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. George

    Curiosone, please check rigorously your source of information, to avoid to spread around wrong news.
    Regards,
    George

  2. Andrea Rossi

    George:
    Thank you for the correction of the information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  3. George

    Dear Curiosone, before making statements FALSE on M5S should inquire or mention the source.
    Stop throwing mud at those who work on issues such as difficult as the LENR.
    I enclose the link that proves its falsity and reliability. Shame on you

    However, Andrea Rossi has repeatedly said he is not interested in public funding.
    http://banchedati.camera.it/sindacatoispettivo_17/showXhtml.Asp?idAtto=15181&stile=6&highLight=1

  4. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    I read that the “Movimento 5 Stelle” party has proposed to the Italian government to cancel the funds so far granted for the research in the LENR field made in the Frascati Laboratory by Francesco Celani, saying that that work has produced nothing in years and costed to the taxpayer millions of euros. Did Celani or his laboratory participate to your R&D or to your work in some measure?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  5. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    First of all, I never comment the work of our competitors. Therefore, without commenting the quality of the work made by the Competitor you cited, I must say that we never worked with that Laboratory, directly or indirectly and also that we are not interested to their work, based on what they have published so far about their results. In line of principle, as you know, I repeatedly said that I do not believe in public funding of LENR, for many reasons; we always have refused any proposal of funding coming from Taxpayers. This is a personal point of view . If an apparatus works, money comes from the Customers and from private investors. Obviously my opinion can be wrong and I perfectly understand that it is connected with the vast and complex issue of the pure research, independent from immediate application opportunities. But many distinctions have to be made if we enter in this universe.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  6. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Did you see the documentary “Particle Fever”, of Kaplan? Is the story of the quest for the iggs Boson in the LHC of CERN, from the initial fier in 2008 to the discovery of the Higgs; I liked it very much.
    W.G.

  7. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yes, I watched “Particle Fever” and I agree with your opinion. Is very interesting and is a successful example of how difficult physics issues can be explained in a way to be understood from the non physicists.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  8. Wladimir Guglinski

    Lex wrote in September 16th, 2014 at 3:45 PM

    Dear Andrea,

    The generally adapted theory on the creation of elements in the universe states that new elements can only be created under extreme energy level conditions. Now it seems that inside your E-Cat nickel is transformed into cupper at low energy level conditions, what would that mean for the theories on the creation of elements and the creation of the universe? Does your E-Cat fits in this theory?
    ———————————————

    Andrea Rossi replied in September 16th, 2014 at 4:22 PM

    Lex:
    LENR are not that simple, and you cannot resolve the problems just thinking that you can have nuclear reactions with low level energy: it is not that simple. What does not happen in Nature can happen with a mechanism that in Nature does not exist. Nature can take one billion years to make a stone travel from the Alps to the Adriatic sea, but with a truck you can make it faster and without all the meteorytes crush tests, the earthquakes, the floodings, the hurricanes, the you think it you put it, that you need to get Nature make the logistics.
    What I can say is that the so called Rossi Effect does not violate any law of the Standard Model.
    ————————————————–

    Eric Ashworth commented in September 20th, 2014 at 1:03 PM

    My understanding of your reply is that what does happen in nature can be accelerated using a mechanism. Therby the Rossi effect is a process of nature that does not violate the standard model.
    ———————————————

    COMMENT:

    Dear Lex,
    cold fusion occurs only in special condictions, and one of them is the need of having resonance between the nucleons which have fusion.
    In order to have such resonance, there is need to apply a suitable electromagnetic field with a specific frequence.

    Cold fusion does not occur in core of the Sun, because the extreme condictions does not allow two nucleons to have fusion withe help of that suitable frequence.

    However, perhaps cold fusin may occur in the heliosphere of the Sun, where perhaps the condition is more favorable for the occurence for cold fusion. Indeed, the heliosphere has a temperature of 1.000.000ºC, while the temperature of the surface is only 6.000ºC.
    There is no explanation for such phenomenon according to the current theories of Physics, and perhaps the high temperature in the heliosphere is due to cold fusion.

    In spite of Andrea Rossi claims that the Rossi Effect does not violate the Standard Model, but even if that it is true however the Standard Model is violated by the results of two experiments, one made by Don Borghi (1993) and other made by Elio Conte (1999).

    The two experiments show that a neutron can be formed from the fusion proton+electron at low energy (this is impossible according to the Standard Model).

    In the Borghi experiment, he used an oscillatory electromagnetic field which frequence is in the same magnitude of that used in the Rossi’s eCat. So, the resonance in the Borghi experiment occurs in a way similar of that which occurs in the Rossi’s eCat.

    Rughero Maria Santilli tried to repeat the Borghi experiment in several universities of the Europe, between 1994 and 2000. He was banned from all the universities.
    So,
    as all the universities in Europe had refused to repeat the Borghi experiment, then Santilli undertook to repeat it in the laboratories of the Institute for Basic Research, in 2006:
    Confirmation of Don Borghi’s experiment on the synthesis of neutrons from protons and electrons
    http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0608229

    Cold fusion occurs via some mechanisms which violate the Standard Model.

    If the Rossi’s Effect violates, or not, the Standard Model, is another question. In order to respond such question, there is need to know what elements and condictions exist within the eCat, and we dont know them.

    As Andrea Rossi knows what exists within the eCat, he is in a best condition to propose a theory. However, after the moment when he reveals what he uses within the eCat, we will analyse his theory, so that to verify if, indeed, the theory explains the Rossi’s Effect without to violate the Standard Model.

    regards
    wlad

  9. Alexvs

    Dear Mr. Rossi.

    Could you recommend an available book upon atomic nucleus?.

    Thanks in advance.

    Alexvs

  10. Andrea Rossi

    Alexvs:
    I strongly recommend:
    Norman D. Cook – “Models of the Atomic Nucleus”, Springer ( Berlin ) – 2010 ( 2nd edition).
    Find it also by Amazon.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  11. Steven N. Karels

    Roberto,

    The 2009 patent states “… hydrogen is injected into the metal tube containing the highly pressurized nickel powder having a pressure, preferably though not necessarily, from 2 to 20 bars.” The bar is a metric unit of pressure, defined by the IUPAC as exactly equal to 100,000 Pa. It is about equal to the atmospheric pressure on Earth at sea level.

  12. Roberto

    Caro Andrea,
    probably you can’t give this information, anyway, how is the hydrogen inside the E-CAT: is it at atmosferic pressure or higher?
    Ciao, Roberto

  13. Andrea Rossi

    Roberto:
    I gave this information in the patent granted to me in 2009, with priority April 2008: the pressure is higher.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  14. Curiosone

    Why so much time is necessary before an important paper is published? I am asking independently from your specific case.
    Thank you for your patience,
    W.G.

  15. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Obviously you are talking of the “OPERA” team of CERN, experiment made in March 2012. That has been a very unfortunate case: they got 5 Sigma, before making the press conference. If you remember, I published a comment on this blog, immediately after the press conference, writing that there was probably a mistake due to the error margin of the instrumentation. When you obtain a result that is very, very close to the error margin of the instrumentation, the hunch’s Sigmas could not tell the whole story. As a matter of fact it turned out that a loose cable that connected their master clock to a GPS receiver led to a delay in the timing that has been measured by their detector.
    Who doesn’t make mistakes cast the first stone.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  16. Eric Ashworth

    Andrea, Regards your reply to Lex Sept. 16th What you state is ‘What does not happen in nature can happen with a mechanism that does not exist in nature. Nature can take a billion years etc. but with a truck you can make it faster etc.. Also the so called Rossi effect does not violate any law of the standard model’.

    My understanding of your reply is that what does happen in nature can be accelerated using a mechanism. Therby the Rossi effect is a process of nature that does not violate the standard model. It is this reference to the standard model involving the evolution of energy within nature that I have always thought was an unknown and why LENR have not been taken seriously. Am I correct? or am I missing something?. My own theory is that nature, excluding the two absolutes, is sandwiched between these two extremes, these being the absolute fission and fusion states but nature moves from the beginning of fusion which is out of fission into full fusion and consequently into fission. Transmutations I believe are a neccesary requirement to adapt to a foreign environment or you could say adapt into a more positive environmental state thereby distance and time are part of the transmutation equation with regards nature. Just a thought prompted by your analogy. Regards Eric Ashworth.

  17. Andrea Rossi

    Eric Ashworth:
    I confirm what I said. Thank you for your insight.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  18. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    How much is the pressure from journalists in this period?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  19. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    No pressure at all: I am declining any request of interview from any side since December 2013, friendly or hostile as it could be. It’s time to work, not to talk.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  20. Steven N. Karels

    Hank Mills,

    I have also heard speculation about adding some level of deuterium to natural hydrogen to increase the eCat reaction efficiency. I recall in the early days, Andrea Rossi reportedly enhanced the isotopic distribution of his fuel. Back then, we all assumed he was referring to nickel. But in a general sense, the hydrogen could also be considered a fuel. So adding deuterium would be consistent with AR’s earlier comments. Going against this are some tests reported earlier that adding deuterium “poisoned” the nickel-hydrogen reaction but that was not done in the eCat configuration.

    Obviously, we do not need to worry about particle size for the hydrogen or deuterium as they are gases at the operating temperatures. Still, if a catalyst was found to convert their diatomic nature to a single atom, that might facilitate the eCat reaction. But, this is all speculation. I can neither confirm nor deny whether it is positive or negative (LOL).

  21. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    rotfl

    rolling on the floor laughing

  22. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Got it!
    Rolling Regards,
    A.R.

  23. Curiosone

    Do you remember what caused the error of the “discovery” of neutrinos faster than light in CERN ? How many Sigma did obtain the physicists who made it before making a press conference?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  24. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    The steps are:
    1- make the test
    2- data are collected and distributed to all the authors
    3- if the data are millions, thousands of discussions and emails will be exchanged by the authors
    4- the authors have to make independently their own analisys on data, samples, etc
    5- the authors will ask to their peers to replicate the analisys on data, samples, etc
    6- data have to be compared with expectations
    7- every author writes his part of the report, based on his specialization
    8- when a draft of report is ready, every author reviews the parts of the other authors, and they reciprocally review their work and their calculations, analisys, etc
    9- when a text of report is agreed upon, the authors ask further reviewing from colleagues
    10- the report is given to the magazine, which makes its own peer reviewing.
    Said this, use as a calculator your good sense and tell me: do you think a total time between 6 month and 1 year is reasonable ?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  25. DTravchenko

    Attention: you are receiving “innocent” questions that, bit by bit, are stealing IP…
    Warm Regards
    D.T.

  26. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    In this blog I receive important information too. It’s a matter of leverage.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  27. JCRenoir

    If you cannot answer, I understand, thank you all the same,
    JCRenoir

  28. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    One year from the start up.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  29. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    You have already said this before, but to quench some speculation taking place on the internet could you state again, for the record, no deuterium (other than the tiny amount found in ordinary light hydrogen) is added to the E-Cat or Hot Cat?

    Thank you.

    Hank

  30. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    I do not give information about this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  31. orsobubu

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

  32. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    Rolling On The Floor Laughs ?
    Laughing Regards,
    A.R.

  33. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    How much time will you need the 1 MW plant work before considering it reliable and start a mass production?
    Thank you for your time to answer,
    JCRenoir

  34. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobibu
    ROTFL: ?
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  35. Andrea Rossi

    Got it.
    Thank you,
    Warm regards
    A.R.

  36. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    LOL

    abbreviation
    informal

    Laughing out loud; laugh out loud (used chiefly in electronic communication to draw attention to a joke or amusing statement, or to express amusement):
    ‘I love how you said ‘coffee is not my cup of tea’. LOL!’

  37. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I knew that you could not comment on the nickel particle size or anything else that goes on within your eCat reactor. However, you previously stated that the nickel particle size does affect eCat performance. This analysis confirms that statement. Of course, the analysis maybe incorrect or correct, so it may be viewed as either positive or negative. (LOL)

  38. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    In some comment, as in your last one, I found the acronym “LOL”: forgive me for my ignorance, what does it mean, exactly?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  39. Steven N. Karels

    Particle Size Analysis – eCat 10kW Reactor

    Given a Hot eCat, can we derive the minimum nickel particle size consistent with the particle not melting?

    Nickel specific heat capacity: 0.44 Joules/ (g * C)
    Nickel melting point: 1,455C
    eCat External Surface Temperature: 1,000C
    Nickel density:7.81 g/cc
    eCat reactor average output: 10kW

    Assume allowed nickel particle temperature increase is 200C.
    Assumed nuclear energy released per nuclear event: 3MeV
    Assumed amount of nickel fuel in one eCat reactor: 5 grams

    Assuming the nickel fuel is in the form of small particles (spheres) located immediately inside the eCat cylinder, then the average nickel particle temperature must be around 1,200C. So the nickel particle size must be larger enough to absorb a single nuclear event energy release without melting.

    Amount of energy released = 3MeV = 4.8 * 10^^-13 Joules per nuclear event.
    So the amount of mass of each nickel particle must be equal to or greater than 4.8 * 10^^-13 J / (200C * 0.44 J/(g * C) = 5.45 * 10^^-15 grams. The volume of such a particle would be 5.45 * 10^^-15 g / 7.81 g/cc = 6.98 * 10^^-16 cc. The volume for a sphere is 4/3 * pi * radius^^3. So the diameter must be about 11 microns.

    Number of nickel particles: 5 grams / 5.45 * 10^^-15 grams per particle = 9.2 * 10^^+14
    Nuclear events rate: 10,000J/sec / 4.8 * 10^^-13 J/event = 2.1 * 10^^+16 events / sec
    Average event rate for a single nickel particle = 2.1 * 10^^+16 events/sec / 9.2 * 10^^+14 particles = 22.7 events / sec

    Given the larger number of assumptions used, I would guess the nickel particles are 1 micron or larger.

  40. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    All I had to say is written in my patent.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  41. WaltC

    Dear Andrea,
    This may be premature, but do you know if the publisher of the ITPR2 will require payment for us to access the ITPR2 journal article?

    Thanks,
    Walt C.

  42. Andrea Rossi

    WaltC:
    I hope the Report will be published also in a way that will allow free access to the Readers, but, as you know, this does not depend on me.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  43. Tom Conover

    Hello Andrea,

    Just wondering, you mentioned that September you would be exceptionally busy this year. 3 questions not related to IP for you to consider, if possible.

    1) Are the automated production lines running properly?
    2) Have you shipped 5 or more 1MW plants during Aug and Sept?
    3) How many man hours does it take to assemble a 1MW plant?

    Thank you for answering if you are able to do so, and for your pioneer work and perseverance!

    Warmest regards,
    Tom

  44. Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    1- We are not yet in a situation that justifies an automated production line, but we have already part of them and the designs for the complete operation. Obviously, before we launch a mass production we need first of all to evaluate the report of the Independent Third Party, the results of at least one year of operation of the 1MW plant in the factory of the Customer and the follow up of our R&D process. Probably you think all this takes too much time: you have not idea of the thousands of thousands of particulars you have to adjust; the more you work, the more you have to work because new problems are born from former ones. It is a permanent ( Hi, Orsobubu!) struggle.
    2- No.
    3- This information is not available to the public.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  45. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    On the topic of nickel particle size, you referred me to your Italian patent and then said the question was previously answered. I offer this analysis to bound the particle size:

    Particle Size Analysis – eCat 10kW Reactor
    Nickel specific heat capacity: 0.44 Joules/ (g * C)
    Nickel melting point: 1,455C
    eCat External Surface Temperature: 1,000C
    Nickel density:7.81 g/cc
    eCat reactor average output: 10kW
    Assume allowed nickel particle temperature increase is 200C.
    Assumed nuclear energy released per nuclear event: 3MeV
    Assumed amount of nickel fuel in one eCat reactor: 5 grams

    What is the smallest size particle diameter that could function within an eCat reactor?

    Assuming the nickel fuel is in the form of small particles (spheres) located immediately inside the eCat cylinder, then the average nickel particle temperature must be around 1,200C. So the nickel particle size must be larger enough to absorb a single nuclear event energy release without melting.

    Amount of energy released = 3MeV = 4.8 * 10^^-13 Joules per nuclear event.

    So the amount of mass of each nickel particle must be equal to or greater than 4.8 * 10^^-13 J / (200C * 0.44 J/(g * C) = 5.45 * 10^^-15 grams. The volume of such a particle would be 5.45 * 10^^-15 g / 7.81 g/cc = 6.98 * 10^^-16 cc. The volume for a sphere is 4/3 * pi * radius^^3. So the diameter must be about 11 microns.

    Number of nickel particles: 5 grams / 5.45 * 10^^-15 grams per particle = 9.2 * 10^^+14
    Nuclear events rate: 10,000J/sec / 4.8 * 10^^-13 J/event = 2.1 * 10^^+16 events / sec
    Average event rate for a single nickel particle = 2.1 * 10^^+16 events/sec / 9.2 * 10^^+14 particles = 22.7 events / sec

    Given the larger number of assumptions used, I would guess the nickel particles are 1 micron or larger.

  46. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I can’t comment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  47. Lata

    Hi Andrea,

    You had recently said that you can selectively activate the Rossi Effect in a single nano grain of fuel. Is it possible to build a small pebble or lump of NiH fuel with a few grains always activated? The pebble will always be smoldering like the small pilot flame on gas stoves. Then you can ignite the whole pebble when needed.

    Regards,
    Lata

  48. Andrea Rossi

    Lata:
    I did not say that. You probably misunderstood what I wrote.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  49. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 17th, 2014 at 6:43 PM

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “Therefore, as the experiment detected a magnetic field, it means that there is need to have an electric field too.”

    But if there would be an electric field, that means that there would necessarily also be a nonzero resultant electric charge on the photon (perhaps under certain conditions). But since the photon is never observed as charged, the presence of a magnetic field is unexplainable in the context of QRT (as well as QM and QFT).
    =========================================

    Joe,
    as I said, the particle and antiparticle are separated by a distance “d” very short regarding the size of the electromagnetic field.
    The two particles behave as they were in average one unique corpuscle.

    There was not up to now a technology able to detect the non-zero resultant of the electromagnetic field.

    The non zero magnetic resultant also was never detected before the experiment published in August 2014 in the Nature Photonics.

    But now, thanks to the new technology, we know that the photon has a non zero magnetic resultant ( in spite of, in average, the magnetic field is zero).

    regards
    wlad

  50. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “Therefore, as the experiment detected a magnetic field, it means that there is need to have an electric field too.”

    But if there would be an electric field, that means that there would necessarily also be a nonzero resultant electric charge on the photon (perhaps under certain conditions). But since the photon is never observed as charged, the presence of a magnetic field is unexplainable in the context of QRT (as well as QM and QFT).

    All the best,
    Joe

  51. Nava Lina

    Chi ha finanziato il test e i testers?
    Who gave the funds necessary for the Independent Third Party Test and the Professors who did it and the Report ?
    Regards
    Lina

  52. Andrea Rossi

    Nava Lina:
    I do not know. Possibly in the report will be acknowledged who funded the test.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  53. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe
    September 17th, 2014 at 4:00 AM

    Wladimir,

    It would be understandable if the experiment had detected just one of the two magnetic fields within the QRT photon. But that would have been on the order of 10^-30m (the distance d between the two particles) and not on the order of 10^-11m (19 orders of distance further away). At that latter distance, both magnetic fields would cancel if the two particles propagated symmetrically. But since a magnetic field is detected at that greater distance, the two particles must necessarily be propagating asymmetrically. And if such is the case, an electric field (and its associated electric charge) would also be detected. But that does not occur.
    =============================================

    Joe,
    they did not make the experiment so that to the detect an electric field.

    The aim of the experiment is to detect the magnetic field

    However, we know that the electric field and the magnetic field of the photon move together ( DxE = -dB/dt, Maxwell equation). The light is a propagation of an electromagnetic field in the space.

    Therefore, as the experiment detected a magnetic field, it means that there is need to have an electric field too.

    regards
    wlad

  54. DTravchenko

    Are you open to sell other commercial licenses besides the licenses you already sold?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  55. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    No.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    p.s. attention: your comment has been casually fished from the spam, wherein our robot has sent it: check that the address you sent it from is not connected with an advertising of some sort.

  56. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    Which month will be most likely the publication month:
    1- September 2014
    2- October 2014
    3- November 2014
    4- December 2014
    JCRenoir

  57. Andrea Rossi

    JCRenoir:
    October 2014, I think, but I could be wrong.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  58. Marco

    Dear Andrea,
    Regarding my previous question: I know you use common AC current, but I would like to know if you tried AC current with different frequencies or even better measure the frequency response in a reasonably broader band (maybe 10-100000 Hz?) of some parameters like COP etc…
    By the way, if you do that, yo can do a Bode or Nyquist diagram and design a PID controller to enhance the stability… Just a suggestion…

    Regards.

  59. Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    I cannot give this infrmation, in positive or in negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  60. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, are you at this time satisfied with the progress you are making with your job in Research and Development.
    Are things moving in-line with your hopes.
    Have you encountered any major unforeseen difficulties in your progress with the Rossi Effect.
    Best wishes

  61. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    We are working cutting our way through a jungle.
    The compass says we are going in the right direction.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  62. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in September 17th, 2014 at 3:26 AM

    Curiosone:
    After the press conference of CERN regarding the finding of the Higgs boson , the the physicist Joe Incandela, spokesperson of the team that made the job, to a journalist that asked if at that point their work was finished, answered: ” Sometime they think after a success the job is finished, but for us any success is the beginning of a new work”.
    ==============================================

    COMMENT
    But in the case of the Hiigs boson, I suspect that after that success wrongly interpreted as success the physicists will discover that the beginning will be a new work in a different way they are expecting.

    In 2015 the LHC will work at its full capacity, and I think the physicists will have many unexpected surprises.

    regards
    wlad

  63. manfred

    Dear Hank Mills,

    I definitely feel that quantum tunnelling is important to explain the Rossi effect, but I’m not so sure about the Casimir effect. Quantum field theory is fascinating and worth studying any time but before diving deeper into that subject I was hoping to know your opinion if it will also benefit my understanding of the Rossi effect.
    From my rather humble phenomenological approach to understand the Rossi effect, I always felt that phonon resonance effects might be more relevant for its explanation.

    All the best,
    Manfred

  64. Joe

    Wladimir,

    It would be understandable if the experiment had detected just one of the two magnetic fields within the QRT photon. But that would have been on the order of 10^-30m (the distance d between the two particles) and not on the order of 10^-11m (19 orders of distance further away). At that latter distance, both magnetic fields would cancel if the two particles propagated symmetrically. But since a magnetic field is detected at that greater distance, the two particles must necessarily be propagating asymmetrically. And if such is the case, an electric field (and its associated electric charge) would also be detected. But that does not occur.

    All the best,
    Joe

  65. Curiosone

    When the report will be published your work will be substantially finished, if the report will be positive?
    W.G.

  66. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    After the press conference of CERN regarding the finding of the Higgs boson , the the physicist Joe Incandela, spokesperson of the team that made the job, answered to a journalist that asked if at that point their work was finished: ” Sometime they think after a success the job is finished, but for us any success is the beginning of a new work”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  67. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    In regards to the question about quantum tunneling and the Casimir effect, I think both are active in the E-Cat.

    Recently, I’ve read how researchers have seen quantum tunneling between the tips of tubercles on nickel powder. Even when the tips are not touching, the high amount of charge at the tips allows for current to pass between them. If there is hydrogen present, it can transform into a superconducting form at the tips. This could allow nuclear reactions to take place.

    When it comes to the Casimir effect, at the small distances between cracks, there can exist newtons of force. These forces may manipulate hydrogen and allow for energy extraction from the zero point energy field.

    My guess is there are multiple phenomenon taking place in the E-Cat. Some may be desirable and others may not.

    Have you ever attempted to stimulate nuclear reactions via a spinning permanent magnet – presenting alternating fields to the reactor – and a non-magnetic reactor casing? It would be interesting to see how it affects the reactions.

  68. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    You already know my answer,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  69. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    How many full time staff do you expect will need to be employed by companies that install your industrial plants to operate them?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  70. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Very difficult to say now, but the potential scenario could be proportional to that of a diffused utility.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  71. Dima Redko

    Dear Andrea,
    in your opinion what might be reason for the 3-d party testers to take so much time to release their report? If I understood correctly the test itself ought to be complete by March 2014.

  72. Andrea Rossi

    Dima Redko:
    The peer reviewing of an important paper usually needs 6-12 months of reviewing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  73. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 16th, 2014 at 4:46 PM

    If asymmetry occurs, BOTH those fields should appear, not just the magnetic one.
    ==============================

    Joe,
    note that the size of the magnetic field of the photon (the range of its actuation) has the magnitude of 10^-11 meter.
    While the magnitude of the distance “d” in the photon has a magnitude shorter than 10^-30 meter.

    So, the distance “d” within the photon is practically zero regarding to the size of the magnetic fields of the particle and antiparticle.

    Therefore the existence of an effective magnetic field for photons can be detected only via a phenomenon of resonance, and that’s why it can be detected only via the use of an interferometer.

    Also,
    note that such resonance (thanks to which it is possible to detect the existence of the effective magnetic field for photons) occurs because of the existence of the distance “d” between the particle and antiparticle.

    If the distance “d” would not exist between particle and antiparticle, the resonance would not occur, and the experiment published in the journal Nature `Photonics would detect nothing.

    regards
    wlad

    regards
    wlad

  74. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 16th, 2014 at 5:41 PM

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    Now I am a bit confused about your model of photon linear polarization… Photon linear polarization info is contained in distance “d” between particle and antiparticle OR in angular position between particle and antiparticle?
    How are these two info related?
    ===============================================

    Silvio,

    1- The angular position between particle and antiparticle defines the polarization of the photon.

    2- The distance “d” defines the ability of the photon either to be polarized, or not.
    Because the polarization is a resonance phenomenon (the ability of the polarizer to change the angular position between particle and antiparticle depends on the resonance between the distance “d” in the photon and the distance “D” between two consecutive atomic planes within the polarizer; if the distance “d” in the photon is not able to get resonance with the distance “D” in the polarizer, then the polarization does not occur).

    regards
    wlad

  75. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 16th, 2014 at 4:46 PM

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, it is the symmetrical motion of the charged particle-antiparticle pair within the photon that is responsible for the seeming lack of electric and magnetic fields. Those fields cancel. If asymmetry occurs, BOTH those fields should appear, not just the magnetic one. And the electric charge should become nonzero as would be indicated by the presence of a newly appeared electric field. So QRT has to explain how we can have a magnetic field without an electric field (and its associated electric charge).
    ==========================================

    Joe,
    in average the electric field of the two corpuscles is null.
    As the particle and the antiparticle are very small, and also is very small the distance “d” between them, they behave as if they were one unique particle with electric charge zero.

    There is no way to detect each one of the two electric fields by experiments.

    And the magnetic fied acually does not appear in the experiment published by Nature. The existence of such magnetic field is deduced from the use of an interferometer, as said in the paper:
    “We experimentally observe an effective magnetic flux between 0 and 2π corresponding to a non-reciprocal 2π phase shift with an interferometer length of 8.35 mm and an interference-fringe extinction ratio of 2.4 dB. “

    regards
    wlad

  76. silvio caggia

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    Now I am a bit confused about your model of photon linear polarization… Photon linear polarization info is contained in distance “d” between particle and antiparticle OR in angular position between particle and antiparticle?
    How are these two info related?

  77. Joe

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, it is the symmetrical motion of the charged particle-antiparticle pair within the photon that is responsible for the seeming lack of electric and magnetic fields. Those fields cancel. If asymmetry occurs, BOTH those fields should appear, not just the magnetic one. And the electric charge should become nonzero as would be indicated by the presence of a newly appeared electric field. So QRT has to explain how we can have a magnetic field without an electric field (and its associated electric charge).

    All the best,
    Joe

  78. manfred

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    Which one of the two effects do you think are more relevant to explain the Rossi effect?

    - Quantum Tunnelling
    - Casimir Effect

    Wishing you all the best and keeping my finger crossed for the energy revolution!

    Thanks,
    Manfred

  79. Andrea Rossi

    Manfred:
    Whattaya think?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  80. Lex

    Dear Andrea,

    I’m following your story with great interest because to me its clear that this is a big promise for the future of my kids. One question keeps running in my mind since I started reading about the E-Cat and LENR 3 years ago.
    The generally adapted theory on the creation of elements in the universe states that new elements can only be created under extreme energy level conditions. Now it seems that inside your E-Cat nickel is transformed into cupper at low energy level conditions, what would that mean for the theories on the creation of elements and the creation of the universe? Does your E-Cat fits in this theory?

    Kind regards,

    Lex Steigenga

    Lex

  81. Andrea Rossi

    Lex:
    LENR are not that simple, and you cannot resolve the problems just thinking that you can have nuclear reactions with low level energy: it is not that simple. What does not happen in Nature can happen with a mechanism that in Nature does not exist. Nature can take one billion years to make a stone travel from the Alps to the Adriatic sea, but with a truck you can make it faster and without all the meteorytes crush tests, the earthquakes, the floodings, the hurricanes, the you think it you put it, that you need to get Nature make the logistics.
    What I can say is that the so called Rossi Effect does not violate any law of the Standard Model.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  82. Wladimir Guglinski

    To the readers of the JoNP:

    New experiment with light published by the journal Nature Photonics corroborates photon model proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.

    Non-reciprocal phase shift induced by an effective magnetic flux for light
    http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/v8/n9/full/nphoton.2014.177.html

    In the experiment the photon had interaction with a magnetic field.

    But according to Quantum Mechanics, the light is a propagation of a duality wave-particle, which electric charge is null.

    First of all, we have to note that a particle with charge zero cannot have magnetic field.
    So,
    according to the concept of photon considered in Quantum Mechanics we had to expect that would be impossible to have interaction between the photon and a magnetic field.

    Such experiment can be explained only by considering the photon model proposed in Quantum Ring Theory, because as there is a distance “d” between the particle and the antiparticle, it is possible the existence of an effective magnetic field for photons, in spite of its total electric charge is null.

    There is no way to explain the phenomenon by considering a photon with electric charge null as considered in Quantum Mechanics.

    In the paper published in the journal Nature, the authors say in the Abstract:
    “However, recent theoretical work¹,² has shown that an effective magnetic field for photons can exist if the phase of light changes with its direction of propagation”.

    But in spite of the recent theoretical work mentioned in the paper had proposed the existence of an effective magnetic field for protons, however it is IMPOSSIBLE to explain WHY the phenomenon occurs, because it makes no sense to consider that a wave-particle propagation with electric charge zero could be able to produce such magnetic field.

    This is always the problem with Quantum Mechanics. The authors of a paper propose something, but they cannot explain WHY that occurs, because from the models of Quantum Mechanics there is no way to find the cause of the phenomenon.

    regards
    wlad

  83. Marco

    Dear Andrea,
    maybe my comment got spammed, so i am resending it. Anyway some of the issues got asked and answered.

    I was wondering if the frequency of the AC current changes the COP or the stability or other features and if you have tried, with an AC/AC converter, other frequencies and with what results.

    Regards.

  84. Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    We use normal AC current at the frequency it is supplied to us from the grid.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  85. NCY

    Has there been any R&D toward using a Stirling Engine to generate mechanical advantage/electricity directly from the E-cat?
    Thank you for your time.
    NCY

  86. Andrea Rossi

    NCY:
    Yes, it is an issue for our R&D.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  87. Wladimir Guglinski

    Silvio,
    an additional explanation on the linear polarization:

    a) Suppose a photon passes by a polarizizer 90º, and so it is polarized vertically with 90º. It means that his particle and antiparticle meet them together in the positions 90º and 270º.

    b) Now we will oblige that photon to pass by a polarizer 45º. It has 50% chance to be polarized 45º, depending on his distance d. If it is polarized 45º, it means that the particle and the antiparticle changed their relative position, and they will meet together in the positions 45º and 225º. And perhpas the distance d also can be affected, by a litle changing.

    regards
    wlad

  88. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 15th, 2014 at 4:55 PM

    Wladimir,

    How is the creation of two new corpuscles for the two particles of a divided photon different in essence from hadronization which also involves an act of creation of particles from the vacuum (or aether, as you believe)?
    ============================================

    Joe,
    I think the creation is the same in the two cases. When a “hole” is created in the aether due to the rupture of the partnership of the two corpuscles in the photon, the aether creates a new particle.

    But in the case of polarization there is not creation of particles.
    In the case of polarization there is changing in the properties of some photon.
    I cannot believe that, if we change the polarization of a twin brother photon here in the Earth, his brother in the Moon will also change its polarization.

    When we change the polariztion of the first twin brother photon here in the Earth, a polarizer is changing the relative position between the particle and the antiparticle of that photon. Such phenomenon requires the interaction between the two corpuscles of the photon with the atomic planes of the polarizer.
    I dont believe the twin brother photon in the Moon will also change the relative position between the particle and the antiparticle.

    regards
    wlad

  89. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia
    September 15th, 2014 at 9:49 PM

    @Wladimir Guglinski

    1)======================
    Sorry, I missed someting…
    Two photons A and B, emitted from the SAME laser, can have different distances “d” between their particle and
    antiparticle? Shouldn’t them have same distance “d”?
    Anyway, if both them pass a vertically polarizer (90º), shouldn’t them have NOW same distance “d”?
    =============================================

    No,
    two photons can be created with the exact same distance d only when are produced via the process of broken an original photon in two twin photons.

    The fact that two photons pass a vertically polarizer (90º) does not mean that they must have the distance d.

    Two photons with different distances d can be polarized 90º . Each one has 50% of chance to be polarized.
    Polarization is a phenomenon of resonance between the distance d and the distance D between the atomic planes of the polarizer. The value of the distance d varies between a maximum and minimum to be polarized.

    .

    2) =============================================
    By the way, what does it means the linear polarization of a SINGLE photon? Shouldn’t it have only spin (circular polarization)?
    Shouldn’t linear polarization be a collective property of photons?
    =========================================

    The particle and antiparticle move in contrary direction, with the same angular velocity (about the line center of their helical trajectory). So they pass one in front to the other in two positions, separated by 180º.

    In vertical linear polarization, the particle and the antiparticle pass by the points 90º and 270º at the same time (90º and 270º are the points where they pass one in front to the other).
    They always pass one in front to the other in the points 90º and 270º in the linear polarization.

    Unlike, in the circular polarization the particle has a circular motion a litle slowly, and so the point of their meeting is always changing.

    regards
    wlad

  90. silvio caggia

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    Sorry, I missed someting…
    Two photons A and B, emitted from the SAME laser, can have different distances “d” between their particle and
    antiparticle? Shouldn’t them have same distance “d”?
    Anyway, if both them pass a vertically polarizer (90º), shouldn’t them have NOW same distance “d”?
    By the way, what does it means the linear polarization of a SINGLE photon? Shouldn’t it have only spin (circular polarization)?
    Shouldn’t linear polarization be a collective property of photons?
    Regards

  91. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    The requirement for AC makes me think an magnetic field, altering in polarity, may be needed to stimulate the reactions until they reach a certain level at which they become self sustaining. Another possibility is that the resistor coil acts like a helical antenna emitting an RF signal into the reactor. This second possibility seems less likely, due to the possibility that red hot resistors might have such a great resistance they may not transmit well.

    Can you elaborate at all on this? As always, I understand if you cannot. But after following this saga for years now, I’ll be thrilled when we can learn a bit more about what is happening: rather than only reading speculation that is probably 90% wrong that has been rehashed over and over on internet E-Cat forums.

    The E-Cat is a dream of an ideal energy source made manifest. I’m not a doubting Thomas, but perhaps a bit of a Zacchaeus, with a great curiosity , climbing up the “tree” of the internet to hear an explanation of whats happening that allows the E-Cat to work it’s wonders. If you were a prophet and the E-Cat was a barrel of water turned into wine, the situation would be so much easier. But since you are a scientist having to deal with patent laws, unsavory characters, and IP issues, the whole situation is much more complicated.

  92. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    In your question there is the answer. Obviously I cannot comment. Our Team is making all the necessary work to make the E Cat operate.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  93. Rafal Krych

    Dear Andrea,

    How about making your E-Cat reactors (both domestic & industrial) resistant to EMP (electromagnetic pulse). I mean to hide all electronic components inside metal shielding of reactor (Faraday cage) and maybe some extra fuses to protect against currents induced in external cabling. This might be very important in case of possible “Carrington Event” or human triggered EMP:
    http://www.wired.com/2012/02/massive-solar-flare/

    Such feature will make your reactors even better when comparing with classical energy sources which cannot be secured like this.

  94. Andrea Rossi

    Rafal Krych:
    Interesting issue, never thought about that. I will talk with out electronic experts to check what you write.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  95. Joe

    Wladimir,

    How is the creation of two new corpuscles for the two particles of a divided photon different in essence from hadronization which also involves an act of creation of particles from the vacuum (or aether, as you believe)?

    All the best,
    Joe

  96. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 13th, 2014 at 9:47 AM

    @Wladimir Guglinski

    Now I have some doubts that asked her (and still waiting for reply)
    1) What happens if NL2 is put before D2 (after b)?
    2) Why do you need to put the infrared beam (that hit O) before NL2?
    3) Whats happens if you reduce the distance between D3 and D2?
    I thing that you should maintain some reasonable doubt about this experiment till Gabriela answers these questions.
    =========================================

    Silvio,
    we have to wait Gabriela to make the experiments suggested by me.
    I even dont know if she will undertake them
    regards
    wlad

  97. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 13th, 2014 at 8:39 AM

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    If I well understood your thinking, the photon behaviour approaching a polarizer should be deterministic (its sub-particles have a determined distance between them) and not probabilistic (as QM says).
    So what should happen when a laser beam of vertically polarized photons approach a 45degree polarizer (or a beam splitter)?
    According to a deterministic approach all photons should get the same way…
    But experimental results say they get two different ways: 50% pass and 50% absorbed (or deviated in a beam splitter).
    Have I missed something?
    How your model explains the different behaviour of identical photons (same polarization)?
    I think that this is the core concept of QM, we must agree on this point before discussing about entanglement or Aspect experiment.
    =====================================

    Silvio,
    two photons with the same wavelenght can have different distances “d” between their particle and antiparticle.

    Suppose two photons A and B with the same wavelength, but in the photon A the distance is “d(a)”, and the distance in the photon B is “d(b)”.

    Both the photons A and B can be polarized vertically.

    So, suppose both them are polarized vertically (90º)

    Now suppose they both hit a polarizator 45º

    Their chance to be polarized 45º depends on their distances d(a) and d(b). For each one of them the chance is 50%.

    Only two twin photons (as created in Gabriela experiment) will have the same behavior, because they both have the same distance “d”.
    If one is polarized, the other is polarized too.
    If one is not polarized, the other also is not polarized.

    regards
    wlad

  98. Mark

    Hi Andrea,
    Lets not talk about controllability of the E-cat, can the Rossi effect be initiated by any heat source (gas, Dc, Ac, animal fat, coal,gasoline….)?

  99. Andrea Rossi

    Mark:
    No, only with AC, so far. R&D is on course for gas operated E-Cats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  100. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 14th, 2014 at 9:28 PM

    Eric,

    Your suggestion about recreating a missing part of a particle by using the environment may be true. One example of such a speculated process is called hadronization:

    “In particle physics, hadronization (or hadronisation) is the process of the formation of hadrons out of quarks and gluons. This occurs after high-energy collisions in a particle collider in which free quarks or gluons are created. Due to postulated colour confinement, these cannot exist individually. In the Standard Model they combine with quarks and antiquarks SPONTANEOUSLY CREATED FROM THE VACUUM to form hadrons.” (capitalization is mine) (Wikipedia, Hadronization)
    ============================================

    Joe,
    there is a confusion here.

    in high-energy collisions there is collision between matter with matter, at high energy. As energy is converted to matter following Einstein’s equation E=mc² , the creation of quarks occurs.

    A similar phenomenon occurs when a photon is divided in the Gabriela experiment. The particle takes a direction, and as the photon cannot be formed by one unique corpuscle, a new antiparticle is created, and together with the particle they form the first new twin photon.

    The same happens with the antiparticle of the original photon. It takes another direction, and a perticle is created, and together with the antiparticle they form the second new thin photon.

    It is not the case in the entanglement between photons. They have to interact through a very long distance.
    And it is not the case of formation of a new photon. It is actually the case of change its polarization.

    regards
    wlad

  101. Andreas Moraitis

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Could the gas-powered reactors use a DC source (for example, a battery) as electrical input?

    Best regards,
    Andreas Moraitis

  102. Andrea Rossi

    Andreas Moraitis:
    Gas powered E-Cats are still in a very primitive R&D status, therefore I am not able to answer to your question. Sorry.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  103. Piergiorgio Mongioj

    Dear Andrea, you say “50 Hz or 60 Hz are frequencies at which the E-Cat can work properly”. So The E-Cat works properly… Very good news!!! Negative or positive? ;-) “Hot” regards. Piergiorgio Mongioj

  104. Andrea Rossi

    Piergiorgio Mongioj:
    I meant that the E-Cats can work properly “from the electrical point of view” if the frequency is either 50 or 60 Hz, I was not referring to the other data.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  105. Greg Leonard

    Dear AR
    Will the ecat work just as well with the American 60Hz and the British 50Hz mains electricity?

  106. Andrea Rossi

    Greg Leonard:
    Yes, 50 Hz or 60 Hz are frequencies at which the E-Cat can work properly. As a matter of fact, in the USA we have 60 Hz, while in Europe we have 50 Hz.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  107. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    You say that the E-Cat needs AC current to operate. My understanding is that the electricity is needed to run an electric resistance heater — could not DC current power a resistor and achieve the same effect?

    So what is additional purpose behind the need for AC?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  108. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    No, we need AC current: the E-Cat cannot be operated with DC current.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  109. Wladimir Guglinski

    Eric Ashworth
    September 14th, 2014 at 12:48 PM

    Could it be posible that if you split a rotating object then the two rotating objects will by means of the free aether be able to re-create its missing partner if it only needs one or two aethers. Could this explain the Gabriela experiment or am I completely off the mark. Regards Eric Ashworth
    ========================================

    Eric
    I dont believe, it

    That would require a very complex mechanism

    regards
    wlad

  110. Joe

    Eric,

    Your suggestion about recreating a missing part of a particle by using the environment may be true. One example of such a speculated process is called hadronization:

    “In particle physics, hadronization (or hadronisation) is the process of the formation of hadrons out of quarks and gluons. This occurs after high-energy collisions in a particle collider in which free quarks or gluons are created. Due to postulated colour confinement, these cannot exist individually. In the Standard Model they combine with quarks and antiquarks SPONTANEOUSLY CREATED FROM THE VACUUM to form hadrons.” (capitalization is mine) (Wikipedia, Hadronization)

    All the best,
    Joe

  111. Eric Ashworth

    To Wladimir and Joe, Thanks for your reply to my questions regarding QE. I will be following your comments which I enjoy on this blog. The subject of aether regarding its existence is, I believe, an important missing link in physics which if ever proven will provide major advances in the understanding of a complex subject. My understanding of aether is that it is a grainy substance with no gravity value because it lacks a dimension of volume but represents a value of size energy i.e. not volume energy. It will respond to gravity because gravity has to sit within a volume. Maybe aether can only make so much volume energy/ matter within a given volume and any remaining aether has to fill the empty space between the manufactured volumes and thereby the free aether will never be at rest as it takes straight line projectories to cover as much distance in the shortest possible time. Could it be posible that if you split a rotating object then the two rotating objects will by means of the free aether be able to re-create its missing partner if it only needs one or two aethers. Could this explain the Gabriela experiment or am I completely off the mark. Regards Eric Ashworth

  112. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    In considering the size of the nickel particles, it seems to me there must be an optimal nickel particle average diameter for the Rossi effect to work for industrial applications such as the Hot eCat. Assuming the eCat reactor is at temperature with the internal fuel close to but less than the melting point of nickel, then too small a nickel particle diameter and the particle will melt due to the nuclear event. Likewise, since the LENR effect appears to be a function of surface area, too large of a particle diameter will reduce the likelihood of an LENR effect. So there must be a “sweet zone” for the Rossi effect in terms of nickel particle size. Do you agree?

  113. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    As you know, I already answered to you regarding this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  114. Dan C.

    DR. Rossi

    From images I’ve seen, it appears you still employ the flange on the reactor with the studs protruding out.

    This would indicate that the reactor would be positioned inside a boiler with the flange pressing against the wall squeezing the seal tight against that wall. As opposed to the flange being on the outside pressing the seal apart when under pressure & increasing the odds of springing a leak. Or worse, the reactor being jettisoned like a safety plug should the studs break off.

    Could one assume then that with the above configuration of the reactor mounted to the inner wall of the boiler, that the reactor core itself can be removed through the center of the flange without removal of the outer casing. This could involve just the hermetically sealed charge/insert or include the resistor coils imbedded in the ceramic insert should they need checked or replaced.

    I ask because in a comment you posted “When charges have to be changed the system is fast.”
    This configuration would be fast & possibly even done without shutting down the entire system to change a single dead reactor.

    Also with this design, The outer reactor shell could be built robust enough to last years or decades & become a physical part of the boiler. The reactor itself would then just be the core charge & resistor assembly.

  115. Andrea Rossi

    Dan C.:
    Thank you for your intelligent comment. Obviously you refer to the Hot Cat. As a matter of fact the issue you raised is correct, anyway the images you have seen were not related to an industrial plant, but to a bench prototype.
    Thank you for your attention and your suggestion.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  116. NCY

    Would it be possible to hook up a thermoelectric generator to an Ecat (with the Ecat as the heat source), produce electricity and with the aid of a small battery for a buffer, loop the electricity back into the Ecat for a demonstration device? Thermoelectic seems the simplest for this as they commonly have efficiencies of 5-8% which may be plenty for this application.
    NCY

  117. Andrea Rossi

    NCY:
    Any electric energy source is good for the E-Cat drive, provided :
    1- it must be alternate current ( the E-Cat cannot work with direct current)
    2- it must be e very elastic source, due to the control system technology
    3- it must have an efficiency enough to save the economic convenience of the E-Cat
    For these reasons the integration of the Seebeck Effect with the so called Rossi Effect does not work: so far the efficiency of the Seebeck Effect is too low ( max 5%, more likely 3%, minus the loss to convert DC into AC).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  118. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    Do you think that gas will substitute electric power to make the E-Cats work?
    I noticed all your public tests have been made using electricity.
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  119. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    We have an R&D section working on gas activated E-Cats, and I think we will be able to resolve the problems we have.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  120. JCRenoir

    Did you ever make experiments to treat with the Rossi Effect radioactive wastes from thermonuclear plants? There are rumors you did .
    JCRenoir

  121. Andrea Rossi

    JCRenoir:
    Yes, with inconclusive results.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  122. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you, useful link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  123. Joseph Fine

    AR,

    Sorry. I sent the plot/picture of High Entropy Alloys without the article. The link to the original article is below.

    http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2014/09/04/a-metallic-alloy-that-is-tough-and-ductile-at-cryogenic-temperatures/

    Joseph Fine

  124. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    Can you explain better the “five sigma” thing?
    JCRenoir

  125. Andrea Rossi

    JCRenoir:
    The classic example is the case of flipping a coin: you have a 50% chance that it will be face 1 and 50% that it will be face 2. Obviously if you flip 100 times the coin, it is unlikely you get 50 F1 and 50 F2, most likely you will get 45-55 times either one face or the other: this interval 45-55 is in this example “sigma 1″; means that if you find from 45 through 55 times a face flipping 100 times, there is no event at all, because it is normal. If a stretch of 10 is sigma 1, we will have a stretch of 20 = sigma 2, a stretch of 30= sigma 3, a stretch of 40= sigma 4, a stretch of 50= sigma 5; this means that the higher the value of sigma, the higher the possibility that there is something, that you are looking for, that makes a work: in the case of the coin, can be a trick that makes the coin fraudolent, in case of Physics can be a force that breaks the symmetry or something else. If you get a sigma 5 the probability that there is a break of the normality is very close to be certain ( in Physics nothing is certain, everything has a higher or lower grade of probability).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  126. Roberto

    Dear Andrea, two questions:
    The current international situation is affecting the delay of the report release?
    Without Focardi and the fantastic Italian academic world made ​​of humble people would have the E-Cat existed ?
    Regards, Roberto

  127. Andrea Rossi

    Roberto:
    I do not see how the current international situation could affect the report release. The Report of the ITP has been delayed by nothing but the necessity of a proper review. All Physicists know that the publication of an important paper can take from 6 to 12 months.
    Prof. Sergio Focardi has given a strong help to the development of the E-Cat.
    Many Professors from the Italian academic world have given an important contribution. The E-Cat is the result of an international team work without which the E-Cat probably could not have been born.

  128. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you, useful information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  129. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    Just saw this article on high-entropy alloys.

    The article only focused on cryogenic applications, but these materials may also have exceptional properties in high temperature applications.

    You may find these materials of some use in your R & D.

    http://newscenter.lbl.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/08/Rob-Ritchie-alloys-paper.jpg

    http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/12/5338 (Click on PDF; Open Access)

    High-Entropy regards,

    Joseph Fine

  130. Curiosone

    We are now going toward the period of the Christmas gifts, and books are among the more donated gifts: which book would you suggest to give as a gift in the LENR neighbourhood?
    W.G.

  131. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Sigma can be two different things:
    1- a boson of the family of Barions, inside the Hadron system. Is a virtual particle, can have positive, neutral and negative charge.
    2- a probabilistic interval that measures statistically the probability that an event is real: for example, sigma 1 makes the extraordinary event unlikely, sigma five makes the event close to certain.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  132. Curiosone

    What is “sigma” in nuclear physics?
    W.G.

  133. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Norman Cook ” Models of the Atomic Nucleus”, 2nd edition, Springer, 2010
    Is a gold mine.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  134. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    In Russia we have enormous reserves of gas: do you think we can take advantage from the E-Cats using gas?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  135. silvio caggia

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    About the Gabriela’s experiment I finally got the setup schema:
    i.imgur.com/nwHb1qp.jpg
    The red line is the infrared path while the yellow line is the red light path. Yeah, a bit confusingly…
    It is very different from what I imagined from the article you posted here, there are not the two arms to apply my suggestions.
    Now I have some doubts that asked her (and still waiting for reply)
    1) What happens if NL2 is put before D2 (after b)?
    2) Why do you need to put the infrared beam (that hit O) before NL2?
    3) Whats happens if you reduce the distance between D3 and D2?
    I thing that you should maintain some reasonable doubt about this experiment till Gabriela answers these questions.

  136. silvio caggia

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    If I well understood your thinking, the photon behaviour approaching a polarizer should be deterministic (its sub-particles have a determined distance between them) and not probabilistic (as QM says).
    So what should happen when a laser beam of vertically polarized photons approach a 45degree polarizer (or a beam splitter)?
    According to a deterministic approach all photons should get the same way…
    But experimental results say they get two different ways: 50% pass and 50% absorbed (or deviated in a beam splitter).
    Have I missed something?
    How your model explains the different behaviour of identical photons (same polarization)?
    I think that this is the core concept of QM, we must agree on this point before discussing about entanglement or Aspect experiment.

  137. Alessandro Coppi

    Hi Andrea, when the ITP2 will be released, we can imagine an huge number of requests for the paper at the same time, and the web server could be overloaded, becoming unavailable.
    Are your IT guys aware on this issue?

    Best regards
    Alessandro Coppi

  138. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    This is an issue to be assessed by the publisher. The publication will not be made by us.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  139. timycelyn1

    Dear Andrea,
    now that the 1MW plant has been delivered to your Customer, are you able to return to focusing your attention on the rest of the research you are pursuing, or does the 1MW plant still take up your time?

    Best wishes

    Tim

  140. Andrea Rossi

    Timycelyn1:
    I will have to control the operation of the 1 MW plant closely, but also participate to the R&D.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  141. Wladimir Guglinski

    Discussion on entanglement in the JoNP blog posted in ZPEnergy:

    http://zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3571

    .

  142. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    It seems to me there must be an optimal size for the nickel particles used in the Rossi effect. I suppose too large a particle and the surface area effect decreases. Too small a particle and the small particle melts by the generate energy before the thermal energy can be conducted away. Comments?

  143. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    This issue has been described in the Patent granted to Andrea Rossi in Italy with priority April 2008.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  144. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Good news about the movement of the 1MW plant from your factory to the customers’ factory! Is transporting the plant a difficult procedure? I hope it is not something that is easily damaged.

    Best wishes,

    Frank

  145. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    The 1 MW units do not carry transportation troubles.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  146. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,

    Can you please explain now, after a few years, the reason why 1 MW was the minimum size of output that you offered to customers ?
    As people know, the (original) 1MW plant consists of modules of +/- 30kW.

    Since your R&D allows to have better control on the Rossi-Effect, nowadays it may be possible to have a continuous and guaranteed output with units smaller than 1 MW. Do you think that smaller units are a viable option ?

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  147. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    Of course small units are a viable option; the choice to limit the market to big units is dictated by commercial strategies integrated with IP issues. The destiny of the E-Cat is to be produced, if it works, in a mass of small and big models: your comment matches with Argon’s I answered to few minutes ago.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  148. Argon

    Dear Andrea! I respect your inventing merit and copyright. However, i would like to see alive the Rossi-Focardy effects creation of energy in the Ni-H systems and show this fact for my friends and students. Even simple and without the resources to long working model of a power of several watts. As an example, is a model internal combustion engine for school . They twisted and smoked, they can be taken apart and repaired, but for commercial engines are not competitors in any case, and not threatened anybody’s patents or business. Also the question of finance for the purchase of large E-сat will be perceived our potential sponsors much closer after meeting with the current model

  149. Andrea Rossi

    Argon:
    If and when the so called Rossi Effect will be produced in millions of apparatuses, it will be available universally as a car engine today. At the time of Dr Diesel it was not so easy to have engines, even small, in a classroom…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  150. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    ‘If’ the report is positive, will you be able to supply at least some video or a photo of the new 1MW plant running to release at the same time

    At the very least, it will give the media a nice video-bite to play on the news? Perhaps you could speak with IH marketing (although I would hope they have thought of this already)!

    I really hope the report is released soon, I’m getting far too anxious! :)

  151. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    The 1 MW plant is in the factory of a Customer of IH. As far as I know, the Customer will not allow any video for the time being. IH has not jurisdiction in the factories of the Customers as for what is related to videos to be published. Eventually specific visits, as I already said, will be allowed, but it is too soon to talk about this. Report of the ITP: I do not think it will take too long before the publication, but this is just a supposition of mine.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  152. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    You say that E-Cat production will be an international concern — do you expect to be manufacturing E-Cat plants outside the United States? If so, where do you anticipate production facilities will be located?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  153. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Presently the manufacturing is made in the USA. I am not informed about a dislocation. In the USA you can find very skilled and efficient employees at any level.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  154. Bob

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    Can you share with your readers any information about progress or setbacks in the effort to integrate the e-cat into a gas turbine aircraft powerplant?

    Thanks

    Bob

  155. Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    Yes, this is an issue on course in our R&D program. When we will have results worth to be communicated, we surely will give information. So far we are distant from valid results, honestly.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  156. Hello Andrea,

    Recently people who follow news about the ECat have been discussing William McDonough, who has collaborated with Tom Darden in various projects. Mr. McDonough’s “Cradle-to-Cradle” site encourages industry to develop and enrich ecosystems (as opposed to minimizing harm).

    It would seem to be a Phenomenological approach to the industrial process.

    Are you familiar with William McDonough’s work such as “Cradle-to-Cradle”?

  157. Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    Yes, I have known William Mc Donough in the factory of IH in Raleigh, and he explained to me the cradle-to-cradle concept. Very smart guy and a brilliant speaker. I agree with the basics of his philosophy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  158. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Do you think that the study of Astrophysics can be useful for the LENR?
    W.G.

  159. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yes, see for example the work of Raiola cited in the paper Focardi-Rossi. Astrophysics are an infinite source of information. Did you see the photos of the Universe published by NASA? What a wonderful thing!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  160. JCRenoir

    Please, Dr Rossi: is there a term upon which you could bet 1$ for the publication of the Independent Third Party Report?

  161. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    I am very sorry, but whatever I say could be wrong and if I give just a guess, it could be taken as an information.
    I do not think it will take long, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  162. JCRenoir

    Are the control systems of the 1MW plant made by some specialist like National Instruments or similar?

  163. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    No, we made the control systems by our electronic engineers. We designed and produced all the control system inside our factory.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  164. DTravchenko

    Another question:
    Are there women in the ITP?
    DT

  165. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    I will continue my R&D work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  166. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    What you will do if the results of the Independent Third Party will be positive?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  167. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Yes, one. She is a nuclear physicist.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  168. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Do you think the TRP has been completed, or do you think it is still being worked on?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  169. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    I do not know, sorry.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  170. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 10th, 2014 at 6:25 AM

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    Only for sake of truth, the “simple” explanation is based on QM, the “less simple” is a complete reformulation of phisics from the fundamentals as you ask, so in contrast with QM and Relativity. ======================================

    Dear Silvio,
    by reformulation of physics I mean from fundamentals agree to the logic.
    In my oppinion go back in the time is not agree to logic.

    I dont see advantage in replacing an old theory as Quantum Mechanics, developed from some absurd postulates as the Bohr Principle of Complementarity, by other new theory developed from new absurd postulates.

    regards
    wlad

  171. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 10th, 2014 at 12:35 AM

    Wladimir,

    Since you believe that aether and space are identical with each other, how would it be possible for you to know that there is a greater density of aether near a star since the measuring rod that exists near the star is contracted due to gravity to the same degree that aether is condensed? In other words, the greater density would look average (d=1) when measured using a contracted rod. (The only solution, of course, is to consider space as nonphysical and therefore beyond the influence of physical processes.)
    =============================================

    Joe,
    the fact that the physical properties of the aether cannot be measured by experiments does not mean that they do not exist.
    It is only a limitation of the technology available.

    Michelson did not succeed to detect the existence of the aether with his experimment, but today new experiments made via new technologies are proving its existence.

    regards
    wlad

  172. Roberto

    Dear Andrea, thanks for the answer
    obviously, as Italian this makes me very sad and disappointed, you are our new gioconda that gets out of hand.
    Roberto

  173. Andrea Rossi

    Nero of Florence:
    R&D and ITP work are both on course: the results are still pending and at last could be either positive or negative.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  174. Nero_of_Florence

    Dear Andrea, always you are telling of “negative or positive” … This is good for ITP and NDA, but… you must know how the e_cats – warm and hot ;-) – operate and what they are producing… What about this? I think you may be more affermative… all in your clear responsability… I apologize for my poor english and… good luck for your R&D… and busyness!

  175. Carlo Marcena

    I do not think that AR will be served a Golden Tapire …

    Warm Regards,
    CM

  176. silvio caggia

    @joe
    For sake of truth, in Reciprocal System time is ONLY an ASPECT of motion, 3Dtime is a deduction from postulates, not an ad hoc postulate. Material sector (3Dspace+clock time) and Cosmic sector (3Dtime+clock space) are ONLY PROJECTIONS. As you say Time and Space are mental objects. The only real thing is Motion.

  177. Giuliano Bettini

    Roberto:
    eventually, I think, if the results are positive, Italy will receive a “golden tapir”, to have lost an opportunity.
    http://nonciclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/File:Tapiro_d‘oro.jpg
    Regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  178. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    …, but if the results will be negative, the Golden Tapire will be served to me.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  179. Giuliano Bettini

    Roberto:
    sorry, I don’t think so. :(
    Giuliano Bettini.

  180. Roberto

    Dear Andrea,
    As italian, I’ll give you a very direct question, Italy will have a direct and tangible benefit from your new technology compared to other countries?
    Roberto

  181. Andrea Rossi

    Roberto:
    If the results of the R&D and tests on course will be positive, the development of this technology will be based on an international concern. I must invite you to remind that the results could also be negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  182. silvio caggia

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    Only for sake of truth, the “simple” explanation is based on QM, the “less simple” is a complete reformulation of phisics from the fundamentals as you ask, so in contrast with QM and Relativity. Regards

  183. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Since you believe that aether and space are identical with each other, how would it be possible for you to know that there is a greater density of aether near a star since the measuring rod that exists near the star is contracted due to gravity to the same degree that aether is condensed? In other words, the greater density would look average (d=1) when measured using a contracted rod. (The only solution, of course, is to consider space as nonphysical and therefore beyond the influence of physical processes.)

    All the best,
    Joe

  184. Joe

    Silvio,

    Let us assume that time is physical.
    In that case, it would be described as linear since we observe events evolving in one temporal direction. But a linear dimension also implies a potential negative direction – a going backwards in time. But since we do not observe such a backwards evolution of events, we can safely and scientifically (since science is based on observation) conclude that time is therefore not a linear dimension. And what is more, if it is not a linear dimension, it is most certainly not an entity consisting of three linear dimensions. The Reciprocal System by Larson is really just an enforced symmetry on what we popularly call 3D space and 1D time, rendering a 3D time and 1D space. But such an act is gratuitous, a mere concoction that will most certainly fail in predicting physical phenomena. Any theory that is solid is derived from first principles – built from the bottom up. The Reciprocal System was built in a lateral movement – a horizontal work rather than the needed vertical one.

    All the best,
    Joe

  185. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    1 – Are there any E-Cat reactors in China at this time?

    2 – As Chief Scientist, do you get to choose who is hired to head the Chinese research project?

    3 – Where will the funding for the Chinese research project originate?

    4 – Have you considered opening an E-Cat acadamy for when the tech starts entering the market in a big way? Those who enrolled could study theory, operation of reactors, construction, safety, etc. Then they could be certified to work E-Cat related jobs in manufacturing, maintenance, servicing, inspecting, etc. I’d be interested in enrolling.

    Thank you.

  186. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    1- no
    2- no
    3- I am not involved in this
    4- we are considering how to prepare certified operators: this is an important issue
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  187. Wladimir Guglinski

    Eric Ashworth wrote in September 9th, 2014 at 12:10 AM

    The two objects must have the same identical resonance. What would Wladimir think of this. As I have said this subject is fascinating. Regards Eric Ashworth
    =========================================

    Eric,
    my friend Dr. Claudio Nassif is the author of a new version for the Theory of Relativity, by introducing the concept the aether in the Einstein’s theory.

    Nassif already published 4 papers in the most prestigious journals of Physics, as for instance in the International Journal of Modern Physics D.

    His theory is named Symmetric Special Relativity – SSR.

    In his theory Nassif shows that there is in the aether a sort of propagation of longitudinal waves with speed several times faster than the speed of light. They can cross the universe in few seconds.

    And Nassif supposed that such very fast interaction could be the cause of the entanglement in the Alain Aspect experiment.

    However such explanation supposed by Nassif cannot work, because such very fast interaction propagates itself LONGITUDINALLY along the aether.

    But in order to change the polarization of a photon there is need to apply a rotation in the photon. In order words, there is need to change the angular momentum. But the longitudinal propagations faster than light are not able to produce a change in the angular momentum of a photon, because they are longitudinal.

    That’s why your idea (similar to that supposed by Nassif) cannot explain the “apparent” entanglement in the Alain Aspect experiment.

    regards
    wlad

  188. Wladimir Guglinski

    Eric Ashworth wrote in September 9th, 2014 at 12:10 AM

    The two objects must have the same identical resonance. What would Wladimir think of this. As I have said this subject is fascinating. Regards Eric Ashworth
    =========================================

    Eric,
    the polarization of a photon cannot be changed via resonance with other photon

    regards
    wlad

  189. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 9th, 2014 at 5:49 PM

    @joe
    Quantum Entanglement has interesting explanations at the cost that you exit from the mainstream phisics…
    A “simple” explanation is that the entangled particles are connected THRU time… you find details in Transactional Interpretation o QM by John Cramer.
    A “less simple” explanation is that space and time are not phisical containers but only aspects of the real constituent of whole universe: scalar motion. We live in a projection of scalar motion in a 3D space+clock time reference system, but there is also a reciprocal 3Dtime+clock space reference system… You find details in Reciprocal System of theory by Larson.
    ================================================

    COMMENT

    Silvio,
    500 years ago Galileo said that science and logic cannot be divorced. If somebody creates a theory divorced to logic, you can be sure that his theory is wrong, because the Nature does not work divorced to logic.

    The problem of Modern Physics started when Einstein proposed a theory divorced to logic, where an empty space can have contraction and dilation.
    Following the Einstein’s example, the creators of the Quantum Mechanics, lead by Heisenberg, developed a theory divorced to logic too, because they supposed be impossible to create a theory in the field of quantum physics compatible with the logic.

    The origin of the crisis in the Modern Physics was the empty space proposed by Einstein.
    Because of the elimination of the physical space (aether) in the Theoretical Physics, many hidden mechanisms used by the Nature in the production of the phenomena were neglected by the theorists. And this is the reason why many of them used the desperate resource of trying crazy theoretical solutions.

    So, the physicists were induced to believe that Nature is no logic, and such conclusion opened the door for all the sort of theories based on several crazy hypothesis.

    In such a panorama, along the years, when a new paradox appeared defying the current theories, the theorist used to propose solutions divorced to the logic.

    Many experiments published along the 5 last years are showing that Quantum Mechanics was developed from wrong foundations. And the experiment published by the journal Nature in 2011 showed that Einstein’s theory of empty space is wrong.

    Therefore,
    it is not now the time to keep the crazy solutions adopted by some theorists along the years with the aim to explain paradoxes not solved via the current Quantum Mechanics and the Theory of Relativity, because all those crazy solutions are based on the wrong foundations of Quantum Mechanics.

    It is now the time of starting everything again, from the zero, by introducing the concept of aether in the Relativity, and by introducing several new principles missing in the Quantum Mechanics.
    This is the only way.

    The Nature is not crazy.
    But crazy theories sometimes are proposed when some theorists develop them by starting up from the assumption that Nature is crazy.

    regards
    wlad

  190. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 9th, 2014 at 12:21 PM

    Wladimir,

    Aether (physical) and space (mental) are not identical with each other. How can you ascertain the dilation or contraction, i.e. the change in density, of aether without a FIXED space in which the aether could operate, and against which the aether could be measured?
    =======================================================

    Joe,
    I call density d=1 of the aether those regions far away of the presence of matter (for instance, the intergalactic space between stars).

    The density of the aether around a star could be established via the gravitational field of the star.
    Suppose that only one star was existing in the universe.
    The regions very far away of the star, where the gravity is practically zero, would be regions with density d=1 of the aether.
    In a point near to the star, the density of the aether would be changing proportional to the square of the distance between that point and the star.

    regards
    wlad

  191. silvio caggia

    @joe
    Quantum Entanglement has interesting explanations at the cost that you exit from the mainstream phisics…
    A “simple” explanation is that the entangled particles are connected THRU time… you find details in Transactional Interpretation o QM by John Cramer.
    A “less simple” explanation is that space and time are not phisical containers but only aspects of the real constituent of whole universe: scalar motion. We live in a projection of scalar motion in a 3D space+clock time reference system, but there is also a reciprocal 3Dtime+clock space reference system… You find details in Reciprocal System of theory by Larson.
    Note: both explanations require that you reconsider deeply the nature of time.

  192. H-G Branzell

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    The acronym should be ITPR, not TIPR because it is a report from an independent third party. It is neither a report from a third independent party nor the third report from an independent party, i. e. is an (ITP)R but neither a (TIP)R nor a T(IPR).
    Best regards, H-G Branzell

  193. Andrea Rossi

    H-G Branzell:
    You are right.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  194. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Aether (physical) and space (mental) are not identical with each other. How can you ascertain the dilation or contraction, i.e. the change in density, of aether without a FIXED space in which the aether could operate, and against which the aether could be measured?

    All the best,
    Joe

  195. Joe

    Eric,

    You bring up three important points:

    1. You are right to be concerned about the manner in which the physical world would connect to the mental world of space and time. The interface is very subtle. It is hard to tease the two worlds apart.

    2. The reason QE is a hard subject for QM is because QM believes that QE is fundamentally nebulous – probabilistic rather than deterministic. But I have already explained how a Nature based on uncertainty would not even exist.

    3. Many years ago, I had contemplated the use of an incompressible medium. But that brings with itself a whole new set of incongruities. (It would be possible to explain instantaneity over a short distance but not over a long distance what with disturbances of the medium with various physical phenomena.)

    All the best,
    Joe

  196. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    thank you very much for your very positive answer.
    This opens new perspective on “positive or negative”.
    Did you or your team make important or structural modifications on the low temperature e-cat and high-temperature e-cat because of this improved control on the Rossi-Effect ?
    Will the patents, if ever granted, not be outdated or obsolete because of this ?
    I hope you and your team find a way out.
    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  197. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    The evolution of our technology is permanent and depends on the R&D on course amd the tests. For obvious reasons, the most important test is the TIPR related one.
    IP is matter of out patent attorneys.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  198. Eric Ashworth

    Joe, Regards your comment to Wladimir. You state ” So since space and time are non physical they are no impediments to the concept of instanteneity. Therefore, instantaneity can exist in reality. You could equally state that distance and duration are non physical concepts but without the physical these non physical concepts would not exist as a concept of reality. Instantaneity is an event that without the physical would not exist as a concept (as a conceived idea). The photon I think of as a minute physical structure and thereby is able to bring into existence the concept of space and time. I find physics fscinating but I am not academic and therefore non technical. This concept of entanglement with regards a split photon, if my understanding is correct, could it be that the word entanglement could be misleading?. As an example would it be accurate to describe a radio set entangled with a transmitter. As I see it, because there is no such thing as empty space, resonance is able to maintain a connection over any distance due to the aether i.e. not exactly an entanglement more of a ‘knock on effect’ moreso like two objects connected by a solid rod providing instantaneouse reaction. The two objects must have the same identical resonance. What would Wladimir think of this. As I have said this subject is fascinating. Regards Eric Ashworth.

  199. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 8th, 2014 at 6:19 PM

    Wladimir,

    1) ====================
    There is nothing wrong with a hypothesis being proven wrong. That proof can take either of two forms: logical or experimental. In the case of Aristotle, it is experimental.
    ==========================

    Galileo proved it not only experimentally.
    He proved it by logic.
    If you take a body with mass m and other heavier body with mass M and glue them togehter, the body with mass M+m needs to fall down slowly than the body with mass M, because the body with mass m will retard the falling down of the body with mass M.
    But the body with mass M+m must fall down faster than the body with mass M, because M+m is heavier.
    Therefore there is a paradox: the body with mass M+m cannot fall down slowly and faster than the body with mass M, and therefore all the bodies fall down with the same acceleration.

    ,

    2)=======================
    In the case of Einstein, it is logical. His example is self-contradicting as I have shown in my previous post.
    ========================

    Einstein’s theory is illogical because he supposed that space is empty. But as he realized that space must have dilation, then he decided to connect space and time, by creating the concept of space-time.

    However space and time are not connected.
    Actually space is physical (the aether).
    And time actually does not exist (it is only a mathematical concept used so that to measure the evolution of mass changings).

    A new experiment published in the journal Nature in 2011 prove be wrong Einstein’s concept of empty space:
    Light created from vacuum shows empty space a myth
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Light-created-from-vacuum-shows-empty-space-a-myth/articleshow/10789049.cms

    .

    3)============================
    But there is no room for contradicting realities in science.
    =============================

    Yes, as said Galileo.
    That’s why I decided to develop my theory, in order to discover if it would be possible to eliminate the nonsenses of Modern Phusics (introduced firstly by Einstein).

    .

    4) ======================
    So his hypothesis – the physicality of space and time – must be wrong.
    ========================

    Not for the space.
    The space is physical.
    Only the time is non-physical, because actually time does not exist.
    The contraction and dilation of the space-time supposed by Einstein is actually due to the dilation and contraction of the aether

    .

    5) ======================
    There can be no experiment that will prove otherwise.

    So since space and time are nonphysical, they are no impediment to the concept of instantaneity. Therefore instantaneity can exist in reality.
    ============================

    Being the space physical, there is no way to have an instantenous interaction between two paticles aparted far away one of the other.

    .

    6) ===========================
    But as I have also explained in another previous post, the concept of QE is illogical and therefore can not exist realistically even though it is popularly associated with the concept of instantaneity.
    ==============================

    QE is illogical in Quantum Mechanics, because wrongly interpreted by quantum theorists.

    regards
    wlad

  200. Lata

    Hi Andrea,
    Is it possible to induce radioactivity in e-cat fuel through LENR reactions and then use the activated fuel for Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator(RTG). If this can be done, the end product will be simplified and it will be easier to protect the trade secrets because you will be giving away only the activated fuel not the whole e-cat setup. You already see transmutations in e-cat, so this should be possible.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator

    Regards,
    Lata

  201. Andrea Rossi

    Lata:
    No, it is not possible. Besides, we do not produce any radioactive residual, as well as we do not use any radioactive material. The E-Cat works in a totally different way. The thermoelectric device you gave the link of is a classic generator based upon the Seebeck Effect, that I know pretty well, having worked with it for many years. The particular application fueled by radioactive isotopes has been used by NASA in space devices like spaceships, satellites etc. As a source has been normally used plutonium. This application has been abandoned, due to the risk related to a possible fall of the apparatus on the surface of the Earth. All this has nothing to do with the possible applications of the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  202. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “Galileo proved that Aristotle was wrong by making the experiment in the Pisa tower.”

    There is nothing wrong with a hypothesis being proven wrong. That proof can take either of two forms: logical or experimental. In the case of Aristotle, it is experimental. In the case of Einstein, it is logical. His example is self-contradicting as I have shown in my previous post. But there is no room for contradicting realities in science. So his hypothesis – the physicality of space and time – must be wrong. There can be no experiment that will prove otherwise.

    So since space and time are nonphysical, they are no impediment to the concept of instantaneity. Therefore instantaneity can exist in reality.

    But as I have also explained in another previous post, the concept of QE is illogical and therefore can not exist realistically even though it is popularly associated with the concept of instantaneity.

    All the best,
    Joe

  203. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I was specifically asking about the units which were used in the configuration of the 1 Mev devices. I assume they were all tested with the same routine to assure consistent operating values. In this testing, were there large deviations in outputs and did they perform reliably with a minimum of failure upon startup procedures?
    Fond regards.

  204. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Wrong, we need a certification for the domestic E-Cats: no reliable insurances can give a proper and consistent insurance for non certified apparatuses.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  205. Tom Conover

    Dear Andrea,

    1) Was the 1st TIP conducted on the older style Ecat?
    2) Was the 2nd TIP conducted on the newer style Activator-Ecat?

    Thanks in advance!

    God bless you,

    Tom Conover

  206. Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    The report will contain the detailed description of the test. I am not able to answer because I have not been there continuously.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  207. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 5th, 2014 at 8:01 PM

    @Vladimir Guglinski
    By the way…
    Which is your model interpretation of Wheeler’s delayed choice experiment?
    =================================

    Dear Silvio
    the error comes from this wrong interpretation by quantum theorists:

    ——————————————-
    If the apparatus is changed so that a second beam splitter is placed in the upper-right corner, then the two detectors will exhibit interference effects. Experimenters must explain these phenomena as consequences of the wave nature of light. They may affirm that each photon must have traveled by both paths as a wave else that photon could not have interfered with itself.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%27s_delayed_choice_experiment
    ——————————————-

    The error is because quantum theorist suppose that the photon is a wave-particle duality.

    The photon is NOT a wave-particle duality.

    The photon is a corpuscle formed by particle-antiparticle moving by helical trajectory, and the wave feature of the photon is due to its helical trajectory.

    In 2012 an experiment made by Aephraim Steinberg proved that the photon can have interference with itself, which was supposed impossible by the quantum theorists, because they dont know the true structure of the photon.
    http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.100404

    So,
    the photon is NOT a wave-particle duality, as believed the quantum theorists along 100 years.
    The photon is a corpuscle moving with helical trajectory, and its wave feature is consequence of its helical trajectory, and that’s why the photon can have interference with itself.

    The photon decides NOTHING in the Wheeler’s experiment, because the photon has AT THE SAME TIME the two features corpuscle and wave, because the photon is a corpuscle and the wave feature is due to the helical trajectory of the corpuscle.

    Therefore the quantum theorists had interpreted wrongly the Wheeler’s experiment, because they wrongly supposed that the photon cannot have interference with itself.

    regards
    wlad

  208. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    You must have run hundreds of units at this time. Can you tell us if their is a deviation of output you have measured between units? If so, how large(1% or more). Also, do you have any reliability numbers for successful unit operations you can release?
    Thanks for any information you can release.

  209. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    We did not note discrepances between them.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  210. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 7th, 2014 at 8:02 PM

    Wladimir,

    I deduced that space and time are not physical through the use of reason.
    See my post on September 1st, 2014 at 6:42 PM.
    =================================

    Dear Joe,
    Aristotle also had deduced through the use of reason several assumptions, later proved wrong by Galileo, because Aristotle did not take in account some hidden mechanisms which work as cause of some phenomena. For instance, Galileo left two body with different masses to fall down from the Piza tower, and proved that they arrive at the same time in the ground, while Aristotle believed that heavy bodies fall down faster than light ones.

    Aristotle was suggested to think wrongly that lighter bodies fall down slowly than heavy ones because leaves of trees fall slowly, and he did not realize that leaves fall slowly due to their interaction with the air.

    So, dear Joe,
    it seems to me that you had been suggested to think that two entangled photons interact instantaneously because Alain Aspect experiment had suggested such conclusion to all the quantum theorists, because they do not know the structure of the photon, and so they are committing the same mistake commited by Aristotle.

    Galileo proved that Aristotle was wrong by making the experiment in the Piza tower.

    Dont you think that we have to undertake new experiments (like those suggested by me to Gabriela Lemos), so that to discover the true physical mechamisms of the photons entanglement?

    regards
    wlad

  211. gillana

    Dear Dr. A.Rossi.
    From your recent reply to Mr. Jc Renoir there is a point on wich I fail to agree with you.
    Define “important” negative result on the test TIP2 would seem a contradiction, I would describe it as a “disaster”, or am I missing something?
    Best regards
    Gillana

  212. Andrea Rossi

    Gillana:
    “disaster” is not correct, because a negative result should put in evidence errors to be corrected, not a final failure. Anyway, I am not a semiologist.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  213. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I agree that if the TPR2 is positive it would give the entire field of LENR a huge boost. However isn’t that going to work against you somewhat since then your rivals would be able to attract much more support for their projects. Even I would be tempted to write a proposal for development of a system on the basis of this report that shows the feasibility of extracting energy from the nucleus. The number of possible approaches are large(I can thing of at least a dozen), and there is abundant venture monies available in the financial world(almost all internet startups can get some funding). If you are allowing the inspectors to generate this information for altruistic reasons, I commend you, but that is the only reason I see for your generosity.
    Regards from your friend

  214. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    We made tests with many different configurations and there are deviations in the outputs, depending on many factors.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  215. Joe

    Wladimir,

    I deduced that space and time are not physical through the use of reason.
    See my post on September 1st, 2014 at 6:42 PM.

    All the best,
    Joe

  216. KL

    Dear Mr Rossi

    Whilst we await the publication of the TIP, which we understand may be positive or negative, can you comment on the current level of confidence in your technology amongst the qualified/experienced engineers and scientists with whom you have been working at IH?

    Best regards.

    KL

  217. Andrea Rossi

    KL:
    We are a great Team. We are making together a strong work of R&D, industrialization. It is soon to know if the results will be positive or negative, but we are working together with enthusiasm. I am helped in my work as I never have been in my life.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  218. Henry Ethancourt

    Hello all. This is HOT news. A photograph recently taken right in the lab of Industrial canned Heat, LLC, showing the CEO of IcH and the CEO of Leonarduck Corporation at work.
    The reaction catalyst appears to be a well-known Italian product!

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Byy1eWi2Qr7JLTU1LUVtbFFQcHM/edit?usp=sharing

  219. Andrea Rossi

    Henry Ethancourt:
    He,he,he,he,he!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  220. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi

    Only for joke: you have to learn chinese language, too..:-))

    Mandarin Regards,
    Italo R.

  221. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    I already know what I need:
    Lavolale, Lavolale!
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  222. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 5th, 2014 at 1:27 AM

    Wladimir,

    Space and time are not of the physical world. That does not mean that the physical world does not exist. The physical world is not constrained by space and time. But our view of the physical world IS constrained by space and time since they are mental objects.

    Dear Joe
    where did you get from the idea that space and time are not of the physical world and they are mental objects ?

  223. Roberto

    Steven N Karels
    Regarding the onion question; I think we have to consider to how many joule we can produce by surface and the ability to convert it to power.
    Regards, Roberto

  224. Anonymous

    Mr. Rossi,

    A few times you have suggested that particular commercialization steps would wait or depend on the third party test (or at least that has been my understanding). Have your customers or investors tied specific contracts or investments to the results of the third party tests? Or is it just the case that you believe that a positive result will have an important impact on the success and recognition of the E-Cat.

    If this veers into confidential territory then obviously please disregard this question.

    Thank you for taking the time to answer isofar as you are able.

    F

  225. Andrea Rossi

    Anonymous:
    Again we lost in the spam your comment as I tried to publish it. Very strange. Anyway, thank you for your kind considerations and sustain. I confirm that, as you wrote, I found in the USA a very strong help, at any level, without which this technology could never arrive to the point it arrived so far, even if I must add that the results from the TIP report and the 1 MW operation could be positive, as well as negative.
    Also: the US team is preparing with Chinese scientists an important R&D operation that will help the industrialization of our devices: LAVOLALE, LAVOLALE!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  226. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I believe the “onion” question referred not necessarily to power output but to individual module operating temperature range. For example, the initial eCat might operate over a reduced temperature range, the next one a higher range and the last eCat over a narrow but high temperature regime. Can you answer the following?

    1. Does the control and the stability of the eCat reactor depend on the average temperature the reactor is running at?
    2. Does the control and stability of the eCat reactor improve if the operating range is narrower than the full temperature range of the entire system (i.e., room temperature to say, 1000 degC)?
    3. Does control and stability improve going beyond the “mouse” and “cat” architecture to three, four or more modules in thermal series?

  227. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    1- yes
    2- yes
    3- no
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  228. aka

    Dear Andrea,
    You indicated that a ceramic reactor vessel was used during 2012 testing.
    I did some reading on the first independent test report that was first published in May 2012.
    The report indeed mentioned a construction having three concentric cylinders out of which two were made from ceramic materials and the cylinder holding the (Ni) powder made of AISI 310 steel.

    Let me phrase my question on using a ceramic vessel more specific:
    Would it be possible to also make the cylinder that holds the (Ni) powder holder out of ceramic material(s)?

    Sincerely,
    Aka

  229. Andrea Rossi

    Aka:
    Yes, as you can read in former reports: there is published a photo of a reactor whose external surface was in caramic.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  230. Roberto

    Dear Andrea.
    First, if it makes sense, then the manufacturability and safety and control of the system.
    Roberto

  231. Andrea Rossi

    Roberto:
    It could make sense, everything is manufacturable, safety can be assessed for any device. Costs and convenience of it all is another story and only R&D can resolve the issue.The development algorythm of any prodct from our Team is:
    1st: study and desicn of the concept
    2nd: prototype construction
    3rd: tests
    4th: decisions about the development toward manufacturing
    5th: passing the design to the manufacturing factoryfrom the laboratory
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  232. Roberto

    Dear Andrea,
    Is it realistic to think to an ECAT with an onion structure where many layers are gradually increasing the power. Start with a mouse then a cat, then a dog, then a tiger and so on…
    Roberto

  233. Andrea Rossi

    Roberto:
    This depends on which meaning you want to relate to the word “realistic”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  234. JCRenoir

    Also: news from the TIP?

  235. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    The Higgs interacts directly mainly with heavy particles, rarely with light particles, never with massless particles, but this leaves the possibility to the Higgs to interact indirectly with massless particles.
    Said this, one of the most probable Feynman diagram related to the formation of the Higgs boson is made by two waves that end in a circle from which exits a dashed line, wherein the 2 waves are 2 gluons which interact forming a virtual quark, represented by the circle ( the massive Top Quark, which has the heavyest flavour of quarks), which decays after about 10^-23 s into the dashed line, which represents the Higgs boson . We could say that two vibrations in the gluon field interact and generate a vibration in the quark field, which produces a vibration in the Higgs field.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  236. JCRenoir

    We read in a recent comment of yours that Higgs field makes matter: but what makes Higgs boson?

  237. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    The news from the TIP is that the report is under reviewing. I do not think it will take a lot of time before the publication. The results, I have been told, will be important, but I do not know if in positive or negative sense.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  238. Andreas Moraitis

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    With regard to the answer you gave Koen Vandewalle: Did you refer to a single, isolated grain or a specific grain in the powder?

    Best regards,
    Andreas Moraitis

  239. Andrea Rossi

    Andreas Moraitis:
    To be more precise: I referred to the possibility to enhance the reactions in a specific area of the charge.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  240. Mark

    Andrea,
    Are you anticipating this report in late September?
    Sorry if this question has been popup

  241. Andrea Rossi

    Mark:
    I do not know the date of publication, but I expect it anytime.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  242. Anonymous

    Mr. Rossi

    I hope that you are well.

    I was wondering

    (A) if there was any update on the status of the third party test and

    (B) Whether there was anything you could tell us about possible industrialization efforts. Are you targeting current applications or negotiating with potential customers or is your focus currently on research?

    Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions

  243. Andrea Rossi

    Anonymous:
    Your message got lost in the spam when I tried to publish it, I do not know why, but here is your question, that I remember perfectly, and the related answer:
    You asked: ” What were the Professors of the TIP allowed to?”
    Answer: in the report will be described the protocol. I cannot anticipate this information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  244. silvio caggia

    @Vladimir Guglinski
    By the way…
    Which is your model interpretation of Wheeler’s delayed choice experiment?
    Thanks in advance

  245. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    1. Can we expect that it will be possible to initiate one single Rossi-Effect-reaction on the time you want it to occur and on the place you choose, e.g: one specific nickel “grain” ?
    2. Can it, if former is positive, be managed to generate a predefined amount of excess energy ?
    I mean scientifically, not commercially profitable or exploitable.
    3. Is this part of your R&D ?
    thought full greetings
    Koen

  246. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    1- yes
    2- yes
    3- yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  247. aka

    Dear Andrea,

    Ignoring the minor side effect of atomic transmutations, would the “Rossi-effect” be feasible in a ceramic reactor vessel?

    Sincerely,
    Aka

  248. Andrea Rossi

    Aka:
    Yes, we did it and also published the report of a test in 2012.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  249. Giovanni

    Dear Andrea
    Today on the Italian Radio there was a debate about the various sources of energy. Somebody said that accordinga data collected in 150 years, every new source of energy to pass from 1-2% of the total market to about 50% needs 50-60 years. Do you think that the same will apply to LENR and E-Cat? Hard to say, right?

  250. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni:
    I think that what they said ( as you report) is an unsustainable generalization. Every specific source has its particular application limits we have to make a distinction of. About us, I have not the data necessary to make that kind of forecast.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  251. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    Thak you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  252. Roberto

    Dear Andrea,
    As you say, the third party report can be positiv or negative, but what can you say instead of 1 meg plant that you gave to an industry, have you had any feedback from them? Is it performing well? Are theme pleased or disappointed?
    Roberto

  253. Andrea Rossi

    Roberto:
    When we will be allowed to give information regarding the operation of the 1 MW plant we will publish the available data. Now is too soon to talk about it, we still are in a preliminary phase.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  254. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 5th, 2014 at 1:27 AM

    Wladimir,

    Space and time are not of the physical world. That does not mean that the physical world does not exist. The physical world is not constrained by space and time. But our view of the physical world IS constrained by space and time since they are mental objects. Results of an experiment are therefore independent of our view of it.
    ========================================

    Joe,
    therefore from such viewpoint the sharpness of the entangled image in the detector in the Gabriela Lemos experiment cannot change if she changes the angles between the beams of entangled photons.
    Such assumption can be tested in her experiment.

    regards
    wlad

  255. georgehants

    Dear Mr Rossi, with your discovery of the Rossi Effect, are you aware of any other new science that may come from that discovery.
    Can you see the Rossi Effect as just the beginning of a whole new area of science.
    Best wishes

  256. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    Too soon to say. So far we are focused on the product we are making.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  257. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea.
    I’m sorry, in all this circus of NDA, commercial interests, 3rd Party Report, I’m lost.
    According to what can be inferred to date, is the Rossi effect real or not?
    Nuclear Regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  258. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    NDA, commercial interests and 3rd Party Report are normal issues in a serious technological innovation.
    I repeat that we need to wait the results of the work on course before confirming if our work needs corrections or if it is on the right trail.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  259. Joe

    Wladimir,

    One last thought:

    QM is right about the existence of instantaneity.
    QM is wrong about the existence of QE.

    QM says that neither of two entangled particles can be fully described without considering the other. The problem with that scenario is that it is illogical. A particle is a particle because it contains all its properties without doubt. A particle is defined by the presence of all of its properties. There could never be any actual uncertainty in the property of a particle lest that particle cease to exist altogether.

    All the best,
    Joe

  260. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Space and time are not of the physical world. That does not mean that the physical world does not exist. The physical world is not constrained by space and time. But our view of the physical world IS constrained by space and time since they are mental objects. Results of an experiment are therefore independent of our view of it.

    All the best,
    Joe

  261. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I’m sorry to hear of the loss of your powder preparer. It sounds like his contribution was very important.

    Do you find the powder prepared by the new process is inferior, equal, or superior to the manually prepared powder?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  262. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    The quality is equal, but, obviously, in view of an industrial production the manufacturing system cannot be manual. The stage our powders preparer was involved in was a prototypical phase, when you have to be ready to change anytime the formula, depending on the experiments. Industrialization is a different thing, but without the first stage you cannot reach the second one. You couldn’t have a hen shouldn’t you have an egg before.

  263. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 4th, 2014 at 4:08 PM

    @Vladimir Guglinski

    1) =================================
    Sorry but I am a little confused from your answers… You say that Alain Aspect’s experiments require no kind of communication because the entangled properties of the two photons are “predefined” at photon emission and travel with the photons as hidden variables (i.e. Distance between particles)… But you say that Gabriela’s experiment requires a sort of communication when photon C is absorbed by the cat trasmitting something to photon D…
    Why do you give different explanations of the two experiments? Should not entanglement logic be universal?
    ====================================

    Simple.
    Because Alain Aspect does not require entanglement when we consider the photon formed by particle and antiparticle, with the distance “d” between them equal in the case of twin brother photons.

    Unlike, there is no way to explain Gabriela’ experiment without to consider some sort of entanglement, which mechanism we need to discover.

    2) ====================================
    Anyway, you seem to accept that Gabriela’s experiment implies that D photon “is aware” of C photon destiny, and that this “awareness” cannot be explained with “hidden variables” but needs a kind of communication from C photon (when hits the cat) to D photon (when hits the detector) and you are looking for a phisical explanation.
    =======================================

    Yes,
    but photon D does not hit the detector (pay attention that the image in the detector is black, which means that photon D does not hit the detector).

    So, there are two possibilities:

    a) the trajectory of the photon D is deviated due to the collapese of the entanglement, and that’s why it does not hit the detector. (this hipothesis can be tested,putting detectors along the trajectory of the photon D.

    b) the photon D collapses, because ot the collapse of the entanglement, and that’s why it does not hit the detector.

    3) ===================================
    According to Cramer’s Transactional Interpretation of QM the life of two entangled photons is a sort of “bank transaction” that is closed THRU the time of their travel till they are both absorbed, so C photon “destiny info” flows BACKWARD in time till the entanglement source and is disponible to D photon at ANY time of its life. In other words the two photons have got agreements with their FUTURE absorbers in order that all conservation laws will be respected. But one of the weirdest prediction of this theory is that the cat image is obtained even if D arm is shorter then C arm… In other words you should be able to see the cat photo BEFORE you put the cat! Now Gabriela can validate/falsify this teory very simply.
    ========================================

    Such interpretation is based on the concepts of Quantum Mechanics, and as I dont believe QM is correct, I dont think his interpretation can be correct

    regards
    wlad

  264. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 2nd, 2014 at 11:34 PM

    ———————————————
    But time (and space) is a mental object, not physical.
    ———————————————

    Dear Joe
    you did not answer my question:

    what happens if Gabriela puts a video so that to film the experiment, and no person will see it.

    Later she and her staff will see the video, so that to see if the entanglement image of the cat was formed in the detector.

    In this case there is not any “mental” object in the experiment

    What do you think happens?

    regards
    wlad

  265. silvio caggia

    @Vladimir Guglinski
    Sorry but I am a little confused from your answers… You say that Alain Aspect’s experiments require no kind of communication because the entangled properties of the two photons are “predefined” at photon emission and travel with the photons as hidden variables (i.e. Distance between particles)… But you say that Gabriela’s experiment requires a sort of communication when photon C is absorbed by the cat trasmitting something to photon D…
    Why do you give different explanations of the two experiments? Should not entanglement logic be universal?
    Anyway, you seem to accept that Gabriela’s experiment implies that D photon “is aware” of C photon destiny, and that this “awareness” cannot be explained with “hidden variables” but needs a kind of communication from C photon (when hits the cat) to D photon (when hits the detector) and you are looking for a phisical explanation.
    According to Cramer’s Transactional Interpretation of QM the life of two entangled photons is a sort of “bank transaction” that is closed THRU the time of their travel till they are both absorbed, so C photon “destiny info” flows BACKWARD in time till the entanglement source and is disponible to D photon at ANY time of its life. In other words the two photons have got agreements with their FUTURE absorbers in order that all conservation laws will be respected. But one of the weirdest prediction of this theory is that the cat image is obtained even if D arm is shorter then C arm… In other words you should be able to see the cat photo BEFORE you put the cat! Now Gabriela can validate/falsify this teory very simply.

  266. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 4th, 2014 at 3:45 AM

    There can never be experimental evidence since time and space are nonphysical. In fact, by logic, the onus is on scientists to produce evidence for their new claim that time and space are physical objects – something that they have never done.
    ===============================================

    That’s why I would love if Gabriela decides to perform the experiments suggested by me, in order to verify if , by changing the angles of interaction between the beams of photons, the sharpness of the entangled image in the detector is changed.

    If the sharpness changes, it implies that QE is interaction of fields

    regards
    wlad

  267. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    In the early days of this blog you mentioned that you employed a 95 year-old man to prepare the nickel powder that you use in your E-cats.

    Is your powder still prepared manually, or have you developed newer techniques?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  268. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes, you are right: that old master of mine is returned in God’s Spirit, but after his teaching we have industrialized the powders production.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  269. Carlo Marcena

    Hi,
    I do not see any input dated after Sept 1st.
    Is there any change in the address?
    Regards,
    CM

  270. Andrea Rossi

    Carlo Marcena:
    Probably you have problems with your computer, because since September 1st many comments have been published.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  271. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 3rd, 2014 at 3:23 PM

    @Wladimir Guglinski

    1) ========================================
    What I don’t understand is how your model explains the way Gabriela obtained the cat’s photo without using cat’s side photons.
    ===========================================

    Caling photon C that which hits the cat, and photon D that which hits the detector, I think in two possibilities:

    a) when the photon C hits the cat (and therefore it collapses), as the entanglement is broken the photon D becomes instable, and collapses, and it does not hit the detector.

    b) when the photon C hits the cat (and therefore it collapses), as the entanglement is broken there is a deviation in the trajectory of the photon D, and it does hit the detector.
    Such hypothesis can be tested, putting detectors along the trajectory of the photon D.

    2) ======================================
    By the way, how your model explains circular polarization?
    ========================================

    It can be explained by considering that when the photon is polarized, the particle ahead the photon’s motion has an increase in the radius R of the helical trajectory of that particle. So, in spite of the velocity of rotation stays the same, however the angular velocity W of the particle becomes lower than the angular velocity of the antiparticle.
    The electric field vector will take the form as shown in the figure:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_polarization

    regards
    wlad

  272. KD

    >>>>>Mario on September 4th, 2014 at 4:44 AM wrote.
    Think about it: imagine a huge pool heated by the hot-cat with many people taking a bath the opening day (April is still cold in Italy )
    What a wonderful world!
    -mario<<<<<<

    And invite the Kardashian sisters to swim in the pool.
    This will bring attention of all the population of the world.

    But for sure, the critics still will say.
    Of course the water is hot because the girls are hot.:)

  273. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, I know you want to develop an E-Cat to supply electricity for a home.
    In a location like Ft. Lauderdale, we have very little need for heat. when
    needed we get it from our AC unit.
    But in a State up North, where the temperature is sometimes below zero,
    the need for heat is enormous.
    Will you develop an E-Cat to produce heat for a home ?
    Will you develop an E-Cat to produce electricity and heat for a home ?
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  274. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    The E-Cat is a heat generator, therefore it is simpler to produce heat . With heat it will be possible to make also electric power.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  275. Mario

    Dear Andrea,
    I cannot contribute to the technical discussion because phisics is out of my knowledge.
    But I’m a dreamer.. Actually, with the TPR2 coming and the first plant reaching the production site, I’m moving my mind to tomorrow..
    Next year, as you probably know, there will be the Universal Exposition in Italy, Expo 2015 in Milan.
    Just imagine an Hot-cat running at the Expo.. it would be like the Eiffel Tower for the Paris expo.. something unforgettable!!
    An occasion for million of people to see your invention from really close.. and without any doubt the way for you to get all the attention your invention deserves.
    Think about it: imagine a huge pool heated by the hot-cat with many people taking a bath the opening day (April is till cold in Italy :-) )
    What a wonderful world!
    -mario

  276. Andrea Rossi

    Mario:
    Thank you for the suggestion.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  277. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. You wrote,
    “Therefore, the flux of magnetons within the strings of gravitons of the gravitational field can work by resonance.”

    I have already explained how gravitational fields in the Universe are present everywhere, interacting with your potential gravitational strings and thereby destroying any possibility for the existence of QE within the framework of QRT. But now the same holds true for your potential magnetic fluxes whereby magnetic fields which are present everywhere in the Universe will interact with those potential magnetic fluxes and thereby destroy any possibility for the existence of QE within the framework of QRT.

    2. You wrote,
    “Actually, Quantum Mechanics is wrong, because there is not a physical model of photon in the theory.”

    Even if your theory about the polarization of photons is correct, the reality is that ALL properties, not just polarization, are subject to QE.

    3. You wrote,
    “There is not experimental evidence for such assumption [...]”

    There can never be experimental evidence since time and space are nonphysical. In fact, by logic, the onus is on scientists to produce evidence for their new claim that time and space are physical objects – something that they have never done.

    All the best,
    Joe

  278. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 2nd, 2014 at 11:34 PM

    Wladimir,
    1) =======================================
    1. Gravity works independently of
    i) any potential frequency that it might have;
    ii) the speed of the source (particle) of that gravitational field.
    ===========================================

    COMMENT
    I am not speaking about gravity.
    I am refering to the gravitational field.

    The gravitational field in QRT is formed by strings of gravitons crossed by a flux of magnetons, as shown in the Fig. 2.5 of the paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_2.5%3D_flux_of_magnetons_within_string_of_gravitons.png

    The resonance can be caused by the flux of magnetons

    .

    2) ==========================================
    (That is why the gravitational field of the Earth pulls everything down independently of its nature or motion.)
    =============================================

    This is concerning the gravitational attraction, due to the strings of gravitons.
    However the motion of a photon can have influence in the flux of magnetons within the strings of gravitons

    .

    3) ========================================
    Therefore, it is unacceptable to claim that QE within the framework of QRT works by
    i) resonance;
    ii) two (or more) particles sharing a common speed,
    respectively.
    ============================================

    Therefore, the flux of magnetons within the strings of gravitons of the gravitational field can work by resonance

    .

    4) =========================================
    2. Your concept of a cause for QE is wrong. The concept of cause and effect is a temporal (and spatial) one obviously.
    ============================================

    No.
    Actually Quantum Mechanics is wrong, because there is not a physical model of photon in the theory.

    There is a distance “d” between the particle and antiparticle of the photon, and the polarization depends on this distance “d” (a process of resonance between “d” and the atomic distance within the crystal used for polarization)

    A photon A and B can have the same wavelenght, but with different values of the distance “d”.
    So,
    when they are polarized, in spite of they have the same wavelength, however their polarization follow statistical laws.

    Unlike, two twin broter photons (as produced in Gabriela’s experiment) have the same distance “d”, and therefore whe you measure their polarization you get the same value.

    Therefore,
    considering two entangled twin photons, if you measure polarization of the first photon here in the Earth, and I measure the polarization of the second photon in the Moon, I will get the same value of polarization measured by you, because the two photons have the same distance “d”, and not because the photon measured by me in the Moon was affected by your measurement of the first photon in the Earth.

    Such misunderstanding of the Alain Aspect experiment is the reason why you and the quantum theorists believe that The concept of cause and effect is a temporal in QE.
    ======================================

    .

    5) =====================================
    But time (and space) is a mental object, not physical.
    ========================================

    There is not experimental evicende for such assumption, by considering physical phenomena ruled by the laws of Physics.

    Such assumption is consequence of the wrong interpretation of the Alain Aspect experiment
    =============================================

    .

    6) ==========================================
    So QE lacking cause and effect (atemporality, aspatiality) demonstrates the physical nature of QE which is unadorned by time (and space).
    =============================================

    There is NOT entanglement in the Alain Aspect experiment, as I already had explained.
    The reason why the two twin photons exhibit the same polarization is due to the same distance “d” between the particle and antiparticle in the both photons.

    The entanglement occurs only in the Gabriela Lemos

    .

    7) ====================================
    Schrodinger was right in considering the instantaneous phenomenon of QE the only true separator of quantum mechanics (QM) from classical mechanics (CM).
    =======================================

    As I said, there is no entanblement in the Alain Aspect experiment.
    The polarization of the second twin photon measured in the Moon is NOT affected by the measurement of the polarization of the first twin photon here in the Earth.

    So, the reason why in the Moon the measurement gets the same value is due to the property of the two twin photons: the have the same distance “d”.
    The phenomenon is NOT instantaneous, since there is not any phenomenon caused by the quantum entanglement between the two photons.

    We even dont know if the entanglement detected by Gabrela Lemos can be obtained by having the cat here in the Earth and the detector in the Moon.
    Perhaps her experiment works only in short distances.

    regards
    wlad

    All the best,
    Joe

  279. silvio caggia

    @Wladimir Guglinski
    I knew your model of photon and its interesting explanation of linear polarization and entanglement by a sort of “hidden variable” (the offset between the two particles that make the photon). What I don’t understand is how your model explains the way Gabriela obtained the cat’s photo without using cat’s side photons.
    By the way, how your model explains circular polarization?
    Regards

  280. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you, the work of Prof. Stephen Hawking is extremely interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  281. Wladimir Guglinski

    Silvio,
    in another words:

    when Gabriela produces two twin brother photons in her experiment, she eliminates the statistical feature of the two photons. They have the same distance “d”, and so they will have the same behavior when somebody measures their polarization.

    This is waht the quantum theorists do not know.

    If you measure here in the Earth the polarization of the first photon and you get 60º, then if Joe goes to the Moon and he measures the polarization of the second photon he will get 60º too, because the two photons have the same distance “d”, and not because when you measuered the polarizaton of the first photon it had affected the polarization of the photon measured by Joe.

    That’s why Joe and the quantum theorists believe that “fields can not be responsible for QE since their range is indefinite and would therefore interact immediately with any other fields in their vicinity, making the reality of QE impossible for even a moment”

    regards
    wlad

  282. Edward

    try to combine Enshten theory and law of Keeps saved weight.(E=mc2). mass disappears and becomes energy. add to the several paradoxes and you get a black hole. Do you believe in it ?

  283. Andrea Rossi

    Edward:
    I do not understand what you want to say. Can you rephrase clearly?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  284. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 2nd, 2014 at 7:15 PM

    @Wladimir Guglinsky
    Does the correlation between two entangled photons depend from the lenght of the two arms of the experimental setup?
    Does the correlation depend from the order in which you take measurements?
    Does entanglement “vanish” when first photon is measured?
    Why entangled photons should behave in asymmetric way respect to time?
    ====================================

    Silvio,
    entanglement is a link between two photons.

    There are two aspects:

    1) If one photon has collision with matter (and so it calllapses), the other collapses too. Accordding to Quantum Mechanics, it does not occur via physical causes, and it is instantaneous.

    2) If we take a measure of one photon, the other is affected (according to Quantum Mechanics)

    .

    Let us analyse the two aspects:

    1)
    Regarding the first aspect, I am not agree that the second photon collapses via phantasmagoric way, and instantaneously.
    There are not experiments comproving that it is instantaneous.

    Also, as enfphasized by Mr. Joe, according to Quantum Mechanics:
    fields can not be responsible for QE since their range is indefinite and would therefore interact immediately with any other fields in their vicinity, making the reality of QE impossible for even a moment
    There is not experimental confirmation for such assumption

    .

    2)
    According to Quantum Mechanics, when you take a measure of the polarization of one of the photons, the second photon instantaneously takes the same polarity.

    In my book Quantum Ring Theory I show that such interpretation is wrong.

    The origin of the misunderstanding is because there is not, in Theoretical Physics, a physical model of the photon.

    Einstein and Dirac supposed be impossible to exist a physical model of the photon, because the photons have statistical behavior.

    However, in my model of the photon there is a distance “d” between the particle and the antiparticle. The statistical feature of the photon behavior is due to such distance “d”, because when the photon hits a polarizator, the angle of polarization depends on the distance “d”.
    So, when a photon is created, you cannot predict how it will be behave when is submitted to polarization.

    Therefore, when two twin photon brothers are criated as happens in Gabriela’s experiment, the quantum theorists believe that the two entangled photons have each one a random angle of polarization.
    But such assumption is wrong, because as they are twin brothers, the distance “d” in the two photons is the same.
    Therefore, if you take a measure in one of the photons, and the polarization gets 45º, when the other photon will be measured it will have also 45º, because their distance “d” is the same.

    But the quantum theorists suppposed that, when the two twin photons were created, one could hava a polarization for instance 60º, while the second had 30º. And when the first photon had been measured for 45º (and so its polarization changed from 60º to 45º), the second photon also changes its polarization, from 30º to 45º.

    This is not true. Because as you are using a polarizator 45º, the both photons will be polarized in the same way, because their distance “d” is the same.

    So,
    if you use a polarizator 30º, both the two photons will be polarized by 30º
    if you use a polarizator 45º, both them will be polarized by 45º
    if you use a polarizator 60º, both them will be polarized by 60º

    The two photons always exhibit the same angle of polarization because their distance “d” is the same, and not because the second photon is affected by the measurement of the first photon due to their entanglement, as believe the quantum theorists.

    regards
    wlad

  285. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. Gravity works independently of
    i) any potential frequency that it might have;
    ii) the speed of the source (particle) of that gravitational field.

    (That is why the gravitational field of the Earth pulls everything down independently of its nature or motion.)

    Therefore, it is unacceptable to claim that QE within the framework of QRT works by
    i) resonance;
    ii) two (or more) particles sharing a common speed,
    respectively.

    2. Your concept of a cause for QE is wrong. The concept of cause and effect is a temporal (and spatial) one obviously. But time (and space) is a mental object, not physical. So QE lacking cause and effect (atemporality, aspatiality) demonstrates the physical nature of QE which is unadorned by time (and space). Schrodinger was right in considering the instantaneous phenomenon of QE the only true separator of quantum mechanics (QM) from classical mechanics (CM).

    All the best,
    Joe

  286. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 2nd, 2014 at 4:33 PM

    Wladimir,

    And do you believe that their gravitational fields would not be affected by any of the myriad of gravitational fields that exist between them in the Universe? Because if they would be affected, then your scenario is impossible since any change to their fields would collapse them immediately.
    ======================================

    Joe,
    consider also another fact:

    the two entangled photons move with the speed of the light.

    Therefore, in order to afect their gravitational field (in a say similar to the interaction which occurs between the two entangled photons), only the gravitational field of other photon can affect their entanglement (because other photon also moves with the speed of the light).

    The gravitational field of other elementary particles as protons, electrons, neutrons, etc. do not affect the entanglement, because protons and electrons do not move with the speed of light.

    But only a third photon with the exact wavelength of the two entangled photons would be able to affect their gravitational fields.

    regards
    wlad

  287. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 2nd, 2014 at 4:33 PM

    Wladimir,

    And do you believe that their gravitational fields would not be affected by any of the myriad of gravitational fields that exist between them in the Universe? Because if they would be affected, then your scenario is impossible since any change to their fields would collapse them immediately.
    ==========================================

    For the gravitational field of each of the entangled photons to be affected there would be neeed a gravitational field of another photon in the same exact wavelenght of the two entangled photons.
    It’s an interaction by resonance.
    Actually we dont know how such resonance affects the field of repulsive gravitons within the body of the photon, responsible for its statility.

    Perhaps you may claim that it is hard to believe in such sort of entanglement mechanism.

    However in my oppinion it is harder to believe that entanglemnt occurs via phantasmagoric way, with no any physical cause.

    regards
    wlad

    regards
    wlad

  288. silvio caggia

    @Wladimir Guglinsky
    Does the correlation between two entangled photons depend from the lenght of the two arms of the experimental setup?
    Does the correlation depend from the order in which you take measurements?
    Does entanglement “vanish” when first photon is measured?
    Why entangled photons should behave in asymmetric way respect to time?

  289. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You wrote,
    “So, two photons in two opposite points of the extreme of the universe can interact via their gravity fields.”

    And do you believe that their gravitational fields would not be affected by any of the myriad of gravitational fields that exist between them in the Universe? Because if they would be affected, then your scenario is impossible since any change to their fields would collapse them immediately.

    The bottom line is this: fields can not be responsible for QE since their range is indefinite and would therefore interact immediately with any other fields in their vicinity, making the reality of QE impossible for even a moment.

    All the best,
    Joe

  290. Wladimir Guglinski

    A POSSIBLE PHYSICAL MECHANISM FOR THE ENTANGLEMENT

    Joe wrote in September 1st, 2014 at 5:05 PM

    Wladimir,

    But since the particles remain entangled for an indefinite amount of time, the idea that fields are responsible for QE can be safely eliminated.
    ==========================================

    Dear Joe,
    I discovered that it is possible to have entanglement via interaction of fields for an indefinite amount of time, by considering my model of the photon.
    Let me explain it to you.

    In my paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism it is proposed the structure of field of the elementary particles, including the photon.
    The figure 2.5 ahead shows one gravity string of the gravity field of the particles. The body of the gravitons in those strings is crossed by a flux of magnetons with speed c of light:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_2.5%3D_flux_of_magnetons_within_string_of_gravitons.png

    The magnetons are captured in the perimeter of the universe, and it means that the lenght of the gravity field of an elementary particle goes from its body until the limit of the universe. So, two photons in two opposite points of the extreme of the universe can interact via their gravity fields.

    The mechanism of the photon collapse due to entanglement
    Now let us see how one photon collapses when its twin photon is collapsed due to an collision with matter.

    According to the photon model proposed in Quantum Ring Theory, a photon is formed by particle and antiparticle moving in circular contrary direction about the line center of their helical trajectory.

    As the particle and the antiparticle have contrary electric charge, they would have to meet together, and the photon would have to collapse.

    However the photon does not collapse because repulsive gravitons avoid the particle and the antiparticle to meet together. So, the repulsive gravitons avoid the collapse of the photon.

    When two twin photons are formed (as for instance in the Gabriela Lemos experiment), they interact very easy via their gravity field, because as they are twin brother they resonate very easily.

    So, two twin photons brothers move in the aether having entanglement between their gravity field, which means that the stability of each of them depends on that entanglement.

    When one of the twin brothers collapses hitting some surface of matter, the entanglement is broken. So, because the resonance with his brother was broken, a disturbance occurs in the field of the repulsive gravitons responsible for the stability of the photon. Due to the disturbance, the particle an the antiparticle succeed to meet together, and the photon collapses.

    Joe,
    as we may realize, from such mechanism for the entanglement, the Quantum Ring Theory becomes compatible with Quantum Mechanics, from the consideration that the entanglement occurs via interaction of fields.

    regards
    wlad

  291. Eric Ashworth

    Regards ideas pertaining to space and time. My understanding is that space represents a distance and time is a duration. Therefore, to bring both into a concept of actuality, surely a physical body is required to travel a distance over a duration of time. However, I do not believe in empty space because of the aether and its activity. Therefore, technically there may exist two contradictory states or two types of nature. One whereby space and time exist and one whereby space and time do not exist. Just a thought. Regards, Eric Ashworth.

  292. JCRenoir

    Dr Andrea Rossi,
    another question: are quarks stable or virtual particles?
    JCR

  293. Andrea Rossi

    JCRenoir:
    1- gravitational field: the symmetries responsible for the force are changes of positions and changes in orientation in four dimensional spacetime
    2- strong interactions field: the symmetry relates to the colors ( red, green, or blue) of the quarks, wherein colors are different quantic status of the same parton: it does not matter if we describe a quark as red, blue or green or any combination of these colors, therefore it is a simmetry
    3- electromagnetic field: particles with electric charges come in matched pairs, one with a positive charge, one with a negative charge, because to get a charged particle is necessary to have two fields that can rotate into each other under the gauge symmetry of electromagnetism. A single field can’t be charged , since there’s nothing for the symmetry to act on ( This reminds me the dialectic between slave and lord in the Phenomenology of the Spirit of Hegel).
    4- weak interactions field: we are talking of the W and Z bosons; they are connection fields born out of an underlying symmetry of nature masked by the Higgs field. The Higgs breaks the symmetry on which W and Z bosons are based and once that symmetry is broken these bosons lose their ” masslessness”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  294. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in September 1st, 2014 at 5:05 PM

    Wladimir,

    But since the particles remain entangled for an indefinite amount of time, the idea that fields are responsible for QE can be safely eliminated.
    All the best,
    Joe
    ===================================================

    Joe,
    such assumption is what the quantum theorists claim.

    But never any experiment had confirmed it.

    Now, if Gabriela decides to perform the experiments suggested by me, from the results we will be able to know if the entanglement is caused either by the interaction of fields or not.

    So, I prefer to wait the results of the experiments.

    In my last comment, I said to you:

    ====================================================
    Joe,
    concerning the experiment made by Gabriela,
    I suspect the following:

    when the two beams of photons go along the SAME LINE, and moving in CONTRARY direction, NO image due to the entanglement will be formed in the detector.

    I suppose it because when the interaction between the fields of the two photons is broken (because the first photon is annihilated when it hits the cat), the second photon will not deviate its trajectory (because the two photons were moving along the same line).
    As there is no deviation in the trajectory of the second photon, it will continue its motion and it hits the detector. And therefore the black image is not formed in the detector
    ==============================================

    regards
    wlad

  295. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 1st, 2014 at 5:39 PM

    @Wladimir Gusglinski

    What happens if “output” arm is much shorter than “input” arm?
    Some think that entanglement vanish, but others, like John Cramer, think that something very conuterintuitive happens: retrocausality, you see the cat before you put it!
    ============================================

    COMMENT
    Let’s call C the photon which hits the cat, and D the photon which hits the detector.

    The photon D hits the detector before the photon C hits the cat.
    Due to the collision with the detector, the photon D vanishes. As the entanglement is broken, the photon C deviates its trajectory (or is vanished), and so the photon C does not hit the cat.

    Therefore is not formed the real image of the cat, and it is not formed the image due to entanglemnt in the detector.

    regards
    wlad

  296. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 1st, 2014 at 5:39 PM

    @Wladimir Gusglinski

    What happens if “output” arm is much shorter than “input” arm?
    Some think that entanglement vanish, but others, like John Cramer, think that something very conuterintuitive happens: retrocausality, you see the cat before you put it!
    ============================================

    COMMENT
    Let’s call C the photon which hits the cat, and D the photon which hits the detector.

    The photon D hits the detector before the photon C hits the cat.
    Due to the collision with the detector, the photon D vanishes. As the entanglement is broken, the photon C deviates its trajectory (or is vanished), and so the photon C does not hit the cat.

    Therefore is not formed the real image of the cat, and it is not formed the image due to entanglemnt in the detector.

    regards
    wlad

  297. JCRenoir

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    I read with great interest your explication about Symmetry. Can you explain which are the Symmetries responsible for the 4 foundamental forces?
    JCRenoir

  298. Andrea Rossi

    JCRenoir:
    Quarks can be stable, but there are also virtual quarks. Valence quarks in protons and neutrons are stable, but in protons and neutrons there are also virtual particles like gluons and quark-antiquark pairs: in this case quarks are virtual. Note that in a proton we have always 2 up quarks more than the antiup and one down quark more than the antidown, while in the neutron we have always two down more than the antidown and one up more than the antiup.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  299. Steven N. Karels

    dear Andrea Rossi,

    You posted “No, the efficiency remains the same during the 6 months of scheduled operation”. You also stated that the eCat under test for the TIR ran continuously for thousands of hours. So I must conclude that the operational performance was long-term stable and was nominally outputting a constant power level. I know that you mentioned the input and output were monitored every second and millions of data points were collected. So a six month continuous run would produce over 15 million data points with sampling at a one Hertz rate. Given these facts and derived knowledge, what should we look for in the TIR report.

    1. Energy Density: Given the net output (output minus the input) energy and the size or weight of the eCat, we should expect a bound on the energy density. A bound because the TIR team may not know the fuel size and volume, so they would have to use the eCat reactor size and volume.
    2. Likewise for power density.
    3. Operating conditions (room temperature? Type and amount of input power). Experiment description and rules.
    4. Detected radiation (or lack thereof).
    5. Output stability — a Fourier Transform of the recorded data , input and output would be interesting.
    6. Any change in weight/mass hopefully would be presented.
    7. Change in physical appearance or dis-coloration.
    8. Pre and post experiment fuel composition (if allowed under the experiment rules)

  300. Joe

    Claudio,

    Albert Einstein once gave the example of the new versus the old paradigm of time and space. In the old paradigm, when you removed matter and energy from the Universe, time and space would be left behind. In the new paradigm, when you remove matter and energy from the Universe, time and space follow. The reason for this is that time and space are now considered an integral part of the physical Universe. The problem with this example is that it is illogical. And since logic undergirds science, this example is also unscientific. Therefore, the new paradigm can not be true.

    So how is it illogical?
    When all four species (matter, energy, time, space) are removed from the Universe, there must necessarily be left behind a Universe that acts as a receptacle from which these four species were removed. But this Universe must exist in time and space for it to exist at all in order to extricate the four species. But then we are left with two sets of time and space: one that can be removed, and one that can not be removed. This is contradictory. But Nature is not contradictory, else Nature would not exist.
    So one set of time and space must necessarily be false.

    So which is the false set of time and space?
    If the set that was removed is false, then the new paradigm is obviously false, and time and space are determined to be the mental objects that they have always been considered throughout most of human history.
    If the set that was removed is true, then no Universe could be left behind, which would render this example given by Einstein as logically impossible. And being so, the new paradigm that this example purports to illumine is likewise logically impossible. Consequently, time and space can not be physical objects. Therefore, they are mental ones.
    As we can see in either case, time and space are mental objects, not physical.

    All the best,
    Joe

  301. Hank Mills

    http://www.rsc.org/Education/EiC/issues/2007Sept/ConductingComposites.asp

    This article reminds me of the tubercules on the surface of the nickel powder in the E-Cat.

    “Lussey, working in collaboration with Bloor, discovered that the nanoscale spikes on the surface of the nickel particles in his composite are key to its unique conducting properties. By gently mixing the materials by hand, he had limited shear forces during mixing and so maintained the particles spiky shape. Although packed close together, the nickel particles always remain separated by the silicone polymer even when the material is deformed. Electronic charge on the particles is concentrated onto the tips of the spikes on the surface, which generates high charge densities. When the composite is deformed the particles are brought close enough together for electrons from these areas of high charge density to ‘jump’ from one particle to another other. This process is known as quantum tunnelling.”

    It makes me wonder what is more important in the E-Cat, the tips of the spikes where high levels of charge can accumilate and create conditions favorable for quantum tunneling, or the cracks between the spikes.

    Just letting my mind wander for a bit. I’m hoping the upcoming E-Cat report will be posted soon.

  302. silvio caggia

    @Wladimir Gusglinski
    Sorry but I don’t understand your warning about istantaneous/simultaneous.
    If the two arms of the esperimental setup have the same lenght you have simultaneity, if the “output” arm is much longer than “input” arm, photons that make the picture arrive to detectors later than photons that hit the cat.
    What happens if “output” arm is much shorter than “input” arm?
    Some think that entanglement vanish, but others, like John Cramer, think that something very conuterintuitive happens: retrocausality, you see the cat before you put it!
    Now we can check if the results of Transactional Interpretation predictions are positive or negative :-)

  303. Joe

    Wladimir,

    In my last post, I gave you the temporal reason why fields can never explain QE. Now, let me give you the spatial reason. Two particles separated by space will always have various media between them in real world situations. Whatever field connections these two particles had initially with each other could never be maintained since they would be interacting with their local environments as well as with each other. And remember how QE is destroyed: by particles interacting with their environment (which includes acts of measurement). But since the particles remain entangled for an indefinite amount of time, the idea that fields are responsible for QE can be safely eliminated.

    All the best,
    Joe

  304. Joe

    Silvio,

    Although I do not fully understand the technical aspects of the experiment, I agree with Wladimir that you are probably confusing the concept of instantaneity with that of simultaneity. The former seems magical. But the latter is mundane, which is why I doubt that we will get something as extraordinary as a time machine from it.

    All the best,
    Joe

  305. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    Today has been published on the JoNP the paper “Black hole cosmos and micro cosmos” by the Indian nuclear Physicists Prof. U.V.S Seshavatharam and Prof. S. Lakshminarayana.
    JoNP

  306. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you and a great Labor Day to you
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  307. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I hope you are spending your Labor Day holiday doing something you enjoy. Let’s hope the exponential anxiety levels at Industrial Heat do not spoil the holiday!

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  308. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    I am celebrating just working.
    I wish a wonderful Labor Day to all our US Readers
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  309. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    concerning the experiment made by Gabriela,
    I suspect the following:

    when the two beams of photons go along the SAME LINE, and moving in CONTRARY direction, NO image due to the entanglement will be formed in the detector.

    I suppose it because when the interaction between the fields of the two photons is broken (because the first photon is annihilated when it hits the cat), the second photon will not deviate its trajectory (because the two photons were moving along the same line).
    As there is no deviation in the trajectory of the second photon, it will continue its motion and it hits the detector. And therefore the black image is not formed in the detector

    regards
    wlad

  310. claudio

    Joe – Referring to space & time what does it mean “mental object”? How can you distinguish mental from NON mental? And which are the means (or evidences) you rely on to state this? Thanks. Claudio

  311. Wladimir Guglinski

    A second suggestion sent to DR. Gabriela Barreto Lemos:

    From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    To: gabriela.barreto.lemos@univie.ac.at
    Subject: RE: a structure of space for explaining the ENTANGLEMENT
    Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 11:08:15 -0300

    Dear Dr. Grabriela

    I think it is of interest to compare the image produced by the entanglement in the following conditions:

    1) The two beams of photons go along two parallel lines

    2) The two beams of photons go along two orthogonal lines

    3) The two beams of photons go along two lines having 130º

    Other very much interesting experiment is the following:

    == The two beams of photons go along the SAME LINE, but moving in CONTRARY DIRECTION.

    In the case the experiments get to detect a difference in the sharpness of the image produced by the entanglement in those different conditions of the direction of the two beams, this imply that the entanglement must be due to the interaction of some sort of field of the photons.

    When the photons are moving, their fields have interaction. But when the first photon hits the real image of the cat and therefore it is annihilated, the interaction between their fields is broken, and the second photon suffers a deviation in the direction of its trajectory (because the interaction was broken), and so the second photon does not arrive to the detector, because its trajectory changed its direction. As consequence, as the photon does not hit the detector, then a black image is formed in the detector.

    regards
    wlad

  312. Joseph Fine

    AR,

    Happy Labor Day,

    After you and your teams’ many hours, days, weeks, months and years of hard work, in the near future, I hope the Third Party Independent Report will arise and shine on a bright new day.

    Joseph Fine

  313. Wladimir Guglinski

    silvio caggia wrote in September 1st, 2014 at 1:20 AM
    @Joe
    @Wladimir Guglinski
    I have not well understood the experimental setup of Gabriela Barreto Lemos, can you correct me?
    She has a laser beam L that is splitted in two beams L1 and L2, L1 is then splitted by a non linear cristal NLC1 in two entangled beams L1a and L1b, while L2 is splitted by a non linear cristal NLC2 in two entangled beams L2a and L2b. L1b and L2b show an “output” (interference or not) according to the “input” that L1a and L2a interfere or are blocked by something put between them. Is this resume correct?
    You say that “output” at Lxb occurs istantaneously with “input” at Lxa, but this is due to the fact that the two arms of the experimental setup have the same lenght. What happens if Lxb arm is shorter than Lxa arm? The “output” will precede temporally the “input” realizing a sort of time-machine! :-)
    John Cramer tried this for many years without success, If Gabriela succeded the most interesting thing to inspect with this experiment is the real nature of Time.
    Regards
    ===============================

    Dear Silvio
    you are making confusion between INSTANTANEOUS and SIMULTANEOUS

    According to Quantum Mechanics, the entanglement is INSTANTANEOUS

    According to QM, you can put one detector here in the Earth, and the other in the Moon, but the image of the entanglement in the Moon will be produced simulteneously with the image produced in the Earth, because the entanglement is INSTANTENOUS (according to QM).

    regards
    wlad

  314. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 31st, 2014 at 9:24 PM

    Wladimir,

    But quantum entanglement (QE)occurs INSTANTANEOUSLY. The reason why neither standard physics nor QRT can explain QE is because they depend on the concept of field which implies a lapse of time rather than instantaneity.

    All the best,
    Joe
    ===========================================

    COMMENT
    Dear Joe,
    this is the INTERPRETATION of the quantum theorists for the entanglement, according to the principles of the Quantum Mechanics.
    To consider it as instantaneous is consequence of the Interpretation of Copenhagen.

    Actually we dont know if it really is instantaneous, because in the experiments the distance between the detectors is very short, and there is no way to verify if it occurs instanteneously, or not.

    A new experiment published by Nature in 31 July 2014 already had shown that it is wrong the Interpretation of Copenhagen:
    “To Bohr and others, the process was instantaneous – when you opened the box, the entangled system collapsed into a definite, classical state. This postulate stirred debate in quantum mechanics, But real-time tracking of a quantum system shows that it’s a continuous process, and that we can constantly extract information from the system as it goes from quantum to classical. This level of detail was never considered accessible by the original founders of quantum theory.”
    http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2014/07/30/watching-schrodingers-cat-die/

    .

    I dont believe entanglement is intantaneous.

    I think the entanglement occurs via interaction between the gravity fields of the twins photons.

    As any theoretical controversy must be decided via experiments, this is the reason why in my oppinion more experiments must be performed, in order to help us to discover how entanglement occurs.

    regards
    wlad

  315. Wladimir Guglinski

    SECOND REPLY BY DR. GABRIELA BARRETO LEMOS

    From: gabriela.barreto.lemos@univie.ac.at
    Subject: Re: a structure of space for explaining the ENTANGLEMENT
    Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 09:49:03 +0200
    To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

    Hello Mr Guglinski

    Thank you for your suggestion. I will discuss it with my co-workers when they all return from their holidays

    Best regards.
    Gabriela

    .

    On Aug 30, 2014, at 1:22 PM, Wladimir wrote:

    Dear Dr. Gabriela Barreto Lemos

    I think it would be of interest to repeat your experiment by changing the angles of incidence of the two twins photons when they hit the two detectors (by putting the two detectors with several different angles one regarding the other, in order to verify how the relative different angles between the two detectors can influence in the formation of the image produced by the entanglement).

    I hope by this way we may try to understand the physical laws that rule the entanglement.

    The reason why I suppose it is explained in the comment of mine published in the Rossi’s blog Journal of Nuclear Physics:
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853#comments

  316. silvio caggia

    @Joe
    @Wladimir Guglinski
    I have not well understood the experimental setup of Gabriela Barreto Lemos, can you correct me?
    She has a laser beam L that is splitted in two beams L1 and L2, L1 is then splitted by a non linear cristal NLC1 in two entangled beams L1a and L1b, while L2 is splitted by a non linear cristal NLC2 in two entangled beams L2a and L2b. L1b and L2b show an “output” (interference or not) according to the “input” that L1a and L2a interfere or are blocked by something put between them. Is this resume correct?
    You say that “output” at Lxb occurs istantaneously with “input” at Lxa, but this is due to the fact that the two arms of the experimental setup have the same lenght. What happens if Lxb arm is shorter than Lxa arm? The “output” will precede temporally the “input” realizing a sort of time-machine! :-)
    John Cramer tried this for many years without success, If Gabriela succeded the most interesting thing to inspect with this experiment is the real nature of Time.
    Regards

  317. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Communication of information occurs by way of waves traveling in a field. And the concept of travel implies the concept of speed. And the concept of speed implies a lapse of time between two points in space. But quantum entanglement (QE)occurs INSTANTANEOUSLY. The reason why neither standard physics nor QRT can explain QE is because they depend on the concept of field which implies a lapse of time rather than instantaneity.

    All the best,
    Joe

  318. Rafal Krych

    Dear Andrea,

    This is Appeal of Polish intellectuals to the citizens and governments of Europe. We need your E-Cat ever more then before in order to cease dependence on Russian gas.

    Good luck then and please keep saving this world.

  319. Andrea Rossi

    Rafal Krych:
    All I can do is to perform honestly my work together with my great Team in our limited field of application. World can be saved only by Mankind ( which means persons like you) with the help of God.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  320. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, today it is Sunday and in this day people generally rest from own work.
    How are you passing the time today?
    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  321. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    I spent today working all the day.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  322. Wladimir Guglinski

    From: gabriela.barreto.lemos@univie.ac.at
    Subject: Re: a structure of space for explaining the ENTANGLEMENT
    Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 11:44:11 +0200
    To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com

    Thank you for your email. I will look into this proposal. Best Regards

    .

    On Aug 30, 2014, at 1:22 PM, Wladimir wrote:

    Dear Dr. Gabriela Barreto Lemos

    I think it would be of interest to repeat your experiment by changing the angles of incidence of the two twins photons when they hit the two detectors (by putting the two detectors with several different angles one regarding the other, in order to verify how the relative different angles between the two detectors can influence in the formation of the image produced by the entanglement).

    I hope by this way we may try to understand the physical laws that rule the entanglement.

    The reason why I suppose it is explained in the comment of mine published in the blog Journal of Nuclear Physics:
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853#comments

  323. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 30th, 2014 at 9:53 PM

    Wladimir,

    1- =========================================
    There is no mystery to quantum entanglement when you remember what I mentioned a while back about the nature of space and time. Space and time are not physical objects but mental ones.
    =============================================

    COMMENT:
    I am not agree.

    Joe,
    I also believe in the power of the mind, because several experiments in the field of Biology already had proved it.

    However, the power of the mind has no influence in the results of experiments where the Laws of Physics prevail.

    You are assuming that Gabriela and her team were accompanying the experience all the time, and so the their minds were influencing the occurrence of the entanglement.

    But suppose that Gabriele repeats the experiment as follows:

    1- The team puts a video camera filming what happens in the detectors

    2- They go away, leaving the experiment to run without any mental influence

    Do you think that, in this case, will the entanglement do not occur?

    2- ===================================
    a change in one entangled particle will produce an inverse change in its partner.
    ======================================

    COMMENT

    I want just to discover how the entanglement occurs, and I think it is caused by the interaction between the two gravity fields of the twins photons A and B.

    That’s why I suppose that the relative angle between the detectors has influence in the formation of the image caused by the entanglement, because the angle between the detectors changes the angle between the paths of two photons.

    Suppose Gabriele makes two experiments:

    a) the photon A and B have perpendicular paths.
    b) the photon A and B have parallel paths

    The interaction between the two gravity fields will be different in the situation a) and b). And we have to discover if such difference has influence in the formation of the image caused by the entanglement

    regards
    wlad

  324. RicT

    Dear. Dr. Rossi

    What’s Your “feeling” about TPRII?

    1) positive
    2) negative
    3) prosecco For the Team
    4) Champagne free For anyone!!!

    As human beings, after all, we have feeling – that may be wrong or right….

    Thank you

  325. Andrea Rossi

    RicT:
    By nature I am an optimist guy, but, as a professional, I must maintain a neutral equilibrium.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  326. H-G Branzell

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    For the commercial E-Cats you have promised a COP of around 6. If if turns out that the independent third party has found that the COP is less than 5, will you then call the result negative?
    Best regards, H-G Branzell

  327. Andrea Rossi

    H-G Branzell:
    Good question.
    Under a scientific point of view, based on the First Principle of Thermodynamic, the COP of an apparatus that generates heat with chemical reactions MUST be <1. Therefore, under a scientific point of view, any COP>1 should be considered a positive result.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  328. M.B.

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    Let me share one thing that has always puzzled me. In your references about the third independent party report you’ve never failed to stress that a negative result in it cannot be ruled out. A negative result, as far as I understand, will mean that the E-CAT reactor does not work the way it is supposed to. On the other hand, you are getting ready to open a 1MW plant which will use E-CAT reactors.

    Isn’t there a logical inconsistency here? How can E-CAT’s be used in industrial applications if the 3rd party report, which is supposed to be the final word about the functionality of these devices, eventually comes out negative?

    Kindest regards,
    M.B.

  329. Andrea Rossi

    M.B.:
    There is no inconsistency: also the results of the 1 MW plant operating in the factory of the Customer of IH could be, after a long operation time, positive, but also negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  330. Mark

    Hi Andrea, 1 or 2?

    1,The test report will be available freely to the general public

    2, The test report will be available at a cost through some commercial means to the general public

  331. Andrea Rossi

    Mark:
    1, of course !!!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  332. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I still don’t understand why the TPR2 report is so important to you. You have already established the basis of the industrial complex necessary to introduce and manufacture your devices. There is field testing established which will confirm the quality of the devices and their usefulness. These results are what will allow your work to be continued and distributed, not the results of the report. Also, you claim that the theory of the Rossi effect is well known to your group so any speculation by the investigators can only be conformation which has no real value to you. Having this report as a backup is useful only to allow you to say “I told you so”, and you don’t need that in my opinion. Perhaps the institutions that are funding the report work need their own confirmation to convince their owners to further fund their own efforts in this area of technology, but your establishment does not. The only other value I can imagine is the possibility that they may uncover some technology which may be useful to you. A long shot in my opinion since you have much more device experience than them.
    I am saving my anxiety for the results of the plant installation, which I thing will, after a few bumps, prove your system is a genuine advancement.
    Regards and good luck!

  333. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    This was necessary.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  334. Joe

    Wladimir,

    There is no mystery to quantum entanglement when you remember what I mentioned a while back about the nature of space and time. Space and time are not physical objects but mental ones. True physical reality is beyond space and time, therefore it is not constrained by space and time. And since by logic, conservation must always be upheld, a change in one entangled particle will produce an inverse change in its partner. And this happens immediately and independently of the distance between them because time and space are of no consequence as I mentioned.

    All the best,
    Joe

  335. Andrea Rossi

    Jouni Toumela:
    Thank you for your information regarding heat exchangers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  336. Jouni Tuomela

    Dear Mr. Andrea Rossi,

    Now thinking again, I am quite sure you already knew all this, but still the makings of the heat-exchanger is facinating. Perhaps relaxing also, you surely need that also.

    Br Jouni

  337. Jouni Tuomela

    Dear Mr. Andrea Rossi,

    Mr. Steven N. Karels brought silver nanoparticles to my attention, thank you, they are facinating.

    Also the thermal properties of nanoparticle fluids are interesting. Please use 10 minutes of your studying-time to watch this highly interesting video about the theory of nano-fluids aswell as the makings of a micron-sized(?) heat exchanger.

    Youtube-videos are highly valuable in learning.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y04W53ihLXk

    Warmer Regards, and all the best,
    Jouni Tuomela

  338. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I know you cannot discuss the inner workings of your eCat reactor. But more than likely you have an adhesive that holds the nickel powder to the inside of the external cylinder so that energy may be transferred when the eCat is reacting. That assumed, it is important to keep a high thermal conductivity of whatever material secures the nickel to the heat transfer elements, i.e., the external cylinder. Increasing the thermal conductivity of the material that secures the nickel is important in a couple of ways.

    1. It keeps the nickel from melting and therefore loosing what ever surface preparation has been done to make it work.
    2. It will allow a higher external cylinder surface temperature at the heat transfer area to occur which could affect Carnot efficiency.

    My estimates based on some assumptions and some simple calculations indicate that the difference between a moderate thermal conductivity and a good thermal conductivity might result in a temperature difference of 100 Celsius. Perhaps you may wish to consider this? Adding a conductive material like silver nanoparticles might significantly increase the thermal conductivity.

  339. Andrea Rossi

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

  340. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    At this time I presume you and your team have been operating the factory unit for a lengthy time(more than a month). Have you run into unexpected bugs(problems)? If so, have they been eliminated? In my experience with many startups,there have been problems(mostly minor) with all of them. Expect them and you will not be disappointed.
    Bona Fortuna!!!

  341. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    The work of the Third Independent Party is the first long term test made upon a LENR device in the last 25 years. The results will be the results that for the first time in the history of the LENR will be released by a third independent party after a test not of hours, but of thousands of hours, without interruptions and without intervention of the inventor or the owner. The results could be positive or negative, as I always said.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  342. Giuliano Bettini

    “just say”: I mean: please stop to say…

  343. Angel Blume

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    I am getting confused with your last replies.
    I entirely agree with Mr. Janhunen to the possible reaction scenario. Being all isotopes from Cu59 to Cu62 long lived enough (minutes / hours), it is factible to detect the positronic radiation. Moreover the ratio Ni60/Ni62 before and after gives a clue of what is happening inside the reactor.
    Without revealing your catalyst, not breaking your NDagreements, I think you could be more explicit. As I see, some posters are well qualified to help you on foreseeing the effects regarding radiation from reactor, because I understand that your mayor concern now is safety.

    From last posters I learned that we can preorder domestic E-Cats. How much do they cost? How can I preorder a single unit?

    Thanks in advance and good luck.

    Angel

  344. Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    I cannot supply further information about the mechanism of the E-Cat. We now know it well, and it is strictly bound to the issues covered, as you correctly say, by the NDA and the defense of the IP.
    We do not have safety concerns, since safety certification has been obtained for our industrial E-Cat after the reactors have been properly designed and all the measurements made OUTSIDE the E-Cat have confirmed its safety also in terms of ionizing radiations. We have experts of the matter working with us, who are physicists from laboratories specialized in measurements of ionizing radiations.
    About the domestic E-Cat, any commercial information is impossible until a safety certification is obtained for it: as I explained many times, there is a paramount difference between the certification of industrial plants, operated by certified technicians, and domestic appliances, operated by persons that are not even supposed to read the manuals. The price of the domestic E-Cat will be computed after we will know exactly the requirements estabilished during the certification process, besides other issues.
    Pre-orders are just a waiting list, with no engagement at all, with no money deposited. We cannot accept money until the product is really for sale.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  345. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Steven,
    you are right, I agree (obviously).
    However, IMO the matter is too important, it’s time to give an answer. The Americans went to the moon, so just say “yes, oh well, who knows, may be, perhaps, boh, it is too difficult …..”.
    I repeat: I hope that the professors give a definitive answer.
    My best Regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  346. Pietro F.

    Buongiorno ing. Rossi,
    1) su cento attivazioni dell’ecat quante riescono?
    2) riguardo alla prima domanda c’é stata una progressione significativa negli ultimi tre anni?
    3) su cento ecat attivati quanti mantengono una stabilità ragionevolmente utilizzabile ai fini commerciali?

    Se puo’…!

    comunque la ringrazio e buon lavoro

    (by google translate):
    Hello ing. Rossi,
    1) on one hundred of ecat activations ecat how they do it?
    2) With regard to the first question there was a significant progression in the last three years?
    3) on one hundred of those ECAT activated how maintain a stable reasonably usable for commercial purposes?

    If you can …!

    anyway thank you and good job

    Pietro F.

  347. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    I will answer to your questions after:
    1- the publication of the TIPR
    2- our publication of the performance data of the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  348. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Just like in an American jury trial, the fast verdict is usually guilty when the evidence is overwhelming. If the TIR scientists saw results where the amount of output energy was less than or equal to the input energy, the report would be negative and it could be quickly released. So the seemingly long release time for the TIR to me says the results will most likely be very positive. But as in any trial, we must wait for the verdict before congratulations are in order.

  349. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    We have to wait and be patient. Obviously the anxiety is getting exponential.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  350. Wladimir Guglinski

    From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    To: vcq@quantum.at
    Subject: a structure of space for explaining the ENTANGLEMENT
    Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 08:13:07 -0300

    Dear Dr. Gabriela Barreto Lemos

    I think it would be of interest to repeat your experiment by changing the angles of incidence of the two twins photons when they hit the two detectors (by putting the two detectors with several different angles one regarding the other, in order to verify how the relative different angles between the two detectors can influence in the formation of the image produced by the entanglement).

    I hope by this way we may try to understand the physical laws that rule the entanglement.

    The reason why I suppose it is explained in the comment of mine published in the Rossi’s blog Journal of Nuclear Physics:
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853#comments

    ============================================
    Wladimir Guglinski
    August 29th, 2014 at 7:32 PM
    How does the quantum entanglement works?
    I used do not believe in the existence of the quantum entanglement. In my book Quantum Ring Theory, by considering my model of the photon, I had proposed a new interpretation for the Alain Aspect experiment, without the need of considering the entanglement.

    But a new experiment published in the journal Nature does not allow any doubt on its existence:
    Quantum imaging with undetected photons
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v512/n7515/full/nature13586.html
    The experiment was made under the lead of Gabriela Barreto Lemos, a Brazilian physicist.

    So, the entanglement exists, and we have to try to understand what is physical mechanism underlying its occurrence.

    It is obvious that, for the understanding of such physical mechanism, we need to try to understand the entanglement by considering a physical structure of the aether.

    Another experiment which is dealing with the structure of the aether is being made in the Fermilab:
    http://astro.fnal.gov/projects/OtherInitiatives/holometer_project.html

    The structure of the aether is proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.
    But the best aspect of the structure of the aether proposed in QRT is the fact that such structure is connected to the structures of the electron, the proton, the neutrino, the photon, and the nucleus.
    Therefore, the structure of the aether proposed in QRT is not a lonely theory, actually it is a theory connected to structures of the elementary stable particles of the universe, and this is the best aspect of the theory.

    According to the photon model of QRT, the photon is composed by a particle and its antiparticle moving in helical trajectory.

    In the experiment made by Gabriela, when the photon is broken in two parts, the particle takes a direction, and the antiparticle takes another direction.
    However, in the instant when the photon is broken, the lonely particle captures a new antiparticle from the aether, and the antiparticle captures a new particle either, in orther that two twins photons A and B are formed.

    The question is: how does occur the entanglement between the twins photons A and B?

    In the paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism, submitted for publication in the Journal of Nuclear Physics, it is proposed a string of gravitons (of the elementary particles as the electron and the proton) captures magnetons in the perimeter of the universe (the most far away limit of the universe), as we see in the Figure 2.5 of the paper, ahead:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_2.5%3D_flux_of_magnetons_within_string_of_gravitons.png

    The question now is to discover how the gravity strings of the photon A gets entanglement with the gravity strings of the photon B in the experiment made by Gabriela.

    In another words:
    What are the laws of Physics underlying the entanglement via the structure of the aether?
    It’s an exciting chalenge.

    .

    Dear Joe
    when my paper will be published in the Journal of Nuclear Physics, I would like to talk about the question with you, here in the Comments of the JoNP.
    regards
    wlad
    ============================================

    .

    Thanks to your attention
    Wladimir Guglinski

  351. Steven N. Karels

    Giuliano Bettini,

    You posted — I’m quite amazed by the statement “..the transmutation of Ni (…) has still to be confirmed.” In other LENR experiments transmutation have been reported at the atomic level. But for AR to report transmutation of a secondary (not primary) reaction would be very difficult. The amount of copper that might be produced could be much less than one milligram of mass, depending on how secondary the reaction was. So distinguishing it from contamination could be difficult.

    Nuclear reactions produce so much energy compared to chemical reactions that not a lot of byproducts are produced. To prove a nickel-to-copper relationship, one way might be to determine the fuel contents before initial operation, then examine the same fuel distributed in different eCat reactors run at one month, two months, … to six months and measure the copper in each fuel sample. And to be able to show a relationship with energy produced versus copper produced. But measuring milligram or microgram levels of any material can be very challenging.

  352. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear A.R.
    I’m quite amazed by the statement “..the transmutation of Ni (…) has still to be confirmed.”
    You must admit: after 25 years, the transmutation which “has still to be confirmed” feeds the skepticism, at least with regard to the cold fusion. In my naivety, I would say: “If there is Copper, there is Copper. However, if there is no Copper, it means that there is no Copper. Full stop.”
    Where is the problem? Extremely sophisticated measurements? Unexpected difficulties?
    Where am I wrong? I hope that at least the Professors give a definitive answer.
    Giuliano Bettini.

  353. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    When I say that the results of the Third independent Party could be positive, but also negative, I do not joke. That is the reality. Our work is under examination and under R&D and we honestly have the duty to say that the results of the examination could be negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  354. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    I think the data from the next TIPR will give information about the energy density issue after a long operation period.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  355. Wladimir Guglinski

    How does the quantum entanglement works?

    I used do not believe in the existence of the quantum entanglement. In my book Quantum Ring Theory, by considering my model of the photon, I had proposed a new interpretation for the Alain Aspect experiment, without the need of considering the entanglement.

    But a new experiment published in the journal Nature does not allow any doubt on its existence:
    Quantum imaging with undetected photons
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v512/n7515/full/nature13586.html

    The experiment was made under the lead of Gabriela Barreto Lemos, a Brazilian physicist.

    So, the entanglement exists, and we have to try to understand what is physical mechanism underlying its occurrence.

    It is obvious that, for the understanding of such physical mechanism, we need to try to understand the entanglement by considering a physical structure of the aether.

    Another experiment which is dealing with the structure of the aether is being made in the Fermilab:
    http://astro.fnal.gov/projects/OtherInitiatives/holometer_project.html

    The structure of the aether is proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.
    But the best aspect of the structure of the aether proposed in QRT is the fact that such structure is connected to the structures of the electron, the proton, the neutrino, the photon, and the nucleus.

    Therefore, the structure of the aether proposed in QRT is not a lonely theory, actually it is a theory connected to structures of the elementary stable particles of the universe, and this is the best aspect of the theory.

    According to the photon model of QRT, the photon is composed by a particle and its antiparticle moving in helical trajectory.

    In the experiment made by Gabriela, when the photon is broken in two parts, the particle takes a direction, and the antiparticle takes another direction.
    However, in the instant when the photon is broken, the lonely particle captures a new antiparticle from the aether, and the antiparticle captures a new particle either, in orther that two twins photons A and B are formed.

    The question is: how does occur the entanglement between the twins photons A and B?

    In the paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism, submitted for publication in the Journal of Nuclear Physics, it is proposed a string of gravitons (of the elementary particles as the electron and the proton) captures magnetons in the perimeter of the universe (the most far away limit of the universe), as we see in the Figure 2.5 of the paper, ahead:

    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_2.5%3D_flux_of_magnetons_within_string_of_gravitons.png

    The question now is to discover how the gravity strings of the photon A gets entanglement with the gravity strings of the photon B in the experiment made by Gabriela.
    In another words:
    What are the laws of Physics underlying the entanglement via the structure of the aether?

    It’s an exciting chalenge.

    .

    Dear Joe

    when my paper will be published in the Journal of Nuclear Physics, I would like to talk about the question with you, here in the Comments of the JoNP.

    regards
    wlad

  356. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    If the High Temperature E-Cat produced its design power (nearly) continuously for an entire year, or about 8,765.76 hours, then its Energy Density (Wh/kg) should be about (8765.76/116) = 75 times the Energy Density reported in the May 2013 Arxiv paper.

    I don’t remember the May 2013 Energy Density, but a factor of 75 is significant. Of course, if it ran for only six months per charge, the Energy Density multiplying factor is ‘only’ about 38 times as large.

    Still good.

    Energetic regards,

    Joseph Fine

  357. Martyn Aubrey

    Dear Dr Rossi,

    Whilst I understand that the domestic E-Cat will not be available until it is certified (which may take some time), what form would the construction take?

    1. A single reactor.

    2. A smaller version of the Cat & Mouse two reactor configuration.

    3. Something else.

    4. Not decided yet.

    Also, would the domestic E-Cat be purely electrically powered, purely gas powered, either, or both?

    Kind Regards,

    Martyn Aubrey.

  358. Andrea Rossi

    Martyn Aubrey:
    2.
    It will be either electrically or gas powered, we think.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  359. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You had mentioned previously, I think, that the conversion of hydrogen plus nickel into copper was a secondary reaction regarding thermal energy generation. Now, apparently, you are suggesting that 62Ni production occurs and can possibly enhance the eCat efficiency. Are these statements in conflict?

    1. Can you clarify?
    2, Can you define what you mean by eCat efficiency? Improved effective COP? Something else?

  360. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    1- There is not a conflict, the transmutation of Ni remains a secondary effect that, by the way, has still to be confirmed.
    2- Efficiency is not just COP, is a more wide concept encompassing many other characteristics, like stability, reliability, duration etc. All these issues are in evolution.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  361. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Curiosone

    the nonsenses of Mr. JR make us to remember those said by Simplicius in Galileo’s Dialogue:

    http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/Extras/Galileo_Dialogue.html

    So,
    we realize that people never change.
    Simplicius tried to save the wrong Aristotle’s concepts. And Mr. JR is trying to save the flawed concepts of current Nuclear Physics.

    Changes the scenery of human theatrical comedy, but the characters are always the same.

    regards
    wlad

  362. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Your pre-order is in our records, as well as all the pre-orders we received, but I must say that we cannot foresee when the domestic E-Cats will be put in the market.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  363. Alan DeAngelis

    Dear Pekka Janhunen,

    I think the chemistry sets things up for the sort of reactions you’re proposing.
    If there are no gamma rays or neutrons, I think that the chemistry would set it up for the following nuclear reactions. Nickel hydride absorbs a proton to become cuprous hydride in an excited state. Cuprous hydride absorbs its proton to become zinc in an excited state. Zinc in an excited state, fissions into nickel (with two fewer neutrons) and helium.

    NiH2 >CuH*>Zn*> Ni + He

    For example:
    H(1) + Ni(62) > Cu(63)* Step1
    H(1) + Cu(63)* > Ni(60) + He(4) Step 2
    ________________________
    Over all
    2 H(1) + Ni(62) > Ni(60) + He(4) 9.87 MeV

    For example:
    H(1) + Ni(64) > Cu(65)* Step1
    H(1) + Cu(65)* > Ni(62) + He(4) Step 2
    ________________________
    Over all
    2 H(1) + Ni(64) > Ni(62) + He(4) 11.8 MeV

    And other isotopes:
    2 H(1) + Ni(N) > Ni(N-2) + He(4)

  364. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 28th, 2014 at 4:55 PM

    Argon:
    Your pre-order, as all the pre-orders for domestic E-Cats, will be satisfied as soon as we will obtain the safety certification for the domestic E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    ======================================

    Dear Andrea,
    please dont forget my pre-order of 1.000 domestic E-Cats.

    regards
    wlad

  365. Argon

    Dear Andrea! Many months ago, i deliver to pre-order yours small domestics LENR heater . Wanted to show students. Many papers descriptions of experiments can never replace training laboratory work. It is clear that the students can not afford commercially megawatt LENR system for 2 million dollars. Please suggest a simple version of the demonstration non-chemical power in the NI-H systems for students range tens-hundred watt power. Or do you think it premature and inappropriate to inform young people about the actual running LENR?

  366. Andrea Rossi

    Argon:
    Your pre-order, as all the pre-orders for domestic E-Cats, will be satisfied as soon as we will obtain the safety certification for the domestic E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  367. Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in August 28th, 2014 at 8:40 AM

    Why on earth would Curiosone want to thank Wladimir for totally ignoring the question that was asked and then using it as an excuse to post yet another error-riddled comment? Wlad’s comment is almost entirely incorrect and even if it had any meaningful content, it wouldn’t address the question of symmetries in any useful way.
    ===========================================================

    Daar Curiosone,
    Mr. JR is the person who claims that in the Figure 1 of the link bellow the shape is spherical:

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/nature11246.html

    So, Mr. JR is a theorist able to avoid the breakdown of the current Nuclear PHysics by changing the fundamental principles of the Geometry.
    According to Mr. JR, a sphere has ellipsoidal shape.

    regards
    wlad

  368. DTravchenko

    JR:
    I do not agree with you. I too think that Wladimir Guglinski’s theories are very audacious, but Curiosone has to thank him because he has answered to his question based on his ideas, as well as he could.
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  369. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    To catch the essence of Parity, you can imagine to look at a mirror : the image you see of yourself when you look at you in a mirror has your left side and right side swapped: your right ear seems the left ear and vice versa. 3 of the 4 foundamental forces – strong, gravitational and electromagnetic- respect the parity in this sense, not so the weak forces: let me start a little bit from a deeper level.
    Massless particles can spin left handed, or right handed; in the weak interactions there is a symmetry only for the left handed elementary particles and the associated force, therefore the weak interactions violate Parity, because they discriminate between left and right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  370. Dear Andrea,

    For your reaction, some speculation, for whatever it’s worth:

    1) List of exothermic p reactions of stable Ni and Cu isotopes
    (radioactive isotopes are marked with *):

    p + Ni58 –> Cu59* + 3.41861 MeV
    p + Ni60 –> Cu61* + 4.80002 MeV
    p + Ni61 –> Cu62* + 5.86565 MeV
    p + Ni62 –> Cu63 + 6.12181 MeV
    p + Ni64 –> Cu65 + 7.45291 MeV
    p + Cu63 –> Zn64 + 7.71373 MeV
    –> Ni60 + He4 + 3.75744 MeV
    p + Cu65 –> Zn66 + 8.92561 MeV
    –> Ni62 + He4 + 4.34708 MeV

    2) Postulate that reactions producing radioactive isotopes are
    suppressed (maybe because they produce less excess energy):

    p + Ni62 –> Cu63 + 6.12181 MeV
    p + Ni64 –> Cu65 + 7.45291 MeV
    p + Cu63 –> Zn64 + 7.71373 MeV
    –> Ni60 + He4 + 3.75744 MeV
    p + Cu65 –> Zn66 + 8.92561 MeV
    –> Ni62 + He4 + 4.34708 MeV

    3) Postulate that when there is a choice, reactions producing two
    output particles are strongly favoured (perhaps natural from reaction kinematics):

    p + Ni62 –> Cu63 + 6.12181 MeV
    p + Ni64 –> Cu65 + 7.45291 MeV
    p + Cu63 –> Ni60 + He4 + 3.75744 MeV
    p + Cu65 –> Ni62 + He4 + 4.34708 MeV

    4) Then the net reactions would be:

    2p + Ni62 –> Ni60 + He4 + 9.87925 MeV
    4p + Ni64 –> Ni60 + 2He4 + 21.6792 MeV
    p + Cu63 –> Ni60 + He4 + 3.75744 MeV
    3p + Cu65 –> Ni60 + 2He4 + 14.2263 MeV

    in other words, this kind of reasoning would predict formation of Ni-60. Since you say that Ni-62 is produced, instead, then the above reasoning cannot be entirely correct.

    regards, /pekka

  371. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    Is there any relation between symmetry and parity?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  372. silvio caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    It’s time to ask you the simplest and the more difficult question: do you have any idea about “from where” e-cat excess energy comes from?
    Which are the particles that are “consumed” in the so called Rossi effect producing heat?

  373. Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    Yes, we have a pretty precise idea, but I have to remind you that the results of the tests could be positive or negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  374. JR

    Why on earth would Curiosone want to thank Wladimir for totally ignoring the question that was asked and then using it as an excuse to post yet another error-riddled comment? Wlad’s comment is almost entirely incorrect and even if it had any meaningful content, it wouldn’t address the question of symmetries in any useful way.

  375. Curiosone

    Thank you for your “Simmetry” analogy, as usually you gave a model to understand for dummies.
    W.G.

  376. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Not for dummies, just for not professionals. I am sure you also want to thank Wladimir Guglinski.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  377. Heath

    Thank you. I knew it was a very basic question when I asked and one that is much discussed. A few have wondered (ecatworld) if now you understood it to be something unrelated to LENR in theory and something different from Pons and Fleischmann so many years ago. I’m just hoping to clear up the small things. Good luck on the things to come!

  378. Andrea Rossi

    Heath:
    The Rossi Effect is something different from the F.P. effect, as you can easily understand studying both. The F.P. system is an electrolysis based concept, the R.E. is a H-Metal reaction.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  379. Curiosone

    Do you use different isotopes of Ni in your reactions?

  380. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    We think that our process, the so called “Rossi Effect”, is , as a serendipity, also a system to produce 62Ni, because only this fact can explain the formation of atoms of stable Cu, even if in very small amounts; we also noticed that using eventually powders of Ni enriched this way, the efficiency of the E-Cats increases. But we are not sure of this fact, because there may have been errors in the analysis, so we are studying , as a side effect , this phenomenon. Obviously, I cannot add information regarding this issue, pending the patents relative to it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  381. Heath

    Dear Andrea.
    I am new to commenting on this site but greatly appreciate your work in the invention, design and understanding of the e-cat. And I am certainly excited for the report soon to come and the reactor for Industrial Heat’s customer. Do you still believe that the Rossi Effect involves low energy nuclear reactions?

  382. Andrea Rossi

    Heath:
    Whatever definition you want to give them, obviously yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  383. Wladimir Guglinski

    Curiosone wrote in August 24th, 2014 at 6:06 PM

    When you have time: in your answers regarding Physics, you said that Higgs boson breaks the “symmetry”. What is exactly the simmetry?
    Thank you for your patience,
    W.G.
    ——————————————————————

    .

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 25th, 2014 at 10:18 PM

    Curiosone:

    As we saw, from symmetry arise the 4 forces: strong force, electromagnetic force, weak force and gravitational force arise all from symmetry: let’s try to see how.
    ========================================================

    COMMENT:

    Dear Curiosone,
    actually all the Modern Physics was developed on the concept of symmetry. So, the current Nuclear Theory is also based on the concept of symmetry.

    That’s why, according to current Nuclear Physics, even-even nuclei with the same quantity Z of protons and N neutrons, Z=N, as 2He4, 4Be8, 6C12, 8O16, 10Ne20, etc., would have to have spherical shape.

    However experiments have detected 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

    Look at the Figure 1 of the paper the elipsoidal shape of the nucleus 10Ne20.

    .

    According to the current Nuclear Physics, there is only one way to explain such eliposoidal shape of the even-even nuclei with Z=N:
    There is need to consider a fifth fundamental force existing in the Nature

    .

    Other experiment detected that the nucleus 224Ra has a pear shape IMPOSSIBLE to occur, according to the current Nuclear Physics:

    Pear-Shaped Nucleus Boosts Search for Alternatives to “Standard Model” Physics
    The strange shape of radium 224 could lead to new physics:
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/pear-shaped-nucleus-boost-search-for-alternatives-to-standard-model-physics/

    That’s why some theorists are thinking that it is unavoidable to consider a fifth force beyond the four fundamental forces proposed in the Standard Model, otherwise it is impossible to explain such anomalous shape of the Ra224.

    In the link posted above, Stephen Batters says:
    “Even more enticingly, the experiments could probe basic physics. The standard model of particle physics, which describes the strong and weak nuclear forces and the electromagnetic force, leaves several basic questions unanswered.”

    And nuclear physicist Gavin Smith of the University of Manchester, UK, says:
    I believe that this will eventually lead to results of much broader impact than this experiment alone, with the possibility of placing constraints on the standard model,”

    regards
    wlad

  384. orsobubu

    In the answer to Italo R., who says that wars are due to oil, Andrea Rossi writes that “the roots of wars are deeper: during the stone age men killed each other not for lack of stones. Cain did not kill Abel for lack of apples.”

    This is absolutely correct. Most of the wars today are placed in the new framework of global relations that began to take shape in the 90s, with the federation of the Euro and the rise of Asia and China in particular. In the relations between powers, what matters is not the specific event but the historical process leading to the event and that is intrinsic to the structure of the system itself, the capitalistic production system and the imperialistic political order (Kissinger). It is from the womb of politics that the wars take their origin (Klausewitz), being the result of objective causal chains, from a society in which the human species is not consciously master of its own destiny. The states and the wars between the states are irreconcilable expressions of the conflict between classes: the uneven economic and political development changes the relationship between the powers, calls for a strength showdown and leads to the breakdown of the international order. (Guido La Barbera, La nuova fase strategica, 2014)

  385. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    do you hear some other rumors, other than Brumm Brumm? :)
    I mean:
    I know you cannot “give informations either in positive or in negative”, but what are, at this moment, your feelings about the Report?
    1. None?
    2. Positive?
    3. Negative?
    4. Too many Harley Davidson all around?
    (Of course, answer “1″ is not allowed. It’s not credible ….).
    Regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  386. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    4
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  387. Alessandro Coppi

    In add to the last post of Steven we could imagine that we have in front of us a nickel plated iron surface, and I observed that the nickel plated surfaces if printed by laser beam becomes like sponge, could be this one a good way to go?
    When you will own the report of trp2, will you publish something here before the TRP2 public release?

    Best regards
    Alessandro Coppi

  388. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    I cannot comment on this in positive or negative and will publish nothing before TIP’ s Report publication.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  389. Steven N. Karels

    A Look at the eCat Nickel Surface – A Guess

    We understand that approximately 5 grams of nickel powder are contained within the eCat. We also know the dimensions of the eCat reactor are 33 cm in length and a diameter of 9 cm. We further understand that the nickel particles have an average diameter of 1 micron. So what does the nickel layer look like?

    Assumptions:

    1. The nickel particles are coated by some means on the interior of the outside cylinder probably through the use of a highly thermally conductive adhesive.
    2. The dimensions of the interior cylinder are 32cm in length with an interior diameter of 8.5 cm.

    Calculations:

    The area of this interior surface would be 32cm x pi * 8.5 cm or 854.5 cm2. The density of nickel is 8.912 grams per cc. So 5 grams of bulk nickel would occupy a space of 0.561 cc.

    If the nickel were bulk (not particle shaped), the nickel layer on the interior cylinder would be 0.561 cc / 854.5 cm2 or 656.5 microns. To account for the spherical particle shape we multiply by 4 / pi to estimate a nickel particle thickness of 835.9 microns. The actual adhesive and nickel particle will be thicker to accommodate imperfect packing geometry so we can assume a coating thickness of around 1 millimeter.

  390. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Obviously, I cannot comment in positive or in negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  391. Dear Andrea,
    The Higgs mechanism can give mass to gauge bosons and to fermions, but it does not turn bosons into fermions. Turning bosons into fermions would need more mathematical machinery, because one cannot reach half-integer numbers by doing additions or subtractions of integers.
    regards, /pekka

  392. Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    Thank you for your comment, but the mechanism is much more complex. Obviously in the proposed analogies I have to simplify enormously, otherwise instead of giving a simple nutshell I make things more complicated. The same analogies are misleading, being semplifications, if referred to a rigorous interpretation. Who wants to have a rigorous explication of the Higgs mechanism can go to:
    Standard Model Lagrangian with explicit Higgs term ( T.D.Gutierrez, 1999)
    An introduction to Quantum Field Theory ( M.E. Peskin, D.V. Schroeder, 1995)
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  393. Curiosone

    When you have time: in your answers regarding Physics, you said that Higgs boson breaks the “symmetry”. What is exactly the simmetry?
    Thank you for your patience,
    W.G.

  394. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    The concept of Symmetry in Physics is not substantially different from the common use: in the common language we define “symmetric” an object that reflects the same shape in two parts of it, for example a face is symmetric if its left side is equal to its right side. In Physics is defined symmetric a characteristic that is equal separately at every point ( in case of “gauge symmetry) or uniformely everywhere at the same time ( in case of global symmetry).
    As we saw, from symmetry arise the 4 forces: strong force, electromagnetic force, weak force and gravitational force arise all from symmetry: let’s try to see how.
    Imagine gauge symmetry to be like a system of trails along which multiplets of particles travel like trains and imagine that the trails are not straight and flat, but like roller coasters; now imagine that the wheels of the train are of four type: one type feels the strong forces, one the e.m. forces, one the weak f., one the gravitational f.: imagine that the strong forces are the ones that push the wheels rightward, the e.m. the ones that pull and push the wagons up and down, the weak the ones that try to slow down the trains, the gravitational the ones that try to make the train fall along the perpendicular of the train’s axis: obviously, these examples have nothing to do with the reality, are just analogies; where these forces are felt is because the displacement from the position of the trail respect the straight and flat position is filled up by means of the FIELD relative to the specific force, so that are the fields that vibrating make the train subject to their force: so we can say that forces arise from symmetry. All this would conserve the gauge symmetry, should not exist the Higgs Field. Imagine that upon the top of the wagons there are pebbles. Now imagine that the train arrives to a terrain full of grass, high grass that makes fluffy the space between the two leads of the trails and upon the trails: obviously the attrite between the wheels and the grass covering the trail will slow down the train, and the wagons would feel their mass, mainly the wheels, while the pebbles not being affected by the attrite, are projected ahead: the grass ( the Higgs Field) breaks the symmetry, now wheels feel their mass because the attrite with the grass slows them down, while the pebbles are not affected and continue to go ahead. Now if we make bosons correspond to the train before the Higgs Field, photons the pebbles, we can say that the Higgs Field has turned the Bosons into Fermions breaking the symmetry.
    As a matter of fact, symmetry is a much more complicated thing, but I think this analogy can give an idea of a possible model.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  395. DTravchenko

    By the way: can ou tell us in which state of the USA is the customer who bought the 1 MW plant from IH?
    DT

  396. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    All this kind of information will be given in due time.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  397. Curiosone

    Does the fuel efficiency decrease during the 6 months of scheduled operation?
    W.G.

  398. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    No, the efficiency remains the same during the 6 months of scheduled operaton.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  399. Joseph Fine

    Silvio:

    Thank you for sending me (and the readers) the link to Reciprocal System Theory.

    It looks very interesting but I will refrain from making any comments until I have read and studied it more.

    Reciprocal Regards.

    Joseph Fine

  400. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, one source claims that 14,500 wars have taken place between 3500 BC and the late 20th century, costing 3.5 billion lives, leaving only 300 years of peace.
    3500 + 1980 = 5480 years.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  401. LENR-to-Market Digest — August 22, 2014 – It’s been 4.5 months since I compiled a digest. While I’ve not been able to be comprehensive this time, pulling from the many news sources, I was able to organize most all of the 120 E-CatWorld articles Frank posted, which gives an exciting overview of the burgeoning stage of development the industry is at. (PESN; August 22, 2014)

  402. silvio caggia

    @joseph fine
    Your link about radiactive isotopes and neutrinos
    m.phys.org/_news201795438.html#jCp
    says:
    “No one knows how neutrinos could interact with radioactive materials to change their rate of decay.”
    This is false, try the Reciprocal System theory:
    rs2theory.org/atoms/isotopes
    Good luck (warning: you need to be very open minded about phisics to accept RS2).

  403. DTravchenko

    I bet a supper in Moscow and I lost. It’s yours if you come here.
    Warm regards
    DT

  404. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, don’t you think that in future, when your QUAR will be applied all over the world in hundreds of million pieces, there will be less wars due to oil?

    Peaceful Regards

  405. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    The roots of wars are deeper: during the stone age men killed each other not for lack of stones. Cain did not kill Abel for lack of apples.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  406. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear A.R.
    I had intentionally left ambiguous the question.
    =D
    I specify:
    1. you will post the Report on the JoNP, before the publication?
    2. they will deliver to you the Report several days before the publication?
    3. what’s the meaning of “several”? One day? One week?
    Regards,
    Bettini.

  407. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    1- no
    2- yes
    3- 3 to 4 days
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  408. George

    Good morning dr. Rossi is following the events in the Middle East? where the nations are at war for the procurement of energy based on oil?
    The situation is very serious!
    See the video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrhZwWWMmAk

  409. Andrea Rossi

    George:
    The events in M.E. are a tragedy. Oil is doubtless an issue on that field. Let’s hope a peaceful solution is found.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  410. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea, I read on JoNP:
    ——————————————————-
    H-G Branzell, July 1st, 2014 at 2:23 PM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    (…)Why don’t you just publish the report here (…) ?

    Andrea Rossi, July 1st, 2014 at 3:43 PM
    (…) Our protocol so far says that they will deliver to me the report several days before the publication.
    ——————————————————-
    Can you confirm that it will be done? Thank you.
    Giuliano Bettini.

  411. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    Can you specify your question? What do you mean with “it”?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  412. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Interesting, anyway. To study wrong ideas can bring us to good ideas.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  413. DTravchenko

    I bet this comment and the former one will be spammed by the robot.
    DT

  414. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Do you know that 75% of the motorcycles in the USA are Harley Davidsons? This is why I hear only their rumors: they are so many!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    p.s.
    What did you bet?

  415. Joseph Fine

    AR,

    I’m sorry. I stated it backwards. If the decay rate of a radioactive element gets smaller due to reduced solar neutrino flux, it becomes less radioactive and the half life would get longer. So the way to get rid of radioactive wastes is be to shield materials from neutrinos as much as possible. (Seems like an impractical idea!)

    And, unfortunately, I have no idea how to do that as of now. Oh well, the article was interesting. :)

    Joseph Fine

  416. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    http://phys.org/news201795438.html#jCp

    An online article at http://www.Phys.org (see above) suggests that Radioactive decay rates depend on the incoming rate (flux) of Solar Neutrinos from the Sun. When solar flares erupt, the rate of solar neutrinos declines and the decay rate of radioactive isotopes decreases as well. When the solar neutrino flux increases to normal, the decay rate returns (that is, increases) to normal.

    The article does not say how any change in neutrino flux could alter radioactive decay rates, but only suggests that it does. The author also did not mention any possible contribution of electromagnetic fields. (At night-time, after traveling 93 Million miles as well as through the earth, it is difficult to imagine how an EM field from the Sun could have any effect on a detector on the Earth.)

    A possible conclusion from my reading of this article – my own crazy idea – is that increasing the neutrino flux probably would increase the radioactive isotope decay rate. And, increasing Solar Neutrinos above the normal flux, should reduce the Half Life (increase the decay rate) of a radioactive element. So, ‘Voila’, there it is ! To increase the radioactive decay rate of a substance, just increase the neutrino flux. All you need are a few more neutrinos.

    The rest are engineering details!

    Sunny regards,

    Joseph Fine

  417. Curiosone

    I am in vacation in India where I think the E-Cat can have enormous importance. What do you think? I also have big problems with moschitos: do you think the Ecat can be useful for disinfestation ?
    Thank you
    WG

  418. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I am not an expert of disinfestation, but I do not think that the E-Kat could help. About you, I think also in India you can find TriCalm, the best after moschito bite cream we have in the USA.
    Warmest Regards
    A.R.

  419. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Hopefully this posting has outwitted your robot…

    Do you take vacations (defined as one week or longer away from the place you work)? If so, when was your last vacation?

  420. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    My last vacation has been in Italy in Costa Smeralda in August 2011 two weeks. Since then I have not been able to leave my job. But I must add that the places I am working in are so beautiful, that I am very lucky to be here.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  421. BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea

    Thinking about the logical/hypothetical assessment Mr. Karels presented on the ‘E-Cat Fuel Limitations’, has it been conceived by your team a means by which the spent nickel powder core could be replaced on an automated continuous basis?

    In my limited knowledge of metallic particle flow under harsh heat conditions, perhaps a very slow heat tolerant auger would feed at one end while dumping the “41%” spent nickel into a hopper at the other end. This not only could provide an extension of its life cycle but break up any coagulation occurring.
    I’m sure you have thought of many ways to extend the maintenance cycle of the E-Cat and their limitations. Could you share your thoughts on these proposed concepts? Thanks.

    With much respect, BK

  422. Andrea Rossi

    Brokeeper:
    Maintainance is made by our assistance team. When charges have to be changed the system is fast.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  423. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    I know that you don’t care rumors, whispers etc, but I am hearing very strong rumors from important sources that the report of the TIP will be published in September. Any comment?
    DT

  424. Curiosone

    Thank you for all your answers about Physics: I appreciated also your answer about mass and gravity.
    W.G.

  425. Francesco Poscetti

    Carissimo Andrea Rossi,

    Ti seguo dal 2011, quando mi sono cominciato ad interessare al problema energetico dell’umanità. La tua invenzione e’ la soluzione più promettente tra quelle che io conosco. Sono molti mesi ormai che attendo novità. So che stiamo aspettando un test di terze parti. Quando scade il termine? Sono impaziente! E sono anche un pò preoccupato perchè ho timore che questa tecnologia venga frenata dal sistema attuale. Sara accessibile a tutti? O avremo il solito monopolio? A parte questi miei timori vorrei comunque ringraziarti di tutto quello che hai fatto. Sei un esempio per me.
    Francesco Poscetti
    Ps. Qual’è la fase successiva?

    ENGLISH
    Your invention is the most promising game changer I heard of. We all are waiting for the publication of the second TIPR: is there a term for the publication? Will this technology available to all?
    What’s the next step?
    Thank you for your work.
    Francesco Poscetti

  426. Andrea Rossi

    Francesco Poscetti:
    Thank you for your kind attention.
    Answers:
    1- There is not a term for the publication, but I think it will not take long, at this point.
    2- This technology will be available for industrial utilizations, eventually it will be available also for domestic applications, provided safety certifications will be granted after enough experience in the industries.
    3- Next step: the 1 MW plant installed in the factory of a Customer of IH.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  427. Angel Blume

    Dear Mr. Rossi.

    I am happy knowing that some posts are erroneously classified as spam.
    Were not for your kind responses I had thought I were banned.

    Warm regards

    Angel

  428. Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    For some reason that we do not know, many comments go in the spam. Our IT guy says that probably in the address or in the text there is something that the robot identifies as an advertisement. I always take a look to the first page of spam, to check if there is a good one, and now and again i fish a good comment erroneously spammed, but we receive hundreds of spammed comments per day, so, unfortunately, some good comment goes lost. What I suggest, if a comment is spammed, is to change address from where you send the comment, or eliminate any link, because sometimes links are carriers of advertising and for this reason the comments are spammed. I never ban anybody!!! Sometimes I spam a comment because contains offensive expressions, but when I do it I always send a private email to the Author, explaining why I spammed the comment: I spam specific comments, never ban any Reader !
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  429. Steven N. Karels

    eCat Fuel Limitations

    Let us make a hypothesis that the primary reaction within the eCat is a hydrogen-to-hydrogen reaction. Andrea Rossi has stated he now believes the nickel plus hydrogen to copper is a secondary reaction. So let us assume that the secondary reaction is at 1 per cent level. Let us also assume that the nickel consists of the natural distribution of nickel isotopes and the reaction between the hydrogen-to-hydrogen only occurs in the presence of 64Ni. 64NI occurs in about 0.9% of natural nickel.

    We understand that the amount of natural nickel in the eCat reactor is about 5 grams of mass. So the 64Ni would constitute about 46 milligrams. A 10kW eCat reactor operating continuously for 6 months would produce 43,200 kWhrs of energy. One gram of converted mass is equivalent to 23,000 kWhrs of energy. So 1.88 grams of mass will have been converted to energy. With our assumption of a 1 per cent secondary reaction, the amount of 64Ni would be 18.8 milligrams.

    If the above is true, then the long term output power of the eCat should decrease by 41% over the six month operating run. Look to the independent report to see if this occurred.

  430. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    This comment of yours has been casually recovered by me in the spam, where the robot had placed it. Please use another address to send your comments from, because this one goes to the spam, for some reason. Thank you for your insight.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  431. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    the TPR2 has lasted about 6 months, and has been made only on one reactor. There were other two of them as spares, but they haven’t been used, there hasn’t been no need to use and test them.
    The writing of its report is lasting for long, very long time.

    I mean: for me, the result surely will be very very exciting.

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  432. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    Thank you: we must be patient.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  433. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I know that you have repeatedly stated the long duration test may be positive or negative. And I understand this as a normal disclaimer. But what you have revealed is that a single eCat operated for a long period of time, perhaps greater than six months of continuous operation. So the only success or failure metric that I can foresee is if the total energy being used to control the eCat was greater or less than the total energy output by the eCat. Am I missing another possible metric or outcome? Given your statement that it operated continuously and without failure seems to me to limit other possible outcomes. We all await to see what that ratio (output vs input energy) will be.

  434. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    We all wait to see, you are right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  435. Andrea Rossi

    Angek Blume:
    Thank you for your attention.
    The text-tail is due to the fact that the results of the long run Third Independent Party can really be positive or negative, as far as I know. Anyway should not be long the waiting for the results at this point. As for the industrial plant, we must wait a long run operation before being sure it works and respects the guarantees.
    Thanks, again, for your offer of help.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  436. Angel Blume

    Dear Mr. Rossi
    I am buffled by the persistent texttail ‘positive or negative’.
    What is it related to?
    Of course NOT to efficiency as it would mean that the E-Cat does not work.
    If problems with process control / safety, it is a matter of time.
    If related to Ni isotopes enrichement / separation let me know.
    Do not dismay.
    Go on and do not hesitate on asking for help if needed.

  437. Dear Andrea Rossi, Mr. Inventor

    Probably self-evident for you, but I did not think or realize that atomic vibration of individual atoms even in very small nanoscale atomic clusters are not equal. External atoms on the surface of the nano-structure vibrate more than internal atoms. Sounds very common sense, of course.

    Anyway, interesting article about it, see
    - Popularization in phys.org: “Scientists unveil new technology to better understand small clusters of atoms”, http://phys.org/news/2014-08-scientists-unveil-technology-small-clusters.html
    - Original article in Physical Review Letters: “Modeling Nanoscale Inhomogeneities for Quantitative HAADF STEM Imaging”, http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.075501

    I remember that you have found certain confidential particle size of nickel powder to work best for Rossi effect. An outsider speculation: maybe there are additional reasons than just larger surface with smaller particles to that.

    kind regards

    Ville Kanninen

  438. Andrea Rossi

    Ville Kanninen:
    Thank you.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  439. Will Hurley

    Mr. Rossi,

    Will the Ecat qualify for low-carbon/clean energy tax incentives, credits or subsities that will lower the initial capital cost. I understand that it is competitive now. It is probably still to early but it will be a selling point.
    God speed
    Will

  440. Andrea Rossi

    Will Hurley:
    I do not know about the matter, but we are not counting on incentives.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  441. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    “Our activity is in expansion, the team is increasing. Important events are on the verge to happen.”
    Seems to be the TYPICAL move of whom is expecting “negative results”, I would say. :)
    What kind of “important events”?
    Regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  442. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    Obviously, even in case of negative results the activity will continue, probably in a more difficult situation, but we are not going to retire whatever the results.
    Due information will be given in due time.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  443. McEk

    Steve Karels,
    I certainly do not want to run the Hot cat in an ‘open loop situation’ because in that case you would have no control. As far as I know is the Hot cat controlled by a temperature control loop: If the temperature exceeds a desired temperature, you switch the internal electrical heating element off, if it drops say ten degrees below that, you switch it on. What I understood is that if the temperature increases, the probability of runaway is higher. What I suggested is to control the Hot cat temperature with the flow of the cooling medium (say water). So if the temperature rises you increase the flow, it it drops you lower the flow, so it is still controlled and certainly not ‘open loop’. If, for whatever reason, the temperature continues to rise, I would suggest a second (safety) cooling loop with a factor 10 higher maximum flow and triggered by a second temperature indicator, which should always be able to stop a runaway and switch it completely off.
    There is a similarity with a nuclear fission power station, which is also being operated around the runaway point (‘reactor is critical’). The biggest difference is that I think that a Hot cat that melts down is potentially not very dangerous for people and the environment, but melt down of a nuclear power station is and that therefore the precautions can be relaxed for a ‘critical’ Hot cat.
    Andrea Rossi indicated that this cannot be done because of safety reasons. He will know best. Maybe the Hot cat can explode in case of a runaway, or cause fire or melt through its casing, whatever. I am sure for the time being he wants to walk the safe way and I agree with that. A ‘critical’ Hot cat may be something for the future if the advantages of this approach exceed the disadvantages.

  444. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, you have written:
    “… In September I am afraid this situation will be frequent, but with the help of my great team we can do it. Failure is not an option….”

    Can you give us some more details about what will happen in September? Thank you

    Working Regards,
    Italo R.

  445. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    Our activity is in expansion, the team is increasing. Important events are on the verge to happen.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  446. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, you have written:
    “… In September I am afraid this situation will be frequent, but with the help of my great team we can do it. Failure is not an option….”

    Can you give us more details about what will happen in September? Thank you

    Working Regards,
    Italo R.

  447. Curiosone

    On the New York Times of today is published an article about Diesel oil made by algae: is this related to your patent of 1978 to make oil from wastes?
    W.G.

  448. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Mass and Gravity are two completely different things. You can have Mass in absence of Gravity ( otherwise you could move spaceships in the space without any effort) and you can have Gravity in absence of Mass ( for example light rays, made by massless photons, are bent by the gravitational field of galaxies).
    Said this, Mass, conceptually, measures how much resistance you encounter when you push apart an object at a certain speed; more precisely, Mass is the amount of Energy that an object has when it is at rest: from the Einstein equation E=mc^2, you , which gives us the amount of energy that is in an object with a certain mass, we have, by equivalence, a formula that gives us the mass of the same object when it is not moving. Gravity is a force, mediated by gravitons, independent from mass: if I remember well I already answered you about how we can conceptually figure gravity fields and their bosons ( gravitons).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  449. Curiosone

    When you have time: what is the difference between mass and gravity exactly? I continue to take advantage from your ability to explain simply diff ult things, or things difficult for me.
    Thank you
    W.G.

  450. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I think you are referring to the plant made in Alabama by Algae System, a Nevada company. They heat algae at 300°C at high pressure and, yes, it is the same process I patented in 1978. Good luck to them, is an important contribution and a very interesting new energy source.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  451. DTravchenko

    Andrea Rossi:
    There are rumors that the 1 MW plant is running well already. Is it true?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  452. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Yes, the 1 MW plant has been made in the USA by IH.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  453. DTravchenko

    I also want to ask: the 1 MW plant has been made totally in the USA by IH ?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  454. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Information about the 1 MW plant will be given in due time. Now is too soon to give any kind of information, in positive or in negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  455. Steven N. Karels

    McEk,

    If I understand your suggestion correctly, it would be to run the Hot eCat in an open loop mode of operation — that is, let it run away but rely on cooling to keep it from destroying itself. Is that essentially correct? The problem with open loop systems, among other things, is that what happens if the cooling system fails? What about the thermal resistance between the cooling fluid and the eCat? The eCat could destroy itself. Keep up the suggestions but I don’t think this one is practical.

  456. > I also like to play drums ( Jazz), but I have no more the time to exercise, so I am losing the skill: years ago I was very good, >now I stink.

    If you stink, then you are ready to play with us. “Stinking” is intricate to our style.

  457. Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    Not true: your band is good and your music interesting.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  458. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, your readers may be interested in this book.
    Google:
    I LOVE TO READ BOOKS OF PHYSICS
    Click on:
    For The Love Of Physics/Bill Gates
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  459. Andrea Rossi

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

  460. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    I wonder if there is a way to design a home product, such as a basic heater, that would keep it super safe and accident proof. For example, making an incredibly thick reactor wall (far larger than what is required) and a robust, fire proof case of thick metal? Surely there is some level of overkill shielding and structual reinforcement that would not rupture even in the worst of runaway situations? Could you build such a prototype, intentionally allow the reactor to melt down (on the inside), and repeat the process a hundred times to show the cerificators?

    It seems to me that although such a device could cost more in materials, it could be accident proof.

  461. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    The proposed model of domestic E-Cat is accident proof, but the concept of “accident proof” must be based on precise protocols that do not exist for LENR. This makes the limits of the concept unknown, therefore is necessary experience to build a protocol from the statistics. It is a very complex thing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  462. McEk

    Dear Adrea,

    I am following your E-cat/ Hot cat developments now for 3 years and I have read about all the little and big steps in progress you are making. I would love to be one of your team, but I am sure that will not be possible. Nevertheless, I constantly think of things I read. I have tried to ask your opinion on this earlier, but it is difficult to find the right entrance of your blog.

    My suggestion is to run the Hot cat at such high temperature that runaway would start and then use the cooling medium to control the temperature. The advantage is that there is no need for stimulating the LENR process and energy input, so the COP would virtually be infinite. It would bring the possibility of producing electricity in combination with the Hot cat a huge step forward.
    The disadvantage is that you cannot control the energy output of the Hot cat, but just its stability. However, windmills and solar panels suffer a similar problem and that does not seem a real disadvantage.
    I would love to read your opinion about this, although I expect you have had a similar idea yourself or within your team.

  463. Andrea Rossi

    McEk:
    This is not possible, for safety reasons.
    Thank you anyway for your suggestion,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  464. WaltC

    Dear Andrea,
    Domestic certification could become practicable overnight with the stroke of a pen (if not in the US, then elsewhere).

    Have something on the verge of ready to go, that’s all I ask.

    That’s an awful lot to ask of you and your team, I understand!

    Best wishes,
    WaltC

  465. Andrea Rossi

    WaltC:
    Domestic certification for LENR is not like for a normal appliance. I already explained why.
    The task, not easy, is to convince the Certificator that LENR can be handled by laymen. We need consolidated experience with industrial plants . It is not how you say, the issue is not to show to have something practicable, it is to convince that LENR are not dangerous for persons without skill for them. It is much more complex than you say. It is not impossible, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  466. Ralf

    Dear Andrea,
    could you tell us something about an average working day?
    At what time you start work, end work?
    What do you do the most time?
    Meetings? Study results? Making drawings? Visiting the labs/fab? Travelling to other IH sites?
    Lunch time? After works? Hobby/Recreation? Do you still do your running sport?
    Maybe you can give us little look inside your daily business as a R&D Chief in Operation :-)
    Thanks
    __
    Ralf

  467. Andrea Rossi

    Ralf:
    For whom it may interest: I wake up at 6, run 1 hour ( or bike, or tennis, or swim, I consider mandatory 1 hour exercise per day), two hours per day are dedicated to study Physics, mandatory, either related to the E-Cat or independent from it, or at least not directly related. Twelve hours are dedicated to the work on the E-Cats and Hot Cats, which depends on the specific situation, can be experiments in the laboratory, control of the manufacturing to study better systems, invention every day of new things to make it better together with the great Team with which I share the job in IH. This can happen in the factory of IH or of the Customer of IH or in other locations of IH: inventions, I can’t help to stay without them. Measurements analysis are a daily duty too. Obviously meetings are part of the job, to maintain a clear vision of the precise duties of every component of the Team, that vibrate upon a dynamic field. The remaining hours are dedicated to my personal life, usually, but many times these plans have to change: it happened that I had to stay 36 hours straight on a plant in critical operation to control it, without sleeping, eating, just drinking water. Luckily God gave me strong excess of stamina and I use it, if necessary, to the limit. In September I am afraid this situation will be frequent, but with the help of my great team we can do it. Failure is not an option.
    Hobby: I adore to read books of Physics, I need to learn. Recreation: Play Tennis with my woman ( much stronger than me). I also like to play drums ( Jazz), but I have no more the time to exercise, so I am losing the skill: years ago I was very good, now I stink.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  468. WaltC

    Dear Andrea,
    I like the “all of the above” list that you have in mind for upcoming work. It’s good to have lots of irons in the fire– it keeps everyone energized.

    - Is the following item (that’s been discussed here before) also on your “radar screen”?:

    A portable E-cat based room heater that plugs into a normal power outlet, provides a high COP, and can heat a single room with a thermal output of, say, 0.5KW-1.5KW.

    I realize you’re not currently certified to sell such a device to the residential market, but once you had certification, if you had something like that “on the shelf” and ready to go, it would be a quick sell into many homes around the world since it has the benefit of ultra high efficiency and “no installation required!”. We could pick it up at the portable heater section of any store and plug it in immediately.

  469. Andrea Rossi

    WaltC:
    Yes, this is a good idea, even if not practicable until we have a domestic certification.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  470. Steven N. Karels

    Dear AR,

    You must have discovered cloning and made many copies of yourself to do so much, so continually, and so well… (LOL)

  471. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I have a great Team that makes it possible.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  472. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    As the independent report draws near and your 1MW industrial unit is eventually released to your customer, what will you be working on? Is it

    a. A higher sustained eCat temperatures?
    b. Multi-MegaWatt thermal output eCat?
    c. Smaller eCat output?
    d. Non-electrically driven eCat (e.g., natural gas)?
    e. Electricity production?
    f. All of the above (plus some more)?

    What do you plan to be working on in 2015?

  473. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels.
    f
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  474. Koen Vandewalle

    Andrea,

    Even in the case that the report of TIP2 is negative, then does the Rossi-Effect bring new scientific insights that industry can rely on to create substantial solutions to the problems of the world of today ?
    I mean very specific towards energy and environmental problems.

    I derive that from an earlier answer of yours that you plan to work even more in that case of a negative outcome.

    It remains a very strange situation that a technology that could avoid some kind of world armageddon, remains private property. There exist examples of inventions with military and/or intelligence properties that become military secrets or of national interest, and therefore can not be exploited by private persons or companies.

    I know this is a very stupid question because most of the problems we have now are often man-made and they could be solved if all humans were able to think and work together with sophisticated systems of motivation and redistribution.

    We’re mostly looking for an easy way out, that does not demand to change our habits a lot. Do you, in general, believe there is an easy way out ?

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  475. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    There are not free meals ( First Principle of Thermodynamics).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  476. Angel Blume

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    I thank you for your response. It makes sense for me and reveals the “-cat” expression. Keep secrecy of catalyst. Good luck.

  477. Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  478. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    I would say that we are working to have also at higher temperatures the same reliability.
    Yes, the production of high temperature and low temperature plants will have separated lines.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  479. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    Have E-Cat systems that could be used in the lower temperature range of 200-400 degrees Celsius more developed and “robust” than Higher Temperature systems to be used in a temperature range of 600-800+ degrees Celsius? By more robust, I mean more reliable, more efficient, having greater operation time before recharging etc. Lower temperature systems would probably be less expensive as well.

    If so, are there any plans on dividing the product line into lower and higher temperature systems? (Not Industrial vs Domestic systems, but Industrial High Temp and Industrial Medium Temp systems.)

    Best regards,

    Joseph Fine

  480. Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear dr. Rossi,

    The point I try to make is this:

    Because of human influence in present climate change, and because of the fact that the present nuclear energy technology is not good enough (safety and environmental issues), and in the case the results of the tests (mentioned below) would be ‘negative’, and imagine (hypothetical) to the level that IH would decide to stop funding your work, it’s my opinion that you or someone else should go on with your work, even if that would mean with public money, and this just for the reason that the world needs your technology (or the further development of it in case of ‘negative’ results). And confronted with the environmental problems of present solutions (fossil fuels and present nuclear technology), and the limitations of others (wind and solar), and the fact that the world population rises quickly (at the moment 7 billion people, and in 2040 or 2050 maybe 10 billion people on this planet, who will ask for the same living standard as we have now), we maybe need a kind of Manhatten Project (for the further development of Cold Fusion, LENR and/or QUAR), and why not, financed by the UN? (The public worldwide interest is or could be bigger than the private interests, working via the free market, but that’s just my opinion ;-)

    Kind Regards,

  481. Carlo Marcena

    Dear Andrea, dear All,

    I want to underline and support Hank Mills last contribution to this blog, and in particular his statement “The simple truth is that the E-Cat works. Regardless as to the upcoming report, there can be no reasonable doubt of this”.
    At this point in time, the only doubts may be about COP value, dependability, availability, etc.: all of them being fundamental issues to be identified, measured, resolved, improved …, still – for sure – in need of important R&D work. But all of them notwithstanding, another quote from Hank last message, “the E-Cat technology has already proven to be real”.
    Warm regards,
    CM

  482. Andrea Rossi

    Carlo Marcena:
    Please read my answer to Daniel De Caluwé one hour ago.
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  483. Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear dr. Rossi,

    As I also know for a very long time that you have something very valuable (based on all previous tests and all information we got so far), I agree completely with the last message of Hank Mills, so, if the results of the Third Party Test (nr. 2) and the results of the 1MW plant (tested at the site of a customer) would turn out to be ‘negative’, we on this forum all know that in that case, it could only be because of commercial reasons, but not because your technology doesn’t work or isn’t valuable for the world. And because of the human influence in the present climate change, and the fact that the present nuclear technology is not good enough (because of safety and environmental issues) the world needs your technology very badly! So, even if the results would be ‘negative’, we on this forum know that this could only be for commercial reasons, and that you already have a product that – in that case- is almost ready for the market, so you and/or other researchers have to go on with your R&D work than!

  484. Andrea Rossi

    Daniel De Caluwé:
    I did not say that. The results could be positive or negative and the implications in both cases will be relevant. In what measure I am not able to say, will depend on the results.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  485. Angel Blume

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    I wonder if you could answer following questions.

    1.-Is the so called Rossi effect explainable through the Standard Model?
    2.-Having Ni60 the maximal binding energy, are you working with any other Ni stable isotope?

  486. Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    1- yes
    2- confidential
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  487. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    I understand that for certain reasons you must appear impartial about the potential results – positive or negative – of the recent testing. However, in my own personal opinion, the E-Cat technology has already proven to be real. Even if the test results turned out to be negative, the E-Cat technology has already been proven to work:

    1 – In dozens of previous tests, many of which were conducted or monitored by third parties.

    2 – In many different form factors ranging from the size if a D Cell battery to a two liter soda bottle.

    3 – Using many different types of caloremetry including tests heating water, heating air, messuring IR radiation being emitted, etc.

    4 – In constant powered mode, intermittent powered mode, and self sustained mode in which the output continued for many hours with no input.

    5 – In tests conducted at different locations.

    The simple truth is that the E-Cat works. Regardless as to the upcoming report, there can be no reasonable doubt of this. There is a tiny chance of course that the reactors you sent for the recent testing may have not produced any excess power due to fuel contamination. But even if they didn’t, the tech as a whole would still work.

    What I want to see happen is the world wake up to the fact that the ideal power source for the next several hundred years has arrived. There is a lot of engineering and R and D that must be done. But when a fraction of the funding that goes into wind or solar power starts going into the E-Cat, all of these issues will be resolved.

  488. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Our funding will come from the Customers, if the plants will operate profitably.
    Thank you for your kind words.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  489. Tom Conover

    Dear Andrea,

    I hear you saying “The data related to the 1 MW plant ” (that is now) ” in the factory of the Customer of Industrial Heat …” to Eernie1 and I just have to smile at the progress you continue to make!!

    Godspeed, my friend.

    Tom Conover

  490. Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  491. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I have another theory for LENR that may make some sense. It has been proposed that, the lowest allowed (by standard QM )electron orbit of Hydrogen, can be forced into a lower orbit by an external negative force(concentrated plasma electron cluster). This allows the new orbit to assume extra energy from the H nucleus because of its closer proximity and subsequently release the energy to provide over unity energy. However, the same effect can be accomplished using the negative fields of a H- ion imposed upon the electron cloud of the Nickel atom trapped in a crystal lattice, forcing the inner electrons closer to the Nickel nucleus and allowing them to assume energy from the interaction with the nuclear forces(strong or weak). When the amount of assumed energy exceeds a critical level, the electron emits the extra energy(returning to its original orbit) into the lattice in the form of photons that interact with the lattice to produce phonons. The nucleus balances this lost energy by rearranging their inner nucleons, producing some type of transmutation and emission of particles(Beta+-).

  492. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    The data related to the 1 MW plant in the factory of the Customer of Industrial Heat will be published in due time. Until then we will be under NDA.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  493. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    one last remark:

    Look the difference between the acceleration and deceleration in the 3 cases:

    1) Free electron being accelerated (or decelerated) in Euclidian space:
    The electron is submtted to an electromagnetic force aplied on the same direction (or in contrary direction) of the motion

    2) Electron in the atom model of Quantum Mechanics:
    The electron is submitted to the electromagnetic force due to the proton in the same direction (or contrary direction) of the motion when the electron moves in the radial direction.

    3) Electron in the atom model of Quantum Ring Theory:
    Moving in circular trajectory in the levels n=1, n=2, n=3, etc., the electron is NOT submitted to any electromagnetic force in the same direction (or contrary direction) of the motion.
    Therefore, when the energy of the photon absorbed (or emitted) by the atom is transferred to the electron, there is NOT any force applied on the electron toward the direction (or contrary the direction) of its motion.
    In the case of emission of photon, it is not the electromagnetic field of the proton which emits the photon when the electron decelerates because of the emission of the photon (unlike, in the case of free electron decelerating in the Euclidian space, the emission of photon is due to the electromagnetic field applied on the electron).

    regards
    wlad

  494. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 17th, 2014 at 2:24 AM

    Wladimir,

    Let me re-phrase my last question:

    In QRT, since either a positive or a negative change in radius R of the helical trajectory of an electron results in energy (in the form of photons) being emitted only, what happens to radius R when energy (from a photon or anything else) is absorbed by the electron?
    ============================================

    COMMENT

    Joe,
    considering an Euclidian space (not into the atom), we have the following for the change in the radius R of the helical trajectory:

    a) When there is shrinkage in the radius R (acceleration of the electron), the electromagnetic field is in front of the motion, applying a force in the direction of the motion. The photons are created by the energy of the electromagnetic field.

    b)In the case of the growth of the radius R (deceleration of the electron) there is an electromagnetic field at the back of the electron’s motion, applying a force against the force. The photons also are created by the energy of the electromagnetic field.

    The energy from which the photons are emitted is not of the electron

    Considering into the atom, we have:

    In the case of a photons emitted or absorbed by an atom, as I said the energy will be extracted or supplied only for electrons moving in a circular orbit about the proton (levels n=1, n=2, n=3, etc.).

    The gradient of aether density exists only in RADIAL direction within the electrosphere.
    Moving in CIRCULAR orbit, there is not gradiente density of the aether. The electron’s motion occurs as if it had been moving in an Euclidian space.

    a) When the electron moving in circular orbit the atom absorbs a photon, the energy of the photon is absorbed by the electron, it has acceleration, and the radius R has a shrinkage

    b) When the electron moving in circular orbit and the atom emits a photon, the electron loses that energy of the photon, it has deceleration, and the radius R has a growth.

    .

    But pay attention that the situation within the atom is different than for a free electron being accelerated by an electromagnetic field, because:

    1) Into the atom the energy of the photon (absorbed or emitted by the atom) changes the kinetic energy of the electron

    2) For a free electron, the change of the kinetic energy of the electron is due to the electromagnetic field applied, which changes the electron velocity and at the same time emits photons.

    .

    Note also that, when the electron moves in RADIAL direction in the electrosphere of an atom, there is not emission of photons.

    Probably the energy of a photon absorbed does not change directly the kinetic energy of motion of the electron. The mechanism can be the following:
    1) The energy of the photon accelerates the velocity of the spin of the electron (increases its kinetic energy of spin).
    2) The kinetic energy of spin is transfered to kinetic energy of motion, and the electron restaures the original speed of its spin

    In the case of a photon emitted by the atom, and the electron moving with speed V, we have:
    1) Firstly there is a decrease in the velocity of the electron’s spin
    2) In sequence the electron absorbs energy from is kinetic energy of motion, decreasing the speed V, and restaures the speed of the spin.

    Joe,
    note the difference between the two models of hydrogen atoms:

    a) In the case of Quantum Mechanics, as the space is Euclidian into the atom, there is the force of the electromagnetic field of the proton actuating on the electron (like happens in the case of a free electron moving along an Euclidian space, and accelerated by an electromagnetic field)..
    That’s why the electron needs to emit energy if it moves between two levels, in radial direction.

    b) In the case of Quantum Ring Theory, as the space is non-Euclidian into the atom, the force of the electromagnetic field of the proton is canceled by the gradient of the aether.
    Therefore, the emission and absorption of the energy of photons by the electrons happens in a different way of that considered in Quantum Mechanics, where the electron is under the influence of the electromagnetic force due to the field of the proton.

    regards
    wlad

  495. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Yes, we have doubtless reached good results in past, but not enough.
    You are right: let’s wait patiently. It will not be for ever…
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  496. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi:

    I discussed this with other people on Facebook, and I conclude you may have meant…. ” it is ‘too’ soon to make claims of results that have not yet been achieved.” Please keep working and achieve these results, preferably positive.

    Why not claim the results that have already been achieved?

    Patient regards,

    Joseph Fine

  497. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Let me re-phrase my last question:

    In QRT, since either a positive or a negative change in radius R of the helical trajectory of an electron results in energy (in the form of photons) being emitted only, what happens to radius R when energy (from a photon or anything else) is absorbed by the electron?

    All the best,
    Joe

  498. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you for your correction.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  499. Joseph Fine

    Andrea,

    In your reply to Hank Mills, you suggest there may soon be “claims of results that have not yet been achieved”. With the greatest respect, I think this means there may soon be “claims of results that have not been achieved before”, rather than claims of results that no one has achieved.

    I apologize for being picky. But this is only a matter of words, not Physics.

    Grammatical regards,

    Joseph

  500. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 16th, 2014 at 4:37 PM

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, since only emission of a photon occurs with either a positive or a negative change in the radius R of the helical trajectory of the electron, what happens to this radius R when a photon is absorbed instead of emitted? Logically, should not R remain unaffected? If so, then what is the mechanism for electrons absorbing photons in QRT?

    All the best,
    Joe
    =========================================

    Joe,
    electrons do not absorb photons.

    Photons are absorbed by atoms.
    It’s a process of resonance, involving the proton (considering hydrogen atom), the aether of the electrosphere, and the helical trajectory of the electron.
    Probably the electromagnetic energy of the photon is captured by the aether, and trasnformed in kinetic energy of the electron.

    The electron does not capture the electromagnetic energy of the photon when the electron is moving in radial direction within the electrosphere. The electron is not able to do it.

    The electron captures the energy of the photons only when the electron is moving about the proton, in the fundamental status n=1, or in circular trajectory at other levels n=2, n=3, etc.

    Any photon absorbed in a level (for instance n=2 ) must have the same wavelength of the photon emitted in that level ( n=2 in our example here).
    Photons of other wavelength are not absorbed in that level n=2. This explain the spectrum of absorption, discovered by William Hyde Wollaston in 1802 and rediscovered by Fraunhofer in 1814:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraunhofer_lines

    regards
    wlad

  501. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    In addition to the E-Cat not requiring sunlight or wind it has another huge benefit: compactness and/or power denisity. A significant portion of the cost of a solar installation is the mounting. Solar and wind generators need large areas of space. Proponents of solar power forget that there is no way for a car (even with every inch covered with hypothetical, 100% efficency solar panels) to run continuously using solar. A Tesla Roadster, for example, would have to tow a trailer with hundreds of panels to continually drive a normal speeds.

    The E-Cat, however, can produce huge amounts of power from a compact space. An E-Cat generator could fit under the hood of a car, in a closet, or in a shed. Producing 10kw, or more, from something the size of a two liter soda bottle is amazing. Even adding volume for a generator to convert heat to electricity, the power density is still large.

    So in addition to 24/7 operation, the compactness is also a benefit.

  502. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Please remind that the report of the Third Independent Party is still under discussion as well as the analysis of the data; also the industrial plant needs a long period of validation; as a consequence of these considerations, we must be well aware of the fact that the results could be positive or negative. Substantial R&D is also on course. We are working at the maximum level allowed by our force, but it is soon to make claims of results that have not yet been achieved.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  503. Joe

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, since only emission of a photon occurs with either a positive or a negative change in the radius R of the helical trajectory of the electron, what happens to this radius R when a photon is absorbed instead of emitted? Logically, should not R remain unaffected? If so, then what is the mechanism for electrons absorbing photons in QRT?

    All the best,
    Joe

  504. BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    With the advent of new Wind Farms like that pointed out by Robert Curto and Solar Farms built in the West could you and IH provide?:

    1. An Estimated ‘Levelized’ Cost of Electricity (LCOE) for HT E-CAT plants vs. the “Levelized Cost and Levelized Avoided Cost of New Generation Resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2014″ listed by National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) projections for 2019 (if not exact then a questimate)?
    http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/electricity_generation.cfm

    2. The Pros and Cons, other than cost, the HT E-Cat would have next to other low cost energy sources, specifically the renewable sources with the understanding we need all of them.

    With much respect, BK

  505. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    1- We will be able to give these data when we will produce electric energy.
    2- If the renewable energy sources you are referring to are the ones without emissions like windmills or solar, the competition will be exclusively based upon economic considerations, taking in account the independence of the E-Cat from metheorological conditions ( wind force, “sunnity” , etc.). We will be able to make a comparative analysis when we will have an actual plant making electric energy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  506. Bob

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    Have you ever made videorecordings inside an e-cat chamber while the e-cat is in operation?

    If yes, can a video clearly show the so-called Rossi effect as it occurs.

    Thanks

    Bob

  507. Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    Impossible to videotape.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  508. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 15th, 2014 at 10:02 PM

    Wladimir,

    On August 15th, 2014 at 3:45 PM, you ask the following:

    “Why the spin of the secondary fields Sn(p) of proton and Sn(e) of electron do not induce magnetic moments?”

    Since the electron and the proton do exhibit magnetic dipole moments, what is their cause then – the primary fields Sp(e) and Sp(p)?

    All the best,
    Joe
    ===========================================================

    COMMNENT

    Joe
    the radius of the fields Sn(e) and Sn(p) have the magnitude of the Bohr radius, R=10^-11 m.

    It’s a very large radius.

    If the spin of Sn(e) had magnetic moment, it would be in the order of magnitude several times larger than the electron’s magnetic moment measured in the experiments.

    The neutron is formed by proton+electron

    But the magnetic moment of the electron is 1000 times stronger than that of the neutron, and one could expect that the magnetic moment of the neutron would have to be 1000tims stronger that that measered in the experiments, by considering a model n=p+3.

    However, when the electron is captured by the proton, and they form the neutron, the electron loses its helical trajectory, and it loses its spin 1/2 (that’s why the neutron has spin 1/2)>
    So, we conclude that the electron’s magnetic moment is due to its helical trajectory.

    The hypothesis that electron’s magnetic moment and its spin is consequence of its helical trajectory was origanlly supposed by Schroedinger:

    ==============================================
    1. INTRODUCTION
    The idea that the electron spin and magnetic moment are generated by a localized circulatory motion of the electron has been proposed independently by many physicists.
    Schroedinger’s zitterbewegung (zbw) model for such motion is especially noteworthy, because it is grounded in an analysis of solutions to the Dirac equation.

    The Zitterbewegung Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
    http://geocalc.clas.asu.edu/pdf-preAdobe8/ZBW_I_QM.pdf

    ===============================================

    regards
    wlad

  509. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 15th, 2014 at 7:34 PM

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, why is there only EMISSION of energy when an electron undergoes either acceleration or deceleration in a vacuum? Should not one of these two conditions necessitate an ABSORPTION of energy instead? The following is your quote from August 14th, 2014 at 7:16 PM:

    “In the instant when occurs the reduction ∆R in the radius of the helical trajectory, there is emission of energy, according to Maxwell’s law.

    “The same happens when the electron is decelerated, but energy is emitted with the radius of the helical trajectory grows.”

    All the best,
    Joe
    ======================================================

    Why/how does an electron emit a photon when decelerating?
    http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/29877/why-how-does-an-electron-emit-a-photon-when-decelerating

  510. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    because I was unable to formulate a question, I try with a more direct question:
    what the heck do you mean by “quantum reactions”?
    Quantum Rergards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  511. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    Changements in quantic status of elementary particles. Quanta are discrete and undivisible quantities of energy: you cannot divide energy infinitely, because at a certain point you arrive to an amount of energy that cannot be further divided: this is a “quantum” ( discovered by Planck) and gives name to the “Quantum Mechanics” as well as to the “Quantum Field Theory”. Imagine to see a car going away from you in the night: you will see the red lights get dimmer while it goes away and away…should you have an unlimited view, at a certain point you could see that arrived at a certain amount of light you could have no more the possibility to see it get dimmer, because all at a time you could see no light at all; it should be possible to see the same amount of light just making the car get closer a distance as small as you want: like when you use a switch to turn on a lamp, you have that amount of light, or you have no light, there are no possibilities to get a fraction of it: that’s a quantum ( a photon). Changements in quantic status determine energy transmission.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    p.s. “Quantum Regards” you granted me is a very small amount of regard, I would say: it’s is the mimimum possible regard you can reserve! ( he,he,he…)

  512. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, they plan to build a 3,000 MW Wind Farm for 6 billion
    dollars.
    Plus they have to build a 725 mile power line, for 3 billion dollars, to get the power to where it is needed.
    You can Google:
    LARGEST WIND FARM APPROVED IN WYOMING
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  513. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Thanks for the info,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  514. Joe

    Wladimir,

    On August 15th, 2014 at 3:45 PM, you ask the following:

    “Why the spin of the secondary fields Sn(p) of proton and Sn(e) of electron do not induce magnetic moments?”

    Since the electron and the proton do exhibit magnetic dipole moments, what is their cause then – the primary fields Sp(e) and Sp(p)?

    All the best,
    Joe

  515. Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear Readers,

    Although dr. Rossi can explain the Rossi Effect with present quantum fields theory, and although he doesn’t need a revolution in science, on this forum and with the E-cat of dr. Rossi, we’re not only witnessing a big revolution in energy technology, but with the messages of dr. Guglinsky also a revolution in science, and I would suggest: mark these pages in your favourites: ;-)

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=9#comment-987216

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=9#comment-987498

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=9#comment-987537

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=9#comment-987815

    So, thank you very much to both!

  516. Joe

    Wladimir,

    In QRT, why is there only EMISSION of energy when an electron undergoes either acceleration or deceleration in a vacuum? Should not one of these two conditions necessitate an ABSORPTION of energy instead? The following is your quote from August 14th, 2014 at 7:16 PM:

    “In the instant when occurs the reduction ∆R in the radius of the helical trajectory, there is emission of energy, according to Maxwell’s law.

    “The same happens when the electron is decelerated, but energy is emitted with the radius of the helical trajectory grows.”

    All the best,
    Joe

  517. Wladimir Guglinski

    Causality violated by the atom model of Quantum Mechanics

    Dear Joe

    In my book “Os Dados que Deus Escondeu” (The Dice God Hid) published in 2003 in Brazil, in the Introduction it is explained why the atom model of Quantum Mechanics violates the causality.
    Os Dados que Deus Escondeu
    http://bodigaya.com.br/index.php/os-dados-que-deus-escondeu.html

    Let me give a little idea why there is violation of the causality.

    According to QM the atom emits photons when the electron changes its position from a level to another. The electron can, for instance, to go from n=1 to n=2, or from n=2 to n=4, or from n=1 to n=3, or from n=4 to n=1, etc.

    But there is not, in QM, any cause responsible for some specific sequence. For instance, why sometimes does the electron go from n=1 to n=2, and sometimes it goes from n=1 to n=4? From the theory there is no way to find the physical cause for the reason why, from a starting point at the same initial level n=1, sometimes the electron goes to n=2, sometimes it goes to n=3, and sometimes it goes to n=4.

    Bohr proposed the selection rules so that to describe that “statistical” behavior of the electron. However it is only a mathematical description. The cause of the sequence of the jumpings is not pointed out.

    Suppose some atom A has the following sequence of six jumpings:
    1) From n=1 to n=3
    2) From n=3 to n=2
    3) From n=2 to n=4
    4) From n=4 to n=2
    5) From n=2 to n=3
    6) From n=3 to n=1
    7) … and the sequence is ended, and it starts again, and it is repeated again, and again, and again…

    What the cause of such a sequence is?
    As Quantum Mechanics works via statistical laws, we dont have to expect any specific sequence when the electron moves from a level to another. According to the model of Quantum Mechanics, the sequence would have to be chaotic, and never repeated again. However, we know from experiments that, for the atom A considered above, the sequence is repeated indefinitely forever.

    Suppose we take a die, and in the first of its side we write 1, in the second side we write 2, and so one, til to write 6 in the sixth side.
    If we start to throw the die, it will give a chaotic sequence of extractions, for instance as follows: 5-3-5-2-1-4-3-6-6-4-2-1-5-4-3-6-2-6-4-5-…

    There is not any repetition in the sequence. This is just the sequence which the model of the atom A, according to Quantum Mechanics, had to have.

    Suppose that we want to build a die able to give the following sequence:
    1) first extraction = 1
    2) second extraction = 3
    3) third extraction = 2
    4) fourth extaction = 4
    5) Fifth extraction = 2
    6) sixth extraction = 3
    7) seventh extraction = 1… , and so we realize that it is the sequence of emission of photons by the atom A.

    Continuing to throw the die, it will repeat again the same sequence, and the sequence is never stopped.

    How can we do it?
    Well, we can to get it, for instance, by installing an apparatus within the die (with springs and an iron sphere moving within channels), so that it will follow the wished sequence.

    QUESTION: What is the difference of such die and the atom model of Quantum Mechanics?

    RESPONSE: The difference is because while the die has a physical device responsible for the extractions always in the same sequence , unlike the atom model of Quantum Mechanics has not any physical device capable to produce always the same sequence of photons emission observed in the experiments.

    So, Quantum Mechanics is phantasmagoric. It works without physical causes.

    .

    Why the spin of the secondary fields Sn(p) of proton and Sn(e) of electron do not induce magnetic moments

    Joe,
    do you remember our discussion about the rotation of the secondary field Sn , here in the JoNP ?
    Along the discussion I had explained that the spin of the field Sn does not induce magnetic moment.

    Ahead is a stretch of the paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism, submitted for publication in JoNP, showing the reason why the spin of the field Sn does not induce magnetic moment:

    Page 8 of he paper ========================================

    We see in the figure 4.2:

    1- The red electriciton e(+) with orbit radius R= n2 has spin-down and is situated in a region of aether density proportinal to n=1.

    2- The red electriciton e(+) with orbit radius R= 1 has spin-up and is situated in a region of aether density proportional to n2.

    So, the magnetic moment due to the rotation of the field Sn(p) is null, because the two red electricitons in the Fig. 4.2 induce magnetic moments with the same value but with contrary signs.

    Figure 4.2:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:STRUCTURE_OF_THE_FIELD_Sn%28p%29_of_the_proton.png
    ==============================================

    .

    The physical cause of the sequence of jumpings in the atom model of Quantum Ring Theory

    As we realize from the Figure 4.2, the spin of the secondary field Sn does not induce magnetic moment because of the symmetry of the field.

    Therefore, when the electron is moving within the electrosphere of a proton in a RADIAL direction (moving far away of the proton or, unlike, going to the proton’s direction), the spin Sn(e) of the electron has no magnetic moment. So, when the electron is going in the RADIAL direction, the only existing force of attraction proton-electron due to their electric charges is the Coulomb attraction.

    But what does happens when the electron is moving in circular trajectory about the proton?
    Well, in this case the symmetry of the field Sn(e) of the electron is broken, and then from the Fig. 4.2 we realize that a BIG MAGNETIC moment is induced by the spin of the field Sn(e).

    With the electron moving in circular trajectory about the proton, the electron is submitted to two forces:
    a) the attraction proton-electron (Coulomb attraction and attraction due to the BIG magnetic moment of the field Sn(e) )
    b) the centripetal force trying to expel the electron

    If the electron had not being attracted by the BIG magnetic moment, quickly the centripetal force would win the dispute, and the electron would not be able to storage a big energy enough to allow the electron to do several sequence of consecutives jumpings about the proton.
    Thanks to the contribution of the BIG magnetic attraction due to the spin of the field Sn(e), the electron stores a big kinetic energy of motion and of kinetic energy of its spin Sn(e). These two energy are liberated when the electron arrives to the many levels n=1, n=2, n=3, n=4, etc.
    By losing energy after a sequence of consecutive jumpings, in the next big jumping the sequence will be different, because the condictions have changed, thanks to the waste of energy. And when the energy is totally wasted in the emission of photons after many big jumpings , the electron goes back to move about the proton again, so that to storage kinetic energy again, in order to do again a new sequence of several consecutive big jumpings.

    The several different sequence of jumpings, as for instance from n=1 to n=4, n=2 to n=3, n=3 to n=1, etc., is consequence the physical mechanism explained here.
    Of course there are many other details. For instance, the emission of photons is consequence (among other reasons) of the resonance between the pitch of the helical trajectory of the electron and the gradient ∆d of the aether density within the electrosphere of the atom (each atom has its specific ∆d ).

    Joe,
    looking at the incoherences of Quantum Mechanics (as for instance the violation of the causality principle), one must be astonished face to the fact that the physicists do not worry about them. In spite of so many incoherences point out that Quantum Mechanics cannot be the definitive description of the Nature, the physicists never show interest to discuss such questions and recognize that Quantum Mechanics is wrong, and why do not have interest to consider new theories with new principles missing in Quantum Mechanics.

    I really don’t understand such a missing of interest in fundamental questions which prove that Quantum Mechanics was developed from wrong foundations.
    Regards
    Wlad

  518. Lata

    Hi Andrea,
    Congratulations on getting the safety certificate. I think a home e-cat convection oven or e-cat powered microwave oven will be even more useful than home heater. In warmer climates, you don’t need a heater. But everybody needs to cook. Can we expect to see?

    1. A home e-cat convection oven within one year.
    2. A home e-cat microwave oven within two years.

    Regards,
    Lata

  519. Andrea Rossi

    Lata:
    We did not get, so far, the safety certification for any domestic application.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  520. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    to “ask a precise question” of what you mean for quantum reactions, QUAR.
    I scratched my head wondering what a question “without asking what happens inside the reactor” can be.
    However on other occasions you wrote:
    “In the quantum field theory, elementary particles are tiny vibrating waves in a particular field and interactions are between elementary particles in fields; forces carried in their interactions by means of bosons can be thought of as resulting from vibrations in fields.”
    And regarding the Rossi effect and excess heat achieved in other systems, you spoke about:
    “vibrations in the QUAR (or, if you prefer, LENR)field”.
    So I would say: for “quantum reaction” you mean specifically
    “reactions involving elementary particles and transmutations of them”?
    Best regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  521. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    The phrase “…vibrations in the QUAR …” was a smile, referred to the fact that we all work in that field…I was just comparing us to elementary particles!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  522. Wladimir Guglinski

    Energy emission by an electric charge accelerated following Maxweel’s law

    Joe,
    along the years I had already imagined several mechanisms, in order to explain why the electron does not emit energy when it travels the space between two levels in the atom.
    Let me explain to you my last conclusion.
    In order to simplify the explanation, we will consider the hydrogen atom.

    1) A free electric charge with acceleration in the vaccuum

    Consider an electron moving with constant speed V in the vacuum, and suppose that its helical trajectory has a radius R.

    Suppose an electromagnetic force apply an acceleration on the electron.
    The electron does not change its speed continously. Instead of, it speed grows by discrete quanta ∆V.

    The elementary particles are constrained to move with helical trajectory subjected to the following law, proposed in Quantum Ring Theory:
    =========================================================================
    It is constant the flux the aether crossing within the helical trajectory
    =========================================================================

    This happens also with the photon, as shown in my book QRT. That’s why the photon reduces its speed from c in the vaccum to V in the translucent substances as water and glass.

    Then let us analyse the acceleration of the electron in the vaccum.
    The electromagnetic force applies an increase ∆V in the velocity V. In order to keep constant the flux of aether crossing its helical trajectory, its radius R has a reduction ∆R.

    In the instant when occurs the reduction ∆R in the radius of the helical trajectory, there is emission of energy, according to Maxweel’s law.

    The same happens when the electron is decelerated, but energy is emitted with the radius of the helical trajectory grows.

    2) Electron moving between levels in the atom according to Quantum Mechanics
    The space of the electrosphere of atoms according to QM is Euclidian, and therefore under the force of attraction with the proton, the electron is accelerated, and emit energy, as happens with the electron moving in the vacuum, as already explained.

    3) Electron moving between levels in the electrosphere with aether
    The gradient of growth in the density of the aether is not continous. Actually it grows with discrete quanta ∆d.
    Each atom has its particular quantum ∆d. The hydrogen has its quantum ∆d, the helium has its quantum ∆d, etc.

    Now consider the aether involving the proton, but suppose that the proton is removed from there, in order that it remains only its electrosphere with that aether.

    And consider that an electron with speed V, comming from the vacuum, enters within that electrosphere of the hydrogen atom (without the proton, since it was removed).

    Well, when the electron enters in that electrosphere, it starts to face an aether with gradient ∆d.
    When the electron touches the first ∆d, in order to keep constant the flux of aether within its helical trajectory, the speed of the electron has a decrease ∆V.

    So, it happens as if the electron was submitted to a force Fa due to the aether applying a deceleration on the electron.
    And pay attention that, in spite of the electron is decelerated, there is no emission of energy, because the electron keeps the radius R of its helical trajectory.

    Therefore the electron continues moving with decelerated motion toward the direction where the proton was before removed.

    Now let us put the proton again in his place into the electrosphere where the electron is moving with decelerated motion.
    As the proton applies a force Fp on the electron, in this new situation the electron is submitted to two forces:
    1- Fa due to the aether trying to decelerate it
    2- The attraction force Fp of the proton trying to accelerate it

    The force Fa of the aether on the electron depends on the gradient ∆d of the proton, and therefore Fa is equal to Fp, and as they are applied on contrary direction, then the electron is actually submitted to a null force, and the atom does not emit energy when the electron moves between to levels.

    In the regions of the electrosphere far away of the proton, the density of the aether has a gradient ∆d very low, and therefore the electron is accelerated toward the proton emitting energy. But when the electron enters in the region where the gradient ∆d is high, the acceleration ceases, and the electron starts to move with constant speed.

    Moving about the proton in the level n=1, the atom captures energy from the enviroment and the electron starts to gyrate faster about the proton, and it jumps when the centripetal force wins the dispute against the force of attraction trying to keep the electron in the level n=1.

    regards
    wlad

  523. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in August 14th, 2014 at 12:27 AM

    Wladimir,

    For an object to go from a state of zero velocity to nonzero velocity means that there is a change in velocity with time. This is the definition of acceleration. And acceleration is due to a nonzero resultant force acting on that object. Therefore, an electron going from one energy level (zero radial velocity) to another energy level (zero radial velocity) requires a positive and negative acceleration respectively. This requires a nonzero positive and negative resultant force acting on the electron respectively. In QRT, since a smooth gradient of aether is responsible for nullifying the smooth field of the electrostatic force of the nucleus (allowing only constant velocity between energy levels in the electrosphere), how is this smoothness destroyed at the various energy levels in order to allow nonzero resultant forces to occur there?

    All the best,
    Joe
    ================================================

    Joe,
    the description made by me in the post entitled Definitive breakdown of the Quantum Mechanics is actually a simplified explanation, because the mechaninisms within the electrosphere are actually more complex. For instance, there is the participation of the helical tajectory.

    When the electron moves between two levels with constant speed, the resultant of forces on it is zero, and the electron moves thanks to its inertia (before to jump from n=1 to n=2, for instance, the electron stays in the orbit n=2 increasing its velocity, thanks to the absoprtion of photons by the atom).
    The electron moving about the proton in circular motion would have to emit energy, from the classical physics. However, as shown in my book Quantum Ring Theory, because of the helical trajectory the electron does not emit energy, also bececause of the gradient of the aether.

    When is moving far away of the proton, the pitch of the helix increases, because the density of the aether decreases.
    With the electon coming from n=1, the photon is emitted in n=2 thanks to a resonance between the pitch of the helix and the distance proton-electron and also the velocity of the electron, and it occurs in the points with radius R= 2², R= 3² , 4² , etc. (the size of the pitch depends on the velocity).

    When the velocity is slow, the resonance does no occur, and the electron passes by the level n=2 without emitting photon, and it emits the photon in the level n=3 or n=4.

    Moving in circular orbit in the level n=1, there is a Coulomb attraction proton-electron, and there are two sort of energy to be accumulated: the kinetic energy due to its velocity, and the kinetic energy thanks to its spin (the spin is also quantized, and it produces a magnetic field increasing the force of attraction proton-electron).

    When the electron is coming back after the first big jumping, for instance jumping between n=4 to n=2, the kinetic energy of its spin is changed to the form of kinetic energy of motion 0,5m.V² when it passes by the level n=2. As the spin lost a portion of its energy, the rotation of the spin decreases, and so decreases the additional magnetic moment due to the spin, in order that now the electron will do a second big jumping, however with a lower level of energy than it did in the first jumping.
    As the magnetic attraction proton-electron decreased, the centripetal force wins the dispute, and the electron makes its second jump from n=2 to n=3.

    The additional magnetic field due to the spin changes drastically the state of the aether in the electrosphere, in order that each big jumping occurs in a particular condiction of the aether.

    When moving in circular orbit about the proton in n=1, the electron accumulates energy for many consecutive jumps. When the capacity of the electron to acummulate energy is satured, the centripetal force wins the dispute, and the electron jumps, doing several consecutive jumpings (emitting photons in going and coming.

    There are many other details, as for instance concerning the forces on the electron, because as the Sn(e)-spin of an electron into the atom produces an additional magnetic field, when the field Sn((e) suffers variation in its angular speed, the variation of magnetic intensity has influence on the frequency of photon emission.

    regards
    wlad

  524. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Congratulations on the safety certification of the hot cat reactors. That is an important accomplishment. Of course from everything we know about how they work, there was no doubt as to their safety.

    1 – Regardless as to the actual temperatures hot cats are capable of reaching, what is the temperature range they are certified, safety wise, to function within? This is simply the numbers on the certificate, of course, and has nothing to do with what the upcoming third party report may disclose, positive or negative.

    2 – Are there any other types of certification required or legal hoops to go through before low or high temp E-Cats can be used in an industrial setting?

    3 – When the third independent party report is released, do you plan to present your understanding of the theory of how the E-Cat operates, separately of any theory that may be in the report?

    4 – Have you been communicating with members of the team preparing the report to formulate a joint theory on the E-Cat?

    5 – To me, it is pretty obvious the upcoming report will show massive anomalous heat production (although as you say the report could be negative). In addition to excess heat and high COP, what else are you hoping to see in the report?

    Thank you.

  525. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    1- the data of the safety certification are restricted to the Customers
    2- depends on specific situations
    3- sooner or later we will be able to. Depends on the IP issues and situation
    4- what is discussed in our team, when it becomes an issue to be published, is published, in due time
    5- difficult to say
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  526. Dima Redko

    Dear Andrea!
    You mention that your modules of E-cats and Hot-cats have been certified, that’s great news! Does it mean that Home ECAT-units are certified too, since they are basicaly single E-cats, or Home ECats require different certification? If so, when might we hope to expect this happen?

  527. Andrea Rossi

    Dima Redko:
    The safety certifications we obtained are strictly referred to industrial plants, for the reasons I many times explained. Our plants can work only if operated by professionally prepared employees that have to be certified by us.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  528. Joe

    Wladimir,

    For an object to go from a state of zero velocity to nonzero velocity means that there is a change in velocity with time. This is the definition of acceleration. And acceleration is due to a nonzero resultant force acting on that object. Therefore, an electron going from one energy level (zero radial velocity) to another energy level (zero radial velocity) requires a positive and negative acceleration respectively. This requires a nonzero positive and negative resultant force acting on the electron respectively. In QRT, since a smooth gradient of aether is responsible for nullifying the smooth field of the electrostatic force of the nucleus (allowing only constant velocity between energy levels in the electrosphere), how is this smoothness destroyed at the various energy levels in order to allow nonzero resultant forces to occur there?

    All the best,
    Joe

  529. Wladimir Guglinski

    How God wrote eCat in a mysterious way

    Ahead is a discussion between Andrea Rossi, Wlad, Mr. Joe, Mr. JR, and Mr. Curiosone, in the Rossi’s blog Journal of Nuclear Physics.

    http://zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3566&mode=&order=0&thold=0

    .

  530. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Have you considered using nickel-plated carbon nanotubes. They are commercially available at about $1,600 per 100 grams. Specs follow:
    60% Ni/38% MWNT (95+%, OD 8-15 nm)
    $180/5g
    $630/25g
    $1,575/100g

    Nickel-coated multi-walled carbon nanotubes
    Nickel content: ~ 60 wt%
    Carbon nanotube content: ~ 38 wt%

    Specification of carbon nanotubes:
    Outside diameter: 8-15 nm
    Inside diameter: 3-5 nm
    Length: 10-50 um
    SSA: ~ 230 m2/g

    My thoughts are that hydrogen molecules might more easily disassociate to form atomic hydrogen within the nanotubes and be directly exposed to the nickel with application of heat.

  531. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I cannot give this kind of information, either in positive or in negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  532. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    It would seem that to have both E-Cats and Hot Cats certified is significant news.

    From Industrial Heat’s perspective, what does this certification now make possible for you?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  533. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    We obtained a Safety certification. Is necessary for the development of industrial plants made by Hot Cats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  534. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    The most important item that can come from your work is not the new devices you produce. Although they are important, humanity can survive without them since it is obvious now that there is enough available energy sources on earth from various sources to sustain our needs for as long as the sun shines.
    What is more important is the knowledge that stems from your work. This can open the door to a large number of new devices that can benefit man in the future. As the saying goes “You can give a man a fish and he will not be hungry for a day. But show a man how to fish and he will never be hungry”.
    I think that if your device is shown to work, you will be better known for discovering the Rossi effect than for developing the E-cat.

  535. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Thank you.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  536. Wladimir Guglinski

    DEFINITIVE BREAKDOWN OF THE QUANTUM MECHANICS

    The new experiment published by the journal Nature in the end of 2014 represents the definitive breakdown of Quantum Mechanics, as explained ahead.

    1) How photons are emitted by atoms according to Quantum Mechanics

    According to the Quantum Mechanics, into the electrosphere of the atoms the electrons do not travel the space between two levels n and n+1. According to the theory, the electron disappears in the level n, and it appears instantaneously in the level n+1, without traveling along the space which separate the two levels.

    The reason why the electron does not travel the space between the two levels in the atom is easy to be understood, and it is consequence of the assumptions adopted in the development of the Quantum Mechanics, as seeing ahead :

    a) The space within the electrosphere of atoms is considered Euclidian
    b) There is Coulomb attraction between the proton and the electron
    c) Therefore, if the space between two levels had been travelled by the electron, it would have to be accelerated, because it is submitted to the force of attraction
    d) By having acceleration, the electron would have to emit energy when moving in that space between the levels, according to the Maxwell’s law (continuous emission).
    e) However, the experiments show that the atom does not emit energy continuously, but actually it emits discrete packages of energy (photons) only when the electron arrives to the points of emission in the levels n=1, 2, 3.. , etc.
    f) Therefore, according to Quantum Mechanics, the electron cannot travel along the space between the levels, and that’s why according to the theory the electron disappears in one level, and it appears instantaneously in another level.

    .

    2) How photons are emitted by atoms according to Quantum Ring Theory

    Unlike happens in Quantum Mechanics, according to the model of atom proposed in Quantum Ring Theory the electron travels the space between the levels within the electrosphere. In order to simplify the explanation, we will explain what happens in the hydrogen atom. The mechanism of the phenomenon according to QRT is the following:

    a) The space within the electrosphere of atoms is non-Euclidian (there is a gradient of density which grows toward the direction of the proton).
    b) The electron moves with helical trajectory in the electrosphere of the atom
    c) The electron moves with CONSTANT speed between two energy levels, and this is the reason why it does not irradiate energy when it moves along the space between two levels
    d) Because the space is non-Euclidian, when the electron is moving toward the direction of the proton, there is a growth in the inertia of the electron (it is a growth in the resistance of the electron against its acceleration toward the proton, because while the force of attraction grows inversely proportional to the decrease of the distance proton-electron, at the same time grows its resistance opposing the growth of the attraction force). The same happens when the electron is moving leaving away the proton.
    e) Such constant speed of the electron in the electrosphere of the atoms can occur only in the atom model of Quantum Ring Theory, because the electrosphere is filled with aether (the reason why the space is non-Euclidian).

    .

    3) The Hans Dehmelt experiment

    In 1989 Hans Dehmelt published a paper describing a new technology, which detected the trajectory of the electrons within the electrosphere of the atoms. His experiment proved to be wrong the assumption adopted in Quantum Mechanics, because he detected that the electron travels the space between two levels of energy in the atom.

    Obviously that discovery had represented in 1989 the definitive breakdown of the Quantum Mechanics, because as the electrons travel the space between levels in the atom (as detected in the Dehmelt experiments), then according to Quantum Mechanics the atoms have be emitting energy continuously, and therefore the theory is denied by the experiments made concerning the atom emission.

    In order to save Quantum Mechanics face to the definitive breakdown, the community of physicists adopted the strategy of claiming that in the Dehmelt experiment the atom is “dressed”. So, according that new ad hoc hypothesis, the electron actually does not travel the space between levels, however due to the new technology used by Dehmelt the measurements show an “apparent” trajectory of the electron, because thanks to that new technology the atom becomes “dressed”.

    So, by this way the community of physicist succeeded to avoid the definitive collapse of the Quantum Mechanics along 25 years.

    .

    4) The experiment published by Nature in 2014

    But finally now, in the end of July 2014, the journal Nature published a paper proving that Quantum Mechanics is indeed wrong, because the hypothesis of “dressed atom” is actually a bunch of baloney.

    The experiment published by the journal Nature detected trajectories in a way different of that predicted in Quantum Mechanics:
    Mapping the optimal route between two quantum states
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.4992

    The experiment shows that the Interpretation of Copenhagen was wrong, as predicted in the book Quantum Ring Theory.

    Irfan Siddiqi, UC Berkeley associate professor of physics, says about the wrong entanglement of states considered in Quantum Mechanics:

    To Bohr and others, the process was instantaneous – when you opened the box, the entangled system collapsed into a definite, classical state. This postulate stirred debate in quantum mechanics, But real-time tracking of a quantum system shows that it’s a continuous process, and that we can constantly extract information from the system as it goes from quantum to classical. This level of detail was never considered accessible by the original founders of quantum theory.
    http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2014/07/30/watching-schrodingers-cat-die/

    .

    5) The experiment made by Aephraim Steinberg

    The experiment published now in 2014 by Nature was performed thanks to a new technology, already used by Aephraim Steinberg, who published in 2012 a paper proving that Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity is also a bunch of baloney.
    The meaning of Steinberg experiment is explained in the ZPEnergy:
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3295&mode=&order=0&thold=0

    Steinberg, from the Toronto University-Canada, made the double-slit experiment with photons, and the results show that Quantum Mechanics is wrong, while Quantum Ring Theory is correct, because:

    1- According to Quantum Mechanics, a quantum particle can behave either as a particle or as a wave, but it cannot behave as wave and as a particle at the same time.

    2- Unlike, as Quantum Ring Theory considers that the wave-particle duality is consequence of the helical trajectory, then the particle can have interference with its own helical trajectory when it crosses a slit.
    So, according to QRT, the quantum particle can behave as a wave and as a particle as the same time.

    In the Steinberg experiment, a photon crossed a unique slit, and it had inferference with itself (a wave feature), while from Quantum Mechanics we would have to expect a particle feature only, since the photon crossed only one slit.

    .

    CONCLUSIONS

    1- This new technology is proving definitively that Quantum Mechanics was developed from wrong foundations, and it must be replaced by a new theory with new fundamental principles missing in Quantum Mechanics.

    2- A new model of atom capable to explain how the electron can travel the space between levels in the atom must be developed from the new principles considered in the atom model proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.

  537. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Thank you for addressing some of the previous questions. Is there a technical reason to stay at the 1 MW thermal output for your delivered units? Can a 10 MW or 100MW or 1000MW single unit be scaled up using 1 – 10kW units? Or would you prefer to stay at a 1MW package and scale up by paralleling 10, 100 or 1000 1MW units for the combined thermal output? I would assume maintenance access at some point becomes an issue?

  538. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    For power demand above 1 MW so far we think to combine 1 MW plants.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  539. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You previously posted thoughts of a mini-reactor (around 1 kW thermal output) and a larger reactor (around 25 kW thermal output) and a much larger reactor (around 100 kW thermal output).

    a. Can you discuss the practical or theoretical limitations of the reactor sizing? Control, heat dissipation?
    b. Given your current research activities, what do you see as the smallest and largest eCat reactor sizings?
    c. Taking all this into account, what is the largest size of a number of combined reactors into a single unit in terms of thermal output?
    d. And what drives this limit?

    Please answer what you can, consistent with your needs for protecting intellectual property.

  540. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    The size issue so far has been resolved choosing the solution of adopting the modular assembling of 1- 10 kW units.
    The reason of this choice is that we have consolidated experience on small modules and that if one or several modules break up we can preserve most of the power in operation.
    Besides, to menage many cats is easier then to menage several tigers.
    Last, but not least: our modules of E-cats and Hot-cats have been certified.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  541. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    thanks, it seems to me that, in your answer, you implicitly agree that the “Rossi effect” obeys the rules of Quantum Mechanics, such as all the chemical and/or nuclear reactions do.
    In this sense, the name “quantum reactions” attributed to the Rossi effect does not define anything specific.
    And that’s OK.
    However, I wonder if the Rossi effect has in itself something specific, which differentiates it from all the other possible reactions.
    I try:
    1 is it a nuclear reaction, ie, involves the nucleus?
    2. involves, in particular, in this case, the Nickel nucleus?
    3 during the reaction, isotopes of Nickel are forming?
    4. during the reaction, the above-mentioned isotopes of Nickel are subject to a decay with the emission of soft-Gamma radiations?
    5, is instead a reaction that involves the formation of isotopes of Hydrogen?
    6. during the reaction, the above-mentioned isotopes of hydrogen are subject to a decay with the emission of soft-Gamma radiations?
    7. are, instead, (the Rossi effect reactions) reactions that are affecting the electrons in the interior shells?
    8. in every way, can you confirm that in the reaction the soft-Gamma-radiation (or hard-X) have the order of magnitude of 100 keV?
    9. are these the responsible for the heat produced?
    I would not have been boring, it is only an attempt “to put a precise question.”
    Thanks again,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  542. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    As you know, I do not answer to question regarding what happens inside the reactor, so far, Beyond what I already have written on this subject.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  543. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    I supposed to know something about physics, but apparently I did not know a damn thing!
    All the chemical and/or nuclear phenomena obey quantum mechanics, or something like that (for what I know). So I presume you use the term “quantum reactions” in some specific way, but what’s this specific way?
    Best regards, good work,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  544. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    can you put a precise question? Under a generic point of view you already answered to yourself inside the same question.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  545. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    You said that the sole systems that the scientists funded by Industrial Heat have replicated obtaining interesting results are the publications of Ikegami- Petterson and Ahern, while all the other systems replicated gave zero results.

    Do you think the excess heat achieved in these systems is produced by a different phenomenon than the ‘Rossi Effect’?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  546. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    All these works are “vibrations in the QUAR (or, if you prefer, LENR) field”…
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  547. Wladimir Guglinski

    New experiment published in Nature confirms Helical Trajectory of elementary particles predicted in Quantum Ring Theory

    Look at the shape of the million trajectories measured in the experiments:
    http://www.eurekalert.org/multimedia/pub/77169.php?from=273859

    The release:
    http://phys.org/news/2014-07-optimal-route-quantum-states.html

    And the paper published by Nature:
    Mapping the optimal route between two quantum states
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.4992

    The experiment shows that the Interpretation of Copenhagen was wrong, as predicted in the book Quantum Ring Theory.

    Dr. Irfan Siddiqi, UC Berkeley associate professor of physics, says about the wrong entanglement of states considered in Quantum Mechanics:

    To Bohr and others, the process was instantaneous – when you opened the box, the entangled system collapsed into a definite, classical state. This postulate stirred debate in quantum mechanics, But real-time tracking of a quantum system shows that it’s a continuous process, and that we can constantly extract information from the system as it goes from quantum to classical. This level of detail was never considered accessible by the original founders of quantum theory.
    http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2014/07/30/watching-schrodingers-cat-die/

    So,
    one more experiment is showing that are wrong some fundamental principles of Quantum Mechanics, as predicted in the book Quantum Ring Theory.

    Regards
    Wlad

  548. Mark

    Andrea,

    Taking Dr.Fine’idea in consideration, perhaps QUAR (aka Rossi effect) is a nucleonic interaction and reaction class in general.

  549. Mark

    Hi Andrea,
    Could you correct one of my a,b, c, d by deleting or adding some words to make it more correctly describing the Rossi effect?

  550. Andrea Rossi

    Mark:
    Very difficult question I sympathize with.
    To answer correctly we must first of all make a distinction between the so called Rossi effect and other phenomenons. I am talking exclusively of the Rossi effect.
    None of the definitions you proposed are proper and to rephrase them could be misleading.
    The more I think to it, the more I like QUAR, quantum reactions. There is nothing new, I use what I learnt from the study of books used in the Universities.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  551. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    LENR is a perused acronym that would be anyway considered the old way, but your idea is fine.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  552. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    Mark inspired me to ask/suggest if a new name for LENR might be LENR?!

    :D

    That is, Low Energy Nucleon Reactions (instead of Nuclear Reactions).

    Since a Nucleon is a component of a nucleus (such as the Neutron and Proton) there could be interactions of Nucleons which do not involve the fusion or fission of nuclei.

    The case of Hydrogen would be an exception, since the nucleon of 1H1 is also the nucleus.

  553. Andrea,
    I guess if you own it, you can call it what you want…. :-)

    Political or economic power comes from controlling either energy, food, water, or strategic territories. Your success will change all that, and promise autonomy to individuals throughout the world. Then the fireworks begins.

    Of course, I want you to get on with it. I turn 74 next month, and I want to live long enough to see these changes you will be causing. At 74, I have to remember that life is doing something yourself and not waiting for someone else to do something or just waiting to die, so I have decided to add a Glider Pilot rating to my bucket list….. I just bought a single seat ’73 Schweizer 1-26E and am fixing it up. I am presently flying a two place 2-33. Glider flying is a lot less dangerous than politics as you will soon discover as your project proves itself.

    It’s been a pleasure trying to keep up with your progress. When you finally get this thing really moving, I would appreciate your giving me the opportunity to shake your hand.

    Charlie

  554. Andrea Rossi

    Charlie Sutherland:
    Thank you, but remind that we are still waiting for results that could be positive, but also negative.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  555. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    In my extensive reading of the Physical literature(of which there is not much conclusive about the Graviton) I must conclude that the Graviton is treated like a mysterious particle. Almost no experimental evidence is available and the mathematical treatment of the subject requires a great deal of assumption. Various explanations and scenarios are abundant and vary widely. In other words my guess and yours are as good as presented by anyone else. What I stated as my view of the Graviton is based on my idea that it acts much like the gluon. It holds masses together by attraction as the gluon holds the nucleons together by creating an artificial attraction between the quarks. Since the gluon decays rapidly when detached from the nucleons, my guess is that the Graviton also decays when detached from the masses that created it, possibly into dark energy or matter and that is the reason it has not been physically observed. Its manifestation is in the reported accelerated expansion of the Universe.
    The bottom line of my efforts to explain gravity is the enjoyment and satisfaction I get in exercising my imagination. I hope you also feel this satisfaction in your efforts.

  556. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    I know the feeling.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  557. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 12th, 2014 at 6:40 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    … but I want to confirm that I strongly adhere to the quantum fields theory.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    ======================================

    COMMENT

    Therefore:

    a) As from the principles of Quantum Field Theory the results of the Don Borghi experiment are impossible to occur…

    b) … it implies that you reject the Don Borghi experiment…

    c) … as are doing the most Physicists who betray the Scientific Method, trying to save the Quantum Field Theory

    Curiously,
    the synthesis of neutrons from protons and electrons at low energy (impossible to occur from the principles of Quantum Field Theory) is probably one among the mechanisms involved in cold fusion occurrence.
    And therefore,
    by rejecting the results of Don Borghi experiment is impossible to explain cold fusion.

    And also curiously, the frequency used by Don Borghi in his experiment is in the same order of the frequence used by you in your eCat.

    So,
    I confess that I am no able to understand the mysterious way on how God writes in order to give insight for scientists to advance the Physics.
    The way used by God is more mysterious than the way on how the own cold fusion occurs.

    I suppose one day in the future we will understand how cold fusion occurs.
    And I hope we will also understand how God writes the mysterious way so that to allow the advancement of science.

    regards
    wlad

  558. Wladimir Guglinski

    Curiosone wrote in August 10th, 2014 at 2:35 AM

    Andrea Rossi:
    Thank you for your answers: your “analogies” are big help to understand the worls of elementary particles for us laymen. I also have to thank Wladimir Guglinski, but I am not able to understand what he says, I have not enough education.
    W.G.
    ======================================================================

    Dear Mr. Curiosone

    dont worry about your poor education in Physics.

    Because sometimes learning what is taught in univerisites is harmful to the development of science.

    According to the foundations of Quantum Mechanics (foundations from which Quantum Field Theory was developed), cold fusion is impossible.

    In 1998 during a lecture in Portland State University, the Nobel Laureate Murray Gell Mann said:
    “It’s a bunch of baloney. Cold fusion is theoretically impossible, and there are no experimental findings that indicate it exists.”
    http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/kaplan2.html

    That’s why, along more than 20 years, the academic physicists rejected cold fusion, by using all kind of subterfuges, as pointing out errors in the calorimeters, and by claiming that theoretically cold fusion is impossible to occur.

    The reason for the cold fusion refusal was always the same: if cold fusion exists, then the foundations of Quantum Mechanics are wrong. And physicists like Gell Mann, who received their Nobel Prize thanks to their contribution for the development of Quantum Mechanics, could no admit their theories being threatened by cold fusion.

    So, along more than 20 years, experiments like of the pioneers Fleischmann and Pons (and many others) have been rejected by the academic physicists.

    When Andrea Rossi started his research, he did not have at that time a deep knowledge on the foundations Quantum Field Theory, and so he did not know that cold fusion is theoretically impossible.
    That’s why Andrea Rossi continued firmly believing that he would succeed to get a technology able to extract energy from cold fusion.

    And as happened to other cold fusion researchers, the work of Andrea Rossi also was under the attack of academic snakes, who tried to discredit his research along the years, claiming that his results are a fraud.

    It is interesting to note that, if Andrea Rossi had studied Physics in the universities, he would never discover his eCat, because by getting an academic background he would believe in the untouchable dogma that cold fusion is theoretically impossible, and therefore he would not start a research in cold fusion, since he would be convinced that theoretically cold fusion is impossible.

    But now Andrea Rossi started to study Quantum Field Theory, at least two hours per day. And now finally he fully believes that the QFT is the best available model.
    Happily, Andrea Rossi discovered it now, because if he had discovered it 20 years ago, today we would not have his eCat producing energy from cold fusion.

    And now, as Andrea Rossi knows that Quantum Field Theory is the best available theory, he adopts the same speach of the academic snakes who attacked his work along 20 years, claiming that his research is a pseudoscientific work impossible of being successful, because it is impossible according to the principles of Quantum Field Theory.

    Finally, dear Mr. Curiosone,
    it is curious to see how God writes in mysterious ways.

    regards
    wlad

  559. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    As always, we publish your theory and consequent considerations of yours, as we will continue to do, but I want to confirm that I strongly adhere to the quantum fields theory. It is not true that the snakes came from the academic world, the snakes came from well individuated sources. I owe to the Academic environment all I learnt about Physics and is at the base of my research.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  560. BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    Here QUAR and many other clever interesting scientific acronyms posted in the E-Cat World blog that you may want to review represents well the Rossi Effect; but I was wondering how well the common consumer would relate to scientific expressions? Perhaps a more whimsical the scientific acronym the more memorable it could be as a household name. Having a little fun shuffling the LENR buzz words another energy storing critter in constant motion came to mind:
    Safe QUantum Exothermic Rossi Effect Lattice – Catalytic Assisted Generated Energy or ‘SQUEREL CAGE’. Wish you much fun in your work.

  561. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    Thank you for this suggestion.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  562. Mark

    Hi Andrea,
    Which of these is more correctly describing the Rossi effect

    a, a new form of powerful chemical reaction.

    b, a new form of benign nuclear fusion
    reaction.

    C, a new form of benign nuclear fission reaction.

    D, a new form of benign nuclear annihilation of sub atomic particles reaction.

  563. Andrea Rossi

    Mark:
    None of them.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  564. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Mr. Curisione,

    as Andrea Rossi did not answer my questions, I can suppose that we may complete his sentence which he said to you, as follows:

    About Wladimir Guglinski: take in account that he is bearer of a theory that is not coherent with the Quantum Field Theory, because he thinks that it is wrong. This is not the opinion of most of the Physicists… because they do not follow the Scientific Criterium, since they reject some experiments which prove Quantum Field Theory be wrong. Therefore you find incoherence between what he writes and what you find in what I write, because the most of the Physicists betray the Scientific Method when Quantum Field Theory is disproved by some experiments.

    regards
    wlad

  565. Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I believe a change in the acronym LENR which has the worrisome “N” word is a good thing, but your QUAR is not exactly an acronym in the strict sense. How about just replacing the “N” with “Q” to read, LEQR (Low Energy Quantum Reaction)?…… The term Quantum has only benevolent connotations …. QED.

    Charlie Sutherland

  566. Andrea Rossi

    Charlie Sutherland:
    I prefer QUAR.
    Warm Regasrds,
    A.R.

  567. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    If I can impose upon you during this time of waiting for the TPR2, would you cite a source that defines the Graviton as a stable particle. As I understand, the case has not been made for its stability except as a theoretical outcome of string theory and which is contested by scientists who would like a proof using standard QM. The thought is that unlike the photon(wave packet) which is easily detected and is found abundantly in space when detached from its association with masses(free) because of its stability, the graviton defies all attempts to detect any free particles. If stable there should be huge amounts in space and detectable.

  568. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    The graviton is defined a stable elementary particle in all the Physics books adopted in the Universities. About the indirect evidence of them I already answered as well as about the search of direct evidence.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  569. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi,
    Please Google:
    ALGAE POWERED BUILDING IN GERMANY
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, florida
    USA

  570. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Thank you, interesting
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  571. silvio caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Let’s have an historical parallel:
    American continent was already inhabited by natives and seems that some north european businessmen made business with natives before Columbus’s discovery.
    In 1492 the italian Columbus was able to convince a big partner, Isabel of Hispany, to finance the west way to China Far lands, after some problems with some “portoghesi”…
    But after years columbus was still wrongly convinced to have reached China Far lands.
    Was only Vespucci who understood that it was a New World, so in 1507 the map drawer Martin Waldseemüller used the name of Vespucci to call America.
    :-)
    Moral: the name of this phenomena will be attributed to the first who will *explain* them, not who discovered or sell them.

  572. Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    I do not know if you are right or not and if your parallel makes sense or not. I know that we have a consolidated explication about how the so called “Rossi Effect” works and the physical mechanirms that allow it to work. Otherwise, it could not work reliably in industrial applications.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  573. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    From the outside, with no news forthcoming, things seem very quiet regarding the E-Cat. Obviously things are different from your perspective.

    What can you tell us about the level of activity going on with your team at the moment?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  574. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    This is a period of top level engagement for what concerns the 1 MW plant, we are in the most critic moment; all our team is focused on it. About the Report, the waiting for it is a massive vibration in the field of anxiety.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  575. eernie1

    Dear Andrea, I don’t know if the Graviton can be classified as a stable gauge Boson like the photon. Many gauge bosons are considered virtual particles(see Feynman diagrams). The discovery of a free Graviton particle as of this time is still in question although the speed of the Graviton field effect has been measured as the speed of light.

  576. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Graviton IS classified a stable gauge boson by the Standard Model. It is true that other gauge bosons are virtual particles ( gluons, which mediate the strong forces and W+, W- and Z, which mediate the weak forces), but this fact has nothing to do with the fact that gravitons are stable gauge bosons, as well as photons. The speed of the gravitons is necessarily the speed of light, since gravitons are massless: all massless particles travel at the speed of light, this is a law of Physics!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  577. Andrea Rossi

    Thorbjorn:
    I prefer QUAR, but I respect your choice.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  578. Thorbjörn

    Just to be clear, do you agree with Frank Ackland that it is better to use QR, or do you prefer QUAR?
    I prefer QR.

    Best regards
    Thorbjörn

  579. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 10th, 2014 at 8:50 AM

    Curiosone,
    : I fully believe that the QFT is the best available model, even if we all know that theories are done to be eventually overcome .
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    Curiosone wrote in August 10th, 2014 at 2:35 AM

    Andrea Rossi:
    Thank you for your answers: your “analogies” are big help to understand the worls of elementary particles for us laymen. I also have to thank Wladimir Guglinski, but I am not able to understand what he says, I have not enough education.
    W.G.
    ===========================================================

    COMMENT
    Dears Andrea Rossi and Curisione

    Quantum Field Theory is the best available model, but it works in a certain level.

    In a deep level it does not work, and therefore some principles of the theory must be wrong.

    For instance, according to the fundamental principles of QFT the neutron cannot be formed by proton+electron.
    However, the Conte-Pieralice experiment and the Borghi experiment prove that neutron is formed by proton+electron, and therefore something is wrong with the principles of QFT

    And since those two experiments prove that QFT cannot be the fundamental theory, what we had to expect from the theorists?

    Well, we had to expect that the community of physicists would have to undertake an effort, in order to repeat those two experiments.

    Unfortunatelly, instead of to undertake an effort so that to repeat the two experiments, the community of physicists actually adopts the strategy of running away of the two experiments as the devil runs away of the cross.

    Dr. Ruggero Maria Santilli tried to repeat the Don Borghi experiment in the laboratories of several universities in Europe, between 1993 and 2000. He was banned from all the European niversities.

    In 2002 I had a discussion via email about the Taleyarkhan experiment with the Nobel Laureate Dr. G. t’Hooft.
    During the discussion I told him about the Don Borghi experiment, and he sent me the following reply:

    “There is much more wrong with n=p+e, but most of all the fact that the ‘experimental evidence’ is phony”.

    Well, a scientist cannot claim that any evidence of any experiment is phony, because he has not a laboratory into his brain, in order to repeat the experiment within his head, so that to verify the results of the experiment.

    The Scienfific Community prescribes that any controversy about any experiment must be solved via the repetition of the experiment. And not to claim that the experiment is phony, because its results are disagree to the foundations of the Quantum Field Theory.

    But it is easy to understand why Dr. t’Hooft said that Borghi experiment is phony. It is because Dr. t’Hooft is one among the theorists who developed the Quantum Field Theory, and he awarded the Nobel Prize thanks to his theoretical contributions.
    So, as Borghi experiment proves that something is wrong in the foundations of QFT, it is obvious that Dr. t’Hooft wishes to be the most far away he can from any experiment with the aim to repeat the Borghi experiment.

    In 2008 Santilli repeated the Don Borghi experiment and confirmed its results:
    Confirmation of Don Borghi’s experiment on the synthesis of neutrons from protons and electrons
    http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0608229

    Finally, I would like to ask to Andrea Rossi to answer:

    1- Are you agree with Dr. G. t’Hooft, and you also believe that Don Borghi experiment is phony?

    2- As Dr. t’Hooft, do you think that there is no need to repeat an experiment, in order to eliminate the controversy about its results?

    3- Do you think that the community of physicists is in the correct way, rejecting the Don Borghi experiment without to try to repeat it ? (so that to save QFT)

    4- In the case your opinion is that Don Borghi must be repeated in the laboratories of the universities worldwide, suppose the results be confirmed. Please tell us your opinion:

    As from the foundations of QFT a neutron cannot be formed by proton+electron at low energy , which is a premise denied by Don Borghi experiment, do you continue keeping your opinion that QFT is the best available model ?

    5- Concerning your words: “About Wladimir Guglinski: take in account that he is bearer of a theory that is not coherent with the Quantum Field Theory, because he thinks that it is wrong. This is not the opinion of most of the Physicists“, I would like to know your opinion:

    A) I think that Quantum Field Theory is wrong because, among other experiments, from its foundations the results of the Don Borghi experiment are impossible to occur.

    B) The opinion of the most of the Physicists is based on their rejection of the Don Borghi experiment.

    C) Therefore:
    Who, in your opinion, is following the Scientific Criterium?

    a) Wlad ? (having my opinion supported in the results of the Borghi experiment)

    or

    b) the most of the Physicists? (having their opinion suported by the rejection of the Borghi experiment).

    regards
    wlad

  580. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Interesting discussion about a label for your energy source. I would suggest that just as LENR is an acronym for Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, it would be better to use QR for Quantum Reactions (easier to say, too!)

    Also, I think if you want any label to stick you, and Industrial Heat, would need to make a coordinated effort to use it in official communications. Even then, the media will probably be the ones who will determine the common name for this reaction.

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  581. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    We are talking of QUAR, or LENR in generic sense, not just for the E-Cat, anyway.
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  582. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    1. Will the customer of the first 1 MW plant be involved in the testing of the plant before it is installed to ensure it meets expected performance standards?

    2. Will the plant replace an existing heat source at the customer’s location, or will it be installed on a brand new production line?

    3. Is your work on the 1MW plant currently on schedule?

    Many thanks!

    Frank Acland

  583. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    You are right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  584. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    What do you think about the proposal of Mr Estri to change the definition “LENR” into “QUAR” ( Quantum Reactions)?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  585. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    W+ and W- ( discovered by Carlo Rubbia, who merited a Nobel Prize for this discovery) are the sole GAUGE bosons with an electric charge, but there are other bosons with electric charge: the bosons that belong to the hadrons are mesons, made by a quark and an antiquark, and among the mesons there are kaons ( k+ and k-) and pions ( pi+ and pi-) that have an electric charge. Obviously, we are talking of virtual particles, with a lifespan below 10^-23 s
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  586. KD

    Mr. DTravchenko
    You wrote.
    “What do you think about the proposal of Mr Estri to change the definition “LENR” into “QUAR” ( Quantum Reactions)” ?
    The other proposal might be. QURER (Quantum Rossi Effect Reactions)

  587. Dear Mr. Rossi,

    I don’t think there is anything wrong with LENR. Once you explain to people that this technology is non-radioactive and inherently nontoxic, they won’t care what you call it. The problem now is not that people are afraid of LENR. The problem is they don’t think that it actually work. All we need to do is prove that it works and the name won’t matter. LENR is more honest and understandable than QUAR.

    Sincerely, Christopher Calder

  588. Andrea Rossi

    Christopher Calder:
    I understand your point, but you are making confusion between two issues that have to be distinguished between each other.
    Evidence of the fact that QUAR ( or LENR) work is in course of being collected, due to the TPR2 and the first 1 MW commercial plant : we will see if the results will be positive or negative. A different thing is the negativeness or positiveness of a specific semanthic. If somebody asks you if it is raining you cannot answer ” the real problem is to have a roof upon houses”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  589. eernie1

    Dear Andrea and Wlad,
    Since the idea of virtual particles has been introduced into this discussion, do you think as I do that the graviton is a virtual particle. That is, it does not exist as a particle until there is mass interaction. No mass no graviton. The mass interactions create the graviton force fields which then interact in an attractive manner. The graviton has no mass itself and no spin therefor can be classified as a Boson. The spins of the fermionic particles are coupled to the field and therefore conserve spin parity. The system exhibits 4 dimensional Riemann symmetry with time as the only non-Abelian dimension and has spherical geometry. The fields are weak but interact across vast distances.

  590. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Along the Standard Model, that I respect, Gravitons are stable gauge bosons, therefore they cannot be considered virtual particles. It is true that they have not yet been directly observed, but indirect evidence of them is clear: a consequence of the general relativity is that ripples in the gravitational field describe waves at the speed of light. They have been indirectly detected in 1974 by Russel Hulse and Joseph Taylor, who merited the Nobel Price for this work; they discovered a binary system of neutron stars spinning in a very close orbit. General relativity says that this system should lose energy emitting gravitational waves , causing the orbital period to decrease as the two stars approach closer: Hulse and Taylor measured this change in the period, exactly as Einstein had supposed on the base of his theory.
    Many attempts are now in course to measure directly gravitons: mainly utilizing astrophysical sources, by bouncing lasers off mirrors distant from each other: as a gravitational wave passes through, it stretches spacetime and as a consequence mirrors get closer, eventually getting more distant. This distance variation can be measured by the changement in the lasers’ wavelength. A typical example is the US Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory, that consists of two separate facilities, one in Washington State and one in Louisiana.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  591. Curiosone

    Andrea Rossi:
    Thank you for your answers: your “analogies” are big help to understand the worls of elementary particles for us laymen. I also have to thank Wladimir Guglinski, but I am not able to understand what he says, I have not enough education.
    W.G.

  592. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Conservation has nothing to do with Stability: all leptons respect the conservation law, but only electrons and neutrinos are stable. Leptons conservation law implies that the number of leptons has to be conserved after any interaction in which leptons are involved, while stability implies that an elementary particle does not decay, so far we know about it. Muon and Tau are leptons, but they are not stable, they are virtual particles, which means resonances of waves during interactions between particles: virtual particles are bookkeeping devices that indicate how quantum fields are vibrating during interactions between elementary particles.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  593. Curiosone

    Another question, dear Andrea Rossi, when you have time: since Leptons are conserved, does this mean that Leptons are stable?
    W.G.

  594. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone,
    There is not any thing enough difficult not to be possible to explain it in simple words, but also remind that simple explanations are superficial and sometimes the necessity to semplify makes explications misleading. Just be aware of this. About Wladimir Guglinski: take in account that he is bearer of a theory that is not coherent with the Quantum Field Theory, because he thinks that it is wrong. This is not the opinion of most of the Physicists, therefore you find incoherence between what he writes and what you find in what I write: I fully believe that the QFT is the best available model, even if we all know that theories are done to be eventually overcome .
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  595. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Since everybody asks you questions of Physics, allow me to ask you: are W+ and W- the sole bosons with an electric charge?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  596. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Yes, I think is a very good idea, also to take off from LENR the pressure of the “N” letter. Semanthics sometimes count. I will try from now to spell QUAR instead of LENR, and this will be a contribution of the Journal of Nuclear Physics. Therefore: the next Authors are gently invited to use the definition QUAR instead of LENR. Let’s see what happens.
    Thank you for your comment,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  597. Hank Mills

    Orsobubu,

    Here is my response in the form of an essay. I think that the E-Cat will allow an amazing future for the world, if used appropriately.

    http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00MJOFSAW

  598. Lata

    Hi Andrea,
    If you detecting pulsating electrostatic forces, EM waves cannot be far behind. Will it be possible to make e-cat powered microwave oven. That will be amazing.
    Warm Regards,
    Lata

  599. Andrea Rossi

    Lata:
    As I said, this is an issue that has to be put under a long and complex R&D work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  600. Wladimir Guglinski

    orsobubu wrote in August 8th, 2014 at 11:43 AM

    Hank Mills:

    My dream would be that you could design a low temp E-Cat that would produce pulsing magnetic fields outside of the reactor. If this was the case, you could wrap a coil of copper wire around it and convert the magnetism to electricity. I can imagine such a solid state E-Cat being used to power an RF cavity thruster so we could colonize the solar system.
    ====================================

    COMMENT:

    Your dream of colonizing the solar system is already a reality:

    Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum
    http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2014-4029

    regards
    wlad

  601. Wladimir Guglinski

    To the readers of the JoNP

    New experiment (again) proves to be wrong Einstein’s empty space:

    Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum

    http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2014-4029

    According to the current Modern Physics, the experiment (tested in the NASA Johnson Space Center) violates the energy-mass conservation law.

    This new proof that space is not empty reinforces the experiment publshed in 2011 by Nature:
    Observation of the dynamical Casimir effect in a superconducting circuit
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v479/n7373/full/nature10561.html

    Surprisingly, again we dont see any newspaper in the world claiming that Einstein was wrong.

    The scientific community of physicists continues keeping the old desparate attempt so that do not recognize that Einstein was wrong.

    We have only to wait so that see how many years the scientific community will be well succeeded in such attempt.

    regards
    wlad

  602. orsobubu

    Hank Mills:

    My dream would be that you could design a low temp E-Cat that would produce pulsing magnetic fields outside of the reactor. If this was the case, you could wrap a coil of copper wire around it and convert the magnetism to electricity. I can imagine such a solid state E-Cat being used to power an RF cavity thruster so we could colonize the solar system.

    Surely you’ve read Gerard K. O’Neill’s “High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space”; related technology problems could heve been addressed since the ’70s, at least for the beginning phase requirements. But the political will was lacking and, above all, the possibility – for a capitalistic production system – to plan such huge projects requiring massive capital investment without short-term profits. Yes, someone is building spaceplanes for rich tourists, but only because they are already collecting fat advance payments. Think about Ebola outbreak. Animal vaccines are almost ready, they cannot complete the human trials because companies foresee uncertain returns. Capital market is too much plagued by risks and overproduction crisis. I cannot imagine that a “simple” energy plant can extricate these philosophical, objective economic contradictions. It seems more plausible that disruptive technologies could exacerbate the social turmoil and bring to a revolution, like the steam machine marked the end of serfdom economy. This is my bet ;)

    But, Hank, I really wish that an E-Cat would allow your dream to come true; yesterday Rossi wrote: “I am anyway always interested to analyse newfindings in my old love, the Seebeck Effect, to which I dedicated IN THE NINETIES 4 years of my life”

    Imagine if in a distant future he could write: “I am anyway always interested to analyse newfindings in my old love, the LENR-powered EmDrive Thruster, to which I dedicated IN MY NINETIES 4 years of my life”

    hehe

  603. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    forgot the last phrase!
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  604. Andrea Rossi

    Ecco Libération:
    I cannot give information in positive or in negative regarding what happens inside the reactor.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  605. Ecco Liberation

    Dr. Rossi:
    I’m sort of reluctant to ask this since I don’t want to step into confidential information territory, but have you ever observed whether putting a powerful magnet in contact with the internal E-Cat surface or applying a powerful electromagnetic field to the entire reactor (along different directions just to be sure) stops or affects this electrostatic field phenomenon in any detectable way? If it’s related to the motion of particles inside the E-Cat like I previously speculated, then I would expect it does, perhaps together with excess heat production.
    Regards E4L.

  606. Dan C.

    Dear Andrea,

    he he, You knew these questions would be asked.
    1. Does this electrostatic pulse occur
    A. during drive mode
    B. during self sustain mode
    C. during both

    2. Is this detected in
    A. the mouse
    B. the cat
    C. in both

    3. Does this occur
    A. at high temps
    B. low temps
    C. both

    4. Was this detected as some type of feed back to the control box or some evidence discovered when analyzing the reactor after a shut down.

    Thank you in advance for any answers you can give. It helps to occupy our idle minds while awaiting the TIP report.
    I wish you all the best with the 1Mw plant.

    A Rossi kind of analogy:
    We have built a beautiful new car in our factory. It sounds wonderful. It is time to cross fingers and drive it around the block.
    If all goes well, we plan a great road trip. :-)

    Regards,
    Dan C.

  607. Andrea Rossi

    Dan C.:
    Here are the answers, but not for free: you owe me a pizza.
    1. C
    2. B
    3. A
    4. No: the effect ( if real) is totally independent and insulated from the control box, which is external. The E-Cats’ external surface doesn’t carry any kind of current, being electrically insulated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  608. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi.

    This was just a conceptual question. Perhaps the thermoelectric conversion would be more reliable (no moving parts) than a conventional Carnot cycle electricity generation. In an ideal world, the excess heat would be made available to thermo-to-electric converters (through batteries) that would control the eCat operation. But I agree — probably a not useful combination for further consideration. Thank you for your response and consideration.

  609. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Thank you for your insights.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    p.s. I am anyway always interested to analyse newfindings in my old love, the Seebeck Effect, to which I dedicated in the nineties 4 years of my life. So far they are not efficient, but I am curious to understand what is going on with the new rare earth based semiconductors.

  610. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I was suggesting that a possible configuration for an eCat system might be one where the eCat produces heat which drives a refrigeration unit from the heat. The cold from the refrigeration unit and the excess heat from the eCat drive a device that produces some electricity which is used to control the eCat. It probably will not work as the thermal-to-electric conversion efficiency is very low. If I knew a typical eCat effective COP, an analysis could be attempted.

  611. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Why have we do adopt a system that has a lower efficiency if we can have a system that yields a higher efficiency?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  612. Alessandro Coppi

    Hi Andrea, I read that reactors are insulated for safety reasons by means of particular ceramic material, this reduce the heat transmission, would not be better to use an insulating transformer that will grant the same safety grade without affect the heat excange?

    Best regards

  613. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    The configuration of the Hot Cat and the E-Cat is such that all the heat produced goes out to the heat exchanger, once the operation is stabilized, for the 1st and 2nd thermodynamic principle. On the contrary, a transfoemer would reduce the efficiency.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  614. Steven N. Karels

    Tread A drew Rossi,

    Interesting comment on cooling. I know some devices can produce electricity. Depending on you effective COP, you might be able to make sufficient electrical power from the thermal heat difference, provide cooling and maybe use the excess heat for another application?

  615. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Sorry, I do not understand what you mean: can you kindly rephrase?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  616. Wladimir Guglinski

    Curiosone wrote in August 5th, 2014 at 10:59 AM

    Andrea Rossi,
    When you have time: a neutron out of an atom decays into proton and an electron; this means that it contains them someway?
    Thank you for your patience
    W.G.
    ============================================

    COMMENT

    Dear Curisione,
    along decades the theorists used to suppose that it is impossible the neutron to be formed by proton+electron, because of several theoretical restrictions against the model n=p+e.
    For instance, the proton has spin 1/2, the electron has spin 1/2, and so the neutron formed by p+e would have to have spin 0 or 1.
    But experiments show that neutron has spin 1/2.
    There are many other theoretical restrictions agsinst the model n=p+e.

    Therefore the nuclear theorists believe that the proton and the electron do not exist into the neutron.
    And from the principles of Quantum Mechanics, it is impossible a neutron be formed by the fusion proton+electron at low energy.

    However two experiments, one made by Elio Conte and Maria Piealice, and the other made by Don Borghi, have demonstrated that a neutron can be formed by proton+electron at low energy (this is IMPOSSIBLE according to the current Nuclear Physics).

    So, the two experiments show that something very serious is wrong in the principles of the current Nuclear Physics).

    And, as Nuclear Physics is wrong, then the structure of neutron formed by proton+electron is possible, as the two experiments have proven.

    According to the Scientific Method, any controversy about a question must be solved via the performance of experiments.
    However, sometimes the scientific comunity does not apply the Scientific Method so that to solve scientific controversy. Instead of, they betray the Scientific Method, so that to save the theories in which they believe.

    That’s why the physicits reject the experiments made by Conte-Pieralice and Don Borghi, because if the two experiments be accepted by the Scientific Community there is need to reject as wrong even some principles of the most reputable theory of the present days, the Quantum Electrodynamics.

    The Conte-Pieralice experiment was published in 1999 by the Infinite Energy Magazine.

    The Don Borghi experment was in a paper titled Experimental Evidence of Emission of Neutrons from Cold Hydrogen Plasma, in the American Institute of Physics (Phys. At. Nucl.), vol 56, no 7, 1993.

    regards
    wlad

  617. Ecco Liberation

    Dr. Rossi:
    I figured that since a Hot Cat already is a thermal hazard under working conditions (as its surface temperature peaks at several hundreds °C), having electrical insulation for the static electricity it apparently generates would have been kind of redundant as one would get a bad burn before possibly getting electrocuted. I meant that hypothetically speaking – where safety is not #1 priority – referring to an exposed, uninsulated inner core. I do get your point, though.
    Thanks, E.L.

  618. Andrea Rossi

    Ecco Liberation:
    The external surface must be electrically insulated for safety reasons because even if you don’t touch it with the finger, you could enter in contact by means of any accidental conductor.
    The E-Cats and the Hot Cats all have the external body surface electrically insulated by means of a ceramic that is thermally conductive and electrically insulating

  619. Ecco Liberation

    Dr. Rossi:
    In practice, does this electrostatic field phenomenon imply that if a person were to touch an E-Cat he would get a zap (-> electrostatic discharge / ESD)? Or perhaps would he get zapped continuously? I wonder if more than pulsating electrostatic field, ‘randomly intermittent’ wouldn’t be a more appropriate definition for this effect. I speculate that this is caused by nickel dust clouds forming inside your Hot Cats under operating conditions.
    Regards E.L.

  620. Andrea Rossi

    Ecco Liberation:
    The external surface of the Hot-Cat is electrically insulated, for obvious safety reasons.
    Currents are out of the reaction but inside the Hot Cat.
    If you touch any external part of the Hot Cat you do not feel any current nor measure any electromagnetic emission.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  621. WaltC

    Dear Andrea,
    I believe it’s been said that your lab is sometimes heated by an E-Cat and I understand that it’s not too difficult to produce cooling based off of a heat source (absorption cooler?)…

    - do you ever use an E-Cat driven cooler to provide cooling for the lab?

    It seems like a good time of year for cooling right now.

    Thanks,
    Walt C.

  622. Andrea Rossi

    WaltC:
    Production of cold using heat is a well known technology and surely a possible application for the E-Cat. We made experiments with specialists with good results, but priority is gone to heat demanding industrial utilizations. Your intuition is valid, though.

  623. renatoestri

    Andrea, Giovanni Guerrini :
    thank you for your kind appreciations.
    When this technology will be spread to public,
    an appropriate acronym is important to call it properly.
    These two simple words summarize deep concepts, are
    accurate from technical & scientific point of view,
    and won’t scare anyone.
    My best regards

  624. Andrea Rossi

    Renatoestri:
    Yes, I agree,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  625. Andrea Rossi

    Ecco Libération:
    No, this phenomenon is for us a serendipity, it has not even mentioned to the Third Independent Party, because, as I said, a lot of further R&D is necessary before considering it a real production.
    We suspect to have observed it during our internal tests with the Hot Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  626. Ecco Liberation

    Dr. Rossi:
    Is there any chance/do you believe that the third party testers have observed and analyzed this electrostatic emission phenomenon in addition to performing heat measurements, and that they will report about it in their upcoming paper? Also, does this happen on every E-Cat crafted so far or just specific versions (for example the Hot-Cat)?
    Regards E.L.

  627. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Could you please tell us a little more about the electromagnetic fields detected from your device? They have nothing to do with the upcoming report which is only measuring heat production, so I hope you can share just a bit of info. For example:

    1 – What form of EM fields are you measuring? Magnetic? Electrostatic?

    2 – Where are they detected? Inside the reactor? Outside?

    3 – What is the strength of the field in Tesla, if it is a magnetic field?

    4 – Is it pulsing or constant?

    My dream would be that you could design a low temp E-Cat that would produce pulsing magnetic fields outside of the reactor. If this was the case, you could wrap a coil of copper wire around it and convert the magnetism to electricity. I can imagine such a solid state E-Cat being used to power an RF cavity thruster so we could colonize the solar system.

  628. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    In this period I am exclusively focused on the 1 MW plant, therefore the issue of the e.m. fields detected is not at the moment on the top of the spear. This is an issue that we do not consider consolidated, more complex research has to be done to say anything important about it. Anyway, based on what we made:
    1- electrostatic
    2- outside the reactor, inside the E-Cat, not outside the E-Cat
    3- see 1
    4- pulsing
    Warning: this all could be wrong. Consistent R&D is necessary before saying anything decisive.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  629. Giovanni Guerrini

    renatoestri,
    I like your idea,maybe it is more correct and easier to say.

    Regards G G

  630. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You posted “Because we need to drive the reactor for safety reasons and we cannot drive a reactor by means of itself.”

    I suggest an alternative consideration. You obviously have a control mechanism (the commercial power) that drives and controls the eCat. If the energy supplied by commercial power was replaced with a very large battery, then the eCat would still be controlled. Correct?

    So the issue is can the eCat generate sufficient electrical power to charge a large capacity power with a large time constant? Do you agree?

    Or is this a safety certification problem rather than a technical problem?

  631. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I casually found this comment of you in the spam and retrieved, published it. Probably your address is taken as a spam from our robot. For the next comments, it is better if you change address.
    About your comment: if you read carefully TPR1 you can understand why we need a drive to maintain stable the reactor; this factor, as you correctly say, is also connected with the safety certification.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  632. renatoestri

    Dear Andrea,

    I’ve just read on Ecat World an article full of good sense:

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/08/06/change-of-name-from-lenr-is-an-urgent-necessity-guest-post/

    It would be a very attractive idea to change the LENR name, where ‘N’=Nuclear recalls in the public imagination
    strongly negative sensations, while, as we know, this new technology doesn’t hide dangerous effects.

    So what would you think about this new acronym to replace the LENR:

    QUAR = Quantum Reactions

    (incidentally, ‘AR’ remembers someone working a bit in this field….)
    My regards and best wishes

  633. Andrea Rossi

    renatoestri:
    Is a good idea.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  634. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea:

    You wrote:
    Fermions, as we have seen, are waves in particular quantum fields: matter particles are discrete vibrations in fermionic fields.
    By harnessing these waves, or better let them interact on a controlled way, it may be possible to invent new technology that beats gravity or can be used as a direct propulsion system, or a nuclear-electric battery, I would assume.

    The heat, coming from the E-cat can then be “uncontrolled” by-product of some interactions of these wave-systems.

    Are you studying (two hours each day) and experimenting on these phenomena ?

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  635. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    That is quantum fields theory. Obviously, the study of Physics influences my experimantalistic work, in general. About your assumptions, I am not able to answer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  636. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    Were you or your team of scientists capable of predicting or explaining phenomena from this insight ? Do you make hypothesis or ideas on direct propulsion or influencing gravity or the use of resonance for whatever purpose, of these vibrations ?
    If you study two hours per day on physics, it must be worth the effort I assume.
    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  637. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    Sorry, I did not understand your question. Can you kindly rephrase it ?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  638. Carlo Marcena

    Thanks, Martyn.
    CM

  639. Martyn Aubrey

    Hi Carlo,

    It looks like you are stuck on an old comment page/thread.

    To see the latest comments go to http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853#comments

    To see all the sections of the blog go to the top level: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com or just click on the logo/title at the top of this page.

    All the best,
    Martyn (another avid reader of the JoNP)

  640. Curiosone

    Andrea Rossi,
    When you have time: a neutron out of an atom decays into proton and an electron; this means that it contains them someway?
    Thank you for your patience
    W.G.

  641. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Fermions, as we have seen, are waves in particular quantum fields: matter particles are discrete vibrations in fermionic fields. When a neutron decays its quantum field resonates with the quantum field of electrons and the quantum field of protons, so that from such resonance one electron is born in its quantum field and a proton is born in its quantum field too. By the way, also an antineutrino is born in its quantum field to maintain the leptons conservation.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  642. Curiosone

    Why don’t you power the E-Cat with part of the surplus energy it produces?
    W.G.

  643. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Because we need to drive the reactor for safety reasons and we cannot drive a reactor by means of itself.
    Arm Regards
    A.R.

  644. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Are the powders inside the reactor under pressure?
    Warm Regards
    DT

  645. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    You can read my patent granted in Italy in 2009.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  646. Claudio

    Dear Andrea, recently Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX, Solarcity and Tesla Automotive, has opened the source of his project patents affirming that:
    “Tesla Motors was created to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport. If we clear a path to the creation of compelling electric vehicles, but then lay intellectual property landmines behind us to inhibit others, we are acting in a manner contrary to that goal.”
    Behind the first imagine of a philantropist, in his stance there is a solid economic background. If the whole field of electric vehicles developes rapidly, the industrial leader of to-day (that is him now) will earn the maximum benefit by the entire growth.
    Do you think that this method can fit the LENR application market?
    Warm Regards

  647. Andrea Rossi

    Claudio:
    Maybe in future
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  648. Carlo Marcena

    Today I haven’t seen any new post … worried for this … so I have decided to send this one.
    Hello to everybody and happy to wait with you all good news about E-Cat.
    Regards,
    CM

  649. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    Something happened in my last message, which was not published in its entire form.

    The item 6 in its entire form is the following:

    ————————————————————-
    6) Therefore, such question (why from the mono-field concept considered in Quantum Field Theory it is not possible to explain the zero magnetic moment of the even-even nuclei with Z=N ) is a fundamental question in Physics.
    ————————————————————-

    regards
    wlad

  650. Wladimir Guglinski

    To the readers of the JoNP:

    Here is another example of my disagreement with Mr JR:

    ———————————————————
    3) You don’t understand Quantum Field Theory. QFT does not allow you to calculate magnetic moments of nuclei.
    ———————————————————

    COMMENT

    Mr. JR is not able to understand the fundamental question regarding the reason why Quantum Field Theory is not able to explain the null magnetic moment of even-even nuclei with Z=N.

    Indeed, QFT does not allow to calculate magnetic moment. Actually magnetic moments are calculated from the nuclear models existing in the Standard Nuclear Physics.

    But here is the reason why QFT is not able to exlain the null magnetic moment of those nuclei:

    1) The concept of field considered in the Standard Nuclear Physics is the same concept of field existing in the Quantum Field Theory, which is a mono-field concept.

    2) Without to consider the rotation of the nuclei, the even-even nuclei with Z=N would have null magnetic moment, by considering the Standard Nuclear Physics, because, due to the symmetry of the nucleus, each pair proton-neutron has a symmetrical pair proton-neutron, and the two pairs proton-neutron cancel each other their magnetic moments.

    3) But the nuclei have rotation. And the rotation of a charge induces magnetic moments. THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF PHYSICS. So the rotation of the protons within the nuclei induce magnetic moment. And therefore the even-even nuclei with Z=N have to have magnetic moment different of zero.

    3.1) And a theorist cannot, by definition, to define as zero a nuclear property which must be DIFFERENT of zero as consequence of a FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF PHYSICS, because such stupid method of definition proposed by Mr. JR violates a fundamental law of Physics.

    4) The problem with Quantum Field Theory is because it is a mono-field theory. And it is IMPOSSIBLE to explain the zero magnetic moment of even-even nuclei with Z=N, by considering ANY THEORY developed from the mono-field concept of field.

    5) The zero magnetic moment of the even-even nuclei with Z=N can be explained only by considering a NON-mono-field theory, as proposed in Quantum Ring Theory, where the field of elementary particles is formed by the overlap of two concentric fiedls Sn and Sp.

    6) Therefore, such question (why from the mono-field concept considered in Quantum Field Theory)) is a fundamental question in Physics

    .

    regards
    wlad

  651. Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in August 3rd, 2014 at 9:33 AM

    Wladimir,

    Your last several posts are simply wrong in all significant respect. In most cases you don’t even appear to understand the concepts that are being discussed and so even your initial ‘statements of fact’ are simply nonsense:

    =========================================================

    COMMENT

    Dear JR,

    I challenged any theorist expert in Quantum Field Theory to come here to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero.

    But you are not expert even in elementary Physics, dear JR.

    Actually you dont know even geometry, since you dont know the difference between an ellipsoid and a sphere.
    So, I will not waste my time with your nonsenses.

    .

    To the readers of the JoNP

    Look at the Figure 1 of the paper How atomic nuclei cluster, published in Nature:

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/nature11246.html

    Are you able to realize that Figure 1 shows a structure with elipsoidal shape?

    But Mr. JR is not able to understand that Figure 1 shows an elipsoidal structure.

    In December 2013 Mr. JR claimed here in the JoNP that the structure of the Figure 1 is spherical:

    ————————————————
    JR
    December 15th, 2013 at 12:33 AM

    Wladimir,

    Actually, Martin Freer and I gave the same argument, you just didn’t understand it. And it’s not exactly an argument, it’s part of the definition of the quadrupole moment, which is taken as the measure of the deviation from spherical symmetry. That is why I was explaining that the nucleus is spherical, in the standard meaning of the phrase, even though it has structures as shown in Freer’s work.
    ————————————————–

    regards
    wlad

  652. Dave Lafleur

    If you are finding a magnetic byproduct as well that is certainly interesting. You had no mention of magnetic materials. Care to comment? Should I be surprised if you find a monopole mechanism? I apologize for my questions with no (known?) answers but you sir are a mad scientist and enjoy your blog. I believe that skepticism is healthy but positive or negative this would be a better world if more scientists were asking your questions.

  653. Andrea Rossi

    Dave Lafleur:
    It is not exactly as you wrote. We have found as an unexpected phenomenon the direct production of electromagnetic energy. This is an issue we are making R&D upon, but, sincerely, in this period my focus is on the 1 MW plant of the new US Customer. I agree about what you say in regard of scepticism.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  654. orsobubu

    Ahhh… after months of nice compliments about cats and containers and reports, THIS is the action I was missing so much. Pass me my popcorn and soda now, and let me sit down and enjoy.

  655. JR

    Wladimir,

    Your last several posts are simply wrong in all significant respect. In most cases you don’t even appear to understand the concepts that are being discussed and so even your initial ‘statements of fact’ are simply nonsense:

    1) You don’t understand the concept of wave-particle duality: all particles behave as waves (in the quantum mechanical sense) all the time. In some energy limits this behavior is similar to a classical mechanics description of particle behavior. In some limits, it is more similar to a classical wave. But it is not correct to say that a particle is ever just a classical particle or a classical wave.

    2) You don’t understand diffraction and quantum mechanics. There is nothing that says a single photon or electron behaves like a particle when it passes through a single slit. A basic QM textbook can address your misunderstanding.

    3) You don’t understand Quantum Field Theory. QFT does not allow you to calculate magnetic moments of nuclei. It can be used to calculate interactions of fundamental (point-like) particles, but a model is required to build a bound state nucleus from a collection of composite (non-fundamental) particles such as protons and neutrons. Also, your argument about orbiting nucleons is a purely classical one, so both wrong and irrelevant.

    4) You (still) don’t understand magnetic moments. They are, by definition, zero for any spin-0 nucleus. So the only thing you can possibly learn from the magnetic moment of these spin-0 nuclei is that people who raise the question of predictions for them don’t have any idea what they’re talking about.

    5) While I’m here, the pion is the particle associated with the Yukawa potential, so it’s fair to say that Yukawa did predict the existence of the pion. However, he assumed it was a fundamental particle, and it turns out that it was a QCD bound state.

    6) You also appear to have basic trouble with numbers. A “zero” is different from a missing entry in a table – that one has given you a lot of trouble. Also, when two measured values are slightly different (proton radius of 0.84 and 0.88 fm), that does not mean that the correct answer is 0.25.

    7) Basic logic. Even if you find a case where someones model of a QCD or quantum mechanical phenomenon is incorrect, that does not overturn everything we know about QCD or quantum mechanics. It might mean that there’s a fundamental flaw, but you’d have to actually look at the details of the model to make such a conclusion.

    These are some of the issues with the claims you’ve been making more recently. There was a useful compilation of an extended list of errors in claims you’ve been making for a longer time, but I’d have to search for it. I can do so if anyone cares.

    I’d work on sorting out these more basic issues before reinventing all of known physics. My apologies if I’ve stated things unclearly or made any minor errors; this didn’t seem like a post that was worthy of a lot of time.

  656. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski, Joe:
    Who wants to answer you is very welcome, as well as your comments are.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  657. Michael S

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    1/ You have great expertise in plastics waste treatment. Do you think that the Ecat heat-energy cost would allow to tackle/ significantly improve the plastics recovery/reformation costs ? We currently pollute our environment with these plastics as they are so practical but do not include the waste process costs because that would be to expensive. Maybe this jump in energy costs will allow us to create a real cradle to cradle economy and clean up the existing mess ?

    2/ maybe you have already answered this: have you indications of strong electromagnetic fields during the working of ecat ? If yes could a systematic enhancement of this effect allow harvesting of Electricity ?

    Following with patience.
    Electric:) regards,

    Michael

  658. Andrea Rossi

    Michael S.:
    1- When we will have E-Cats producing also electric power, the energy produced will be useful for any apparatus.
    2- We got indications and we are working on that issue in our R&D program
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  659. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 2nd, 2014 at 9:02 PM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    …but I do not agree upon the fact that quantum field theory is wrong.
    ——————————————

    COMMENT:

    Dear Andrea,

    Quantum Field Theory (QFT) was developed from the contribution of several theorists, and one among them is the Nobel Laureate Dr. Gerard t’ Hooft.

    From the concept of field considered in QFT it is impossible to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have zero magnetic moment (as all the nuclei have rotation, the rotation of the protons within those nuclei would have to induce a positive magnetic moment, and therefore QFT cannot explain why those nuclei have null magnetic moment).

    So, I would like to suggest you, dear Andrea, to invite the Dr. G. t’Hooft to come here to tell us how it is possible to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have zero magnetic moment, by considering the Quantum Field Theory.

    His email is the following: G.tHooft@phys.uu.nl

    And I challenge any theorist expert in Quantum Field Theory to come here, to tell us how it is possible to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have zero magnetic moment, from the foundations of QFT.

    Regards
    wlad

  660. Joe

    Dr Rossi,

    An electron has an electric field. We can point to the electron, and we can also point to its effect far away (perhaps to a device measuring field strength). The electron is a local phenomenon, and its electric field is a remote phenomenon. Both phenomena exist at the same time. The local one is of a particle nature, and the remote one is of a wave nature. Therefore, there exists an obvious point of transition between these two different natures. But if we now consider the local phenomenon as wave, the point of transition between two similar (wave) natures becomes problematic. If there were no point of transition, the two phenomena could only be considered as actually one phenomenon (one wave), with no distinction between local particle and remote field.

    All the best,
    Joe

  661. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 2nd, 2014 at 9:02 PM

    1)
    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Obviously I respect your opinion,
    ———————————–

    Dear Andrea,
    it is not a question of opinion.

    The scientific method prescribes that a theory must be able to be fit to the results of the experiments.
    If the theory is incompatible with the experiments, it cannot be correct.
    This is what the scientific method prescribes.

    It is not my opinion

    .

    2)
    but I do not agree upon the fact that quantum field theory is wrong.
    ———————————-

    COMMENT

    By considering Quantum Field theory even-even with Z=N have to have positive magnetic moment.
    But they have null magnetic moment.

    It is not a question to be agree, or not.

    By considering the scientific method, Quanum Field Theory is wrong, because the theory does not fit to the results of experiments.

    .

    3)
    I also must add that I do not think that any theory should be considered eternally valid and I think that the phenomenological epochè is always a good exercise.
    ————————————–

    COMMENT

    So, it is the time to realize that Quantum Field Theory is wrong.
    It can work well in a certain level.

    But in smaller scales Quantum Field Theory is fundamentally wrong.

    regards
    wlad

  662. Joe

    Dr Rossi,

    How do you distinguish between the wave that composes a particle and the wave that is associated with the surrounding field of that particle? For example, an electron has an electric field which has a wave associated with it. If the electron itself is a wave, where is the point of transition between the wave of the electron and the wave of its electric field?

    All the best,
    Joe

  663. Andrea Rossi

    Joe:
    An electron is a tiny vibration in the particular quantum field it belongs to. The “transition” of a boson into a fermion like a lepton is made by the interaction between the quantum field in which the boson vibrates and the Higgs field; the Higgs field turns the boson into a fermion breaking the symmetry. Once the electron is born after the interaction between the boson’s field and the Higgs field, there is not a transition between the wave and the electron: the electron IS a wave, because it is, as said above, a tiny vibration in the quantum field it belongs to, a tiny vibration that we perceive as a particle of matter. I made the example of the image in the screen of the computer, that is an image, but if we observe it precisely our senses perceive it as a system of pixels, but it is still an image; image does not pass through any transition between image and pixel or vice versa. In this model image is the quantum field of the electron, the lepton ( electron) is the matter: the matter is just a vibration in the field as well as the pixel is just a dot of the image.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  664. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 2nd, 2014 at 8:09 AM

    Joe:
    In the quantum field theory, elementary particles are tiny vibrating waves in a particular field and interactions are between elementary particles in fields; forces carried in their interactions by means of bosons can be thought of as resulting from vibrations in fields.
    =======================================

    COMMENT

    Quantum Field Theory is wrong, because according to the theory the even-even nuclei with Z=N (like 2He4, 6C12, etc.) cannot have null nuclear magnetic moment, because due to the rotation of the nucleus the charged protons would have to produce a positive magnetic moment.

    As said in 29th July:

    …for the moment, we are overlooking something fundamental at smaller scales.

    regards
    wlad

  665. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Obviously I respect your opinion, but I do not agree upon the fact that quantum field theory is wrong.
    I also must add that I do not think that any theory should be considered eternally valid and I think that the phenomenological epochè is always a good exercise.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  666. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 1st, 2014 at 7:24 PM

    Curiosone:
    As you see, I have edited a little bit your question to make it correct.
    Matter is made by waves
    =====================================

    COMMENT

    Waves cannot colide like billiard balls, as happens in Compton Effect.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_scattering

    Only corpuscular particles can collide like billiar balls.

    As from the foundations of Quantum Mechanics is impossible to eliminate the incompatibility between the theory and the experiments, Bohr proposed his famous Principle of Complementarity, according to which in some experiments the matter behaves like particles and in other experiments the matter behaves like waves.

    But in 2011 the physicist Aephraim Steinberg made an experiment showing that Bohr’s Principle of Complmentarity is wrong:
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3295

    According to Quantum Mechanics, a quantum particle can behave either as a particle or as a wave, but it cannot behave as wave and as a particle at the same time.

    The experiment made by Steinberg showed that Quantum Mechanics is wrong, because in his experiment a photon crossed a unique slit, and it had inferference with itself (a wave feature), while from Quantum Mechanics we would have to expect a particle feature only, since the photon crossed only one slit.

    regards
    wlad

  667. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Can you give us the names of the people JONP uses for peer review? It seems to me that it is difficult to choose qualified judges for papers dealing in LENR or some of the other subjects that are published here. Most of the renown scientists will stay away from these subjects because of the prejudices caused by main line academia.
    Any news you can give us about the situation of the TPR2 will be much appreciated.

  668. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    I am sorry, but our peer reviewers prefer not to be disclosed. They all are from the main line academia, just to correct your opinion. It is not true that most from the main line scientist are biased against LENR, they are biased against the clowneries that happened in the LENR fields, that unavoidably spray dirt on all the field, as recently happened in a paradigmatic example that everybody understands which has been.
    Anyway: if some of our Readers, with a degree in Physics, wants to be a peer reviewer of the papers that the JoNP receives for publication, he will be welcome.
    About the TPR2, as soon as I will know when it will be published, I will communicate the information on this blog.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  669. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    So do you feel that if you were to step away from your work now (I do not expect this), that the team at IH would be able to continue along developing E-Cat technology very well without you?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  670. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    1- No, we have to respect the guarantees of performance we signed for and we will be paid if the guarantees will be respected. As it happens for any kind of technological plant.
    2- Brand new production line with a back up in case of problems to our plant
    3- Yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  671. Joe

    Dr Rossi,

    If you believe that a particle is a wave, and since a wave exists in a medium, does that mean that two different particles (electron, neutrino) would each have a different medium associated with them? Or would their respective waves be situated within only one shared fundamental medium (aether)?

    All the best,
    Joe

  672. Andrea Rossi

    Joe:
    In the quantum field theory, elementary particles are tiny vibrating waves in a particular field and interactions are between elementary particles in fields; forces carried in their interactions by means of bosons can be thought of as resulting from vibrations in fields.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  673. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Without asking what is going on within the eCat reactor but based on your experimental history:

    1. I suggest that nanospheres of some material other than nickel or palladium could be coated with nickel or palladium. The difference in the thermal coeffcient of expansion would cause stress when the material is heated. When heated to the Debye temperature, nano-sized cracks could appear which would form localized reaction areas. What is your opinion of this approach?

    2. What about carbon-coated nickel nanoparticles? What is your opinion?

  674. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    1- 2: Dear friend, you know by heart that I cannot give any information in positive or in negative of this kind. My opinion, the only one I can express, is that any opinion must be respected, independently if they are right or wrong, for the work that is behind it. Work must always be respected.
    The only way to know if an opinion is right or wrong is to make experiments to test it. You can test what you wrote, it is not difficult. For example: we make experiments to reproduce all the apparatuses and processes that have been described in all the patents and publications made in the world regarding the LENR, because that is the only way to verify if they work or not.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  675. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    When you have time ( repeat: when you have time, I want not to steal your time) can you answer to this question that nobody has been able to answer me, since I was in the high school: matter is made of waves or of particles?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  676. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    As you see, I have edited a little bit your question to make it correct.
    Matter is made by waves, which are quantum fields. Everything in the elementary particle world is made by waves and are the vibrations in the waves quantum fields that make the difference between one particle and another, or between a Fermion and a Boson. Therefore, if you look carefully among waves, you can see particles, which are particular vibrations in a particular field; here is an analogy: if you look at a photo in the screen of your computer , you see images ( waves in a quantum field); but if you look more precisely, you see in them pixels ( particles).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  677. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Thank you for your answer about gravitons.
    Thank you also for all your answers even if you have to respect your NDA.
    Godspeed,
    W.G.

  678. Tony McConnell

    Dear Andrea,

    Firstly, congratulations on your successes so far, and long may they continue!

    This is a little off-topic (well, a lot off-topic, really). I am lucky enough to be invited to a wedding in Ancona this year; is there a place you can recommend visiting whilst there?

    Also, are there suitable Italian sayings I could learn to toast the happy couple?

    Thank you

    Tony

  679. Andrea Rossi

    Tony Mc Connell:
    Ancona is a nice town, with a beautiful sea-coast along the Adriatic Sea. Close to Ancona is Florence ( couple of hours of train), where the cultural and touristic references are infinite for importance and quantity.
    About the toast, I suggest to avoid sayings and say your sincere and personal words.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  680. Tony McConnell

    Ing. Rossi

    Please don’t let youself be distracted by insults and become involved in lawsuits.

    Your work will tell the real story.

  681. Andrea Rossi

    Tony Mc Connell:
    Ancona is a wonderful town, in particular the sea-coast is like a necklace of jewels. You also are not far from Florence ( couple of hours of train or drive). Any comment is useless…just go.
    About the toast: avoid sayings, say your sincere and personal words: much better.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  682. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    I’ve been attempting to think of some questions you may be allowed to answer. Here goes:

    1 – Regardless if the one megawatt plant satisfies the customer or not, how much did it cost to build in parts and materials. (This does not include labor but only the container, electronics, plumbing, reactors, etc.)

    2 – Are there any other third parties testing, with industrial heat’s permission, E-Cat reactors other than the TIP? (Even if the testing is private and results will not be disclosed publically.)

    3 – What temperature range of steam is the one megawatt plant designed to produce?

    4 – When the one megawatt plant is demostrated and allowed to be visited, would you consider releasing some of the more facinating videos of your private testing? For example, reactors intentionally being allowed to self destruct.

    5 – Have you considered reaching out to ( omissis) as a potential customer?

  683. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    1- This information is confidential for commercial reasons, so far. I can say, though, that the production cost in $/Kw is very competitive with the cost of power of traditional power and heat generation systems.
    2- Next third parties will be the Customers, but, obviously, our R&D activity will never end, as well as it never ended for any technological production and manufacturing, like cars, computers, whatever.
    3- Technical data will be given in due time.
    4- Maybe
    5- I passed your information to our commercial department. I put under “omissis” the name you suggested and their production because we cannot name a company without their permission, nor describe their production.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  684. Ashley Hurtis

    Dear Andrea,
    Are you saying that the new 1MW plant has been installed and been operating for some time now? Currently, You are collecting and solidating data to determine positive or negative commercial operations.

    Ashley

  685. Andrea Rossi

    Ashley Hurtis:
    We will give due information when visits will be allowed.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  686. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, you have described your new Cat as a Masterpiece, are you referring just to it’s Wonderful looks or do you mean that it works pretty good as well.
    Best wishes

  687. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    In Italy they say: ” Ogni scarrafone è bello a mamma sua” ( translation: “every beetle is beautiful for his mother”). Let’s see the objective results, than we will be able to answer objectively.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  688. gillana

    Dear Dr. A. Rossi
    Allow me to propose a few questions that maybe a little somewhat provocative.
    If, as I read, the experimental phase is over, and now scientists are analyzing millions of data so that the results are incontrovertible because positive issues may have serious consequences, and these data will be published in a scientific accredited peer-reviewed journal I have reason to believe that if the results are positive I can watch news on TV waiting for a sensational announcement by the media.
    If the 1MW plant will be operating, even if only for a few days, will be commercially a disaster but successful from the point of view of science.
    Warm regards,
    Gillana

  689. Andrea Rossi

    Gillana:
    It is extremely important that the 1 MW plant does not work well for any days, but reliably for at least one year without major problems, because what we are aiming to is the real industrial application of the so called Rossi Effect, not another test. The next 1 MW plant has the task to open the era of the industrial utilization of the so called Rossi Effect, with ratings supplied not from experimentalists, but from satisfied Customers that make money with our plants. Obviously R&D will continue for ever, but the next 1MW plant will close the experimentalism era and will open the commercial era, in which we will no more discuss if the so called Rossi Effect works or not, but the discussion will be about its industrial evolution and, eventually, its domestic application: provided the results of the TPR2 and the 1 MW plant will be positive, and not negative, because: THE RESULTS COULD BE POSITIVE, BUT ALSO NEGATIVE AS FOR WE KNOW SO FAR.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  690. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    In your theory of eCat operation,

    1. do you believe the eCat reaction is taking place at a finite number of locations (hotspots) or do you believe the reaction is uniformly distributed over the fuel?
    2. If a finite number of hotspots, do you believe the number of hotspots reoughly remain constant over the operating lifetime of the eCat?
    3. If finite, do you believe that most hotspots are dynamically destroyed and created during the process and perhaps is a function of fuel temperature?

  691. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    1- Confidential
    2- Confidential
    3- Confidential
    As you know, any information regarding the process of the so called Rossi Effect are so far confidential.
    By the way: a precise reading of the TPR1 can give you information that answer, at least partially, to your questions. Maybe the next TPR will have results more interesting, because based upon a much longer period of operation. I think the TPR2 will teach us things that I myself do not know, due to the sophisticated analysis the Professors are doing. Hoping that the results will be positive, or at least not negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  692. George M

    Andrea
    Is the application, industrial food processing production? (hope this is not a NDA) or cleaning?

  693. Andrea Rossi

    George M.:
    I cannot give answers in positive or in negative: obviously I would receive one thousand questions: ” is this? Is that? ” and, by exclusion, I would end up giving confidential information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  694. Andrea Rossi

    George M: The 1 MW plant is not a demo, is a plant in operation to work for a Customer. It is a factory, not a show room !
    Visits will be allowed when the Customer will allow them, maybe within the year. This plant will make history, if the results will be positive, and every step has to be calculated with precision.
    I have to add that the results could be positive, but also negative and that the results will be considered positive only after months of regular and reliable operation.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  695. toussaint

    Dear Mr Rossi,

    Is your new 1MW plant is still inside a container

    For your US customer ?

    Kind regards.

    Toussaint françois

  696. Andrea Rossi

    Toussaint:
    In due time we will publish the photographies of the plant in operation. Anyway: the new series of 1MW ECAT ha substantial differences from the original prototype, but, yes, we use a standard container as external case. More compact, though. We maintained this solution to make the plants easy to transport and faster to build up.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  697. George M

    Dear Andrea,
    Do you think your 1MW plant will be ready for demo within this year.
    Regards. George M

  698. Bob

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    1. Do you know whether the so called Rossi effect occurs in nature (that is, not within an e-cat device)? If so, is there evidence of such occurrence? What is the evidence?

    2. The operation of the e-cat has been described with these steps:

    a) A separate energy source is used to provide start up heat.

    b) Some time later, the e-cat will will run in self sustain mode and the start up heat is no longer needed.

    c) At a later point in time additional heat from another outside source is again required.

    d) The cat and mouse design may provide additional heat to the e-cat.

    Does the so called Rossi effect account for the need for additional energy at step c)?

    Thanks

    Bob

  699. Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    1- No
    2- yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  700. Wladimir Guglinski

    Satellite galaxies put astronomers in a spin
    http://phys.org/news/2014-07-satellite-galaxies-astronomers.html

    “Today, everything appears to indicate that the standard model provides a faithful representation of observations at the largest scales of the Universe (“Weak lensing mass map and peak statistics in Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Stripe 82 survey”), but that, for the moment, we are overlooking something fundamental at smaller scales”.

    .

    So, something fundamental is wrong with the Standard Cosmological Model at smaller scales, as also happens with the Standard Model of Particle Physics and the Standard Nuclear Physics.

    Each day new discoveries are showing fundamental wrong things in Physics.

    It’s hard to believe that current Modern Physics is able to explain LENR.

  701. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Thank you, very interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  702. Wladimir Guglinski

    Satellite galaxies put astronomers in a spin
    http://phys.org/news/2014-07-satellite-galaxies-astronomers.html

    An international team of researchers, led by astronomers at the Observatoire Astronomique de Strasbourg (CNRS/Université de Strasbourg), has studied 380 galaxies and shown that their small satellite galaxies almost always move in rotating discs. However, such satellite galaxy discs are not predicted by current models of the formation of structures in the Universe. This discovery could cause modelers serious headaches in the years ahead. The results of the study are published in the 31 July 2014 issue of the journal Nature (“Velocity anti-correlation of diametrically opposed galaxy satellites in the low-redshift universe”).

    These findings call into question the predictions of the standard model at galactic scales. This is because, if this phenomenon were linked to the accretion of satellite galaxies along filaments of dark matter in the Universe, it would be necessary to explain why these rotating structures are much thinner than the filaments that gave rise to them, and also why the two brightest satellite galaxies, which are the two that can be seen, systematically always come from the same filament. Alternatively, the discovery may mean that our current models need to be completely revised. Today, everything appears to indicate that the standard model provides a faithful representation of observations at the largest scales of the Universe (“Weak lensing mass map and peak statistics in Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Stripe 82 survey”), but that, for the moment, we are overlooking something fundamental at smaller scales.

    .

    Velocity anti-correlation of diametrically opposed galaxy satellites in the low-redshift Universe
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature13481.html

  703. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    What do you think of the last discoveries in the Seebeck Effect?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  704. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    The plant has to work 24 hours/ day for 350 days/year, producing 1 MWh/h of heat in the form of steam.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  705. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Another question: the 1 MW plant that is going in operation in the factory of a US customer how many hours per year will work?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  706. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Interesting, but we need they go in the market to buy them and test them.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  707. Frederic Maillard

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Have you tried an E-Cat with molybdenum instead of nickel ?
    Is it useless to try molybdenum ?

    FM

  708. Andrea Rossi

    Frederic Maillard:
    We tested many combinations, but I cannot give information in positive or negative about our R&D. In due time we will give the necessary specific information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  709. Gherardo

    A curious situation generated by renewable energy in german electric grid.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-24/german-utilities-bail-out-electric-grid-at-wind-s-mercy.html

  710. Andrea Rossi

    Gherardo:
    Still few persons have understood well the difference between power and energy. To install 1 MW of power by wind mills, photovoltaics, etc does not mean to substitute 1 MW of power of not alternative energy facilities, because the actual energy produced by the alternative energy plants is at most the 10% of the installed power. In a nutshell: to install a 1 MW power windmill and to have a wind energy that can yeld an average of 50 kWh/h is like to have a Ferrari with 10 liters ( 2.5 gallons) of gasoline per month. The only way to make these alternative energies work is to fund them with the backing of the taxpayer. This is the truth. With the obvious exception of particular cases, like, for example, remote installations where no grid arrives.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  711. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi
    after the publication of the TPR2 you will be attacked very strongly and devastatingly in the whole world. Are you prepared for that? What will you do in this case?
    W.G.

  712. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Let’s try this.
    imagine that the Universe is like a model made by a bundle of elastic strings, an enormous amount of them, equally distributed and symmetrically placed. Imagine that inside this bundle of symmetric elastic and vibrating strings there are dispersed pebbles of different mass too distant from each other to break the symmetry.
    Now imagine that the elastic strings vibrate regularly maintaining the symmetry.
    In this model the elastic strings are gravitons on a still Universe.
    But Universe is not still and stars,planets etc move fast, so that the elastic strings are pulled and when they are pulled the symmetry is broken and they force the close pebbles to get closer:we could say that the gravitational field (the elastic strings bundle) has been distorted, so that the force of the elastic strings is exchanged between the closer pebbles. Sometimes this force makes the smaller pebbles fall on the bigger and what happens is a mess; sometimes the smaller pebbles orbit around the bigger one with a momentum that compensates the force of the elastic strings (the gravitons)
    like Earth makes around the Sun.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  713. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi
    can you explain with your skill to make easy difficult things how gravitons work in quantum theory?
    Godspeed
    WG

  714. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I will continue to prey God every morning.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  715. Andrea Rossi

    Alain Co:
    interesting,
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  716. Since you seems to have studied the question of water treatment, which is a key point for poor and emerging countries, you may be interested (if you did not study it already) in the Boron-doped diamond electrodes.
    This technology allow to treat water without chemical, by violent electrolysis.
    This market is hard to develop because like LENR it is changing the market.
    There was a project for a babywater machine like expresso machine, but it failed, for many reason implying insurance and liabilities, and market disruption of established business.(it will remind you something).
    The company Adamantec tried the market of pool water cleaning, but get bought by AquaDiamante
    http://www.aquadiamante.com/13.0.html
    This company works on the domain too
    http://www.neocoat.ch/en

    there is some interesting review
    http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijelc/si/450284/

    water treatment with autonomy of years may create niche market, whatever is the price, whatever is the size.

    hope this helps (but maybe you are enough busy while disrupting a trillion dollar market, not to disrupt a trillion more on water).

  717. Dan C.

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    As to desalination, most think of the boiling or flash steam process. From their point of view, the E-cat would be cheaper. They are unaware of the magnitude of the effects that mineral scaling have on the water vessel. This requires continuous labor intensive maintenance, so while using E-cats would make this process cheaper, it is still an expensive process. A Reverse Osmosis filtering system will eliminate many of these associated problems.

    I would point out that with R.O. filtration systems, an electric E-cat would still contribute in significant cost reduction. The electricity used for ionizing the filters, UV sterilization treatment, and pumps to name the obvious.

    The less obvious would be when the E-cat, both electric and heat processes are integrated into the manufacturing sector, the products used in building Desalination plants will be cheaper.
    There’s more than one way to skin a cat. “Skin as in Utilize”

    Regards,
    Dan C.

  718. Andrea Rossi

    Dan C.:
    The fact that when and if we will be able to sell electric power producing E-Cats will make cheaper electricity is true and, in this case, convenience should be generalized, but the desalination made by steam is not competitive with the reverse osmosis by an order of magnitude.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  719. Steven N. Karels

    Dave Lafleur,

    This topic has been discussed before so I will summarize what I believe are the issues. To boil water at room pressure takes a large amount of energy.

    India has demonstrated a prototype program using the relatively warm ocean seawater and evaporating it by pumping it into a reduced pressure (partial vacuum) chamber that is cooled by ocean water brought up by pumps from the relatively cold ocean depths. So perhaps eCat technology could generate the electricity to do this. This would be a continuous operation at a constant power so eCat would be ideally suited for this purpose.

    In other ocean locations where this might not work, reverse osmosis techniques are more energy efficient than boiling the sea water. Again, eCat could provide the electricity needed.

    ECat waste heat would also assist the effort.

    Your suggest is correct. It is just that there are more efficient ways of doing this.

  720. Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gills:
    Brian Ahern is one of the few scientists in the LENR field that I think is making something that can have success. Said this, I must add that:
    1- I cannot discuss issues that would force me to disclose information that is still confidential.
    2- in principle, I respect the opinion of Dr Ahern, but I disagree, on the base of experiments we made with the E-Cats and the Hot Cats
    3- I wish good luck to this competitor of ours
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  721. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Useful information, as usually happens when you send a comment. As a matter of fact this treatment is very competitive and my opinion is that the E-Cat is not competitive for the desalination.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  722. Dear Mr. Rossi,

    This fascinating YouTube interview gives some possible explanations as to how your reactor works. It’s about magnetism in LENR.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_kID_E-3tY

    “Dr. Brian Ahern: Nanomagnetism, Cooperative Modes, & Non-Linear LENR”

    All the best, Christopher Calder

  723. Andrea Rossi

    Christopher Calder:
    Interesting opinion, but I think differently, based on my experiments. The work of Brian Ahern is interesting, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  724. Joseph Fine

    AR, Dave Lafleur,

    Here is a web resource on desalination and also of desalination filter membranes made out of graphene sheets. You can find further information on this website on a variety of subjects related to desalination.

    http://www.desalination.com

    http://www.desalination.com/wdr/50/9/graphene-membrane-technology-update

    Fresh regards,

    Joseph Fine

  725. Herb Gillis

    Dr. Rossi:
    Brian Ahern has expressed the opinion that LENR is not a nuclear phenomenon but instead an electromagnetic one. If that is true it raises the question of what the ultimate source of the observed excess energy might be. It clearly cannot be chemical, if your observations and the “third party test” results are accurate. Ahern said in a recent interview that the source may be some kind of vacuum energy (or the so-called “zero-point” energy of the vacuum). Do you think he might be right? If so; are there any limits to how much usable energy could be extracted from such a strange source?
    Kind regards; HRG.

  726. Dave Lafleur

    AR,
    I would think that desalination would be an easy application of your technology, as all that is needed is boiling water and a condenser- and your low cost energy to make it practical.

    To make a quantum leap, pardon the pun, could you irrigate the deserts? Could you turn the Sinai Desert into an oasis instead of a war torn wasteland?

  727. Andrea Rossi

    Dave Lafleur:
    I have no idea. I am not an expert of desalination, but costs of desalination are already very low, as far as I know: experts in past analyzed the possibility to desalinate with the E-Cat, but it turned out not to be competitive.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  728. DTravchenko

    To complete my comment: if yes, are you glad if I try to put you in contact with the right persons in Russia?
    D.T.

  729. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Answer to both comments: yes, I think we can do it with profit. Of course we are interested to this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  730. Rafal Krych

    Dear Andrea,

    This is why humanity needs home e-Cats so badly: How a solar storm two years ago nearly caused a catastrophe on Earth.

    Best wishes and keep up with good work with ending the “Fossil Fuels Age”!
    Rafal

  731. Andrea Rossi

    Rafal Krych:
    We are working…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  732. Rafal Krych

    Dear Andrea,

    This is why humanity needs home e-Cats so badly: .

    Best wishes and keep up with good work with ending the “Fossil Fuels Age”!
    Rafal

  733. Curiosone

    Do you continue to study physics, or now you just make your experiments and manufacturing?
    W.G.

  734. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    The answer is yes. It is the foundamental of LENR.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  735. Curiosone

    Dr Rossi:
    Are you still convinced that the “lattice” theory of Norman Cook is right?
    Thank you for your answer,
    W.G.

  736. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I have ordered to myself to study and update myself on Physics at least 2 hours per day, rain or shine.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  737. DTravchenko

    Dr Rossi:
    You think your Hot Cats could be useful to retrofit partially nuclear plants?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  738. Italo R.

    “… we, the Team….”
    and that reminds me “We, The People of E-Cat” :-)

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  739. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    Yes, you are absolutely right. The People of the E-Cat are extremely important . It maintains us constantly under a positive pressure. I am very disappointed not to be able to give information about the TIP-R2, of which I know nothing, and also for the 1 MW plant, about which we will give information only after a period of consolidation of the operation. That’s why now we talk of the rumors of Harley Davidsons. By the way, I read that many fans of this motorcycles are angry about the electric Harley, since its characteristic noise is an iconic heritage of these ouvres d’art. Anyway, it will not take long before we will have to talk about specific things.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  740. Paul

    Andrea,

    In regards to: “Nobody is indispensable.”

    If you change the paint, you change the painting.

    Paul

  741. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    …and this give further evidence that no paint is indispensable.
    I really hope, and I am sure that, the Team of Industrial Heat has in me a good, but not indispensable, player. Their organization will overcome my subjective shortcomings.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    p.s.: 1 a.m. of Thursday July 24th, and we are working: we, the Team.

  742. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Regarding the first public 1 MW plant. As you have designed, built and tested it, do you now see ways it can be improved? Can the masterpiece be surpassed by an even better masterpiece?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  743. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Nobody is indispensable.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  744. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Thank you — you say ‘worked’ on this plant. Does this mean the manufacturing has been completed? Maybe you are now involved in testing it?

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  745. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    My team will be able to make better than me for sure.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  746. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Harley Davidson is now testing a prototype electric powered motorcycle. Perhaps, in the future, an eCat powered motorcycle? So many possible eCat applications and so little time to think of them all.

  747. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    No more brumm brumm?
    A.R.

  748. Curiosone

    I am hearing a rumor that the report of the TIP will be published in September…
    W.G.

  749. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I am hearing the rumor of a Harley Davidson making “brumm, brumm” out of the window of my laboratory. That’s some rumor!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  750. Curiosone

    Andrea:
    I imagine you are talking with the TIP now and again: how is the sensation, good or bad?
    W.G.

  751. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    The work of the Third Independent Party does not depend on me, as I wrote repeatedly. I must ask that the discussions about the report are put on hold until it will be published. I do not know, and cannot know when it will be ready and cannot provide any better information. I understand your feeling, I am very anxious too, but we must be patient.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  752. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    What do you think in general, not in particular, of all the people working in the LENR ?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  753. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  754. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    In your team is also a nuclear physicist?
    Warm Regards,
    D.T.

  755. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    We find the work of our competitors to be anyway respectable and noteworthy.
    LENR as a field is rapidly pursuing cleaner and more affordable sources of energy. Making the world a better place through cleaner and more affordable energy is why we are working so hard with our R&D testing.
    This is a good thing and would be of great benefit to Society.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  756. Giovanni Guerrini

    This article was published in 1999,today it is of storical interest.

    http://www.radiocittadelcapo.it/wp-content/uploads/2-CHIMICA-E…MISTERI1.doc

    Regads G G

  757. Steven N. Karels

    Curwin,

    If eCat can use 3He AND it is economical to mine it on the moon, it would be less costly to use it rather than transporting hydrogen from the Earth. Probably hydrogen will be transported to the moon but for water unless vast quantities can be found during mining.

  758. curwin

    Steven N Karels:

    Even with the *astronomical cost of space launches, there seems to be enough energy in a kilo of H/D/Ni (or whatever) to perhaps make 3He a moot question?

  759. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Helium-3 is readily available on the Moon’s regolith. It is also commercially available, albeit rather expensive. If you could obtain a sufficient quantity, you could test it. If it proves successful, you could then patent the process. That might serve you well but, of course, patents are limited in time and we do not know when a lunar colony will be viable. Use of lunar 3He would be much more economical than transporting hydrogen to the moon.

    There was conjecture that 3He might be the fusion fuel in the near future, be mined on the moon and transported to the Earth. If eCat is successful with nickel and ordinary hydrogen, there will be no need for lunar mining for Earth’s fuel needs.

  760. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Thank you, anyway interesting as an idea. Obviously I cannot give information, in positive, or in negative, regarding the materials I use or do not use in the reactor, even if projected in the future.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  761. While we wait for the independent report, here is an exclusive radio interview with Andrea Rossi. He discusses his feelings about music, and his experience playing the drums. This appears this week’s “Tom and Doug Show” which is broadcast on WOOL-FM, KHOI-FM and other stations on the Pacifica Network.

    Here is a link to the internet version of the program:
    http://tomanddoug.com/podcasts/TDShow470.mp3

  762. Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  763. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Looking to the future – do you think eCat technology could be employed on the Earth’s moon, but using 3He instead of 1H? Please let me know if the result could be positive or negative (LOL)

  764. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Honestly, I am not able to answer. Being an experimentalist, I will answer you when I will go to the moon, try it with a series of tests and I will satellite you the results, positive or negative as they might be.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  765. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    The analysis I presented was regarding what would happen if the world population increased to 10 billion AND the per capita energy consumption of everyone reached the current USA level. Other than solar or hydro, energy production uses the energy stored within the fuel (nuclear, coal, natural gas or eCat). Since eCat emits no greenhouse gases nor dangerous residuals as in nuclear power generation, eCat could replace most other fuel-based systems without adversely affecting the Earth.

  766. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Thank you for your futuristic insight,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  767. Andrea Rossi

    AlainCo:
    He,he,he…did the old expert of Los Alamos you heard of look like Peter Sellers? ( experimental observations reserve surprises).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  768. While we wait for the independent report, here is an exclusive radio interview with Andrea Rossi. He discusses his feelings about music, and his experience playing the drums. This appears this week’s “Tom and Doug Show” which is broadcast on WOOL-FM, KHOI-FM and other stations on the Pacifica Network.

    Here is a link to the internet version of the program:
    http://tomanddoug.com/podcasts/TDShow470.mp3

  769. Just a funny question (the rest is either positive or negative).

    Do you plan to build a tea kettle ? (even if it boils 10 tons of lyophilized tea)

    It seems that from old expert of Los Alamos I heard of, only a tea kettle can make them change their position.

    Scientific papers seems to have no value for most scientists. (experimental observation).

  770. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, as there is very little info coming, could you confirm that you prefer British tea to American coffee.
    I hope that is not covered by a NDA.
    Ha.
    Best wishes

  771. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    He,he,he…I prefer coffee, but after playing tennis tea is better. Obviously this is jamesbondy language to talk about the catalyzers of the E-Cat (!) dodging the NDA.
    Warm Regards,
    A.

  772. Rodney Nicholson

    Hi Andrea:

    I predict that, while the original design (your ‘Bologna model’) had many E-cat units set up ‘in parallel’, the design of the newest industrial model has multiple E-cat modules set up ‘in series’, with the coolant temperature rising step by step as it passes each unit.

    As an economist I enjoy predicting things. Of course my predictions are not always correct!

    Rodney Nicholson.

  773. Andrea Rossi

    Rodney Nicholson:
    Obviously we all have freedom of prediction!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  774. Steven N. Karels

    Sent from my iPhone

    On Jul 20, 2014, at 8:49 PM, “Steven Karels” wrote:

    Too Much Heat?

    If the world switched to eCat technology for all of its energy needs, would the planet become too warm?

    Assumptions:

    1. ECat technology used to generate electricity for all forms of energy produced (heating, cars, electrical).
    2. World population of 10 billion (10,000,000,000) people
    3. All people consume at the USA per capita level.
    4. Effective conversion efficiency is 30% (Carnot of 45% plus COP of 6)
    5. If the total man-made energy release is less than 1% of the solar insolation, then no excessive heating should be observed

    Given:
    1. The total solar energy absorbed by Earth’s atmosphere, oceans and land masses is approximately 3,850,000 exajoules (EJ) per year or 3.85 * 10^^24 Joules
    2. USA per capita energy consumption per year = 300 GJ or 3 * 10^^11 J per year per person (USA)

    Computation:
    1.0 * 10^^10 people * 3 * 10^^9 J/(year – person) = 3 * 10^^19 J per year
    Accounting for a 30% efficiency means the amount of heat released per year is 1.0 * 10^^20 J

    Therefore, since the amount of energy released, (with everyone on the planet consuming as much energy as the average American), the net increase is less than 1% of 1% of the solar insolation and excess heating should not be a problem. This, without the release of greenhouse gases.

  775. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    The heat produced from the E-Cats is in substitution, not in addition, to the average.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  776. silvio caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Reading between lines, it seems to me that the 1MW plant 001 is an evolution from the bologna container, while the TIP report is about the hot-cat cylinder module.
    This could explain why the positive or negative results of the last has no direct relation with the results of the first…
    My idea is that the goal of the last is to study the “rossi effect” by itself, while the object of the first is the industrial application of the effect…
    To make an automotive metafora: can we say hot-cat is like a “formula 1″ car while 1MW plant is like a “rally” car?

  777. Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    Yes, you are correct.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  778. Lata

    Hi Andrea,
    As a mother of two little kids, I must reprimand you for constantly saying results will be positive or negative. It is like showing a kid a candy wrapper. When the kid gets interested, you say candy may or may not be in there. I believe you must be a grandfather. It is not very grandfatherly for you to be teasing your followers :-)

    Regards and Good Luck,
    Lata

  779. Andrea Rossi

    Lata:
    I am sorry for your feeling, but I am not playing with candies. For what concerns the Third Independent Party report, there is nothing I can do but waiting the publication, which does not depend on me and I cannot have more information. Regarding the 1 MW plant, we cannot give any specific information before we are allowed to publish the data of its operations. We cannot risk to give data that eventually could become substantially different. Imagine you have candies you do not know what are they made with and you have to say to your children “I cannot give you these candies until I am not sure they are positive for you”.
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  780. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Photos are nice, but I would rather see test data – output versus input.

  781. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Of course. As I said, photos and data will be published when the visits will be allowed.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  782. Giuliano Bettini

    Andrea,
    georgehants says: “Come on, keep the galley happy, give us a small clue.”
    I propose, just a Selfie with the new 1 MW plant.
    All celebrities make a Selfie now. =D
    Thanks
    Giuliano Bettini

  783. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    We will publish the photos of the new 1MW plant .
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  784. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, Sherlock Holmes father Conan Doyle always knew that Sherlock had to give a few hints to the readers to keep them interested.
    Come on, keep the galley happy, give us a small clue.

  785. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    There are no clues, just very sophisticated measurements of which we are waiting the results.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  786. Angel Blume

    Dear Andrea,

    Precedent post did not arrive.

    My question:
    Apart from publication of TIP results, could you publish your own results with magnitude values.

    Best regards

    Angel

  787. Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    We will publish, from now on, only results of plants in operation. The Third Independent Report will be the last report published regarding an experiment on the current E-Cat or Hot Cat, , at least until we will not introduce significant modifications. We cannot give any further information about our plants until the opening of visits to our industrial plant in operation. About the TIP Report: it is not “so long delayed”, it is running through the normal reviewing period of any important scientific publication. There is no doubt that the results will be important, positive or negative as they might be.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  788. Angel Blume

    Dear Adrea,

    I have followed your work with great expectation since spring 2011. Apart from the publication of the Third Independent Party conclusions which are being so long delayed, are your own results positive or negative? Any figures of physical magnitudes herein?

    Best regards

    Angel

  789. Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    We will publish nothing before the publication of the Third Independent Party. We must confront it before any further communication.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  790. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    What is the size of the workforce working on the 1MW plant?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  791. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Compared to you, Sherlock Holmes was a dummy! ( he,he,he…I can’t give specific information now).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  792. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I am glad to hear you speak so highly of your team — it must make your job so much easier. It is difficult to conceive of a masterpiece that doesn’t work as you intend!

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  793. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Between Engineers, technicians, workers, Computer designer, the Team that worked on this 1 MW plant has been composed by 15 persons, plus me.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  794. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Have there been any restrictions placed on the testers about what they can do with the E-Cat reactors you gave them for their testing — if so, what are those restrictions?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  795. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    In Raleigh area the standard level of employees’ professional background is very high. Every member of our team, whatever his level and profession, has the highest level of professionality one can hope for, from the welder to the engineer. Working with them you feel what means to play in the Majors. When I say that we are making a masterpiece I really mean it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  796. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, just wanted to say I loved your comment to Curiosone about your lack of sleep,
    plus you shared the credit with your Team.
    You are first class !
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale Florida
    usa

  797. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Our team is making a terrific job. We are making a masterpiece.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  798. H-G Branzell

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    If the third party test comes out negative, what are the chances that the one MW plant that you are so busy building will work?

  799. Andrea Rossi

    H-G Branzell:
    He,he,he…good question. As a matter of fact these are two separated issues. Both are under exam.
    Theoretically, if one goes well there is no reason why the other go bad, and viceversa. Both results will arrive after a long term run, so both results will be reliable, positive or negative as they might be.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  800. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    The 1 MW plant that you are making now is still a remake of the one we saw in the 2012 test of Bologna?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  801. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I can say this: the 1 MW plant we are working upon has been manufactured in the USA, in the factory of Industrial Heat. It is substantially different from the one we made the test of in Bologna, because during these 2 years I did not sleep too much and because I am working with a top class Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  802. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Thank you again for your answer on quarks. You are a good teacher.
    W.G.

  803. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, while you and IH wait for the results of the new report, I take it that you and they are continuing your good work on LENR.
    Would you say that the progress being made fits in with your personal expectations of the E-cats abilities.
    Many thanks.

  804. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    My work now is focused on the new 1 MW plant. As soon as we will have results that will available for publication, we will publish them. So far, pending the tests on the 1 MW plant and an R&D work of our team that could result in positive or negative results, we cannot give specific information.
    Than you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  805. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    What effect does it have on your work to be located in the heart of the Research Triangle in North Carolina?

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  806. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    The protocol of the experiment will be published in the report. I am not authorized to give previous information about any issue regarding the experiment .
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  807. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    Black, grey, white; It doesn’t matter what color the cat, what’s important is whether it heats the factory!

    :D

    Joseph Fine

  808. alutam

    Andrea,
    You say positive or negative as though they are the only two possibilities.
    What about “inconclusive”?
    Regards

  809. Andrea Rossi

    alutam:
    Maybe too, you are right. Like black, grey, white.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  810. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Would you consider the installation of the initial 1MW plant the start of mass production?

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  811. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    In this place History has been made by some of the most imporant concerns of the USA.
    Besides, the Nature here is wonderful.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  812. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you, useful info as usual. A gift for our Readers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  813. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    Today, I received a paper from Drs. Fred Mayer and John Reitz which discusses Compton Composite Particles (i.e. Tresinos) in the early Universe. The message below is self-explanatory, but I am saddened that one of papers’ co-authors is no longer with us. The paper discusses their cosmological theories and the topic of dark matter. This subject may be of interest to astrophysicists, but may also be of interest to many others.

    Composite Regards,

    Joseph Fine

    //////

    Dear Colleagues,
    It is my pleasure to forward our new (open source) paper “Compton Composites Late in the Early Universe” to you. Unfortunately, it is also a sad moment because my mentor, colleague, and co-author, John Reitz, passed away just a few days before our paper was to appear.
    -Fred Mayer

    http://www.mdpi.com/2075-4434/2/3/382

  814. Curiosone

    Sorry, another question I forgot to ask for an answer: is it true that in the CERN accelerator protons speed makes them become smaller?
    Again, thank you,
    W.G.

  815. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone,
    Here are the answers to both comments of yours.
    Protons and neutrons are both made by 3 quarks; a proton is made by 2 UP quarks, each with an electric charge of +2/3 and a DOWN quark, with a charge of -1/3, so that the resulting charge is +1;
    neutrons are made by 2 DOWN and 1 UP, so that the resulting charge is 0.
    These quarks that make up the protons and the neutrons are called the “valence quarks”. The valence quarks are sorrounded by means of virtual particles, which are gluons, quark-antiquark pairs, so that the rest mass of protons and neutrons is much higher than the bare sum of the rest mass of the valence quarks. While the virtual particles around the valence quarks are in permanent revolution to make glad my friend Orsobubu, the number of the valence quarks remains fixed, so that if you add the total # of quark inside a proton, UP are always 2 more than the antiUP while likewise the # of DOWN is always 1 more than antiDOWN; in neutrons, DOWN are always 2 more than antiDOWN, UP are always 1 more than antiUP.
    Richard Feynmann named all these particles PARTONS.
    When protons ride around the Large Hadron Collider of CERN they reach a speed very close to the speed of the light; this fact, along the laws of the Relativity, make them become thinner: imagine a ball that becomes a subtle disk.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  816. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Another question of Physics, if you have time: of what are made protons and neutrons? I know, they are made by quarks, but can you explain some more ?
    Thank you for your patience,
    W.G.

  817. Andrea Rossi

    Daniel De Caluwè:
    If a LENR system works, it does not need public funding. If anything that works well needs funding, money arrives from investors. Think to Microsoft, Apple, etc. There are things that need public funding because they are important but do not produce profit, or the perspective of profits are too much distant in time to make them appealing for capital investments; in those cases is necessary that governments make funding: for example CERN, the conquer of Space, things like these. But it is not the case of LENR.
    This is my opinion, obviously it can be wrong.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  818. Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear dr. Rossi,

    Regarding the discussion about public or private funding of LENR, I can image that, in your case, you got a lot of dishonnest competition from wannebee competitors that are payed by taxpayer money (public funding), or by people who don’t play it very honestly, and was that the reason why, in your answer to Lande (who gave examples of the necessity of public funding in other fields), you wrote that LENR is a totally different thing.

    But why? I personally strongly believe that we, the people of the world (and we’re already with 7 billion on this globe, and we will be with 10 billion in 2050 or so), need very much LENR, because, (although there still are sceptics, especially in the United States), I studied very deeply the present climate change, and I know there is a problem (mainly caused by human activities), and also I know our nuclear power industry and its plants very well, and I know we need a better solution. So, as the present technologies are not good enough and could bring us in danger on the longer term (as well fossil fuels as present nuclear industry), do you agree that there should be (and probably will be an increasing) intrest and even demand from the public, maybe already in the near future? I personally think this will legitimate public funding, for the simple reason that the world needs it.

    Kind Regards,

  819. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    If the scientists performing the third party report figure out how the E-Cat works on their own – perhaps confirming by replicating the E-Cat – would you allow them to publish the details?

  820. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    The Third Independent Party, as such, is INDEPENDENT.
    They can publish what they want independently from me and whatever the results, positive or negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  821. Lande

    Dear mr Rossi,

    regarding your statement
    “I am totally contrary to public funding of LENR. It is a high risk field, that must be funded by enterpreneurs, not by taxpayers. Taxpayers must not be exposed to industrial risks.”

    I believe we have many industrial fields that started with public scientific research funding and which later was beneficial for humand kind. Like the Space and Moon race in the 1950′s and 60′s. Or the public funded research of Nuclear power for peaceful use, which have given us the Nuclear Power industry. So I don’t think it’s necessary a bad thing for the Public to fund high risk ventures, when the possible reward for the society are very high.

    And I may add that Public actually are exposed to industrial risks every day from the present Nuclear power plants, which have only limited liability against major Nuclear accidents….

    regards
    Lande

  822. Andrea Rossi

    Lande:
    Yes, the cases you cited are right, but LENR are a totally different thing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  823. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    At what point do you expect you will be able explain how the E-Cat Works?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  824. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland,
    It is impossible now to give an answer.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  825. H-G Branzell

    Dear Andrea Rossi, you wrote:

    “Yes, I agree about public funding of basic and foundamental research: without it the CERN could not exist. But the case of LENR is totally different.”

    Maybe when the second independent third party report is published it will not be totally different?

    /H-G Branzell

  826. Andrea Rossi

    H-G Branzell:
    Depends on the results
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  827. Giovanni Guerrini

    @ orsobubu
    Sorry,but I am not a keinesians,my thinking is more close to Jean Baptiste Say’s thinking.
    Maybe I did not explain well my ideas.
    I think that humanity evolution mast go on and it happens through natural laws. We are the product of nature and the human system is a natural system. Included freedom of choice.
    I think that Thecnology is the first way for our evolution and revolution,givin us more time for loving,thinking and everything is aligned with ours desires and attitudes. In a word, freedom.

    Regards G G

  828. orsobubu

    >I am totally contrary to public funding of LENR. It is a high risk field, that must be funded by enterpreneurs, not by taxpayers. Taxpayers must not be exposed to industrial risks

    Perhaps you could agree at least about public funding of basic, fundamental research; this is widespread policy also in United States. This way, the capitalistic state can boost the national competitivity in global markets, employ and specialize large masses of workers and at the same time replace the capitalists when they cannot risk big capitals in long term programs. Then, when there are some results, capitalists can take advantage of this generous public help, exploit the discoveries and bring them to market and make the bucks. Obviously, I’m not a keynesian, so I don’t agree either, but this is a common political economy that gave impressive results in the past. Mr Guerrini asks you to turn keynesian, but I know that we’re for the revolution and will resist the temptation.

  829. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    Yes, I agree about public funding of basic and foundamental research: without it the CERN could not exist. But the case of LENR is totally different.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  830. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    You have mentioned that you have made a strong investment in time, money and manpower in trying to replicate all LENR processes you can learn about from others through their available patent applications.

    Can you explain why this is such a priority for you when you have a huge job ahead of you in developing your own products?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  831. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    For to explain the theory behind its operation is necessary the start of the mass production.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  832. Giovanni Guerrini

    Dott Rossi,
    I agree with you.

    Regards G G

  833. silvio caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    about clowneries: Best way to hide a needle is to put a lot of straw around it. :-)
    About Ikegami-Petterson system and Brian Ahern System: do you think they use different technologies from your e-cat but share the same phisical effect or we are admiring an incredible series of new phisical discoveries?

  834. Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    Should I have to answer specifically to your good question, I would have to explain what happens inside the E-Cat’s reactor. Let’s delay the answer to when I will be able to explain how the E-Cat works.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  835. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Stunning, thank you very much for your usual useful information,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  836. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in July 12th, 2014 at 11:32 AM

    1) ————————————-
    Dear Wlad,
    I am looking forward to the publication of your latest ansazt concerning the interaction of energy-matter.

    REPLY:
    Dear eernie1, the latest comment of mine concerning the interaction matter-energy is the item 11 of my paper AETHER STRUCTURE FOR UNIFICATION BETWEEN GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM, submitted for publication two months ago to JoNP.
    I hope the paper will be published in Nov-2014

    2) ————————————
    I assume you are attempting to also explain the involvement of gravitational effects in your dissertation.

    REPLY:
    Yes

    3)—————————————-
    Do you present a different argument for the presence of only an attractive gravitational effect?

    REPLY:
    The paper proposes how strings formed by fluxes of gravitons, electricitons, and magnetons, are criated within the structures of the electron and proton, responsible for their electro-magnetic-gravitaty field

    4)——————————————–
    Also what have you decided for the speed of the effect? Is it instantaneous or does it propagate at the speed of light as determined by a Chinese experimenter who measured the speed by using tidal effects caused by the moons mass?

    REPLY:
    The speed of light

    regards
    wlad

  837. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Your paper arrived damaged: please send it again as an attachment to an email to be mailed to:
    info@journal-of-nuclear-physics.com
    Do not use Leonardo’s email address, please.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  838. Giovanni Guerrini

    And I refer not only to the man of the street:
    http://iononfaccioniente.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/ancora-uninterrogazione-parlamentare-sulla-fusione-fredda/

    I think this is another “Rossi’s effect” !

    Regards G G

  839. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni Guerrini:
    I am totally contrary to public funding of LENR. It is a high risk field, that must be funded by enterpreneurs, not by taxpayers. Taxpayers must not be exposed to industrial risks.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  840. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    The following links descibe the “MiniSpec” – a recently developed compact Gamma Ray Spectrometer. MiniSpec connects wirelessly to a Smartphone and displays radiation intensity and Gamma Spectra. It was developed by Prof. Abi Farsoni of Oregon State University. This device can be used for environmental safety/security. Also, to make you aware that Gamma Spectrometers have been getting smaller and smaller.

    MiniSpec (Gamma Spectrometer)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmirNBEoGYU

    http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2014/jul/sophisticated-radiation-detector-designed-broad-public-use

    High Energy Regards,

    Joseph Fine

  841. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Is this masterpiece so good that you will duplicate it many times — or is this a custom project?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  842. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    I did not say “I made a strong investment in time, money and manpower trying to replicate all LENR processes of the competitors”: I wrote “WE ( etc)”. We have set up a team of specialists for this purpose, to learn exactly what our competition does. I am not involved in this work, because, as you correctly say, I have other priorities, but I Always read the results to keep me informed and updated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  843. Giovanni Guerrini

    Dear Dott Rossi,
    if I should be in your clothes I’d not be worried,because in the market there is the true.
    When you give an E-CAT to a scientist,he wants know how it works,when you give it to an industrialist he wants to see a good performance that gives him a lot of money.
    So he is very happy and this is the greatest evidence that the E-CAT works well.
    I think this is a synthesis,because the E-CAT could “save the world” exploiting a human “fault”,but this is a personal thinking.

    Mark,
    for “a lot of people” I was talking about the “man of the street”, the people who ,3-4 years ago,did’n know anything about lenr or “cold fusion”,now I have noticed that a lot of them say “oh,now there is the cold fusion!”.They are the same persons who said to me “cold fusion? Ah,it doesn’t work..”
    This could be a cultural effect of another “Rossi’s effect”.
    It seems that they have lost their memory,and I enjoy myself saying “oh,is it true?!”.
    Everyone enjoy himself as he can. eh eh.

    Regards G G

  844. Todd Burkett

    Hello Andrea
    Did your replication efforts include Blacklight powers suncell tech?
    As Dr.Mills hydrino is not a LENR, but a possible competing energy source?

  845. Andrea Rossi

    Todd Burkett:
    We have made substantial investments to replicate ALL the experiments reported in patents and publications. I repeat : ALL. I am sure that, at least in some cases, we know those Technologies better than the inventors themselves. We are taking LENR of our potential competitors very seriously and I confrm what I answered to Giovanni Guerrini today.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  846. Koen Vandewalle

    Andrea,
    Why would anyone in his right mind try to compete with you ?
    It is extremely pointless. A waste of time and effort.

    If your tech were open-sourced, then there would be some contest.
    If the music is the same, the dancers can compete.

    I’ve been watching “Le Concert”.
    I still wonder what role would suit me.
    Do you know what role suits you ?

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  847. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle :
    Le Concert: the director of the orchestra of the Bolscioi has been reduced to a janitor for crimes he did not commit……… What a wonderful movie, probably the best I ever have seen in my life.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  848. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    If you not only tested patented concepts but also know how, does that mean Ikegami’s proposal for a “lithium permeated grain metal” system – using not only nickel but also lithium and magnesium – may have validity or may work? The paper which details the concept can be found here.

    http://www.roxit.ax/CN.pdf

    The above paper also explains a theory of how transmutations of nickel into copper may not be the primary energy source. It actually goes into a lot of detail in what reactions may be taking place. I’m very curious to know if you consider the paper and proposal clownery, or something potentially real and worthy of being studied.

  849. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    The Ikegami- Peterson theory is worth to be studied.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  850. Mark

    @GG
    “People”? There are people still literally believe that the earth is only 6000 year-old. Depending on who you are talking to I suppose. “A lot”??? Where???. Other horses could be Mitsubishi heavy industries……end of the day from the consumers perspective, the more genuine competitors to the field the better.

  851. Giovanni Guerrini

    …three years ago a lot of people said that this technology did not exist…now there are a lot of horses and people that say ” I said that lenr works !”.
    I enjoy myself very much ! eh eh .

    Regards G G

  852. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni Guerrini:
    I agree with you, but I am very worried of the wannabe competitors that now are presenting clowneries, like did Defkalion: they are very dangerous, because their failures will spray dirt on our work, as well as defkalion did: our enemies are eager to find another defkocones to say that all LENR world is a clownerie. Therefore I want to say sound and clear: we have replicated all the existing patents and know hows regarding the LENR existing in the world and no one of them has manifested a real heat excess with the following exceptions: Ikegami-Petterson system and Brian Ahern System. These are the only two systems that actually gave us evidence of a heat excess. All the other systems that we have reproduced ( and we have reproduced, with huge investments, all of the systems that have been proposed in all the world in the last 20 years, with particular attention on the experiments made in the last 4 years, that have been analyzed with extreme endeavour) have not given any heat excess evidence. One of them had put in the market a “kit” that has turned out to be a joke. I have to say this to make well clear that any future failure coming from all the burlesque reactors persented recently have nothing to do with our work and has not any right to cite our work as a reference without our explicit permission.
    I hope this has been understood sound and clear, because I have been strongly disturbed form all the insults I had to sustain after the clownerie of the def… has been put in evidence, even if I had said from the beginning that def… was a clownerie. Much before Others have put it in evidence.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  853. eernie1

    Dear Wlad,
    I am looking forward to the publication of your latest ansazt concerning the interaction of energy-matter. I assume you are attempting to also explain the involvement of gravitational effects in your dissertation. Do you present a different argument for the presence of only an attractive gravitational effect? Also what have you decided for the speed of the effect? Is it instantaneous or does it propagate at the speed of light as determined by a Chinese experimenter who measured the speed by using tidal effects caused by the moons mass?

  854. Mark

    LATA
    It is all about “could be positive or negative” at this stage and I generously give 3 figures. If Andrea is all out on “positive” I will gladly add a few more zeros on.
    There are other horses in the market and Andrea , you don’t want to be too late!

  855. Andrea Rossi

    Mark:
    We are working under a tremendous pressure, but we are working well. Other horses? That’s what competition is!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  856. Lata

    Andrea,

    Someone suggested that the first 1MW plant has a serial number of 001. Should you not reserve at least twelve digits for the serial number, like 000 000 000 001. If everyone in the world had an e-cat, nine digits won’t be enough. Long time ago, Bill Gates allegedly said, “who needs more than 640K of memory?”! You don’t want to make that kind of mistake.

    Regards and Good Luck,
    Lata

  857. Andrea Rossi

    Lata:
    He,he,he…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  858. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in July 11th, 2014 at 5:12 PM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Please just submit the appendix as an appendix to your paper. We cannot publish twice the same paper.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    ———————————————–

    OK,
    the appendix was sent to JoNP, having the following item :

    11. The different mechanisms for energy-matter interaction

    regards
    wlad

  859. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    We received it, thank you. The paper has been already sent to the peer reviewer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  860. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in July 10th, 2014 at 7:04 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    But if you have urgency, you can send your appendix first as a link in a comment to this blog – you can do this also right now, and it will be immediately published- and at the same time send it to the JoNP as you usually do, where it will be reviewed first, published eventually.

    COMMENT
    Dear Andrea
    there is no urgency, I only wished to know if there is no problem to incorporate a new item, and submit it again.

    I will send the paper again (with the new item incorporated to it) to the JoNP.

    regards
    wlad

  861. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Please just submit the appendix as an appendix to your paper. We cannot publish twice the same paper.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  862. orsobubu

    >Our Team is making a masterpiece. But I must add that…(Orsobubu, please complete this phrase)

    Our Team is making a masterpiece. But I must add that energy production systems are in permanent revolution. Also I must add that we don’t know if the masterpiece could possibly work or there is a chance that it does not work at all

  863. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    Perfect: any number can be negative or positive, whatever the figure.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  864. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Andrea

    I had a new insight on how works the mechanism of interaction matter-energy, and I would like to incorporate it to my paper AETHER STRUCTURE FOR UNIFICATION BETWEEN GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM, submitted to the Journal of Nuclear Physics 2 months ago.

    As the time of the peer review process is about 6 months, I would like to know if I can write a new additional item in the paper, and submit it again to the JoNP.

    regards
    wlad

  865. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Welcome back!
    We have a long list of articles under peer review, and your appendix has to be reviewed anyway, I cannot tell you how much time it takes, I am not your reviewer. But if you have urgency, you can send your appendix first as a link in a comment to this blog – you can do this also right now, and it will be immediately published- and at the same time send it to the JoNP as you usually do, where it will be reviewed first, published eventually.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  866. Mark

    Hi Andrea
    A piece of great technological history, whoever has got the first unit serial number 001.

  867. Andrea Rossi

    Mark:
    I agree. Whatever the results.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  868. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    How is work on the 1MW plant progressing?

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  869. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    This is the 1 MW that will be produced in series.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  870. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Regarding the 1MW plant you are installing at a customer’s factory: Did it pass the required tests at your factory satisfactorily before you took it to the new location?

    And happy independence day — how have you celebrated the holiday?

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  871. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Our Team is making a masterpiece. But I must add that…(Orsobubu, please complete this phrase)
    Warm regards
    A.R.

  872. Carlo Marcena

    At this point, having seen the long time professors are taking to issue their TP report, I am quite sure that they are going to give us good news. In fact, disclosing negative results and avoiding any disturbance to the energy “business as usual”, would have been much more easy, and fast.
    Regards to everybody,

    CM

  873. Here is a movie-trailer for the upcoming feature-length film called “Andrea Rossi: Revolution”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHJ6julvoMg

  874. Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    Thank you and good luck for your work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  875. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Since the publication of the TPR seems a relatively long time away I would like to continue this line of thought to perhaps fill the time with some interesting discussion.
    OF course I am speaking of electron capture by nuclei of heavier elements. The proton capture of electrons to produce neutrons however is an ongoing discussion among various groups(Mills et al) which want to explain LENR with this reaction. Other groups(Italian priest et al)claim to have produced neutrons in this manner and have proposed a few sources for the missing 780kev of mass. From heavy electrons to vacuum space energy to acceleration effects, the theories continue.
    I think I have previously stated that attempting to explain the LENR effect by fusing H or D is the hard way to proceed. It is much easier and takes much less energy to manipulate electrons, especially when aided by the large coulomb forces within the nucleus of heavy atoms. When the electron fields are inside the nucleus all sorts of reactions can be proposed especially with the interaction of the weak forces. They can cause Beta emission, neutrino emission and even ejection of electrons from the atom along with a variety of energetic photons. All these have been reported in published reports by various highly regarded scientific authors.
    What ever the case, I look forward with great interest the publication of your theory.
    Thank you for all the enjoyable discussions you have provided me and continued good luck on your development efforts.

  876. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Thanks to you!
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  877. Andrew

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    What you keep saying about the schedule of the pubblication is completely understandable, and there is no doubt that (considering previous events) several months of keen review of data, it’s the only way to proceed.
    Having that said, there is one thing I do not understand.
    You have to agree with me that the magnitude of the ‘Rossi effect’ that you claim It s not that hard to test. I mean they have to test a cop a lot grater than 1. Grater enough to be economically competitive to other forms of energy. If indeed it could take several months to public a report, I am absolutely sure that it would not take more than a week to a serious expert professor to state wheather the apparatus meets your claims .
    This means that at this point they know without any reasonable doubt if the Cat works or not.
    And that leads to the conclusion that there is no reason for them to not share (at least with you) their results.
    What do you think?

  878. Andrea Rossi

    Dear Andrew:
    In the first part of your comment you answered to the second part. Besides, the peer review of a scientific publication takes minimum 3 months maximum one year.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  879. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    some days ago (July 1st, 2014) you wrote “It is true that now and again I make a phone call to the Professors to ask about the scheduling of the publication.”
    Me too. hehe…, not a phone call to the Professors but a request to you.
    =D
    But later (on July 5th, 2014) you said “it won’t take too long the publication of the report”.
    It would be interesting to know if it’s some new news or just a guess.
    And if it’s a news, what “not too long” means? Days?
    Best regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  880. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    Only a guess. Not days, anyway, nor weeks. Several months, is my guess.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  881. Dear Andrea Rossi,
    In beta+ decay, a proton converts itself to neutron by emitting a W+ boson, which in turn decays to positron and neutrino. In electron capture, the same happens except that the W+ boson absorbs an electron to emit a neutrino. Both processes are described by the same Feynman diagram interaction vertex, so from the QFT point of view, there is no difference between beta+ decay and electron capture.

    In proton-rich beta+ active nuclei, electron capture is always possible in principle, while positron emission can only occur when the energy excess is sufficient to create a positron. When energy excess is above the limit, positron emission is typically more probable than electron capture (because it has a smaller number of input particles, I assume).

    The relationship between beta+ decay and electron capture is somewhat analogous with the spontaneous and stimulated emission of photons. In QED all those processes are described by a single interaction vertex and a single coupling constant (the fine-structure constant), although the phenomenology of the processes is quite different: one describes ordinary bodies, the other describes a laser. It took Einstein to realise this.

    As you pointed out, a free proton cannot spontaneously turn into a neutron by this coupling because it is energetically not possible.

    Best regards, /pekka

  882. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Not to belabor the question, but as reported by many sources(including Fermi) one of the most common modes of radioactive decay(Beta- or Beta+) is postulated to be caused by electron capture including 56Ni. In all cases the resulting reaction involves the subsequent emission of a neutrino along with the Betas. The reports also measured Auger electrons and x rays which were predicted to occur when the upper electrons fell down into the vacated inner orbits(K shell). There seems to be a large consensus among researchers that electron capture does occur. If as you say the emission of the neutrinos cannot explain the conservation of parity, what else can?

  883. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Beta+ and Beta- decay, discovered by Fermi, are totally different things from electron capture. They are mediated in the weak force field by the W bosons, which are the sole bosons, with Z boson, the other boson that mediates the weak forces, able to change the identity of the particles they interact with inside the nucleus, not outside: the electron and the positron emitted, respectively, from the Beta- and the Beta+ decay are generated from the nucleus of the atom and have nothing to do with the K field of the electrons .
    About the electron capture:
    p + e^- = n + nu_e
    does not conserve the energy, therefore I can’t see how they can respect the parity. Make the math:
    p = 938.3 MeV
    n = 939.6 MeV
    e^+ = 0.5110 MeV
    nu_e = 2.2 eV
    The difference is equal to 1.6 times circa the mass of an electron.
    Electron captures can happen, it is true, exceptionally, but in case of instable atoms with a strong excess of protons, because in that case we have an exceptional exchange of photons between the nucleons and the K field of the electrons, but this is not our case. They are the classic exception that confirms the rule.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  884. Dave Lafleur

    Dr. Rossi,
    I find your work credible and am excited to see the potential for your science. I wonder if you would care to comment on any career advice in this field of what could be a major breakthrough. Boilermaker?

  885. Andrea Rossi

    Dave Lafleur:
    At the moment we have the safety certifications only for industrial plants. Industrial utilization of heat is the more profitable field, because in this field is possible to operate 24/7/360.
    Boilermaker surely could be an option. But remind that the results of the tests in course could be negative, so let’s be conservative so far. Thank you for your enthusiasm, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  886. Mark

    Andrea
    I also predict that the EHV and HV grids will disappear and be replaced by smart Mv and Lv grids. The reason why we have EHV and HV grids, is transmission efficiency over long distances. They will be no longer required with local Hotcat boosters compensators, which can do the job more efficiently and cheaply. Maybe there will be a smart grid, which can coordinate the number of online Hotcats and generators to the most demanding areas via the internet.

  887. Mark

    Hello Andrea
    I predict this scenario will happen when the Hotcat is available for sale. The grids and utilities will approach you and buy them in the thousands. They will fit them together with the suitable generators and inverters inside the substations or along the transmission lines to boost the power output of their grids cheaply and become very competitive in running cost to your home Ecat versions. The last thing they want, is people getting off grid. Mark.

  888. Andrea Rossi

    Mark:
    I predict another scenario: if the validity of the so called Rossi Effect will find confirmation in the report of the TIP and in the operation of the first plants installed, this technology will have the development within the limits of its potentiality inside the market. I am not able to know specifically in this period where these limits will set, but, as I Always said, there will be in any case an integration. What we will have, if all this will work, will be a new fire to be used. Anybody will be able to change fire, within the limits of the competitivity.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  889. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    L. Alvarez has written a number of papers on the electron capture process. He expanded on the foundation work of Wick and makes a good argument for it. Again perhaps I am misunderstanding your questions.

  890. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Of course, I know numbers of papers have been written about electron capture, and I read many of them, but this does not change the fact that leptons conservation law cannot be violated and that one neutrino does not conserve one electron. What I need to read is the report of the experiment in which an electron capture happened, with a credible, and not naif, explication how leptons conservation law has been respected.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  891. Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Electron capture (in the usual meaning of the term) is not a wrong concept because neutrino emission balances the lepton conservation law: p+e->n+nu_e.
    Whether electron capture has anything to do with LENR, I do not know.
    Best regards, /pekka

  892. Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    your comment assumes that a neutrino is enough to conserve an electron, which is wrong.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  893. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    What do you see as the major opposition to eCat technology, assuming the TIR report is positive?

  894. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I do not know, and I am an experimentalist: we will see.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  895. orsobubu

    Andrea, whith all this horrible drones swarming around, when publicly disclosing your current geographical position, please sidetrack the exact location by a couple of miles, just in case :)

  896. Andrea Rossi

    orsobubu:
    he,he,he…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  897. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I do not mean to take up your valuable time, but I think what you mean is that no sign of electron capture has been shown in any LENR experiments. The concept of electron capture(reverse Beta, internal conversion) has been shown in many experiments to be a viable effect. Usually a neutrino is emitted during the process which balances the electron spin parity. Perhaps I am missing something.

  898. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Send us a link to a publication wherein there is an electron capture with the respect of the lepton conservation: I never saw one. A neutrino is not enough to conserve the balance of leptons in an electron capture process!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  899. Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Part of energy price is due to market vision of its likely future scarcity due to depletion of some easily extractable oil and gas resources. Belief in the scientific and practical viability of the Rossi Effect will change the market vision, because it will provide an economic incentive for producers to sell more oil and gas before the products diminish in value too much. If this happens (i.e. if some produces indeed start to sell more oil and gas), the price of energy will drop. If that happens, it is obviously good for consumers, but it also reduces the E-cats’ profit margin.

    I realise that the above description is a bit complicated, so let me try a simpler version: Knowledge of E-cat might reduce energy price to some extent, possibly rapidly, so the E-cat in the market might face a somewhat tougher competition from traditional energies than what the present price levels would indicate.

    I hope the E-cat has enough “reserve” to be able to compete economically in a robust way even if the energy market changes as described above. Notice that the price change could come rapidly, much more rapidly than the availability of E-cat energy itself would affect the market by normal mechanisms.

    Best regards, /pekka

  900. Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    I understand perfectly what you say, but I repeat that all energy sources will be integrated in the market along specific fields of competitivity, in a dynamic evolution.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  901. eernie1

    Andrea,
    I have noticed that the bloggers on Vortex-l are discussing internal conversion through electron capture as a possible LENR producer. They seem to look for reactions involving deuterium rather than in the metals used in LENR. I would suggest they read further the work of Fermi(Beta decay), Gian-Carlo Wick, L. Alvarez and Hideki Yucawa. If they do not understand or believe the reaction
    ,this research may aid them.

  902. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    I think electron capture is a wrong concept because it violates the leptons conservation law. I will, of course, be happy to say I am wrong as soon as I will be informed of substantial experimental evidence of it. So far, no trace of it I have been informed of.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  903. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea, the customer that has bought the 1 MW plant is someway owned or has been also partially owned now or in past by Industrial Heat or by Leonardo Corp?
    Warm regards
    D.T.

  904. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Raleigh, North Carolina, USA; in the factory of Industrial Heat, in the heart of the Research Triangle, where many mammoth companies have their R&D centers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  905. “The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it.”
    Chinese Proverb.

    I think sometimes the Eastern philosophers can tell us a bit about how to approach a situation where we don’t know all of the details.

    Cheers,
    Mattias

  906. Andrea Rossi

    Mattias Andersson:
    Right!
    Warm regards
    A.R.

  907. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Where are you exactly in this moment, if I can ask?
    D.T.

  908. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Not at all.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  909. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    You have stated the scientists doing the testing can perform whatever tests they see fit. Does this mean:

    1) They can perform any type of analysis (microscopic, elemental, isotopic) on the contents of the reactors – metals, gases, hydrides – that they desire?

    2) They can perform any type of analysis on the walls of the reactor?

    3) They can use the above info to attempt to build and replicate a hot cat? Cherokee has done this already, and I wonder if the TIP might be trying to do the same.

    4) They can publish any of the above findings in the report?

  910. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    What they are doing will be described in the report. I do not know what they are doing and I cannot give information about the protocol of the experiment, that surely will be published in the report.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  911. Curiosone

    Dr Rossi:
    I also wanted to ask: do you think it is more useful an instrument like this of the Lund University or the titanic facilities like CERN’s LHC ?
    W.G.

  912. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    These are two totally different things. LHC is a concern dedicated to theoretical Physics, to discover elementary particles that can be found only with unimmaginable energies in the common world. I strongly doubt that the particles discovered by apparatuses like the LHC will find a practical use, due to the costs of production. MAX IV and ESS are born to study any kind of material at costs that can be sustained to improve any product. In a nutshell, here is the principle upon which this system is based: when a beam of neutrons is aimed at a sample,some neutrons pass trough the material, some deviate with a characteristic angle that allows, analysing the deflection patterns and the energy of the neutrons, to get information regarding fundamental properties of the material targeted; for example, it will be possible to determine atomic and magnetic structures and to get a deeper understanding of the possible applications.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  913. Curiosone

    Dr Rossi:
    What do you think of the MAX IV and ESS ?
    (Google Lund University Max IV, ESS)
    W.G.

  914. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I read that this fantastic plant is in the middle of an intensive development phase: this facility is like a gigantic microscope that, by means of neutrons, will allow to study materials more completely than ever. It will be extremely useful for all the scientific community.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  915. WaltC

    Andrea,
    The E-Cat detractors are getting desperate– to paraphrase how their complaints have evolved over time:

    1) It can’t work, the neutrons would kill you.
    2) Maybe neutrons aren’t a problem, but it’s only just a chemical reaction.
    3) Maybe it’s not chemical, but it’s not reproducible.
    4) Maybe it’s reproducible, maybe it works, but it’s not patentable because it happens in nature all the time. (So does Velcro/burrs which is patented.)
    5) Maybe it works, maybe it’s patentable, but he won’t share part of the profits with poor children.

    I wonder what they’ll come up with next?

    By the way, I believe the vast majority of the readers here completely trust your word– on profit sharing & many other things still to come.

    Walt C.

  916. Andrea Rossi

    WaltC:
    The E-Cat detractors are making a wonderful work: they do not know, but I read carefully all they say and write. Their critics sometimes are right, sometimes are not, but in both cases we learn from them. You have noticed that the more they fight against us the more we grow up and a scientific observation should put a ratio cause-effect between the criticism and our growth.
    About your paragraphs:
    1- no neutrons exit from the E-Cats
    2- quite difficult with the first and second thermodynamic principles
    3- we will see from the next Third Independent Party: maybe it is true, maybe not
    4- the patentability has nothing to do with the question if it works or not
    5- this is a very important paragraph, let us analyse it; first of all we must put a distinction between the objective and the subjective aspect of this issue;
    a- objective aspect: if the so called Rossi Effect works ( and let me remind to all that the results of the tests could be positive, but also negative) it will be useful for everybody, also for the children or all the world
    b- subjective aspect: I repeat what I wrote in another comment today: I gave my honour word that a relevant part of the profits of our work will be spent to fund the healthcare of children whose families cannot afford proper healthcare. I said it, my Team and I are doing it, we will do it. Do not ask me anymore about this issue, because this is an issue I want not to trumpet around.
    Thank you for your trust.
    You ask: what they will come up with next ? Whatever it will be, we will take advantage of it. In my life I had to overcome many, many, many very, very negative events and to survive I developed a skill to turn into positive a negative event: for example, when I have been put in prison for crimes I never made, I told to myself: ” what a wonderful occasion to study the LENR: now I lost everything I had, all my time can be dedicated to this”. It worked.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  917. Claud

    Dear Andrea, you say that “any attempt to stop a competitive product is a lost battle” but this is true only in a “perfect competition” environment that happens in a very limited macro-economics actual circumstances. Especially in the field of energy, which influences worldwide lifestyle and economy, the theoretical principles are defeated by geopolitical interests, weapon enforcement, big cartel price fixing and so on.
    Unfortunately the world goes without referring to economics textbooks.

  918. Andrea Rossi

    Claud:
    I am structurally optimist: if a product is competitive the Customers buy it. If a product is not competitive, the market will eliminate it. Period. I also have the luck to live in a Country where if something has a Worth, its Worth is always sustained: the USA.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  919. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    There is one thing that disturbs me, that is circulationg in minor blogs that have been reported to me: I am accused not to respect my honour word to spend relevant part of the profits produced by the Rossi Effect for the healthcare of children that cannot afford proper healthcare. I gave my word on this issue, and I always do what I say, even if this will not be trumpeted around.
    In due time and in due sites we will give information of this endeavour of us. I am very upset to have to write about this, but, unfortunately, the mother of the imbeciles is always pregnant and we must take care of what pops out.
    Andrea Rossi

  920. ettore

    Dear Andrea,

    to me it has always seemed as if the market is not as democratic as it should be. Power is not homogeneously distributed but rather concentrated on old established companies and networks.

    I am actually worried that some of these companies and networks have a large interest in disturbing or at least decelerating yours and other inventor’s work to conserve their power and position. Let us all do our best to not let them. As far as I am concerned I will.

    There are things whose importance lies beyond economical success.

    Best wishes,
    Ettore

  921. Andrea Rossi

    Ettore:
    I do not agree with you. Power is distributed in the cheapest way at the moment. Believe me: a product does not resist in the market if it is not competitive, and to decide if it is competitive or not is only one entity: THE CUSTOMER. For this reason we do not react to the stupidities said about our product, we just care the satisfation of the Customer, while the science of tests and experiments is essential to the development of a reliable industrial product. Any attempt to stop a competitive product is a lost battle, because the Customers will eliminate the non competitive ones.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  922. KeithT

    Dear Andrea,

    For the third party examinations, in addition to the Ecat is your theory also being examined.

    Best regards,

    Keith Thomson.

  923. curwin

    Andrea,

    Congratulations, not long now!

    Many LENR studies find some metal samples being tested reproduce the desired effect whilst other samples, often from the same batch, don’t. However, the majority of these studies use the electrolysis method.

    Does your method find that some batches of ‘fuel’ do not work as hoped, or have you completely overcome that problem?

    Best regards,
    Colin

  924. Andrea Rossi

    Curwin:
    This issue is typical of the systems based upon electrolysis . We do not use any kind of electrolysis.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  925. ettore

    Dear Dr. Andrea Rossi,

    your invention will relativise the meaning of money itself. Since such an enormous drop of the price of energy und it’s availability should strongly influence the economy.

    I think it would be very interesting to discuss the economical and societal impact of your invention.

    Best wishes,
    Ettore de Sio

  926. Andrea Rossi

    Ettore:
    I repeat: all the energy sources must be integrated. The commercial and social impact of the so called Rossi Effect will be made by that universal and democratic medium that is the market: in mercatu veritas.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  927. Ken

    Dr Andreawhile Rossi,

    How is the certification for the home user e-cats coming along? We haven’t heard much about them in awhile.

    Ken

  928. Andrea Rossi

    Ken:
    Before we get such a safety certification strong statistics of industrial plants safe operation are necessary. We are constantly working on this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  929. LMV

    Hi Andrea,

    I for once completely agree with Andrew’s comment. Some photos will not hurt your company.

  930. Andrea Rossi

    LMV:
    I understand you all, but when we publish photos they are analized from professionals to the most microscopical level. Our photos are never trivial, if analyzed to that level, even if to you they can appear trivial. We will give all the specific possible information as soon as we will open the visits period. It won’t take too long, as well as it won’t take too long the publication of the report.
    Thanks to all of you for your strong attention, I understand the feeling, but we have to avoid a mess and an infinite theory of one ended discussions, not having the possibility, in this stage, to answer to the unavoidable tsunami of questions.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  931. Andrew

    Dr Andrea Rossi,
    For all of those people that support, believe and cheer for you, why don’t you give back a Little something? Such as some fresh new pictures of the working Plan or the hot Cat or whatever..
    That would Not violate your nda anyway
    Best regards

  932. Andrea Rossi

    Andrew:
    We are close to the moment in which abundance of what you are requesting will be poured in this blog and, maybe, somewhere else.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  933. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Thank you for your response to Giuliano Bettini below. These explanations are helpful to those of us who are following this story in making sense of the situation.

    Two follow-up questions if you don’t mind.

    1. Are the peer reviewers committed to publishing the report in the scientific magazine whatever the results might be — positive, negative, or inconclusive?

    2. If the peer reviewers refuse to publish the results for whatever reason, are the testers free to publish the results independently?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  934. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Before we deliver a plant it has to be tested in our factory.
    I celebrated my 4th of July studying History of the USA, playing tennis, swimming and biking. Tomorrow back at work.
    Hope you too got fun.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  935. DTravchenko

    Did I understand well? Did you say that this blog is useless to you? As I said, you are the worst enemy of yourself.
    D.T.

  936. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    In my answer to BroKeeper ( to which obviously you refer) I said anything but what you write. This blog is a true treasure for me and my team, because we learn here from our Readers an infinite amount of information that surely is strongly useful to our work. I just said that we did not get information useful regarding what happens inside the reactor’s core, and it is obvious, so long we do not give information, direct or indirect, about it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  937. Curiosone

    I also would like to know if it is different from the 1 MW plant that has been tested in Bologna in October 2011
    W.G.

  938. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yes, it is different.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  939. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Has the 1 MW plant been built in the USA in the factory of Industrial Heat of Raleigh, North Carolina?
    I hope this is not confidential,
    Godspeed,
    W.G.

  940. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  941. Andrea Rossi

    To all our USA Readers:
    Happy July 4th and remember that July 4th is not just a barbecue chance, but is maily to remember the fight to get Independence from any oppression. Freedom is not for free, also freedom from the stupidity of persons that do not understand a revolution.
    Andrea Rossi

  942. Pietro F

    Un tempaccio da quelle parti, ho letto che l’uragano Arthur sta arrivando sulla Carolina del nord, forse era meglio Miami!!! Buon lavoro ingeniere (per meriti).

    A bad weather in those parts, I read that the hurricane Arthur is coming on North Carolina, it was better to Miami! Good job engineer (for merit)

    Pietro F

  943. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F:
    Yes, Arthur hit the coast, but the effect has been not so strong inland, where we work. Thank you for your feeling!
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  944. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: Below is an article about Dean Karmen and his sterling engine. 1) Do you think your E-Cat could effectively supply the heat? 2) Have you met Dean Karmen to discuss? If not, do you think a meeting with him would be productive? Thanks.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/07/02/dean-kamen-thinks-his-new-stirling-engine-could-power-the-world/?utm_campaign=techtwittersf&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

  945. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    I think that can be an interesting application.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  946. BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    You have a multitude of followers that visualize your contribution to society as an epoch of industrial and social revolution. Because of this many have offered helpful ideas, suggestions and innovative contributions within this JoNP. Have any of these instilled an epiphany to you for E-Cat and its peripheral application? If so, could you provide any insight as to what those may have been and any significant role to its evolution? If not now, could you provide those insights after the public industrial demonstration? Thank you.

    Best regards,

    BroKeeper

  947. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    I can say that this blog is very useful for an exchange of information. I learn very much from the comments made here, in general, but it is very difficult to find a specific link to the epiphany of the E-Cat, also because, as you know, I never exchange information about the operation of the reactor. Information exchanged here is very useful in general, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  948. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi you can also Google:
    The men who built America
    And watch the videos
    Robert Curto

  949. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    As I said many times, I am sure all the energy sources will be integrated for the good of all.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  950. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi I live in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, on Channel 116 H2 they have a program called:
    The men who built America, with serval parts, all good.
    The one that I think is very good is:
    Changing the Game. J.P. Morgan.
    When he wanted to bring electricity to America, John D. Rockefeller tried to stop him, because he was selling kerosene to provide light.
    He knew the electric bulb would put him out of business.

    I was wondering if the people who provide Coal, Nuclear Power, Natural Gas, Solar, Wind, etc. are worried that the ECat will provide electricity with less expense and zero emissions ?
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  951. Andrea Rossi

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

  952. Layman

    Hi Andrea
    You can just sell the thermal energy only and not the unit and keep the IP secured . Seeing the unit in operation making money for your customers in long term, no Tip report can equate that.

  953. Andrea Rossi

    Layman:
    Your comment makes sense, but there are many other formulas that can protect the IP against reverse engineering. The contracts we make with our Customers protect us adequately, combined with the due diligence we make upon our Customers, their real need of the energy produced by our plants and upon the history of their activity.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  954. Hermano Tobia: I totally understand Andrea Rossi position with eCat IP as he nailed it down once again in his answer. In the case of Google, Linux open source operating system code in Android is good choice for Google business strategy. But keep in mind, that Googles most valuable IP is in their superior Internet search algorithms and technology, which are strictly secret, closed source and proprietary software.

    kind regards

    Ville Kanninen

  955. Andrea Rossi

    Ville Kanninen:
    Thank you, very good point.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  956. eernie1

    Jacques,
    You have stated that electron capture from K L M orbitals occurs in neutron stars. In a number of blogs concerning LENR, I have proposed an ansazt that includes the capture of these orbital electrons or electron fields in NiH systems. Fermi showed that this event in some elements, produced the emission of B+ or B- particles and corresponding neutrinos. In lighter isotopes(more protons) the emission is B+, in heavier isotopes(more neutrons) the emission is B-. In the heavier elements such as Nickel, this process is enhanced because of the attractive influence of the larger nuclear coulomb field causing the inner electrons to possess smaller orbital radii. Not only do you achieve energy emission when captured, but also transmutation effects. The presence of external H- ions if brought close to the outer electrons impose another negative field which drive the inner electrons closer to the nucleus assisting in the electron capture by the nucleus and the interaction with the nucleons. May I have your thoughts on this.
    Respectively awaiting your reply.

  957. Hello Andrea. I am very curious about whether you have any opinions about the new pope. Some might say that Pope Francis is putting a refreshing amount of energy into his work.

  958. Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    Is a Great Pope. In this historic period, with so many analogies with the periods before the first and the second WW, God has chosen the right man to help to maintain as much as possible a relative peace. It is paradoxical, but in this very period if the third WW has not yet been born it is thanks to the nuclear weapons.
    I think Pope Francis will play a cosmic- historical role to save the world from the war.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  959. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    Hopefully you can answer at least some of these questions :)

    1) Can you confirm whether the housing for the 1MW plant is the same as has been used for the previous 1MW test, or is a different container
    2) Do the internals look substantially different than the previous 1MW test
    3) What temperature will the 1MW plant be supplying
    4) Is the owner of the new 1MW plant Industrial Heat, or a separate entity with no ties to Industrial Heat?
    5) If the answer to 4 is no, can you specify whether it’s an instant coffee factory – a subtle insult at all the scientists asking for the ecat to boil a cup of tea? (‘fortyniner’ mentioned this on e-cat world, I think it would be great) :)
    6)Have you started up the 1MW plant yet and if so is it working?
    7)Have you started the installation for the 1MW plant at the customers premises yet?
    8) And final question, pleaaasssee answer this… will the plant be making just heat or heat and electricity?

    The first thing I do every day is check for news on the e-cat. Don’t keep us waiting too long please!! :)

  960. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    I can answer only to this:
    a- the Customer is independent from us and has no participation to our business
    b- its employ is to make heat for industrial purposes.
    About all the other issues, we will give due specifications when the visits will be allowed.
    About the imbeciles, let them laugh, but, please, do not call them scientists: scientists are curious, intelligent and always wait for solid experimentation; besides, they never laugh of working people: only an imbecile can laugh of persons that are working with all the force they dispose of, and a scientist cannot be an imbecile.

  961. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, could you clear a little confusion.
    Is your new 1MW plant driven by the older E-cats or the newer Hot-cats.
    Best wishes

  962. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    We will give specifications when the visits will be allowed.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  963. Jeff Smathers

    I’d like to post a recent paper that may describe a directly contributing attribute in this field. It is interesting how associated fields in physics are merging results of disparate science activities into a possible explaination for the anomlies many are now utilizing in alternative energy platforms.

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.3941

    Thank you again Mr. Rossi for your diligence and honest efforts in applying the real scientific method, and not the current ego driven ‘religion of modern science’.

  964. Andrea Rossi

    Jeff Smathers:
    Thank you for the information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  965. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    The paper is the eighth reference in the bibliography posted at the end of the article on the JONP found here:

    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=53

    Earlier in the paper, posted on the JONP, it references the paper I have requested as a successive paper.

    These allowed us the determination of the ratio Cu63/Cu65=1,6 different from the value (2,24) relative to the copper isotopic natural composition. The Zn64 derives from the β‾ Cu64 decay: as it.s shown in Table 3, formation of Cu64 requires the existence of Ni63 which, absent in natural Ni composition, must have been in precedence produced starting by more light nickel isotopes. More details on this analysis will be given in a successive paper [8].

    I have double checked all papers posted during 2010 on the JONP, and I do not see the successive paper.

  966. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    The paper you are referring to has not been published because we were not sure of the results.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  967. Alessandro Coppi

    Hi Andrea, now you have certainly spoken with the professors that have written the report.
    While we all are waiting for the publishing, how are you? Much more happy or not?

    Best regards
    Alessandro

  968. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    It is true that now and again I make a phone call to the Professors to ask about the scheduling of the publication. It is absolutely not true that we talk of the report’s content. I have no reason to be happy or unhappy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  969. KeithT

    Dear Andrea,

    1. Does the magazine have exclusive rights to review until publication.

    2. Are all the peer reviewers nominated by the magazine.

    Best regards,

    Keith Thomson.

  970. Andrea Rossi

    Keith T:
    1- I do not know, it does not depend on me
    2- I do not know: also this does not depend on me, but I suppose that first the paper is reviewed by the 6 Professors that made the experiment, who are reviewing each other, eventually also the magazine makes its own peer reviewing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  971. H-G Branzell

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    The third party members have done their best to make a good report describing the results of the extended testing, I am sure. Why don’t you just publish the report here and now to let the whole world be your peer reviewers?
    Best regards, H-G Branzell

  972. Andrea Rossi

    H-G Branzell:
    I can do that if:
    1- the magazine will reject the paper
    2- the Professors will allow me to do that and will deliver me the report. Our protocol so far says that they will deliver to me the report several days before the publication. I am very positive about the fact that the paper will be published, because, whatever the results, positive or negative, the measurements have been made, as you correctly say, describing rigorously the extended test. I agree on the fact that, after the publication, the world will be the super-peer reviewer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  973. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: Could you please provide us with just a little more information about the E-Cat you are installing for the customer? 1) Will it be supplementing the necessary heat or power or will it be providing all the heat or power needed in the customers situation. 2) How obvious will it be that the E-Cat is saving the customer money, will the customer see immediate savings?

  974. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    1- it will provide all the energy for the production it is employed for
    2- yes ( I hope)
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  975. Bob

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    1. Can you tell us if the new 1MW plant will be located in the U.S. or in Europe?

    2. Does the customer intend to use the plant for an industrial application (like making a product)or an environmental application (like heating a building)?

    3. Are the dimensions of the new plant smaller larger or the same size as the other 1MW plants you had previously completed?

    Thanks,

    Bob

    P.S. Thank you and the other commenters to this blog for the many clearly written explanations about particle physics concepts.

  976. Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    1- USA
    2- industrial application
    3- same size
    Thanks to you for your kind attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  977. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    While we are waiting on the TIP, I was wondering if perhaps you could publish the paper referenced as, “ S. Focardi, A. Rossi, to be published on Arxiv.” that Sergio Focardi stated was rejected. After all this time, it would be great to actually be able to read it. Also, it would give all of us something to read and think about while we wait for the TIP.

    Thank you.

  978. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    That paper has been published on the Journal Of Nuclear Physics in 2010.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  979. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Will your plans for the 1MW plant visitations by invited persons be affected by the third party report? In other words, will you wait for the publication of the report before the visits are allowed? Or are the two issues totally unconnected?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  980. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    1- yes: they accepted to make a third independent party test at the foundamental conditions that they will publish the results, positive or negative as they might be.
    2- yes: they can publish where they want to.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  981. Giuliano Bettini

    Hi Andrea,
    sincere thanks for answering.
    6 months … from WHEN?
    Very respectful greetings,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  982. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    You ask me to give answers I am not able to give. I just said that you must understand that as an average an important scientific publication ( and this will be important, either negative or positive as the results may be) can demand an average of 6 months for the publication. The reviewers want not to risk to make mistakes. An average means that a reviewing can last between 2 and 12 months starting from when the report has been delivered. In this moment I have not the information that would allow me to give specific answers. The experiment has been completed in April, then a report has been written on the base of the analysis of millions of data, confronting calculations of 6 Professors who reviewed each other before delivering the report. After that there is the peer reviewing of the magazine. It is a long, difficult process. You are intelligent and I am sure you can understand. The report made in 2013 by the same Commettee has put the bases and yelded precious experience for this long run test, making all the measurements that in 2013 have not been made and that have been suggested by many scientists who read the 2013 report. A Professor of the Commettee explained to me recently, when I made a phone call to ask the scheduling of the publication, that they ( the Professors) need all the time necessary to make a work that gives results beyond any possible doubt, because the results, positive or negative, will have important effects.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  983. Layman

    Thank you Sir!
    You make difficult concept, simple to understand

  984. Andrea Rossi

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

  985. Layman

    Hi Andrea
    Please explain what is a rest mass? And mass of moving particles? Are they different?
    Thank you

  986. Andrea Rossi

    Layman:
    Rest mass: its value is
    m= E/c^2 time the square root of ( 1- v^2/c^2)
    It is one of the 4 foundamental magnitudes of the elementary particles and is the minimum amount of energy that an object can have: when a particle is perfectly still its amount of energy is equal to its mass time c^2, where, obviously, c is the speed of the light: in fact when the elementary particle is perfectly still in the above described formula v^2/c^2=0/c^2, the square root of 1 is 1, therefore m= E/c^2, from which E= m x c^2.
    Following this formula, you can see also that if the particle goes at the speed of light, mass becomes zero ( if v=c we will have the square root of 1-1=0, therefore the mass becomes E/c^2 x 0 = 0): in fact, the elementary particles that travel at the speed of light are massless. Obviously, this does not mean that a fermion accelerates to reach the speed of light, we all know it is impossible, but a Fermion can interact with another particle and generate a gauge boson ( for example, a neutron decays into a proton plus a photon and a neutrino). If you substitute to the variable v the speed of the particle, you get the value of the mass ( which is an integral, not a number). Due to the value of c ( 186 000 miles/second) don’t even think you can reduce your mass driving your car as fast as possible.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  987. H-B Branzell

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    In a closed system mass but not matter is always conserved.
    Kind regards, Albert

  988. Andrea Rossi

    H-B Branzell:
    In a closed system mass but not matter is conserved, as you say, provided the elementary particles are still. In a collision, energy is conserved, not mass.
    Thank you for your good point, though.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  989. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi,
    I want to take profit from your skill to teach Physics in a way everybody can understand: in your comment about the 4 foundamental magnitudes you wrote that energy is conserved, not mass. But, since mass is energy, why didn’t you write that also mass is conserved ?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  990. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    To make it short, let’s start from Logic: “all cats are animals, but not all animals are cats”. Analogously, E = mc^2 implies that any form of mass is convertible into Energy ( in fact mass is usually measured in eV) , but , on the contrary, not any form of energy can be convertible in mass: in fact, all the Bosons that do not interact in the Higgs field are not turned into Fermions. For this reason it is correct to say that energy is conserved, in any form ( even in mass), but not mass.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  991. Andrea Rossi

    TO THE READERS OF THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR PHYSICS:
    Today has been published on the JoNP the paper
    “Relation between short- range forces and the concept of neutrality” , by Jacques Chaveheid ( time of peer reviewing: 6 months).
    JoNP

  992. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    the impatience is not anxiety or curiosity, but it’s something related to the huge importance of the issue: why does take so much time to make the publication of the report of the 2014 experiment?
    Best regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  993. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    I edited your text for obvious reasons, conserving the meaning of it. You must know that the peer reviewing of a scientific publication usually takes 6 months as an average.
    The experiment made by the Third Independent Party is important, as you correctly wrote, and the Professors, to avoid criticisms, need all the time necessary to publish results of which they need to be sure beyond any reasonable doubt, also considering all the experience and the critics made during and after the 2013 experiment. It is not just matter of patience, it is also matter of respect for serious scientific work. The reviewing must take all the time it needs on the base of a serious and exhaustive analysis of the results, positive or negative as they might be.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  994. Angel Blume

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    What COP figure is expected at the new 1 Mw plant in construction?
    Thanks and good luck

  995. Andrea Rossi

    Angel Blume:
    We will give detailed public information about the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer when the visits will start. At the moment we cannot give any specific information. It is matter of months, not years, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  996. Hermano Tobia

    @Andrea Rossi
    While I agree in priciple with your IP position, I don’t think the Linux / MS / Apple / Opensource comparison is appropriate nowadays: in the exploding smartphone mobile market, Android, which is basically free, and built upon Linux + AOSP (opensource) + Google apps has globally 80% market share, Apple has 16% and Microsoft 3-4%.
    But Google is not run by communists, it has simply a different business model in respect of its competitors.

  997. Andrea Rossi

    Hermano Tobia:
    You are right, but, as I said, after a technology is spread in the market it is normal its expansion with open sources. Our situation is totally different now, while it will be similar to what you describe several years after the mother-technology will have been consolidated in the market. Good point, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  998. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: Thanks again for you answer about IP, you must have answered that question ten times in the last four years. (: Of course you are right, IP is what makes the Tech world go around, without profit motive, very few new high tech inventions. Even China has learned that lesson. You are headed for exciting times in the next few months. Good luck.

  999. DTravchenko

    Another question: what do you think of the results so far got from your competitors? Can you make a sort of a rating?
    Warm Regards
    D.T.

  1000. Andrea Rossi

    Dtravchenko:
    Some of them are making a very good work, mainly the ones that have worked to repeat our technology after it has been published in 2009 by the Patent Office, some are not, but I never comment specifically the work of our Competitors. A team of specialists funded by us is studying all the Technologies published and/or patented by our Competitors, replicating exactly what they describe, to check the real worth of their IP. So far we obtained the same results described in their publications only in three cases, regarding a Swedish, a Japanese and a USA LENR scientists. All the others have not given any anomalous amount of energy, honestly, even if we have spent substantial time and money to check the real status of their potential competitivity. I must add that many of the Technologies that did not produce any anomalous excess of energy can be considered all the same interesting and good, so that maybe in future will be improved.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1001. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Strong suggestion from a Russian friend: you too make open science of your technology, as Others LENR researchers did: this choice from you can help the development of your technology.
    From Russia, with love and “Warm Regards!”
    D.T.

  1002. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    I answered many times about this issue, this is the last one, because I cannot continue to repeat the same things…
    As many Readers invited me to do, I should give away as a gift the Intellectual Property portfolio to make everybody happy and energized, as well as many other LENR researchers declare would do should they be in my same situation.
    Let me tell you a story.
    Before the fall of the USSR, in the seventies, when the Italian Communist Party ( PCI) was one of the pillars for the communist parties in Europe, an Italian Comrade ( “compagno” in Italian language) had to sustain an exam to become the chief comrade of the communist section of his neighborood. His examiner asked him: ” Should you be the owner of two skyscrapers in the centertown of Milan, what would you do?” Promptly the wannabe chief comrade answered: ” one to me, one to the PCI”.
    The examiner raises a bit his eyebrows and says ” I was hoping you could answer both skyscrapers to the Party, but enough is better than nothing, so I take for good, even if not perfect, your answer…second question: should you be the owner of 2 Ferrari cars, what would you do?”
    Again promptly the wannabe chief comrade, looking straightforward in the eyes of the examiner, answers: ” one for me, one for the Party “.
    Coherently, the examiner says ” I would have preferred you could answer both to the Party, but nobody is perfect, so I accept for good also your second answer…now third and last question: should you own two bycycles, what would you do? ”
    At this point the wannabe chief comrade doesn’t answer, drops of sweat begin to wet his forehead, becomes first red faced, than white…until the examiner says: ” What’s the matter with you? You were ready to give to the party one skyscraper in downtown Milan, then a Ferrari and now you remain mute and scared to give to the Party a bycycle? ”
    The wannabe comrade turns the eyes toward nowhere, cocks the head between his shoulders and whispers: ” As a matter of fact, I really own two bycicles “.
    The sense of this story is, as everybody surely has understood, that the generosity to give away for free the Intellectual Property portfolio is inversally proportional to the square of the worth of its content.
    To give away for free the Intellectual Property of a technology is a mistake that takes away from the real business that technology, because nobody invests seriously in a technology if there is not the right of the ownership of the connected IP. The history gives a lot of even recent examples: compare what happened with Linux vs Microsoft, compare what happened with the open source high technologies vs Apple…Obviously, eventually the technology becomes universally known, once it is spread in the market, but in the meantime the companies that have put immense capitals to fund its development will have paid back their efforts with profit. Finally: look what happened in the communist Countries, where private property has been universally turned into common property and knowledge, frustrating ( and forbidding) private interest.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1003. orsobubu

    Andrea, will you find the time to write an autobiography? I can already see the hardcover, with a photo of yourself in running shoes standing next to a small shining Ecat placed on the ground. In the background, a big rusted Petroldragon tank with the cat logo and the book title painted on in capital yellow letters: The Caterpillar. As a bonus, a DVD is included with the complete JONP database and the catalyzer formula. Also a voucher is inserted for the new Wladimir’s book.

  1004. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    He,he,he…when I will be retired ( after my hundredth ride around the sun) I will consider your suggestion…obviously the title you could like is, I suppose, ” The permanent revolution of energy production systems”: true?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1005. Wladimir Guglinski

    To the readers of the JoNP:

    Einstein proposed in his Special Relativity that space is empty.

    That’s why he proposed in his General Relativity that the space-time can be bent by big masses, and it originates the gravity.

    However a new experiment published in 2011 proved that space is not empty:
    Light created from vacuum shows empty space a myth
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Light-created-from-vacuum-shows-empty-space-a-myth/articleshow/10789049.cms

    So, it is obvious that Einstein theory of gravity is wrong.

    And now some theorists are dealing with the question of the gravity as it was be a fluid.
    Turbulent Black Holes
    http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.4859

    In another words, Huan Yang, Aaron Zimmerman, and Luis Lehner are dealing with the gravity from a new fundamental consideration: that space is not empty, as Einstein had wrongly supposed.

    As we realize, step by step the theorists are changing everything in the foundations of the Theoretical Physics.

    But obviously the problem is more complex, because there is need also to consider other fundamental question: how to conciliate the gravity with the Higgs boson, if they continue to consider that the mass of particles is caused by the Higgs boson.

    They have hard questions to solve, indeed…

    regards
    wlad

  1006. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    For anyone interested, here’s a link to your 1978 patent, “Procedure for the recovery of industrial and urban waste”. Thanks to Mats Lewan for providing this.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/231423045/BREVETTO-PETROLIO-1978

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  1007. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    The two issues are unconnected.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1008. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    This might be of interest to you — I posted on E-Cat World about the waste-to-biofuel plant that is opening in Edmonton, Canada. http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/06/25/edmonton-to-launch-waste-to-biofuel-plant-based-on-old-rossi-technology/

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  1009. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    When I applied for that patent I was 27 years old, with a 6 years experience in production of waste to energy plants and air pollution control systems. I designed, patented and manufactured my plants, and used to go personally to sell them. At those times my competitors called me “the Caterpillar” for the amount of work I was able to do…wherever there was a plant to do, I was there ( he,he,he…it was not easy to beat me in a competition to get a Customer). Then I put in the tech of this patent all the money earned, and lost everything in 1995 ( see http://www.ingandrearossi.com).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1010. Wladimir Guglinski

    Curiosone wrote in June 25th, 2014 at 6:38 PM

    Dr Andrea Rossi,
    one question of physics: when an accelerator like CERN finds antimatter is because antimatter is inside the matter and crushing it the antimatter is made free?
    W.G.

    ————————————-

    Dear Curiosone
    I supppose you are asking it because of the paper published in 22 June 2014 in the journal Nature:
    Evidence for the direct decay of the 125 GeV Higgs boson to fermions
    http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys3005.html

    However, the role played by the Higgs boson for the mass of the particles is the same role played by the Yukawa’s meson within the structure of the neutron.

    Yukawa proposed a theory according to which the neutron is formed by proton+meson, and he awarded the Nobel Prize in 1949 because the meson was detected (the existence of the meson was unknown before Yukawa’s proposal).

    Today we know that the meson plays no any role in the structure of the neutron, because according to Standard Physics the neutron is formed by two quarks down and one quark up , n=(d,u,d).

    So, in spite of the LHC had detected the Higgs boson, it does not mean that the detected boson is responsible for the mass of the particles, as proposed in Higgs theory.
    In 2015 the LHC will work with its full potency, and probably many other bosons will be found.

    The Yukawa’s meson and the Higgs boson are two examples on how the development of Physics advances via misunderstandings and “coincidences” which induce the theorists to believe that they are in the correct way.

    regards
    wlad

  1011. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    An enjoyable (well enlightening) read for you on the origin of creativity I have just read and recommend. It’s approximately fifteen minutes worth of words! :)

    http://goo.gl/eUdmRF

  1012. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1013. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    How are the current eCat reactors configured in the 1 MW commercial unit that you are working on?

    1. Are you using the same eCat reactor the independent party report reviewed or a later model?
    2. What is the nominal thermal output of each eCat reactor used in the 1 MW system?
    3. How many eCat reactors are used in the 1MW system.
    4. Is the power input electrical (e.g., 220VAC)?
    5. Can individual eCat reactors be replaced while the 1MW system is continually operating?
    6. How far can the 1MW control unit be from the 1MW unit?

  1014. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    All the particulars regarding the 1 MW plant, as I said already, will be given when the visits will begin, not before.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1015. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi,
    one question of physics: when an accelerator like CERN finds antimatter is because antimatter is inside the matter and crushing it the antimatter is made free?
    W.G.

  1016. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    When an accelerator generates antimatter it is not because antimatter is someway contained in the matter ( they would annichilate). What happens is that the collisions between elementary particles generate new particles: the waves representing the original particles make new vibrations in the antimatter field and we detect them as antiparticles. In quantum field theory, elementary particles are just tiny vibrating waves in a particular field: they arise out of the field and interact in fields.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1017. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Obviously when the 1MW plant is revealed to the public there will be much interest many questions about it in terms of efficiency, performance, construction, etc.

    1. Is your intention to release the maximum amount of information possible about this plant so that interested parties can make informed decisions about future investment in E-Cat technology?

    2. In addition to showing the plant to invited guests, will you be releasing documentation, images, film, etc. to the general public?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  1018. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes, I knew about it, and I am proud of it and wish good luck to this enterprise. They use the technology basics that I patented in 1978 ( patent expired) and I am very happy to see that my work has left a legacy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1019. silvio caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    a difficult question, but you should be able to answer, as a philosopher:
    Forget to be Andrea Rossi, and forget to work for I.H., if you were a common but clever guy, that could get info only from internet, would you believe that e-cat works?

  1020. Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    Obviously yes, but the objectivity coming from a subject is born from his subjective knowledge, which, as any knowledge, can be wrong, or, better, must be wrong in some situation to be real ( this is phylosophy). Anyway this is not a matter of “to believe or not to believe” , it is a matter of technology, which means to work or not to work ( this is science ). In mercatu veritas ( this is good sense).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1021. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Thank you for the update regarding the 1 MW plant, and best wishes with this installation. I hope that your team is recording this activity for future publication — the successful completion of this project will be major technological and historical milestone.

    Best regards,

    Frank Acland

  1022. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    1- Our commercial division will release all the information useful for the purpose in the forms deemed opportune
    2- The invited media will be able to do it
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1023. Paul

    Andrea,

    How long did it take to manufacture all the e-cat reactors for new 1MW plant?

    Paul

  1024. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    It is difficult to say, due to prototyping for technological evolution in course.
    We will be able to define the specific times of manufacturing along an assembling chain after this R&D phase.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  1025. Koen Vandewalle

    Andrea,
    You write that you’re very busy with the 1MW plant.
    How about the jet-engine ? Is that on hold ?
    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  1026. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    Our R&D department is working on more that one issue. I personally in this period am focused on the 1 MW plant. You must put a distinction between us and me.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1027. Piero Mongioj

    Grazie per la accurata risposta… Solo un’ultima precisazione, se puó… L’impianto in elaborazione è un Hot-cat o un impianto E-cat del tipo già mostrato a Bologna? Grazie di nuovo e… tanta fortuna (serve anche quella, no?). Cari saluti, Piero Mongioj

  1028. Andrea Rossi

    Piero Mongioj:
    We will give in due time the description of it. Substantial evolution happened, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1029. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I’m sorry — what I meant to ask was: what would you consider to be a negative result in each case?

    In other words, what kind of results from the TPR would you consider to be negative?

    Also, in your R&D work?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  1030. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    We are recording everything. Thank you for your constant attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  1031. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Now that the tests for the report have been concluded, are the devices(all three)provided by you, to be returned or will you give them to the professors for their further study under NDA? I still hope you can give us a heads up for the report when you receive it.
    Thank you for all your past and future responses.

  1032. Piero Mongioj

    Anche se la curiosità per il report è tanta, vorrei invece chiederle se gli e-cat direttamente sotto il suo controllo (per ricerca o monitoraggio) si stanno comportando secondo le sue aspettative e con i rendimenti da lei attesi. Un caro saluto, Piergiorgio Mongioj