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

    Steven N. Karels:
    Interesting insight about the work of Dr Parkhomov.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  2. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I cannot give information about this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  3. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I recall your much earlier postings suggested that the so called Rossi effect required around 100 – 200 Bars of pressure for the non-catalyst nickel-hydrogen reaction. Yet Dr. Parkhomov indicates a COP of 2 – 3 at 5 Bars. Is this consistent with your experience?

    His pressure profile of 5 Bars then decreasing to a vacuum of 0.5 Bars suggests perhaps loading (of the nickel?) is occurring. Also after the reaction start, additional hydrogen is drawn into the nickel or consumed? Any thoughts?

  4. Steven N. Karels

    To all JONP readers,

    Analysis of the Parkhomov Experiment – Gas Pressure

    The Parkhomov reactor is described a cylinder 29cm in length. From the pictorial diagram, I estimated the inner diameter at 1 cm with an effective length of 7cm. Filler rods were used to decrease the air volume but there were some additional volume for test equipment. I therefore estimate a gas volume of 20cc.

    Working Volume = 20 cc. = 0.02 liters

    How much hydrogen is needed to support a pressure of 5 atm at 1473K (1200C)?

    Using the ideal gas law P * V = n * R * T, where R = 0.082 liter * atm / ( K * moles)

    n = P * V / ( T * R) = 5 atm * 0.02 liters / (1473 K * 0.082 atm * liters / (mole * K)
    n = 8.3 * 10 ^-4 moles

    2 grams of hydrogen in one mole, therefore hydrogen mass = about 1.7 milligrams

    Assumption: LiAlH4 was used to supply both the hydrogen and the lithium to the eCat.

    What was the required LiAlH4H mass?

    Assume LiAlH4 can yield about 25% of its hydrogen when heated above 700C. So the hydrogen portion of the LiAlH4 must be 6.8 milligrams.
    Total molar mass of LiAlH4 is 37.95 so the LiAlH4 mass = 6.8 milligrams * 37.94 / 4 = about 64 milligrams.

    Dr. Parkhomov’s report indicated 60 mg so this is generally consistent with his reported results.

  5. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Again thank you for this thread of very interesting links to the work of Dr Parkhomov.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  6. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dr. Rossi , here is the report of Professor Alexander Parkhomov March 26

    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1269-Parkhomov-Paper-2015-03-26-English-pdf/

  7. Andrea Rossi

    Ian Walker:
    1- No, I can’t, because I never attended the experiments of Dr Parkhomov. I just am taking notice of his very interesting work.
    2- Yes, we had temperature changes before finding the way to stabilize the operation, but I cannot know if the causes of this effect are the same in different situations.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  8. Ian Walker

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    1) In Alexander Georgevich Parkhomov’s recent replication of the Rossi Reactor he noted some step changes in temperature, might you shed some light on the matter?
    2) Have you also recorded such step changes in temperature?

    Kind Regards Ian Glen Walker

  9. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Very interesting,
    Thank you.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  10. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Have you seen this report by Dr. A G Parkhomov?

    https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5Pc25a4cOM2WWVmdHRjVmVHMDA/edit

    He has shown the Rossi Effect in action for about 3 days.

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  11. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you! Interesting link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  12. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    PARKHOMOV”S 3rd PAPER, TEXT

    Conclusions.

    1. The apparatus worked continuously for more than 3 days, producing more than twice as much as the applied electrical energy. 50 kWh or 18MJ were produced in excess of the electrical energy expended. This amount of energy could be obtained by burning 350g of petroleum products.

    2. The reactor chamber pressure during slow burning was relatively low (in this experiment up to 5 bar)

    3. The used fuel had the appearance of soft droplets of golden color mixed with grey powder.

    4. The resultant used fuel mixture was sent for analysis of atomic and isotopic composition. But the results, unfortunately, have not yet been received.

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.it/2015/03/parkhomovs-3rd-paper-text.html

  13. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Fro what I can read and see in the internet, Alexander Parkhomov is making a good work. Thank you for the new link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  14. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi:
    Dr Parkhomov presented the results of his experiments , it seems that talks of a COP 3,3. What do you think: is he on the right track ?

    https://youtu.be/iAgvs9-tbsA

    https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bz7lTfqkED9Wfll6bDlfWE5lbnVSRW53RHYxU0hqYkI5VE9kYldJWDdmekF0WnZaMW43ZlE&usp=sharing

  15. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Wow!! Are you working on a propulsion system, a water desalination system or a direct hot cat to electricity system? Any of the three would instantly be useful to a large degree.
    Regards

  16. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    As I said in my last answer to you, I cannot talk of the lines of our R&D regarding the Hot Cat. We talk of our products when they are ready for operational work. Thank you for your continue attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  17. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I agree.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  18. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    This sounds like an ideal application for a new thermal production system… A constant load is an easier requirement than a highly varying load. The input electrical power is always there (as long as commercial power is available or while the UPS batteries last). You have either chosen very well or are very lucky in this application (or both).

    Still it is a difficult task transitioning from a laboratory system to a commercial system. I doubt many readers really appreciate the technical challenges your team is addressing and have addressed. I trust your customer is flexible and a pleasure to work with… It would appear so by your work history with them.

  19. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    a. We must deliver 1 MWh/h. There is no minimum: if we get short of it, they back up
    b. If there are not problems, the output is constant
    c. The question is too generic to answer. Depends on the cases and the reasons of the demand variations.
    d. Our Customer provides UPS
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  20. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    You have stated that a test line for the hot cat has been established in the customers facility. I assume the tests are to determine if the hot cat can reliably produce electricity. If this is the case, does this mean the customer is also interested in using electricity along with the heat generated by the cool cat in its production process, or is it just allowing you to use its facility as a bonus to you?
    Regards

  21. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    No, your assumption is wrong. We already know that we can apply the Carnot cycle. Our Customer is not interested to the producion by the E-Cat of electric energy, because he needs heat to make his industrial production.
    Our R&D on the Hot Cat is aimed to other issues I cannot disclose.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  22. Alexvs

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    The energy generated by the 1Mw plant during 1 year test being

    E = 31.536 Terajoules = 7.54 Teracalories (Am I wrong?)

    is really impressive. How do you evacuate such an enormous heat amount?

    Greetings

  23. Andrea Rossi

    Alexvs:
    The Customer does not pay the 1 MW E-Cat plant to “evacuate” the thermal energy produced: the Customer uses the thermal energy for his industrial production.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  24. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Yes, but we have to work on the charge before using it in another reactor.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  25. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Have you ever ran an E-Cat for a period of time, removed the fuel, and then successfully used the fuel in another reactor?

  26. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    On your current 1MW eCat system, can you reveal the dynamic information for your customer’s load?

    a. The range of power requirements (e.g., 1 MW maximum load; 0.01MW minimum load)?
    b. Does the thermal output load presented to your unit remain relatively constant days at a time or is there a daily cycle (e.g., maximum during some hours, minimum during other hours)?
    c. How quickly is your system required to respond to changes in demand (minutes or hours)?
    d. Does your customer provide uninterrupted power service (UPS) for the input to your system? If not, are their any issues with your system should electrical power be lost?

  27. Paul

    Andrea,

    I hope you are not using the customer’s power to run the hot-cat tests. That would negatively influence the performance metrics of the 1MW plant.

    Stay Self-Sustaining,

    Paul

  28. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    The 1 MW E-Cat has a specific and independent electric cable that supplies the energy, along which is measured the energy consumed by the plant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  29. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I cannot give this information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  30. carloluna

    Andrea.You can let us hear the voice of the E-Cat putting a clip on YouTube?

  31. Andrea Rossi

    Carloluna:
    He,he,he,he…good idea, I will ask permission for it to the Customer!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  32. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Some posts on eCat-World.com reveal that during a test of the Rossi Effect reactor performed by Dr. Parkhomov, he measured a significant drop in internal gas pressure. This drop in internal pressure seems counter-intuitive to me. A sealed vessel should maintain the same pressure or elevate as temperature is increased. It seems the magnitude of the change cannot be adequately explained by additional adsorption into the nickel.

    a. Can you explain what is happening in the Rossi Effect that might allow such a drop?
    b. Do you attribute the decrease to a break in the “seal” of the reactor?
    c. Have you measured the internal pressure in your testing?
    d. If so, have you observed a similar effect?

  33. Fyodor

    Mr. Rossi

    Can you tell us anything about the work that others at your company are doing while you live inside the container? Has there been additional experimentation on the Hot-Cat? Electricity generation?

    Thank you for taking the time to answer my question.

  34. Andrea Rossi

    Fyodor:
    As I already said, the R&D on the Hot Cat is going on here where I am working with the 1 MW E-Cat, where a test line for the Hot Cats has been set up. About the electric power generation, we decided for the Carnot Cycle, made possible by the temperatures we can reach with the Hot Cat.
    We are making R&D also for other systems of electric power production, about which I must hold confidentiality, but not reached so far acceptable efficiency and reliability. So far.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  35. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    The voice of the E-Cat during these nights is constant and stable. But unpredictable too, as always!
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  36. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    What does the voice of the machine tell you these days? Is it agitated, calm, unpredictable, angry . . . something else?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  37. DTravchenko

    Dear Dr Rossi:
    Airbus has made a patent application on LENR basically copied from your work: reading the text of the application appears they too have replicated your effect!
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  38. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Yes, I too infer from the application that they have replicated the effect in their laboratories.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  39. Andrea Rossi

    Quadrupole deformations are types of multiple deformations of the atomic nucleus and belong to the area of collective models. You can find a rigorous description of them on:
    “Nuclear Models”, Greiner- Maruhn, Springer 1996, pp 99- 206 ( see in particular pp 108- 135).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  40. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Metz:
    Before giving any kind of answer to these kind of questions we must complete the cycle of tests. It will take at the least until the end of the year.
    We want not to publish any intermediate result. Let me remind you that the final results could be positive, but they could also be negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  41. Andrea Rossi

    Dima Redko:
    LENR should descibe any kind of nuclear effect observed in the order of magnitude of temperature within the thousands Celsius degrees instead of in the millions degrees.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  42. Dima Redko

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Is LENR a Low Energy (fission) Nuclear Reaction or Low Energy (fusion) Nuclear Reaction?

  43. Peter Metz

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    If the COP of the 1MW is say 6, will you not know that the result will be positive (as far as energy use goes) after 2 months? Are we there yet??? :)

    Regards,
    Peter Metz

  44. Andrea Rossi

    Renoir:
    Tell to your physicist friend to read Cole A.J. ” Statistical Models for Nuclear Decay”, IOP Publishers, Bristol 2000, pp 155, 156:
    “Understanding the low energy fission process has proved so difficult that, even 60 years after the Bohr Wheeler liquid drop statistical model , which provided a qualitative understanding of fission, there does not seem to exist a well defined and universally accepted theory”. Note: this has been written in the year 2000! If he does not understand this, try this other one: ” Nobody has been able to detect gravitons so far, therefore how can you be sure that you can crash if jump from the window of a 10th floor apartment?”
    But your friend could still have his vindication, if the test of the 1 MW plant, from the inside of which I am writing this answer, will turn out to be negative after one year of operation. You never know.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  45. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Can you address me to find where I can get good information about the quadrupole deformations ?
    Thank you for your patience,
    W.G.

  46. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    During a discussion, a physicist asked me how can exist the Rossi Effect if there is not a well defined theory about it.
    Answers?

  47. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    One thing is certain: Dr Parkhomov is a strong worker, like me.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  48. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Also Airbus, after Lockeed Martin and NASA, has made a patent application inspired by our work: well, sounds our work has been taken very seriously from very serious concerns.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  49. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    1- no
    2- not so far
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  50. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    1 – Does refueling a reactor in a low or high temperature E-Cat require replacing any part other than the fuel powder?

    2 – Are the reactors in the one megawatt plant showing any sign of wear, corrosion, or fatigue that could eventually result in a need for replacement?

  51. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi ,
    Also the giants in the LENR field:

    Airbus Files Patent for LENR ‘Power-Generating Device’

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/03/22/airbus-files-patent-for-lenr-power-generating-device/

  52. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    dear Dr. Rossi:
    the work of prof . Alessandro Parkhomov continues to make progress …

    http://kb.e-catworld.com/index.php?title=Alexander_Parkhomov%27s_E-Cat_replication_experiments

  53. Respected Andreea Rossi Sir

    Dear Dr. Eernie1 sir,

    Regarding “galaxy growth rate”, I humbly request you to please see sections (8) and (9) of ‘this’ published paper.

    http://pubs.sciepub.com/faac/1/1/2/index.html

    thanking you sir,
    yours sincerely,
    U.V.S.Seshavatharam.

  54. eernie1

    Dear U.V.S. Seshavatharam,
    Are you saying that the reason we can observe objects having superluminal velocities such as the movement of the spiral arms of galaxies is due to the change in mass densities of their black bodies and the subsequent expansion of the Hubble radius?
    Regards and good luck with what I consider one of the most complex scientific fields.

  55. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Thank you for the reference.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  56. Respected Andreea Rossi Sir

    Dear Dr.Eernie1 sir,

    I would like to bring to your kind notice that, for the cosmic black hole, if mass density suddenly falls down to thermal energy density, Hubble radius increases by a factor of 27 and similarly if mass density suddenly falls down to the mass density of elliptical or spiral galaxies, Hubble radius increases by a factor of 5. With these two points, one can suspect the existence of currently believed “dark energy”. First of all, from particle physics point of dark energy and dark matter must be addressed. Then only it is possible to think about the other applications dark energy.

    thanking you sir,
    yours sincerely,
    U.V.S.Seshavatharam.

  57. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, you and your Readers may be interested in a Book written by Stephen Hawking’s wife.
    It was made into a Movie, that won many Awards.
    Google:
    Traveling to Infinity: My Life With Stephen
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  58. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for this important link.
    The work of Dr Alexander Parkomov is getting all the more important.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  59. eernie1

    U.V.S. Seshavatharam,
    IMHO I think many of the questions in cosmology can be answered by the Dirac theory of epos. As an example the sea of epos that constitute space are in a ground state that cannot be detected because they are not luminal but exhibit gravity interactions with the epos that are excited into the sensible portion of our space. Thus they can be the entities that we call dark energy.
    Can I ask your opinion of the possibility for application to your theory?
    Regards and perhaps we can emerge from this dark period of science.

  60. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    dear Dr. Rossi , from Russia arrive good news …

    Russian Press about Parkhomov

    1) A.G. Parkhomov succeeded to build a long-time working reactor with measurement of pressure. From March 16, 23:30 hour the temperature is maintained till now (March 19, 10:00 hour)
    Photography of the reactor
    http://lenr.seplm.ru/novosti/ag-parkhomovu-udalos-sdelat-dlitelno-rabotayushchii-reaktor-s-2330-16-marta-temperatura-derzhitsya-do-sikh-por

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html

  61. Respected Andreea Rossi Sir

    Dear Dr. Alexvs sir,

    I would like to bring to your kind notice that, Galaxy rotation curves can be considered as key supporting item for black hole cosmology. But the main problem is with “finding the cosmic center”. We are working on this. For the time being I humbly request you to see section (7) of this published paper.

    Title: “On the Evolving Black Holes and Black Hole Cosmology Scale
    Independent Quantum Gravity Approach”

    “so far many models have been proposed for understanding the real picture of ‘quantum gravity’. But none is successful in interpreting the observed cosmological phenomena. By going through this revised paper as a review article, many concepts on evolving black holes, black hole radiation, black hole cosmology, scale independent cosmological quantum gravity, CMBR isotropy and anisotropy, ordered galactic structures, galactic rotation curves, observed galactic redshifts, present and future cosmic rate of expansion etc. can be understood. The three heuristic concepts are: 1) Evolving universe is a scale independent quantum gravitational object. 2) CMBR temperature is a quantum gravitational effect of the (evolving and light speed rotating) primordial black hole universe and 3) Observed cosmic redshift is the result of a characteristic light emission mechanism of the cosmologically evolving hydrogen atom and is inversely proportional to the cosmic temperature”.

    I humbly request you yo please see this link.

    http://www.sciepub.com/reference/85162

    thanking you sir,
    yours sincerely,
    U.V.S.Seshavatharam.

  62. Andrea Rossi

    U.V.S. Seshavatharam:
    Thank you for your answer to Joe. I found your paper very interesting, even if I am not an expert of the matter related to Black Holes. I am just a staunch reader ( not student) of the books of Stephen Hawking.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  63. Respected Andreea Rossi Sir

    Dear Dr. Joe sir,

    I would like to bring to your kind notice that, so far no theoretical model proposed a solution for the origin of ‘rest mass’ of nay elementary particle. Newtonian as well as Einstein theory both could not address the ‘origin of mass’ of matter or ‘origin of mass’ of the universe. One should not forget the fact that stars, galaxies, black holes and plasma etc all are composed of elementary particles. If one is considering any celestial object – it means – knowingly and unknowingly one is considering the elementary particles whose massive origin is still a mystery. So far no world laboratory detected the dark matter.At utmost fundamental level, current physics is very silent. So far no astrophysicist knows the composition of a black hole! In this context, I humbly request you to please re-think. With black hole cosmology, we are trying to link the known and unknown physical quantities of the observable universe with accurate data fitting. Something is better than nothing. I request you to please see the following link. http://pubs.sciepub.com/faac/1/1/3/index.html

    yours sincerely,
    U.V.S.Seshavatharam

  64. Joe

    Concerning the paper “To Understand the Basics of Black Hole Cosmology,” the following three issues come to mind:

    1. The factor M – the mass of the Universe or of a black hole – should not be used with the certainty shown in the paper since it is almost guaranteed to be wrong. All the other factors are derived from lab experiments, so they are trustworthy. The mass of the Universe is a very rough estimate.

    2. Today, we know that most matter in the Universe is composed of plasma. And so the laws of EM will necessarily need to make their presence known in calculations concerning phenomena out in Space. Since EM forces are 39 orders stronger than gravity, having a gravity-only approach like in the present paper guarantees a failure of conclusion.

    3. Even if all phenomena out in Space were gravitational in nature, we must ask which definition of gravity – Newton or Einstein. With Newton, mass can be deduced from observing phenomena. With Einstein, gravity is geometry of space. And geometry is influenced by both mass and energy. So how do we decide which phenomena are due to the presence of mass and which are due to the presence of energy? By ignoring energy, the present paper takes the Newton approach by default. But the Newton Universe is obsolete, thereby negating any conclusion reached by the paper.

    All the best,
    Joe

  65. JR

    I’m truly impressed, I didn’t realize that Wladimir was famous/infamous enough to get a Nobel Prize winner to correct his basic physics misunderstandings. I guess all of those spam emails finally paid off.

    Of course, this simply follows from what Wladimir has been told on numerous occasions: the magnetic moment is by definition zero for spin-0 nuclei. Wladimir claims that there’s no need to define some things, and that the definition that “feels” right to him is better than the formal definition used in physics. That would be fine if he actually shared his own definition and stuck to it, but he simply changes it in his head and then makes false claims that HIS version of the magnetic moment has been measured to be zero. It appears as zero in tables for spin-0 nuclei, because it’s zero by definition – the real definition not Wladimir’s. I hope it’s obvious (at least to people other than Wladimir) that you can’t simply redefine what some quantity means and then plug in numerical values that come from a different definition.

  66. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski, Prof. Brian Josephson:
    I totally agree with Prof Brian Josephson.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  67. Alexvs

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    Did you read the above article “To Understand The Basics Of Black Hole Cosmology”?

    If so, what is your opinion about it? I mean precisely paragraph 11. I think that following the reasoning, the probability of isotope existence at least for even N nuclei could be deduced. For most of even N atoms the stable isotopes follow the pattern: STABLE-UNSTABLE-STABLE…..STABLE-UNSTABLE-STABLE.

    Greetings

  68. Andrea Rossi

    Alexvs:
    Stimulated by your comment, I read the paper of the Professors Seshavatharam- Lakhsminarayana on the JoNP.
    It is intriguing and very interesting, besides is well sustained under a mathematical point of view. I cannot criticize it, because I am not an expert of black holes, but I think the paper is worth a reading. I am fascinated by the idea that the Universe could be the internal of a super massive black hole generated by the collapse of stars…I am not able to understand if this is possible or not, because I am not a student of the matter. About your question, I do not think I have understood what do you mean regarding the existence of even N isotopes related specifically to the paragraph 11.
    Maybe the Authors are more qualified than I am to give you a satisfying answer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  69. Wladimir Guglinski

    Comment by the Nobel Prize in Physics Dr. Brian Josephson in Amazon.com, on the book The Evolution of Physics- from Newton to Rossi’s eCat:

    Dr. Josephson sent me the following email:

    ————————————————————–
    Subject: Re: The Evolution of Physics: The duel Newton versus Descartes
    From: bdj10@cam.ac.uk
    Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 10:22:50 +0000
    To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

    Hmmm. I suppose your spamming people had a good result in the end, in that people will now be warned of the deficiencies of your friend’s book, which they otherwise would not have been. See review page at

    http://www.amazon.com/review/R23H8JJ5NJU48

    A system with an even number of fermions can be in an S state, which is spherically symmetrical and so must have zero magnetic moment.

    Brian J.
    ————————————————————–

    .

    And his comment in the Amazon.com:

    ————————————————————–
    By Brian
    This review is from: The Evolution of Physics: From Newton to Rossi’s eCat (Kindle Edition)
    The book summary says “any nuclear model proposed according to Standard Model cannot explain a nuclear property of the even-even nuclei with equal quantity of protons and neutrons: those nuclei have null magnetic moment. As the atomic nuclei have rotation, those nuclei cannot have null magnetic moment. Such puzzle cannot be solved by any nuclear model based on the Standard Model”. The author is right to think that rotating nuclei should have a magnetic moment, but seems not to have realised that even-even nuclei don’t necessarily rotate. So his conclusion that the data cannot be explained by the Standard Model is incorrect. His elementary failure in this regard must raise doubts as to the accuracy of the rest of the book.
    ————————————————————–

    .

    And I sent to Dr. Josephson the following reply:

    ————————————————————–
    From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    To: bdj10@cam.ac.uk
    Subject: RE: The Evolution of Physics: The duel Newton versus Descartes
    Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 09:06:59 -0300

    Dear Dr. Josephson,

    you wrote in your comment in the Amazon.com:
    “The author is right to think that rotating nuclei should have a magnetic moment, but seems not to have realised that even-even nuclei don’t necessarily rotate”.

    So, I would like you give me a good reason why nuclei with odd number of fermions rotate, while the nuclei with even number of fermions do not rotate.
    For instance, 6C11 has rotation.
    But if 6C11 captures a neutron, it transmutes to 6C12. And the rotation of the 11 fermions of the 6C11 stops, because the 6C11 has transmuted to 6C12 ????
    How can one unique neutron get to eliminate the kinetic energy of rotation of 6 protons and 5 neutrons with fast rotation????

    Besides,
    you are wrong because of the following:

    1- A paper published by Nature in 2012 had shown that even-even nuclei with Z=N have non-spherical shape:
    How atomic nuclei cluster
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/nature11246.html

    2- I sent the following email to the journal Nature:
    Dear Martin Freer
    With that distribution of charge of the 10Ne20 structure shown in Figure 1, how to explain that 10Ne20 has null electric quadrupole momentum ? That structure shown in Figure 1 is not spherical, and therefore 10Ne20 could not have null electric quadrupole momentum (detected in experiments concerning nuclear data)
    Regards
    WLADIMIR GUGLINSKI

    2- Martin Freer sent to me the following answer:
    The nucleus is intrinsically deformed as shown, but has spin 0. Consequently, there is no preferred orientation in the laboratory frame and thus the experimental quadrupole is an average over all orientations and hence is zero. Experimentally is is possible to show that the deformation of the ground state is non zero by breaking the symmetry and rotating the nucleus.
    Martin

    Therefore, Dr. Josephson,
    your hypothesis that nuclei with even number of fermions have no rotation is wrong, because if they had no rotation the experiments would have to detect non-null quadrupole moment for the even-even nuclei with Z=N.

    Sorry, but you are wrong, Dr. Josephson.
    There is no way to solve the puzzle from the principles of the Standard Nuclear Physics

    regards
    Wladimir Guglinski
    ————————————————————–

  70. Alexvs

    About the last paper published on the JoNP “To understand the basics of black hole cosmology”: good tentative. It does not explain the anomalous galaxy dinamic.

  71. Andrea Rossi

    Alexvs:
    I am not the one who made the peer reviewing of the paper. I did not read it, yet. If you have questions regarding it, please put them to the Authors. I am sure they will be delighted to answer you.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  72. Andrea Rossi

    Kenko 1:
    I do not know. It is too soon to know: we are now focused on the test of the 1 MW plant and of the Hot Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  73. kenko1

    If the results are positive for your customer, do they plan to use even more ecats for production of their products?
    TIA
    kenko1

  74. Andrea Rossi

    Piero Mongioj ( so you are Nero!):
    Also today your message arrived in the spam, but today I have been able to recover it!
    Next time you better change the address from which you send the comments.
    Thank you anyway for your comment: I wait to know the results of this new experiment of Alexander Parkhomov.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S.
    In the ancient Rome there has been another Nero: he too was an experimanmtalist of heat production systems…

  75. Piero Mongioj

    Grazie… Have you seen the test “in fieri” by Parkhomov today? Comment! Buon lavoro… Con affetto, Nero

  76. Andrea Rossi

    John Atkinson:
    My vision ( and hope) is that we will have a mass production and utilization of the e-Cats.
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  77. john Atkinson

    I would like to thank you for your devotion and iron will in developing and improving your invention the e cat. I have no dought that after you are satisfied that the e cat meets your clients and investers performance exspectations the world will be a better and differnt place.Considering the unprecedented progress you have had in the past five years,what is your vision five years from now of realistic applications for the e cat? Thank you

  78. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    R&D, tests and industrial/commercial work are strictly bound.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  79. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I think it is important to differentiate the Lugano tests and the Parkhomov tests from your commercial work. These tests characterized the relatively long term performance of the basic eCat design and the so-call Rossi effect. COP was relatively low and testing was conducted for long periods of time to produce statistics on average heat generation.

    Your commercial work, I gather, is dealing with maximum energy efficiency, and short term control issues — keeping the Cat from becoming the Tiger. I would assume the emphasis on the commercial work is to demonstrate how much cost savings can be obtained while still keeping operation under total control. Comments?

  80. Andrea Rossi

    Nero:
    I unfortunately did not succeed to recover your comment from the spam where it wrongly is gone, because I made a wrong click.
    But I read your question that was: why have not the measurements of the Lugano test been made with calorimetry as Parkhomov did?
    Answer: I did not choose how to make measurements during the Lugano test, nor I did make such measurements. In the Report of the ITP it is clearly written the reason of the choice of the Professors. The important work of Parkhomov, who used a calorimetric system, has confirmed independently the results.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  81. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    After the disclosure of the ash analysis and your confirmation that as far as you know it is correct, I think that there are a number of conclusions that can be made. First, there must be a source of thermal neutrons generated in the reaction. Second these neutrons must be generated by using relatively low energy sources(LENR). Thirdly there must be a large cross section for interaction with an atom for capture(most of the neutrons are then absorbed therefor not detected). Any generated Gammas must be of low energy and capable of interacting with the surrounding media to produce thermal energy.
    There is a source of thermal neutrons available in the 7Li atom. They are the Halo neutrons located 7fm from the nucleus center and almost completely free from the strong force holding the other nucleons together. They should be able to be dislodged by a relatively small force such as a free electron passing near the atom colliding with it. since the neutron would be a relatively low energy neutron, it has a high probability for encountering an atom such as Ni in a lattice and entering its nucleus.
    There are many other atoms possessing Halo neutrons(37Mg has two)available along with others that have not been explored. Perhaps neutrons captured by other atoms remain as Halo neutron, thereby much more volatile and capable of interacting further in the reaction. Because all these occur at low energies, the generated photons would also possess relatively low energies thus enhancing their probability for interaction with lattice configurations.
    Many of these conjectures of course depend upon the ash analysis presently available to us. We look forward with great anticipation to further refinements of the analysis information
    Regards and enjoyable analysis.

  82. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Thank you for your insight.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  83. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    He is a mainstream scientist, a University Prof of Physics, with whom I am writing a paper regarding the Lugano results and the possible reconciliations, to which is also interested in. I am learning from him more than he is learning from me, for sure.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  84. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Interesting to hear about your long Skype meetings with the physicist. Is this someone who takes your work seriously, and is able broaden your understanding — or are you trying to convince them of the validity of your work?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  85. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    The liquid drop model implies a sharp drop of nuclear density at the surface of the nucleus, like would happen with a billiard ball. But the experiments show this is not true.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  86. Paul

    Andrea,

    I have just purchased a high voltage self-charging capacitor to simulate the output of the photo cat. It is called a Van de Graaff generator. Playing with this 10pF 100 KV capacitor, it becomes obvious to me that, in the photo cat, the spacing of the electrode plates and the break down voltage of the gas between the plates determine the maximum voltage across the plates. In theory, the maximum possible voltage of the photo cat should be the maximum eV of the captured x-rays.

    Stay Self-Sustaining,

    Paul

  87. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  88. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    The work of Dr Alexander Parkhomov is professional. He did not involve himself in fields he is not expert in and made a mastery calorimetric measurement. His system was apparently simple, but every particular has been made with professionality and a lot of work. He is a guy that for every page that he writes has a background of 100 pages studied. I do not know him, I did not work with him, but this is the idea I thought up about him reading what he did.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  89. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea:
    About your Effect: are you going to publish some theoretical interpretation of it?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  90. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I am studying together with a major nuclear physicist the results of the Lugano test. Long Skype conferences, he from his University, me from inside the 1 MW E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  91. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers of the JoNP:
    Today has been published on the Journal of Nuclear Physics the paper “To understand the basics of the Black Hole cosmology” by Proff. Seshavatharam and Laksminarayana ( Dept. Nuclear Physics- Andhra University, India).

  92. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    After your answers to April and Ing. Michelangelo De Meo, what do you think now of the work of Dr Parkhomov with the replicas of the Hot Cat?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  93. JCRenoir

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Do you think the liquid drop model can explain the functions of the atomic nucleus?
    JCR

  94. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    I repeat the answer already given to the comment of “April” few hours ago.
    I could also add:
    E = BSc^2
    where BS stays for Bull S….
    Should this equation be true, with the theories I read regarding electron capture in LENR we could move all the high speed trains of the world for millions of years.
    Not to mention the tragicomic reference to ” very fast changes of pressure”: what does mean very fast ??? Where are the numbers? Where is the Math ? In these reactions one second is an eternity: the average halflife of a virtual particle is 10^-23 s !!! Who controls if a reaction is faster or slower? It appears clearly that these guys have no idea what is a real experiment, what is a real machine, what is real work…in this paradisiac condition of virtual reality ( sort of mental masturbation) they can say whatever theoretical BS they want, provided they have not to make real work that forces them to pay hard if make mistakes.
    I suppose to have made clear my opinion.
    As my friend Sergio Focardi many times said: ” To understand LENR is not necessary to make exotic Physics, is enough to study seriously the existing Physics”. And I add: ” Without bias”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  95. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi:
    what do you think of the electron capture at low energy ? See the link:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ntgj0_CUo2U9Ic0lgoHEFgezpXZq6vIcbkD1LP2zLuk/edit?pli=1#gid=1904317063

  96. Paul

    Andrea,

    How often do you meet with Industrial Heat’s management team?

    IH’s hands off management style seams a little too good to be true.

    Paul

  97. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Our Team is always in close contact, the flow of information must be exchanged in real time as things happen. As for the management, everybody has his specific role and I do not belong to IH’s management.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  98. Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Do you think electron capture can explain the so called “Rossi Effect”?

  99. Andrea Rossi

    April:
    The electron capture happens ( very rarely) only when the atomic nucleus contains a superabundance of protons, which is not our case. The theories that try to explain LENR with electron capture contain basic errors, about which I already have written, due to lack of knowledge of elementary Physics laws and can only add confusion to an already complicated matter. My sensation is that among most of LENR “experts” ( either positively or negatively biased) is maintained the following equation:
    Physics pages written : Physics pages studied = 100 : 1
    This does not help.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  100. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    I want to add that we trust the USPTO and I am confident our appeal will be taken in due consideration.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.