Rossi Blog Reader

This page contains all the postings to Andrea Rossi's Journal of Nuclear Physics, with the entries sorted so that Rossi's answers appear under each question (where possible).

This page is generated once a day.

Back to the most recent entries.

Comments to Webmaster

  1. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Many people are trying to duplicate the hot cat. I have not heard of many attempts to duplicate the cool cat. Am I missing something or are those attempts being kept secret(DOD, NASA etc).
    Regards.

  2. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    I am not able to answer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  3. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea and team in your containers.
    You really are an example for many, the way you work and why you work.

    Congratulations whith the enhanced SSM ! A giant leap, it seems.
    The principle of this improvement can also be applied to the driven mode?

    I have a question that arises from your answer to the previous question of Nils Fryklund:
    The answer is: yes, it is possible, if opportune.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S. I preferred to answer here because your question maybe of interest also for others.

    What do you really mean with: “If opportune” ?

    Kind Regards
    Koen

  4. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    in this case, “if opportune” means that we do not expect that will be necessary to make the maintainance to one or few modules per time, since we expect that the charges will consume moreless equally; the maintainance will not involve only the charge replace, but many other issues, so it will be less time consuming a global intervention presumably of a week. But this is an opinion, not based upon experience, that’s why I said “if opportune”. We’ll see.
    Warm Regards, from all our team “in our containers”.
    A.R.

  5. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    In you answer to Nils Fryklund you indicated it is possible to stop a single module of the 1 MW E-Cat and perform maintenance of the single module, change the charge while all the other modules are in operation. This suggests to me that:

    a. The eCat modules are individually controlled (as opposed to belonging to a group of reactors).
    b. I would further guess that you may be doing load balancing between eCat reactors to obtain maximum useful working time.

    Comments?

  6. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Thank you for your insight.
    I cannot comment.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  7. Giannino Ferro Casagrande

    Egregio e stimatissimo signor Andrea la seguo da molti anni per dove posso e mi pare assodato pure che Lei mi conosca, perché mi sono presentato a Lei più volte e pure di persona a Pordenone ad esempio dove Lei teneva una conferenza su divulgazioni relative alle LENR , oltre che aver più volte aderito allo acquisto di 4 E-CAT di qualsiasi tipo . Mi sono pure espresso epistolarmente anni fa , quale Suo possibile aiuto per qualsivoglia bisogna (senza assolutamente tornaconto ) . Leggendola in continuazione sul Suo sito JoNP mi immagino pure nei miei pensieri , relativamente alla Sua persona , una qualche forma di simpatia parecchio consolidata . Complimenti . Ora io leggendo la Sua Risposta al sig, Nils del 30-03-15 , dove si esprime : “ e-mail privato “ , e pure : “ Ho preferito rispondere alla Tua domanda , in una sede diversa “ Le chiedo gentilmente se posso avere un suo recapito di posta privata . Amorevolissimi e cordialissimi saluti da Giannino di Udin , Suo fans assoluto !

  8. Andrea Rossi

    Giannino Ferro Casagrande:
    You are asking how to contact me personally, here is the address:
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  9. Andrea Rossi

    Gianino Ferro Casagrande:
    You are asking how to contact me personally, here is the address:
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  10. mark saker

    Dear Andrea,

    when did you decide to make a peer reviewed paper (to possibly publish in May). Will this help you to be granted a patent or are the two not connected?

    Did the scientist get full disclosure of the Rossi effect and will there be new pictures :)

  11. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    I decided to publish a theoretical paper after a discussion with the scientist I wrote it with, five months ago.
    Theory has nothing to do with patents. The theory is based on the results of the Lugano Report, not on the industrial secrets, for obvious reasons.
    For the rest, let’s wait for the publication.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  12. Steven N. Karels

    Hank Mills,

    Since Dr. Parkhomov’s experiment was controlling the power based on the sensed temperature, then by definition he was sensing the temperature and he was using a computer. If he had periodically recorded the temperature and the input power, then all needed information would be present for the analysis. The missing piece could be resolved by deliberately interrupting power for both the control (no fuel) and the fueled versions to observe the temperature decay at different stable temperature settings. So I see this as a procedural issue, not an experiment design issue.

  13. Andrea Rossi

    Nils Fryklund:
    In your private email to the JoNP you asked if it is possible to stop a single module of the 1 MW E-Cat and make the maintainance of the single module, change the charge while all the other modules are in operation.
    The answer is: yes, it is possible, if opportune.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S. I preferred to answer here because your question maybe of interest also for others.

  14. Hank Mills

    Dear LENR – Cold Fusion – Rossi Effect Community,

    Alexander Parkhomov’s most recent test report and oral presentation clearly indicates he has once again replicated the basic Rossi Effect. Although additional replications from qualified experts utilizing all safety precautions would provide even more corroboration – his evidence seems very strong.

    This post is not to dispute his positive findings; actually, it’s purpose is to discuss further evidence in support of the Rossi Effect that could have been captured but was not. His test – even though it has detected massive excess heat – did not measure heat after death. Both his report and oral presentation fail to mention any heat messurements taken after the point at which the resistor failed. Multiple groups and individuals have contacted him to ask about this issue. Parkhomov has answered.

    I’ve personally read two email responses from Parkhomov that he sent to other researchers. I have forwarded one of them to Andrea Rossi in order to show the information I am sharing is authentic. Parkhomov states in the email that no data exists from the time period because he was not present and temperature data was not being recorded.

    This does not negate his overall positive findings. But it makes determining if heat after death took place impossible. This represents a flaw in his experiment. This flaw does not impact the results that have been released, but the flaw allowed key data that could be used to measure HAD to go unrecorded.

    We know his system was designed to keep the reactor at a constant temperature of 1,200C. This is factual according to his report. If this was the temperature at the moment the resistor failed, then we would need to know the drop in this value over time to create a slope on a graph. If the graph showed a constant temperature being maintained (self sustaining) or a slower drop in temperature than that of a control unit, then HAD could be detected. Since the temperature over time after the resistor failed is unknown, there is no way of determining id HAD was produced.

    Inital Temperature + Unknown Temperature / Time = No Proof Of HAD

    I am not attacking Parkhomov. I think he has done a great work by replicating when others were simply talking. However, I hope the entire community can learn the importance of setting up a data acquisition system so temperature data can be recorded even if a resistor fails. An amazing opportunity to possibly detect HAD was lost, and I hope this does not happen again.

    Maybe this flaw in an otherwise tremendously successful experiment will be a wake up call for the community.

  15. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Thank you for your insight. In the last experiment it seems to me that Dr Parkhomov has addressed the issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  16. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Congratulations on the extended SSM. It sounds like you have found where to rub the belly of your eCat to make it Purr.. It sounds like a non-linear control problem where there may be several “sweet zones” where optimal behavior occurs. Good luck as you map out these zones.

  17. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Thank you for your kind words and for your insight.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  18. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    Apologies if I was not clear.

    Is the increased SSM because it runs for longer periods in SSM or the periods when electrical input is applied have got shorter. For example, where previously it might have been 120mins SSM then 60mins control, perhaps now it is 120mins SSM then only 10mins control

    Thankyou

    Mark

  19. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    It is the SSM that has increased and, consequently, the driving time is decreased.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  20. JCRenoir

    Andrea:
    You say you stay in the container of the E-Cat 16 hours per day: can I ask you what do you do in the remaining 8 hours?
    JCR

  21. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    1 hour to eat ( I am Italian). I eat once a day.
    1 hour to go with my bike or to make jogging.
    5 hours in bed.
    30 minutes to wash.
    30 minutes for shopping.
    If called for an emergency, I run anytime to the plant, as does anyone of the Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  22. Marco Serra

    Dear Andrea
    I wonder how can you obtain similar extensions in the ssm periods on a working device. One can’t change a tire in a running car. In my mind the only things you could change are some software parameters, to be propagated to a hundred of microcontrollers.
    Are theese great results in terms of long ssm sons of your “actions” on the devicea or are you simply discovering a potential of your baby that you didn’t know yet ?
    Scaramanzia a parte, do you still realiatically believe that the final results of the test could also be negative ?
    I don’t. And I suggest humbly to start to think to the mass production. I predict a very large demand.

    God bless you
    Marco Serra

  23. Andrea Rossi

    Marco Serra:
    Good question. The improvements are due mainly to the fact that for the first time we can operate for a very long period, 24/7 the 1 MW E-Cat Lady. We are learning to know Her better, using Her. We can operate changements using the regulation of the control system; surely, as you correctly say, we cannot make major modifications with the E-Cat in operation.
    About the final results: honestly, I think that the final results could be positive, but also negative, even if the more we advance through the test path, the more the probability of a successful output increases; at the moment I give 50.1% positive chance, 49.9% negative.
    I am 64 years old, working from more than 40 years, made about 1,500 plants of various kind, seen too many problems arise from new plants not to be worried of what from the next future will come. My foreseeable future is tomorrow: beyond that I need a cristal ball. That’s why I stay with Her 16 hours per day, included Christmas and Easter.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  24. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Since you work so many hours inside the 1MW unit, can you tell us something about the human experience?

    a. Hot/Cold temperature – is the unit air conditioned or heated for personal comfort?
    b. Lighting – LED, CFL?
    c. Communications – telephone, computer, television?
    d. Furniture – desk and chair? Bed?
    e. Drinking water, refrigerator?

  25. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    a. we have air conditioned in the container where are the computers to operate the control system and wherein we mostly stay
    b. High Efficiency Fluoreshent Tubes, Mod. General Electric Ecolux WM ( made in China).
    c. we got cell phones, wi-fi, obviously computers ( enough to set up a computer shop…); no television ( so I will have not to suffer looking at the Red Sox).
    d. desk and chair, standard office furniture. No bed.
    e. drinking water, of course, refrigetator.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  26. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    Is it that the SSM periods have got longer or the periods that the electrical input is required has got shorter? for example perhaps you have a 1hour SSM period followed by a 5minute control period or an even better ratio? :)

  27. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    Can you rephrase your question? It is not precise enough to give an answer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  28. Andrea Rossi

    The E-Cat this week has been good, with very, very extended ssm periods. I prefer to give data regarding the COP after the end of the test.
    From inside the plant,
    A.R., with Warm Regards

  29. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone: No, I prefer maintain this information undisclosed until the publication is made.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  30. Curiosone

    Can you inform us about when your paper will be published in a peer reviewed magazine?

  31. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I think May, but I am not sure. At the moment it is under peer reviewing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  32. DTravchenko

    …also: are you worried in general that patents of others steal your technology ? After all the wonderful work you made are not you afraid that the fruits go to the gorillas?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  33. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    Same answer as few minutes ago.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  34. DTravchenko

    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
    I read the patent application of Airbus, it is obviously copied from your publications and the reports of the Independent Third Party. Are you worried that they can steal your technology?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  35. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    No, I am glad that Airbus is working on LENR inspired by our work: this gives evidence that all the ” I-Know-Everything” guys that aprioristically define LENR impossible to be sustained in serious concerns are wrong. I am honoured of the fact that our work has moved seriously Airbus, Shell, Lockeed Martin, Bill Gates …and many others I can’t say. In all the World. This happened because we made facts, not words.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  36. Curiosone

    You said that you are writing a theoretical paper about the Rossi Effect in collaboration with a mainstream scientist: can you tell us who he is?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  37. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    How did work the 1 MW E-Cat this week ? What is the COP?
    JCR

  38. Dr Rossi:
    Do you think that your technology could help the improving and therefore the surviving of the coal plants? That would be important for the tens of thousands of jobs linked to coal minimg and coal fired power plants.

  39. Andrea Rossi

    Eddie:
    That is my pet dream. If the test on course with the 1 MW plant we supplied to our Customer will be positive at the end of this year, certainly we could integrate our technology inside the coal fueled power plants, reducing in proporon their pollution. The problem here risks to be more boureaucratic than technological, because, as I already had occasion to wtite here, we already discussed this issue with a director of a coal fired plant and he explained to me that our integration means to change all the authorization system, whic is a very unpredictable path. As a matter of fact, the new regulations imposed by the Obama Administration should encourage the integration of new not polluting technologies ( see Power Engineering, March 2015).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  40. 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?

  41. Andrea Rossi

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

  42. 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.

  43. Andrea Rossi

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

  44. 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/

  45. 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.

  46. 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

  47. 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.

  48. 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

  49. Andrea Rossi

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

  50. 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

  51. Andrea Rossi

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

  52. 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

  53. 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.

  54. 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

  55. 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.

  56. Dr Rossi:
    Will you attend the ICCF of Padua on April this year? Will you present there the paper you are writing with a mainstream physicist?

  57. Andrea Rossi

    Dorthy:
    I will not attend the ICCF of Padua: I have to stay 16 hours per day in our 1 MW E-Cat in operation in the USA.
    The paper we are writing about the theoretical base of the so called Rossi Effect will be published in a mainstream science context.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  58. 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.

  59. Andrea Rossi

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

  60. 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?

  61. 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.

  62. 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

  63. 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.

  64. 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

  65. 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.

  66. 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?

  67. Andrea Rossi

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

  68. 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

  69. 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.

  70. 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?

  71. Andrea Rossi

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

  72. carloluna

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

  73. Andrea Rossi

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

  74. 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.

  75. 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.

  76. 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

  77. 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.

  78. 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

  79. Andrea Rossi

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

  80. 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.

  81. 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

  82. 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.

  83. Dima Redko

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

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

  84. 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.

  85. 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.

  86. 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.

  87. 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?

  88. 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/

  89. Andrea Rossi

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

  90. 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

  91. 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.

  92. 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?

  93. Andrea Rossi

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

  94. I am thinking to the application of a 1 MW E-Cat to give heating to hospitals: if it will work as I think is working now the plant installed by IH in a factory of their customer, it can save money useful for research in medicine. Did you think about this?

  95. Andrea Rossi

    Medicine:
    If the test at the end of the year will result to be positive, you will have been right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  96. 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.

  97. 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.

  98. 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

  99. Andrea Rossi

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

  100. 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.

  101. 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

  102. 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.

  103. 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.

  104. Andrea Rossi:
    I watched the photos of your plant on http://www.andrea-rossi.com
    Do you know that it could be also considered also a contemporary art masterpiece, due to its importance for mankind? Do you have abandoned models of it ? We could be interested !

  105. Andrea Rossi

    Arthop:
    That’s quite a bizarre proposal…I could never think such a thing. When I was in high school I was very bad in art and ornamental drawing…the teacher unserstood that there was nothing to do with me and allowed me to use the hours of her matter ( 2 hours per week) to rehearse in other matters. Whatever I tried to make “artistic” always resulted in something obscene: it was a gift.
    Now I discover to be a contemporary artist: what a nemesys!
    For intellectual property reasons I am afraid my artistic career will have to wait…
    Thank you for your very funny proposal,
    Warm Regards,
    Andrea

  106. 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.

  107. U.V.S. Seshavatharam

    Respected Sir/Madam,

    Till today there is no reason for the question: why there exists 6 individual quarks? Till today no experiment reported a ‘free quark’. Authors humble opinion is – nuclear charge (either positive or negative) constitutes 6 different flavors and each flavor holds certain mass. ‘charged flavor’ can be called as a ‘quark’. It is neither a fermion nor a boson. A ‘fermion’ is a container for different charges, a ‘charge’ is a container for different flavors and each ‘flavor’ is a container for certain ‘matter’. If charged matter rests in a ‘fermionic container’ it is a fermion and if charged matter rests in a ‘bosonic container’ it is a boson. The fundamental questions to be answered are : what is a charge? why and how opposite charges attracts each other? why and how there exists a fermion? and why and how there exists a boson?

    Here interesting thing is that if 6 flavors are existing with 6 different masses then a single charge can have one or two or more flavors simultaneously. Since charge is a common property, mass of the ‘multi flavor charge’ seems to be the geometric mean of the mass of each flavor. If ‘charge with flavor’ is called as a ‘quark’ then ‘charge with multi flavors’ can be called as a ‘hybrid quark’. Hybrid quark generates a multi flavor baryon. It is a property of ‘strong interaction space – time – charge’. This is just like ‘different tastes’ or ‘different smells’ of matter. Important consequence of this idea is that- for generating a baryon there is no need to couple 3 fractional charge quarks.

    In this paper authors tried to implement the super symmetry concepts in quark and sub quark physics. The basic idea is that for each and every quark fermion there exists a corresponding super symmetric quark boson. Proposed quark fermion and quark boson ratio is Obtained top quark boson mass is 80523 MeV and its assumed charge is (±e). This is close to charged W mass (average with CERN UA2 data) = 80.454 ± 0.059 GeV. This may be a coincidence or there is some mystery behind the charged weak boson! In this way if one is able to predict the existence of (quark) bosons, there is no need to assume that – any two quark fermions couples together to form a meson. Note that till today no experiment reported the existence of a ‘fractional charge’. Thus it can be interpreted that nature allows only ‘integral charges’. Hence it can be assumed that quark fermions and quark bosons possess ‘unit charge’. This is the beginning of integral charge quark super symmetry.

    Due to strong interaction there is a chance of coupling any two quark bosons. If any two oppositely charged quark bosons couples together then a neutral quark boson can be generated. It may be called as a neutral meson. Due to strong interaction by any chance if any quark boson couples with any quark fermion then a neutral baryon or baryon with ‘±2e’ can be generated. This idea is very similar to the ‘photon absorption’ by electron. When a weakly interacting electron is able to absorb a boson, in strong interaction it is certainly possible. More over if a baryon couples with two or three quark bosons then the baryon mass increases and charge also changes. Here also if the system follows the principle– unlike charges attracts each other – in most of the cases baryon charge changes from ‘±e’ to neutral and neutral to ‘±e’. In rare cases baryon with ‘±2e’can be generated.

    Thanking you,
    yours obediently,
    UVS.Seshavatharam.

  108. 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.

  109. 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

  110. 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

  111. 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.

  112. Andrea Rossi

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

  113. 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

  114. 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.

  115. 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
    ————————————————————–

  116. 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.

  117. 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.

  118. kenko1

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

  119. 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.

  120. Mr Rossi:
    The Russian scientist Alexander Parkhomov today has replicated LIVE your effect, getting COP >3 !

  121. Andrea Rossi

    Maximina Ilagan:
    Thank you for the very interesting information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  122. Hi!
    What do you think of all the scientific evaluation that is made in the world after the Lugano test?

  123. Andrea Rossi

    Nida Kerkhoff:
    I value scientific testing and the important work that comes with validating those theirs through independent evaluation. I also think it is important to show how we can use science to solve problems. The existing tests for applied workof the E-Cat will be a considerable effort. It is important for both to continue, but the applied Research is now my focus.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  124. Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Congratulations for your fantastic work, but we think you could need help in management issues, for example concerning how to handle the patent problems.
    We could help you.

  125. Andrea Rossi

    Management Consultants:
    The patents matter is being carefully reviewed. This matter is business strategy and I cannot comment in these matters in positive or negative. I must continue to focus, together with my team, on the 1 MW E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  126. Grazie per il Suo durissimo lavoro, di cui tutti beneficeremo. Solo voglio dire: Grazie!
    Thyank you for your work that will be important for all of us. I want just to say: Thank you!

  127. Andrea Rossi

    Mei Sweeney:
    Thank you for your kind attention to the work of our Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  128. 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…

  129. Piero Mongioj

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

  130. 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

  131. 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.

  132. Andrea Rossi

    Tiède fusion Pourquoi Comment Combien
    Thank you for the interesting link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  133. 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?

  134. Andrea Rossi

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

  135. When do you think your domestic product will be for sale ?

  136. Andrea Rossi

    Pedro Griffis:
    Surely not before the end of the tests and R&D on course with the 1 MW E-Cat. It is difficult to give an answer now, but we are working on it. The problems are:
    1- safety certification
    2- mass production to make pointless reverse engineering
    3- completion of the R&D on course on this specific model
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  137. Ciao a tutti, sto facendo un progetto universitario su questi argomenti e ho bisogno di qualche informazione aggiuntiva che può aiutarmi nel mio lavoro. vuoi aiutarmi?
    Hello, I am preparing a project on LENR in my University. Can you help me?

  138. Andrea Rossi

    Theo Muratore:
    You must be more specific about what you want to do.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  139. 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.

  140. 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.

  141. Andrea Rossi

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

  142. 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

  143. 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.

  144. JCRenoir

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

  145. 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.

  146. 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

  147. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  148. 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.

  149. 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.

  150. Curiosone

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

  151. 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.

  152. 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).

  153. 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

  154. 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.

  155. 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

  156. 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.

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

  158. 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.

  159. Pietro F.

    Dovrebbe (Lei ma soprattutto il legale che si occupa del brevetto) dare un occhiata al commento che ha postato su facebook il gruppo Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project:

    Should (but mostly the lawyer in charge of the patent) take a look at the comment posted on facebook by the group Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project:

    https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject?fref=nf

    Buona domenica e si riposi!! ;)

    Pietro F.

  160. 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.

  161. Pietro F.

    I’m sorry I did not see the answer to KeithT.

  162. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    Our attorney is preparing a strong appeal.
    We’ll see.
    I can’t take rest this year.
    Warm Regards from inside the plant.
    A.R.

  163. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Have these very long periods of self sustain (via changes of the charge and control system) also transferred over to the individual hot cat reactors you are testing?

    Thank you.

  164. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    For the small units the situation is more difficult, because the control system does not have the same synergies. We are working on it, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  165. Dear Dr Rossi Andrea:
    About the action of the USPTO what is your position ? Can you make a statement in this blog?

  166. Andrea Rossi

    Stewart Dahlquist:
    It is very premature to talk about this issue, because the application is well alive. Obviously we are convinced that there are many errors and also a good slice of bias in the text of the refusal, but we have 60 days to appeal. My Attorney says we have wide room for a very strong appeal, also because in the text of the action there are evident mistakes. We believe we will arrive to a positive result.
    This said, it is totally premature to speak about this issue. Anyway, we can get the patent or not, but in either case our commercial strategy will not change. With a massive production we will make useless the reverse engineering. Obviously, a patent could make easier for us to give more information, because without a granted patent we must count only on the industrial secret for the time being before the mass production.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  167. Andrea:
    Where are you NOW?
    Cheers,
    Chantal

  168. Andrea Rossi

    Chantal:
    Now is exactly 7 p.m. where I am, which obviously is inside the plant. I’d say that NOW everything is all right. I am testing the new version of the Hot Cat while the voice of the 1MW plant is delightful. In this moment he is in harmony with itself.
    ( Frank: what about my mental health? Please take it under control through what I write).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  169. Patrick Ellul

    Dear Andrea,
    Your plant is using more ssm than you predicted thanks to the preciseness of your control system. Based on your theory, does this mean it might ‘burn’ through the fuel faster than the originally calculated 1 year? Or is there no correlation?
    Regards,
    Patrick

  170. Andrea Rossi

    Patrick Ellul:
    The upgraded ssm is not due only to the control system, even if it allows more synergies. Also the charge is changed after an intense study of the Lugano report analysis. If the fuel will last less, more, or uneffected has to be experienced. Good question, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  171. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Has your understanding of the mechanism (theory) behind the Rossi effect changed significantly since your study of the Lugano report?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  172. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes. The Professors of the Independent Third Party are scientists from whom there is really to learn and I have taken advantage of this.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  173. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeper:
    Sorry, I cannot give this information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  174. BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    Can you surmise yet during the plant’s operational time if the resulting added isotopes influence the catalyst’s reactions either positive or negative and whether it affects its ssm and/or life span? Have you or will you analyze periodically a sample of the plant’s E-Cat ash in stages for isotopic change?

    With much respect, BK

  175. Alessandro Coppi

    Hi Andrea, you and your team are making by yourself the whole jobs of primary research, practice experimentation, and industrialization of the devices.
    Now you can say: the cop is beyond what we hoped.
    The oil price is dropping, and I believe your work is a factor.
    In this situation what is that still keeps out of this business in a massive manner the main stream research laboratoryes, and the real jant top firms?

    Best regards
    Alessandro Coppi

  176. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    We are not waiting Godot.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  177. For your fans during 2015

    Hi Andrea,
    I believe that it would be appreciated by your fans if you could give, at the end of each month, a very brief summary of how the 1MW unit has performed ; something like ‘This month has seen no problems that were difficult to solve’.

    If a difficult problem had occurred you would not have to be specific, but you could indicate a flavour/flavor of how it impacted on all of you. For example you could say that there was a difficult problem that taxed us for a while but we are happy to say that a satisfactory solution was found and everything is functioning now in a way that pleases us.

    What would you think of this suggestion?

    Warmest regards as always. Jean Pierre

  178. Andrea Rossi

    Jean Pierre:
    It is basically what I am trying to do within the constraints due to the fact that I cannot give data before the end of the tests.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  179. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    History repeats itself. Fermi solved the questions about fission through ash analysis. It seems to me that the ash analysis of the 3PT is going a long way towards solving the LENR questions at least in the case of your device.
    Regards and good hunting.

  180. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    You are right.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  181. Andrea Rossi

    Marco Serra (2):
    1- We have to test this, because we cannot apply to a single E-Cat the same control system and synergy we can with the 1MW E-Cat.
    2- Everybody is free to use our publication to try to replicate whatever he wants. Patents ( when granted and if granted) protect commercial use of an invention, not its scientific experimentation.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  182. Andrea Rossi

    Marco Serra (1):
    We hoped that an increase of COP was on course, due to evolution after the Lugano Report, but not in the measure we got it, SO FAR: don’t forget that at the end the results could be positive, but also negative: we are opening our path through a jungle with a machete: don’t know what is beyond.
    Only at least one year of experience will give us a reasonable certainty about the reliability of the technology.
    Thank you for the blessing: we all need it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  183. Marco Serra

    Dear Andrea,
    I’m very curious about the positive surprise of your customer but understand your committement to not release any number until the end of the test. But let’s try to not broken any secret.
    The customer certainly has evaluated the $COP measure, which is defined as:

    $COP = (gas cost for the same amount of thermal energy) / (cost in the electric bill to produce it).

    In ITP setting (with no SSM) the COP was around 3. The unofficial COP with SSM was very roughly estimated to be 10 or more (I don’t remember where it was said, maybe i’m wrong).
    Is the $COP, the customer evaluated and be surprised of, in line with the estimated COP with SSM or is it a positive surprise also for you ?

    God bless you
    Marco Serra

  184. Marco Serra

    Dear Andrea,
    It’s a great joy to me to listen that the current electric feeded 1MW ECat could compete in costs with the, not yet ready, gas cat. It means that NOW you are really ready for the market. The positive surprise of your customer is a confirmation that your ECat can be sold NOW, as it is, and spread world wide. It would be a good news for planet earth that has broken this month the threshold of 400 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere.
    I have theese questions:

    - Is this long SSM achievement already replicable in a single reactor HomECat ?

    - what kind of application does your applied for patent cover ? I mean, are Dr Parkhomov, Dr Ahern current experiments in conflict with it because they are based on nikel powder too?

    God bless you

    Marco Serra

  185. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    You stated, “The ssm of the 1MW E-Cat is very long.”

    To be clear, are you using the acronym ssm for self sustain mode (long periods of constant temperature without input) or start stop mode (excess anomalous power but with a slowly falling temperature)?

    Long periods of either would be very significant, but I think long self sustain periods are preferrable if control can be maintained.

  186. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    “ssm” means to me self sustained mode.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  187. Paul

    Andrea,

    Does the improved ssm of the electric e-cat reduce the priority of developing the gas cat?

    Paul

    p.s. Sharpening pencils is not a pointless pursuit.

  188. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Grand good question! We’ll see. Depends on how gas price goes, too.
    Anyway the gas fueled version has to be developed.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S. he,he,he

  189. Monash j

    Andrea,
    If your control system is unique to maximise the Rossi effect, a patent on that control system alone would stop any serious open commercial competition.

  190. Andrea Rossi

    Monash J:
    I agree upon the fact that also the control system is worth to be patented.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  191. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    It’s encouraging to learn of your pleasant surprises! Did the Lugano test report contribute anything to the evolution of the charge that you mention?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  192. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes, the charges have been modified studying very carefully the results of the analysis made by the Independent Third Party. For us that report has been a gold mine.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  193. Paul

    Andrea,

    Will you be submitting run data to-date of the 1 MW plant in your reply to the patent office’s “Final” rejection?

    Paul

  194. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Now we have 60 days at our disposal for the appeal.
    I fully trust my patent Attorney. He told me we have wide room for a strong appeal. He will decide what to do. I have to think to the 1 MW E-Cat. Everybody has his role. I cannot be distracted from my job and the patent Attorney knows what to do.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  195. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    How long is the SSM?

    a. Less than 5 hours?
    b. Less than 10 hours?
    c. As long as a day (24 hours)?
    d. Longer than 24 hours?

  196. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    The ssm of the 1MW E-Cat is very long. It has been a terrific surprise, due to evolution of the charge and to the control system. I am not permitted to publish numbers before the end of the test, but I must say that the final results can be positive, but also could be negative, so we retain the data until the test is finished. One thing is for sure: I do not stay here 16-18 hours per day to sharpen the points to the pencils. We also have a new kind of gauge, which is the bill of the electric provider to our Customer, wherein are written the MWh he consumes per month ( the electricity source that feeds the plant has been insulated from other loads): the Customer makes a ratio between the thermal MWh we deliver and the MWh he pays for to the electricity provider and has the real COP. This is a measuring system not very sophysticated, but brutally true: the Customer is positively surprised from the results, so far, after a troublesome initial period. We hope the situation goes on likewise.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  197. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, i enjoyed your response to Jackie.
    I guess Jackie wanted to know why you don’t give away your invention free,
    so other people could make a profit on your lifetime of dedicated work.
    Then you could live in poverty, with your kind heart.

    Alexander Graham Bell got a patent on the telephone.
    He went on to great wealth. He helped many other Scientist’s with their work, he also did many other great things, including helping the Deaf, with their problem.

    I predict Dr. Rossi will go on to great wealth, and will be a tremendous help
    to the Cancer World.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  198. Wesley

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    thank you very much for your hard work!
    I believe that in the following months we will see revolutionary discoveries.
    I truly hope in your success.

    On the other hand, if you want be sure that all your hard work will be helpfull to the whole world, you may consider if it is really worth to patent it.
    Patenting may be very profitable for you, but there are other forces, that can arrange that it will be hidden for many years.

    You are fighting with Oil companies and people that can do everything, at least make your patents invalid or secret – unusable.

    There is only one, correct solution – make your work open to all as fast as possible, until it is possible.

    Yes, you can be very rich and proud. Nobody can imagine your hard work.
    But you can also make life much better to our planet immediately, with zero cost. You can do so faster, than anybody else can register patents and/or hide the truth for Army usage.

    Remember, even that something is open or open sourced, it can be still very profitable.
    But for what are money? The most important thing, people’s life can’t be bought for any amount of money.

    You can change the world overnight.

  199. Andrea Rossi

    Wesley:
    Thank you for your comment.
    1- we will continue to try to have the patent, there is room for it
    2- we will continue our R&D and tests on the 1 MW plant and on the Hot Cat to arrive to a massive production of them that will defend the competitivity independently from the patent policy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  200. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    I read the rejection reason of your patent application. A sad joke in my opinion. You are very smart, and I trust you will find a way to market the ECat with or without a patent.

    Keep going

    Peter

  201. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    Thank you for your kind comment.
    The rejection is not the end: we have 60 days to present our reasons and the effort to obtain a patent will continue. Our Attorney says there is wide room to contrast the rejection. In the meantime I continue my work, together with my Team in the plant of 1 MW that has been installed in the factory of the Customer, patent or not patent. Surely our work will proceed also without a patent protection, but there is no reason not to try to have also a patent. Anyway: with the patent i have to work 16-18 hours per day. Without the patent I have to work 16-18 hours per day. There is not much difference.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S. The plant is going well. Very long ssm periods. Very long.

  202. jackie

    Dear Mr. Rossi, do you not believe that the benefits of your Wonderful work with Cold Fusion should belong freely to the World.

  203. Andrea Rossi

    Jackie:
    Of course I do ! And to make it real, and not just sitting room chattering, it is necessary defend the Intellectual Property, to allow the strong investments necessary to make my work properly distributed around the World.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  204. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers of the JoNP:
    We received the USPTO action against our patent application. The action is negative and we have 60 days to make our counter- considerations. Our patent attorney is working on it, because we think our application is worth a defense.
    Any consideration is premature, being on course our due action.
    Andrea Rossi

  205. Carlo Marcena

    Ni-255: Thanks, Andrea.
    CM

  206. Carlo Marcena

    To Michelangelo De Meo: NI-255. Do you know what is this 255 about?
    CM

  207. Andrea Rossi

    Carlo Marcena:
    I can answer to you: Nickel 255 is a particular Ni powder produced by Vale ( Brasil). The index defines the granulometry around 1 micron. I too have tested it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  208. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    A reactor operating for a year without refueling would be phenomenol. How many grams of fuel are in each reactor?

    Sincerely,
    Hank

  209. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    I cannot give this information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  210. Achi

    Mr. Rossi,
    I apologize if this question has already been asked, but do you believe that the process that heats the earth’s core and forms the earth’s magnetic field to be a variation of the Rossi Effect?
    Thanks – Achi

  211. Andrea Rossi

    Achi:
    I read an interesting article on Europhysicsnews ( vol 45, #4, pp 16-19) regarding this issue: ” The Earth Magnetic Field”, by Henri Claude Nataf, CNRS Research Director at ISTerre in Grenoble, France.
    Maybe you can be interested to it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  212. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo D Meo:
    Thank you for the important information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  213. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Three researchers are working in Acton, Massachussets (USA): Jeff Driscoll, Andrew Anselmo and Brian Ahern sealed two alumina tubes with Ni-255.

    Both tubes contained 1.0 grams of Ni-255. The second tube also had 0.1 grams of NaAlH2. This compound liquefies at a lower temperature than LiAlH4.

    The tubes are mounted side by side in a tube furnace with a 30mm ID. Thermocouples (K) mounted on the outside will give continuous reading similar to a DTA system. They will be able to detect phase changes by differentiating the TC output.

    They hope to run on Sunday.

    If will see something interesting, will load a third tube with 0.1 grams of LiAlD4. That could result in a BANG!

    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1181-Parkhomov-replication/

  214. Achi

    Dear Mr Rossi,
    I would like to thank you for all the hard work you and your team are putting in to bring LENR to the world. It feels good knowing that such a revolutionary tech is just on the horizon.
    I would like to ask you about the different modes your ecats have.
    I know of the start stop mode where power is cycled, and self sustained mode where there is no power supplied to drive the device, and I would also assume that there is a mode where power is constantly being supplied.

    Of these modes, which do you believe the LENR effect to be the most powerful? Most able to sustain a load?
    Do you believe that the reaction changes effect with the different modes?
    Do you think that could be more than one type of reaction occuring?
    Are there other “modes” in which the ecat runs?

    I understand if you cannot answer my questions but I appreciate your reading them.

    Thank you,
    Achi

  215. Andrea Rossi

    Achi:
    No, it has nothing to do.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  216. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    How important is the performance of your 1MW plant year-long run for the certifications of the domestic E-Cats?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  217. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Very important, because statistically gives the safety performance of more than 100 modules.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  218. Andrea Rossi

    Timcelyn:
    It is quite difficult to foresee the future, but I do not see the point of it. I do not see any advantage in making bigger reactors respect putting smaller modules in parallel. Not even in terms of space.
    Thank you for your constant attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  219. timycelyn1

    Dear Andrea,
    like many others, I am hopefully following and watching the progress of your team at this critical time, and can only wish for the very best outcome to your current work, with the 1MW unit. In your recent reply to Mike L you explained that you could go beyond 1MW by adding additional parallel 10kW units, to make (in future) a unit with output power >1MW.
    Having followed your progress carefully since 2011, I have read your explanation of how the difficulty of running a reactor increases rapidly (exponentially?) with size, and you would much prefer to work with 100 cats than 10 tigers!
    My question is, do you see this as a long term fact of life? Will devices using this technology – say in 20 years – still be based around arrays of ~10kW units? Can you imagine any possibility of a further breakthrough that will ease this module size restriction, taming the tiger?

    With very best wishes

    Tim

  220. jackie

    Dear Mr. Rossi if you were given safety certification now for your small domestic E-cat, how long would it take you to put it on to the market?
    Is everything ready to go?
    Best wishes

  221. Andrea Rossi

    Jackie:
    The product is close to be ready, the mass production line is organized. From the granting of the certification to the start of the production my guess is that it will be matter of months, not of years. But this is my guess and the output also depends on the behaviour during this year of the 1 MW plant, whose modules are , essentially even if not totally, made by means of the same reactors that will make work the small units.
    I must remind you that the final results of the test on course could be positive, but it could also turn out to be negative. It is always better first do things, eventually talk about them. In Italy we have a saying: ” Non vendere la pelle dell’orso prima di averlo preso” ( “Don’t sell the fur of the bear before getting him”).
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  222. I saw the new book about the E-Cat on http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com : is the writer, Ing. Ventola an employee or a consultant of your Company, to be so well informed?
    Thank you for the answer,
    Anna

  223. Andrea Rossi

    Anna:
    As I said in my first answer to you, having read it, I return on the book E-Cat 2.0 written by Eng. Roberto Ventola and Dr Vessela Nikolova.
    It is composed by series of comments related to the reports published regarding the tests made with the E-Cat. The book has been written without we had any knowledge of it, without any discussion with us before publishing it and we have been anaware of this publication until the book has been available for sale. The comments made in it have to be considered totally independent from us; we never worked with Eng. Ventola; his innuendos regarding the charges and how the E-Cat “really” works have been speculated by the Authors without any collaboration with us, or suggestion from us, therefore must be considered totally independent from any kind of connection with our work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  224. PeterMetz

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You mention that you hope the fuel will last 1 year. When you charged the E-Cats, for how long did you charge them for?

    Also since there are 100 E-Cats in 1MW plant, this provides a wonderful opportunity to compare the performance and operation of the E-Cats. Assuming they are all the same, how closely would you say they are they performing so far? (It may be too early to ask this question–my apologies if so.)

    Sincerely,
    Peter Metz

  225. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Metz:
    We charged for 1 year, supposedly. I say supposedly because we have not experience about this and based the calculation on theory. Therefore we are not sure how much the charge will last. I think at least 1 year, but I will be sure of this after 350 days of operation.
    Your question regarding the different behaviour of every single E-Cat respect the others is very interesting, but, as you correctly say, it is too soon to know, even if we have already collected many data also related to this issue. The results, obviously, will be communicated when the test will have been completed.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  226. Mike L

    Dear Andrea,

    I have followed your story for years, and am very excited with your progress. Congratulations!

    I am curious to know what control system you are using if you can disclose this information? Is the basic process control similar to that of a once through steam generator, or do you have a steam drum? How many Inputs and Outputs (IO) are there for the 1MW plant? Is the eventual plan to scale up the 1MW plant to a larger capacity, or will additional capacity come from parallel 1MW modules?

    I work in the process automation industry, so am very interested in how your technology will impact my industry both positively and negatively.

    Regards,

    Mike Lieberg

  227. Andrea Rossi

    Mike L:
    Thank you for your attention.
    Answers:
    1- The control system has been entirely designed, manufactured and programmed by our electronic engineers, because it contains information that we prefer not to deliver to a supplier. I cannot give you information about it, but it is very complex and sophisticated, because the central computer has to armonize the computers of every single module. It has nothing to do with existing systems, bacause the characteristics of the E-Cat are unique.
    2- I cannot give information regarding the IO
    3- We think that we will be able easily to put the E-Cats 1 MW in parallel to reach higher power
    4- I don’t see why our technology could impact negatively your industry !
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  228. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    A few questions if you don’t mind.

    1. How many members of your team, beside yourself, are assigned full time to manage the production of the 1MW plant?

    2. If the plant passes the year-long test, how many people will be required to manage the plant?

    3. Have any of the reactors in the plant received a replacement charge so far?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  229. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    1- here are two persons fix plus me. They work 8 -10 hours per day, I prefer to stay here 16-18 hours per day. When necessary we call reinforces.
    2- none, the control system will make it all, but will be necessary the presence in the factory of a specialist certified by us.
    3- no and I hope the charge will last 1 year.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  230. Dr Rossi:
    How is going today the 1 MW plant?
    Godspeed,
    J

  231. Andrea Rossi

    Jordan 10:
    Today is stable, we are proceeding our test and R&D work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  232. gaby de wilde

    Hello Andrea Rossi,

    I would like to point your curiosity at the [forgotten] Nitinol engine ( memory metal / Nickel-titanium )

    It could be interesting as such engines run amazingly efficient even on small heat gradients. The original idea [back in the days] was to use waste heat as a source.

    The video here gives some historic perspective.

    http://blog.go-here.nl/8652

    Hope this helps!

    Good luck!

  233. Andrea Rossi

    Gaby De Wilde:
    Thank you for the information and the link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  234. Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Many companies in the world are trying to compete against you after the report made by the independent third party. Are you worried of this looming competition?

  235. Andrea Rossi

    Adrienne:
    We know that there are competitors looming, as you say. This is positive for the LENR market under a general point of view. This said, we have to think to put our products in the market. We will have real competitors when a competitor will be able to sell a plant and put it in operation . My sensation is that Brian Ahern is close to that, I have not the same sensation about others, but I am also aware of the fact that possibly there is somebody working in silence, without talking, as I did until 2009, that will present a valid product unexpectedly.
    We have to ignore all this, anyway, and think only to work hard, as hard as possible, to complete the test of our 1MW plant and our small E-Cat to be manufactured massively. We must do our race at the maximum speed possible, independently from the work of the competitors.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  236. My Dear Dr. Rossi

    Congratulations!!

    Some business considerations I hope will be helpful:

    You may already know this…
    Large e-Cat building air conditioners
    Chiller input energy/temperature specifications:
    http://geoheat.oit.edu/pdf/tp51.pdf

    Max Palevsky, SDS founder, observed (for computers in 1964) that as much expense is spent in construction as in maintenance over the lifetime of the installation. 50% to build and 50% to maintain.

    We (in engineering procurement) now try to figure life cycle costs for a system.

    I am sure you have someone modeling this for your business.

    I have some painful personal experience as a user of a new BOSCH tank-less water heater, where in the field it is very hard to find effective and affordable field service persons. BOSCH has a miserable reputation for dependability and unhelpful customer support, and they are a ‘successful’ global company, with mature designs.

    I am trying to imagine how you might design a small low-duty-cycle spa water heater that will run, problem free, for the life of the spa. For 20 years, and so very dependable that there is no need for maintenance for many years and using very low electric input.

    It could open up a huge market for tiny e-Cats and re-start the spa industry that is today uneconomic.

    So, I am sure you are wrestling with the problem of providing the necessary affordable organization to do the field support. Six months replacement time is not very attractive for the consumer. Unless he can do this himself, safely, with common tools. So I hope 6 months to replace is not the figure for a low-energy, low-duty-cycle design.

    The specification for minimum guaranteed number of restarts, and Min/Mean/Max time to replace all need to be high and known from the start by the consumer.

    A conservative specification sheet needs to be published. Duty cycles, Availability percentages, on/off cycle-times, output life degradation curves, and efficiency lifetimes need to be conservatively specified and guaranteed by over design.

    Safety factors and control requirements need specification. Appropriate sensors, actuators, displays and computer programmed control units need to exist, and have backup power for graceful emergency shutdown.

    Seismic/vibration specifications and safety-certification testing needs to be developed and performed.

    So you might expect to first sell to organizations that will do the safety engineering and certifications at their cost and they will sell to the public and do the field support.

    To start up, and to avoid bankrupting your company, you must manage the growth carefully, keep the production scale small, highly predictable, and at first geographically concentrated, close to the factory.

    Beware, there was and may still be a US law that enables the government to buy, in a self declared emergency, any number of just-finished units off your production line for any (DX-priority) government project. This causes you to breach your contract delivery schedules to your regular customers. So if you make things in USA, you might want to plan to have some units uncommitted for emergency shipments. You may also need some clause in your contracts to revoke schedule dates for any force majeure or government preemption actions. http://www.bis.doc.gov/dpas/default.htm

    Every sale must be at a profit that is high enough to sustain growth. Field support must also be ever profitable.

    The unknown unknowns will come from ‘knowhere’ to bite.
    Never ship problems to the field. Field ‘costs-to-fix’ cascade.

    Never promise a schedule that you cannot conservatively meet.
    [You are doing this splendidly to date, and I salute you for this.
    You are amazing!]

    Start with a high-cost product and a small production structure that is initially and continuously profitable and maintain slow profitable, balanced growth of your support organization. This enables continued improvement in design with little cost to retrofit.

    If you publicly let it be known that you are going to grow your business slowly and in a controlled, always-profitable, never-borrowing, business-like way, you might disarm the snakes that are fearful of too rapid a change.

    They can adjust over time if their plans can be gracefully revised to include low-cost, appropriate scale, dependable (99.999 Availability) steam energy a few years out.

    As an investor in Husky Energy (Canada)I am aware that they are starting to exploit tar sand oil extraction and shale oil extraction, both that consume a large amount of steam, generated from burning extracted oil that they could otherwise sell profitably if they had your inexpensive steam energy.

    Seems like a natural for the e-Cat in a larger scale installation. The company is controlled by Li-Ka Shing en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Ka-shing
    Hopefully he is not one of the snakes.

    My best wishes to you and your team for your continued successes.

    Karl Poehlmann

    BA, Physics, 1958 San Diego State College,
    Retired Electronics/Aerospace/Computer Scientist

    I am doing medical research now, and not looking for employment.
    But if I could help you in any confidential and thoughtful way,
    based on over 50 years of
    science/business/computer/investment/management/procurement experience,
    please let me know offline.

    You may delete this message, unpublished, from the blog if you wish.

  237. Andrea Rossi

    Karl Poehlmann:
    Sorry, the comment of yours has been lost in the spam, but let me resume its core you described in your email:
    you are informing us that California Resources Corporation (CRC) uses a huge amount of steam for its steam flooding to get oil from sands.
    You suggest us to verify if this activity can get advantage from the use of E-Cats.
    Answer:
    I do not know this particular technology, but if it needs steam and if our test on the 1 MW E-Cat will be successful, our technology can be convenient for any industrial activity that uses steam.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  238. Marc Ellenbroek

    Dear Andrea,

    When I read that you work nearly day and night in the office container next to your plant and also spend quite some time in the E-cat container, while enjoying the infant sounds or your new born baby, I wonder where you can find the time to also develop the E-cat, the Hot-cat and the domestic E-cat further?
    Also, if you need to spend so much time on your plant, do you still believe we will ever have a plant which will be reliable enough so that it can run without your constant attention?
    Nevertheless, I hope you will succeed and wish all the luck and success with your plant.

  239. Andrea Rossi

    Marc Ellenbroek:
    1- I stay here 16-18 hours per day, so there is time for everything, also because I am focused exclusively on this.
    2- Of course! My Team’s work is now is necessary because this period of R&D and tests is aimed to make the plant reliable with a control system that allows operators with a certified preparation able to menage it.
    This is the first plant and we have to learn many things; after one year of operation we will have consolidated the reliability of our 1 MW plants.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  240. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Have you ever been woken up in the middle of the night to come back to the factory to deal with a problem with the plant?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  241. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes, it happened twice, so far. Luckily, I sleep in a motel not far from the plant and at 2 or 3 a.m. there is no traffic.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  242. Marc Ellenbroek

    Dear Andrea,

    Just a few questions.
    Recently you said you are working nearly day and night in your control container next to your 1MW plant. Quite often you are also in your plant, enjoying the infant sounds of your new born baby. I just wonder that if you are so very occupied by that work, how you find the time to also further develop the E-cat, the hot-cat and also the domestic E-cat. Besides that, as you need to spend so much time on your plant, do you believe it will ever be so reliable that it can run without your close attention?
    I do hope you will succeed with this enormous task and wish you all the luck and success with your plant.

  243. Paul Atkinson

    Andrea:

    I wonder if you have kept up with Dean Kamen’s progress in creating a low-maintenance stirling engine? I am a big fan of Kamen due to his commitment to student robotic competitions. Kamen’s team now has a production-ready generator that can convert any heat source (cow dung, natural gas, etc) into electricity. Here are links to 7 short videos where he gives a detailed demonstration of a 2.5 kW stirling generator that has been installed at his home in Connecticut:

    1) http://oninnovation.com/videos/detail.aspx?video=1901&title=Stirling%20Engine%20Demo%20(part%202)

    2) http://oninnovation.com/videos/detail.aspx?video=1902&title=Stirling%20Engine%20Demo%20(part%203)

    3) http://oninnovation.com/videos/detail.aspx?video=1903&title=Stirling%20Engine%20Demo%20(part%204)

    4) http://oninnovation.com/videos/detail.aspx?video=1904&title=Stirling%20Engine%20Demo%20(part%205)

    5) http://oninnovation.com/videos/detail.aspx?video=1905&title=Stirling%20Engine%20Demo%20(part%206)

    6) http://oninnovation.com/videos/detail.aspx?video=1906&title=Stirling%20Engine%20Demo%20(part%207)

    7) http://oninnovation.com/videos/detail.aspx?video=1907&title=Stirling%20Engine%20Demo%20(part%208)

    If you haven’t seen this demonstration yet, then I hope find it helpful. Similarly, Forbes magazine has a feature article about Kamen’s 10 kW commercial generators, which can be manufactured and installed for approximately $10,000 per unit. Here is a link to the article – http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/07/02/dean-kamen-thinks-his-new-stirling-engine-could-power-the-world/

    I hope you find this intriguing and useful. Keep up the good work!

    Take good care,
    Paul Atkinson

  244. Andrea Rossi

    Paul Atkinson:
    Thank you for your very interesting links. I did not know them. Very interesting status of the art for the Stirling engine.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  245. Marco

    Dear Andrea,

    could you tell us what kind of evolution have you performed on the hot cat? COP? Stability?

  246. Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    These data will be published after the end of the R&D on course.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  247. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: You stated your contract states the reactor must run 355 days out of 400, leaving 45 days for “down” time. Could you tell us how many “down days” you have used to this point. Thanks.

  248. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Sorry I cannot give this information.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  249. Curiosone

    Yesterday appeared on E-Bay a Hot Cat for sale at 900 $: I suppose is a fraud, just want to inform you.
    W.G.

  250. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yes, I saw it, I had been informed immediately, made a complaint and the announcement has been deleted.
    I remind to our Readers that any offer of domestic or small E-Cat or Hot Cat can only be a fraud, because we do not sell them. When they will be put for sale we will make official announcement, obviously.
    Therefore DO NOT GIVE MONEY TO ANYBODY PROMISES YOU OUR APPARATUS. Anybody can ask us information on this matter writing to
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  251. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    I have been informed that strange interviews made by you and members of your team, like Eng. Fabiani, are proposed to some blogs. The language and the contents of the interviews are stupid and surely fake. Just beware of this. Now that all the attempts to destroy your work have failed, your enemies are trying the dirt play.
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  252. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    Yes, I know, I have been informed of this also from an important Italian blogger. Obviously I can do nothing about this; I can just invite our Readers to check with me if the interview is genuine if they find around some interview in which some of my fellows or myself say strange or anomalous things.
    Thank you for the information,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  253. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi
    March 8th, 2015 at 8:40 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Good luck for your book; obviously I have to remind that from my point of view the E-Cat has absolutely nothing to do with your theory; thak you anyway for the kind attention you always reserved to our work.
    This said, again, Good Luck!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R
    ——————————————————-

    Dear Andrea,

    actally the book The Evolution of Physics – The duel Newton vx Descartes has nothjng to do with aetheric questions.

    The scientists and the people in general suppose that along the 4 centuries of the development of Physics the scientists have used the Newtonian quantitative method.

    However,
    in the book it is shown that the development actually occurred by alternation between the Newtonian quantitative method and the qualitative method of Descartes.

    For instance, the discoveries made by Bohr were made by the use of the Descartes method. And while Einstein used both the methods, Heisenberg used only the Newtonian method (that’s why the Standard Nuclear Physics was develooped from the Newtonian quantitative method only), and this is the reason why the nuclear theorists have failled in the development of the theory.

    The book also shows that the development of Physics has 5 Stages. And nowadeyas we are in the 4th stage.
    The 5th Stage will begin in the next upcoing years.

    The eCat is mentioned only in the last chapter of the book, but it actually has nothing to do with the subject of the book, since the eCat is an experimental discovery, while the book deals with theoretical discoveries.

    The questions regarding cold fusion have connection with the subject of the book only when we consider the cold fusion from the theoretical aspect: the theory for the explanation of the phenomenon.

    regards
    wlad

  254. JCRenoir

    Bert Abbing:
    Thank you for your comment, precise and to the point. I heard you and your group are from CERN: can you confirm?
    Cheers,
    JCR

  255. Monash j

    Andrea
    SCADA simply gives you the pleasure of controlling things remotely, you still are the pilot. I guess, “to be there ” immediately is necessary for plant number 1,however after this you will need SCADA AND RTU for plant number 2,3,4…or clone Andrea Rossi 1,2,3,4….which is improbable.

  256. Andrea Rossi

    Monash J:
    You are right.
    Of course we can control things remotely, and this will surely be useful when we will have many plants working with a consolidated technology. But in this situation we cannot rely on remote control, because if it is necessary an immediate intervention we must be here. To activate the remote control is simple thing, but in this specific situation it is not much of use.
    Thank you for your kind attention.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  257. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    …and for a very interesting coincidence, today is also the birthday of Prof Sven Kullander !
    The same day of the recurrence of the invention of the General Relativity Theory!
    Odd, isn’t it?

  258. Monash j

    Andrea
    Why don’t you have SCADA and RTU relaying the encrypted information to your headquarters, instead of staying in the contener 18 hr a day?

  259. Andrea Rossi

    Monash J:
    Because if something goes wrong SCADA and RTU cannot substitute the intervention of my Team and me and anything can happen anytime. Is like to ask to the teams of Formula 1 why instead of the pilots they don’t put robots to drive the race cars. Interventions must be immediate and competent, sometimes also creative, since this is the first plant in real operation of this kind ever installed.
    Encrypted Regards,
    A.R.

  260. Wladimir Guglinski

    Wladimir Guglinski
    March 6th, 2015 at 7:47 AM

    To the readers of the JoNP:

    My book “The The Evolution of Physics: From Newton to Rossi’s eCat” is available as ebook in the Amazon.com:

    http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00UDU8978

    Regards,
    Wlad

  261. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Good luck for your book; obviously I have to remind you that from my point of view the E-Cat has absolutely nothing to do with your theory; thank you anyway for the kind attention you always reserved to our work.
    This said, again, Good Luck!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  262. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    Today is the birthday of the General Relativity Theory: its existence has made the hundredth ride around the Sun!
    It is celebrated in the last issue of Science, which also reports the last confirmation of the GRT by the explosion of the supernova which has been “replicated” 4 times, due to the distorsion made on the light by the interstallar mass, so that the light emitted by the explosion followed multiple paths, which appeared, from different positions, respectively in 1964, 1995, 2014, 2015.
    The Science issue also contains an explication of the relativity explained in layman language.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  263. Dear Andrea Rossi:
    If you are working inside the containers of the 1 MW plant that is operating in the factory of the customer, how can you be able to continue the R&D on the Hot Cat as you answered to Frank Acland?
    Cheers,
    Wiecej

  264. Andrea Rossi

    Wiecej Tutaj:
    Because I have the capacity to be at the same time in two different places! ( Ha,ha,ha!)
    Talking seriously: in the container of the computers, from where I am writing now this answer to you, we made in a corner the set up of the Hot Cat that will be the core of the mass production E-Cats. So it too is under R&D in the same place of the 1 MW E-Cat. As you can see, here is not much to be bored about.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  265. Andrea Rossi

    Again Marco Serra:
    But I want to add that Alexander Parkhomov has made a highly professional work, due to his strong experience in the field of nuclear engineering: the difference that made succesful his replication is in the high level of professionality, even if he has used very simple things, not sophisticated instruments: you can compare his work to the Jazz of Louis Armstong: very simple, but made masterpieces thanks to his top level professionality in music. You can make with few simple notes a masterpiece like ” When the Saints go marching in”, but you must be a real Master in music and, in his case, in trumpet technique. Professionality cannot be improvised. It is not a matter of funds, it is a matter of knowledge and experience of hard work and this is the background of a scientist like Parkhomov. And is the background Russian scientists are normally grown up in.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  266. LENR-to-Market Digest — March 7, 2015 – Highlights include: photos of 1 MW E-Cat with 30,000 components; rudimentary direct-to-elec. achieved; Parkhomov replication acclaim; new replication attempts by Benoit Schillings and by Jean-Paul Biberian; Hot-Cat 2.0 book; Current Science issue on LENR; explosion of MFMP “dog bone”; LENR-Cinderella analogy; $4 trillion BlackRock looking; fraud fundraiser (PESN)

  267. Andrea Rossi

    Sterling Allan:
    Thank you for the link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  268. Dr Rossi:
    When do you think the Rossi Effect will be applied to aviation purposes?

  269. Andrea Rossi

    Pro flight simulator:
    In the short and middle term it is easier that a camel passes through a needle eye than the E-Cat gets a certification to be applied to avionics. To forecast the long term I need a cristal ball.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  270. Marco Serra

    Dear Andrea,
    We all know that Dr Parkhomov claims to have replicated the Rossi Effect and it is likely he really did because he was driven by data from your works.
    Is the Rossi Effect all there? I mean, is his settings the same as yours or have you added some extra “things” that make a significant difference in the core reaction ?

    God bless you
    Marco

  271. Andrea Rossi

    Marco Serra:
    Parkhomov has replicated the so called Rossi Effect with remarkable skill, using the information contained in the Lugano Report and in the literature. Obviously a totally different thing is to make an industrial product, I mean a product that works reliably and without interruptions, with stability, to produce energy. For that things are quite different.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  272. Andrea Rossi

    Roman Rodiovov:
    Yes, we made also that kind of check. All the radiation measurements we made gave OUTSIDE the E-Cat the same results published on the Lugano Report.
    For what cincerns the measurements we made INSIDE the E-Cat, the data are confidential.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  273. Roman Rodionov

    Dear Andrea,

    Did you check for possible e-cat radiation using detection of photo emulsion tracks? As far as I know multiple LENR experiments in Russia had some “strange radiation” that does not detected by usual radiation detection devices such as Geiger counter, but which produced tracks in photo emulsion.

  274. Andrea Rossi

    Dear Prof. Bert Abbing:
    I think you are right, but I prefer not to participate to this discussion, because the measurements of the Lugano Test have been designed and made by the Independent Third Party. I was away for most of the time and I never participated to the measurements. I did not participate at all to the work of analysis, evaluations, discussions about the measurements that the Professors of the ITP made after the test in Lugano and before the publication. As a consequence of these facts, I do not think it is proper for me to participate to this discussion.
    Thank you for the important attention of yours and your group.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  275. BertAbbing

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    maybe you are interested about the short email note that we have sent today to Mats Lewan, Frank Akland and daniele Passerini. We can’t stand that a work like yours is denigrated in a blog I have discovered today in the most possible unscientific way. Here is the thread.

    Dear Dr. Lewan I have written this letter to Daniele Passerini and in CC to Frank Akland regarding the horrible blog page by “GSVIT”

    https://gsvit.wordpress.com/2015/03/02/tpr2-calorimetry-of-hot-cat-performed-by-means-of-ir-camera-2/

    appeard today. I think that this short considerations could interest also you.

    Regards,

    Bert

    Dear Danele, Dear Frank

    I ( we ) write here some observations about the disgusting blog page you ( and Levi ) have have indicated to me.

    Those pages ( and all the site ) are purposely designed to appear as scientific to a layman so to divulge disinformation and ill formed concepts.

    They pretend to be written by an “official institution” that should appear seroius and scientific for the outsider and the common man.

    In fact the “institution” ins NOT a research institute and does non have any contact with internationally recognized research institutions or any University.

    No surprise if they received NO answer from any of the research group.

    The most disgusting thing is that their page appear purposely written in a way, mixing up real information from literature, omitted information and absolutely FALSE statements so to “demonstrate” a ( false ) conclusion. This demonstrate that the group that have written this pages is far to be scientific but has an agenda and a precise goal.

    Let us review just some of the points:

    The main FALSE information they try to transmit is that when measuring a temperature with a non contact thermometer one should use the “Spectral emissivity” and NOT the total normal emissivity.

    This statement is absolutely WRONG. Due to the fact that detector sensitivity is far to be a flat function and usually differs from pixel to pixel in an IR camera all that information is handled by the internal software of the instrument and to the user is requested ONLY to input the value of the TOTAL NORMAL EMISSIVITY which is “the ratio of the energy radiated by the material at a temperature T and the energy radiated by a black body at the same temperature” over ALL wavelengths. ( you can find that in ANY textbook ! eg:G. Gaussorgues Infrared Thermography )

    So all the argumentations in the blog page about integrating only in the “measurement window” are ILL-FORMED, wrong and misleading !

    Note also that is just by chance that Allumina has a constant spectral emissivity in the window of sensitivity of the detector. Many other materials have not ! And the “spectral emissivity” is NOT available for many materials. This would limit tha use of non contact thermometers just to few special cases, and this is not true ! Total Normal Emissivity tables for materials are available from many vendors showing similar values independently from the detector!

    The authors of the also MISS to explain WHY if the AA of the TPR2 would have done such a tremendous error ( they have NOT ) all the measures done with the DUMMY ( uncharged ) reactor match the input power ! THIS was in fact a calibration and a confirmation that the method was good.

    Another point they MISS to cite is that when they have measured the emissivity of the with the reference dots of the external allumina pipes the have found a values ( 0.69…. 064 ) that are in PERFECT agreement with the literature. Note that is even possible for the TPR reader note that the reference dots have a higher emissivity then the pipe because the are much britgher that that.

    Is NOT surprising on the other hand that MFMP have obtained different values. Cement materials, even if they have a high percentage of alumina can have a very different emissivity because the presence of metals ( Mg ).

    The TPR authors have analyzed the material by X-ray spectroscopy and found that was pure alumina, so they applied correctly the data for that material.

    Is quite WIERD that the blog page authors have found an emissivity near to 1 ( in contrast to any emissivity table ! ) at that low temperature. Or the material was not pure or they have done an error ! ( bad thermal contact of the PT100 or K probe could eventually lead to that ! )

    In conclusion.

    We have found that blog page far to be scientific and probably part of a “disinformation plan”. They make evident theoretical and experimental errors probably on pourpose.

    We will ignore it and go on working.

    Bert Abbing

  276. Dr Rossi:
    Perhaps nobody understands that you could stop working and enjoy a golden retire, at your age, but you are burning all the remaining of your life, after a hard life so far, for this cause.
    Thank you, Andrea, for your hard work.
    Adrienne

  277. Andrea Rossi

    Adrienne:
    Thank you for your simpathy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  278. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi,
    Frank Acland March 5 at5:50P

    In reply to your question about your mental health.
    You show the World every day that your mental health is in excellent condition !
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  279. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Wait….
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  280. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dr. Rossi , I send a very interesting document of Dr Parkhomov entitled:

    Investigation of the heat generator similar to Rossi reactor

    “This paper describes development and tests of a device that is similar to the well-known high-temperature Rossi reactor. The experiments confirmed that at the temperature about 1100◦C and more this device produces more energy than it consumes. Performed measurements demonstrated no ionized radiation above the background level from the working reactor.”

    VII. Conclusions
    Experiments with the replication of the high-temperature Rossi heat generator loaded by a mixture of Ni and lithium aluminum hydride demonstrated that these devices produce more energy than they consume at the temperature about 1100◦C and more. There was no ionized radiation above the background level observed while operating the reactor. Neutron flux density was not larger than 0.2 neutron/cm2·s.

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/03/05/alexander-parkhomov-paper-published-in-journal-of-unconventional-science/

  281. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you: Dr Parkhomov is continuing a very important work.
    He doesn’t talk too much, works hard, makes results: a real Russian.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  282. Andrea Rossi

    Yes, we are continuing the R&D of the Hot Cat. And we are working also on the safety certification of it. Very important evolution has been made after the Lugano test results.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  283. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Do you have any time to do R&D on the Hot Cat?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  284. Buck

    Dear Andrea,

    I saw the following Editorial in Arab News, a 39 year old newspaper (in English) with a circulation of about 51,000, coming out of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. It is owned by a member of the House of Saud.

    I find it interesting that the editor chose to cite Cold Fusion in this piece extolling the importance of Saudi businesses’ need to strongly consider funding R&D in the pursuit of improving their businesses. My first thought is that if the House of Saud wanted people to ignore Cold Fusion as a disruptive technology then it would likely choose to exclude it. However, they chose to end their point on the attainability of Cold Fusion by saying “never say never”.

    Being on the LENR side of the fence, I think it a reasonable policy for Arab News (House of Saud) to point to the importance of elevating the importance of R&D in preparation for the day when Oil does NOT drive the economy.

    What are your thoughts?
    ——

    “Some answers today seem frankly unreachable. The issue of Cold Fusion, generating a nuclear reaction at room temperature, rather than with the immense heat currently required, is one such inquiry. Just as medieval alchemists sought the Philosopher’s Stone that would turn base metal into gold, so Cold Fusion currently seems unattainable. But never say never.” (See the 4th paragraph)

    Link>> http://www.arabnews.com/editorial/news/714186

    Link>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_News

    Link>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turki_bin_Salman_Al_Saud

  285. Andrea Rossi

    Buck:
    Interesting. Thank you.
    I am sure, as I always said, that all the energy sources will be integrated, with advantage for all. The approach of the Arab News is intelligent, though, and the skepticism is in the right and smart measure.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  286. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    If you were to sell a 5MW low temp plant in the future, would you still only need one control room container to 5 reactor containers.

    How many 1MW plants could one control container look after?

    I really enjoyed reading your description of the noises the reactor makes. Would there be any possibility of you making an audio recording of the reactor or do you think that would possibly give away important information? Perhaps you could edit certain noises you think are too revealing? If you could record with a stereo microphone that would be AMAZING. I could listen to it at work for relaxation :)

  287. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    1- yes, I think, but must be tested
    2- I am not able to answer this question now, but I assume several
    3- Not now, maybe in future. An expert could get sensitive information
    4- Good idea!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  288. flesheatingemu

    Dr. Rossi, if you are only getting 4 hours of sleep a day, it sounds like you could use a lab assistant or ten. Surely you deserve some help on such an important mission. Where should we email our CVs? :)

    Bion Alex Howard

  289. Andrea Rossi

    Flesheatingemu:
    I am here with my Team, of course and I have all the help I need. It is my choice to overstay, to give all I can.
    Communications can be sent to
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  290. Wladimir Guglinski

    To the readers of the JoNP:

    My book “The Missed U-Turn – The duel Heisenberg vs Schrödinger” is available as ebook in the Amazon.com:

    http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00UBGN93I

    Regards,
    Wlad

  291. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    What do you think of the MFP and the independent particle model?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  292. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    The MFP ( Main Free Path) is supposed to be the space a nucleon has inside the atomic nucleus to orbit independently along the “independent particle model”. Good sense says that there is not MFP in a nucleus, because strong forces would force the nucleon to react with other nuclea. To defend the independent particle model, it has been pulled out the exclusion principle of Pauli, which forbids any interaction that puts particles into states that are already occupied. Yes, but the Pauli principle is not a force, therefore cannot eliminate the strong forces, so it seems to me that the MFP is an error.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  293. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea:
    During this test of the 1 MW plant have you and your Team made modifications to the technology after the experience of the work of the E-Cat?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  294. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Yes, we did, and substantial too. Obviously I cannot release particulars. Inside the container where are the computers, we have also a small electronic laboratory where our electronic engineer can modify the boards of the computers of the reactors to make them follow suite the requested operative modifications.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  295. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Yes, I am worried about you more than ever now (hehe)!

    You mention 2 containers. In the photos you released on your web site, it seemed that there was one container containing the reactors, etc., and people working inside another container. Is this second container a workshop/factory for you?

    Many thanks,

    Frank

  296. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    One container contains the E-Cats, pumps heat exchangers and the satellitar informatic system of every E-Cat. The second container contains the central control system, the general electric panels, general switches etc, plus the computers to read all the data and, obviously, the chairs and the desks. One of the desks is mine, from it I am writing this comment to answer to you, as well as all the comments I sent and will send in 2015. I make the trip from one container to the other not less than 100 times every day, but for the 60% of time I am in the container where are the computers. Together with me are several components of the Team. Both containers are installed inside the factory of the Customer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  297. JCRenoir

    During the nights do you have security in the factory of the customer where the 1 MW plant is in operation ?
    JCR

  298. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    Here is a strong private police security 24 hours per day. The factory is filled by cameras and many signs which say ” Smile: you are on camera”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  299. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    It’s interesting (and a bit painful) to read about your high anxiety levels surrounding you work with the 1 MW plant. I hope it does not affect your mental and physical health!

    Is the E-Cat such an unpredictable machine to cause you so much anxiety? Or is your anxiety more about the reliability of the controllers breaking down?

    I hope you are able to sleep well!

    Frank Acland

  300. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    To obtain statistics about predictability you need experience. We cannot have experience, since this plant is the first of industrial size ( 1 MW) to be observed in operation 24/7/350. This is also why we prefer not to publish data before at least one year of operation. I sleep 4 hours per day, but very well. This life will go on for all this year and possibly a slice of the next. But it is worth. During the long nights I can hear the voice of the plant ( just speaking of mental health….-he,he,he): the voice of the plant is a blend of huge bubbling of water, pumps tictocs, bips of computers and blinking leds, bzzzzs of electric stuff…all this is not constant, but is dynamic, it’s an integral. I get data also from it. Obviously the gauges of the control system make the job, but the voice raises my instinct. I invented him, not the gauges. ( Whattaya think about my mental health, after this? He,he,he,he…)
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  301. Ecco Liberation

    Dr.Rossi:
    Which aspects of Dr.Parkhomov’s work do you find particularly worth mentioning?
    Regards, EL.

  302. Andrea Rossi

    Ecco Liberation:
    The whole of the work of Parkomov is very interesting; obviously, I do not know the particulars, beside what I have read and seen in the internet.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  303. Brandon Hurd

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    Thank-you very much for all the answers you provide to readers’ questions on this forum. I believe such openness on your part is greatly appreciated by all the readers. I think your spirit of openness together with the daily sharing of news and opinions regarding LENR by people like Franck Acland, Mats Lewan, Vessela Nikolova, Peter Gluck, the MFMP and many others, is what gives a lot of readers, hope for a better future – one in which LENR will play a very big part.

    There are many people who wait patiently for that better future to take a big leap forward. The wait is occasionally rewarded with news, such as, for example with your recent publication of the photo’s of the 1MW plant. Let me say, it looks very impressive – a true “work of magnificence.” Also, may I say congratulations on the release of your official website. I think probably, the release of the photo’s of the 1MW plant over-shadowed the fact that you had just put up a very professional and informative website. Well done – it looks great.

    I have a question for you with regard to the 1MW plant. What will happen when the testing phase of your 1MW plant is complete, assuming the results are posisitve?

    Will Industrial Heat “announce” the technology to the world? By that stage, it should be well considered to be a “proven” technology, especially if your results are positive and your customer confirms that fact.

    I guess the alternative approach would be a more “low profile” next step towards mass manufacture. I think many people would be very dissapointed with a low profile approach since people want this technology to be “announced” to the world. After all, this technology will eventually benefit all mankind and that will be something, which you will be very proud of I am sure.

    Warm regards
    Brandon Hurd
    Cape Town, South Africa

  304. Andrea Rossi

    Brandon Hurd:
    Thank you for your delightful words. I gave all the possible information, with exception of issues that we deem critical to pass from a laboratory replication to an industrial manufacturing. I have been enchanted by the work of Dr Parkhomov: simply genial, as for what I could see in the internet. Also the work of Brian Ahern merits to be observed with great attention.
    The persons you cited have helped us with their honest sustain; in particular I have appreciated the intellectual honesty of Peter Gluck: he started hostile, because his opinion regarding our former work was not positive ( but he was sincere and did not have an agenda); eventually, with remarkable honesty, he published his change of opinion; maybe in the future he will again turn into negative his mood toward us, but he gave strong evidence of his intellectual honesty.
    About the future: the commercial strategic decisions are totally premature, because all will depend on the results and we need to wait the end of this test period. Every moment here we do not know what will happen the next moment. I am in the plant ( inside the 2 containers wherein is everything) from 5.30 a.m. through midnight and there is no moment without anxiety. I understand it is difficult to imagine how difficult this is.
    For now my future is in the next 10 minutes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  305. You wrote that during the self sustained mode the consume of electricity is 40 kWh/h: this sums up a COP 25.
    You and your team have really made a masterpiece if you are stable and working like this. We have seen how difficult is to perform from the replication attempts. It seems to me that the best replication is the one made by the Russian scientist Parkhomov. What do you think?

  306. Andrea Rossi

    Masaj Antalya:
    Yes, I agree: Dr Parkhomov has made the best replication job, so far. He is very, very skillful, from what I read.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  307. Andrea Rossi

    Anna:
    No, Eng. Ventola is a skillful engineer, I never knew him personally and he did not work with us. I read in the preface of Vessela Nikolova that he is a professional expert in computer science. I ordered the book, of which I have been informed yesterday ( I never knew before about it), and after reading it I will be able to comment; in the meantime, from the introduction published in the blog you saw, I understand that Eng. Ventola has collected many papers related to the Hot Cat and made personal considerations. The guy is skillful and intelligent, nevertheless what he writes is totally independent from us.
    This said, I like to renew my wishes of good luck to the Authors!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  308. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    This is the release of a new book related to the E-Cats:

    “Hot-Cat 2.0: How last generation E-Cats are made”

    http://fusionefredda3.com/novita/un-nuovo-libro-ci-racconta-lultima-generazione-degli-e-cat

  309. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the interesting link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  310. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, a very sad story.
    Google:
    THE DEATH OF GUIDO GHISOLFI
    Click on:
    Beth Renewables CEO Guido Ghisolfi dies in apparent suicide
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    USA

  311. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    I knew him, when in Italy I manufactured biomass fueled power generators: they manufactured esterification plants. I was interested to to treat the vegetables to make fuel oil. He was a very decent person.
    Depression is a very dangerous enemy and can hit anybody. He was a hard worker. I am very sorry, for him, fir his family, for his employees. But his company is very solid.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  312. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Very interesting response to Hank Mills. May I ask in what areas has work on the E-Cat progressed by an order of magnitude since 2014?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  313. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    in all the areas, because we now have to maintain in stable operation for ever a 1 MW plant, giving to a Customer all the energy he needs to make his production. Here the anxiety is exponentially higher and all the particulars go to a stress. We are learning, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  314. Dr Andrea:
    I saw in the blog of ecat-thenewfire.com that there is an interview to Prof. Nagel: do you know if he is a parent of Ernst Nagel ?
    Thank you

  315. Andrea Rossi

    Vernita:
    Curious question: I put the same years ago, in 2010 to be exact, during a meeting in NRL Dr Nagel attended to, because Nagel is a rare name.
    It is worth, at this point, to explain who Ernst Nagel was and why he connects with us.
    He wrote an important book: ” The structure of science, problems in the logic of the scientific explanation” ( Cambridge, 1961): I studied throughly this book, because it was the basic text to sustain the exam of ” Filosofia della Scienza” with Prof. Ludovico Geymonat at the Università degli Studi of Milan ( Italy), where I got my doctorate in Phylosophy. I sustained this exam, a very difficult one and I loved this book, because it was the positivistic and structural counterpoint of the Husserl’s phenomenology.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  316. Dr Rossi:
    Can you update about the safety certification for the domestic units?

  317. Andrea Rossi

    Melanie Lisk:
    The safety certification for the domestic units is on course.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  318. Dear Andrea,

    Now that Hank Mills has slightly prepared the floor I dare to say the following. Warning: may look sentimental to some.

    It is probably no accident that especially you, Andrea Rossi, succeeded in developing the E-cat. The work has seemingly required an enormous, almost but not quite superhuman, amount of dedication and commitment, humbleness in front of nature, and relentless willpower to utilize the possibilities it offers.

    Typically it is 100 times more laborious to make new R&D, compared to repeating something that has already been done or doing reverse engineering. Other groups are now beginning to slowly succeed with reverse engineering. That gives some small indication of the magnitude of the original effort involved.

    I could be wrong, but it is my guess that in general such amount of willpower and dedication can only stem from a most genuine love of humans and of mankind by fundamentally altruistic motives.

    End of sentimentality warning.

    Best regards, /pekka

  319. Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    Thank you. When I stay idle not working I feel guilty. I do not know why, but that is it. It has always been so. Probably my mother instilled this in me in my first years of life: everywhen she saw me doing nothing, sitting in an armchair, she used to say: ” Are you a parasite?”. This sank in my brain: in this period I work in the plant from 5.30 a.m. through midnight, but when I return in the motel to sleep I feel guilty to leave the plant. In any case, the work I made has been born also by the books I studied: this is why I am fond in particular of “Models of the Atomic Nucleus” of Norman Cook and its rigorous companion “Nuclear Models” of Greiner-Maruhn ( both published by Springer and available by Amazon). The first, I learnt by heart, the second I study every day and both gave me an enormous help. It has been a process of trial and error, but directed by a theoretical strategy, wrong or right as it may be. This is why I reccommend to everybody, mainly young people, to study with rigor. If it is true what Edison said, that an invention is composed by 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration, it is also true that the brain weights less than 0.5% of a human body: this means that quantity is not proportional to importance.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  320. Wladimir Guglinski

    Again, Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity is denied by a new experiment

    According to the Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity, the photon cannot manifest its wave and corpuscular nature at the same time.
    According to that principle of the Quantum Mechanics, the photon manifest its wave feature in some experiments, and its corpuscular feature in other experiments, but never the two features at the same time.

    The first experiment was made by Ephraim Steinberg in 2011:
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3295

    The new experiment was published in the Journal Nature:
    http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/150302/ncomms7407/abs/ncomms7407.html

    So, new experiments are proving that some principles of the Quantum Mechanics are wrong.

    This new experiment corroborates (again now in 2015) the photon model proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.

    regards
    wlad

  321. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    While on the road today, in order to go and solve someone’s tech troubles, I just had the same thought as Hank Mills, you just answered to.
    Do you have knowlegde if millions (or better: many billions)are being spent in LENR research by hundreds (or better: (ten thousands) of scientists and engineers worldwide to harness the Rossi Effect ? Maybe by competitors of yours ?
    My opinion is that there should be such investments. Urgently.
    If this does not happen, this has also a reason: they have no idea how and where to search. In that case, Billions and trillions are worth nothing for the world.
    My honest and humble opinion.
    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  322. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    Thank you for your opinion.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  323. Paul

    Andrea,

    In the recently published book “Hot Cat 2.0″ the e-cat evaluated in the Lugano report is considered a “Type 4 design”. Based on this designation what number design is the current Hot Cat?

    Paul

  324. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    The book “Hot Cat 2.0″ has been a surprise for me: I heard about it this morning, after it has been signaled to me. I didn’t yet read it, I bought a copy this morning, so I am not able to answer, I do not know how the classification has been made.
    I take the chance you give me to wish “good luck” to the Authors of the book!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  325. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    I’m only now starting to realize the challenges you faced and the almost incalculable number of tests you must have performed to produce stable E-Cats that do not destroy themselves. You, as an individual with minimal assistance, achieved so much due to your huge sacrifice to test these systems continuously and regularly for years. Right now, there are dozens of part-time scientists and others working to replicate, but no individual or team seems willing or able (perhaps do to a lack of money, resources, other commitments, family issues) to perform the type of rigorous testing you did.

    You cannot talk about the inside of the reactor. Also, you cannot talk about wave forms, magnetics, pulse width modulators, etc. But one problem is that in the replications you indicate are taking place, the tests seem to be ending quickly due to mechanical failure. Sometimes, reactors only seem to last seconds after excess heat may be showing up. If you cannot talk about basic structural issues, I will understand. But if you have a tip or two about enhancing the durability of these reactors so the nickel-LiAlH4 reaction (Rossi Effect) can be slightly better observed after the anomalous heat starts being produced, any information would be appreciated.

    Of course, maybe that information should be earned by trial and error testing. However, I think having the Rossi Effect (which you indicate is already being replicated) made a bit easier to examine and show the world could have some value to you and industrial heat.

    Thank you.

  326. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Thank you for your sympathy. As I said many times, to give away the IP would mean to stop any serious investment. We aleady disclosed a huge amount of information along the Lugano test.
    By the way: the work made until 2014 has been less by an order of magnitude respect the work we are making now on the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer of IH.
    Fortunately, now I work with a strong team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  327. Joe

    Wladimir,

    I gave the example of bending light. Photons have no mass but are affected by massive objects. The scientists had to re-define SOMETHING, otherwise their system would look inconsistent. So they concluded that light still travels in a straight line but in a space bent by objects’ mass. And this new definition of gravity affects both massive and non-massive particles. That would be similar to a re-definition of rotation that accounts for both null and non-null nuclear magnetic moments.

    All the best,
    Joe

  328. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dears Joe and Eernie,

    beyond the puzzle of the null magnetic moments for the even-even nuclei with Z=N, there is other puzzle impossible to be solved by the Standard Nuclear Physics.

    The nucleus 6C12 has spin 0 and magnetic moment zero. It means that:
    a) each proton has a symmetric proton and they cancel each other their magnetic moment and their spins
    b) each neutron has a symmetric neutron and they cancel each other their magnetic moment and their spins

    But the excited nucleus 6C12 has spin 2 and magnetic moment zero.
    This means that one deuteron in the excited 6C12 changes its spin, but the magnetic moment does not change.

    It is impossible to explain the spin 2 and magnetic moment zero of the excited 6C12 by considering any nuclear model of the Standard Model.

    Such puzzle can be solved only by considering the flux n(o) crossing into the protons and neutrons within the nuclei, as shown in the figures 28 and 29 of the paper Stability of Light Nuclei:
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Stability%20of%20light%20nuclei.pdf

    Joe,
    how do you think the nuclear theorist can solve this puzzle?

    Eernie,
    do you think is it possible to solve the puzzle by considering the statistical viewpoint?

    regards
    wlad

  329. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in March 2nd, 2015 at 11:06 AM

    Wladimir,

    In the distant past, rotation was only classical. We could change the rate of rotation by altering the amount of energy in the system. In the recent past, we discovered a new type of rotation – intrinsic spin – whose rate of rotation does not vary with the energy of the system. Logically, this new type of rotation is considered non-classical. Therefore, the concept of rotation was re-defined and a new theory of intrinsic spin was created.
    —————————————————————

    Joe,
    I know that in quantum theory the concept of spin is non-classical. In my Quantum Ring Theory the non-classical spin of the electron is composed by the intrinsic-spin of the electron plus the spin due to the helical trajectory of the electron.

    However the spin of a nucleus considered in Nuclear Physics is classical. The total spin of a nucleus is composed by the addition of the spins of protons and neutrons. For instance, the spin of 3Li6 is 1, resulted from the spin zero due to 2 protons, 2 neutrons, and a deuteron.

    As I already said,
    in the case the nuclear theorist try to explain the null magnetic moment for the even-even nuclei with Z=N through a non-classical rotation, however the same solution must be applied for the other nuclei.
    They cannot propóse a solution only for the even-even nuclei.
    The solution must be applied to all the nuclei. And the magnetic moment of the nucleus 3Li6 (for instance) must be explained by considering a classical rotation.

    regards
    wlad

  330. Gil

    Dear Andrea Rossi
    I found yesterday a site where it was reported that in Lugano Report scientists were not allowed to check the control tool (control-box?) of the electric current incoming and outgoing.
    Then I reread the Lugano Report but I have found no trace of such a statement which reported a direct statement of one of the signatories of the Test .
    It ‘possible that physicists were subject to any other restrictions than that of not opening the reactor?
    Warm regards.

  331. Andrea Rossi

    Gil:
    We supplied the apparatus and the Professors of the ITP made the measurements as they wanted. I was not present for most of the test and the instrumentation for the measurements was of their property. I do not know what they inspected and what they did not. Obviously they could not open the reactor’s containment body.
    For all the rest, you have to read the report: the set up of the electric measurements has been described in detail and there is nothing I can add because I had nothing to do with their measurements.
    On the same subject: the Russian scientist Alexander Parkomov has independently replicated repeatedly the apparatus made by us as descripted in the report of the Professors and the tests made by the ITP:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsdewHQxW4
    and also see
    http://coldfusion3.com/blog/more-details-of-russian-e-cat-replication-available
    That’s quite interesting, isn’t it?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  332. Dr Rossi:
    What is the COP of the 1 MW plant when it is in self sustained mode?

  333. Andrea Rossi

    Vivian:
    When the 1 MW E-Cat in operation in the factory of the Customer of Industrial Heat is in self sustained mode we have to spend an energy of about 20- 40 kWh/h necessary for the reactors. But it is soon to give numbers, because we have to experience the endurance and the reliability at the ssm status. We are collecting data systems every 10 seconds, so we have not lacks of matter to study…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  334. eernie1

    Wlad,
    That shrinkage would really be drastic. Right now they are puzzled by an apparently measured shrinkage of .035fm. A measured shrinkage of .2 to .5fm would indeed send everyone back to the drawing board looking for possible answers.
    Regards.

  335. Joe

    Wladimir,

    In the distant past, rotation was only classical. We could change the rate of rotation by altering the amount of energy in the system. In the recent past, we discovered a new type of rotation – intrinsic spin – whose rate of rotation does not vary with the energy of the system. Logically, this new type of rotation is considered non-classical. Therefore, the concept of rotation was re-defined and a new theory of intrinsic spin was created.

    Another example is the following. Scientists claim that the trajectory of light bends in the presence of massive objects. But photons have no mass to account for this phenomenon. But due to re-definition, light trajectory is still considered straight but in a space that happens to be bent by the gravitational fields of massive objects.

    All the best,
    Joe

  336. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you for this important updating about the 3D printing of the Swedish company ARCAM.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  337. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi , prof . Parkohomov was the best of all the scientists who are seeking LERN !
    Parkohomov has achieved results similar to those that the independent third party has achieved in the test at Lugano, Switzerland published in October, 2014.

    http://coldfusion3.com/blog/more-details-of-russian-e-cat-replication-available

  338. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Very interesting video, thanks.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  339. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi to send a report Russian very interesting !

    Russian Reportage on Cold Fusion (Alexander Parkhomov)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTsdewHQxW4

  340. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you: Dr Parkhomov has definitely made a valid job.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  341. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dears Joe and Eernie,

    in the case the experiments of the MUSE Project measure in 2016 a value for the proton’s radius between 0,3fm and 0,6fm, as I expect, what do you think the scientists will change in the concepts of Physics so that to save the Standard Model?
    Proton’s radius to be measured by MUSE Project (2015-2016)
    http://www.zpenergy.com/

    They can re-define the concept of radius, by proposing a new non-classical concept of radius.

    Or perhaps they can allege that proton’s radius changes due to statistical causes.

    What do you think?

    regards
    wlad

  342. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in March 1st, 2015 at 6:14 PM

    Wlad,
    That table has already been revised a number of times including a decrease of the reported moment of the proton and other reported moments as other refined adjustments are made.
    As a suggestion,your conversations would be more enjoyable if you were not as defensive.
    ———————————————————————

    Eernie,
    but the spin never changes by refinments or adjustments.

    The magnetic moments have refinments and adjustments because new methods are invented, and the technology advances.
    But magnetic moments different of zero had never be detected form the even-even nuclei with Z=N.

    regards
    wlad

  343. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi, Frank Acland, JYD, Navdrew,

    ARCAM (Sweden) can not yet print an entire airplane, but they can print turbine blades.

    Some assembly required. ;)

    http://www.arcam.com/wp-content/uploads/Arcam-Q20.pdf

    http://www.additive3d.com/

    http://www.additive3d.com/news1/inr2969.htm

    The Arcam series of additive metal printers are products.

    There are also a number of other manufacturers. This area deserves further attention.

    Additive Regards,

    Joseph Fine

  344. Navdrew

    Mr.Rossi:

    I agree that 3D printing is now primarily useful for non=metal parts but work is progressing. GE is pursuing R&D in 3D printing for jet engine parts. See: http://www.ge.com/stories/advanced-manufacturing. I believe E-cats will be in production long before we see 3D printed high temperature structural metal parts in GE engines. But never say never. DoD has a major initiative is this area.

    Drew

  345. Andrea Rossi

    Navdrew:
    I totally agree. Thank you for the interesting link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  346. JYD

    Dear Andrea Rossi, dear Franck Ackland

    Concerning 3D printers and industry, I found this :

    http://www.lemonde.fr/sciences/article/2015/02/26/deux-reacteurs-d-avion-reproduits-par-impression-3d_4583403_1650684.html

    Sorry, it’s French paper, and my english is so poor!
    Thanks and good luck for your works

  347. Andrea Rossi

    JYD:
    Thank you for the information. Still it is a prototype, anyway its development will be worth the while of a strong attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  348. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Yes, but this is an experimental prototype: they are not ready to sell a production system. It is very interesting and when in the market we will react.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  349. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    3D printing with metals is becoming more sophisticated.

    Here’s an example: “Forget food and guns, the first 3D-printed jet engines have arrived” http://mashable.com/2015/02/25/3d-printed-jet-engine/

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  350. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Thank you, very interesting, but still prototipal. Not ready for the market.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  351. Joseph Fine

    There’s more out there on 3D Metal printing, but here’s an interesting link. If you can print a Jet Engine, you probably can print an E-Cat.

    Joseph Fine

    http://www.computerworld.com/article/2890313/researchers-make-a-3d-printed-jet-engine.html

  352. eernie1

    Wlad,
    That table has already been revised a number of times including a decrease of the reported moment of the proton and other reported moments as other refined adjustments are made.
    As a suggestion,your conversations would be more enjoyable if you were not as defensive.
    Regards.

  353. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Eernie,

    perhaps you are right, and the nuclear theorists will solve the puzzle of the even-even nuclei by proposing nonsenses (as a non-classical rotation suggested by Joe, or by claiming that the influence of the statistics in the results of the measurements is responsible for the null magnetic moment of those nuclei).
    Maybe they even prefer to keep silent, in order to avoid to propose nonsenses, as they did up to now.

    The physicists are not interested in the discovery of the scientific truth.

    I posted a comment here in the JoNP, speaking about he lack of honesty among the scientists, but Andrea Rossi had spammed it because in his viewpoint I was insulting the work of the scientific community.

    But I have a different viewpoint.
    I think the physicists are insulting themselves, since they are betraying the scientific method by rejecting experiments which deny their theories.

    regards
    wlad

  354. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    What part do you think 3D printing might play in the future development and production of E-Cats?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  355. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    That’s an interesting question!
    Obviously we have considered carefully the 3D printing technology. It appears to me that it is mature for objects made by paper, cardboard, plastic et similia, but still it is not mature for apparatuses made by steel or by other metals. Please correct me if I am wrong. Without any doubt 3D Printing can be a very interesting system to produce the E-Cats, provided it works with steel.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  356. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in March 1st, 2015 at 12:27 PM

    Dear Wlad,
    What complicates the problem of nuclear magnetic moments is that since the nucleus is relatively massive, the magnetic moments are relatively small(1/1000th)of the moments of an electron. When I did electron spin work I was able to obtain significant effects with a relatively small magnet using a relatively high microwave frequency energy. Nuclear spin requires a much larger magnet along with much lower frequency energy for effect. Since the statistical treatment at the atomic level produced usable results for the SQM scientists, they would look at a statistical solution to your question and consider the question answered.
    ——————————————————————-

    Eernie,
    I suggest you to advise Dr. N. J. Stone telling him that his nuclear table is full of errors

    http://www.psi.ch/low-energy-muons/DocumentsEN/nuclear-moments.pdf

    Tell him there is need to change all the values of the nuclear spins measured by the experiments

    regards
    wlad

  357. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1
    March 1st, 2015 at 12:27 PM

    Dear Wlad,
    I did not say the solution of the null magnetic moments was easy. On the contrary what I am referring to is the difficulty of mathematically solve the problem.
    —————————————————————

    No, Eernie,
    it is not difficult.

    If statistically the mangetic moment of even-even nuclei with Z=N should be different of zero, then statistically the nuclear spin would be different of zero too.

    Very simple.

    regards
    wlad

  358. eernie1

    Dear Wlad,
    I did not say the solution of the null magnetic moments was easy. On the contrary what I am referring to is the difficulty of mathematically solve the problem. What we are dealing with is a multi-body interactive situation(rotating nucleons and fields possessing charges)within a rotating nucleus interacting with each other. As you know mathematically solving a multi-body problem is impossible when the number of participating components are numerous. This is what drove the SQM scientists into a statistical treatment to obtain solutions. What complicates the problem of nuclear magnetic moments is that since the nucleus is relatively massive, the magnetic moments are relatively small(1/1000th)of the moments of an electron. When I did electron spin work I was able to obtain significant effects with a relatively small magnet using a relatively high microwave frequency energy. Nuclear spin requires a much larger magnet along with much lower frequency energy for effect. Since the statistical treatment at the atomic level produced usable results for the SQM scientists, they would look at a statistical solution to your question and consider the question answered.
    Regards.

  359. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 28th, 2015 at 10:48 PM

    3. You state,
    “Even if the scientists re-define the concept of rotation to suit to their needs, however a new concept of non-classical rotation cannot solve the puzzle of the even-even nuclei with Z =N.”

    Of course it can. The whole purpose behind re-defining is to actually solve problems. Otherwise, why bother doing it?
    ————————————————————————

    No, Joe, it cannot solve the puzzle
    I already proved it to you.

    And I repeat again:

    1) Suppose the nuclear theorist re-define the rotation, proposing a non-classical rotation

    2) The difference of 10% in the magnetic moment in the 3Li6 must be credited to the non-classical rotation (Hans Bethe said to be due to clasical rotation, but the nuclear theorists will say that it is due to non-classical rotation).

    3) Therefore the non-classical rotation is able to induce magnetic moments

    4) So, the non-classical rotation must induce a magnetic moment due to the non-classical rotation of the protons in the even-even nuclei with Z=N. And those nuclei cannot have null magnetic moment, even by considering the non-classical rotation.

    CONCLUSION:
    The non-classical rotation is not able to solve the puzzle

    regards
    wlad

  360. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    I have spammed your comment whose title was: ” The standard nuclear model is dead”.
    Useless to explain why.
    Please moderate your language within acceptable limits. Make your points, but do not insult the work of the scientific community, and, please, take in consideration the possibility that you could be wrong. I always do this. I know my limits.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  361. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. You state two categories: one of cause and one of effect.

    CAUSE:
    “Rotation is a phenomenon which you can detect with your eyes: a body having rotation.

    “You observe the rotation by the CAUSE of the rotation: a body moving with rotation.”

    EFFECT:
    “Unlike, you cannot see the gravity. The existence of the gravity we DEDUCE only through the EFFECTS of the gravity.
    Therefore, we have to measure the effects of the gravity, in order to define it.”

    Question: is intrinsic spin “cause” or “effect”?

    2. You state,
    “There is not any theory of rotation.”

    Question: does standard physics have a theory of intrinsic spin?

    3. You state,
    “Even if the scientists re-define the concept of rotation to suit to their needs, however a new concept of non-classical rotation cannot solve the puzzle of the even-even nuclei with Z =N.”

    Of course it can. The whole purpose behind re-defining is to actually solve problems. Otherwise, why bother doing it?

    All the best,
    Joe

  362. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in February 28th, 2015 at 7:42 PM

    Wlad,
    1) —————————————————–
    Then there is rotation about an object(moon around the earth),the time rotation of an occurrence(once a day) the statistical rotation of events such as the appearance of an electron within a sphere about the nucleus at any given time.
    ————————————————————

    Eernie,
    in a previous comment I already mentioned the other sort of rotation, posting a link of the Wikipedia.

    The nucleus has not any sort of rotation like the moon around the earth and rotation like an electron within a sphere etc.
    The nucleus has only a rotation about its central axis, and so there is no need to consider other sort of rotations.

    2) —————————————————–
    Not to forget that fields can intertwine and rotate(Spinors) which produce particle spins which interact with other spin fields energetically. Your nucleons spin creating the magnetic moments which can add or subtract depending on the number of nucleons and their distribution(protons vis neutrons). SQM attempts to explain the observed values by statistical methods. They would say the null values observed in even-even nucli are a result of the large number of created individual moments statistically adding up to the null values overall.
    —————————————————————————

    Eernie,
    obviously you did not understand the puzzle.

    The null values observed in even-even nuclei are ( as you said ) a result of the large number of created individual moments statistically adding up to the null values overall.

    However,
    as the nucleus has rotation, an additional magnetic moment is created due to the electric charge of the protons moving about the center of the nucleus.

    In order to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have null magnetic moment, the following hypothesis would have to be considered:

    a) the large number of created individual moments statistically results in a negative moment with value +X.

    b) the rotation of the protons of the nucleus induce a positive moment with value -X.

    Such a “coincidence” of having +X and -X equals in absolute values, for all the even-even nuclei with Z=N, is statistically impossible to occur, because:

    c) the rotation of the nucleus is responsible for 10% of the magnetic moment of the nucleus. For instance, I already had explained to Joe that 3Li6 has magnetic moment +0,822, while the magnetic moment of the deuteron is +0,857.

    d) the even-even nuclei with Z=N have spin zero.
    Therefore, statistically, each proton has a symmentric proton and they cancell each other their magnetic moment, while each neutron has a symmetric neutron and they cancell each other their magnetic moment.
    If, statistically this would not occur, then statistically the spin of the even-even nuclei with Z=N could not be zero.

    e) Therefore in even-even nuclei with Z=N the result of the large number of created individual moments statistically cannot create a positive magnetic moment with value +X, as supposed in the item “a” above.
    They have to create statistically a magnetic moment ZERO, since statistically the spin of those nuclei is ZERO.

    f) And as the statistical moment due to indivifual protons and neutrons is ZERO, then the even-even nuclei with Z=N must have a non-null magnetic moment -X due to the rotation of the positive charge of the protons.

    Besides,
    dear Eernie,
    if the solution of the puzzle would be so easy to be solved as you think, I am sure that all the nuclear physicist (who I had already invited to come here to solve the puzzle) would feel themselves very glad to come here to explain it.

    regards
    wlad

  363. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 28th, 2015 at 12:15 AM

    Wladimir,

    Here is another example of re-defining:
    Classical (Newton) gravity has been replaced by General Relativity (GR). Force has been re-defined as geometry (of space). Scientists believe that this is an improvement. (See “Tests of General Relativity” in Wikipedia.) But the most emblematic gravitational phenomenon – attraction between objects – can not be explained by GR. (Geometry does not impart impulse to objects.) So how can GR be an improvement in gravitational theory over classical?
    ——————————————————————–

    Joe,
    all the re-definitions were proposed with the aim of solving puzzles.

    But the re-definition of the classical rotation cannot solve the puzzle of the even-even nuclei with Z=N, as I had showed to you yesterday:
    —————————————————————-
    But let us suppose that those scientists who had re-defined the concept of rotation claim the following:
    The non-classical rotation proposed by us is also able to induce magnetic moments.

    Then we reply to them:
    In this case, the non-classical rotation also induces magnetic moment in the even-even nuclei with Z=N, due to the rotation of the protons.

    Therefore,
    dear Joe,
    even if the scientists re-define the concept of rotation to suit to their needs, however a new concept of non-classical rotation cannot solve the puzzle of the even-even nuclei with Z =N.

    As you may realize, dear Joe,
    it is impossible to solve the puzzle of the even-even nuclei with Z=N even by a solution proposed from a pseudoscientific attempt, as you had supposed to be possible
    ——————————————————————-

    Therefore,
    it makes no sense to re-define the classical rotation, since any non-classical rotation is not able to solve the puzzle.

    regards
    wlad

  364. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    All that expensive equipment to produce 1MW heat.
    I hope that you have an awsome COP on the Rossi Effect.
    Do you still have ideas and plans for improvements “orders of magnitude”, or do you have allmost the final product ?
    Both can be true, of course.
    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  365. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    You are right: both are true.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  366. eernie1

    Wlad,
    Your arguments about the meaning of rotation appear to be circular(little joke). When I think of rotation there are a number of scenarios that for me define rotation. There is the one you have discussed with Joe, rotation about an axis. Then there is rotation about an object(moon around the earth),the time rotation of an occurrence(once a day) the statistical rotation of events such as the appearance of an electron within a sphere about the nucleus at any given time. Not to forget that fields can intertwine and rotate(Spinors) which produce particle spins which interact with other spin fields energetically. Your nucleons spin creating the magnetic moments which can add or subtract depending on the number of nucleons and their distribution(protons vis neutrons). SQM attempts to explain the observed values by statistical methods. They would say the null values observed in even-even nucli are a result of the large number of created individual moments statistically adding up to the null values overall.
    Regards please do not think I am attacking your theories. I think they are well thought out.

  367. Peter Forsberg

    Well, my main field of expertise is computer science and artificial intelligence; not pandas.

    I wish you good luck with the 1 Meg plant.

    Regards

    Peter

  368. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    Computer science is strongly present in the 1 Meg.
    Thank you and, from inside the E-Cat,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  369. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 28th, 2015 at 12:15 AM

    Wladimir,

    1) ————————————————————
    You stated,
    “Rotation is NOT DEFINED.

    Rotation is a physical phenomenon: a body moving around an axis.”

    Your first sentence contradicts your second sentence. You actually defined rotation.
    —————————————————————–

    No, Joe,
    I did not define rotation.

    Rotation is a phenomenon existing in the Nature.
    There is no need to define it.
    The Earth has a rotation about the axis which crosses its center.
    Such rotation of the Earth exists, and nobody needs to define it.

    What the men did was only to give a name to that phenomenon existing in the Nature. They called it ROTATION. Nobody had defined it.

    2) —————————————————————
    Here is another example of re-defining:
    Classical (Newton) gravity has been replaced by General Relativity (GR).
    ——————————————————————-

    Joe,
    you cannot compare ROTATION with GRAVITY.

    Rotation is a phenomemon which you can detect with your eyes: a body having rotation.

    You observe the rotation by the CAUSE of the rotation: a body moving with rotation.

    .

    Unlike, you cannot see the gravity. The existence of the gravity we DEDUCE only thorugh the EFFECTS of the gravity.
    Therefore, we have to measure the effects of the gravity, in order to define it.

    The concept of gravity was defined as follows:

    1- Newton defined gravity by making experiments, when he measured the universal constant G of the gravity.

    2- Einstein re-defined the gravity because he realized that Newton theory of the gravity was not complete.

    Unlike,
    you cannot re-define rotation by claiming the following:
    The phenomenon of the rotation of a body is not complete. We need to re-define rotation in order to get a complete theory of rotation.

    There is not any theory of rotation.
    Rotation is a phenomenon observed in the Nature.
    You cannot re-define a PHENOMENON existing in the Nature.

    3) ————————————————————-
    Force has been re-defined as geometry (of space). Scientists believe that this is an improvement.
    —————————————————————-

    You cannot compare FORCE with ROTATION.

    Rotation is a PHENOMENON observed in the Nature.
    Rotation is a phenomenon existing in itself a priori. Rotation is INDEPENDENT of any theory and any concept.

    Force is a CONCEPT defined in the Newton’s theory.

    The concept of force was proposed by Newton, according to which F=m.a

    You can re-define the concept of force, since force is defined in the equation F=m.a, because the concept of mass was also re-defined by Einstein.

    Unlike,
    you cannot re-define rotation, because rotation is INDEPENDENT of any concept and any theory.
    Rotation is a phenomenon observed: a body moving about its axis. And this phenomenon does not depend on any other concept.

    regards
    wlad

  370. Kay

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    2016 it will be the revolution from Sunfire http://www.sunfire.de/en/
    because they will go in big business to produce fuel and to reduce the CO2 !

    maybe it is possible the ecat combination with it.

    best regart
    Kay

  371. Andrea Rossi

    Kay:
    Good luck!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  372. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Morissey:
    It is not me who gave names to all the reactors, have been the workers of the Team.
    Some name is from their fiancèe, some from the movie stars…Windy and Cindy you already know, then we have Rambo, Angiolina and so on. Officially every reactor is listed by a matrix ( like EC 1, EC 2,…) but they preferred give real names, for fun. One that had given a lot of troubles at the beginning of the operation has been named “Mothersucker”. So it is not rare hear some of the Team say “how’s going Mothersucker?” and the answer ( presently) “not bad”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  373. Bernie Morrissey

    With so many Cats in small space it must be hard to keep them all purring. You have given them all names. Can you list them?

  374. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    I have seen the photos published on your personal website http://www.andrea-rossi.com and what I saw is impressive. Really impressive. Enlarging the photos I saw a remarkable number of connections , wiring, electronic and informatic components probably by the thousands. All this work has been made internally by your Team, or you had external specialists ? Is this gigantic amount of components reliable when in operation at high temperatures, humidity, etc?
    I hope you can answer, thank you for your patience.
    W.G.

  375. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    All the boards, the informatics, the programmation, the electronics have been made inside our company by our Team. We just buy the elementary components and the microchips. We decided to do this to avoid to give to potential competitors the advantage to know the very complex regulation and control system. As I always said, the E-Cat is a much more complex system than it appears to be from outside.
    All the control system is designed to resist to attacks from temperature and humidity, within tolerable limits, and is designed to make not too difficult the maintainance.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  376. JCRenoir

    Dear Andrea:
    Take more rest, you cannot resist one year working 16-18 hours per day; sorry to say this, but you are 65 years old… you risk a heart attack. I am a phisician ( not a physicist) and I suggest you not to work more than 10 hours per day, in that situation of stress.
    Gog bless you,
    JCR

  377. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    I am delighted by your very kind attention, but, to make it short, it is easier I get a heart attack if I stay far from the plant. I am taking advantage of the physical resistance I cropped being a marathonete when I was 45 years younger: that is a kind of training that lasts, as everything gained with hard work.
    Again thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  378. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    Here is the new story of the General Spaziante that in the nineties had started, organized and directed the action that put you in jail for crimes you have cleared of after years and in the meantime destroyed your life and your business: got it today from my informants:
    http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2015/02/28/confiscati-4-milioni-spaziante-usava-ufficiali-gdf-come-prestanome/1463319/
    He was corrupted. He pleaded guilty for corruption and is in prison.
    Comments?
    From Russia, with love,
    D.T.

  379. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    I have no comments related to the person, but, as an Italian, I want to state this: Italian Guardia Di Finanza (Custom Police) is a glorious military Corp that for more than a century has defended our Country fighting and working with honour and sacrifice. We have 60,000 military of this Corp and at least the 99.9% of them are heroes that for a wage not proportional to their sacrifice risk their life to defend us. It is unavoidable, under a statistic point of view, that among 60,000 persons there is somebody not good, but I can assure you that in my career, when I worked in Italy, I have known many of them, and they were very, very, very decent persons.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  380. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You stated,
    “Rotation is NOT DEFINED.

    Rotation is a physical phenomenon: a body moving around an axis.”

    Your first sentence contradicts your second sentence. You actually defined rotation.

    Here is another example of re-defining:
    Classical (Newton) gravity has been replaced by General Relativity (GR). Force has been re-defined as geometry (of space). Scientists believe that this is an improvement. (See “Tests of General Relativity” in Wikipedia.) But the most emblematic gravitational phenomenon – attraction between objects – can not be explained by GR. (Geometry does not impart impulse to objects.) So how can GR be an improvement in gravitational theory over classical?

    All the best,
    Joe

  381. WaltC

    Dear Andrea,

    I have two very oddball questions, if you’re willing:

    I assume the plant design for a hot E-cat based plant will be different than the one you’re working on today because of things like water/steam temperature and pressure–

    1) If a 1MW hot E-cat customer came along next (after this current plant is delivered), is the 1MW hot E-cat plant design something that is ready to go?

    In the past I worked with people called “Manufacturability Engineers” (I was in R&D at Bell Labs, they worked for Western Electric). Their job was to make things easier & faster to manufacture and repair– e.g., by reducing part counts, assembly/disassembly steps, increasing mean time to failure, etc.–

    2) Does your team have anyone who’s experienced with Manufacturability of hot water/steam systems somewhat like yours?

    Thanks,
    WaltC

  382. Andrea Rossi

    WaltC:
    1- I think yes, because we have already the single modules and the control system is practically the same, “mutatis mutandis”
    2- Yes
    Anyway, I got what you want to say: send a detailed CV and your address, if you want, to
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    I am curious.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  383. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I have to apologize for extending the discussion on the aether(the devil made me do it). I know that the time you spend replying to our blogs detracts from the time you can spend on your main project. However having spent time on an extended time test(continuous one month duration), I know that when the test is proceeding well, it becomes very boring just monitoring the instruments. My only excuse for doing it is that it may fill some time for you and your readers who religiously follow the JNP at this time when there is little new news published because of your commitments to your customer. These discussions do entertain me greatly while I wait for the good results of your program.
    One experiment I forgot to add to the discussion was the double slit results that seem to require a medium for the electrons to display the interference patterns they display as they pass through the slits. some theorists claim that only a mediating space field can explain the results.
    Now I will keep silent on this subject and await the positive results I am sure will be forthcoming.
    Regards with anticipation.

  384. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    First and foremost, I am delighted to receive your comments as well as all the comments sent to this blog, and I learnt many things from all of you, so that many of you are part of our Team, even if they don’t know. I read very carefully the comments I receive, also when I do not answer.
    This said: some theorists claim that only a mediating space field can explain the results, some do not. Let me make up a model: Relativity and Quantum Theory are enormous and very massive buildings, wherein live and work thousands of persons since decades, but some nostalgics of the old times, before the construction of these enormous and massive buildings, insist to say that the buldings are not real, that the area is still as it was before. In the quest for evidence of their “theory” they search, search, search until they find a hole in a wall; they take picture across the hole to show evidence of the fact that in that very place, where the building was supposed to be, there is nothing, ” look at the photos!!!”.
    The problem is that a hole is not enough to give evidence of the non-existence of the buildings.
    About the 1 MW plant: positive results could be forhcoming, as well as bad results. Let’s put down at work: when I got important results it has happened only because I worked at the maximum of my possibilities. Now I am strongly helped by my magnificent Team, which makes things less difficult.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  385. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    I agree.

    Regards

    Peter

  386. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    You are precious: persons who agree with me are as rare as Chinese Pandas. I will propose you for an international protection apparatus organized by environmental experts. Do you mind?
    ( sorry, but I am on the plant today since 19 hours straight, because we had some problem and I need to joke, obviously not at you, but with you. The plant now is a magnificence, though).
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  387. Patrick Ellul

    Dear Andrea,

    You might have already seen these or similar Electron Microscope photos of fuel for e-cat like reactors.

    Here is the link from the Martin Fleischmann Memoria lProject Page: https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/posts/929920440371989

    Best regards,
    Patrick

  388. Andrea Rossi

    Patrick Ellul:
    Thank you for the interesting link.
    I must say that all these replications are totally independent from us and made with materials that have not been supplied by us.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  389. Wladimir Guglinski

    Even the pseudoscience cannot save the Standard Nuclear Physics

    Joe wrote in February 27th, 2015 at 12:54 AM
    ——————————————————–
    Scientists can define concepts in any way that works for them. Rotation can be re-defined to suit a scientist’s needs.
    ——————————————————–

    Joe,

    the nucleus 3Li6 has spin 1. This means that two protons cancel each other their spins and magnetic moments, and two neutros cancel each other their spins and magnetic moments.

    So, the unmatched proton and the unmatched neutron have parallel spins, responsible for the spin 1 of the 3Li6.

    The proton has magnetic moment +2,793 , and the neutron has -1,913.
    The difference is +0,880
    But the 3Li6 has magnetic moment +0,822

    Therefore, if the 3Li6 had not a classical rotation, would be IMPOSSIBLE to explain the difference between +0,880 and +0,822.

    If you consider that the proton and the neutron form a deuteron within the structure of the 3Li6, we have the following magnetic moments:
    3Li6 = +0,822
    1H2 = +0,857
    So, again there is a difference, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to explain the difference if we do not consider a CLASSICAL rotation of the nucleus.
    After all,
    we know that magnetic moments are induced by CLASSICAL rotations.

    This is the reason why the Nobel Laureate in Physics Hans Bethe said that the nuclei have CLASSICAL rotation. He said that about 10% of the magnetic moment is due to the classical rotation of the nucleus.
    So the difference between +0,857 and +0,822 in the 3Li6 is due to the CLASSICAL rotation of the nucleus.

    But let us suppose that those scientists who had re-defined the concept of rotation claim the following:
    The non-classical rotation proposed by us is also able to induce magnetic moments.

    Then we reply to them:
    In this case, the non-classical rotation also induces magnetic moment in the even-even nuclei with Z=N, due to the rotation of the protons.

    Therefore,
    dear Joe,
    even if the scientists re-define the concept of rotation to suit to their needs, however a new concept of non-classical rotation cannot solve the puzzle of the even-even nuclei with Z =N.

    As you may realize, dear Joe,
    it is impossible to solve the puzzle of the even-even nuclei with Z=N even by a solution proposed from a pseudoscientific attempt, as you had supposed to be possible.

    Sorry,
    even the pseudoscience cannot save the Standard Nuclear Physics.

    regards
    wlad

  390. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 27th, 2015 at 12:54 AM

    1) ———————————————————-
    Scientists can define concepts in any way that works for them. Rotation can be re-defined to suit a scientist’s needs.
    ————————————————————–

    Joe,
    this is not Science

    this is not Physics

    By distorting the Laws of Physics a charlatan scientist can prove anything he wishes.

    By the re-definition of the rotation we can prove that Galileo and Copernicus were wrong, and Ptolomeu was right.

    What the scientists are doing nowadays is pseudoscience.

    A scientific theory is that one which can be proved or disproved by scientific experiments.

    A theory which cannot be disproved by scientific experiments (because the authors of the theory introduce changes and distortions in the well known Laws of Physics replacing them by ad hoc hypothesis so that to fit the theory to new experimental findings) is not a scientific theory, it is actually pseudoscience.

    regards
    wlad

  391. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 27th, 2015 at 12:54 AM

    1) ————————————————-
    Scientists can define concepts in any way that works for them. Rotation can be re-defined to suit a scientist’s needs.
    —————————————————-

    Joe,
    rotation is NOT DEFINED

    Rotation is a physical phenomenon: a body moving around an axis.

    Only a PHYSICAL rotation is able to produce rotational spectra:
    http://scitation.aip.org/content/aapt/journal/ajp/26/2/10.1119/1.1996107

    Phantasmagoric fantasy rotation cannot do it.

    2) ————————————————————–
    You asked,
    “I don’t understand why there is need to name a rotation by the name classical rotation.

    After all, what a hell can be a non-classical rotation???”

    You answered your own question later.
    “[...] of course the scientists will solve the puzzle by proposing a phantasmagoric rotation, like Heisenberg proposed the phantasmagoric concept of Isospin.”
    ——————————————————————–

    No, Joe
    I did not answer.
    If you did not understand, that is only irony.
    I only showed how crazy are the theories of Modern Physics.

    The Standard Nuclear Physics is a scientific fraud

    regards
    wlad

  392. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    Interesting that you bring up infinitesimal calculus. No doubt this has been a useful invention, but I think that it will come a day when it will be regarded as a big mistake. In reality there is nothing infinite or infinitesimally small. It is an approximation that violate reality, and it really is the root cause of the problems physics is in now in my opinion.

    Regards

    Peter Forsberg

  393. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    I think that we must make a relevant distinction between Mathematics and Physics. In Physics, after the Relativity and the Quantum Theory, the “infinite”, as you correctly say, is an error. In Mathematics the infinite exists, as well as the infinitesimal, because Mathematics can be based upon pure conceptual theory, while Physics has to confront with reality through experiments and in reality infinite and infinitesimal do not exist. Conceptually you can divide an apple by half infinitely, and Mathematics can help you to sustain this; in Physics you have to give experimental evidence of what you say, and you discover that you cannot divide infinitely an apple by half, so if in an equation from a Physics theory you end up with results that contain the infinite, you are in error.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  394. Giovanni Guerrini

    Andrea Rossi

    It could be,certainly it is something.

    Regards G G

  395. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni Guerrini:
    I suggest to avoid the word “certainly”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  396. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Can you discuss what some of the challenges are in going to a gas-fueled eCat compared to an electricity heated eCat?

    For example:

    1. The difference in time constant between the application and removal of heat between electric heating and flame?
    2. The difference in heat transfer for gas-fired versus direct electric windings?
    3. The difficulty in providing adequate ventilation for gas-fired system (incoming air)?
    4. The difficulty in exhausting the exhaust products?
    5. The energy efficiency of gas-fired (how much energy goes up the chimney)?

  397. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    None of them.
    The problem is deeper and has its roots in the core of the know how. It is not a problem of heat exchange or of heat conservation. Otherwise, it could have been already resolved.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  398. Giovanni Guerrini

    I’d say:
    between two objects there is space,space is “something”,but it does not mean that it is filled by something else.

    Spaced regards G G

  399. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni Guerrini:
    It doesn’t mean that it is not either…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  400. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    You are learned in the field of philosofy. What do different schools of philosofy say about empty space? Is it not a contradiction of terms to consider space empty? When two object have a distance between them, must it not be something between them that separates them from each other? If there is nothing between the objects, should the distance between the objects not be zero as well?

    Regards

    Peter Forsberg

  401. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    ” The only thing I know is that I do not know” (Socrates).
    This said, in Philosophy there is not a distinction between empty space and filled- with- something- space. If in a certain space there is something, also between the components of this something there will be some space: remember the paradox of the turtle that will never be reached by the fox ? This brings to the infinitesimal calculus, that has been invented by philosophers. My personal opinion is that space and time are anthropocentric concepts: our brain needs the concept of space and time to formulate models that bring to new understandings.
    But again: ” The only thing I know for sure is that I don’t know”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  402. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Scientists can define concepts in any way that works for them. Rotation can be re-defined to suit a scientist’s needs.

    You asked,
    “I don’t understand why there is need to name a rotation by the name classical rotation.

    After all, what a hell can be a non-classical rotation???”

    You answered your own question later.
    “[...] of course the scientists will solve the puzzle by proposing a phantasmagoric rotation, like Heisenberg proposed the phantasmagoric concept of Isospin.”

    All the best,
    Joe

  403. Paul

    Andrea,

    How is the gas-cat doing?

    Paul

  404. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    We are making R&D on it and I am convinced that soon we will have a gas fueled E-Cat.
    Thank you for the queston,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  405. Wladimir Guglinski

    ERRATA:

    Joe,
    I think the solutions 4 and 5 are best if they were the following:

    4- The scientists can avoid the classical zero (any zero value in the Standard Physics sometimes is not zero).

    5- The scientists can avoid the classical null magnetic moment (a null magnetic moment in the Standard Physics sometimes is not null).

    NOTE:
    SOMETIMES means: always when the theories of the Standard Model are contradicted by experiments.

    .

    And I also would suggest to add the 6th and 7th suggestions, Joe:

    6- The scientists can avoid the classical experiments (in the Standard Model a scientific experiment sometimes is not a scientific experiment)

    7- The scientists can avoid the classical scientific measurement ( in the Standard Model a measurement obtained by experiments sometimes is not a measurement).

    regards
    wlad

  406. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 26th, 2015 at 1:55 AM

    Wladimir,

    But scientists would then devise methods that would avoid classical rotation.
    ————————————————————-

    Dear Joe,
    I guess your suggestion is so much radical.

    There are other solutions not so radical as you suggested.
    For instance:

    1 – The scientists can avoid the classical monopolar nature of the electric charge

    2- The scientists can avoid the classical equal quantity Z of protons and N neutrons.

    3- The scientists can avoid the classical even-even nuclei

    4- The scientists can avoid the classical zero (any zero value in the Standard Physics is never zero).

    5- The scientists can avoid the classical null magnetic moment (a null magnetic moment in the Standard Physics is never null).

    .

    All the five solutions above make sense, and all they are more acceptable than to avoid the classical rotation.

    Dont you think so ?

    regards
    wlad

  407. Could you make a guess how much money you will save for the customer who is using the heat? And could you share how many candidate companies were considered for the first installation? Thank you and bets wishes for future success.

  408. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    In the debate between advocates of an empty vaccum space and a space filled with some sort of existing entity, the advocates of an empty space(Einstein Relativists)continually try to negate any evidence used by the advocated of a filled space. There are many experimenters who have offered evidence of a filled space such as the Casimer Effect, Quantum entanglement(requires a medium to effect instantaneous connection between particles and waves), detection of superlumininal energy from distant galaxies and for arguments to explain dark matter and string theory. Dirac for one postulated a space filled with his famous epos each connected to every other existing entity to explain some of the mysteries of an imperfect quantum theory.
    Whatever the case, I’m afraid this debate will go on for a long time since each side has many intelligent scientists and the means to produce unquestioned experimental evidence is with the present day technologies not obtainable. The secret lies, IMHO, within the scope of a unassailable theory of gravity.
    Regards and keep an open mind.

  409. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    I agree upon the fact that it is necessary to maintain an open mind and give room to all the opinions. There is always to learn, also from mistakes. I learnt a lot from my very mistakes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  410. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 26th, 2015 at 1:55 AM

    Wladimir,

    Without the mechanisms of variable aether density and gravitational fluxes n(o) that are found only in QRT, all nuclear models that include a classical rotation of charged nucleons will find it difficult to describe even-even Z = N nuclei which exhibit a null magnetic moment. But scientists would then devise methods that would avoid classical rotation.
    ——————————————————————

    Joe,
    I dont understand why there is need to name a rotation by the name classical rotation

    After all, what a hell can be a non-classical rotation???

    There are two sort of rotation:
    “A rotation is a circular movement of an object around a center (or point) of rotation. A three-dimensional object always rotates around an imaginary line called a rotation axis. If the axis passes through the body’s center of mass, the body is said to rotate upon itself, or spin. A rotation about an external point, e.g. the Earth about the Sun, is called a revolution or orbital revolution, typically when it is produced by gravity”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotation

    There is not such a thing named non-classical rotation

    A body can have rotation, or not.
    Experiments have shown that nuclei have the CLASSICAL ROTATION:

    Rotation of Elongated Atomic Nuclei
    http://scitation.aip.org/content/aapt/journal/ajp/26/2/10.1119/1.1996107

    In the Abstract is said:
    “Many nuclei exhibit rotational spectra much as molecules do.”

    Rotational spectra cannot be produced by some PHANTASMAGORIC “non-classical” rotation.

    .

    But I can understand that,
    as all the nuclear models based on the Standard Model are wrong, and therefore it is impossible to explain the puzzle of the even-even nuclei with Z=N by those models, of course the scientists will solve the puzzle by proposing a phantasmagoric rotation, like Heisenberg proposed the phantasmagoric concept of Isospin.

    .

    In resume,
    the Modern Physics is actually a scientific fraud.

    regards
    wlad

  411. Michael Schneider

    Dear Mister Rossi,

    I was wondering about the realistically achievable compactness of Ecat devices in the future. Today the production of 1 MW heat takes up the space of one shipping container. There probably is no need to rationalise space this beeing a fixed device in a probably rather big facility, and it is rather acessability for easy maintenance that matters.

    But have you started thinking about mobile applications and their inherent need for compactness ? Could a setup for electricity production (for mobile use with batteries and or ultracapicitors) or an ecat harnessed to a steamengine have the same order of total volume as today’s explosion engines ?

    Kind regards,

    Michael S.

  412. Andrea Rossi

    Michael Schneider:
    The E-Cats are more compact than it appears. The reactors of the 1 MW plant have a combined volume of 1 cubic meter. All the remaining space is necessary for the heat exchange and the control system.
    For 10-20 kW units I think the volume will be smaller than in traditional heating systems, while the volume necessary for the heat exchange is the same of any other kind of heaters, since it is a matter of heat exchange surface calculations, independently from the heat source.
    All these problems are on the table of the R&D. The combination with ultra capacitors is interesting, but I do not think it will be something doable in a middle term.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  413. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    Can you say now if the 1 MW plant is working? Is it already producing heat in the factory of the Customer ? Is the Customer making its production using the heat made by the 1 MW plant?
    Now, months after when you said the first time it has been delivered, I hope you can answer to this.

  414. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    1- yes
    2- yes
    3- yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  415. DTravchenko

    Dear Dr Rossi,
    I am very sorry of the fraud made by “indiagogo”, the fraudsters that put fraudolently for sale youe E-Cats. They are not real Russians, believe me, they are trash.
    Continue your important job, we all sustain you.
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  416. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    Fraudsters are everywhere: the mother of the imbeciles is always pregnant: this is a global symmetry and, as such, does not lead to new forces..
    I have enormous esteem for your Country, for Russia.
    When I was a teen ager I have plasmated my brain reading Tolstoj and Dostojevsky, Majakowsky…my mother introduced me to them. You have scientific schools correctly deemed to be among the most prestigious of the world.
    I worked with Russian scientists on the Seebeck effect in the nineties, and there was really to learn from them; I am in contact with top level Russian nuclear physicists and I had the delighting surprise to be informed of the very important work made by Dr Alexander Parkhomov.
    From Andrea, to Russia, with love.
    A.R.

  417. Curiosone

    After the Lugano test results many industries, governments, laboratories and universities have invested in R&D for LENR. Before your work LENR were considered from everybody not worth investments. Thanks to you LENR have got the headlines. How do you feel about these facts?
    W.G.

  418. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I would say that thanks to our Team also the official scientific echelon has got a grip on the LENR issue, as the test of Lugano shows: consider that the scientist who made the independent third party test in Lugano belong to the scientific mainstream, as the history of their life gives evidence of.
    Yes, I agree: our Team does have the merit to have revitalized a sector that had been put apart and reduced to a sect. Honestly, this is the truth.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  419. Jack

    Hello again Mr. Rossi,
    one more question for you.

    Assuming the best scenario for your 1MW plant, at the end of the tests and the R&D, do you think the Customer will come out of anonymity with a public statement?
    Do you have any agreement with the Customer about this?

    I ask this because having a big Customer supporting you and saying publicly that your 1MW plant actually saved them money would be a huge push for the adoption of your E-Cats.

    Thank you again.

  420. Andrea Rossi

    Jack:
    Here is the issues hierarchy:
    1st: work
    2nd: complete the work
    3rd: make the plant confirm for at least 1 year that it works properly, reliably, continuously, without chattering too much, or, better, without chattering at all: our work needs working plants, not chatters.
    LENR will not be launched by sterile chatters moreless theoretical: they will be launched exclusively by a commercial breakthrough. Without it every imbecile will continue to chatter for nothing and theorize about nothing and stupidities said by guys that have nothing better to do will fill up thousands of void theories and innuendos.
    4th: ” assuming the best scenario”, at the end of this year during which I will have sustained work shifts of 16-20 hours per day, I will get rest.
    5th: all the following operations cited by you are the turf of commercial guys, not of me. Obviously we cannot talk on behalf of the Customer and cannot know what he will do about the issue you raised. All I know for sure is :
    a- if the plant will respect the guarantees, the Customer will pay all that is due
    b- if the plant will not respect the guarantees, the Customer will not pay and the plant will be returned.
    All the rest is TDA ( Tongue- Displaced- Air).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  421. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Without the mechanisms of variable aether density and gravitational fluxes n(o) that are found only in QRT, all nuclear models that include a classical rotation of charged nucleons will find it difficult to describe even-even Z = N nuclei which exhibit a null magnetic moment. But scientists would then devise methods that would avoid classical rotation.

    All the best,
    Joe

  422. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    tell us your opinion:

    1- do you think is it possible to solve the puzzle of the null magnetic moment for the even-even nuclei with Z=N, by considering any nuclear model based on the principles of the Standard Nuclear Physics?

    2- In the case your answer is NO,
    do you think there is chance to be correct any nuclear model based on the Standard Model?

    regards
    wlad

  423. Jack

    Hello Mr Rossi,
    you said that “The Customer has a back up, just in case we’d have interruptions”,
    I am a bit curious… did any such interruption happen so far? If yes, how many times and for how long?

  424. Andrea Rossi

    Jack:
    I cannot give information about the particulars of this issue.
    When the tests and the R&D related to the operation of the 1 MW plant supplied to the Customer will have been completed we will give the due information.
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  425. Steve H

    Dear Andrea,

    I have followed and admired your work since early 2011. I am interested in the role of electro-magnetic fields with respect to the Rossi Effect and wondered if you could elaborate on the following questions:-

    1. Do the magnetostrictive properties of Nickel play an important role in the Rossi Effect?
    2. If so, is 3-phase power preferred to single phase – in creating the magnetic field?
    3. If a/c magnetic field, do you see any difference when using European 50Hz to USA 60Hz?

    Best wishes,

    Steve.

  426. Andrea Rossi

    Steve H.:
    I cannot give information regarding what happens inside the reactor.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  427. Paul

    Hello Dr Rossi and am glad to report that the fraudulent eCat Funding website has been removed!

    https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/e-cat-energy-catalyzer

  428. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Very good.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  429. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    As you continue your year-long production testing on your customer’s site, is the customer able to carry on operations normally, or are you interrupting their production activity with your work?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  430. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    The Customer has a back up, just in case we’d have interruptions.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  431. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 24th, 2015 at 4:29 PM

    Wladimir,

    2. Are you saying that the central area of the proton’s body-ring might have radius r = 0 in order to account for the lack of a varying aether density in Sp?
    ————————————————————

    No, Joe,
    obviously the central area cannot have radius r=0.

    I mean to say that there is a central area with radius in order of 3 or 5 fm along which the density of the aether is practically constant.

    A central area with radius r = 0 is shown in the figure ahead (the red line).
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Core_with_10fm_in_the_center_of_nuclei.png
    A density variation of the aether shown in the by the red line makes no sense.

    There is need to have a central area with radius different of zero like shown by the blue line

    regards
    wlad

  432. BroKeeper

    Dear Wladimir,

    Thank you for clarifying the infinite conundrum within theoretical
    physics equations versus more common mathematical equations (I think).
    Again on behalf of us normal’s, Thank you!
    BK

  433. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. How did you determine the exact distribution of Q between Sp and Sn?

    2. Are you saying that the central area of the proton’s body-ring might have radius r = 0 in order to account for the lack of a varying aether density in Sp?

    All the best,
    Joe

  434. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    even if the fields Sn and Sp´have charges with the same value, X=-Y= +1,6×10^-19C, the charges of Sn and Sp will not cancel each other.
    Because the charge of Sp is concentrated in a region with radius in the order of 1fm, while the charge of Sn is distributed along a radius in the order of 10.000fm.
    As the electric charge decreases with the square of the distance, the charge of the field Sp will be very very weak in a distance of the order of 10.000fm.
    So, the electric charge of the proton is q = _1,6×10^-19C.

    The same happens within the nuclei.

    Two charges with the same value and contrary signals can cancel one each other only when they have the same distribution.
    For instance, the field Sn of the neutron is formed by the overlap between the fields Sn of the electron and the field Sn of the proton.
    As the two fields Sn of the proton and electron have the same size (R= 10^-11m), then the charge of the neutron is null.

    regards
    wlad

  435. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, Google:
    WORLD’S LARGEST WIND FARM
    Click on:
    Forbes, World’s would be largest offshore wind farm takes another step forward.
    Robert Curto
    Ft Lauderdale, FL
    USA

  436. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Thank you for the interesting information.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  437. BroKeeper

    An infinite thank yous to you. :)
    BK

  438. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    You are infinitely welcome!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  439. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 24th, 2015 at 12:10 AM

    BroKeeper:
    In Physics the situation is dramatically changed with the Relativity and the Quantum Theory: both made of infinity a nonsense when you are working with equations to resolve problems of Physics.
    ————————————————————————–
    Dear BroKeeper ,
    as Relativity and Quantum Theory are two incomplete theories, since they do not consider a structure for the space (aether), the infinity sometimes appears in the equations.
    In order to solve the puzzle, the theorists introduced a mathematical artifice known as “renormalization”

    The mathematical artifice actually makes no sense, because the quantum theorists use to make subtraction between two infinite quantities..
    For instance:
    5 infinite – 2 infinite = 3 infinite

    Such arithmetic obviously makes no sense, because infinite is infinite. And so 5 infinite is not greater than 3 infinite

    regards
    wlad

  440. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 24th, 2015 at 2:13 AM

    Wladimir,

    1. —————————————————-
    In your new scenario of

    Q = (q of Sp) + (q of Sn)

    Q would have to be measured as +8 for 4Be, for example. But this is obviously not the case in reality.
    ——————————————————————

    Joe,
    you did not understand.

    Sn has charge X = +1,9×10^-19 C
    Sp has charge Y = -0,3×10^-19 C

    The charge of a proton is Q = X + Y = +1,6×10^-19 C

    4Be has 4 protons, and therefore its charge will be +4×1,6×1,6×10^-19 C
    Therefore 4Be has charge +4

    2. ———————————————————-
    Did you not originally have Sp and Sn as having opposite electric charges? If so, the Q of every nucleus would be equal to zero, which is obviously not the case in reality.
    ————————————————————-

    explained in 1

    3. ————————————————————
    Why does only Sn have a varying aether density (in order to always cancel magnetic moment) but not Sp? In your F(M) paradigm, Sp has an aether just like Sn. (Of course, if Sp had a varying aether density too, it too would have a canceled magnetic moment. That would mean a total magnetic moment of zero for every nucleus, which is obviously not the case in reality.)
    —————————————————————

    Joe,
    probably there is a central very small core around the body of the proton (with radius in order of 5fm, where the density of the aether is practically near to constant.
    This can be explained as consequence of the fact that around the body of the proton there is a very high dense field of permeabilitons (see Fig. 2.2 in the present paper).

    Consider a central region C in the center of the proton’s body-ring.
    The density of the aether at the right of the region C and at the left of the point C cannot decrease if the region C has radius zero, because if the radius is zero there is a singularity in the center of the region C.

    regards
    wlad

  441. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. In your new scenario of

    Q = (q of Sp) + (q of Sn)

    Q would have to be measured as +8 for 4Be, for example. But this is obviously not the case in reality.

    2. Did you not originally have Sp and Sn as having opposite electric charges? If so, the Q of every nucleus would be equal to zero, which is obviously not the case in reality.

    3. Why does only Sn have a varying aether density (in order to always cancel magnetic moment) but not Sp? In your F(M) paradigm, Sp has an aether just like Sn. (Of course, if Sp had a varying aether density too, it too would have a canceled magnetic moment. That would mean a total magnetic moment of zero for every nucleus, which is obviously not the case in reality.)

    All the best,
    Joe

  442. BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    All my life the concept of ‘infinity’ has been part of everyday mathematical certainty. Now reading your comment “In Physics when you have an equation that contains the “infinite” means you are in error”. I am now confronted with a paradigm mind-busting concept infinity does not exist. I stumbled across on the same day an article titled “Infinity Is a Beautiful Concept – And It’s Ruining Physics” by physicist Max Tegmark: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2015/02/20/infinity-ruining-physics/. It is a philosophical argument viewing infinity as the “greatest crisis facing modern physics” and appears to mirror your recent comment. Having a Doctor’s Degree in Physics Philosophy yourself, could you shed more light on this controversial principle? Is the infinite time/space concept a convenient way for our limited physical minds to accept this universe? Thanks.
    With much respect, BroKeeper

  443. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    The concept of infinity could need infinite time to talk about it.
    You can find infinite papers talking of it. We must make a distinction related to the field of application of the concept of infinity: it has completely different meaning in Philosophy, in Religion, in Mathematics and in Physics.
    Infinity is an important religious and phylosophical concept, and under a phylosophical and/or religious point of view infinity can help to formulate hypotesis. In Mathematics, obviously, infinity exists and is at the base of mathematical pillars: it is not a case that one of the inventors of the infinitesimal calculus was a philosopher. In Physics the situation is dramatically changed with the Relativity and the Quantum Theory: both made of infinity a nonsense when you are working with equations to resolve problems of Physics.

  444. Robert Curto

    Thanks Steven, for the detailed explanation, I really appreciate it.
    Robert

  445. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 23rd, 2015 at 1:31 PM

    Wladimir Guglinski:

    When in SSM the E-Cat, obviously, in terms of Physics has a consumption that makes a nonsense the infinite. During the SSM the COP is quite high. To put a zero below the line of fraction is a nonsense.
    ————————————————————-

    Dear Andrea
    actually the definition of COP in terms of Physics is wrong (or insatisfactory, if you prefer this word), because the COP is defined regarding a close system, where the energy stored in the space is not considered.

    In order to get the correct COP for the eCat working in the self sustained mode there is need a new definition of the COP, by considering the energy stored in the space.
    The zero below the line of fraction becomes non-zero

    regards
    wlad

  446. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 23rd, 2015 at 2:17 PM

    Wladimir,

    Sn can not act as a Faraday shield to Sp since electricitons are not the equivalent of electrons. With the Faraday shield, an electric field induces a flow of electrons, preventing the electric field from extending further beyond the shield. But an electric field could not induce a flow of electricitons since an electric field would actually be composed of electricitons. Therefore, the electric field of Sp could not be prevented from extending beyond Sn.
    ———————————————————-

    Joe,
    suppose the following:

    1- The outer field Sn of the proton has charge X
    2- The inner field Sp´of the proton has charge Y
    3- The total charge of the proton is q = X+Y = 1,6×10^-19 Coulomb

    A nucleus with Z quantity of protons has:

    a- the outer total field Sn with charge Z.X
    b- the inner total field of protons with charge Z.Y
    c- and therefore the total charge of the nucleus is q = Z.(X+Y) = Z.(1,6X10^-19)Coulomb

    Therefore,
    what the experiments measure is actually the the total electric charge composed by Sn and Sp.

    When the proton is moving about the central 2He4 of a nucleus, the magnetic moment induced by the proton depends on the direction of the flux n(o) regarding the z-axis:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Two_protons_symmetric_captured_by_central_2He4.png
    The flux n(o) crossing the proton in the side Douglas is UP, while in the side Ana the flux n(o) crossing the proton is DOWN.

    .

    In the case of the electron, its charge is q = X+Y = 1,6×10^-19 Coulomb, where X is the charge of the outer field Sn, and Y is the charge of the inner field Sp.

    regards
    wlad

  447. Steven N. Karels

    Robert,

    I will try to answer your questions.

    a. How much does 8000 gallons of diesel cost? Assume the price is around $3.00USD per gallon. $24,000USD
    b. Fuel cost per hour: $24,000USD / 8 hours = $3,000USD per hour.
    c. Type of fuel eCat needs for heating: See Andrea Rossi – natural gas or electricity or maybe something else.
    d. How much energy is needed (excluding heat losses): heat of fusion for water plus heat needed to raise the thawed water to “warm water”. Convert the 180 tons to metric and apply heat of fusion and heat to raise the temperature. This will be how much energy per hour is needed. Then convert it to Watts. I estimated around 3.3 MW of heating was required.
    e. Next assume a design COP: e.g., 3, 6 or some other number. Divide the power level obtained in d. by the COP. This tells you how much input energy is needed (e.g., natural gas or electricity).
    f. Regardless of COP, some additional electrical energy will be required for control, display and running pumps, etc.
    g. Cost to operate: Add the fuel replacement costs (eCat) plus the input energy costs and compare it with the costs in b.
    h. Operating time: depends on the city location and the amount of snow. eCat works best when operated continuously (days, weeks or months at a time). But the city will want the snow removed quickly so the operating time may be very limited. A detailed cost analysis is needed before applying this technology.
    i. External energy type: It is probably more convenient to use diesel or other portable fuel rather than electricity. Where do you plug in for 3.3 MW/COP of electricity? Control electrical power could be provided by a portable generator.

  448. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Sn can not act as a Faraday shield to Sp since electricitons are not the equivalent of electrons. With the Faraday shield, an electric field induces a flow of electrons, preventing the electric field from extending further beyond the shield. But an electric field could not induce a flow of electricitons since an electric field would actually be composed of electricitons. Therefore, the electric field of Sp could not be prevented from extending beyond Sn.

    All the best,
    Joe

  449. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 23rd, 2015 at 5:53 AM

    Steven N. Karels:
    In Physics when you have an equation that contains the “infinite” means you are in error. I agree with you and Robert that this field of application could be particularly fit.
    —————————————————–

    The equations get infinite, of course, when we consider the space as empty.
    Because as an empty space cannot store energy, the equation gives infinite.

    But when we consider the space filled by aether, we get a value different of infinite, since energy is being supplied by the aether.

    But I am curious, dear Andrea:
    when the Ecat is working in the self-sustained model, what is the value of the COP?

    regards
    wlad

  450. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    You consider the space filled by aether, not me, therefore our conclusions follow a different logic.
    When in SSM the E-Cat, obviously, in terms of Physics has a consumption that makes a nonsense the infinite. During the SSM the COP is quite high. To put a zero below the line of fraction is a nonsense.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  451. Robert Curto

    Steven, first I want to thank you for your response.
    Snow Dragon is the name of the company I am talking about.
    You can go on their website, They are very good at responding to emails.
    We have exchanged 17 emails, Jennifer has responded to all of my emails in about one hour.

    The snow melt machine that can melt 180 tones per hour ( 600 to 1,800 cubic yards ) per hour has a 3,000 gallon Tank for diesel.
    It lasts 8 to 9 hours !
    It does not require very hot water as I said, it talks about warm water.

    If you have time to help me with my limited knowledge, I would appreciate it.
    I understand you need electric power for the pumps etc.
    I THINK you said you need diesel or national gas to run the E-Cat ?
    This is what I THINK I know about one E-Cat.
    It’s fuel is a small amount of low cost nickel, hydrogen gas, and a secret catalysis. The fuel is replaced after 6 months.
    I understand it will take hundreds of E-Cats to warm the water to melt the snow.
    But I am trying to compare the cost of the fuel.
    How much does 3,000 gallons of diesel cost…..every 8 hours ?
    Robert Curto

  452. Steven N. Karels

    Robert,

    That is not correct. I was suggesting that, perhaps, Andrea Rossi might find a way for the eCat reaction to only require an energy source during initial start-up and then either none or minimal additional thermal energy during continuous operation. This is effectively the same as having the so called COP become very high (or infinite). There would still be a need for some electrical input for pumps, controls and indications, etc.

  453. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    In Physics when you have an equation that contains the “infinite” means you are in error. I agree with you and Robert that this field of application could be particularly fit.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  454. Robert Curto

    Steven, am I correct ?
    The E-Cat does not need natural gas or diesel to produce heat.
    It produces heat with it’s own fuel.
    Robert Curto

  455. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 21st, 2015 at 2:09 PM

    Wladimir,

    1. You state,
    “The charge of the field Sp of each proton is not detectable.”

    But this can not be true in your F(M) model which includes electricitons (and magnetons) within Sp. Since magnetic moment due to the magnetons of Sp is detectable, electric charge must logically also be detectable due to lack of symmetry in the distribution of electricitons within the Sp of nuclei that are not even-even Z=N.
    —————————————————————-

    NO, Joe,
    there is difference between the way of the electricitons and magnetons be captured.

    Look at the fields of the proton:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_1-_3_fields_of_the_proton.png

    In the magnetic fields M(+) and M(-), the magnetons are bound thanks to the their interaction with the field of permeabilitons involving the body-ring of the proton (see Fig. 2.2 in the present paper).
    So, the magnetic field is able to spread in the space, without being blocked by the outer electric field Sn of the proton, formed by electricitons e(+) captured by the flux n(o).

    But as the outer electric field Sn is formed by electricitons e(+) captured by, the electric charge of the inner electric field are blocked.
    The phenomenon happens similar to the Faraday cage:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage
    “A Faraday cage or Faraday shield is an enclosure formed by conductive material or by a mesh of such material. Such an enclosure blocks external static and non-static electric fields by channeling electricity through the mesh.
    Faraday cages cannot block static or slowly varying magnetic fields”

    The Faraday cage cannot block magnetic fields because the magnetons of the magnetism are spread in the space thanks to the permeability given by the permeabilitons of the aether.

    Therefore,
    the electricity and the magnetism spread in the space via two different mechanisms.

    .

    When a nucleus is aligned by an external magnetic field (produced in experiments), the outer electric field Sn of the nucleus takes the non-spherical shape shown in the figure:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE1.png

    When a nucleus is not aligned by an external magnetic field, due to the chaotic rotation of the nucleus the outer electric field Sn takes the shape of a spherical field, as shown ahead for the 2He4 nucleus:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Calaon-guglinski-FIGURE2.png
    All the inner electric fields Sp of the protons wihin a nucleus are blocked by that outer spherical electric field Sn involving the nucleus.

    In the case of the even-even nuclei with Z=N, as they have null magnetic moment, they cannot be aligned by an external field, and therefore their outer field Sn is spherical and involves completely the nucleus, and it works similar to a Faraday cage, blocking all the inner electric charges Sp of the protons.

    regards
    wlad

  456. Steven N. Karels

    Robert and Andrea Rossi,

    My rough calculations indicated that 3 or 4 MW eCat units could melt the 180 Tons per hour of snow to water. So the sizing is not too distant from your current machine. Probably should use natural gas or diesel as the heat source (assuming the eCat is not self-sustaining). Probably a very good candidate as the application would be a slow start-up and long duration – ideal for eCat technology. Trucks would bring the snow to a location near a natural river and the melted water returned to the environment. Please consider it.

  457. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Could be an interesting field of application.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  458. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 21st, 2015 at 2:29 PM

    2. A neutron does not necessarily need to be bound by the gravitational flux n(o). It can also be bound by a spin-interaction as is the usual case in the F(M) paradigm.
    ————————————————–

    Joe,
    in the 3Li7 of the figure:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE-8-substitute3Li7-28Ni.png
    the neutron is bound by spin-interaction because it is the unique possibility, since as the neutron has no electric charge, it cannot have interaction by the magnetic F(M) force.

    But in the case of a 3Li7 having possibility to be bound by strong force and by spin-interaction force, the neutron must be bound by the stronger of the two forces, which is the strong force.

    regards
    wlad

  459. Dr Rossi:
    When in the academic world will be possible to have a paper regarding the theory behind your effect?

  460. Andrea Rossi

    Remona:
    I am working also on that with a major nuclear physicist. With all the limitations due to the restricted matter.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  461. Robert Curto

    Steven, February 22 at 4:23A
    I agree with you 100%
    The snow melting machines today run on Diesel fuel, or if it is available on natural gas.
    The last thing you want to do is add more emissions in the middle of a city,
    24 hours a day.
    They heat water very hot, that is used to melt the snow. They have to keep the water very hot.
    Some of the large machines can melt 180 tons per hour.
    Plus i believe the fuel cost of an E-Cat will be a lot less expensive.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    USA

  462. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    A self-sustaining eCat heating unit to melt snow would be very useful here in the Northeast of the US. We have had so much snow that our snowblowers can barely move the snow to the high snow mounds. Perhaps another future consumer product?

  463. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Well, this is an application that could fit the E-Cat, as every situation in which you need heat. Nevertheless, plowing apart, snow is what gives to New Hampshire part of its beauty. I used to make jogging on the iced surface of the Massabesic Lake in this season: so fascinating…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  464. Sverre Haslund

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    The Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) has this article & presentation of the JTEC on their website:
    http://www.parc.com/event/713/high-efficiency-solid-state-engine.html

    Best regards

    Sverre Haslund

  465. Andrea Rossi

    Sverre Haslund:
    Got it.
    Interesting, but still at a very “green” stage: we need consolidated, reliable and available technologies, with economy scale prices and operative costs. The invention of Lonnie Johnson is still at the beginning of a process that will take at least 5 years ( as I see it, on the base of my experience) before generating a full scale working prototype and at least 10 years before producing an industrial product. Provided it works, as I wish to the Inventor. When a product will be ready, we will be enthusiast to test it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  466. Sverre Haslund

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Are you aware of the Johnson Thermoelectric Energy Conversion System (JTEC) ?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_thermoelectric_energy_converter

    With a heat to electricity energy conversion efficiency of as much as 60%, would not this invention, if commercialized, be a perfect match with the e-cat ?

    Best regards and godspeed.

    Sverre Haslund

  467. Andrea Rossi

    Sverre Haslund:
    Thank you for your important information, that I stupidly had missed to get.
    I surely study it. If it is as you say, is important.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  468. Andrea Rossi

    AlainCo:
    Thermionic generation is very interesting, but we did not find yet an industrialized product ready to work with acceptable efficiency.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  469. Joe

    Wladimir,

    2. A neutron does not necessarily need to be bound by the gravitational flux n(o). It can also be bound by a spin-interaction as is the usual case in the F(M) paradigm.

    All the best,
    Joe

  470. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. You state,
    “The charge of the field Sp of each proton is not detectable.”

    But this can not be true in your F(M) model which includes electricitons (and magnetons) within Sp. Since magnetic moment due to the magnetons of Sp is detectable, electric charge must logically also be detectable due to lack of symmetry in the distribution of electricitons within the Sp of nuclei that are not even-even Z=N.

    All the best,
    Joe

  471. Dear Dot. Rossi,

    Did you study, at least on paper, the idea to use Thermionic converters. It seems Soviet used rugged thermionic converters (like in TOPAZ).
    The temperature of Lugano’s E-cat are inside the usual working temperature (1500-2000K), but like for steam it is probably not so simple …
    Are there reasons to reject that idea?

  472. Andrea Rossi

    IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO ALL OUR READERS:
    ATTENTION: ANOTHER FRAUDOLENT SALE OF E-CATS HAS BEEN PUT ON THE INTERNET.
    THE BOGUS WEBSITE IS:

    https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/e-cat-energy-catalyzer

    THEY PROPOSE THE SALE OF E-CATS AND ASK MONEY IN ADVANCE TO PRE-BUY THEM.
    THIS IS A TOTAL FRAUD.
    WE DO NOT KNOW THEM, WE NEVER HEARD OF THEM BEFORE ( I HAVE BEEN INFORMED RIGHT NOW OF THIS FRAUD), THEY HAVE NO AGREEMENT WHATSOEVER WITH US, WE ARE NOT SELLING DOMESTIC ECATS, THE PHOTOGRAPHIES PUBLISHED IN THIS FRAUDOLENT SITE ARE TOTALLY INVENTED AND NEVER PRODUCED BY US. WE WILL NEVER SELL THEM ANY OF OUR PRODUCTS, THEREFORE IF YOU GIVE THEM MONEY TO BUY OUR PRODUCTS YOUR MONEY WILL BE TOTALLY LOST FROM YOU.
    IN GENERAL, DO NOT GIVE MONEY TO ANYBODY THAT SAYS THAT HE CAN SELL YOU OUR PRODUCTS BEFORE INFORMING US WHO HE IS: WE WILL IMMEDIATELY INFORM YOU ABOUT THE REALITY. ANYBODY WHO ASKS YOU MONEY IN ADVANCE TO BUY A DOMESTIC E-CAT IS A FRAUDSTER: WE DO NOT ASK MONEY IN ADVANCE TO MAKE A PRE-ORDER AND WE DO NOT SELL DOMESTIC E-CATS.
    IN CASE OF INDUSTRIAL PLANTS, ALWAYS ASK US CONFIRMATION THAT THE PERSON THAT IS OFFERING YOU ANYTHING IS AN AUTHORIZED LICENSEE.
    YOU CAN PUT YOUR QUESTIONS TO
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    I BEG ALL THE BLOGGERS THAT TALK OF OUR WORK TO REPRODUCE THIS MESSAGE, TO HELP TO AVOID THAT HONEST PERSONS GET THEIR MONEY STOLEN FROM THESE FRAUDSTERS.
    WARM REGARDS
    DR ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORPORATION (CEO)

  473. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    thanks for the photos of the plant of 1 MW published on your Official Web Site.
    If possible we would like to see more …
    http://andrea-rossi.com/

    http://fusionefredda3.com/novita/andrea-rossi-ci-regala-nuove-foto-dellimpianto-da-1mw

  474. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Those photos have been allowed because taken months ago in the factory of Industrial Heat.
    Photos from the plant in operation will not be available until the end the tests and R&D we are making on it inside the factory of the Customer of Industrial Heat.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  475. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 20th, 2015 at 6:10 PM

    1. ——————————————————-
    Do not worry about specific calculations. It is important that the theoretical foundation is logical.
    ———————————————————-

    Joe,
    by considering gravity (strong force) interaction between nucleons introduces some phylosophical inconsistences.

    For instance, the 3Li7 has only one neutron, and it is weakly bound.
    If you consider the binding energy due to strong force, the neutron and the deuteron of the 3Li7 would be bound to the central 2He4 with the same force.
    But the neutron is weakly bound.
    See the structure of the 3Li7:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE-8-substitute3Li7-28Ni.png

    If the neutron were bound by strong force, the 3Li7 could not have the structure shown in the figure.

    4. ———————————————————
    A possibility might exist where the gravitational fluxes n(o) are actually color charges. In standard theory, there are three colors and three anti-colors.
    ————————————————————

    Joe,
    in the case there is need to consider the color charges for explaining how quarks are bound, then there is need to introduce three additional particles to the structure of the aether, beyond those proposed in my present paper.
    Beyond the particles e(+), m(+), p(+), P(+), g(+), G(+), and their antiparticles, there is need to introduce more the particles R(+), Y(+), B(+), and their antiparticles (red, yellow, blue).

    The structure will be:

    e(+), m(+), p(+), P(+), g(+), G(+), R(+), Y(+), B(+)
    e(-), m(-), p(-), P(-), g(-), G(-), R(-), Y(-), B(-)

    regards
    wlad

  476. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 21st, 2015 at 2:27 AM

    Wladimir,

    1) ———————————————————-
    You state,
    “[...] only the outer secondary field is detected in macroscopic experiments.”

    If that were true, why would we be detecting magnetic moment emanating from Sp and only from Sp? The problem here is that you have organized your model in order to account for a null magnetic moment in the case of even-even Z=N nuclei, ignoring that in non-null cases, an electric charge would then also necessarily be detectable even within your paradigm of fluxes-influencing-charge-at-the-level-of-Sp.
    —————————————————-

    No, Joe,
    I am not ignoring them.
    We are not speaking about charges, we are speaking about magnetic moments.

    There are two sort of magnetic moments generated by each proton within the field Sp:

    1- The magnetic moment induced by the rotation of the charge of the proton about the z-axis of the nucleus.
    In the case of even-even nuclei with Z=N the total magnetic moment is zero, because two symmetric protons cancel each other their magneti fields (but not in the case of other nuclei with Z different of N, and they contribute for the total magnetic moment of the nucleus).

    2-The magnetic moment induced by the spin of each proton (equal to +2,793). It is the magnetic moment which contributes for the total magnetic moment of the nucleus.

    2) ——————————————————–
    And since that electric charge at the level of Sp would be detectable, it would also necessarily be added to the electric charge found in Sn to give a final electric charge that guaranteed is wrong by empirical standards. In short, in order to save magnetic moments in your F(M) paradigm, you have unknowingly sacrificed electric charge.
    ————————————————————–

    The charge of the field Sp of each proton is not detectable.
    The outer secondary electric field Sn is induced by the rotation of the flux n(o) of the principal field Sp of each proton.

    regards
    wlad

  477. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You state,
    “[...] only the outer secondary field is detected in macroscopic experiments.”

    If that were true, why would we be detecting magnetic moment emanating from Sp and only from Sp? The problem here is that you have organized your model in order to account for a null magnetic moment in the case of even-even Z=N nuclei, ignoring that in non-null cases, an electric charge would then also necessarily be detectable even within your paradigm of fluxes-influencing-charge-at-the-level-of-Sp. And since that electric charge at the level of Sp would be detectable, it would also necessarily be added to the electric charge found in Sn to give a final electric charge that guaranteed is wrong by empirical standards. In short, in order to save magnetic moments in your F(M) paradigm, you have unknowingly sacrificed electric charge.

    All the best,
    Joe

  478. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    I drew a picture, in order you may understand easily my explanation in the previous comment:

    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Two_protons_symmetric_captured_by_central_2He4-1.png

    regards
    wlad

  479. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 20th, 2015 at 6:10 PM

    Wladimir,

    3. Magnetic moments that are induced by the rotation of electric charge are independent of the gravitational fluxes n(o). We see this clearly at the macroscopic level where the direction of rotation is the only factor deciding the orientation of magnetic moments. Gravitational fluxes n(o) do not exist at this level.
    ———————————————————–

    Joe,
    the situation in the macroscopic leve is different. The charge is monopolar in the macroscopic level.

    In the microscopic level, there is need to consider two fields produced by each proton in that nucleus 4Be6 shown in the figure:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Two_protons_symmetric_captured_by_central_2He4.png

    The two fields are:

    1- The outer total secondary electric field of the nucleus 4Be6:
    It is formed by the overlap of the 4 secondary fields of the 4 protons. It is responsible for the Coulomb electric charge of the 4Be6.
    The direction of the flux n(o) of the protons has NOT influence in this total field of the 4Be6, and this is the reason why the electric charge of the 4Be6 is monopolar.

    2- The inner principal electric field of each proton:
    The signal of the magnetic moment induced by the rotation of this principal field depends on the direction of the flux n(o).
    Such property of the inner principal field cannot be detected, because only the outer secondary field is detected in macroscopic experiments.

    regards
    wlad

  480. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. Do not worry about specific calculations. It is important that the theoretical foundation is logical.

    2. There is no reason why any neutron must necessarily be retained by gravitational fluxes n(o). You have already given examples of deuterons having spin-interaction with more than one neutron. I even asked you what the upper limit is for the ratio of neutrons-to-deuterons, and you replied that you had not considered it.

    3. Magnetic moments that are induced by the rotation of electric charge are independent of the gravitational fluxes n(o). We see this clearly at the macroscopic level where the direction of rotation is the only factor deciding the orientation of magnetic moments. Gravitational fluxes n(o) do not exist at this level.

    4. A possibility might exist where the gravitational fluxes n(o) are actually color charges. In standard theory, there are three colors and three anti-colors. These might correspond to three Douglas fluxes and three Ana fluxes. They would be responsible for holding the quarks together. And a spillover of these strong fluxes would be responsible for holding nucleons together; these would be the residual fluxes that you are always discussing. The orbiting nucleons would actually be continually relayed from one color/anti-color flux pair to another. The present calculations would remain unaltered.

    All the best,
    Joe

  481. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Andrea,
    I have a few questions about the electrical energy production:
    - did you use a Turbine, a Sterling Engine or a Steam Engine?
    - has the thermal energy been produced solely from the LENR source (E-Cat/H-Cat), or the LENR was added to a chemical source?
    - Have you used a series of E-Cat and H-Cat to heat the fluid (if any)?
    Warm/Hot regards
    Andrea Calaon

  482. Andrea Rossi

    Andrea Calaon:
    As I already said, I cannot give further information regarding this issue. We will talk about electric power when we will deem our R&D to be mature for the market.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  483. John

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    Is the now confirmed production of electricity–however preliminary–something that was achieved very recently, say in the past few months? I believe this is the first time that you have confirmed electricity production from the Hot Cat!

    Best Regards,

    John

  484. Andrea Rossi

    John:
    I confirm that in our work of R&D we have also made experiments related to the production of electric power. I cannot give information of our R&D work, until we procuce something really working in a satisfactory mode.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  485. Wladimir Guglinski

    Monopolar nature of the electric charge

    Dear Joe,
    there is a serious problem with my present paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism.

    Because in the paper Stability of Light Nuclei I had considered the interaction between the nucleons via magnetic force. I made several calculations in that paper, the stability of the nuclei was explained very well, the calculations of magnetic moments were agree to the experimental data, that model was able to explain the halo neutron of the Be11, etc.

    By considering the nucleons bound via gravity (strong force) there is no way to explain the properties of the light nuclei (for instance, there is no way to explain why 3Li8 is no stable, since the eighth neutron would be bound via strong force.

    So:
    1- There is need to keep the hypothesis that protons are bound within the nuclei via magnetic force, as considered in the paper Stability of Light Nuclei

    2- The reason why the even-even nuclei with Z=N have null magnetic moment must be explained from another mechanism of that proposed in the present paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism.

    I was thinking about the question, and I think the puzzle must be solved as I explain ahead.

    Look at the figure showing two protons captured by a central 2He4. The proton in the side Douglas has spin-up, and the proton in the side Ana has spin-down:

    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Two_protons_symmetric_captured_by_central_2He4.png

    But note that the flux n(o) crossing the proton in the side Douglas is UP, while in the side Ana the flux n(o) crossing the proton is DOWN.

    Then we have to conclude that a magnetic moment induced by an elementary electric charge (as the charge of the proton) depends on the direction of the flux n(o) crossing the particle, regarding the axis of rotation of the particle.

    Therefore, the two electric charges of the two protons shown in the figure induce two magnetic moments with contrary signals, and therefore they cancel one each other.

    .

    Joe,
    no matter what is the solution for solving the puzzle by considering a nuclear model working with the particles of the aether, however there is an important point to be considered:

    IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO SOLVE THE PUZZLE BY SUPPOSING THE HYPOTHESIS OF THE EMPTY SPACE, AS IS CONSIDERED FOR THE WHOLE NUCLEAR MODELS BASED ON THE STANDARD MODEL.

    The puzzle can be solved only by considering a structure for the space.

    regards
    wlad

  486. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi. You have written:
    “…also to prepare the industrial production of the other versions; the roots are the same…”

    You mean, I suppose, another plant using Hot-Cats instead of low temperature E-Cats.

    If it is correct, I think that this new plant could be dedicated to production of electric energy.
    Am I right?

    Hot Regards,
    Italo R.

  487. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    Probably
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  488. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    Thanks for answering my question although I am still left a little unclear.

    1) During your R&D can you confirm that you have produced electricity using the e-cat?

    2) If so, have you recycled the electricity into controlling the e-cat creating a closed loop or is that in the future?

    Many Thanks – especially for the pictures, it gives us all something to chew over :)

  489. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    1- yes, but still at R&D primary stage level.
    2- no
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  490. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: After the third party test showed amazing isotopic changes I am wondering if you have made similar isotopic tests on your research reactors or the industrial reactor. Of course I do not expect you to give us the results but just a confirmation that the isotopic changes the third party reported were not a fluke or error would help us E-Caters. Thanks again for this site and the recent pictures and answering our questions.

  491. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    We re studying the theoretical issues deriving from the report, that obviously is correct.

    We are making intense theoretical work on the results and we are making a reconciliation, but so far we are not ready to give further information about this issue, which is also bound to restricted data.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  492. Patrick Ellul

    Dear Andrea,

    The 1MW plant at the customer is made up of the normal (low temperature) e-cats.

    When do you think you will have a hot-cat operating at a customer and what is the current hold-up for this to happen?

    Best regards,
    Patrick

  493. Andrea Rossi

    Patrick Ellul:
    This year will be spent mainly with the R&D and tests with this plant also to prepare the industrial production of the other versions; the roots are the same.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  494. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Do the types of control systems you use in the 1MW plant in the photographs you published also work for Hot Cats?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  495. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Substantially, I would say yes, with some different particular.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  496. Giannino Ferro Casagrande

    Egregio e stimatissimo signor Andrea , mi complimento pure io per le foto che avete postato , in relazione al lavoro del mega impianto per la ditta Statunitense che darà il via , si spera presto , a tutta una serie di E-Cat , grandi e piccoli . Riconosco pure , dalle foto , il tecnico informatico che ho avuto il piacere di conoscere quando siete stati a Pordenone . Rimango pure particolarmente soddisfatto per il problema che Le avevo si da subito esternato al riguardo “ l’ELEMENTO “ di pericolosità , pure evidenziato dal TOM CONOVER . Sono sempre in attesa dei due E-Cat che ho in ordine ed anzi con questa mia vorrei poter aggiungere altri due in ordine !!!
    Saluti cordiali da Giannino di Udine ;-) )

  497. Andrea Rossi

    Giannino Ferro Casagrande:
    Thank you for your kind words; for the domestic E-Cats we are working very hard.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  498. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, Google:
    consumption by fuel in 2035
    Click on:
    Fuel Fix US energy production will surpass consumption
    They expect Renewable Energy to be 8% by 2035.

    They have never even heard of E-Cat.
    Will E-Cat be ZERO 20 years from today ?
    I don’t think so.
    If E-Cat is less expensive then any of the others, has ZERO emissions,
    has ZERO waste, where will they put their money ?
    I will only give you one guess !
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale FL
    USA

  499. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Let’s work humbly to make our technology consolidated by means of the R&D and tests on course. After that we’ll see all the possible integrations.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  500. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    I haven’t heard much mention of electricity generation in a while now you are concentrated on the 1MW plant. I wonder if you can answer the following question…

    Have you ever managed to generate electricity from an e-cat (either via connecting to a turbine or other forms of electricity generation, perhaps thermoelectric). Even if it was a small test on your own to confirm it could be done?

    Has there been any advancements you can speak of with regards to electricity generation now you have additional help? I know you were looking into jet engines

    Thanks

    Mark

  501. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    Yes, electric power generation is one of the main R&D fields we are going through. We are oriented toward the classic Carnot Cycle, even if we are totally open to new commercial breakthroughs related to other systems.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  502. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Andrea,
    were the pictures of the plant assembly taken around April 2014?
    Thank you for the pictures!
    Warm regards
    Andrea Calaon

  503. Andrea Rossi

    Andrea Calaon:
    I didn’t make the photos, so I do not remember well, but maybe.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  504. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    I am sending an interesting article on LENR.

    http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150000549.pdf
    The Application of LENR to Synergistic Mission Capabilities
    Douglas P. Wells*
    NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23602
    Dimitri N. Mavris†
    Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0150

    27 February 2015 in Milan will host a major event.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO69VeHQT-0&feature=youtu.be

    Here is also a very well documented video broadcast on the Italian TV some years ago, also available on YouTube clicking here: in 2004 ENEL analyzed the opportunity to participate in the research program on LENR carried out, in Italy, by the ENEA (at the time, the Italian “National Agency for Alternative Energies”) at its laboratories in Frascati, near Rome, under the supervision of Carlo Rubbia, Nobel Laureate for Physics in 1984.

    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/enel-early-refusal-towards-lenr/

  505. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the interesting information,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  506. Dear Mr. Rossi,

    maybe you heard of the rumors that Apple is planning to develop electric cars.
    Do you think they know of the possibilities of your technology?

    Thanks for you work!
    barty

  507. Andrea Rossi

    Barty:
    Maybe in future.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  508. Andrea Rossi

    Observer ( Paul):
    Now I understand what you wanted to say in your former comment; what you see in the photo is a work on course, the plant was not completed; the situation is much more complex and the position of the piping has precise reasons; nevertheless, thank you for your suggestion, that will be taken in due consideration: your experience is precious.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  509. Tom Conover

    Dear Andrea.

    The photographs are wonderful! Your team members look very happy. Thank you very much for these gifts. I am also glad to hear that you have removed the element of personal danger from the naysayers, who’s chatter has grown very distant lately. :-)

    100°C Regards

    Tom

  510. Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    Thank you. Now we must make that magnificence continue to work well for a long time, to make it a real breakthrough. We are in front of an enormous work of tests and R&D; I am very hopeful, thanks mainly to my Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  511. Observer

    Andrea,

    Not to be critical, but in the one photo with you standing in a walkway, an insulated pipe runs down the length of the walkway and appears to cross the walkway path in the back ground of the photo. The storage container seems to have plenty of head room. Placing a false floor in the storage container would increase routing options for both plumbing and conduit, and provide emergency drainage if anything sprung a leak.

    Paul

  512. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Thank you for the photos. They are indeed a wonderful gift and appreciated. I fully understand your position on information disclosure and as I have previously stated, I would have done the same if I were in your shoes. I would just caution you to be wary of other interested parties since some of them may not have your interests at heart.
    All the best regards

  513. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  514. curwin

    Andrea,

    The drawing of the cat silhouette & red dot shown in a couple of the photos is very pleasing somehow. New company logo or just a bit of fun?

  515. Andrea Rossi

    Curwin:
    It is our registered trade mark.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  516. eernie1

    Koen,
    Every day the E-Cat is delayed is worth billions to the oil industry. To them a few million dollars spent to achieve this purpose is chicken feed. The suppression of a product introduction is a common tactic in the auto industry. As an example, the introduction of seat belts and other safety features were delayed for financial reasons, causing needless loss of life.
    Delaying the introduction of a better product until the existing inventory of shelf product is depleted is a common practice. If I were an owner of fossil fuel of any kind, this delay is a welcome event.
    Regards.

  517. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    It is necessary to complete the tests of the 1 MW plant operating in the factory of IH’s Customer. The final results could be positive, but also negative. For now we have just to work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  518. John

    Dear Andrea,

    Why publish the photos now, when there’s still possibly a year of testing to go? Can we expect some more news or updates in the near future?

    Best Regards,

    John

  519. Andrea Rossi

    John:
    I wanted to make a gift to our Readers. Obviously on course of the tests that we are making something will change, but the scope of the photos is not to disclose particulars that we deem critical.
    The plant is much more complex than appears in the photos, but they give an idea of the thing, though. No more photos will be produced until the tests will be finished.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  520. Paul

    Andrea,

    I congratulate you on your E-Cat 1 MW plant design.
    May I suggest, in the next generation, you use a raised grating floor in the shipping container so you do not have to step over your plumbing and cabling.

    Paul

  521. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    What do you mean? We have not to step over plumbing and cabling with the plant in operation.
    Maybe I am not understanding. Can you rephrase? When the plant is operating all the doors are closed, nobody has to stay inside. We monitor everuthing from the computers.
    Warm Regards,
    Andrea

  522. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Thank you sharing these very interesting pictures! A couple of questions if you don’t mind:

    a)Is all the activity we see in the pictures taking place inside one large container?
    b) Two of the units shown have names written on them: “Cindy” and “Wendy” — does each reactor have its own name?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  523. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    a) No, the activity of manufactiring in the photos is taken inside a factory in Raleigh
    b) Yes, to make it easier our Team gave a name to every reactor. Some names are very funny.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  524. Peter

    Wow! The new 1 MW plant is a beauty! I like the red color!

    Is there a lot of more free space inside the container now (room for a small work shop?) or is it just that the photos were taken during assembly?

    By the way, do you still use a genset to power the new plant or can it run from the grid?

    Best regards,
    Peter

  525. Andrea Rossi

    Peter:
    It was that the photo has been taken during the assembly, many hi-tech parts are missing in the photo.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  526. eernie1

    Robert,
    Before the patent expired, a black market generic drug would be manufactured in limited quantities and could be obtained through foreign sources. When the IP(patent)expired many companies then began producing the drug much cheaper and in unlimited quantities.

  527. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    Is this the new 1MW plant?

    http://andrea-rossi.com/1mw-plant/

    How old are these photos? Did you agree to have them published?

    Looking Good!

  528. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    These photos, published on my personal website, have been made months ago in Raleigh’s factory, during the final phases of the manufacturing .
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  529. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Are these pictures of the plant you are currently working on? http://andrea-rossi.com/1mw-plant/

    This is from what is described as your ‘official’ web site — are you running this site?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  530. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    These photos have been made in the factory of Raleigh during the manufacturing of the plant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  531. Italo R.

    @ all:

    Here there are various pictures and informations about the 1MW plant in Usa:

    http://andrea-rossi.com/

    They are great!!

  532. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R:
    These photos have been taken in Raleigh during the manufacturing of the 1 MW plant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  533. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Eernie1,
    Did you mean: A way to keep some revolutionary stuff off the market is to buy the IP and let time pass ?
    That happens with other value and businesses.
    We cannot be sure that this is untrue.

    In the 80′s, the Motorola 68000 was a fantastic product, but slow and unefficient if you compare it with todays Intel (and others) processors. Anyway it did not keep them from selling the product at their time.

    There is no strategy to win the unbegun war. First you have to start the war.

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  534. Robert Curto

    eerine1
    You stated:
    Generic drugs accelerated because there was week IP protection or no protection at all.
    When a drug company develops a drug, they get a patent on it which is good for 20 years. When the patent expires, any company can make a Generic drug which must be exactly like the original.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale FL
    USA

  535. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    That’s right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  536. Wladimir Guglinski

    Proton’s radius to be measured by MUSE Project (2015-2016)

    Published in ZPenergy, going directly for the archives of the History of Physics
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3603&mode=&order=0&thold=0

  537. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie:
    Thank you for your opinion. I already made my point on the issue, but what you say will be taken in due consideration.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  538. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I fully agree that, in your personal situation, the loss of protection for your IP would be detrimental to the task of your industrial partners for collecting development funds. However if the necessary information for development was not encumbered by protective legal measures, there would be a mad dash by many groups to take advantage of this in order to take part in the ensuing market for the devices if the information can show unequivocally that the device is feasible. Big corporations, big governments, big educational institutions would pour in funds to capture a segment of this market or for their own use, when unconstrained by requirements to adhere to provisions of a legally protected IP. As examples, the development of aircraft, nuclear power and generic drugs accelerated because there was weak IP protection or no protection.
    If I were in your situation, I would probably do exactly what you are doing. However I was never accused of being altruistic.
    Regards.

  539. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie:
    Thank you for your continue and appreciated attention.
    We already have work on course for the purposes you described. It is not a matter of NDA ( NDAs give to intellectual property the same protection that an umbrella gives under the Niagara Falls), it is a matter of agreements for the expliotation of the technology. Nobody is going to make huge investments in a technology without a well protected intellectual property.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  540. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 15th, 2015 at 9:33 PM

    Wladimir,

    1. ———————————————
    In QRT, do non-rotating particles exist? (These would obviously be lacking gravitational fluxes n(o).)
    ————————————————

    Joe,
    I think any elementary particle without rotation cannot exist

    2. ———————————————
    Perhaps there exist two varieties of F(g):
    i) strong
    ii) residual

    In the case of (i), at very short distances, F(g) is responsible for binding quarks together.
    In the case of (ii), perhaps a lack of perfect coherence (“friction”, as you call it) in the gravitational fluxes n(o) of strong F(g) causes an amount of gravitons g to be continually left out to extend into the immediate environment outside the nucleons. The density of these gravitons g within these outer fluxes n(o) would obviously be smaller, and therefore residual F(g) would take on the usual characteristic of a smaller force than strong F(g).
    ————————————————

    It’s a very interesting suggestion, Joe

    I did not propose a model of quarks because there are no experiments involving quarks, and so there is no way to compare the theoretical model with the results of experiments

    Unlike, there are many expeiments measuring the nuclear properties of the nuclei, and so a theoretical model can be confronted with the results of the experiments

    regards
    wlad

  541. Wladimir Guglinski

    From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    To: randolf.pohl@mpq.mpg.de; aldo@phys.ethz.ch; t.w.haensch@mpq.mpg.de; franz.kottmann@psi.ch; graf@ifsw.uni-stuttgart.de; skarsten@phys.ethz.ch; paul.knowles@unifr.ch
    Subject: the puzzle of the proton’s radius
    Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:09:59 -0200

    To:
    Dr. Randolf Pohl, Max-Planck-Institute of Quantum Optics, Garching, Germany
    Dr. Aldo Antognini, Institute for Particle Physics (IPP), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Prof. Dr. Theodor W. Hänsch, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich
    Dr. Franz Kottmann, Laboratory for Particle Physics, Paul Scherrer Institut Villigen PSI, Switzerland
    Prof. Dr. Thomas Graf, Universität Stuttgart, Institut für Strahlwerkzeuge, Stuttgart, Germany
    Karsten Schuhmann, Institute for Particle Physics (IPP), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Dr. Paul Knowles, Département de physique, Université de Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

    Dear Professors

    Regarding the puzzle of the proton’s radius, in the page of the Paul Scherrer Institute it is written the following:

    “Very interesting proposals explain the discrepancies by physics beyond the standard model. Other explanations suggest a proton structure of higher complexity than assumed today which only reveals itself under the influence of the heavy muon.
    http://www.psi.ch/media/proton-size-puzzle-reinforced

    A model of proton with higher complexity is proposed in the book Quantum Ring Theory-QRT, published in 2006 by the Bauu Institute Press.

    According to the model proposed in QRT, the rotation of the three quarks of the proton induces a flux composed by gravitons with the speed “c” of the light. In the book it is named flux n(o).
    The rotation of the three quarks take the shape of a ring, and the flux n(o) crosses the ring formed by the three quarks.

    The flux n(o) becomes stronger when the proton interacts with other particles, because there is an overlap between the flux n(o) of the proton and the flux n(o) of the other particle. A free proton has the radius in order of 0,8 fm, as measured by the experiments of proton-electron scattering. The shrinkage in the proton’s radius depends on the mass of the other particle, because the intensity of the total flux n(o) crossing the ring of the proton depends on the mass of the other particle.

    Therefore, when the proton interacts with heavier particles, the flux n(o) becomes stronger, and this is the reason why the radius of the proton has shrinkage.

    In the article ANOMALOUS MASS OF THE PROTON published in the book QRT, it is calculated that the radius of the proton within the nuclei is 0,275 fm. From this radius of the proton it is calculated the electric quadrupole moment of the deuteron, and the result is the same obtained from experiments.
    The paper ANOMALOUS MASS OF THE PROTON is also published in the blog Journal of Nuclear Physics:
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516

    As the muon is very heavier than the electron, then from this higher complexity model of proton we have to expect that in proton-muon scattering the experiments will measure a proton radius very shorter than 0,8 fm. I expect a a proton’s radius between 0,3 fm and 0,6 fm.

    In the case the experiments to be carried out by the MUSE project confirm my prediction getting a radius between 0,3 fm and 0,6 fm, I hope the theorists will realize the need of considering seriously my heavier complexity model of the proton, formed by a flux of gravitons crossing the ring formed by the rotation of the three quarks.

    Regards
    Wladimir Guglinski

  542. eernie1

    Dear Andrea.
    Your development of the E-Cat, if it can be successfully integrated into the world’s power structure, would be a monumental achievement. However, IMHO a greater achievement would be the construction of a new basic understanding of Physics through defining the mechanisms of the device. This understanding could unlock nuclear secrets that can lead to even more efficient and useful energy sources for the good of mankind. There is no doubt in my mind that better materials and methods would be developed to assure an unlimited source for any human endeavor utilizing energy such as space exploration.
    I think you hold in your hands the best source of clues for achieving this understanding. That is the relatively large amount of nuclear ash that you must be accumulating through the operation of the past devices under a variety of operating scenarios. Perhaps, if you could have these ashes assayed by a trusted scientific group, under a NDA, you as well as society eventually can benefit greatly.
    Some questions I must ask. Was the assay conducted by the 3PT team and their results, mitigated by materials added to and not connected to your primary operative fuel composition? Were their results really indicative, as far as you know, of the reactions taking place in the device? Do you have more assay results that you cannot reveal and do they provide more clues to the process? If possible, a simple yes or no would be very helpful to those scientifically exploring possible solutions or verifications.
    Regards and be on the lookout for those who would try to divert your efforts, including those who seem to be friendly to your work.

  543. Salve Dr Andrea
    Sono un suo Fan, la seguo da diversi anni giornalmente sia sul blog che sulle varie news. . . pensi che sono in lista per 4 e-cat domestici “spero per un futuro immediato” …
    la mia domanda è: a quando il cambio di era? non è curioso di vedere cosa accade pubblicando integralmente i progetti in rete? scavalcare ogni pregiudizio economico, prospettare un vero e proprio cambio di era, fine delle guerre, fine del petrolio… chissà come sarà la vita nel mondo..

  544. Andrea Rossi

    Sergio Caterina:
    Thank you for your kind words.
    So far let’s fly down and think to make our 1 MW plant work well and please remember that this technology will integrate, if it works well, in the existing system.
    About publishing the know how, it would stop any serious investment. I already commented many times this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  545. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I know it is not in your nature to retire from your work on the E-Cat, and I don’t expect this to happen, but let me pose a hypothetical:

    If you decided tomorrow to move on to do something different with your life, could you leave feeling confident that your Team would have the skill and knowledge to bring the E-Cat successfully to the marketplace?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  546. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Absolutely yes: as I answered also to Mark Ellenbroek, I am very useful to the Team, but not indispensable as I was one year ago.
    This said, it’s quite unlikely that I will retire, at least not as long as God leaves me on this World.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  547. Jonjon

    Hi Andrea,
    Having seen the white hot glowing Hot-cat photos on the internet, have you ever tried to catch this energy by photo-voltaic cells?
    Some multi-wavelength capturing cells on high tech market offer remarkable efficiency.

  548. Andrea Rossi

    Jonjon:
    yes, but the efficiencies are low.
    Consider that in industrial applications the heat is exchanged and the heated medium takes away the energy, so that you have no more glowing surfaces, but steam.

  549. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Ellenbroek:
    I am very useful to my Team, but I am not indispensable.
    Besides, this technology is not an either or and it will be a support, not an enemy.
    Thank you for your attention:
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  550. Marc Ellenbroek

    Dear Andrea,
    At this moment you are working on a device which may well become the most important invention of the century. More and more scientists are recognizing your work and it will not take long before the E-cat will enter the market, I hope.
    The E-cat will be disruptive to the energy market in the world. Many will profit by it, but also many (very rich) will be bankrupted. Those who will suffer will be forceful enemies of the work you are doing and they will try to stop you getting it on the market. They will use any means to do this, which may also be dangerous for you.
    Apart from the personal tragedy, it would be a catastrophe for your work when something would happen to you. I am sure you realize that.
    My question to you is: Have you taken action to avoid that if something would happen to you, your invention would ever be lost?

  551. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    dear Dr. Rossi there are new groups that work on cold fusion reactors .

    Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works group created widespread publicity in October 2014 with its claim that it would be delivering a working prototype of a fusion reactor within five years. It also created a wave of enthusiasm and excitement among science and technology enthusiasts. All this comes from the work of your team.

  552. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the information!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  553. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. In QRT, do non-rotating particles exist? (These would obviously be lacking gravitational fluxes n(o).)

    2. Perhaps there exist two varieties of F(g):
    i) strong
    ii) residual

    In the case of (i), at very short distances, F(g) is responsible for binding quarks together.
    In the case of (ii), perhaps a lack of perfect coherence (“friction”, as you call it) in the gravitational fluxes n(o) of strong F(g) causes an amount of gravitons g to be continually left out to extend into the immediate environment outside the nucleons. The density of these gravitons g within these outer fluxes n(o) would obviously be smaller, and therefore residual F(g) would take on the usual characteristic of a smaller force than strong F(g).

    All the best,
    Joe

  554. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 15th, 2015 at 12:51 PM

    Wladimir,

    If you define the strong nuclear force as the interaction between gravitational fluxes n(o), then what is the force responsible for holding the three quarks of a nucleon together?
    ——————————————————

    I did not propose a model for quarks.
    There would need to study the subject, in order to verify if a quark has its own gravitational flux n(o), and it interacts with the other quarks via strong force.

    The rotation of the 3 quarks would induce the gravitational flux n(o) of the protona and electrons

    regards
    wlad

  555. Andrea Rossi

    Michael Kors:
    Yes, I did.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  556. Joe

    Wladimir,

    If you define the strong nuclear force as the interaction between gravitational fluxes n(o), then what is the force responsible for holding the three quarks of a nucleon together?

    All the best,
    Joe

  557. Dr Rossi:
    Did you find in the books of Norman Cook and of Greiner – Maruhn bases for your theoretical explication of the Rossi Effect?

  558. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: It is long overdue for you to put some limits on Mr. Guglinski’s comments. Thank you.

  559. Wladimir Guglinski

    My reply to Vlad in the ZPenergy

    Dear Vlad,
    I write herein in the ZPenergy not only for the readers of the present days. I write also for the readers of the future.
    When in the future the aether will be finally accepted by the scientific community, the science historians will be looking for the historical events that marked the rejection of the ether in Physics, and one of their sources for searching for historical records will be the pages of the ZPenergy.

    regards
    wlad

  560. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    You wrote in a recent comment you posted in this blog:
    “..there are some events you do not know and are forcing my silence” ( Sic !!!)
    Please do not be ridiculous.
    I gave you an enormous room in this blog, so that you had all the possibility to explain your theories, that I think are completely wrong, but nonetheless I wanted to publish them . I wanted to help you anyway to explain yourself, because I see that you are putting enthusiasm in what you say, wrong or right as it might be. I share the statement that Evelyn Beatrice Hall attributed ( wrongly) to Voltaire, which sounded like ” I do not agree with you, but I am ready to be killed to defend your right to speak”.
    This said, recently you tried to involve me in your discussions, and I warned you that I want not to be involved, therefore I am simply spamming all the comments of yours in which you try to involve in your theories me and Professors that never heard about you and are totally not interested in aetheric issues.
    I am continuing to publish all your comments, as I did today, and to spam any comment from you that tries to involve me in a discussion regarding your theories.
    The two Professors that you are insulting and bullying with arrogance do not know me, do not know you, do not have, I suppose, any intention to answer to all your stuff. I simply suggested to you ( very humbly, not having your tremendous nuclear Physics background) to read their text because I supposed you could learn more about photons, in a rigorous way. You, instead of studying that book, are insulting the Authors who are, I repeat, totally strange to whatever you do and do not know what I wrote to you in this blog and what you wrote everywhere. They teach nuclear Physics in one of the most important Universities of the world ( Institut fur Teoretische Physik der Johann Wolfgang Goethe – Universitat Frankfurt). The book we are talking about is “Nuclear Models” of W. Greiner and J.A. Maruhn. Conjugating the reading of this book with “Models of the Atomic Nucleus” of Prof Norman Cook I have improved my work.
    I will not return on this point, therefore, in a nutshell: do not involve me again in your comments, if you want me not to spam them. The only thing that ” is forcing your silence” (sic!) is that you force me to spam the comments that involve me in discussions regarding your theories.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  561. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in February 14th, 2015 at 2:11 PM

    Wlad,
    You do not have to answer this blog, but I…
    —————————————————-

    Dear Eernie
    there are some events you do not know and are forcing my silence.

    Let me explain why I cannot accept Dirac’s theory.

    In the Quantum Ring Theory the electric and magnetic fields are formed by a flux composed by the motion of particles e(+), m(+), p(+), g(+), G(+) , and their antiparticles.

    The electric and magnetic fields of the proton and the electron are formed by the those fluxes. The electric and magnetic fields of the atomic nuclei is also formed by those fluxes.
    And there is no way to consider a flux composed by electrons and positrons in my model of proton, electron, and nuclear model.

    I am very sorry Diract is not alive.
    If he were alive, I am sure Dirac would be very interested in my theory, and he would realize that my theory is more complete than that proposed by he (after all , he never proposed a nuclear model formed by the structure of aether formed by electrons and positrons).

    regards
    wlad

  562. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 14th, 2015 at 3:26 PM

    Wladimir,

    In your new QRT, you replaced the magnetic force F(M) with the gravitational force F(g). Is F(g) created by the same gravitons g that create the gravitational fluxes n(o)?
    ————————————————

    Joe,
    Yes.
    Look at the Figure 5.1 at the page 10 of my paper.
    The flux n(o) of the central 2He4 rotates and has “friction” with the rotation of the flux n(o) of the proton, both the fluxes n(o) being formed by gravitons g(+).

    This “friction” of fluxes n(o) is the resposible for the strong nuclear force, as I show in the page 207 of my book Quantum Ring Theory, in the article Strong Nuclear Force as Consequence of Gravitational Interactions.

    Obvisously such “friction” is not in the sense of the ordinary friction known in the Classical Physics.

    regards
    wlad

  563. Danielsen

    Dr Rossi:
    Are there any solar energy based plants you consider interesting in particular?

  564. Andrea Rossi

    Danielsen:
    Yes: the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System è [ 392 MW CSP ( Concentrating Solar Power)] in the Mojave Desert in California; another, analogous, is the Solara ( Arizona Solar One), 250 MW, near Gila Bend, Arizona: this is interesting in particular for the molten salt energy store system, the biggest in the world, that in future could be useful also for the E-Cats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  565. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, what do you think about using tungsten tube filled with tungsten foam for containing the “fuel” for hot-cat?

    In the recent tests made by Parkhomov and MFMP, they have had several problems due to the fragility of alumina and for hot-spots.
    Using tungsten for containing the reaction, and a foam for having a great internal surface for the powder would help for a correct running with less problems.

    I have read it here:
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/15/the-ultimate-dog-bone-axil-axil/

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  566. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    I cannot give any suggestion regarding the technology to build a reactor resistant and reliable for long periods. As I already said, the manufacturing of the shielding of our Hot Cats is part of the IP know how. To know if a system works or not you have just to try it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  567. Joe

    Wladimir,

    SR says that two clocks suffer the same time dilation due to a common relative velocity. Each clock sees the other clock as ticking slower. But if they meet, each clock would expect the other clock to be younger (a smaller elapsed time). This paradox invalidates SR. If there is no difference in age, an aether must then exist which acts upon both clocks dilating their proper time in such a way that keeps them the same age. And if there is a difference in age, SR is falsified since SR claims that each clock sees the other as younger – and not one younger, the other older. Of course, only an aether could allow for an age difference.

    NB. Although it does not apply to our discussion here, talking about relativistic velocities necessarily invokes the Composition Law for Velocities:

    s = (v + u)/(1 + (vu/c^2))

    (This is for the case of collinear motion.)
    We must be careful to avoid the simple Galilean addition of velocities.

    All the best,
    Joe

  568. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi,
    I am sending to the JoNP these very interesting articles. What do you think of the theory of Carl Oscar Gullström – PhD at the Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Uppsala ?

    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/limits-gullstrom-theory-neutron-tunneling/

    Andrea Rossi Vindicated? Cold Fusion Takes Another Step Towards Credibility
    http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Andrea-Rossi-Vindicated-Cold-Fusion-Takes-Another-Step-Towards-Credibility.html

  569. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for your links.
    I think that the papers of Gullstroem are worth to be studied.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  570. Joe

    Wladimir,

    In your new QRT, you replaced the magnetic force F(M) with the gravitational force F(g). Is F(g) created by the same gravitons g that create the gravitational fluxes n(o)?

    All the best,
    Joe

  571. eernie1

    Wlad,
    You do not have to answer this blog, but I think Dirac was trying to describe more than the properties of light particles with his theory of the EPO. As an example, his theory suggested that the neutron was the primary cluster of EPOs that emerged from the sea of ground state EPOs when an external force was applied to space. This neutron then degenerated into a proton and electron thereby answering the question of why a proton and electron have the same amount of charge(negative and positive). This was his answer also to the question of why there seems to be much more matter than antimatter. The antimatter resides inside the neutrons and protons within the EPOs that constitute them. It also is an answer to why there are equal numbers of electrons and protons in the universe, and why the number of neutrons are not proportional to the other particles. He also suggested that gravitational forces arise from the attraction of the aligned bipolar EPOs. The electric and magnetic fields he used in his description arose naturally through his use of the spinor field base in his theory as well as the spin quantum number associated with the Fermions.
    For myself, his theory provides as close and acceptable a unified theory as any other I have studied. As you and others have stated there are questions that can be asked of any accepted paradigm, and as shown by the differences among other contributors to this site can lead to interesting discussions.
    Regards and happy hunting theory grounds.

  572. Curiosone

    Can you give us an example of the operation of the 1 MW plant in operation? For example: what happened Yesterday ? Anything anomalous? And today?
    W.G.

  573. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yesterday we had problems with the control system, eventually fixed.
    Today ( Saturday) I can see that so far all is ok.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  574. JCRenoir

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    If in the geographic area where the 1 MW Ecat is operating happens a black out, what happens to the plant? I mean: safety systems, computers, etc, since I assume the reactors can also go in self sustaining mode.
    JCR

  575. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    We have a back up.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  576. Dear Andrea,

    today i got this new replication news from Russia. Do we facing a new “Space Race”? Can we call it “Low Energy Nuclear Race”

    http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Andrea-Rossi-Vindicated-Cold-Fusion-Takes-Another-Step-Towards-Credibility.html

    LavoLaLe lavoLaLe
    Enrico Billi

  577. Andrea Rossi

    M.Sc. Enrico Billi:
    Thank you for your information, very interesting and important. Of course the quest is on! Thanks to the great work of my Team, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S.
    Lavolale, Lavolale!

  578. Joya del Sol

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    I am returning to your website/blog after a few years. Last time I was here, you were going to test the E-cat at your 1st industrial customer’s premises. However it seems your plans for commercial launch have slowed down. I am still curious though about the current schedule of your planned commercial launch for the general public and when the world at large can experience the wonders of your technology. Please share your current plans for the E-cat.

    Thanks and Regards,
    Joya Del Sol

  579. Andrea Rossi

    Joya del Sol:
    It is not true that several years ago we were testing a 1 MW plant in the premises of an industrial Customer. I never said that.
    We are doing it now. The future will depend on the final results of the tests on course. The results could be positive, as we hope, but also negative, as I have to say. This plant is the first commercial plant in operation in the world making thermal energy necessary to an industrial manufacturing concern, inside the premises of the Customer. This plant’s efficiency is not just measured on the base of scientific calculations, as happened up to now, but mainly on the base of the energy costs related to the manufacturing system of the Customer: what counts for the Customer are not the scientific calculations, but the money he makes ( or loses) using the E-Cat instead of a regular plant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  580. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 5:01 PM

    Wladimir,

    I think that SR might allow knowledge of which twin is faster, but I do not know if SR can allow knowledge of the absolute speed. (After all. that is why SR exists.) Maybe it depends on the Lorentz beta factor.

    For example,
    ——————————————————————-

    Joe, the puzzle is not reagarding to get knowledge of which thin has faster speed. The puzzle is concerning why one of them ages faster in the empty space.

    For instance, consider that Joe and Peter are in a planet with relativistic speed V having a motion toward a right direction in the space.

    And Peter exits the planet in a spacecraft with the same relativistic speed V having a motion in the contrary direction of the planet motion in the sapce (tbe spacecraft moves in the left direction in the space).

    So, as the space is empty, both Peter and Joe move with relativistic speed V in the space.
    Would one of them age faster ?

    regards
    wlad

  581. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    the reason why the even-even nuclei with Z=N have null magnetic moment is explained in the page 11 of the present paper:

    ———————————————————————
    So, the even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero because the rotation of the body-rings of the protons within the principal field of the nucleus does not induce magnetic moment due to the rotation of the nucleus. Therefore the even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero because:

    a) In spite of the electric charge of the secondary field Sn of the nucleus is positive, however because of the property of the field Sn shown in Fig. 4.2 there is no induction of magnetic field by the rotations of the field Sn.

    b) There is not induction of magnetic moments by the body-rings of deuterons within the principal field Sp of any even-even nucleus with Z=N, since each pair of deuterons cancell each other their magnetic moment.
    —————————————————————————-

    Joe,
    also note that the gravity force Fg , in the present paper, responsible for the agglutination of the nucleons within a nucleus, is similar to the strong nuclear force considered in the Standard Model, because the strong nuclear force can have gravitational origin (the strong nuclear force is a sort of dynamic gravity, a hypothesis shared by some physicists).

    What did you think about the paper?

    regards
    wlad

  582. Paul

    Andrea,

    It looks like you are not the only one interested in LENR+ jet engines:

    From e-catworld: Here’s an interesting announcement about anupcoming workshop that is posted on the Russian Cold Nuclear Transmutation and CMM site (Google translated from the Russian):

    19/02/2015 in CIAM workshop report “Physical and mathematical model of radiant heat in the combustion chambers of gas turbine engines and heat generation in the generators of Rossi – Parkhomov, which means the Rossi Effect as replicated by Alexander Parkomov.

    On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at the Central Institute of Aviation Motors. PI Baranova, a regular meeting mezhotrasle-new scientific and technical seminar “Applied Problems of Mechanics-tinuous medium in aircraft engine.” Will make a report:

    “Physical and mathematical model of radiant heat in the combustion chambers of GTE and heat generation in the generators of Rossi – Parkhomov. ”
    (Authors: MJ Ivanov, VK Mamaev, MA Surin).

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/09/workshop-on-rossiparkhomov-heat-at-ciam-russian-aviation-engineering-institute/

    Paul

  583. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Good. Alexander Parkhomov merited this. I am honoured from this strong interest in Russia for our work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  584. Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Honestly, do you think that the fall of the oil prices are due also to the Lugano Report, as many say?
    Gregg

  585. Andrea Rossi

    Gregg Tiedeman:
    No.
    Oil has nothing to fear from this technology, provided it will be consolidated during the next year by the 1 MW plant. As I always said, all the energy sources can be integrated and work collaboratively. I am sure it is not and never will be an ” either or “.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  586. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    You have stated that you think the results of A. Parkhomov are valid and interesting. That is significant to me, because according to his data he achieved several minutes of self sustained operation at around 1200C with no input power when the resistor burned out. Of course the difference between his setup and your reactors are night and day: his are test rigs that burn out quickly, but yours have been designed to operate for months at a time. However, can you clarify if his results – specifically including short lived self sustain – should be achievable by qualified expert scientists using the same basic setup and fuel? Or are his results interesting because they were a random event that should not have happened?

  587. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    All I know of Alexander Parkhomov’s replication test is what I read and saw in the internet. He made a remarkable work.
    I can add nothing to this comment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  588. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, if you or your readers are interested in the 912 million dollar World’s most advanced x-ray-shooting super Lab then Google:
    NSLS-II
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale Florida
    USA

  589. Andrea Rossi

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

  590. Marco Serra

    Dear Dr. Rossi
    I’m currently restoring my house after a fire almost destroyed it :(
    For heating I’m using a boiler with radiators in each room.
    The question arising now is: should I switch to an alternative heating system (stove or fireplace) considering that it will pay for itself in approx. five years ?
    My wife, who does not know the Rossi Effect, say yes. I say no, because I believe house heating expenses will be much much lower in 5 years.
    Now I have to make a decision. Can you kindly help us sharing your opinion ?

    Many thanx in advance
    God bless you
    Marco

  591. Andrea Rossi

    Marco Serra:
    To answer you I’d need a cristal ball. I cannot give guarantees, but we hope within the term you cited the domestic applications will be on.
    For what concerns stoves and fireplaces, I am not an enthusiast of them, since the combustion of wood in such devices, with small combustion rooms and a very short retention time of the uncombusted molecules, is usually very polluting. There is a metropolitan legend that says that to burn wood is environmentally friend: the contrary is true, wood generated smoke is very polluting ( traces of dioxin are there too) if it is not burned in a plant with an efficient post-combustion system. Besides, I am all but convinced that you will pay back them in five years.
    This, obviously, is not related to the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  592. Rodneynano

    Andrea Rossi,
    1- Best book you ever read?
    2- Best movie you ever saw?
    3- Best place you ever have been?
    4- Best professional day of your life?
    5- Best work you ever did?

  593. Andrea Rossi

    Rodneynano:
    1- Physics: “Models of the Atomic Nucleus” ( Norman Cook, USA); literature: “War and Peace” ( Lev Tolstoi, Russia)
    2- ” The Concert” ( 1999)
    3- USA
    4- When the 1 MW E-Cat will have been approved by the Customer after 1 year test
    5- The 1 MW E-Cat that has been manufactured by the Team of IH ( see point 4)
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  594. Robertgennick

    Dr Rossi:
    Can you inform the teams that are trying to replicate your results which is the treatment you do on alumina to make the reactors?
    Thank you,
    R.

  595. Andrea Rossi

    Robertgennick:
    Sorry, this is one of the most important know hows related to the operation of the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  596. Dear Andrea,
    recently i started to follow a new technology about heat pumps involving controlled cavitation effect.
    A company developed a new kind of heat pumps calledBernoulli system with a minimum COP of 3.1

    In the past you said e-cat technology can self-sustain the reaction, so finally how much is the minimum COP reachable practically with your e-cats?

    LavoLaLe lavoLaLe
    Enrico Billi

  597. Andrea Rossi

    M. Sc. Enrico Billi:
    I said that the 1 MW E-Cat has long periods of self sustaining. The data will be published when the test will be finished ( please see my answer to Bernie Koppenhofer minutes ago).
    Lavolale, Lavolale!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  598. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: Could you give us a hint about when the 400 days started for your industrial reactor now in use? Everyone is getting bored watching MFMP blow up reactors. (:

  599. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Alexander Parkhomov replica is very interesting, though !
    As I said, the tests of the 1 MW plant delivered to our Customer will end between November 2015 and February 2016.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  600. Wladimir Guglinski

    The Vacuum Catastrophe – Zero-Point Energy

    QED is the most precise physical theory we have; its predictions have been verified to 1 part in 10 billion! The zero-point field is the “ground state” of the electromagnetic field. In this ground state, the equations indicate that no ordinary physical photons are present, yet electromagnetic energy is present. The energy for a given frequency is ½ hf , one half of the usual energy of a photon. Sometimes the zero-point field is described as consisting of “virtual” or very short-lived photons, that appear and disappear before it is possible to detect them. The presence of zero-point fluctuations has been verified experimentally with very accurate measurements of the Lamb Shift, other atomic energy level shifts, the magnetic moment of the electron, and the Casimir force. QED predicts that the number of ZP quanta (½ hf ) of frequency f is proportional to the square of the frequency. This gives an energy density for the vacuum that goes as the cube of the frequency.

    Special relativity requires that any observer going through space cannot tell how fast she is going in an absolute sense. Thus the zero-point fluctuations must look the same, independent of her velocity as she travels through space. Therefore the Doppler shifted frequency spectrum must look the same as the unshifted frequency spectrum. This requirement of special relativity results in an energy density of the zero-point fluctuations identical to that predicted by QED, namely an energy density proportional to the cube of the frequency. Summing over all the frequencies present, gives a total energy density in the vacuum of which is proportional to 1/L4 where L is the shortest wavelength of the ZP fluctuations allowed. If we take L as zero, then we obtain an infinite energy. Applying quantum principles to general relativity (geometrodynamics) suggests that at lengths shorter than the Planck length (10**-35 m), the nature of space-time fluctuates, and therefore no meaning can be ascribed to a length shorter than the Planck length. Thus we could use the Planck length as a cutoff.

    The energy density of the ZP fluctuations in empty space (according to QED) is about 10**114 joules/cubic meter if we use the Planck length (10**-35 m) as a cut-off.

    General Relativity and Vacuum Energy
    In general relativity, any form of energy has an equivalent mass, given by E = mc**2, and is therefore coupled to gravity. This enormous zero-point energy density is equivalent to a mass density of about 10**92 kg/cc, and would be expected to cause an enormous gravitational field. This large field leads to some major problems with general relativity, such as the collapse of the universe into a region of space that is about 1 Planck length across. Thus we have an inconsistency in two very important and well-verified theories, QED and General Relativity. A brief discussion of this problem is given in the excellent book “Lorentzian Wormholes” (Springer-Verlag, 1996, p. 82) by Matt Visser.

    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3598&mode=nested&order=0&thold=0#15495

    .

  601. Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 12:56 PM

    1) ————————————————-
    The point here is that the measurements do not require any sort of new “aether” to explain them; they all saw phenomena that were predicted by conventional physics.
    —————————————————–

    Dear JR
    Marcel Urban, François Couchot, Xavier Sarazin, and Arache Djannati-Atai have different opinion than yours.
    They are the authors of the paper The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light, where they propose that space is filled by particles and antiparticles: “We show that the vacuum permeability μ 0 and permittivity ε 0 may originate from the magnetization and the polarization of continuously appearing and disappearing fermion pairs”.
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1140%2Fepjd%2Fe2013-30578-7#page-1

    Obviously I dont need to remmember you that their proposal is a plagiarism of my model of aether composed by particles and antiparticles, published in my book Quantum Ring Theory in 2006.

    2) —————————————————————-
    He seems to not understand what is meant by longitudinal vs transverse in the context of waves more generally, as light does not have transverse propagation (unless it’s some random redefinition of the word). Anyway, I know of now meaningful argument stating that transverse waves must exist in a medium.
    ——————————————————————–

    My God !!!!
    Dr. JR does not know what is a transverse propagation!!!!

    Dear Dr. JR,
    transverse waves are those ones which suffer polarization. Light can be polarizated. That’s why light has transverse propagation.

    Electromagnetic waves such as light exhibit polarization, Sound waves in a gas or liquid do not exhibit polarization, since the oscillation is always in the direction the wave travels.
    Light which can be approximated as a plane wave in free space or in an isotropic medium propagates as a transverse wave — both the electric and magnetic fields are perpendicular to the wave’s direction of travel.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization_%28waves%29

    It seems you never te tired to come back to say nonsenses, Dr. JR

    3) ———————————————————-
    I’ve explained why his discussion of the “proton radius puzzle” is misguided, but he’s now changed his claim. In the past he claimed that the proton radius was very small, about 0.3fm.
    ————————————————————–

    I changed nothing.
    The radius of the proton 0,275fm calculated in my paper Anomalous Mass of the Neutron was made for the heavy nuclei, where the flux of gravitons crossing the ring of the proton is very strong, and causes a big shrinkage in the proton’s radius.

    A free proton is crossed only the flux of gravitons of the own proton, and that’s why it has radius in order of 0,8fm.

    I hope that in the experiment to be made via scattering proton-muon the radius of the proton will have a big shrinkage, because the mass of the muon is very higher than the mass of the electron, used in the older experiments via scattering proton-electron.
    That’s why I expect that proton’s radius will be measured between 0,3fm and 0,6fm.

    However,
    let’s stop crap, and let us wait the experiments.

    If the measurements will get a value very shorter than 0,8fm, I will be very eaglier hoping to hear an explanation from the experts of the Standard Model.
    Then I will be glad to hear your opinion, Dr. JR.

    4) ————————————————-
    I’m not sure where this came from, but it will not be tested by upcoming experiments (which are looking only at a free protons), and none of these experiments involve building a new accelerator, as he claims.
    —————————————————-

    So,
    I am a lier:

    Next stepts
    Another goal is to repeat the scattering experiments, but instead of shooting electrons at protons they’ll shoot muons at protons. This project, the Muon Scattering Experiment, or MUSE, is set to take place at the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland. The facilities there will allow researchers to simultaneously measure electron- and muon-scattering in one experiment.
    http://www.livescience.com/28707-shrinking-proton-puzzle-new-experiments.html

    5) ————————————————-
    I don’t have the endurance to try and understand his arguments about special relativity, but it seems clear that others are aware that his comments there make no sense.
    —————————————————–

    But of course never somebody will be able to surpass the nonsense you said along the discussion about the shape of fhe nucleus 10Ne20 in the Figure 1:
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/nature11246.html
    when you had proposed a New Geometry, claiming that the shape of the 10Ne20 in the Figure 1 is spherical, because an ellipsoid has spherical shape.

    The record of nonsense is your, DR. JR.
    Dont be afraid.
    Never somebody will take it from you.

    regards
    wlad

  602. Dr Rossi:
    Do you think we will see an imdustrial E-Cat generate electric emergy within the mext three years?
    Thank you for your answer
    Viktor

  603. Andrea Rossi

    Viktor:
    Yes.
    Warm regards
    A.R.

  604. Joe

    Wladimir,

    I think that SR might allow knowledge of which twin is faster, but I do not know if SR can allow knowledge of the absolute speed. (After all. that is why SR exists.) Maybe it depends on the Lorentz beta factor.

    For example,

    Scenario 1:
    Object 1 travels at v = 0.
    Object 2 travels at v = 10m/s.

    Scenario 2:
    Object 1 travels at v = 1,000m/s.
    Object 2 travels at v = 1,010m/s.

    Both scenarios have the two objects with the same relative velocity: 10m/s (in the same direction, of course).

    Now, if the beta factor in scenario 1 is the same as that in scenario 2, then there is no way to evaluate the absolute speeds of the objects. But if the beta factor in scenario 1 is different from that in scenario 2, then absolute speeds can be evaluated. (In this latter case, SR would be denied validity.)

    So if QRT wants legitimacy, it must explain how absolute speeds can actually be evaluated (with the use of the aether as an absolute frame of reference) over and against the impossibility of doing so using the paradigm of SR.

    All the best,
    Joe

  605. Danielsen

    Dear JR,
    I appreciated very much your comment.
    Thank you.
    Please continue.
    Danielsen

  606. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 1:46 AM

    Wladimir,

    Without an absolute frame of reference such as an aether, would it still be possible to determine which of the twins was moving faster?
    ————————————————

    Joe,
    such question you need to do the experts in Einstein’s theory.
    I confess I cannot se how.

    regards
    wlad

  607. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 1:46 AM

    Wladimir,

    Without an absolute frame of reference such as an aether, would it still be possible to determine which of the twins was moving faster? Perhaps by emitting signals to each other in an agreed frequency, the slow twin would receive signals in a smaller frequency due to the dilated time in the fast twin’s frame of reference. (Conversely, the fast twin would receive signals in a larger frequency from the slow twin.) Both of them would then know who the slow or fast twin is?
    —————————————————————

    Dear Joe,
    there is a point: we dont know the velocity of the planets in the aether.

    But consider the following:
    the twin paradox makes sense only if the spacecraft has relativistic speed.
    As the planets have non-relativistic speed, and as Peter is within the spacecraft moving with relativistic speed, therefore Joe will age faster, because he is in the planet moving with non-relativistic speed regarding the aether.

    In the case the planet is moving with relativistic speed, then if the spacecraft exits the planet with relativistic speed in the contrary direction of the motion of the planet, then the speed of the spacecraft will be slow regarding to the aether.
    So, in this case Peter will age faster, since Joe will age slowly because he is moving with the planet with relativistic speed regarding the aether.

    regards
    wlad

  608. JR

    Wladimir has been repeating several of his incorrect statements about theory, experiment, etc… Since I and others have explained why these claims are wrong, I haven’t bothered repeating those explanations. But I thought I’d comment on a few new things he’s claiming:

    1) Experiments prove that his aether exists. As he *finally* admits, all things people call “aether” are not the same. So the fact that aether was shown not to exist long ago by Michelson and Morley only applies to the version of “aether” that they were studying/testing. Similarly, the fact that recent experiments are able to interact with the “quantum vacuum” is a test of the quantum vacuum as it’s understood in modern physics and doesn’t test any new predictions of Wladimir’s aether. He simply claims that if something exists in space, then it must be the thing he says exits in all space. Of course, it’s not quite right to say that it exists in all space, only that when you introduce an external probe or field you can create and observe virtual particles. But this is a subtlety that’s not too important here. The point here is that the measurements do not require any sort of new “aether” to explain them; they all saw phenomena that were predicted by conventional physics.

    He claims that transverse waves must exist in a medium. However, he simply asserts this as fact but gives no explanation, just an analogies to other kinds of waves (which he gets wrong). He seems to not understand what is meant by longitudinal vs transverse in the context of waves more generally, as light does not have transverse propagation (unless it’s some random redefinition of the word). Anyway, I know of now meaningful argument stating that transverse waves must exist in a medium.

    I’ve explained why his discussion of the “proton radius puzzle” is misguided, but he’s now changed his claim. In the past he claimed that the proton radius was very small, about 0.3fm. He somehow believed that a discrepancy between precise measurements giving 0.88fm and ultra-precise measurements giving 0.84fm was evidence that the real radius was closer to 0.3fm. That was obvious nonsense, but he always claimed that the next measurements would give his very small radius. Now he’s changed his prediction – a frequent occurrence – to say that a free proton is large (0.8fm) and a proton in a nucleus is much smaller (0.3fm). I’m not sure where this came from, but it will not be tested by upcoming experiments (which are looking only at a free protons), and none of these experiments involve building a new accelerator, as he claims. The good news is that measurements that are now decades old have looked for a change in size of the proton in nuclei, and find that such changes must be small (well below 10%, though it’s hard to set limits that are significantly more precise), ruling out his idea of a much smaller proton in nuclei. So it doesn’t matter if the people doing new experiments know about his prediction or not; they won’t be testing his new prediction and, based on past performance, if they did he would just change it again. Of course, that’s the scientific method – make predictions, test the model, improve the model. It’s just that most people give up on a model that has yet to make any successful predictions and has to constantly be updated to fix clear flaws.

    I don’t have the endurance to try and understand his arguments about special relativity, but it seems clear that others are aware that his comments there make no sense.

  609. Wladimir Guglinski

    Peter Forsberg wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 7:40 AM

    Dear Wladimir,

    This is unfortunate. Since they do not perform their experiment to test a prediction of your theory, it is not likely that your theory will get at boost even if it validates your theory in this regard.

    Science dogma is not only about truth. It is also about influence. You will likely not succeed if you do not achieve that as well.
    ————————————————————-

    Dear Peter,
    Galileo waited 400 year to receive a pardon request from the papa, in the name of the Church.

    As happened 500 years ago, when the priests had persecuted hereges, today the scientists persecute the defenders of the Scientific Truth, in the name of the Science.

    regards
    wlad

  610. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    I made my point and want not to return to this discussion. It is too much audacious, from my point of view, to talk of disproving the Relativity Theory on these bases.
    I have not time for further discussions on this issue, until I will read something I will be really interested to. In the meantime I remain adherent to the Special Relativity Theory.
    For this reason, while the JoNP’ s blog will continue to publish your comments, independently from my point of view, please do not involve me in your discussions. Let me anyway invite you to study “Nuclear Models” of Greiner – Maruhn ( Springer, Berlin 1996, available on Amazon) in particular pp 75- 206, to get some useful foundamentals regarding photons. Unless you think you do not need it, in this case just disregard this humble suggestion of mine.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  611. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 1:46 AM

    Wladimir,

    Without an absolute frame of reference such as an aether, would it still be possible to determine which of the twins was moving faster? Perhaps by emitting signals to each other in an agreed frequency, the slow twin would receive signals in a smaller frequency due to the dilated time in the fast twin’s frame of reference. (Conversely, the fast twin would receive signals in a larger frequency from the slow twin.) Both of them would then know who the slow or fast twin is?
    —————————————————————

    Joe,
    if the planet is moving in the right direction with with speed V, and the spacecraft exits the planet in the left direction with speed v, then the velocity of spacecraft regading the aether is V-v.

    If the spacecraft leaves the planet in the right direction, its speed regarding the aether is V+v.

    if the spacecraft leaves the planet in a direction orthogonal to the motion of the planet, the speed of the spacecraft regarding the aether is (V² + v²)^1/2.

    regards
    wlad

  612. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir,

    From previous posts:

    “Peter:

    Who will conduct the experiment regarding proton radius? Was the experiment designed by someone who wants to test prediction of your theory? Does the group testing the proton radius know about your theory and its prediction regarding proton radius?
    ————————————————–

    Wladimir:

    No, Peter, they do not know.”

    This is unfortunate. Since they do not perform their experiment to test a prediction of your theory, it is not likely that your theory will get at boost even if it validates your theory in this regard.

    Science dogma is not only about truth. It is also about influence. You will likely not succeed if you do not achieve that as well.

    Regards

    Peter

  613. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 9:37 PM

    Valeriy Tarasov:
    Albert Einstein based his theory on experimental results.
    Thousands of experiments have confirmed the SRT; to cite some:
    —————————————————————–

    Albert Einstein is reported to have said: No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

    Non-transverse electromagnetic waves prove he is wrong

    regards
    wlad

  614. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Without an absolute frame of reference such as an aether, would it still be possible to determine which of the twins was moving faster? Perhaps by emitting signals to each other in an agreed frequency, the slow twin would receive signals in a smaller frequency due to the dilated time in the fast twin’s frame of reference. (Conversely, the fast twin would receive signals in a larger frequency from the slow twin.) Both of them would then know who the slow or fast twin is?

    All the best,
    Joe

  615. Dear Andrea Rossi,
    I am just curious. In connection with your answer to Peter Forsberg about Einstein’s Relativity Theory, let say Special Relativity Theory, I would like to ask you – which experimental data have convinced you that SRT is correct ?
    Best wishes,
    Valeriy Tarasov

  616. Andrea Rossi

    Valeriy Tarasov:
    Albert Einstein based his theory on experimental results.
    Thousands of experiments have confirmed the SRT; to cite some:
    - the muon experiment
    - Rossi and Hall experiment
    - Hafele and Keating experiment
    Now: do you want an experiment to validate the SRT you do probably everyday, as well as most of our Readers , even if they perhaps don’t know? The GPS you use to reach a destination is a proof of the SRT. Make the experiment now, set up your GPS to go somewhere: if it works, it is a proof of the SRT, if it does not work, change it ( the GPS, not the SRT).
    On the contrary, no repeatable experiment has been able to give evidence that the SRT is wrong.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  617. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 6:51 PM

    Wlad,
    I cannot believe the father of the relativistic wave function would need to couch his theory in semantics. One of the reasons he combined the electron and positron was to create an entity that possessed an integer spin thereby giving it the characteristics of a Boson, allowing it to reach the speed of light like the photon, without the increase of mass to infinity as his formula required for Fermions(fractional spins).
    ————————————————-

    Dear Eernie,
    I have no interest in the Diract theory, because he proposed it with the aim of explaining the phenomena concerning the light ONLY.

    Unlike, with the structure of aether proposed in my Quantum Ring Theory I propose to explain other phenomena, as the formation of magnetic and electric fields, the gravity, etc. And what is the most important: how the particles of the aether contribute for the formation of the structure of the atomic nuclei and their stability.

    There is no way to apply a structure of aether formed by positron-electron, proposed by Dirac, in my nuclear model.

    regards
    wlad

  618. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 2:05 PM

    Wladimir,

    How does QRT resolve the Twins Paradox?
    ———————————————–

    Joe,
    the paradox exists only when we consider it from the Einstein’s theory, because as he considered the space as empty, you cannot consider any referencial frame at rest, and there is no way to make distinction between the two twins.

    But having the aether as a referencial frame at rest, we can refer each one of the twins regarding the aether, as follows:
    * The two twins Joe and Peter are in a planet with speed v regarding to the aether
    * The twin Peter goes away the planet in a spacecraft moving with speed V.
    Being V> v, Joe will age faster than Peter.

    regards
    wlad

  619. eernie1

    Wlad,
    I cannot believe the father of the relativistic wave function would need to couch his theory in semantics. One of the reasons he combined the electron and positron was to create an entity that possessed an integer spin thereby giving it the characteristics of a Boson, allowing it to reach the speed of light like the photon, without the increase of mass to infinity as his formula required for Fermions(fractional spins). It also allowed a description of the charge difference between a proton(composed of approx. 700 EPOs) and an electron(1/2 the apparent mass of an EPO). Each particle was also surrounded by a large number of EPOs thereby transferring any photonic reaction at light speed. The photonic nature of the EPO was demonstrated by the fact that when the phases of the two waves were properly aligned, the EPO resolved into two photons of a total energy of a little more than 1Mev.
    There are more considerations including a possible solution to dark energy which are hinted at in his theory, but that is another story.
    Regards and further delightful thoughts.

  620. Wladimir Guglinski

    Peter Forsberg wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 2:36 PM

    Dear Wladimir,

    Who will conduct the experiment regarding proton radius? Was the experiment designed by someone who wants to test prediction of your theory? Does the group testing the proton radius know about your theory and its prediction regarding proton radius?
    ————————————————–

    No, Peter, they do not know.
    The experiment will be conducted because some years ago a new experiment made with Lamb shift in muonic hydrogen detected a proton radius shorter than that required by the Standard Model. The older experiment was made via scattering proton-electron.
    https://indico.mitp.uni-mainz.de/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=14

    Now they are bilding an accelerator, in order to make an experiment via scattering proton-muon.

    According to my theory, the proton has a variable radius, because the 3 quarks of the proton form a ring crossed by a gravity flux.
    When the gravity flux becomes stronger due to the interaction of the proton with other nucleons, the radius of the ring has shrinkage.

    A free proton has radius in order of 0,8fm.
    When it interacts with other nucleons, the proton’s radius has a shrinkage.
    Within the nuclei the proton’s radius is 0,27fm, calculated in my paper Anomalous Mass of the Neutron
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Anomalous%20mass%20of%20the%20neutron.pdf

    regards
    wlad

  621. Wladimir Guglinski

    There is no honesty in the scientific community

    Peter Forsberg wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 2:46 AM

    Dear Wladimir,

    Science is like an oil tanker. Alternative theories or alternative interpretations of existing theories are like small waves. Even if they are right, they will not move the oil-tanker.
    ——————————————————–

    Dear Peter,
    There is no honesty among the academic physicists.
    They betray the scientific method.

    Non-transverse (longitudinal) propagation requires a medium.

    For instance, the longitudinal waves in the surface of a lake requires a medium: the water
    The sound cannot propagate in the vacuum. The longitudinal waves of the sound requires a medium: the air.

    Non-transverse electromagnetic propagation cannot travel in the Einstein’s empty space. Longitudinal electromagnetic waves requires a medium.

    In resume: waves require a medium. They cannot travel in the empty space.

    We can give any name to such a medium: quantum vacuum, aether, substance, etc., but no matter what name we call it, it cannot be empty, and obviously it must have a structure.

    In Modern Physics there is explanation on how the light (transverse electromagnetic propagation) can travel in the Einstein’s empty space because as the light is considered a duality wave-particle, then the light can move in the empty space (without medium) in its shape of particle mode.

    Here in this tutorial is written:
    All electromagnetic waves are transverse
    http://www.antonine-education.co.uk/Pages/Physics_2/Waves/WAV_02/Waves_2.htm

    The discovery of the existence of non-transverse electromagnetic waves requires the rejection of the Einstein’s empty space, because non-transverse waves cannot move without a medium.

    The discovery of non-transverse electromagnetic propagations obliged the theorists to find a theory for that sort of waves:
    Electromagnetic Waves in the Vacuum with Torsion and Spins
    http://www22.pair.com/csdc/pdf/helical6.pdf
    In the Abstract the authors say:
    These waves are not transverse

    However,
    the description of the longitudinal electromagnetic waves by equations do not solve the puzzle:
    how they can travel in the Einstein’s empty space ???

    After all, a wave cannot travel without a medium.

    Andrea Rossi said:
    “Einstein’s Relativity Theory explains us that space-time depends on an observer’s related speed. This excludes an aetheric medium . To admit Aether implies to waive the Relativity Theory.”

    Then I would like to hear from Andrea Rossi how he explains the existence of non-transverse electromagnetic waves moving in the Einstein’s empty space.

    regards
    wlad

  622. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir,

    Who will conduct the experiment regarding proton radius? Was the experiment designed by someone who wants to test prediction of your theory? Does the group testing the proton radius know about your theory and its prediction regarding proton radius?

    Regards

    Peter

  623. Joe

    Wladimir,

    How does QRT resolve the Twins Paradox?

    All the best,
    Joe

  624. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    You wrote this in an earlier post:

    “As a matter of fact, in Nuclear Physics, in particular when you enter in the world of the nuclear models, you find a lot of artifices like this: when a model becomes shaky because eventually it does not explain some parameters, the stunch sustainers of the shaky model usually invent an adjustment factor that resolves the problem; usually happens that the new adjustment factor acts like an elephant in a Chinese porcelains boutique, extending the properties of the model democratically to every elementary particle, independently from the model.”

    Don’t you think that dark energy and dark matter should be counted as such fiddle factors? No one has ever managed to directly detect or create neither.

    In my opinion these are elephants with a very large energy and mass.

    Regards

    Peter

  625. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    He,he,he…maybe !
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  626. Wladimir Guglinski

    Peter Forsberg
    February 10th, 2015 at 2:46 AM

    Dear Wladimir,

    If you want to have success with your theory, you must make a prediction that cannot be done with existing theory. And you must make sure that you, or someone else conducts an experiment that validates your prediction. Without this no one of importance will listen to your words.
    ————————————————-

    Dear Peter
    Actually the new interpretation on Eistein’s Relativity represents a very small importance in my work.

    There are some phenomena neglected by the physicists which cannot be explained via Einstein’s theory.
    For instance, there are electromgnetic propagations moving in the aether through longitudinal waves:
    Koryu Ishii T. and Giakos G. C. , (1982), Transmit Radio Messages Faster than Light, Microwaves & RF.

    I call the sound of aether those longitudinal electromagnetic waves, because they are electromagnetic propagation which move like the water waves in the surface of a lake (in the aether they have spherical propagation, while in the lake the water waves have a superficial propagation).
    There is no way to explain them by considering the Einstein’s empty space.

    But the most important part of my work is concerning:
    * the model of photon, which is able to explain all the properties of the light, as the EPR experiment, etc.
    * the new model of neutron formed by proton+electron
    * the new model of hydrogen atom, where the electron move with helical trajectory in the
    electrosphere of the proton.
    * the new nuclear model

    I am waiting the results of an experiment to be conducted in 2015 or 2016, where the radius of the proton will be measured via scattering with mesons.
    According to my nuclear model, the radius of proton in those experiments must be found between found between 0,3fm and 0,6fm, while from the Standard Model the radius of the proton must be found in the order of 0,8fm.

    I dont think the physicists will accept my theory only because the experiments get a radius between 0,3fm and 0,6fm.
    However the confirmation will represent a strong evidence for my work.

    Many predictions of my work had been confirmed by experiments between 2008 and 2014.

    The most important is the prediction according to which even-even nuclei with Z=N have non-spherical shape, shown in my book Quantum Ring Theory published in 2006.
    Along 80 years the nuclear theorists had considered that those nuclei must have spherical shape.

    The journal Nature published a plagiarimm of a prediction of mine nuclear model, in 2012, concerning the non-spherical shape of those nuclei:
    Plagiarism in the Journal Nature
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3402

    And the European Physical Journal published a plagiarism of my model of Aether in 2013.
    New experiment (April-2013) corroborates Aether proposed in Quantum Ring Theory
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3464

    regards
    wlad

    regards
    wlad

  627. Wladimir Guglinski

    Alexvs wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 3:29 AM

    Dear Mr. Guglinski

    Could you write please your opinion upon the Stern-Gerlach experiment?
    —————————————-

    Dear Alexvs
    in my book Quantum Ring Theory there is a paper entitle The Stern-Gerlach Experiment and the Helical Trajectory.

    You can find many papers in Peswiki concerning my QRT:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Quantum_Ring_Theory

    Cold fusion mystery finally deciphered
    Similarity between Wave Structure of Matter and Quantum Ring Theory
    PowerPedia:Successes of the Bohr atom
    PowerPedia:Quantum Ring Theory at Temple University
    PowerPedia:Quantum Ring Theory burnt in a Brazillian university
    PowerPedia:Foundations for Cold Fusion
    Heisenberg’s Paradox
    Article:Cold Fusion and Gamow’s Paradox
    PowerPedia:on the indistinguishibility of Quantum Mechanics
    PowerPedia:magnetic monopole – new experiment corroborates Quantum Ring Theory
    PowerPedia:quantum computer will never be constructed
    PowerPedia:… and Schrödinger wins the duel with Heisenberg
    PowerPedia:the mistery on the Andrea Rossi’s catalyzer

    PowerPedia:Don Borghi’s experiment
    PowerPedia:Cold Fusion Theories
    PowerPedia:Cold fusion, Don Borghi’s Experiment, and hydrogen atom
    PowerPedia:Einstein and entanglement: Guglinski interviews Dr. John Stachel
    PowerPedia:Are there five fundamental forces in Nature?
    Article: How zitterbewegung contributes for cold fusion in Pamela Mosier-Boss experiment
    Repulsive gravity within the hydrogen atom

    Script on the film Quantum Ring Theory:

    PowerPedia:Guglinski’s Model of the Photon
    PowerPedia:Guglinski on the De Broglie Paradox
    PowerPedia:Demystifying the EPR Paradox
    PowerPedia:Zitterbewegung Hydrogen Atom of Quantum Ring Theory
    PowerPedia:New model of neutron: explanation for cold fusion
    Article: How magnet motors work
    Article: AN INCOHERENCE OF RELATIVITY ELIMINATED WITH A PHOTON MODEL

    Article: New nuclear model of Quantum Ring Theory corroborated by John Arrington’s experiment
    Article:Quantum Field Theory is being developed in the wrong way

    regards
    wlad

  628. Alexvs

    Dear Mr. Guglinski

    I have read your posts and theories with attention. Not agreeing 100% to your theories I must conceed however that what you call non-luminiferous aether, for me simply SPACE, is a brilliant basis to understand the physical behaviour of particles and light. Space is something that exists. MUST have a structure because it has physical properties (volume, electric/ magnetic permeability).
    I like very much your interpretation of Michelson-Morley experiment and agree with you in your regard about the revision of the experiment itself.
    Could you write please your opinion upon the Stern-Gerlach experiment?
    Please, continue your interessant work.

    Greetings

    Alexvs

  629. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir,

    I find your theory regarding the helical trajectory through the non-luminiferous-aether interesting. I was obviously already aware about the Michelson-Morley experiment, otherwise I would not post things on this forum. But it was nice with a recap from your point of view.

    But unfortunately I am not learned enough in physics and have not studied your theory deeply enough to have an opinion regarding your theory’s validity.

    And Andrea is also right that I misused the term “aether”. What I am interested in is a theory of physics that is on a lower level than Einsteins theory of relativity and your quantum ring theory.

    If you want to have success with your theory, you must make a prediction that cannot be done with existing theory. And you must make sure that you, or someone else conducts an experiment that validates your prediction. Without this no one of importance will listen to your words.

    Science is like an oil tanker. Alternative theories or alternative interpretations of existing theories are like small waves. Even if they are right, they will not move the oil-tanker. Only by making a new prediction of SIGNIFICANCE that directly contradicts existing theory you will create a big wave that can change the course of the oil tanker.

    By significance I mean that the prediction should have major practical applications, like the atom bomb or the photo electric effect.

    Regards

    Peter

  630. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in February 9th, 2015 at 6:29 PM

    Wlad,
    The more you describe your idea of the Ether(Aether),the more in my opinion it resembles the sea of EPOs that Dirac proposed made up the Ether. He proposed a combination of a negative wave(electron)and a positive wave(positron)rotating at the speed of light,
    ———————————————————

    Dear Eernie,
    in spite of my idea of the Aether resembles the Dirac’s EPOs, in my opinion a photon composed by positron-electron cannot reproduce all the properties of the photon.

    Eernie,
    Dirac proposed a photon composed by positron+electron because they are two particles detected by experiments.
    Dirac did it because he hoped his theory would be more acceptable if he would propose a model of photon composed by particles already detected experimentally.

    He knew that his theory would have a biggest rejection if he would propose a model of photon composed by particle and antiparticle of the Aether (as is proposed by me).
    So,
    in order to reduce the resistance against his model of photon, he had proposed a model formed by positron and electron.

    regards
    wlad

  631. Wladimir Guglinski

    Why did Einstein never think about a physical model of photon?

    Einstein supposed that a corpuscular model of photon would have to be composed by one particle moving by rectilinear trajectory in the sense of Newton.

    But such model of photon is incompatible with the Maxwell equations of the light propagation.

    However, when Einstein faced the puzzle of the photoelectric effect, he arrived to the conclusion that the photon would have to have a corpuscular nature. That’s why he proposed the quanta of light.

    But as the quanta of light are incompatible with the Maxwell equations, Einstein spent about 40 years of his life looking for equations so that to conciliate the Maxwell equations with the concept of quanta of light.
    He did never succeed to find those equations.

    The puzzle concerning the controversial nature of the light was easily solved in the Modern Physics as follows:
    the physicists consider the light as a duality wave-particle. Sometimes the light is wave, and sometimes it is particle.
    Along the week days Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday the light behaves as a wave.
    And along Thursday, Friday, Saturday, the light behaves as a particle.
    At Sunday the light rests.

    One of the strong reasons why Einstein did never try to discover the structure of the photon is because he was sure that the photon cannot have a physical structure.
    He had arrived to that conclusion because the polarization of light has a statistical feature.
    But a corpuscular particle moving with Newton’s classical motion cannot have statistical feature.
    Therefore it was impossible for the photon to have a physical structure.

    Other restrictions against the concept of a corpuscular photon moving with Newton’s rectilinear motion are the following:

    1. Light composed of corpuscles would violate the principle of least action.

    2. A corpuscular photon would have to have mass, in which case its rest mass could not be zero.

    3. According to Relativity Theory the photon is massless.

    4. A corpuscular photon would violate gauge invariance.

    All those restrictions are applied to the classical model of photon moving with a Newtonian motion.

    But all those restrictions cannot be applied to a model of photon composed by a corpuscle formed by particle and antiparticle moving with helical trajectory. This is shown in the page 77 of my book The MIssed U-turn, from Newton to Rossi’s Ecat.

    So,
    we realize why Einstein had so many reasons why to give up of trying to discover a physical structure for the photon.

    And this is the reason why in Modern Physics are adopted some strange solutions, unsatisfactory under the viewpoint of phylosophical coherence, as the concept of duality wave-particle.

    The incoherences of Modern Physics are an heritage from the Newton’s classical theory. Because Einstein and the physicists of the 20thCentury tried to develop their theories by starting from the classical rectililenar motion of a particle in the sense of Newton.

    Eisntein had the audacity to reject some laws of the Newton’s Mechanics. So, he kept the Maxwell’s Equations, and changed the Galileo’s transformations.

    But Einstein did not realize that the puzzles of the photon would require to also reject the Newtonian rectilinear trajectory of a particle.

    regards
    wlad

  632. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 9th, 2015 at 7:49 AM

    Peter Forsberg:
    Time has a direction because the speed of light cannot be overcome.
    —————————————————————–

    Dear Peter,
    Einstein discarded the aether, and in return he had to create a new physical entity, in order to replace the lack of a real physical entity existing in the nature: the aether.

    Actually the time does NOT exist.
    What exists is the non-luminiferous aether.

    The speed of light cannot be overcome because when a body moves it has interaction with the non-lumineferous aether, and when the speed of the body approaches to the speed of light, the mass of the body tends to infinite.

    Einstein had proposed that light speed cannot be overcome by proposing a postulate.
    And postulates do not work via physical mechanisms.
    So, Einstein’s Special Relativity is something like a phantasmagoric theory, since some fundamental physical mechanisms are missing in this theory.
    His theory developed from the empty space is phantasmagoric.

    Unlike, the interaction between a body and the non-luminiferous aether works through a physical mechanism.
    A theory developed from the non-luminiferous aether works via physical mechanisms.
    The ghosts of the Einstein’s Relativity are expelled from a theory interpreted from the concept of non-luminifeous aether.

    regards
    wlad

  633. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Peter Forsberg,
    let us understand better the mechanism of the photon interaction in the Michelson-Morley experiment.

    They actually did not try to detect a difference of light speed. They actually tried to detect a difference of frequency between the light going against the motion of the Earth, and the light going in the same direction of the planet’s motion.

    A body is composed by atoms.
    And the atoms are involved by a field of aether.

    The interferometer used by Michelson and Morley is formed by atoms, and it moves with 30km/s.
    Ahead the motion of the interferometer, there is a microscopic contraction of the aether fields which involves the atoms situated in the frontal surface of the interferometer.
    And at the back of the motion of the interferomenter there is a microscopic dilation of the aether fields which involves the atoms situated at the back surface of the interferometer.

    Consider a photon moving with a frequence “f” in contrary direction of the motion of the interferometer.
    When the photon enters the region where there is the contraction of the aether about the atoms of the interferometer, the photon has a decrease of speed equal to 30km/s. As the interferometer has a speed 30km/s, then the frequence of the photon does not change, regarding to the interferometer.

    Now consider another photon with the same frequence “f” moving in the same direction of the inteferometer.
    When the photon enters the region where there is a dilation of the aether about the atoms of the interferometer, the photon has an increase in the speed equal to 30km/s. As the interferometer moves with 30km/s, the frequence of the photon does not change.

    That’s why Michelson-Morley experiment did not detect a difference in the photons frequence.

    Einstein had interpreted the dilation of the non-luminiferous aether as a dilation of the space-time, as he had interpreted the Lorentz transformations.

    The equations developed by Einstein from the Lorentz transformations are correct, from the mathematical viewpoint, because he had considered a postulate: the speed of light is invariant regarding any observer moving with speed V (and his postulate is consequence of the contraction-dilation of the aether about the atoms of a body, when the body moves with speed V).

    However the physical interpretation of the constant speed of light, considered in the Einstein’s Special Relativity, is wrong.
    And therefore from the phylosophical view point the Einstein’s Relativity is wrong, because he had considered the space as empty.

    That’s why Einstein’s Relativity introduces so many phylosophical incoherences.

    You have to note that when Einstein developed his Special Relativity he knew nothing about atoms and the structure of the photon.

    Einstein postulated the constant speed of the light (independent of the speed of the observer), because he decided to eliminate the luminiferous-aether of the 19th Century, since to consider that luminiferous-aether there is need to consider a light moving with longitudinal waves, and such luminiferous-aether would have to have a tenacity in the magnitude of the tenacity of the steel, if one would like to claim that from the luminiferous-aether the light could move with transverse waves.

    regards
    wlad

  634. eernie1

    Wlad,
    The more you describe your idea of the Ether(Aether),the more in my opinion it resembles the sea of EPOs that Dirac proposed made up the Ether. He proposed a combination of a negative wave(electron)and a positive wave(positron)rotating at the speed of light, out of phase and polarized, with one end of the EPO negative and the other end positive. All space, he postulated, was filled end to end with the EPOS negative end to positive end and extending from one end of space to the other. The EPOs would exist in their lowest energy state, below what he envisioned as a zero point level. In order to be observed, a quantity of the EPOs would have to be excited by an external energy to escape this ground state and produce a thermodynamic effect. He postulated that they would emerge in clumps and arrange themselves as neutrons which would then decay to a proton by ejecting an electron wave from one of the EPOs which then formed a basic Hydrogen atom. The rest of what we call matter then would be formed from this production of H through the processes we are familiar with in our Cosmological studies. Since the spin number of the EPOS is an integer, it is not constrained by the uncertainty principal and can occupy each others positions even though possessing the same Quantum features. When photons are generated by the various physical processes they travel through the EPO strings at a rate controlled by the rotation of the waves(speed of light=c).
    Can you please comment since this description for me provides an insight to what the real constituents comprise the Ether?
    Regards and please continue your intriguing research.

  635. Wladimir Guglinski

    Peter Forsberg wrote in February 9th, 2015 at 2:00 AM

    Dear Andrea,

    I agree with you that the word aether might not be the best to use. It has a lot of connotations that are not palatable to physicists.
    ————————————————————-

    Dear Peter,
    there are two sort of aethers: the luminiferous-aether of the 19th Century, and the non-luminiferous-aether proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.

    I suggest you to read my comment posted as The origin of misunderstanding in Einstein Special Theory of Relativity herein in the JoNP.

    regards
    wlad

  636. Wladimir Guglinski

    The origin of misunderstanding in Einstein Special Theory of Relativity

    In the 19th Century the physicists believed that the space is filled by a luminiferous-aether, where the light would move as wave propagation similar to water waves in the sufrace of a lake, when we throw a stone in the lake.

    When a wave moves with velocity “V” in the surface of a lake, and an observer in a boat moves with speed “v” in contrary direction to the propagation of the waves, if the observer measures the speed of the wave he obtains a value V+v. If the observer moves in the same direction of the wave propagation, he obtains a value V-v.
    So, the speed of the observer influences the speed of the wave measured having the apparatus of measurement at rest within the boat.

    Michelson and Morley had made an experiment so that to detect a difference of speed in the light velocity, due to the influence of the speed of the Earth, which moves with 30km/s.
    They made the experiment by measuring the speed of light when it moves in the contrary direction of the Earth’s motion, and when it moves in the same direction. So, if the light should be a propagation of waves in the luminiferous-aether (like the water waves move in the surface of a lake), then obviously Michelson and Morley would have to detect a diference.

    However, the experiment did NOT detect any difference.

    Enstein faced the puzzle, and decided to discard the hypothesis of the luminiferous-aether not only because of the negative result obtained by Michelson-Morley experiment. He actually discarded the luminiferous-aether because of 3 things:

    1- A water wave moving in the surface of a lake has longitudinal propagation. And the light moving in the luminiferous-aether also would have to move by longitudinal propagation.
    However from experiments we know that light has a transversal propagation

    2- For a light moving as TRANSVESE wave in the luminiferous-aether, such medium would have to have a tenacity equivalent of that of the steel.

    3- Michelson-Morley did not detect the difference in the light speed, and therefore they did not detect the luminiferous-aether.

    .

    So, what the Einstein’s Special Relativity actually had discarded is the luminiferous-aether considered in the 19th Century.
    Einstein Special Relativity does not discard a non-luminiferous aether.

    And the real aether which fulfils the space is non-luminiferous. Let us see why.

    The reasons why the aether is non-luminiferous:

    1) The photon is composed by two corpuscles, a particle and its antiparticle.

    2) The two corpuscles of the phton have a circular motion perpendicular to the propagation of the photon

    Therefore a model of photon composed by two corpuscles moving with helical trajectory in the aether has a TRANSVERSE propagation.
    So the aether actually is non-luminiferous, because in the luminiferous-aether the light would be moving with longitudinal propatation.

    With this photon composed by two corpuscles moving with helical trajectory the aether does not need to have the tenacity of the steel, as is required by the luminiferous-aether.

    And how does explain the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment?

    When a body as a planet moves, the motion causes the following changing in the non-luminiferous aether:

    a) Ahead the direction of the motion, there is a contraction of the aether

    b) At the back of the motion, there is a dilation of the aether

    So, when a photon is moving in contrary direction of the motion of the planet, the photon experiences a decrease in its velocity, because it is moving in an aether with biggest density.
    This occurs because it is constant the flux of aether crossing within the circular motion of the two corpuscles of the photon. As the density of the aether had a growth, then the speed of the photon must decreasing, in order to keep constant the flux of aether within the photon.

    And when the photon is moving in the same direction of the motion of the planet, the photon expeiencies a growth in its velocity, because it is moving in an aether with lower density.
    Now the photon needs to increase its speed, because as the density of the aether has decreased, the photon needs to move faster, in order o keep constant the flux of aether within the photon.

    Why the equations of the Special Theory of Relativity (STR) works well

    Einstein developed the equation of the STR by considering the Lorentz Equations.

    Well, but the Lorentz equations just consider that there is a dilation of the space-time when the light is moving with regard to an observer.

    Therefore, we realize that Einstein’s equations of the STR actually describe the motion of a photon composed by two corpuscules moving with helical trjectory in a non-luminiferous aether.

    The equations of the STR do not describe the motion of light in the luminiferous-aether of the 19th Century.
    Actually the equations describe the motion of light in a non-luminiferous aether.

    Such misunderstanding on the interpretation of the Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity was caused by the following sequence of facts:

    a) The theorists did not know the structure of the photon

    b) Einstein decided to discard the aether because he did not know how the light moves in the non–luminiferous aether

    As we see, the missing of the non-luminiferous aether in the Modern Physics is responsible for so many misunderstandings.

    For instance, in the field of the Nuclear Physics the nuclear theorists did not succeed to find any satisfactory model of nucleus, in spite they are trying along more than 100 years.
    The reason of the unsuccess of the Standard Nuclear Physics is because it is missing the contribution of the non-luminiferous aether into the structure of the nuclei.

    If the theorists do not bring back the non-fluminiferous aether for Physics, they will never succeed to find a theory free of paradoxes.

    regards
    wlad

  637. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    I understand your point of view.

    Regards

    Peter

  638. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  639. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    The theory of relativity is no more wrong at the base than Newtonian mechanics and Newton’s law of universal gravitation. Both are models of the world that are very useful, so cannot be said to be wrong. All models have flaws. But both of these also leave unanswered questions. E.g. what exactly is an object and why does time have a direction?

    Until there is a theory that explains everything that has been exlained by earlier theories plus makes some prediction that earlier theories cannot, I agree with your metaphor of tennis balls and tanks.

    My hunch is that the basic rules of the universe is something simpler than the standard model. The standard model will then be more of an emergent phenomenon. So, I am happy that some people try to throw tennis balls on tanks.

    Regards

    Peter

  640. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    Time has a direction because the speed of light cannot be overcome. What exactly is an object is more a phylosophical issue than a physics one: remember Hegel’s distinction between the “thing in se” and the “thing per se” ? Quantum theory has defined pretty well what objects are made of, both in real and virtual terms. I agree with the rest of your comment, and I agree that every theory has its essence in the fact that can be overcome. Otherwise, it would be a religion. This is why this journal hosts very audacious theories, like Wladimir Guglinski’s one, even if we do not agree in toto with him. If you are making a rehearsal, a military exercitation, to shoot “tennis balls” toward a tank can be someway useful: to sharpen the aim, for example; but if you have to fight in a real battlefield, as we have to, that is a suicide.
    Thank you for your comment,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  641. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    I agree with you that the word aether might not be the best to use. It has a lot of connotations that are not palatable to physicists.

    Regards

    Peter

  642. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    The core of the issue is that I am convinced that Aether does not exist, unless somebody is able to give evidence of the fact that Einstein’s Relativity Theory is wrong at his base. I never saw anything of the kind. The critics I saw so far against the Relativity Theory are less than tennis balls thrown to a division of tanks.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  643. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 8th, 2015 at 2:03 PM

    Wladimir,

    2. Newton is able to explain an apple falling from a tree. Einstein is not able to do this. Curvature of space, if we even accept such a concept, provides no mechanism for imparting an impulse to an object.
    ——————————————————

    Joe,
    Einstein’s proposal of the gravity to be due to the curvature of the space is one of the most wrong ideas proposed along the History of Physics.
    Probably that’s why the own Einstein tried to bring back the aether to Physics after 1916.

    regards
    wlad

  644. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 8th, 2015 at 8:17 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Einstein’s Relativity Theory explains us that space-time depends on an observer’s related speed. This excludes an aetheric medium. To admit Aether implies to waive the Relativity Theory. I am not going to explain to you the thousands papers written on this issue, because, obviously, I have not the time to return on this, but
    ————————————————————-

    Dear Andrea,
    unfortunatelly the own Einstein would disagree to what you claim.

    In the page 135 of my book The Missed U-Turn, from Newton to Rossi’s Ecat it is witten:

    —————————————————————
    It was not Einstein who has buried the aether definitively because, starting in 1916, he reconsidered his rejection of the aether and undertook to bring it back into Theoretical Physics. This historical fact, which physicists try to hide from people, is narrated in the recent book by Walter Isaacson on the life of Einstein, where he tells that the father of relativity wrote a letter to Lorentz in 1916, in which Einstein related his latest conclusion regarding the polemic existence of the ether: “I agree to you that the general theory of relativity admits a hypothesis of the ether’s existence”.
    Here is the passage in the Isaacson book:

    So, it’s not surprised that, after some years, Einstein had started to step back from some of his anterior and most radical ideas. For instance, in the famous work of 1905 on the special relativity, he disqualified as “superfluous” the concept of aether. But after analysing the general theory of relativity, he concluded that the gravitational potentials of that theory have characterized the physical qualities of the empty space and have fitted as a way capable of transmitting disturbances. He passed to refer himself to that as a new way of conceiving an aether. “I agree to you that the geingral theory of relativity admits a hypothesis of the ether’s existence”, he wrote to Lorentz, in 1916.
    —————————————————————-

    Unfortunatelly,
    it seems Dr. Prakrash has given up to publish my book The Missed U-turn.
    I suspect that he was blackmail victim by Dr. JR.

    .

    The fact that Einstei tried to bring back the aether to Physics after 1916 is also described by Kostro:
    http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Journal%20Reprints-Relativity%20Theory/Download/3313

    Unfortunatelly,
    even Einstein did not succeed to bring back the aether to Physics again, because the concept of aether is not of interest of the powerful energy producers in the world.

    The powerful energy suppliers tremble with fear of thinking that Tesla’s dream, to supply the world with the free energy of eether, may one day become reality.

    regards
    wlad

  645. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    As I said, I deem useless this discussion. You made very well your point, I have nothing to add to what I have already said. Obviously, I will continue to publish your considerations related to your point of view.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  646. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 8th, 2015 at 7:55 AM

    Peter Forsberg:

    As a matter of fact, in Nuclear Physics, in particular when you enter in the world of the nuclear models, you find a lot of artifices like this: when a model becomes shaky because eventually it does not explain some parameters, the stunch sustainers of the shaky model usually invent an adjustment factor that resolves the problem; usually happens that the new adjustment factor acts like an elephant in a Chinese porcelains boutique, extending the properties of the model democratically to every elementary particle, independently from the model.
    ————————————————————

    Dears Peter and Andrea
    any nuclear model must be able to explain a fundamental premise, as I explain ahead:

    a) The nuclei are formed by protons and neutrons, and the protons have positive electric charge

    b) The nuclei have rotation

    c) Due to rotation the electric charge of the protons induces a magnetic moment

    d) Therefore even-even nuclei with Z=N cannot have magnetic moment zero, because in spite each magnetic moment of a pair proton-neutron is cancelled by an opposite magnetic moment due to a symmetric pair proton-neutron, however the rotation of the protons induce a magnetic moment

    e) But the experiments show that even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero

    Therefore any nuclear model must be able to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have null magnetic moment. This is a fundamental premise to be explained by any nuclear model.

    If by considering a nuclear model there is not way to explain such fundamental premise, the model cannot be right. It must be discarded.

    There is not any one nuclear model based on the Standard Model able to fulfill such fundamental premise.
    And therefore all the nuclear models of the Standard Nuclear Physics are wrong.

    Then of course that a wrong nuclear model always requires new adjustment factor which acts like an elephant in a Chinese porcelains boutique.

    Unfortunatelly,
    nowadays the theorists use neglecting the fundamental premises required so that to consider as satisfactory a theoretical model.
    This is the reason why today the Standard Nuclear Physics faces the worst crisis of its history.

    regards
    wlad

  647. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 8th, 2015 at 8:17 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:

    1) ———————————————————-
    Einstein’s Relativity Theory explains us that space-time depends on an observer’s related speed. This excludes an aetheric medium. To admit Aether implies to waive the Relativity . In any case, please consider that to sustain your theory you have to disproof Einstein’s Relativity. Many tried, not quite successfully. Good luck!
    ————————————————————-

    No, Andrea
    I dont need to disproof Einstein’s Relativity.
    A theory is disproved by experiments.

    This is just what prescribes the scientific method.

    According to Einstein’s theory, the space is empty. And so the space cannot have a structure
    But the experiment published by Nature in 2011 shows that the space is not empty. And therefore the space must have a structure.

    Therefore Einstein’s theory is wrong.
    It is not me who is saying it.
    The experiments are proving that Einstein’s theory is wrong.

    2) ——————————————–
    I am too much convinced of the correctness of the Einstein’s Relativity, that I studied very, very well.
    ————————————————

    Einstein developed some equations which describe the phenomena with accuracy.
    But the success of his equations does not imply that the space is empty.

    As said the own Einstein, all the experiments which confirmed a theory do not confirm definitively the theory. But only one experiment can prove a theory be wrong.

    In this sense Einstein was right.
    And the experiment published by Nature in 2011 proved that Einstein’s theory is wrong.

    Dear Andrea,
    I am loyal to the scientific method, which prescribes that theories must be either proved or disproved by experiments.

    I am no loyal to theories.

    regards
    wlad

  648. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. The article mentions vacuum, but scientists have never created a true vacuum. Not even close.

    2. Newton is able to explain an apple falling from a tree. Einstein is not able to do this. Curvature of space, if we even accept such a concept, provides no mechanism for imparting an impulse to an object.

    All the best,
    Joe

  649. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 7th, 2015 at 7:04 PM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    What our opinion differs upon is the probability we associate to the existence of Aether: for me it is, say, 0.0something%, for you it appears to be 99.99%.
    —————————————————

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    any divergence of opinions in Science is decided by conducting experiments.

    My opinion is supported by the experiment published in the journal Nature in 2011: Moving mirrors make light from nothing
    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110603/full/news.2011.346.html

    Light cannot be generated from the Einstein’s empty space, because light cannot be generated from nothing

    And anything which is “NOT nothing” must have a structure.

    Your opinion was acceptable before 2011, when there no existed any experiment proving that the space is not empty.

    But after 2011 any claim against the existence of the Aether sounds as a dogma.
    And dogmas must be discussed in the field of the Church.

    Before 2011 your opinion had 99,99% of chance to be right.
    After 2011 your opinion has 0% of chance to be right.

    regards
    wlad

  650. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Einstein’s Relativity Theory explains us that space-time depends on an observer’s related speed. This excludes an aetheric medium. To admit Aether implies to waive the Relativity Theory. I am not going to explain to you the thousands papers written on this issue, because, obviously, I have not the time to return on this, but I am sure you read them already and the fact that you are still convinced that Aether exists makes useless a discussion. I have honestly to add that your opinion has been shared by important scientists too. Again: in Physics you never have to say that something is impossible, but associate a probability factor to the possibility that something is right. You are very generous with this probabilistic factor related to Aether, I am not. I am too much convinced of the correctness of the Einstein’s Relativity, that I studied very, very well. In any case, please consider that to sustain your theory you have to disproof Einstein’s Relativity. Many tried, not quite successfully. Good luck!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  651. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir and Andrea,

    I too believe that it will prove more fruitful eventually to view the fundamental level of space as something akin to an aether.

    Regards

    Peter

  652. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    Welcome back !
    Yes, that could be an interesting line of thought; to name the zero point field “aether” risks to become a semanthic issue, though. In analogy, we all agree that life on the moon does not exist, but, if eventually we name ” some sort of life” any chemical reaction, we invent a methodology that makes everything and the contrary of anything true ( or not true).
    As a matter of fact, in Nuclear Physics, in particular when you enter in the world of the nuclear models, you find a lot of artifices like this: when a model becomes shaky because eventually it does not explain some parameters, the stunch sustainers of the shaky model usually invent an adjustment factor that resolves the problem; usually happens that the new adjustment factor acts like an elephant in a Chinese porcelains boutique, extending the properties of the model democratically to every elementary particle, independently from the model.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  653. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi this is the year of LENR , many scientists try to replicate the E cat. It’s becoming viral.

    http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/01/2015-could-be-year-of-lenr-breakout-and.html

  654. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for this interesting link.
    Very interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  655. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 7th, 2015 at 9:11 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    My solid opinion is that “Aether” does not exist.
    —————————————————————

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    the aether was detected experimentaly:
    A vacuum can yield flashes of light
    http://www.nature.com/news/a-vacuum-can-yield-flashes-of-light-1.12430

    A structure for the aether was proposed in a paper published by the European Physical Journal, in 2013, where the authors propose that the aether is formed by particles and antiparticles, as proposed in my book Quatum Ring Theory, published in 2006:
    The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1140%2Fepjd%2Fe2013-30578-7#page-1

    The scientific community uses to call the aether by other name: quantum vacuum.
    But no matter what name we give to the aether, the fact is that the space is not empty as proposed by Einstein, and therefore the aether exists, and by consequence the aether has a structure.

    Obviously the structure proposed in the paper published by the European Physical Journal is incomplete, because those authors proposed a simple structure only with the aim for explaining the emission of light by the space, while I had proposed a structure for the space with the aim for explaining several other phenomena, including the stability of the atomic nuclei.

    Of course in the future the theorists will arrive to the conclusion that a more complex structure is need than that proposed in the European Physical Journal, and they will finally arrive to the conclusion that the structure of the aether proposed by me is correct.

    I respect your opinion, dear Andrea Rossi.
    However I cannot neglect the results of experiments, as that which detected the existence of the quantum vacuum (aether), and so I prefer to keep my opinion that the aether exists.

    regards
    wlad

  656. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    As I said, I respect your opinion and your sincere passion. It is for this passion and for the cospicuous amount of time you dedicate to your studies that our reviewer has decided to publish your paper. Said this, as you know, in Physics nothing is impossible in absolute to exist, but everything is associated to a due probability to exist somewhere, sooner or later. What our opinion differs upon is the probability we associate to the existence of Aether: for me it is, say, 0.0something%, for you it appears to be 99.99%.
    To give you some solace, I must confess to you that many times I am wrong.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  657. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, have no fear of someone taking you “out.”
    Anyone with one ounce of brain power knows that would have ZERO effect on the development of the E-Cat.
    You have already given IH enough of your brain power so that they could continue without you, and everyone that would do you harm is well aware of that fact.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  658. Wladimir Guglinski

    To the readers of the JoNP:

    With the present paper “Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism” published now in the JoNP, my opinion is that we have an entire theory for a complete explanation for the cold fusion phenomena thanks to the the combination between the present paper published herein and the other paper published in Peswiki in 2014:

    “Cold fusion mystery finally deciphered”
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Cold_fusion_mystery_finally_deciphered

    I am very thankful to Andrea Rossi and his staff of the JoNP

    regards
    wlad

  659. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    You are very welcome.
    Obviously, as I already wrote on this blog, I do not agree with your Aether theory and the theory we are elaborating regarding the so called Rossi Effect is totally different. My solid opinion is that “Aether” does not exist. Nevertheless, I respect your work and the sincere enthusiasm you put in it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  660. JonJon

    Milva,
    Andrea must exercise extreme caution, when appearing in the public. Not hard to imagine there are “dogs” would want him D##d or detained.
    This is a dangerous time for him.

  661. Milva

    Hi Dear Andrea, how are you?
    reading your Journal you seem very active and energetic as always! But how do you do ?! :-)
    Considered that for so long I have not written to you, I would like to know a few things, if you will take the patience to answer:
    1. are you coming to Padua in April for the 19th ICCF! It should be a very great event with your presence, considering that this year this annual event will take place in your native Country (I try to whet your emotions, as you see :-) ),
    2. What you are doing has aroused enormous interest in LENR. Nobody has the courage to say that the LENR does not exist, now ! Indeed, there are people who try to reproduce, with some success, your experiments, as simple as it seems the formula. But I just cannot believe that everything is there, as expressed in TPRII?  Considering how hardly you worked to keep the secret and preserve your IP, if everything was in those simple formulas it would be really reductive ?!
    3. But it seems that what you have revealed is sufficient to create positive replicas, even if not industrially exploitable with these values?
    4. Considering that now the road is open, maybe that someone else will add some ideas, some new technology; so it will quickly take off towards the final goal that we all hope!
    5. I also wanted to know something about the certifications of your apparatuses. You do not talk about it anymore. Has you continued with that and with which results ?
    6. Is there any possibility that soon something will be ready also for the market household, too?
    Many thanks and… I wish you good job.
    Warm regards
    Milva

  662. Andrea Rossi

    Milva:
    First of all, thank you for your kind attention.
    Answers:
    1- I cannot leave the 1 MW plant in operation in the USA
    2- The replications made are very interesting. Our IP is related to apparatuses that are able to produce energy in a reliable way and in amount useful for industrial and domestic real utilizations
    3- I can just take notice of what is happening
    4- Maybe
    5- We got already the safety certifications necessary for the industrial application, about the domestic apparatuses we are continuing to work upon this issue too.
    6- Soon I do not think, sooner or later yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  663. Andreas Moraitis

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    This new paper has been found by a blog user:

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.01474

    Best regards,
    Andreas Moraitis

  664. Andrea Rossi

    Andreas Moraitis:
    thank you for the important information, this is another replication of the so called Rossi Effect and a confirm, in general, of the LENR.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  665. JCRenoir

    I read your statement on Ecatworld regarding the zombie. Which is the position of Industrial Heat?
    JCR

  666. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    Industrial Heat has published today on Ecatworld a statement I fully share.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  667. JCRenoir

    Has the action of the zombie had any effect on your present work?
    JCR

  668. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    Not at all. Our present work is too important to have even the time to think about zomberies.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  669. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Can you give a definition of “isospin” in a nutshell ( not the one you can find on Wikipedia)?
    Thank you for your patience,
    W.G.

  670. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I agree.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  671. Curiosone

    I saw the answer you gave to the zombie: well done: ” non ti curar di lor, ma guarda e passa” ( Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy- Inferno).
    W.G.

  672. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    “isospin” defines the symmetry between proton and neutron. It is a quantic number that corresponds to the spin of quarks in a specific situation.
    Isospin is so called because has the same mathematical structure of the spin.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  673. Frank Acland

    Thank you for the clarification about the 400 days.

    If you don’t mind, could I ask:

    a) Is the 365/400 days requirement a contractual obligation you must fulfill?
    b) If so, are you currently within this obligation for the 400 days that have started?
    c) If you go over the 35 days, does the clock restart, and a new 400 day period begin?
    d) Is there a required average COP level you must achieve during the 365 days of operation?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  674. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    I am sorry, but what you are asking for are particulars of a contract between IH and the Customer that are under NDA.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  675. JonJon

    Hi Andrea,
    To an engineer, the 400 days is called Type test (routine, sample and type test of a new product ). As there is currently no standard manual for LENR, for example IEC,AS/NZS, are you setting up a benchmark standard for LENR operation and safety?

  676. Andrea Rossi

    JonJon:
    We are setting up a benchmark for what concerns the E-Cats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  677. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Has the 400 day period you mentioned in the reply to georgehants started already?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  678. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  679. Marco

    Dear Andrea,

    since a typical boiler for hot water and house warm up is 20-30 Kw, is it a huge problem developing a single e-cat with this power? Is the problem only due to control difficulties or also COP is affected?

    So this take me to the next question: you said that the smaller the ecat, the simpler is to control it. Does this mean also higher COP? In other words could you increase COP producing smaller (e.g. 5Kw) ecat?

  680. Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    To make a module of 20-30 kW is not a problem, there are not particular problems.
    The power of the modules does not affect the COP, it is the reliability of the control that becomes an issue increasing the power beyond a limit within which we got reliability.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  681. georgehants

    Dear Mr Rossi, you say that you have a “production plant”, does that mean that the 1mw unit is producing energy that is literally being used in a productive capacity at the customers premises.
    Allowing that there must be “down time” while you do the necessary changes and improvements as you proceed?

  682. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    Yes, the 1 MW plant is for to generate energy necessary to the Customer of IH to make its production in his premises.
    Yes, for the first 400 days of operation is allowed now and again a “pit stop” to make adjustments and improvements, along with regular maintainance. The important is that within 400 days the plant makes its full production for at least 365 days. This means that during the first period of 400 days we have at our disposal a maximum of 35 days of stop to make improvements, adjustments and maintainance. The operation is intended 24 hours/day, 7 days/week.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  683. Bernie Morrissey

    Congratulations on your accomplishments.
    Bernie

  684. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Morrissey:
    Good question. Yes, the basics are the same, the electronics are different, due to the fact that the control system for a unit is much simpler.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  685. Congratulations for the important work of your team of Industrial Heat. Millions of persons, Andrea, are looking for your results. A real plant, at last, not the usual toy on a table we are looking at since 25 years. A real plant that makes real work. A real commercial breakthrough. This is the reason of envy and ferocity against you from the usual gang. Godspeed, Andrea: the world is with you.
    Sammy

  686. Bernie Morrissey

    Dear Andrea,
    Congratulations small your accomplishments. I was wondering if one of the hundred reactors would be the same as one of the home units.
    Bernie

  687. JonJon

    Hi Andrea,
    If everything is going smoothly for you and I.H, by the beginning of next year, how many 1MW units can your production line make a month?

  688. Andrea Rossi

    JonJon:
    Enough.
    Everything is organized. Obviously potential will be turned into actual when the results will be consolidated. For the moment they are not.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  689. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You use the term “Prototype” when describing the installed 1MW thermal plant. I have seen general practice to call a non-customer delivered unit a Prototype while a delivered unit is either Pre-Production or Production, In my work experience, a Pre-Production unit is generally hand assembled by engineers with some technician support while a Production unit is generally assembled by technicians who occasionally may require some engineering support (i.e., a production line process).

    Perhaps you might try the same distinctions if they apply. A Prototype unit generally has connotations of being unreliable, poorly documented and troublesome compared to Production units.

  690. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    On the base of your comment, I definitely used the wrong English translation.
    Let me then correct, and write that the 1 MW plant that has been delivered to the Customer is a production plant, the number one of the production made in the USA by Industrial Heat and our magnificent team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  691. Andrea Rossi

    Sailmenn:
    Sorry, your message is gone in the spam and I have not been able to recover it, but here is the answer.
    You asked if it wouldn’t be better to make a simpler 1 MW plant with bigger reactors instead of a 1 MW plant with 100 reactors.
    The answer is no, based on our R&D and calculations. We have a very consolidated experience about the safety of the E-Cat modules and they also have been already safety- certified. For the time being we have to maintain this configuration of the plant. Obviously bigger reactors are more difficult to control: allow me a naif example: a tiger is more difficult to menage than several tens of cats…
    Thank you for your question.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  692. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    you wrote:
    ”Hot Cat or E-Cat are the same thing, just in different configuration.”
    >oxforddictionaries.com. Definition of configuration in English: “An arrangement of parts or elements in a particular form, figure, or combination.”<
    What causes the difference between the low temperature reactors and the Hot Cat? Because of the fuel? Control system? Engineering? Other?
    Thermal Regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  693. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    I am sorry, I cannot give these details so far.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  694. Dr Rossi:
    So: the 1 MW plant is made by 30 000 components: stunning! A dramatic evolution respect the tabletop toys we have seen in 25 years of LENR attempts. The New Era really begins !!!
    Godspeed,
    Elliott

  695. Andrea Rossi

    Elliott Crain:
    Thank you: this is the achievement of my Team.
    Let’s wait for the results after the year long operation, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  696. Hugh DeVries

    Andrea,

    There needs to be an official focal point for recording and expanding the terminology for the ECAT with product numbers, specifications, etc. I am led to believe this central point of communication is the website ECAT.com –but this seems to add some confusion.

    “ECAT.com is a domain owned and operated by Hydro Fusion. ECAT.com is designated as The Official ECAT Website by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation. – See more at: http://ecat.com/about#sthash.sg7md4qG.dpuf.”

    This opens up some questiona that need to be addressed.

    Has the “ECAT” acronym been trademarked? Hydro Fusion claims they own the “ECAT.com domain. Who is in charge of approving the content of the ECAT.com website? There appears to be model number reference to the ECAT HT. Should the patent terminology be consistent in the website? How does it tie in when defending Intellectual Property rights?

    Best regards,
    Hugh DeVries

  697. Andrea Rossi

    Hugh DeVries:
    1- Ecat is a registered trade mark
    2- Hydrofusion is a Swedish commercial Licensee of Leonardo Corporation and is licensed to use the trade marks of the same in the way they deem it useful
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  698. Alexvs

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    Could you define what is exactly the so called Rossi Effect?
    How is it different from Pons-Fleischmann or Paneth-Peters Effect?

    Regards

    Alex

  699. Andrea Rossi

    Alexvs:
    1- The so called Rossi Effect is described well in the Report of the Independent Third Party.
    2- Pons-Fleishmann is an electrolysys induced LENR, Rossi Effect is a LENR induced by other means ( see 1).
    3- The Paneth-Peters Effect was a fusion of deuterium inside micropowders of Pd, quite similar to what Fleishmann- Pons made.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  700. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie:
    Hot Cat or E-Cat are the same thing, just in different configuration. The distinction is conventional. The structure is the same. Both work on the base of the so called Rossi Effect.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  701. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I am quite familiar with all your previous tests of the low temperature E-Cat which you have employed in the 1 Meg unit used in the present factory device. And I know you have publically allowed observations and published your data when they were displayed. However none of the tests on the low temperature devices were performed outside your venue or by third party investigators like the tests performed on the Hot-cat by the third party group. Again, am I missing some coexisting basis, where testing the Hot-cat by the 3pt format, then also can be related to the low temperature device as proof of its viability?
    Regards.

  702. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Being on your team performing that job must be the most facinating, fullfilling career possible — despite it being long, tedious work.

    Congrats on your exciting occupation!

  703. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Thank you. You are right, but the work, albeit long, is all but tedious.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  704. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    When you refer to this 1 MW plant as a ‘prototype’, do you mean it is a test plant that will see limited commercial use, or is the intent for it to be a fully functioning commercial plant intended for long-term use?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  705. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland,
    When I say “prototype” I mean that it is the first fully functioning commercial plant intended for long term use, supplied to a Customer that uses it for generate the heat necessary to make the production of his industry..
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  706. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Does Industrial Heat have a team or group of researchers looking at a more inherent, fundamental method of controlling the output of a reactor? To be more precise, I mean methods such as adding elements or chemicals to the core, adjusting geometries, or adding the LENR version of control rods rather than the other perfectly valid method of extensive computer control. I dream of a series of E-Cats that are self sustaining, but always bouncing back from a set maximum temperature.

  707. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    That’s the job of my Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  708. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie:
    Please go through this very blog, to find the many tests made with the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  709. Paul

    Andrea,

    Which system has the shorter “Mean Time to Repair”, the reactors (and controllers) or the plumbing?

    Steam under pressure can be very unforgiving.

    Paul

  710. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    We still have not statistics to answer your question. So far we are in a R&D mode, in which maintainance goes in parallel with corrections, modifications, etc.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  711. Congratulations to you and your team: great work, we all are with you with our spirit! :)

  712. Andrea Rossi

    Deborah Rivera:
    Thank you from the whole Team,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  713. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    You have submitted the Hot-Cat to third party testing and allowed the results to be published. I have been curious about the fact that the cool E-Cat has never been investigated or replicated and the results published by third party individuals. Have I missed something?
    Regards and congratulations.

  714. Do you think that the E-Cat could retrofit coal power plants to revitalize them after the new anti pollution requirements?

  715. Andrea Rossi

    Blake Broughton:
    Yes, that is a field where we could be useful, but the big issue, on the base of the experience we had dealing with coal fired power plants, is the very, very long and difficult procedure to change the authorizations. Power plants have extremely complex and precisely defined authotization papers and to change them is very complex. I say this on the base of a specific experience I had on this issue in California in 2012.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  716. Paul

    Andrea,

    What do you do all day when babysitting the 1MW plant?

    E-Cat Stokers will probably have less to do than Maytag repairman.

    Paul

  717. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    control of temperature, steam, flow rates, correct operation of pumps, electromagnetics, just to give an example; obviously I cannot enter into particulars, but consider that the 1 MW plant has about 30,000 components and an orchestra of more than 100 reactors to put in harmony, trying to reach the “perfect harmony”. It is not easy, considering that this is a prototype.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  718. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    I am continuing to find comments not to be spammed in the first page of the daily 30 pages or so of spam. For obvious reasons of time,I can only check the first page. This makes me suppose many comments are unduly spammed by the anti-spam robot. To make it worse, when a comment is spammed the robot puts automatically in the black list the address from which the comment arrives, so that if another comment arrives from the same address, it is automatically spammed again. I apologize for this, but without the robot I could not menage this blog: imagine to receive six, seven hundreds of comments per day and pick up the good ones…
    I invite all the Readers that find spammed their comments to send them again from another address, or inform us about the disfunction writing to
    info@journal-of-nuclear-physics.com
    If you send here your comment, it will be published.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  719. Andrea Rossi

    Jamee Gamp:
    You can put all the questions you want to the Author.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  720. Hello Sir, would you mind if i ask you a few questions on these topics please?

  721. gian

    Caro Andrea
    Please read this, made with Google translate, and tell me how do you feel to be considered at these levels from the highest echelons in the world.
    Leggi questo (io me lo sono goduto con google translate)
    e poi confidami come ci si sente ad essere arbitro dei
    destini delle grandi potenze. anzi del mondo.

    http://www.kp.ru/daily/26323.7/3203639/

    With sympathy, but please be safe, you never know…
    Best wishes,
    Con simpatia, ma sii prudente, non si sa mai.
    Caldi,no roventi saluti

  722. Andrea Rossi

    Gian:
    Thank you for your email, but at the moment I have only one thing to do: work, work, work, with my wonderful Team, to merit all this: I do not think I deserve it still, until the tests are finished; remind that the final results could be positive, but also could be negative. Now we have to work, work, work.
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  723. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, on E cat Word was published the new report of prof. Alexander Parkhomov .

    His conclusions :

    Experiments with the replica of the Rossi high temperature heat source loaded mixture of lithium aluminum hydride and nickel, have shown that at temperatures of about 1100°C or higher, this device actually produces more energy than it consumes.
    The level of ionizing radiation during reactor operation does not significantly exceed background rates. Neutron flux density does not exceed 0.2 neutrons/cm2

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/01/31/new-report-from-alexander-parkhomov-with-new-data-details/

  724. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De meo:
    Thank you for this link too. Definitely, the work of Dr Parkhomov is valid.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  725. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, in Russia you are popular as President Obama. Look at this Russian link.
    Congratulations.

    http://www.kp.ru/daily/26323.7/3203639/

  726. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo de Meo:
    Thank you for the link to the video of the Parkhomov Experiment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  727. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr Rossi:
    From what I read in the blogosphere, LENR, thanks to your work, are beginning to be taken in consideration also from exponents of the mainstream science.

  728. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    I agree: the work made by my Team has produced also a change of mind in most of the mainstream scientists, that from a position negatively biased passed to a more possibilistic opinion. The work of Dr Parkhomov also has been important.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  729. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi , here is the report and the video of the experiment that was successful of Dr. Alexander Parkhomov, which concludes:

    Similar experiments with generators of heat at high temperature Rossi loaded with a mixture of lithium aluminum hydride and nickel , have shown that at temperatures of about 1100 ° C or above this device actually produces more energy than it consumes .
    The level of ionizing radiation during operation of the reactor does not exceed the background radiation . Density of the neutron flux does not exceed 0.2 neutrons / cm2

    https://yadi.sk/i/8f_JV8ygeMQSc

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTa3uVYuvwg

    Prof. Alexander Parkhomov work has been very important.

  730. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Let’s make a distinction: President Obama is among the greatest Presidents of the History of the USA. I am an inventor that works ( with a wonderful Team) 16 hours per day to make sure a 1 MW LENR activated thermal energy generator works well and reliably: my results can be positive, but also negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  731. I discovered your Theoretical feasibility of cold fusion according to the ITP. You also have a lot more traffic.
    Continue your important job, we all are with you!

  732. Andrea Rossi

    Sammy:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  733. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, even Wired has returned to speak of’ E-Cat. Do not miss this article!!

    http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-01/30/cold-fusion-energy-advances-2015

  734. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De meo:
    Thank you for the link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  735. On January 28, a link to paper by U.V.S.Seshavathara was given on this blog (http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/paperinfo.aspx?journalid=169&doi=10.11648/j.ijrse.s.2015040401.11). If I understand the paper correctly, they propose the following reaction to explain the energy production of the E-cat:

    Li7 + Ni58 –> Ni62 + 3p

    and they claim that the reaction is 3.64 MeV exothermic. However, when I compute the energy balance of this reaction, I obtain that it is -0.44 MeV endothermic. Either I calculated wrong or I misunderstood the paper or the paper is wrong.

    I just want to bring this to attention of readers of this blog.

  736. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers of the JoNP:
    Today has been published the paper of Wladimir Guglinski “Aether structure for the unification between gravity and electromagnetism”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  737. Hello again Andrea!

    We have started a new category for replication, now when the Russian researcher Alexander Parkhomov has started- I think many will follow.

    Would you be interested in writing down your most important experiences of safety and construction. And let me publish them as an important topic of security.

    This would be a good thing for everyone. I think this evolution will not be stopped, people willwhether we like it or not try to copy the rossi effect in their garage during those next 10 years.

    Example issue
    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1081-Safety-before-you-start/

    Best David

  738. Andrea Rossi

    David:
    Sorry, but I cannot get any liability about safety related to third parties that want to replicate the so called Rossi Effect.
    As I already wrote in this blog many times, it is absolutely necessary that the experiments are made by professionals with the due knowledge of all the safety regulations and laws.
    Should I give instructions, I automatically could get liabilities. These experiments are dangerous and must be done by professionals expert of the art and of the safety issues involved. This is all I can say and underline. I strongly suggest to non experts of the art and of the safety issues connected to it not to make any experiment: I say this not to avoid competition ( competition will come in any case from proper concerns), but to avoid that somebody gets hurt. This is the sole thing that , responsibly, I can write and say.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  739. LENR-to-Market Digest — January 30, 2015 – Highlights this week include: New report by Alexander Parkhomov showing excess heat in E-Cat variant; Jack Cole Reports Excess Heat, too; Sven Kullander Plaque for 1 MW E-Cat Plant; Report from Cold Fusion 101 at MIT; Science Journal special section on LENR; “Other Nuclear” (PESN; January 30, 2015)

  740. Andrea Rossi

    Sterling Allan:
    Thank you for the information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  741. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Here is a post with some new data from Alexander Parkhomov’s tests done this month on a reactor. They are consistent with data reported in his December tests.

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/01/28/parkhomov-updates-report-with-some-new-data-images/

    Also a video of his reactor and experiment (2 hours long!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTa3uVYuvwg

    What are your thoughts on Dr. Parkhomov’s apparent success on replicating the ‘Rossi effect’?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  742. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    At this point I suppose I can say that the replication of Prof. Parkhomov is serious, very serious.
    I am delighted of the fact that an expert of the art, using what has been published, has been apparently able to replicate the Effect. I think this is a good thing for all.
    Parkhomov is a product of the Russian scientific school, and I am honoured to have been studied from professionals belonging to that level of excellence. Now we have a mainstream scientific environment Prof, not confined in the LENR entity, that has replicated seriously my work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  743. Hi Andrea,

    While I understand how busy you are changing the world, I wanted to be sure to invite you to another small benefit we are planning.

    “Tom & Doug” will be headlining a benefit concert on Saturday March 21 in Princeton NJ. The beneficiary this time is this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpMOJHXn5zI

    We’ll have a drum kit available, just in case there are any Special Guest Drummers.

    -thomas​

  744. Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    He,he,he…I am very sorry, but I have to stay night and day, every day, with the 1 MW plant: I have to direct tens of thousands of components of the plant, playing in the same “orchestra” to reach the perfect harmony, as in the movie “The Concert”.
    And this will be at least until the end of the year.
    I wish great success to your benefit show and I am sure you will find a better drummer ( it doesn’t take too much).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  745. To all readers of JONP.

    The second edition of my book ‘An Impossible Invention’ about Andrea Rossi, the E-Cat and LENR, containing corrections and a few updates, is available both as e-book and paperback through Amazon:
    http://www.amazon.com/Impossible-Invention-Energy-Source-Change-ebook/dp/B00O38417S/

    If you already read the book, feel free to write a review on the Amazon listing page.

    The e-book version of the second edition is offered for free to anyone who bought the first edition. To get a copy, please send an email to mats@animpossibleinvention.com .
    Thanks,
    Mats Lewan

  746. Andrea Rossi

    Mats Lewan:
    Thank yoy for this information regarding your book.
    WRm Regards
    A.R.

  747. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    I read today on Ecatworld the translation of the report regarding the replication of the Rossi Effect made by Prof. Parkhomov: very impressive. Congratulations, Prof. Parkhomov.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  748. Dr Rossi:
    What yoiu write in this blog is truly a great and helpful piece of information. I
    am satisfied that you just shared this useful information with
    us. Please keep us informed like this. Thanks for sharing.

  749. Andrea Rossi

    Phyllis:
    Thank you: I do my best, confined in the intellectual property circled carts, though!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  750. Andrea Rossi

    U.V.S. Seshavatharam:
    Thank you for your publication, whose reference will be surely interesting for our Readers as it has been for me.
    After the important work of the Russian Alexander Parkhomov now this publication from an Indian scientist: I am really delighted of the fact that the work of our team is useful in the world.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  751. Respected Andreea Rossi Sir

    Respected sir,

    How are you sir.

    With your kind blessings and encouragement, SciencePG published our paper on E-CAT.

    http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/paperinfo.aspx?journalid=169&doi=10.11648/j.ijrse.s.2015040401.11
    [1]

    HTTP://ARTICLE.SCIENCEPUBLISHINGGROUP.COM/PDF/10.11648.J.IJRSE.S.2015040401.11.PDF
    [2]

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

  752. Dr Rossi:
    The Russian Scientist Alexander Parkhomov has published the results of his replication of the Rossi Effect: any comment?
    Thank you for your work,
    E.P.

  753. Andrea Rossi

    Evelynpi:
    Russian Scientists normally are serious. It appears that the work of Prof. Parkhomov is serious too, but I do not know enough particulars to express a precise opinion. Surely what he writes and says is worth our attention. The history of his life gives evidence of a history of a serious and hard work. His publications are important.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  754. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Pekka Janhunen,
    The reason for the reaction Li6+ep->He4 + He3 + e + 3.51 MeV not being included in reaction 10e is VERY specific: I forgot to add it. :) .
    Thanks for the suggestion/correction.

    I say that Hyd is “picometrically neutral” only because its maximum charge displacement 0.4 [pm], about 3 thousands of the shortest internuclear distance in a pure Ni crystal at room temperature. This should give penetrating properties much higher than any charged particle, towards that of a neutron. I do not know the cross section of Hyd at their average speed (also unknown) in a Nickel lattice or in alumina. I agree with you that Hyd should not be able to cross many microns of a solid state reacting matrix. I have never done detailed “scenario” numbers, perhaps I should. Clearly, as you say, if the nuclei of the matrix do not react (Ni62 seems to be among these) the Hyd should only be scattered elastically and their free path increase.

    Thanks for your questions.
    Best regards
    Andrea Calaon

  755. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Prof. Carlo Rubbia said yeaterday that alternative energies are useless and that the only resource to go for is gas and the technology to break its molecule to get cheap and clean hydrogen. What do you think?

  756. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I do not agree. The technology cited by Prof. Carlo Rubbia is surely very interesting, but I think that all the possible energy sources have to be integrated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  757. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    When do you think the test phase of the 1 MW plant delivered to the customer will finish?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  758. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Not before November 2015, not later than February 2016, I suppose.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  759. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    Why the COP you are getting from the 1 MW plant is higher than the COP resulted in the Lugano Test made by the ITP?
    Godspeed,
    JCR

  760. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    We make a strong self sustained mode, that, obviously, substantially affects the COP. The Professors of the Independent Third Party wanted not to use the ssm, for the reasons they explained clearly in the report.
    I must remind you that at the end of our tests the final results could be positive, but also negative and we cannot give final results until the tests will have been completed.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  761. Dear Andrea Rossi:
    I am reading this blog from the very beginning in 2011 and everyday for me to read of you is inspiring.
    Thank you for all you are doing for us,
    Sammy

  762. Andrea Rossi

    Sammy:
    Let me correct your delighting comment: it’s not about what I am doing, it’s about what my Team is doing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  763. Is the Customer of IH utilizing the 1 MW plant delivered to him?

  764. Andrea Rossi

    Brenton:
    The Customer is utilizing the 1 MW plant and to the necessary extent we are providing technical assistance. This is all the information I am able to provide, until I’m given further permission from the Customer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  765. Dear Andrea Calaon,
    Is there some specific reason why reaction Li6+ep->He4+He3+e+4MeV is not included in reaction 10e on page 20? I would imagine that one to be a faster reaction than the ones given because it does not involve the weak interaction.
    regards, pekka

  766. Dr Rossi:
    What do you think of all the attempts to replicate the Rossi Effect?

  767. Andrea Rossi

    Brant Erholm:
    I am interested in all the development of energy technologies and this is a positive development for the industry.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  768. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    The E-Cat Australia web site states that domestic e-cats will be available mid-2018 (http://e-cataustralia.com/order-and-buy/domestic-10kw)

    Is this projection based on the latest information you have?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  769. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    At this time it is too early to tell when we will finish our testing and a product will be available for sale; there is also the safety certification issue to complete.
    I will continue my R&D efforts and work with the Team to ensure we are able to bring the domestic E-Cat to market. This will be done as fast as we can, but there is considerable work to be done.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  770. Giannino Ferro Casagrande

    Molto , molto bella la risposta a Frank Acland !!! Rammentare l’immenso Sergio assieme al prof. Kullander , che io non ho mai conosciuto , ma che immagino la statura umana , è una cosa che mi fa gioire nerl seguire ( in silenzio ) da anni il sito JdFN ….. Giannino da Udin !!!!!!!!!

  771. Andrea Rossi

    Giannino Ferro Casagrande:
    Thank you for your kind attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  772. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I assume you are happy with the performance of the plant, since I doubt you would honor Dr. Kullander with such a plaque if it was not performing well.

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  773. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Sven has inspired us to arrive to the top. This does not imply that we are there already and does not mean that after the test period the results will be positive: it means that we have to reach positive results with every positive effort.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  774. John

    Dear Andrea,

    Actually, I was referring to the photograph of the plaque that you sent to Frank Acland. It seems to contain no commas at all. Perhaps a stylistic choice? Also, I believe it is called “The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences” instead of “The Swedish Royal Academy of Science”.

    Minor nitpicks, I know. What I really want to see is a photo of the plaque on the plant itself, and maybe something for Professor Focardi as well?

    Best Regards,

    John

  775. Andrea Rossi

    John:
    The plaque has been written by an English mother language Professor.
    I suppose he has chosen that kind of punctuation for a stylistic choice, as you correctly write. About the “Swedish Royal Academy of Science” I think that it is not uncorrect.
    You are right about the proposal to put a plaque also for Prof. Sergio Focardi. It’s on its way.
    About the photos of the plant, I already answered and I sympathise with your will.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  776. Hi, Andrea Rossi:
    Magnificent skill, we all are defending your job.
    Salvatore

  777. Andrea Rossi

    Salvatore:
    Thanks,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  778. John

    Dear Andrea,

    I was wondering, why does the plaque text contain periods where there should be commas?

    Sincerely,

    The Punctuation Police

  779. Andrea Rossi

    John:
    My typos in the comment, the plaque is correct. Thank you for your attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  780. Greg Leonard

    Dear AR
    A very worthy tribute.
    I look forward to seeing it when the pictures of the new plant are published

  781. Andrea Rossi

    Greg Leonard:
    I agree.
    About the photos: you will find them here asap.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  782. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Joseph Fine,
    thanks for reading the “article” and for the comment about the already used name.
    I think will change from neuter (-um) to masculine (-us) (always in the second declension): Hydronius.
    The shortening will remain Hyd, which suggests how the particles so far managed to “hide” from the researcher’s’ eyes. And Hyd could also be the Hyde version of Dr Hydrogen when using the electron potion.
    Regards
    Andrea Calaon

  783. Andrea Rossi

    To all our Readers:
    One year ago Prof Sven Kullander passed away. We applied to the 1 MW plant installed in the factory of the Customer of IH the following plate, in memory of this giant of the scientific world:
    ” To Prof. Sven Kullander.
    The first industrial plant working with the new LENR technology is dedicated to Prof. Sven Kullander, professor emeritus in high energy physics in Uppsala University and member of the Swedish Royal Academy of Science.
    His scientific spirit and great skill, human and cultural standards and neverending enthusiasm have been of monumental value for the completion of this plant .
    Andrea Rossi and the whole Team that manufactured this plant “

  784. Dear Andrea Calaon,
    Thank you for your kind answer. In the paper you say that Hyd is “picometrically neutral”. If this is taken to mean that its effective size with respect to reactions with metal nuclei is 1 pm, then Hyd’s mean free path in nickel is only 10 microns. If the Hyd (assuming it exists) mostly reacts inelastically with a nucleus it encounters (that is, if it usually causes a nuclear reaction of some sort instead of being scattered elastically), then Hyds should not be able to leak outside the device although there should be some transmutations taking place in the innermost few tens of microns layer of the Al2O3 reactor wall unless Al and O would be for some reason “inert” nuclei with respect to such process.
    best regards, pekka

  785. 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.

  786. 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

  787. 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

  788. 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

  789. 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.

  790. 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

  791. 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

  792. 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

  793. Andrea Rossi

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

  794. 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

  795. Joe

    JR,

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  796. 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

  797. I see this blog has a great success, probably due to your E-Cat. To further increase your success you should show photos of the 1 MW plant!
    Hope this suggestion helps :) Take care.

  798. Andrea Rossi

    Sammy:
    I’ll see what I can do.
    Thank you for your attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  799. Do you think the E-Cat will be useful for electric vehicles?

  800. Andrea Rossi

    Electric Vehicles:
    It will take time, at least several years, before seing E-Cats coupled with car electric power modules, but our team will start experiments in this field too probably in 2016.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  801. 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

  802. 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.

  803. 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

  804. 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)

  805. Andrea Rossi

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

  806. 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

  807. 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

  808. 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

  809. Hi Andrea:

    A quick question, but only if you feel it is appropriate to address the matter. If not please send to trash.

    In very general terms, is your success in finding a method for generating substantial quantities of excess heat based:

    A) Principally, on a careful consideration of your knowledge of nuclear processes and logically deducing what might well stand a chance of working? or:

    B) Principally, on trying all kinds of experiments with all kinds of substances in many combinations, finally finding a combination that worked?

    If it reflects both, would you like to make a guess as to what proportion each contributed?

    The first of the above reflects an astonishingly superior level not only of knowledge but also of understanding. (The difference between knowledge and understanding is, in my opinion, often underestimated!) The second reflects a remarkable degree of tenacity!

    Thank you.

    Rodney Nicholson.

  810. Andrea Rossi

    Rodney Nicholson:
    A) first, then a trial and error process that could be defined by B). More A than B in the first period, eventually a mix of an evolving A modified by B and vice versa. Not easy to digest, I know. This is why the E-Cat is a very complex apparatus and the 1 MW plant is made by tens of thousands of components.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  811. orsobubu

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

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

  812. Andrea Rossi

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

  813. 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

  814. 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.

  815. 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.

  816. 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.

  817. 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

  818. Andrea Rossi

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

  819. 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

  820. 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.

  821. 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/

  822. Andrea Rossi

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

  823. 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

  824. Andrea Rossi

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

  825. Curiosone

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

  826. 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.

  827. 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

  828. 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.

  829. Curiosone

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

  830. 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.

  831. 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

  832. 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.

  833. DTravchenko

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

  834. Andrea Rossi

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

  835. DTravchenko

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

  836. 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.

  837. 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

  838. 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.

  839. Dr Rossi:
    I never wrote here, but I want to thank you for what you are doing with your fantastic work. We all wait for the domestic E-Cat and you cannot imagine how many persons are sustaining you everywhere.
    Godspeed,
    Saul

  840. Andrea Rossi

    Saul Schiffelbein:
    Thank you, we are working very hard on it and it is a pleasure read messages like yours.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  841. 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.

  842. Andrea Rossi

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

  843. 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?

  844. 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.

  845. Dr Rossi:
    Congratulations for your work. Why don’t you sue the two or three morons that continue to insult your work and your character?

  846. Andrea Rossi

    Joey Conlans:
    To sue zombies is a waste of time and money.
    Our plants speak for the Team I have the honour to belong to.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  847. 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

  848. 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.

  849. 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

  850. 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.

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

  852. Andrea Rossi

    Giorgio:
    Likewise,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  853. 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

  854. 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.

  855. 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

  856. 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

  857. 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.

  858. 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/

  859. 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.

  860. Andrea Rossi

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

  861. 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

  862. 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?

  863. 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

  864. 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.

  865. 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?

  866. 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.

  867. 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

  868. 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.

  869. Andrea Rossi

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

  870. 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

  871. 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

  872. 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.

  873. 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

  874. 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.

  875. 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

  876. 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

  877. 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.

  878. 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.

  879. JonJon

    Andrea,
    Is LENR cold fusion or cold transmutation?

  880. 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.

  881. 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

  882. JCRenoir

    Dear Dr Rossi:
    What do you tink about the article of Ing. Ventola on Ecatnewfire?
    JCR

  883. Andrea Rossi

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

  884. 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

  885. 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.

  886. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I wanted you to be aware that at E-Cat World I have started a Knowledge Base project that I hope will serve as a useful reference for all topics connected with LENR. It is built on the MediaWiki software, so it operates much like Wikipedia.

    Anyone is able to add or edit entries (if they abide by the rules): http://kb.e-catworld.com/index.php?title=E-Cat_World_LENR_Knowledge_Base

    Please use it and contribute if you wish!

    Best wishes,

    Frank

  887. Andrea Rossi

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

  888. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi , the Russians are working hard!! The scientist Yuri Nikolaevich states that are at a high level with LENR and think to realize industrial devices .
    What do you think ?

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/01/short-interview-with-yu-n-bazhutov.html

  889. 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.

  890. 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

  891. Andrea Rossi

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

  892. 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/

  893. 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.

  894. 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

  895. 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

  896. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Dr. JR,

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

    sorry

    regards
    wlad

  897. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, sending the great news.
    The Russians have replicated the experiment of ‘ cat and producing abnormal heat of 2.5 times. It ‘s great!!

    http://www.proatom.ru/modules.php?file=article&name=News&sid=5779

    A seminar on LENR with Parkhomov on Jan 27th
    On the russian site proatom.ru, a conference is announced on January 27. Parkhomov will present what looks like his E-cat replication, and “SN Andreev” “academic secretary of the Institute of General Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences” will present “The study of LENR- a new direction in science”, a review of LENr studies outlining priority for future research.

    VNIIAES invites you to a seminar opponents and stroronnikov LENR
    January 27, 2015 g, Tuesday, at 14-00, VNIIAES (Ferghana, 25) in the room. 614 will host a seminar: “The study of low-energy nuclear reactions – a new direction in science.” Everyone is welcome, Order badge: prosvirnov@vniiaes.ru , have passport

    Speakers:
    AG Parkhomov, candidate of physical and mathematical sciences, Moscow State University, “The study of high-temperature heat source analogue of Russia”. The world’s first Russian scientists repeated experience with the release of nickel hydrogenation anomalous heat is 2.5 times greater than the costs (without the participation of A. Rossi).

    SN Andreev, academic secretary of the Institute of General Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, doctor of sciences. “The study of low-energy nuclear reactions – a new direction in science.” Reviewed the results achieved in the study LENR and outlined the priorities for future research.

    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/news/index.php/News/51-A-seminar-on-LENR-with-Parkhomov-on-Jan-27th/

  898. 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

  899. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    Do you think it could be possible to make an industrial or domestic E-Cat, working every day for domestic or industrial customers, without using catalyzers, but only the fuel described in the Lugano Report?
    JCR

  900. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    Interesting. I cannot comment, since I have not knowledge of the particulars, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  901. Curiosone

    Dr Rossi:
    Seems that several replications of the Rossi Effect have been made: congratulations!
    Godspeed,
    W.G.

  902. Marco Serra

    Dear Dr. Rossi
    in this days when the Rossi Effect seems to be almost easy to replicate (even if in its raw essence) I wonder how much your secret catalyst is a well kept secret. Do the people of your team know it?

    God bless you

    Mrco Serra

  903. Andrea Rossi

    Marco Serra:
    There is a very big difference between the replication of the patented effect and the construction of an industrial plant, a difference that takes years of enormous work, a very difficult one. Sooner or later, obviously, this gap will be filled up by the Competition, but n the meantime our team will have reached an economy scale that will make the competition not that much convenient. This is the strategy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  904. gian

    E questo è l’originale.

    http://vpk.name/forum/s188.html

    Sono rimasto fortemente impressionato da quanto i russi (questi russi) apprezzino gli e-cat e da quello che pensano dei rapporti fra Andrea Rossi e gli USA.
    Sarei veramente grato se Lei volesse fare commenti.
    Seguo la Sua attivitò da fine 2010.
    Molto caldamente auguro a Lei ed alla sua ricerca ogni bene.

  905. Andrea Rossi

    Gian:
    Honestly, in this period “rest” is not an option for our Team.
    About the link: I like also to remind the important article of Dr Vitaly Uzikov about our work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  906. gian

    I think you could be interested in

    http://coldfusionnow.org/interview-with-yuri-bazhutov-by-peter-gluck/.

    Andrea, Lei quando si riposa?
    Con stima e simpatia
    Gian

  907. Andrea Rossi

    Gian:
    Thank you for the link : it is really interesting to read the opinions from Russian scientists regarding our work.
    The sole comment O want to write is that I hope this technology not will integrate with all the other sources, but also will help a peaceful integration between all the players. It is unavoidable that the relationship between all the main Countries of the world will reach a new peaceful order, for the good of the mankind. Industrial competition will generate market evolution in fovour of anybody. This is the essence of future, we hope.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  908. Marco Serra

    Dear Sundar Narayan,
    You are certainly aware of a most recent and precise determination of G using laser-cooled atoms and quantum interferometry performed by an italian team. As reported on Nature in 2014 (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v510/n7506/full/nature13433.html)
    they obtained the value G = 6.67191(99) × 10−11 m3 kg−1 s−2 with a relative uncertainty of 150 parts per million

    Best Regards
    Marco Serra

  909. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Joseph Fine,

    I’m speechless, as expected. Thank you very very much !

    Best Regards,
    Koen

  910. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    Yes, I too read that paper and is very intriguing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  911. JR

    Joe,

    I don’t know enough about the details of big bang nucleosynthesis to say. The high densities and temperatures complicate things enormously, as the densities increase the probability of fusion, while the temperatures lead to photo-dissociation of the deuteron, so the temperature-dependent equilibrium complicates things and makes it very different then what’s going on in the universe now.

    However, the temperatures at the point you’re discussing (where there are predictions of the n/p ratios based on thermal equilibrium type arguments) are far too high to have significant deuteron formation. So what happens with deuteron formation depends on later stages when things are cooler.

    Electrons and especially neutrinos are again different. At incredibly high densities (very early on), neutrinos interact enough that they are in equilibrium with matter, but as densities decrease the weak neutrino interaction decouples them from other matter. So the timescales (and density/temperature scales) relevant for determining the neutrino population are different from everything else.

    Those are general issues related to how one deals with the early universe; as I say, it’s not my area of expertise so while I know that these considerations are critical, I can’t provide details or numerical estimates.

  912. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers of the JoNP:
    Today has been published on the Journal of Nuclear Physics the paper ” The gravitational constant and its relationship to the properties of virtual particles” by Dr Sundar Narayan (Lambton College, Sarnia, Ontario- Canada).
    JoNP

  913. Peter Wolstenholme

    Dr. Rossi:
    Of course you are probably right as e-cats will be closely scrutinised by hostile folk. But Alessandro Coppi and I merely drew your attention to the facts relating to the Low Voltage Directive in the European Union, and the CE mark.
    Best Wishes,
    Peter W.

  914. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Wolstenholme:
    You are right, as well as Alessandro Coppi, but the E-Cat is not an apparatus that can be dealt with a self-certification like a low voltage appliance.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  915. Peter Wolstenholme

    In fact the CE low voltage directive covers apparatus working between 50 V and 1000 V. a.c. and a similar d.c. range. Not really low! If a manufacturer of mains- voltage devices checks carefully that his products meet the various relevant specifications he is permitted to affix the CE mark without needing a third-party testing laboratory. (I suspect that in the US one would require UL certification.)

  916. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Wolstenholme:
    To put a device like the E-Cat for sale to the public without a major certification would be a suicide.
    Warm Regards.
    A.R.

  917. Joe

    JR,

    Your statement about a sparsity of neutrons in the Universe (when compared to 1H1) is the only logical explanation for the preponderance of 1H1 in the Universe.

    It has been determined that there were about seven protons for every neutron at the beginning of the Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN), primarily due to their relative mass.
    Question: How are the relative numbers of electrons and neutrinos in the Universe determined? They could not possibly be determined solely by their relative mass as in the case of the baryons.

    All the best,
    Joe

  918. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, the invitation to read an interesting article engineer electric fan.

    The Rossi Effect is visible also without the catalyst
    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/rossi-effect-visible-without-catalyst/

  919. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you, very interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  920. Robert Curto

    JR, Thank you for your comment, intelligent as always.
    Wlad thinks I am your friend ! (I wish)
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  921. Alessandro Coppi

    Hi Andrea, what I am going to say could be a nonsense, but at least for Europe the safety certification in this case should be restricted to the low voltage direttive CE, this imply that it is not mandatory a third party certification, but the IH itself can apply the mark.

    Best regards
    Alessandro Coppi

  922. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    No, it is not so. We need a safety certification made by a major certifier. By the way, the E-Cat is not a low voltage apparatus.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  923. Dear sir (senior)!

    With great admiration I observe Your work and I want to ask the following questions:

    Do you have the distributor of Your firm in Israel?

    Besides, Can Your firm produce devices for building electricity energy providing with automatic control of device loading?

    Can You send Your answer to my question to my E-mail
    rvorobyov@walla.co.il
    with the attributes of Your firm – address, E-mail, etc?

    Sincerely,

    Dr. Roman Vorobyov.

  924. Andrea Rossi

    Roman Vorobyov:
    We do not sell anymore commercial licenses.
    So far we do not produce devices able to make electricity.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  925. Frederic Maillard

    Dear Dr. Rossi
    When do you think you will get the e-cat certified in China for industrial usage, if not granted yet ?
    Best wishes
    FM

  926. Andrea Rossi

    Frederic Maillard:
    Soon.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  927. Dear Andrea Rossi,
    (Not related to E-cat)In Norman Cook’s book that you recommended, I did not understand the angular momentum part. It looks to me that a ground state lattice nucleus should not rotate, because rotation would increase its energy. If so, then the orbital angular momentum of all its nuclei should be zero, and the total angular momentum would just be a sum of the spins. Did you understand this angular momentum issue when you read Cook’s book?
    regards, pekka

  928. Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    The independent -particle model implies that there is a total angular momentum value j for each nucleon that is made by the sum of the spin s and its orbital angular momentum. The j value is an observable quantity that has been measured also for ground state isotopes. Ground states do not imply absence of orbital momentum.
    See also Greiner-Maruhn ” Nuclear Models” Springer 1996 pp 11-40.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  929. Regarding Dr. Joseph Fine’s link to this very interesting article …….. :

    https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140624-fluid-tests-hint-at-concrete-quantum-reality/

    ….. can someone please clarify for me whether the article is implying that if the de Broglie interpretation of quantum mechanics proves to be correct (using the word ‘correct’ cautiously!) then it can be taken as serious evidence for the existence of an aether?

    And that it is on the waves of this vibrating aether that photons propagate, giving them the appearance of possessing wave properties, when in reality they are particles only, riding on these aether waves? Or might the waves some kind of non-aether wave?

    And, as a further consequence, that Occam’s Razor should be applied cautiously!

    Or am I completely off on a tangent here?

    Struggling-for-some-sort-of-understanding regards,

    Rodney Nicholson
    (My understanding is limited because I am an economist not a physicist. But I did a fair amount of physics in my final three years of UK high school.)

  930. Regarding Dr. Joseph Fine’s link to this very interesting article …….. :

    https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140624-fluid-tests-hint-at-concrete-quantum-reality/

    ….. can someone please clarify for me whether the article is implying that if the de Broglie interpretation of quantum mechanics proves to be correct (using the word ‘correct’ cautiously!) then it can be taken as proving the existence of an aether?

    And that it is on the waves of this vibrating aether that photons propagate, giving them the appearance of possessing wave properties, when in reality they are particles only, riding on these aether waves?

    Or am I completely off on a tangent here?

    Struggling-for-some-sort-of-understanding regards,

    Rodney Nicholson
    (My understanding is limited because I am an economist not a physicist. But I did a fair amount of physics in my final three years of UK high school.)

  931. JR

    Wlad,

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

    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 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.

    Joe – Does this sufficiently answer your question? It really has much more to do with the neutron lifetime than the details of proton+neutron fusion.

  932. Joe

    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.

    All the best,
    Joe

  933. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Robert Curto

    please tell to your friend Dr. JR that he can win a US 500.000 prize, if he solves the puzzle on the mystery why the hydrogen exists in the Universe, since it seems impossible to explain why all the hydrogen of the Universe was not converted to deuterium thanks to the fusion proton-neutron due to the background of neutrons of the enviroment.

    regards
    wlad

  934. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Joe,
    I was thinking about the puzzle of the deuterium formation, and I got the following conclusions:

    1) The deuteron cannot be formed via the perforation of the flux n(o) of the proton by a neutron with energy in order of 2MeV. Because with this energy of the neutron, when the neutron enters into the field Sp(p) of the proton there is no way for the neutron to be captured by the proton (they do not succeed to get spin-interaction, in order to form the deuterium).

    2) The neutron can be captured by the proton only if the neutron has low energy when it enters within the field Sp(p) of the proton. But a neutron with low energy cannot perforate the flux n(o) of the proton and neutron, and so the deuterium cannot be formed by low energy neutrons (if the neutron needs to enter within the field Sp(p) by perforating the flux n(o) of the proton).

    3) There is only two ways for the formation of the deuterium:

    3.a) Via hot fusion within the stars, between two protons. The fusion produces 2He2, which decays in deuterium (it happens only in 0,01% of the 2He2 decay, because in 99,99% of the decays the 2He2 decays in two protons).

    3.b) Via cold fusion, when a neutron with low energy enters within the field Sp(p) of a proton by the “hole” in the field Sp(p). In this case the deuterium can be formed by low energy neutrons of the background of neutrons, because the neutron and the proton succeed to get spin-interaction.
    However, it is a very very rare phenomenon, because:

    3.b.1- The neutron needs to hit the “hole” of the field Sp(p) of the proton

    3.b.2- The neutron needs to move along the direction of the z-axis of the field Sp(p) of the proton. If the neutron hits the “hole”, but it does not move along the z-axis direction, the neutron will not hit the proton, and they cannot have spin-interaction, and therefore they cannot form the deuterium.
    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).

    Therefore,
    we realize that the formation of the deuterium is very hard, because in the hot fusion in the stars it occurs less then 0,01% of the 2He2 decay, and via cold fusion (due to the background of neutrons of the enviroment) the formation of the deuterium is also very hard to occur.

    regards
    wlad

  935. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    It appears that on other related sites, people are proposing replicating to some degree the Rossi effect by means of amateur and home-based experiments.

    1. Do you think this is a safe and wise thing to do?

    I would assume, even with the eCat ingredients used in The Report, that it is possible for the reaction to get out of control and an explosion to occur. \

    2.Wouldn’t it be best to suggest the experiments be limited to those with the proper facilities to conduct such a potentially dangerous experiment?

    2. Or do you feel that even with no sophisticated control system, a water-cooled experiment is always safe?

  936. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I already answered to these questions. In a nutshell: replications made by professionals are safe. By not professionals are dangerous.
    That’s all I can say.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  937. Claud

    Dear Andrea, excuse me for the question slightly mischievous: having you now only theoretical and r&d responsibility, are you quite sure that the operating management of your firm are doing their best to obtain quickly the safety certification for the small cat to start in a short the massive production of this new product?
    Hoping it truly, my best regards
    Claudio Rossi

  938. Andrea Rossi

    Claud:
    I am sure 100% that all the members of our Team are working at the maximum of their possibilities to reach the best results reachable at the maximum possible level. Each one of the team related to his specific duties is making the best possible work.
    Nothing to add.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  939. Joseph Fine

    Koen Vandewalle,

    The following links may help answer your question which, ideally, will lead to further questions.

    The first several links refer to the D-Wave Systems Company’s commercial ‘quantum’ computer. It is an advertisement, but perhaps is a good starting point. Other links are to key papers by Richard Feynman and Seth Lloyd. These should keep you busy for several hours or days. Lloyd’s paper suggests the Universe may be a quantum computer.

    http://www.dwavesys.com/d-wave-two-system

    http://www.wired.com/2014/05/quantum-computing/

    http://www.nature.com/news/computing-the-quantum-company-1.13212

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/quest-for-quantum-computers-heats-up/

    http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall05/frs119/papers/feynman82/feynman82.html

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1312.4455

    //////////////
    The universe as quantum computer
    Seth Lloyd

    This article reviews the history of digital computation, and investigates just how far the concept of computation can be taken. In particular, I address the question of whether the universe itself is in fact a giant computer, and if so, just what kind of computer it is. I will show that the universe can be regarded as a giant quantum computer. The quantum computational model of the universe explains a variety of observed phenomena not encompassed by the ordinary laws of physics. In particular, the model shows that the the quantum computational universe automatically gives rise to a mix of randomness and order, and to both simple and complex systems.

    //////////////

    Hope these will be helpful.

    Best regards,

    Joseph Fine

  940. Wladimir Guglinski

    ERRATA:

    Joe,
    In my previous comment to you, where it is written:

    In my book Quantum Ring Theory it is shown that, in order to form the 1H2, there is an energy of 2,2MeV so that to perforate the fluxes n(o) of the proton and of the neutron.

    the correct is:

    In my book Quantum Ring Theory it is shown that, in order to form the 1H2, there is need an energy of 2,2MeV so that to perforate the fluxes n(o) of the proton and of the neutron.

    regards

  941. Wladimir Guglinski

    US 500.000 prize for any nuclear physicists who solves a puzzle

    I will register notarized that will pay the US 500.000 prize for a nuclear physicists who presents a solution for the puzzle explained ahead, via any current nuclear model which works with the principles of the Standard Nuclear Physics.

    The puzzle:

    1- There is no Coulomb repulsion between proton and neutron

    2- There is a background of neutrons in the enviroment

    3- There is attraction proton-neutron via the strong force

    4- So, as there is no Coulomb repulsion proton-neutron, and there is attraction via strong force, then according to the principles of the Standard Nuclear PHysics the low energy neutrons of the neutron backbround would have to hit the protons of the hydrogen in the enviroment, and so deuterium would have to be formed.

    5- Therefore, along billion years, in the Earth the water of the oceans and rivers would have to be composed by heavy water D2O, instead of H2O. Also, all the hydrogen in the Universe would have to be changed to deuterium, and therefore hydrogen could not exist in the Universe.

    .

    I have the following properties:

    One flat in the beath, in Cabo Frio-RJ city – US 150.000

    One flat in Juiz de Fora-MG city – US 100.000

    One house in Paulinia-SP city – US 150.000

    One house in Cataguases-MG city – US 100.000

    .

    According to the notarized, I will sell the four properties if the puzzle is solved, and the nuclear physicist who solve the puzzle will receive the prize.

    regards
    wlad

  942. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe
    January 9th, 2015 at 10:40 PM
    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “[...] in order to form the deuterium 1H2 there is need 2 sort of energy:

    1- the energy necessary to win the Coulomb repulsion
    2- the energy necessary to perforate the flux n(o)”

    This explanation does not tell us why a QRT Universe would consist of mostly 1H1 rather than 1H2.
    =====================================================

    you are wrong.

    The explanation explains it very well

    In my book Quantum Ring Theory it is shown that, in order to form the 1H2, there is an energy of 2,2MeV so that to perforate the fluxes n(o) of the proton and of the neutron.

    The thermal neutrons of the background (with energy smaller than 1MeV) cannot interact with the proton of the hydrogen, so that to form the 1H2.

    When I go back to my house, I will scann the page of the book QRT, and put it here.

    regards
    wlad

  943. Joe

    Valeriy,

    I originally asked Wladimir the following:

    “Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?”

    The Universe contains mostly 1H1 (about 90%, and in molecular and ionized forms) and a much smaller amount of He. The rest is trace elements. None of the isotopes of H or He decays into 1H1. They stop at 1H2, 2He3, 2He4, etc. The 1H1 has had enough time (billions of years) to get hit by traveling neutrons and be converted into 1H2 and 2He3. But obviously that did not happen. 1H1 is still omnipresent in the Universe.

    How does the standard nuclear model explain this lack of conversion?

    All the best,
    Joe

  944. Andrea Calaon

    A reading suggestion for all Italian speaking about the essence of Quantum Mechanics:
    Ghirardi G. Carlo, Un’ occhiata alle carte di Dio. Gli interrogativi che la scienza moderna pone all’uomo

    It is a bit over explaining in some parts, but goes into the core of the QM problems without bias for Hidden Variables and likes.
    The author is absolute world top-class: He is one of the authors of the Ghirardi–Rimini–Weber theory (GRW).

    An English version would be appropriate I think …

    By the way, this is in short what I think: Hidden Variables are non-local because particles are in essence lightlike. Hidden Variables are also NOT CONTEXTUAL because the accepted formalism of spin is Wrong (as unbelievable as it may seem, reed Hestenes …) and the Kochen-Specker theorem does not apply.

    Buona lettura

    Regards

  945. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “[...] in order to form the deuterium 1H2 there is need 2 sort of energy:

    1- the energy necessary to win the Coulomb repulsion
    2- the energy necessary to perforate the flux n(o)”

    This explanation does not tell us why a QRT Universe would consist of mostly 1H1 rather than 1H2.

    All the best,
    Joe

  946. Dear Readers,
    I am looking for an opportunity to perform the experiments proposed in the article to test h-space theory. Any ideas and suggestions are welcome.
    Best wishes,
    Valeriy

  947. Dear Wladimir Guglinski,
    I am afraid, the short answer to your question without describing the relatively large part of h-space theory will not be convincing for you. Any way, in h-space theory the existence of hydrogen in the universe is explained by the fact that it is most stable complex of proton and orbital electron, and in turn, proton is most stable complex comprising two positrons and one electron (I see this sentence will attract anger of many physics textbooks readers :) ).
    I did not understand this part of your question – “Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?”
    Best wishes,
    Valeriy

  948. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Joseph Fine,

    can you give us a link to some understanding of a quantum computer ?

    Could the universe be built with spherical layers of Q-bits ?

    Just a thought.

    Kind regards.

    Koen

  949. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    I did not know the paper you sent the link of, and it appears to be interesting.
    I need to study it.
    Thank you for sending it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  950. Joseph Fine

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I saw this article a few days ago (* See link below).

    https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140624-fluid-tests-hint-at-concrete-quantum-reality/

    Did you knew about this version of Quantum Theory? If so, does it help you to understand and/or explain the Rossi Effect (even if you cannot explain it to your readers at this time)?

    Very real regards,

    Joseph Fine

  951. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi , in the following link an interesting article in an important magazine written by

    Maxim Kalashnikov on how the world has changed , and what awaits them: they talk of you also in Russia!

    http://yug.svpressa.ru/society/article/109141/

  952. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    So…a Kalashnikov is looking at me: have I to be worried or delighted? ( He,he,he…).
    I love Russia and Russian culture. I hope Russia will work peacefully with all the world, and that all the world will work peacefully with Russia, as well as I hope that all the energy sources will be integrated to the benefit of mankind of all the world.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  953. Jack

    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    thank your for your answer at my previous question and my best wishes for a great 2015 to you and your team.

    You said that, in the most positive scenario, the commercial phase will likely start shortly after the end of the test period of the 1 MW plant.
    If everything goes as expected, again in the most positive scenario, how long should this test still last?

    Thank you again and good work, Jack.

  954. Andrea Rossi

    Jack:
    In the best scenario could be November 2015/ January 2016.
    Wishes of a great 2015 also to you from our Team,
    A.R.

  955. guest

    Andrea,

    In the Lugano report it is mentioned that the Hot E-Cat was run at 1400 C. At this temperature, the nickel lattice structure would break down from crystalline into an amorphous structure similar glass. Also at this temperature, the Lithium would be a gas. Aluminum would a liquid. Does the solid-solid phase transition from crystalline structure to amorphous structure in the nickel provide a plausible starting point for any theories?

    Thank you for your hard work hope to hear back,
    guest

  956. Andrea Rossi

    Guest:
    In the Lugano Report is mentioned that for a very short period they had a peak at 1,400°C.
    I cannot give information about what happens inside the reactor.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  957. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    you could invite Valeriy Y.Tarasov in order to come here to explain how from his h-Space Theory it is possible to explain the existence of hydrogen in the universe:

    Since background neutrons continually hit the nuclei of atoms, how does Standard Nuclear Physics explain the persistence of 1H1 in the Universe in a very large proportion? Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?

    May you do it, Andrea?

    regards
    wlad

  958. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    You invited Dr Tarasov to answer you: I think he will do it if he deems it opportune.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  959. WaltC

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    1) You mentioned that you have domestic E-Cat models that are ready to work once they are certified– I’m guessing they are the furnace room, hot water, Boiler Replacement type E-Cats?

    2) Is there also thought on the horizon of a “Portable E-Cat”– something like a portable room heater which produces 3x more heat than it consumes in electricity? (For heating individual rooms, garage spaces, cabins, etc.)

    3) For some reason, I have it stuck in my head that the “Certifiers” would be different for the two types of domestic E-Cats– one being viewed as a piece of furnace room equipment and the other being viewed as an appliance– but maybe that’s not true. Is there any reason to think that certification of a “Boiler Replacement domestic E-Cat” would be harder/easier/different than certification of a “Portable domestic E-Cat”?

    I have uses for both types of domestic E-Cats, once they are available.

    Thanks, as always! WaltC

  960. Andrea Rossi

    Walt C:
    1- I prefer not to give this information before the product is ready. The form will be the one with more commercial potential, for obvious reasons.
    2- Not in the first wave
    3- Certifications will have to be specific for every model
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  961. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    dear Dr. Rossi, I invite you to read this interesting article on the history of the history of cold fusion.
    I also invite readers to read it.

    Low Energy Nuclear Reactions: Papers and Patents

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-h-bailey/low-energy-nuclear-reacti_b_6189772.html

  962. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the very interesting article on Huffingtonpost: is not biased, equilibrated and correct from his neutral point of view. To his references merit to be added the work of Brian Ahern and of Alexander Parkhomov, together with the theoretical papers of Carl Oscar Gullstroem of the Uppsala University.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  963. Jack

    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    with “we are close to go commercial massively” what do you mean? Weeks? Months? Years? What is your guess?

    Thank you,
    Jack.

  964. Andrea Rossi

    Jack:
    I guess after the end of the test period of the 1 MW plant, if all goes well, but, as I always said, the results can be positive, but also negative. We have not experience consolidated statistics to foresee the outcome.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  965. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, the nasty way of having treated you during all these years has surely been unpleasant but, as you say, in a certain way you have to thank all those people.
    We can note a sense of solace in your words. I can deduce that the 1MW plant is going very well, if I can say that…

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  966. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    You can say whatever you deem opportune.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  967. Wladimir Guglinski

    Question for all the nuclear physicists of the world:

    Since background neutrons continually hit the nuclei of atoms, how does Standard Nuclear Physics explain the persistence of 1H1 in the Universe in a very large proportion? Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?

    regards
    wlad

  968. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 28th, 2014 at 7:47 PM
    Wladimir,

    1. ===========================================
    Since background neutrons continually hit the nuclei of atoms, how does QRT explain the persistence of 1H1 in the Universe in a very large proportion? Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?
    ============================================

    Joe,
    I’m on the beach, and this is the reason why I did not respond you earlier.
    I am responding now from a lan house.

    Joe,
    your question obviously cannot be explained by considering any nuclear model based on the Standard Nuclear Physics.
    According to the Standard Nuclear Physics, 1H1 could not exist in the Universe.

    Why dont you ask to Dr. JR to come here to explain it to us?

    But according to Quantum Ring Theory, as I already told you, for a neutron entering a nucleus the neutron needs to perforate the flux n(o).

    As I told you, according to my new nuclear model in order to form the deuterium 1H2 there is need 2 sort of energy:

    1- the energy necessary to win the Coulomb repulsion

    2- the energy necessary to perforate the flux n(o)

    However, according to the Standard Nuclear Physics in order to form any nucleus there is need only the energy so that to win the Coulomb repulsion.
    As there is no Coulomb repulsion between a proton and a neutron, then according to the Standard Model the 1H2 can be formed by neutrons of the background of neutrons.

    .

    2. ============================================
    How does QRT explain the following phenomenon:
    For the lighter nuclei, continually adding a neutron will create a continual decrease in the half-life of the isotopes.
    But for the heavier nuclei, starting from about 10Ne20, there is an alternating decrease and increase in the half-life of the isotopes.
    ===============================================

    Joe,
    as you know,
    according to my new nuclar model, the heavier nuclei are formed by several hexagonal floors composed by 1H2 captured by the central 2He4.

    In the case of the light nuclei, when a neutron is additioned to a nucleus, it is captured by the flux n(o).
    The neutron needs to have a spin-interaction with a deuteron, in order to be kept in the nucleus.
    For instance, in 3Li7 the neutron and the deuteron have spin-interaction.
    If you put a second neutron, in the 3Li8 the second neutron has not a deuteron available so that to get spin-intereaction, and so the second neutron is expelled via the centrifugal force.

    In the case of the heavier nuclei, the excess neutrons are captured:

    1) between two 1H2 of a hexagonal floor (the neutron is not captured by the flux n(o) of the 2He4).
    For instance, in the oxygen 8O17 the neutron is captured between two 1H2.

    2) between two hexagonal floors, when the space available between two 1H2 in the same hexagonal floor is totally filled with neutrons.

    10Ne20 has one complete hexagonal floor and one incomplete hexagonal floor.
    Then the stability of the excess neutrons depends on the positiono of the neutron taken in the nucleus

    regards
    wlad

  969. Curiosone

    I have seen that some group of your competitors think the catalyzer is iron oxyde. Is it true? Are they on the right track?
    Can you give some answer?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  970. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yes, I read it on the blog of Vessela Nikolova. Well, they are trying, so let them try: if they are roses, they will blossom ( a little bit rusty, maybe).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  971. JCRenoir

    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
    How will you spend the New Year first day?
    JC Renoir

  972. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    No, it is impossible. To make an E-Cat work regularly for months you need more than that. As I said, the E-Cat is a much more complicated thing than commonly is imagined. The substantial underevaluation of what we did has given us a strong advantage, since instead of changing the game, the imitation attempts on course try to fix old schemes, thinking that if we did something working the difference must be something very small, close to evanescent. This attitude gave us a strong advantage in the competition. For years I have been considered an imbecile who has been lucky God knows why, who makes things without understanding what the heck is doing ( in the best of cases). Or, more kindly, a fraudster. Obviously this has been a big advantage for our Team. I can say this now, since we are close to go commercial massively. I think now is too late to catch us.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  973. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    When you will have a patent granted or an economy scale that will make you free to disclose theory and operation of your plants, you think you will be able to reconcile the results of Lugano regarding the Ni 62?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  974. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  975. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, thank you for your reply.
    Therefore if the authorities appreciated the importance of the lives that possible could be saved if your small unit was available quickly,then they could fast track the safety certificate as a priority for the benefit of mankind?

  976. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    Ask them.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  977. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, the question must be asked.
    If a safety certificate was given now, do you have a small Cat technically reliable and capable of driving water purifiers where needed.
    You have said you are ready to produce domestic units by the million.
    Best wishes

  978. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    We have domestic E-Cat models ready to work, if this is your question.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  979. Henry Ethancourt

    Hello… Some of you may have noticed this well-balanced appraisal of the 2nd report. En français.

    http://www.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/article/nucleaire-la-3eme-voie-161405

    Henry

  980. Andrea Rossi

    Henry Ethancourt:
    Thank you very much for this link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  981. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Two quick questions if you don’t mind.

    a) You said your team was able to reduce the volume of reactors — did they have to shut down the plant to make this change?

    b) When did the 1 year test begin.

    Many thanks!

    Frank

  982. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    As you know, I cannot give information about the operation of the plant, nor about its timing. Due information will be given only when the tests will have been completed.
    The reduction of the volume of the reactors is not necessarily made when the plant is shut down, because the reactors can be worked on separately, while the others are in operation.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  983. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,

    you wrote: “the confidential field of the complex (very complex) control and regulation system”.

    Just a speculation of mine: Any transmutation, and the integration of all transmutations happening in the reactors, all different in time, location, temperature, consecutive order, and last but not least: pobabilistic behaviour of the particles, demands to be taken care of in the control system.

    Do you really believe that this will become mainstream heating technique for domestic applications, which need for maintenance just replacement of the charges or the nickel ? I don’t.

    It seems to me that the cartridges or reactors will be as complete devices, like harddisks of computers, with their own fine-tuned computer and firmware, which need to be recycled with the fuel, and need to be tuned with every single charge.

    Complexity can be a very strong disadvantage in many ways.

    I think that the chosen name: “industrial heat”, is a very correct one for a very long time.

    Kind regards,
    Koen

  984. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    You are right on this: the domestic E-Cats are totally different things.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  985. Alessandro Coppi

    Rossi effect fantasious explanation:
    With regard to the hard to explain need of external heat to sustain an exothermic reaction, I imagine that the Rossi effect does not happen in the inner of the charge, but the heat adducted produces a cloud of atoms such as the tetracarbonilnichel can do, and the triphase winding supplied by the voltage, produces a rotating magnetic field such the one in the asyncron electric motors, in that way the atoms of the cloud will rotate, and could change their spin, so that antimatter comes in the real dimension from vacuum.
    The exothermic annihilation phenomena involve the space near the surface of the charge, and not the surface itself.
    Cutting off the external heat surge, the cloud of atoms disappear and the effect shut off.

    Spero che l’E-cat rappresenti per Lei quello che le rane hanno rappresentato per Volta.
    Alessandro Coppi

  986. Andrea Rossi

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

  987. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    How satisfied are you with the performance of the 1 MW plant so far?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  988. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    I cannot give any information regarding the performance. I can say that I am optimist about the behaviour of the I MW plant along the 1 year test. I can say that nothing happened that could turn me pessimist. So far. I must add, under the permanent direction of Orsobubu, that the final output could be positive, but also negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  989. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, I enclose an interesting article by a Nobel prize.
    There are no impossible things.
    There are just things that we have never tried to do.

    Nuclear energy in an atomic lattice
    - Order of causality
    a short article ( almost the abstract of an earlier scientific paper ) written in 1991 by Nobel Julian Schwinger ( 1918-1994 ).

    http://22passi.blogspot.it/2014/12/energia-nucleare-in-un-reticolo-atomico.html

  990. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for this interesting 3D version of the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  991. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, I wanted to tell this interesting article that shows your patent in 3D and also said the path of cold fusion in the world.

    http://eco-energie-montreal.com/post/e-cat-lugano-reaction-nucleaire-basse-energie-evenements-derniers-mois

  992. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the interesting link to the Julian Schwinger paper, published on 22 Passi by Daniele Passerini.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  993. Gian Luca

    Dear A.R.
    very interesting the interview of Vessynik on her blog.
    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/exclusive-interview-with-andrea-rossi/
    I would like to know how many italians scientists work in IH or in
    your research staff.
    Thanks a lot and newly…..happy e fruitful 2015.

  994. Andrea Rossi

    Gian Luca:
    The Italian scientists of our Team are two, which means me plus another one, specialized in electronic control systems: thanks to him we have been able to avoid to get external help for the confidential field of the complex (very complex) control and regulation system. Outsourcing the knowledge of the controls we need would be a leak of IP.
    Thank you for the link.
    Warm Regards and a Fruitful 2015 to you
    A.R.

  995. I have been since long time a reader of this blog and very interested to the LENR technology of Mr Rossi. When will you be available for public investors?
    Caroline Collini

  996. Andrea Rossi

    Caroline Collini:
    As the chief scientist of the Team, I am not the right guy to receive that kind of questions.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  997. Marco

    Dear Andrea,

    have you performed, or at least designed, a test with molten sodium salts, instead of water, as I suggested a while ago?

    I think that molten salts can extend SSM duration and/or stability…

    Regards, Marco.

  998. Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    In this period we are focused on the 1 MW plant and the development of the gas fueled Hot Cat. The experiment suggested by you is in the list of our R&D program, though.
    Thank you for your suggestion,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  999. BroKeeper

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    I have wondered if you are focusing on developing ways of storing E-Cat’s excessive heat during low-peak demand hours. Batteries are still very bulky, expensive and degenerative.
    Perhaps you might be interested in this cheap and radically improved concept of storing energy in the form of pressurized air with efficiencies now approaching 90%from ‘LightSail Energy’ and scientist Danielle Fong:

    http://www.lightsail.com/
    http://fortune.com/2014/12/31/danielle-fong-lightsail-energy/
    http://www.engineering.com/DesignerEdge/DesignerEdgeArticles/ArticleID/7474/Compressed-Air-Energy-Storage–A-Moonshot-Project.aspx
    http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/blogs/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/lightsail-diagrams.pdf

    If energy can be stored at these efficiencies then the output requirements could be reduced significantly for oscillating demands. 10KW Cats could be met by 5KW Cats or reduce the number of 10KW Cats to reduce overall plant size.
    Warm regards,
    BroKeeper

  1000. Andrea Rossi