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. Andrea Rossi

    TO ALL OUR READERS:
    From yesterday through today we suffered an attack that has put off line our blog. The IT Guy of our Team has restored the connection few minutes ago. Thanks to him ( Daniele Princiotto, an Italian informatic engineer) for his outstanding job.
    Probably some comment has been lost in the meantime in the spam, therefore the authors of spammed comments are kindly invited to send them again.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  2. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Calaon,

    The term Hydronium ( “Hyd” ) is already used in Chemistry as the H3O+ cation.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydronium ( But ‘Hyd’ is new. )

    Thanks for your interesting article.

    Joseph Fine

  3. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Pekka Janhunen,
    thank you for the interest in my theory and for the comment.
    The equation of Schroedinger (what I am saying is valid for the Pauli and Dirac equations as well) allows to calculate the energy levels of electron orbitals because it describes a system where the electron remains “separate” from the nucleus. The electron Zitterbewegung is free from “intruders” and the electron orbitals are the stationary solutions that match the ZB intrinsic rotation with the orbital motion. The formation of Hyd is a very special event, in fact Cold Fusion is still debated today …
    It is possible that in other, although rare, occasions humans or the universe produced Hyd, however Hyd are picometrically neutral and do not stably add up to nuclei as neutrons do. They are difficult to detect and probably have never been produced massively so far. If I remember well Randell Mills even says that they are responsible for the Diffuse interstellar bands and dark matter. I do not agree, but I am not surprised by the fact that Hyd have so far passed undetected.
    The formation of Hyd must be exothermic because there must be a force that overcomes what I called the “orbital repulsion”, the tendency of electrons not to be confined at distances of less than its ZB size (383 [fm]). And the magnetic attraction force (possibly with an associated potential) accelerates the charges towards the new configuration liberating some energy.
    The Hyd are not bound to the electronic structure of the metal, neither with the conduction nor with the valence electrons. Therefore none of the physical or chemical properties of the metal should change at the formation of Hyd, apart from the “disappearance” of hydrogen nuclei and electrons. Once the Hyd are formed they should behave similarly to the neutrons, and be able to cross matter easily, apart from nuclear encounters with reactions on the way. And even these reactions are not very evident because they do not generate rains of gammas or other energetic particles.
    I suspect the formation of one Hydronium liberates as much as 1.745 [MeV], while the formation of a Deuteronium 1.445 [MeV].
    Best Regards
    Andrea

  4. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for this interesting link regarding the Academy of Science of India and LENR.
    Another step forward for LENR in the world; the immense India is important in the scientific context. I have been in India for business and I will never forget the emotion to visit what I think is the most beautiful architectural construction of the man history: the Taj Mahal. I think no place in the world can inspire the same emotion of this human masterpiece.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  5. Dear Andrea Calaon,

    Your paper is interesting. But of course, a lot is unclear. Below are some quick thoughts.

    The idea of a compact Hyd is good, but I’m sceptical that a Hyd could leave the metal and exist as a free particle because quantum states of single hydrogen atoms are well known and do not allow such solution and because if such compact Hyds would exist, we probably would have seen them already in nature and in astrophysics. That said, it might be possible that some form of “Hyd” can form and exist inside the many-electron environment of the metal where a larger number of electrons might spend part of their time near the hydrogen nucleus to provide charge neutralisation and posssibly electric current to make magnetic effects.

    If such “Hyd” exist, its formation could be more or less exothermic (i.e. we don’t know). If it’s strongly exothermic, then the Hyd should have a hard time leaving the metal because that would require the same energy to be put back from some external source to turn the “Hyd” back to normal hydrogen atom. Existence of such exothermic “Hyds” inside the metal might even increase the melting point of the nickel particle. But if the formation of Hyd would be only weakly exothermic, then these effects would be correspondingly mild.

    I might have more comments later concerning the paper.
    regards, pekka

  6. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi , this link talks about the E cat and even in India . Congratulations for your work that will change the world .

    Next month’s edition of Current Science magazine of the Indian Academy of Sciences will feature low energy nuclear reactions on its cover, a sign of grudging acceptance by the scientific community.
    http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/science/do-not-forget-the-other-nuclear/article6818560.ece

  7. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi , this link talks about the E cat and even in India. Congratulations for your work that will change the world .

    Next month’s edition of Current Science magazine of the Indian Academy of Sciences will feature low energy nuclear reactions on its cover, a sign of grudging acceptance by the scientific community.

    http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/science/do-not-forget-the-other-nuclear/article6818560.ece

  8. Andrea Rossi

    Andrea Calaon:
    Specialists are working on the electric power production.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  9. Joe

    Wladimir,

    If your nuclear model can explain the Rossi Effect, does this mean that E-Cats can be used to remediate nuclear waste?

    All the best,
    Joe

  10. Joe

    JR,

    Thanks for completing the scenario. I had trouble locating a grams-to-mole conversion factor for hydrogen.

    All the best,
    Joe

  11. Andrea Calaon

    Dear All,
    It has been a long time since my last post on my LENR “theory”. In the meantime I have changed it significantly.
    Now the beta-decaying H4 is no more needed, while three neutral pseudo-particles appeared.
    There is never a Coulomb barrier to be overcome and the fractionation happens through the emission of photons during the acceleration of the involved particles.
    The reactions happen in two stages. In the First Stage the neutral pseudo-particles form in the very special conditions Edmund Storms calls Nuclear Active Environment. In the Second Stage the neutral pseudo-particles, which can almost freely cross solid matter, react with the nuclei they encounter.
    The Second Stage reactions take place at practically no excess kinetic energy, so that only the most stable and least energetic nuclei can form.
    I analysed the results of the Hot-Cat test through the theory, as well as the experiments of Iwamura and Mizuno.
    Here is the link if you would like to have a look:
    lenr-calaon-explanation.weebly.com/
    I hope some reader will be so kind to put her/his comment/critic/suggestion in the blog section.
    Thank you Andrea for publishing this shameless advertising.
    Regards
    Andrea Calaon

  12. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Sorry to insist, but I am convinced that you do not need to fiddle much with gas heated cats, which anyway emit some CO2 … You have reactors with surface temperature in excess of 1,300 [C], and electric-to-heat COP above 14 (min. 3.5/0.25 = 14), so a system with a heat-electric efficiency of 50% would already give 50-100/14=42 units of electric power for each 100 units of heat produced. Not bad for a start!
    The single supercritical CO2 turbine has an efficiency around 50%, while with heat recuperators and the rest of the plant, considering water separation and compressors, surpasses 60%.
    If IH manages to enter the consortium of NET Power, LLC, CB&I, Exelon Corporation, and 8 Rivers Capital, for the building of a 50 [MWt] plant in Texas:
    http://news.toshiba.com/press-release/corporate/toshiba-supplies-first-kind-supercritical-co2-turbine-new-thermal-power-gene
    it will be able to show electricity production at 25 [MW] electric scale.
    No emissions whatsoever. New technology, almost no fuel cost. In Texas with the world best energy companies. The whole world would buy it.

    My guess is that the plant will have 60% efficiency, so that, with Cold Fusion modules with a COP of 15 you will have 60-100/15 = 53% heat to electricity conversion. You do not need gas, it is a complication useful only for staying in an old technology market. You will succeed with the gas heated cat, but I am not sure the best move is to concentrate efforts on gas.
    I imagine that from low temperature plants for heating and the domestic units IH will have the revenues to stay in the cutting edge technology like supercritical CO2 for electricity production at >50% overall efficiency.
    Best regards
    Andrea Calaon

  13. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in January 22nd, 2015 at 5:50 PM

    Wladimir,

    2.——————————————————-
    You then stated that this flux was directed toward Earth alone:
    “As a flux with 2s10^6 neutrons/cm².sec is emitted toward the earth direction”
    ———————————————————-

    Joe,
    I did not say that the flux 2×10^6 neutrons/cm².sec hits the earth.

    I did mean to say the following:

    1- There is emission of two types moving in contrary direction:
    1.a) one flux goes moving toward a radial direction leaving out the sun
    1.b) and the other flux goes moving toward a radial direction going to the center of the sun

    2- The flux 1.a is 2×10^6 neutrons/cm².se, and 2×10^-2 neutrons/cm².sec hits the earth

    Actually the quantity of neutrons emitted is actually very bigger than (2*10^-2 neutrons/cm^2*sec) * (area of sphere in cm^2/sphere) pointed by you, because there is emission of neutrons in NO radial direction. They do not hit the earth, however most of them hit the center of the sun.

    regards
    wlad

  14. JR

    Joe,

    Note that a quick glance at the paper Wladimir linked to suggests that they found NO neutrons coming from the sun, with enough data taken to set an upper limit of possible neutron flux at the 4×10-2 level.

    But even taking that upper limit (and the other assumptions) and assuming that every single neutron is captured, it’s again a completely negligible effect. Your estimate was 10^41 individual neutrons vs. 10^33 grams of hydrogen. One gram is about 10^24 protons, making 10^58 protons total and giving one neutron for every million-billion protons. So again, barring a maths errors, a totally negligible amount.

  15. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. The flux toward Earth is 2*10^-2 neutrons/cm^2*sec. If we assume that this flux is the same in every direction from the Sun at the same distance that Earth is from the Sun, the number of neutrons per SPHERE per second should be the following:

    (2*10^-2 neutrons/cm^2*sec) * (area of sphere in cm^2/sphere)

    This number is much bigger than your present number and actually goes toward strengthening your hypothesis since you will need as big of a number as possible to show that all the 1H1 in the Sun should have been converted to 1H2.

    2. You then stated that this flux was directed toward Earth alone:
    “As a flux with 2s10^6 neutrons/cm².sec is emitted toward the earth direction”

    This is illogical.

    3. How do you know that the emission of neutrons is uniform throughout the surface of the Sun? Other matter seems to be mostly ejected by way of solar winds that usually are directed toward nearby bodies (planets, comets, etc). Therefore, the proposition that neutrons may be entering the Sun seems dubious.

    4. If neutrons were entering the Sun with the same flux as emitted, the total number entering would be 10^41 in the span of 1 billion years. (Use the formula from (1) above.) These would have to combine with the 10^33 grams of 1H1 in the Sun to produce 1H2.

    5. 1H2 is very sensitive to gamma photons. Even if neutrons travel further than photons, neutrons would undergo elastic scattering with the 1H1 in the Sun. This would slow them down and they would finally be absorbed by the 1H1 to form 1H2. But these might release gamma photons in the vicinity of other newly formed 1H2 in the Sun and have those 1H2 dissociate as a result. There would be no need to have photons travel through dense matter (which they can not do anyway) to destroy 1H2; this would occur locally instead.

    6. There are two possibilities for the dominance of 1H1 in the Sun:
    i) Not enough free neutrons to create 1H2 and subsequently 2He4 (see (4) above).
    ii) Enough free neutrons to create 1H2 but quickly dissociating due to resulting gamma photons (see (5) above). A small portion of 1H2 would happen to combine quickly enough to form 2He4 and avoid the destructive consequence of being hit by gamma photons.

    All the best,
    Joe

  16. Andrea Rossi

    Sterling Allan:
    Thanks for the updating,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  17. I finally got another digest compiled.

    LENR-to-Market Digest — January 22, 2015 – Highlights include: McKubre reports on a variation of Rossi’s 3rd party test in Lugano by Russian senior scientist, Alexander Parkhomov; info on pre-ordering E-Cats; 1 MW plant test updates; preparing for mass production; Brillouin’s travels and progress; MFMP “dog bone core test” progress. (PESN; January 22, 2015)

  18. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in January 22nd, 2015 at 2:26 AM

    Wladimir,

    1. —————————————
    You write,
    “Therefore the total flux of neutrons emitted by the sun, and leaving out the sun is:

    2×10^-2 x 10^8 = 2×10^6 neutrons/cm².sec”

    followed by

    “As a flux with 2s10^6 neutrons/cm².sec is emitted toward the earth direction”.

    Why do you say that the Sun’s TOTAL flux of neutrons is directed toward the Earth ONLY?
    ————————————————————-

    I did not say that

    the flux measured by experiments, hiting the earth, is 2×10^-2

    The flux of neutrons emitted by the sun is spread by a surface A
    The surface of the earth is S.

    Then the total flux emitted by the sun is 2×10^-2 x A/S

    2. ————————————————-
    You write,
    “then also a flux with the same intensity is emitted by the sun going toward the center of the sun”

    How do you know this?
    —————————————————–

    because the sun will not say: “I prefer emit neutrons along one direction only”

    3. ————————————————–
    You write,
    “and they [neutrons] hit the hydrogen of the sun, and so all the hydrogen of the sun would have to be converted to deuterium, along billion years”.

    i) Have you calculated the ratio of neutrons to 1H1 in the Sun?
    ————————————————————

    There is no need. We can use the calculation made by Dr. JR, based on the Avogadro number

    ii) ————————————————
    1H2 is very sensitive to photons. How does it survive in the Sun’s environment?
    —————————————————-

    photons do not cross matter. Have you ever seen a light crossing matter?
    But neutrons can do it.

    iii) —————————————————–
    1H2 has a strong tendency to couple up and become 2He4. Since 2He4 is second only to 1H1 in abundance in the Sun, what makes you think that 1H2 exists at all in the Sun?
    ———————————————————–

    Ok, then let us change the point, as follows:
    all the hydrogen of the stars would have to be converted to 2He4, and so the hydrogen could not exist in the universe.

    4. —————————————————
    You write,
    “As the earth and the planets were formed by matter coming from the sun, the water in the earth would have to be formed by D2O”

    i) Standard theory describes planets as being formed simultaneously with their star in a disk of dust, and not by matter coming from the star.
    ———————————————————-

    then ask to the authors of the standar theory to explain how heavy elements like uranium were formed from the dust

    ii)—————————————————
    Standard theory says water was bought to Earth by meteorites.
    ——————————————————-

    And who did put water in the meteorites?

    The god Neptune or Poseidon?

    .

    regards
    wlad

  19. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. You write,
    “Therefore the total flux of neutrons emitted by the sun, and leaving out the sun is:

    2×10^-2 x 10^8 = 2×10^6 neutrons/cm².sec”

    followed by

    “As a flux with 2s10^6 neutrons/cm².sec is emitted toward the earth direction”.

    Why do you say that the Sun’s TOTAL flux of neutrons is directed toward the Earth ONLY?

    2. You write,
    “then also a flux with the same intensity is emitted by the sun going toward the center of the sun”

    How do you know this?

    3. You write,
    “and they [neutrons] hit the hydrogen of the sun, and so all the hydrogen of the sun would have to be converted to deuterium, along billion years”.

    i) Have you calculated the ratio of neutrons to 1H1 in the Sun?

    ii) 1H2 is very sensitive to photons. How does it survive in the Sun’s environment?

    iii) 1H2 has a strong tendency to couple up and become 2He4. Since 2He4 is second only to 1H1 in abundance in the Sun, what makes you think that 1H2 exists at all in the Sun?

    4. You write,
    “As the earth and the planets were formed by matter coming from the sun, the water in the earth would have to be formed by D2O”

    i) Standard theory describes planets as being formed simultaneously with their star in a disk of dust, and not by matter coming from the star.

    ii) Standard theory says water was bought to Earth by meteorites.

    All the best,
    Joe

  20. Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in January 15th, 2015 at 8:12 AM

    Joe,

    1) ————————————————-
    You’re right to ask about the details of the neutrons, as the details of where they are formed and how likely they are to form deuterons is important. But even if we ignore that and assume that all 5×10^10 neutrons/second are captured, that’s a tiny number in this context.

    At about 3×10^7 seconds per year, you have roughly 10^18 captured per year, and 10^27 in a billion years. With two hydrogen per water molecule and 6×10^23 molecules per mole, you need 10^24 to convert one mole of water (which is about 18 grams). So this gives 1000 moles, about 18kg, of water being converted to D20 over a billion years. Not even a drop in the bucket.
    —————————————————————

    Dear JR
    I made a mistake here:
    Instead of 13.000km = 13.000.000m = 13×10^7cm
    the correct is:
    13.000km = 13.000.000m = 13×10^8cm

    Then the total of deuterium formed is actually 1800kg over a billion hear.

    But you are right.
    Not even a drop in the bucket

    However,
    it only means that the background of neutrons produced in the earth is not enough to convert all the hydrogen existing the earth to deuterium

    The sun is formed basically by hydrogen:
    http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Sun/fusionsteps.html

    But energetic neutrons are produced in the solar atmosphere by solar cosmic rays, and the emission of solar neutrons at the earth is 2×10^-2neutrons/cm².sec
    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1969SoPh….6..339F

    The distance sun-earth is 150×10^6 km
    So the area of the sphere which receives the flux of neutrons is:
    A = 3,14 x (2 x 1,5×10^8)² = 3×10^17km²

    The area of the disk due to the earth diameter d= 13×10^3 km is:
    S = 3,14 x (13×10^3)² = 5×10~8 km²

    The ratio between the areas A and S is:

    A/S = 3×10^17/5×10^8 = 10^8

    Therefore the total flux of neutrons emitted by the sun, and leaving out the sun is:

    2×10^-2 x 10^8 = 2×10^6 neutrons/cm².sec

    Of course neutrons with low energy are also formed, by as they have low velocity, and they decay in 15 minutes, they do not arrive to the earth.

    As a flus with 2s10^6 neutrons/cm².sec is emitted toward the earth direction, then also a flux with the same intensity is emitted by the sun going toward the center of the sun.

    Therefore a very high flux of neutrons is emitted toward the center of the sun, and they hit the hydrogen of the sun, and so all the hydrogen of the sun would have to be converted to deuterium, along billion years.

    As the earth and the planets were formed by matter comming from the sun, the water in the earth would have to be formed by D2O

    regards
    wlad

  21. orsobubu

    An (old) nice article, never linked here before:

    http://climate.nasa.gov/news/864/

  22. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    Thank you, interesting,
    Permanent Regards,
    A.R.

  23. BroKeeper

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    Could you give us any insight whether the team has made any further strides increasing self-sustain-mode time? If so, could you predict a commercial industrial and domestic E-Cat surpassing a COP of 10?
    Also, could you predict maintenance frequency near a year versus the previous six month periods?
    With much respect,
    BroKeeper

  24. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    We are working on both the issues you cited.
    Real data will be supplied at the end of the R&D and test period.
    So far I can’t say anything consistent.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  25. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, now that Cold Fusion is moving very fast,who do you think will go down in history for being the first to use a Cold Fusion device, to supply clean water for those millions suffering and dying in this World.
    Best wishes.

  26. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    Thank you, but what is important now is to work for the present and the future. History is a consequence that usually is written by the winners, in many cases lack of respect for deads ( as said Sitting Bull). I am not very much interested to it. What counts is to make working plants, the rest is not my problem.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  27. Luca

    Dear AR
    “When you see the light out of tunnel….” I hope that this isnt a train!!
    This just a joke!!!
    Congratulation for your result….and….. I dont forget Sergio Focardi.

  28. Andrea Rossi

    Gian Luca:
    We are studying the issue. Probably we will make agreements with well consolidated existing organizations.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  29. Gian Luca

    Dear A.R.

    you have already thought about how to manage service to customers for optimal distribution of domestic ECAT? This important part of management will be a source of exceptional work. Will be managed by your dealer?
    greetings

  30. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes, the pre-orders will be handled as follows, if and when the domestic units will be put on the market: all the persons that have sent a pre-order will receive an offer: if they will confirm the order along the offer they will receive the E-Cat. Priority will not be a big issue, because when we will decide to put the domestic E-Cat in the market it will be produced in big numbers, so that it is likely that the delivery term will not be a big issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  31. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    It’s good news to hear that you are focusing on the domestic E-Cats — I think many people are excited about the prospect of this product.

    In 2011 you allowed people to pre-order these units, and many signed up. Will these people have priority to purchase the first units that are available?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  32. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    True.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  33. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    dear Dr. Rossi, also the Norwegians take seriously LENR.
    Your work has sparked a chain reaction around the world .

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/01/20/norwegian-technical-and-scientific-association-reports-on-lenr-seminar/

  34. Andrea Rossi

    Andreas Moraitis:
    Correct. Sorry for my typo !
    Thank you for the additional two links.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  35. Andreas Moraitis

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    This might be the site that you meant: http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/

    Below are two links to other useful websites. It needs only a few clicks to obtain the isotopic data. The first site displays the data for all isotopes of an element on a single page. The second site provides additional information, for example on possible decay chains:

    http://education.jlab.org/itselemental/
    http://periodictable.com/

    Best regards,
    Andreas Moraitis

  36. Curiosone

    Can you explain where we can find all the characteristics of the existing atomic isotopes ?
    W.G.

  37. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    To find all the information about isotopes I use
    http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/
    It is based upon the Segre chart. Very useful and easy to consult.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  38. Andrea Rossi

    Enrico Billi:
    What do I expect?
    1- successful (I hope) completion of the R&D and test of the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer of IH
    2- completion of the R&D for the domestic unit
    3- lavolale, lavolale, lavolale, lavolale, lavolale, lavolale…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  39. Curiosone

    When will we be able to see photographies of the 1 MW plant in the factory of the customer ?
    W.G.

  40. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    As soon as possible we will publish photographies of the plant in the factory of the Customer, provided we will get the necessary authorization.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  41. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    As I said in past, the fact that these giants have approached LENR field without bias is an important achievement of our work, in the interest of all.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  42. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    Thank you for the information, obviously I am honoured of this.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  43. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    No, I do not know, but I am glad of that. I repeat, though, that, since I cannot know the particulars, I cannot comment these tests.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  44. Enrico Billi

    Dear Andrea,
    wish you a great 2015. What news should we expect for the new year?
    Best regards and lavoLaLe lavoLaLe

    Enrico Billi
    blog: billienrico.wordpress.com

  45. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    Probably you know that many labs in Russia are replicating your effect
    DT

  46. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    The MIT Group is talking also of your experiments.
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  47. JCRenoir

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Lockeed Martin, NASA, Areva, MIT, Bill Gates, Shell…what do you think about the fact that you have raised interest in LENR in such companies?
    JCRenoir

  48. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Well, this too is a LENR advancement in the global consideration that comes after our hard work and many fights.
    This is good news for all, even if it is not directly connected with us: our technology is totally different. But in the same MIT is on course of development the work of Brian Ahern, more connected with our technology, that, as I always said, is very promising.
    Thank you for the link,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  49. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, MIT goes Live with Cold Fusion 101

    Professor Peter Hagelstein of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at MIT, and Dr. Mitchell Swartz of JET Energy, Inc., will present the course with topics such as:
    Introduction to Excess Power in Fleischmann-Pons Experiments

    http://coldfusionnow.org/cold-fusion-101-at-mit-for-2015/

    Go to the Cold Fusion Now Youtube channel
    https://www.youtube.com/user/ColdFusionNow

  50. Andrea Rossi

    Dave Lafleur:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  51. Dave Lafleur

    Thank you for your reply. My dad used to burn old railroad ties in Chicago for heat.
    Good luck to all you innovators.

  52. Andrea Rossi

    Dave Lafleur:
    Thank you for your attention.
    The marketing will be unleashed after the completion of the R&D cycle on course in the 1 MW plant that has been supplied to the first Customer . We cannot risk to have many Customers with major problems without having reached the consolidation of the technology.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  53. Dave Lafleur

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    You have commented that the e-cat in not ready for the domestic market and your points seem very reasonable to me. This blog has certainly shown demand however.

    Meanwhile, you must be getting many inquiries from industrial users who would be more discrete than to blog. The potential of the e-cat must make some CFOs eyes roll, yet you have not unleashed your commercial market let alone the domestic potential. Do you care to comment on what must be a good problem to have?

  54. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Industrial plants are mature, and at the end of the R&D period of the plant supplied to the Customer of IH the expansion will be already on solid ground, if the final results will be positive ( I must remind you that the results could be also negative, and in this case things will be more difficult). The domestic E-Cats are the big issue we are working on for what concerns the future. We are testing a new design that is extremely interesting and, in parallel, our experts are working on the safety certification side. When I talk of million pieces I am talking of domestic apparatuses, of course. Somebody said: ” I have a dream…”. Me too.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  55. Andrea Rossi

    Ian Walker:
    He,he,he…but the role of the papa is made by our Team, not just by me!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  56. Ian Walker

    Dear Dr. Rossi

    I guess sometimes you get to feeling like papa in those long car journeys to the holidays on the beach with the children in the back asking “Papa, are we there yet?”

    Kind Regards walker

  57. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    When you talk about preparing one million pieces per year, are you talking about industrial or domestic E-Cats?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  58. Thanks for your reply and I wish you and your Team good work and good luck !
    Giorgio Cerrina

  59. Andrea Rossi

    Giorgio:
    Likewise,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  60. Andrea Rossi

    Jane Gooders:
    Thank you for your comment. We cannot give particulars yet, because the product is in preparation and still immature.
    I share your desire, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  61. Jane Gooders

    Hi Andrea,
    Very good news about the progress on domestic units. When these were discussed a year or so ago, the time taken for the unit to go from cold to operating temperature was apparently half an hour or so – this is fine for many applications, but would not suit a home heating system where that system is only used intermittently for a couple of hours a day, or for an “on demand” hot water service. Have you managed to decrease the time taken to complete the end to end start up cycle at all?
    I’m looking forward to the day I can install a domestic unit on my sailing boat for heat and hot water, and in the future replacing our diesel engine with a steam E-Cat propulsion system!
    Many Thanks
    Jane

  62. Joe

    Steven,

    You are right. In today’s Universe of lower densities and speeds, the probability of neutrons encountering hydrogen atoms in Space is also lower. Add to this the neutrons’ unstable nature, and the probability is reduced further. All this adds up to a sparsity of neutrons in Space.

    The reality, though, is that all neutrons would have been used in the early Universe to form first 1H2, followed quickly by 2He4. Any free neutrons that are observed in Space today would necessarily have their provenance in local phenomena (stellar activity primarily).

    Any credible cosmological model would have to first and foremost explain the abundance and distribution of 2He4 in the Universe. The reason for this is that 2He4 is hard to destroy or couple up to other nuclei. Therefore we can be certain that most of the 2He4 in Space was formed soon after the Big Bang. So the presence of 2He4 in Space should act as an important anchor for the creation of a credible cosmological model.

    All the best,
    Joe

  63. Dear Dr Rossi
    I’m following you from 2011 when you introduced your first E Cat to the people and the Sweden scientists understood the importance of the instrument; now have passed 3 years and much way and progress, 2 validations from respectable University opened the way to this new energy. Now many authoritative scientists
    changed idea about Lenr and step by step many scientists will be able to replicate the lenr energy, so everything looks good. But for the layman when this technolgy will be usable?
    Thanks
    Cerrina Giorgio

  64. Andrea Rossi

    Giorgio:
    To make a forecast is very difficult, and if I say a date I will be assailed if the date will not be respected. We are working very hard both for the certification and for the industrialization to be able to manufacture million pieces per year. We are working on this much harder than you can imagine.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  65. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for this link: another giant enters in the LENR field thanks to our enormous work. I think that this, as well as the hundreds of experiments to replicate the Rossi Effect, is an indirect accomplishment of our Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  66. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi,
    are all in search of the ‘ “effect Rossi”!!.

    Duncan formed the Sidney Kimmel Institute for Nuclear Renaissance (SKINR) at MU, which was empowered by a major gift from Sidney Kimmel. He created the Center for Emerging Energy Sciences (CEES) at TTU in 2015. Both CEES and SKINR seek to understand the origins of the Anomalous Heat Effect (AHE) in certain metals that are loaded with hydrogen isotopes.

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/01/16/robert-duncan-starting-center-to-investigate-lenr-at-texas-tech-mckubre-to-join/

  67. Andrea Rossi

    Hugh DeVeies:
    Thank you for your suggestion.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  68. Hugh DeVries

    E-CAT semantics revisited:

    I believe there are two parts to the semantics with regards to the “Rossi Effect”. The first is the semantics for the product(s) and the second is the semantics for the phenomena.

    The name “Energy Catalyzer” was first selected as the product name for marketing a “Rossi Effect” based product line and from this start a very good product acronym,the E-CAT was created. The acronym works well for the product oriented literature and sales related semantics. It certainly works well in the official ECAT web site.

    As a sales point of view it would be very beneficial if there was a clean transition of semantics between E-CAT and the start of a sales explanation of the “Rossi Effect”. When one starts with the description of the E-CAT technology and refers to it as “Energy from Cold Atomic Transmutation” you start with a clean slate and a direct association with the product you are trying to sell. All very beneficial.

    If the salesman’s pitch has to transition to LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reaction) which carries little meaning as to the “Rossi Effect”, the sales description becomes disconnected from the product and less effective. The “nuclear” word mention also opens up many possible negatives in the customer’s mind, all which takes time to overcome to close the sale.

    Best regards,
    Hugh

  69. Steven N. Karels

    Wlad, Joe and JR,

    An interesting discussion. Although outside of my primary field, I do recall that for neutrons to be absorbed into a receiving nucleus, the neutron can only be a thermal neutron, that is having the amount of energy typical of thermal temperatures (e.g., 20C). Given the limited lifetime of neutrons (around 15 minutes) and their low speed because of them being thermal neutrons, would that not limit the distance over which they could seek and find a hydrogen nucleus before they decayed?

    So even though we have billions of years since creation, it would seem to me the opportunity for neutrons causing 1H to become 2H is quite small. Comments?

  70. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for your continue overview of the replication attempts around the world. I am following this evolution with great interest.
    I just want to repeat the warning to work in safety, in proper laboratories, respecting all the safety laws and instructions; it is necessary that the experiments are made under the direction of a professional expert, with the necessary certification regarding his skill of safety responsible. There is a law about this issue, valid in all America, Europe, Russia, China, and these laws must be respected. The materials of the fuel are dangerous, as well as the potential effects of the experiment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  71. Andrea Rossi

    Dima Redko:
    The results of the analysis made upon the ashes are what they are. I did not do the sampling and I did not do the analysis, so all I can do is take notice of the results and study them under any thinkable point of view. I can confirm or disconfirm nothing. What I can say is that we are working very well on the reconciliation of all the consolidated data and the publication of the mechanism will be made at the conditions I have explained in former comments.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  72. Dima Redko

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    In the past the origine of the excess heat produced inside the e-cat reactor was explained as fusion of hydrogen and nikel to produce copper. Now after Lugano report wich reported no copper in the ashes, can you confirm that this initial idea of producing copper is totally dismissed?

  73. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, also Italian scientists are trying to replicate the E-Cat and with a very high COP. Your work will change the world of energy .
    Experimentation LENR Metals Hydrogen
    ( Core test with heat exchanger water )

    http://www.spazionica.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6&Itemid=111

    LENR Square Root of c^2 Project (Preliminary Measurements on Reactor C0)
    video available
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vNe457I90g&feature=youtu.be

  74. Andrea Rossi

    Hugh DeVries:
    Rethinking: my opinion is that we have not to disguise the technological bases, but we have to be sincere and explain. Then it will be the intrinsic safety of the operation to consolidate the diffusion of the product. I trust the intelligence of people, we do not need to make fancy names to hide anything. The issue is too important to be reduced to a semantic trick, that could resemble the attempt to hide an elephant behind a fig leaf.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  75. Andrea Rossi

    Hugh DeVries:
    Thanks for the semantic opinion. To be taken in consideration.
    Warm regards
    A.R.

  76. Joe

    Wladimir,

    The paper mentions “astroparticle” and “cosmogenic origin”, so I assumed that the neutrons were incoming from space and measured underground, as hard as it was to comprehend.

    1. Neutron formation that is linked to the heaviest of elements will never be the source of a universal neutron background. How much U and Th do you think exists in the Universe? And why do you use data from geophysics and apply it to astrophysics? If the neutrons are confined to rock, how can they possibly be responsible for contributing to the creation of a universal neutron background?

    2. How do these confined neutrons even make contact with surface water?

    3. In QRT, you mention that if the neutron’s energy is too small, neutron and proton could never couple since the neutron would never be able to penetrate and place itself in the proton’s gravitational flux n(o). And if too large, no spin-interaction between the two would be possible. So how does QRT explain the formation of 1H2? Should there not be a “right energy” as I have already stated?

    All the best,
    Joe

  77. Hugh DeVries

    Andrea,
    There is a case for not having the word “nuclear” as part of the name referencing the E-CAT.

    The “nuclear” word as part of the name associates the Rossi effect with all of the negative history of the nuclear bomb, nuclear radiation, nuclear power plants, etc. This immediately triggers a negative reaction to the E-CAT as a new product entry as just another “nuclear” device.

    As a suggestion the E-CAT product line can still be defined without the use of the word “nuclear”. One suggestion would be to promote “Energy from Cold Atomic Transmutation” or E-CAT as the proper acronym.

    Best regards.
    Hugh

  78. leDahu

    Dear Andrea,

    The heating sytem of my house is air conditionning with fuel oil.
    I also managed to distribute warm air from the firework through the same circuitry.
    It works fine.
    Since a long time and for many reasons I want to couple a “new clean energy source” via an air/water heat exchanger.
    The heat pump is an option providing good flexibility, but here in the North East of France the COP is not high enough in the middle of winter.

    E-Cat seems to be a much better candidate.
    High and constant COP. Investment, fuel and maintenance very attractive.
    Two 10Kwh units would do the job.
    One or two would be active depending on the needs.

    The very important question for the next future:
    How flexible would be the E-Cat for running the process?
    The project is to have a constant air flow and to modulate air temperature.
    Given a nominal power of 10 Kwh per unit what is the lower rate it can achieve.
    Can we cycle the power and in which extend?
    What about the timing for switching on, getting power and switching off?
    Would such a modulation seriously affect COP?

    My fear is what to do with the excess of energy…when the demand is low!

    Is there any engineering study available in that regard?

    Thanks for you kind attention.

    Bernard

  79. Andrea Rossi

    LeDahu:
    When we will put in commerce the domestic version, the excess of heat will not be a problem, but now I cannot enter in particulars for a thing that is not yet ready to go.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  80. Andrea Rossi

    Greg Leonard:
    Thank you for your kind words.
    The incremental binding energy of a neutron is the effect on binding energy when one more neutron is added in a nuclide.
    The energetic effect of the combination of a neutron- proton spin pair can be estimated, for example, by comparing the incremental binding energy of a neutron for the case in which the neutrons are 1 less than the protons with the case in which the neutrons are 1 more than the protons: the result is different. But, if you are referring to the so called Rossi Effect, the source of it is more complicated and I confirm what I said in my former answer regarding this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  81. Greg Leonard

    Dear AR
    I am sutprised at your comment.
    I do not belong to any group. I am a retired engineer and academic (Aeronatical Engineering and Computer Science).
    I registered quite early on ECAT.com for the domestic ecat – all address details etc. there.
    My question was genuine, and should perhaps be rephrased:
    Is the energy associated with a neutron always the same, or does it depend on which nucleus it is attached to?

    My admiration for your work is also genuine.
    regards,
    Greg Leonard

  82. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in January 15th, 2015 at 2:16 AM

    Wladimir,

    1. =============================
    Does the paper that you link specify if neutrons travel all the way to the surface of the Earth? Usually they are produced by cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere but decay quickly into other species.
    ===================================

    Joe, didnt you read the paper?

    The neutrons are produced in deep underground labs , in the Pyhäsalme mine, by spontaneous fission (mainly U238) and reactions due to U, Th traces.

    .

    2. =========================================
    If the neutrons do hit the surface of the Earth, do they have the right energy for a successful coupling with protons in order to form deuterium (and subsequently D2O)?
    =============================================

    So, they heat the surface of the Earth, since they are produced inside the Earth.

    What do you mean with the right energy for a successful coupling with protons in order fo form deuterium ???????????????????

    This is just the point.
    According to the Standard Model, neutrons with low energy between 0 and 1,5MeV have to have a successful coupling with proton in order to form deuterium, because:

    1- There is not repulsion between protons and neutrons

    2- There is strong attraction when the neutron hits a proton, due to the strong nuclear force

    regards
    wlad

  83. Andrea Rossi

    Greg Leonard:
    The issue is much more complicated. There are not neutrons that misteriously disappear. We are reconciling the isotopical results and will make a publication as soon as the situation will allow us to do this. Our reconciliation does not violate the Standard Model. I am working with several nuclear physicists ( one in particular, well known) upon this issue. The problem is that a full explication unavoidably has to disclose theoretical points that could bring to violate the IP.
    You know perfectly this, we know who you are in the UK, even if you make fake grammatical errors ( ” things nuclear”) to disguise your group and proclaim your “poor understanding”. When we will have reached the proper economy scale all this will be published.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  84. JR

    Joe,

    You’re right to ask about the details of the neutrons, as the details of where they are formed and how likely they are to form deuterons is important. But even if we ignore that and assume that all 5×10^10 neutrons/second are captured, that’s a tiny number in this context.

    At about 3×10^7 seconds per year, you have roughly 10^18 captured per year, and 10^27 in a billion years. With two hydrogen per water molecule and 6×10^23 molecules per mole, you need 10^24 to convert one mole of water (which is about 18 grams). So this gives 1000 moles, about 18kg, of water being converted to D20 over a billion years. Not even a drop in the bucket.

    Also, as you may have guessed, his comment on inversion of causality is, as usual, nonsense. But it’s old nonsense so it doesn’t seem worth going into.

  85. Greg Leonard

    Dear AR
    I am fascinated by the isotopic changes referred to in the Lugano report.
    It leads me to ask a question – which will show my very poor understanding of things nuclear.

    If a neutron mysteriously disappears from 7LI ( to leave 6Li) and a neutron mysteriously appears at 61Ni (to become 62Ni) – has there been any overall energy change in the system?

    Many thanks for all you have achieved so far, and for keeping us informed.
    The dawn brightens.
    regards
    GL

  86. JonJon

    Andrea,
    Is LENR cold fusion or cold transmutation?

  87. Andrea Rossi

    JonJon:
    I think that ” LENR “, in general, can be the definition of any low energy nuclear reaction, independently from the effect.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  88. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. Does the paper that you link specify if neutrons travel all the way to the surface of the Earth? Usually they are produced by cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere but decay quickly into other species.

    2. If the neutrons do hit the surface of the Earth, do they have the right energy for a successful coupling with protons in order to form deuterium (and subsequently D2O)?

    All the best,
    Joe

  89. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    Interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  90. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    Enormous work in Russia to replicate your effect, with great respect for your scientific work. I hope you understand you have big friends in our Country. We love your work.
    DT

  91. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    The replication made in Russia are very interesting. If confirmed, have a great merit.
    Thank you for your kind words,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  92. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Thank you for the information. I am sure our Readers will make use of it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  93. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thanks for the info, clearly our work is generating a Worldwide reaction. It is positive.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  94. orsobubu

    Andrea, I read your anecdote regarding UFO and Area 51, and then the interview with Yuri Bazhutov, these confirm you have amazingly powerful connections there in United States, perhaps you know something I don’t, maybe I’m starting to believe in your vision of a future world of peaceful market (ultimately not integrated?) evolution?? hehee

    Perhaps a remote possibility could exist, but LENR capabilities must be really astonishing, coupled with other impressive technological breakthroughs, able to rapidly expand mankind and robotization in space, before war, in capitalistic floating “islands”, I have to think about it

    Please Andrea confirm and reassure about LENR astonishing futuristic perspectives

    Anyway, this would spell disaster and defeat for my favored (after a chaos age) communistic/anarchic revolution, and this is not good

  95. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu,
    Thank you for the interesting links.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  96. orsobubu

    Andrea, Koen Vandewalle, Joseph Fine, since you were interested in Seth Lloyd’s paper: The universe as quantum computer, here there are some links about an incredible experiment ongoing at Fermilab, exploring the nature of space-time as a sort of bidimensional simulation:

    http://www.nbcnews.com/science/weird-science/do-we-live-2-d-hologram-physicists-aim-find-out-n190406
    http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188727-pixels-of-the-universe-experiment-begins-to-see-if-the-universe-is-a-2d-hologram
    http://holometer.fnal.gov/faq.html#location

    Even more strange than this, here there are some links about a new mathematical object recently discovered, able to challenge the notion of space-time (already posted here in JONP by another reader):

    http://discovermagazine.com/2014/jan-feb/10-shaping-the-future-of-physics
    https://www.quantamagazine.org/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/
    http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2014/03/31/guest-post-jaroslav-trnka-on-the-amplituhedron/

  97. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    LENR will supply a new fire, the effects of a new fire depend on the use men will make of it.
    I hope in a friendly integration with all the existing energy sources for the advantage of all mankind.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  98. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in January 11th, 2015 at 12:04 AM

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “So, the probability of fulfilling the two conditions is very small (there is need to hit the “hole” and at the same time to move along the z-axis direction).”

    The meeting of proton and neutron does not need to be so exact. They can be prompted to alter their course by interacting with each other’s fields. An example is two permanent magnets that are pulled to each other’s pole even if their polar axes are not aligned. Eventually their axes do get aligned. Therefore, by QRT, 1H2 (and not 1H1) should be omnipresent in the Universe. There has been more than enough time for every atom of 1H1 to undergo enough collisions with neutrons to ensure a successful transmutation to 1H2.
    ========================================================

    Joe,
    you cannot compare the behaviour of a neutron with the behaviour of a magnet.

    The neutron needs to enter within the secondary field Sn(p) of the proton via the hole in that field, otherwise the neutron cannot get interaction with the proton.

    The “hole” in the proton’s field Sn(p) is situated in a distance of 10^-11m (radius Bohr).
    The radius of the proton is 10^-15m.

    So, the bodies of the neutron and the proton are separated by a distance 10^4 times larger than the radius of the proton.
    If we compare the body of the proton with a ball with 20cm diameter, the body of the neutron will be in a distance of 2km far away of the proton.

    With this very large distance there is no way to have alignment of their z-axis in order the neutron to hit the proton

    regards
    wlad

  99. Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in January 11th, 2015 at 2:49 PM

    Wlad,

    1) =====================================
    What makes you say that there is a significant neutron background throughout the universe?
    ===========================================

    http://ilias.in2p3.fr/ilias_site/meetings/documents/ILIAS_4th_Annual_Meeting/270207/E_Tziaferi.pdf

    Quantity of neutrons with energy between 0 and 1,5 MeV:

    26,1 x 10^-7 /cm² per second.

    By considering the diameter of the Earth d= 13.000km = 13.000.000m = 13×10^7cm, the area is:
    S= 3,14x(13×10^7)²/4 = 150×10^14 cm²

    Therefore the quantity of neutrons is 26,1×10^-7 x 150×10^14 = 4000×10^7 = 5×10^10 neutrons per second, which are hiting the protons of the hydrogen in the water molecules H2O of the oceans, per second.

    On Earth, deuterated water, HDO, occurs naturally in regular water at a proportion of about 1 molecule in 3200.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_water

    But with the emission of 5×10^10 neutrons per second by the background of neutrons of course the proportion of 1 molecule in 3200 would have to increase all the time, and by considering the billion years of the Earth the oceans would have to be formed by 100% of D2O.
    ================================================================

    .

    2) =========================================
    Even if you generated a large background of neutrons, their lifetime is only about 15 minutes so they will all decay away unless the neutron+proton fusion rate is extremely high. But the neutron-proton interaction has an extremely short range and…
    ===================================================

    WHY ???????
    The neutron-proton interaction has an extremely short range but this is an experimental fact detected by EXPERIMENTS.

    Dear Dr. JR,
    you cannot take the results of experiments so that to explain why a phenomenon occurs. The explanation of a phenomenon requires a THEORY.

    So, dear Dr. JR,
    AGAIN you are using the inversion of causality so that to explain a pheomenon from the principles of the Standard Nuclear Phycics.

    Look at the low energy neutron proton scattering:
    http://www.lns.cornell.edu/~dlr/teaching/p6574/lectures/lecture10-1.pdf

    In the paper they say:
    “As there is no J = 0 bound state, the interaction depends on spin.“.

    WHY????
    Why the interaction depends on the spin???????

    After all, as there is no Coulomb repulsion between a proton and a neutron, and they have a very strong attraction due to the strong nuclear force, then the scattering proton-neutron at low energy would have to produce a deuteron independently of their spin.

    The Standard Nuclear Physics has not explanation for this fact. Such conclusion is inferred from EXPERIMENTS.

    So,
    note that in the paper they try to explain the neutron-proton scattering from an experimental fact that cannot be explained from the principles of Standard Model.

    This is the reason why “the neutron-proton interaction has an extremely short range“, however the Standard Model cannot explain why.
    ===============================================================

    .

    3) ================================================
    so there is little chance that they will come close enough to interact at any reasonable densities, yielding a fusion rate that is negligible compared to the decay rate.
    ==========================================================

    We are not speaking about the interaction between ONE neutron and ONE proton.

    When the neutron is emitted, it moves crossing the matter wich composes the Earth (water, rocks, atmosphere, etc).

    So, ONE neutron has chance to have interaction with billion protons along the trajectory of the neutron.

    As 5×10^10 neutrons are emitted per second in the Earth, then the chance of collision proton-neutron is big, and by considering the billion years of the Earth’s existence, all the hydrogen of the molecules H2O would be converted to D2O.
    ====================================================================

    regards
    wlad

  100. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Dr. JR,

    I forgot to tell you: you did not win the 500.000 prize

    sorry

    regards
    wlad