Physical Journal, because in spite of they had proposed that the space is filled by particles and antiparticles, however they do not explain why the particle and antiparticle do not fuse together.
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1140%2Fepjd%2Fe2013-30578-7#page-1

    The reason why the authors of the paper published by the European Physica Journal did not solve such question is because they did not conceive a complete structure for the aether.
    They proposed an ad hoc theory, so that to explain the experiment published in 2012 by the journal Nature, which proved that the space is not empty.
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Light-created-from-vacuum-shows-empty-space-a-myth/articleshow/10789049.cms
    As because the experiment showed that space is not empty, and it is able to create light, the authors of the paper published by the European Physical Journal felt the need of proposing a structure for the aether.

    Unlike, my model of the aether had been conceived taking in consideration several questions, as the structure of the photon, the structure of elementary particles as the proton and electron, and the structure of the atomic nuclei.
    That’s why I arrived to a complete structure for the aether

    regards
    wlad

  84. Dear Dr. Rossi,

    You have stated that the Third Party Report could have positive or negative results in their summary. A third possibility is that the results of their testing could be reported as “inconclusive” due to repeatability problems with inconsistent startup and shutdown issues, or sudden shutdown or temperature control variations. Based on your current research and testing do you feel that an “inconclusive” summary judgement in the Third Party Report is unlikely or is this a probability due to the technology not yet being mature?

    Again I wish you the best of luck to counter the 1,000 scientists who say “Climate change is not statistically” real. The earth needs your help.

    Best Regards,

    Daniel G. Zavela

  85. Giuliano Bettini

    Andrea, Jean Pierre:
    maybe the issue is not:
    AC has something positive.
    Maybe the issue is: DC has something negative (which gas doesn’t have).
    As a matter of fact, things may be positive, but also negative.
    Magnetic regards
    Giuliano Bettini.

  86. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    In conventional nuclear reactors, there are elements and isotopes generated during the normal nuclear reaction which eventually “poison” the reaction, thus necessitating the removal and reprocessing of the nuclear rods.

    1. Is there an equivalent in the Rossi Effect reactor?

    2. Are “poisons” created or generated which require the reprocessing of the fuel?

    3. Or does the portion of the “fuel” that is active in the reaction disappear or become inactive/ineffective?

  87. eernie1

    Wlad,
    Are you saying that Dirac is wrong? The epo is totally existing as an EM field in the string until it exits the string and converts to what is perceived as mass or as an ejected photon traveling at the speed of sound. The mass differential in the conversion of a neutron to a proton is due to relativistic velocity considerations between the quarks in the nucleus. Please review his theory.
    Regards.

  88. Andrea Rossi

    Jean Pierre:
    Sorry, I cannot give you this information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  89. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in September 25th, 2014 at 10:43 AM

    Dear Wlad,
    How does your theory of the aether differ from that of Dirac. He proposed that the aether consists of strings composed of a positron and an electron whose form is an electromagnetic wave(epo) rotating at the speed of light.
    ————————

    eernie,
    a space composed by positron and electron makes no sense, because they both have mass, and the space would interact with the matter with motion, having friction.

    Besides, the light could not travel in such a space

    regards
    wlad

  90. Dear Andrea.
    Thank you for responding. My query in a nut shell is that alternating current and its associated accompanying magnetic field are associated with a REVERSAL over a cycle and as time goes by.
    DC does not provide this. The ECAT does not work on DC, only on AC.
    I cannot see that a gas heated ECAT is associated with any
    REVERSAL effect. Therefore, since DC does not work then why
    should gas heating? I hope you can provide the missing link?

    Keep up the good research and the very best wishes to you.
    Jean Pierre.

  91. gillana

    Dear A. Rossi
    Considering the type of reaction absolutely abnormal, compared to the classical nuclear fusion (not hard gamma rays nor neutrons), and any other reaction capable of a COP> 1, it is understandable that scientists are very careful before producing a report on an accredited peer reviewed magazine, for which the delays are understandable. Report in question is confined to verifying that the energy produced is greater than the energy provided or could provide a scientific analysis of the data that may bring to a theoretical explanation of the phenomenon?
    Many regards
    Gillana

  92. Andrea Rossi

    Gillana:
    I will be able to answer when the report will be delivered. I have not a clue. I know that the Professors of the ITP asked help from other important institutions. We’ll see.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  93. alutam

    Andrea,
    Problems?!
    Please repeat after me:
    “I don’t have problems, I have opportunities!”
    Doesn’t that feel better?
    Best regards.

  94. Andrea Rossi

    Alutam:
    I don’t have problems, I have opportunities ( x 10)
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  95. Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    Very interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  96. Dear Andrea,
    (Off-topic)A recent physics news: black holes don’t exist (http://uncnews.unc.edu/2014/09/23/carolinas-laura-mersini-houghton-shows-black-holes-exist/).

    They performed a coupled hydrodynamics and general relativity numerical simulation of stellar collapse, including also self-consistently the effects of Hawking radiation emission. The result: an event horizon never forms, the star loses mass by Hawking radiation just fast enough to prevent horizon (black hole) formation. To an external observer whose time is much dilated in comparison to the object itself, it looks like a very dark almost holelike region, but internally what happens is that the star collapses to a minimum size and then bounces back because it loses a lot of mass by Hawking radiation. The bounce back looks internally like an explosion (or “fireworks” as the authors say), but to an external observer is looks like the faint Hawking radiation which slowly evaporates the object away.

    Probably a lively discussion among physicists emerges from this. To me the analysis looks good and seems to make physical sense.
    r:/pekka

  97. barty

    Dear Andrea,

    thank you for that information. It’s good to hear that this problems are “only” minor problems.
    Such kind of problems you always have to resolve ;)

    But it is good to hear that the problems are not major resp. “critical” about your “rossi effect” (not working at general or something else).

    Good luck and best regards from germany!
    barty

  98. Andrea Rossi

    Barty:
    Thank you for your kind attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  99. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    What you have in your installation program are bugs which are uncovered in any first field test. Just look at Apple with their introduction of the I-phone6 or Boeing with the 787. Nothing unusual.

  100. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Yes, exactly; anyway, in my life I have designed and installed hundreds of industrial plants, never had the luck to see one pass through the first period of several months without troubles. This is NOT an exception.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.