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. Dear Andrea,

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

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

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

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

    End of sentimentality warning.

    Best regards, /pekka

  2. Andrea Rossi

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

  3. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  4. Koen Vandewalle

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

  5. Andrea Rossi

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

  6. Paul

    Andrea,

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

    Paul

  7. Andrea Rossi

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

  8. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

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

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

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

    Thank you.

  9. Andrea Rossi

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

  10. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  11. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dears Joe and Eernie,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  12. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  13. Gil

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

  14. Andrea Rossi

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

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

  16. Andrea Rossi

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

  17. eernie1

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

  18. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  19. Andrea Rossi

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

  20. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

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

  21. Andrea Rossi

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

  22. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

    Russian Reportage on Cold Fusion (Alexander Parkhomov)

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

  23. Andrea Rossi

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

  24. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dears Joe and Eernie,

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

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

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

    What do you think?

    regards
    wlad

  25. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  26. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi, Frank Acland, JYD, Navdrew,

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

    Some assembly required. ;)

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

    http://www.additive3d.com/

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

    The Arcam series of additive metal printers are products.

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

    Additive Regards,

    Joseph Fine

  27. Navdrew

    Mr.Rossi:

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

    Drew

  28. Andrea Rossi

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

  29. JYD

    Dear Andrea Rossi, dear Franck Ackland

    Concerning 3D printers and industry, I found this :

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

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

  30. Andrea Rossi

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

  31. Andrea Rossi

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

  32. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    3D printing with metals is becoming more sophisticated.

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

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  33. Andrea Rossi

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

  34. Joseph Fine

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

    Joseph Fine

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

  35. eernie1

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

  36. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Eernie,

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  37. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

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

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  38. Andrea Rossi

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

  39. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  40. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1
    March 1st, 2015 at 12:27 PM

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

    No, Eernie,
    it is not difficult.

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

    Very simple.

    regards
    wlad

  41. eernie1

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

  42. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

    And I repeat again:

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  43. Andrea Rossi

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

  44. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  45. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

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

    Eernie,
    obviously you did not understand the puzzle.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  46. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  47. Koen Vandewalle

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

  48. Andrea Rossi

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

  49. eernie1

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

  50. Peter Forsberg

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

    I wish you good luck with the 1 Meg plant.

    Regards

    Peter

  51. Andrea Rossi

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

  52. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

    No, Joe,
    I did not define rotation.

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

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

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

    Joe,
    you cannot compare ROTATION with GRAVITY.

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

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

    .

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

    The concept of gravity was defined as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

    You cannot compare FORCE with ROTATION.

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  53. Kay

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

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

    maybe it is possible the ecat combination with it.

    best regart
    Kay

  54. Andrea Rossi

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

  55. Andrea Rossi

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

  56. Bernie Morrissey

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

  57. Curiosone

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

  58. Andrea Rossi

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

  59. JCRenoir

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

  60. Andrea Rossi

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

  61. DTravchenko

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

  62. Andrea Rossi

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

  63. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You stated,
    “Rotation is NOT DEFINED.

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  64. WaltC

    Dear Andrea,

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

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

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

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

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

    Thanks,
    WaltC

  65. Andrea Rossi

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

  66. eernie1

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

  67. Andrea Rossi

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

  68. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    I agree.

    Regards

    Peter

  69. Andrea Rossi

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

  70. Patrick Ellul

    Dear Andrea,

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

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

    Best regards,
    Patrick

  71. Andrea Rossi

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

  72. Wladimir Guglinski

    Even the pseudoscience cannot save the Standard Nuclear Physics

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

    Joe,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  73. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

    Joe,
    this is not Science

    this is not Physics

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

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

    What the scientists are doing nowadays is pseudoscience.

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  74. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

    Joe,
    rotation is NOT DEFINED

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

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

    Phantasmagoric fantasy rotation cannot do it.

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

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

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

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

    The Standard Nuclear Physics is a scientific fraud

    regards
    wlad

  75. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

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

    Regards

    Peter Forsberg

  76. Andrea Rossi

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

  77. Giovanni Guerrini

    Andrea Rossi

    It could be,certainly it is something.

    Regards G G

  78. Andrea Rossi

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

  79. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

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

    For example:

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

  80. Andrea Rossi

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

  81. Giovanni Guerrini

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

    Spaced regards G G

  82. Andrea Rossi

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

  83. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

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

    Regards

    Peter Forsberg

  84. Andrea Rossi

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

  85. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  86. Paul

    Andrea,

    How is the gas-cat doing?

    Paul

  87. Andrea Rossi

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

  88. Wladimir Guglinski

    ERRATA:

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

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

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

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

    .

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  89. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    .

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

    Dont you think so ?

    regards
    wlad

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

  91. eernie1

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

  92. Andrea Rossi

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

  93. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

    There is not such a thing named non-classical rotation

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

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

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

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

    .

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

    .

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

    regards
    wlad

  94. Michael Schneider

    Dear Mister Rossi,

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

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

    Kind regards,

    Michael S.

  95. Andrea Rossi

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

  96. JCRenoir

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

  97. Andrea Rossi

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

  98. DTravchenko

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

  99. Andrea Rossi

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

  100. Curiosone

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

  101. Andrea Rossi

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

  102. Jack

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

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

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

    Thank you again.

  103. Andrea Rossi

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

  104. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  105. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    tell us your opinion:

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  106. Jack

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

  107. Andrea Rossi

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

  108. Steve H

    Dear Andrea,

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

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

    Best wishes,

    Steve.

  109. Andrea Rossi

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

  110. Paul

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

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

  111. Andrea Rossi

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

  112. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

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

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  113. Andrea Rossi

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

  114. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  115. BroKeeper

    Dear Wladimir,

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

  116. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  117. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    The same happens within the nuclei.

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

    regards
    wlad

  118. Robert Curto

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

  119. Andrea Rossi

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

  120. BroKeeper

    An infinite thank yous to you. :)
    BK

  121. Andrea Rossi

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

  122. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  123. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

    Joe,
    you did not understand.

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

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

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

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

    explained in 1

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  124. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. In your new scenario of

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

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  125. BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

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

  126. Andrea Rossi

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

  127. Robert Curto

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

  128. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir Guglinski:

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  129. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

    Joe,
    suppose the following:

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

    A nucleus with Z quantity of protons has:

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

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

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

    .

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

    regards
    wlad

  130. Steven N. Karels

    Robert,

    I will try to answer your questions.

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

  131. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  132. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  133. Andrea Rossi

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

  134. Robert Curto

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

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

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

  135. Steven N. Karels

    Robert,

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

  136. Andrea Rossi

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

  137. Robert Curto

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

  138. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    .

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  139. Steven N. Karels

    Robert and Andrea Rossi,

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

  140. Andrea Rossi

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

  141. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

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

  143. Andrea Rossi

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

  144. Robert Curto

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

  145. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

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

  146. Andrea Rossi

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

  147. Sverre Haslund

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

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

    Best regards

    Sverre Haslund

  148. Andrea Rossi

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

  149. Sverre Haslund

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

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

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

    Best regards and godspeed.

    Sverre Haslund

  150. Andrea Rossi

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

  151. Andrea Rossi

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

  152. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  153. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  154. Dear Dot. Rossi,

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

  155. Andrea Rossi

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

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

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

  156. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

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

  157. Andrea Rossi

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

  158. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The structure will be:

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

    regards
    wlad

  159. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  160. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  161. Wladimir Guglinski

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  162. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

    The two fields are:

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  163. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  164. Andrea Calaon

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

  165. Andrea Rossi

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

  166. John

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

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

    Best Regards,

    John

  167. Andrea Rossi

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

  168. Wladimir Guglinski

    Monopolar nature of the electric charge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    .

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  169. Italo R.

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

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

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

    Hot Regards,
    Italo R.

  170. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    Probably
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  171. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

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

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

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

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

  172. Andrea Rossi

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

  173. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: After the third party test showed amazing isotopic changes I am wondering if you have made similar isotopic tests on your research reactors or the industrial reactor. Of course I do not expect you to give us the results but just a confirmation that the isotopic changes the third party reported were not a fluke or error would help us E-Caters. Thanks again for this site and the recent pictures and answering our questions.

  174. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    We re studying the theoretical issues deriving from the report, that obviously is correct.

    We are making intense theoretical work on the results and we are making a reconciliation, but so far we are not ready to give further information about this issue, which is also bound to restricted data.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  175. Patrick Ellul

    Dear Andrea,

    The 1MW plant at the customer is made up of the normal (low temperature) e-cats.

    When do you think you will have a hot-cat operating at a customer and what is the current hold-up for this to happen?

    Best regards,
    Patrick

  176. Andrea Rossi

    Patrick Ellul:
    This year will be spent mainly with the R&D and tests with this plant also to prepare the industrial production of the other versions; the roots are the same.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  177. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Do the types of control systems you use in the 1MW plant in the photographs you published also work for Hot Cats?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  178. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Substantially, I would say yes, with some different particular.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  179. Giannino Ferro Casagrande

    Egregio e stimatissimo signor Andrea , mi complimento pure io per le foto che avete postato , in relazione al lavoro del mega impianto per la ditta Statunitense che darà il via , si spera presto , a tutta una serie di E-Cat , grandi e piccoli . Riconosco pure , dalle foto , il tecnico informatico che ho avuto il piacere di conoscere quando siete stati a Pordenone . Rimango pure particolarmente soddisfatto per il problema che Le avevo si da subito esternato al riguardo “ l’ELEMENTO “ di pericolosità , pure evidenziato dal TOM CONOVER . Sono sempre in attesa dei due E-Cat che ho in ordine ed anzi con questa mia vorrei poter aggiungere altri due in ordine !!!
    Saluti cordiali da Giannino di Udine ;-) )

  180. Andrea Rossi

    Giannino Ferro Casagrande:
    Thank you for your kind words; for the domestic E-Cats we are working very hard.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  181. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, Google:
    consumption by fuel in 2035
    Click on:
    Fuel Fix US energy production will surpass consumption
    They expect Renewable Energy to be 8% by 2035.

    They have never even heard of E-Cat.
    Will E-Cat be ZERO 20 years from today ?
    I don’t think so.
    If E-Cat is less expensive then any of the others, has ZERO emissions,
    has ZERO waste, where will they put their money ?
    I will only give you one guess !
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale FL
    USA

  182. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Let’s work humbly to make our technology consolidated by means of the R&D and tests on course. After that we’ll see all the possible integrations.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  183. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    I haven’t heard much mention of electricity generation in a while now you are concentrated on the 1MW plant. I wonder if you can answer the following question…

    Have you ever managed to generate electricity from an e-cat (either via connecting to a turbine or other forms of electricity generation, perhaps thermoelectric). Even if it was a small test on your own to confirm it could be done?

    Has there been any advancements you can speak of with regards to electricity generation now you have additional help? I know you were looking into jet engines

    Thanks

    Mark

  184. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    Yes, electric power generation is one of the main R&D fields we are going through. We are oriented toward the classic Carnot Cycle, even if we are totally open to new commercial breakthroughs related to other systems.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  185. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Andrea,
    were the pictures of the plant assembly taken around April 2014?
    Thank you for the pictures!
    Warm regards
    Andrea Calaon

  186. Andrea Rossi

    Andrea Calaon:
    I didn’t make the photos, so I do not remember well, but maybe.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  187. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    I am sending an interesting article on LENR.

    http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150000549.pdf
    The Application of LENR to Synergistic Mission Capabilities
    Douglas P. Wells*
    NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23602
    Dimitri N. Mavris†
    Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0150

    27 February 2015 in Milan will host a major event.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO69VeHQT-0&feature=youtu.be

    Here is also a very well documented video broadcast on the Italian TV some years ago, also available on YouTube clicking here: in 2004 ENEL analyzed the opportunity to participate in the research program on LENR carried out, in Italy, by the ENEA (at the time, the Italian “National Agency for Alternative Energies”) at its laboratories in Frascati, near Rome, under the supervision of Carlo Rubbia, Nobel Laureate for Physics in 1984.

    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/enel-early-refusal-towards-lenr/

  188. Andrea Rossi

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

  189. Dear Mr. Rossi,

    maybe you heard of the rumors that Apple is planning to develop electric cars.
    Do you think they know of the possibilities of your technology?

    Thanks for you work!
    barty

  190. Andrea Rossi

    Barty:
    Maybe in future.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  191. Andrea Rossi

    Observer ( Paul):
    Now I understand what you wanted to say in your former comment; what you see in the photo is a work on course, the plant was not completed; the situation is much more complex and the position of the piping has precise reasons; nevertheless, thank you for your suggestion, that will be taken in due consideration: your experience is precious.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  192. Tom Conover

    Dear Andrea.

    The photographs are wonderful! Your team members look very happy. Thank you very much for these gifts. I am also glad to hear that you have removed the element of personal danger from the naysayers, who’s chatter has grown very distant lately. :-)

    100°C Regards

    Tom

  193. Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    Thank you. Now we must make that magnificence continue to work well for a long time, to make it a real breakthrough. We are in front of an enormous work of tests and R&D; I am very hopeful, thanks mainly to my Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  194. Observer

    Andrea,

    Not to be critical, but in the one photo with you standing in a walkway, an insulated pipe runs down the length of the walkway and appears to cross the walkway path in the back ground of the photo. The storage container seems to have plenty of head room. Placing a false floor in the storage container would increase routing options for both plumbing and conduit, and provide emergency drainage if anything sprung a leak.

    Paul

  195. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Thank you for the photos. They are indeed a wonderful gift and appreciated. I fully understand your position on information disclosure and as I have previously stated, I would have done the same if I were in your shoes. I would just caution you to be wary of other interested parties since some of them may not have your interests at heart.
    All the best regards

  196. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  197. curwin

    Andrea,

    The drawing of the cat silhouette & red dot shown in a couple of the photos is very pleasing somehow. New company logo or just a bit of fun?

  198. Andrea Rossi

    Curwin:
    It is our registered trade mark.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  199. eernie1

    Koen,
    Every day the E-Cat is delayed is worth billions to the oil industry. To them a few million dollars spent to achieve this purpose is chicken feed. The suppression of a product introduction is a common tactic in the auto industry. As an example, the introduction of seat belts and other safety features were delayed for financial reasons, causing needless loss of life.
    Delaying the introduction of a better product until the existing inventory of shelf product is depleted is a common practice. If I were an owner of fossil fuel of any kind, this delay is a welcome event.
    Regards.

  200. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    It is necessary to complete the tests of the 1 MW plant operating in the factory of IH’s Customer. The final results could be positive, but also negative. For now we have just to work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  201. John

    Dear Andrea,

    Why publish the photos now, when there’s still possibly a year of testing to go? Can we expect some more news or updates in the near future?

    Best Regards,

    John

  202. Andrea Rossi

    John:
    I wanted to make a gift to our Readers. Obviously on course of the tests that we are making something will change, but the scope of the photos is not to disclose particulars that we deem critical.
    The plant is much more complex than appears in the photos, but they give an idea of the thing, though. No more photos will be produced until the tests will be finished.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  203. Paul

    Andrea,

    I congratulate you on your E-Cat 1 MW plant design.
    May I suggest, in the next generation, you use a raised grating floor in the shipping container so you do not have to step over your plumbing and cabling.

    Paul

  204. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    What do you mean? We have not to step over plumbing and cabling with the plant in operation.
    Maybe I am not understanding. Can you rephrase? When the plant is operating all the doors are closed, nobody has to stay inside. We monitor everuthing from the computers.
    Warm Regards,
    Andrea

  205. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Thank you sharing these very interesting pictures! A couple of questions if you don’t mind:

    a)Is all the activity we see in the pictures taking place inside one large container?
    b) Two of the units shown have names written on them: “Cindy” and “Wendy” — does each reactor have its own name?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  206. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    a) No, the activity of manufactiring in the photos is taken inside a factory in Raleigh
    b) Yes, to make it easier our Team gave a name to every reactor. Some names are very funny.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  207. Peter

    Wow! The new 1 MW plant is a beauty! I like the red color!

    Is there a lot of more free space inside the container now (room for a small work shop?) or is it just that the photos were taken during assembly?

    By the way, do you still use a genset to power the new plant or can it run from the grid?

    Best regards,
    Peter

  208. Andrea Rossi

    Peter:
    It was that the photo has been taken during the assembly, many hi-tech parts are missing in the photo.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  209. eernie1

    Robert,
    Before the patent expired, a black market generic drug would be manufactured in limited quantities and could be obtained through foreign sources. When the IP(patent)expired many companies then began producing the drug much cheaper and in unlimited quantities.

  210. Mark Saker

    Dear Andrea,

    Is this the new 1MW plant?

    http://andrea-rossi.com/1mw-plant/

    How old are these photos? Did you agree to have them published?

    Looking Good!

  211. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Saker:
    These photos, published on my personal website, have been made months ago in Raleigh’s factory, during the final phases of the manufacturing .
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  212. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Are these pictures of the plant you are currently working on? http://andrea-rossi.com/1mw-plant/

    This is from what is described as your ‘official’ web site — are you running this site?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  213. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    These photos have been made in the factory of Raleigh during the manufacturing of the plant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  214. Italo R.

    @ all:

    Here there are various pictures and informations about the 1MW plant in Usa:

    http://andrea-rossi.com/

    They are great!!

  215. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R:
    These photos have been taken in Raleigh during the manufacturing of the 1 MW plant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  216. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Eernie1,
    Did you mean: A way to keep some revolutionary stuff off the market is to buy the IP and let time pass ?
    That happens with other value and businesses.
    We cannot be sure that this is untrue.

    In the 80′s, the Motorola 68000 was a fantastic product, but slow and unefficient if you compare it with todays Intel (and others) processors. Anyway it did not keep them from selling the product at their time.

    There is no strategy to win the unbegun war. First you have to start the war.

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  217. Robert Curto

    eerine1
    You stated:
    Generic drugs accelerated because there was week IP protection or no protection at all.
    When a drug company develops a drug, they get a patent on it which is good for 20 years. When the patent expires, any company can make a Generic drug which must be exactly like the original.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale FL
    USA

  218. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    That’s right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  219. Wladimir Guglinski

    Proton’s radius to be measured by MUSE Project (2015-2016)

    Published in ZPenergy, going directly for the archives of the History of Physics
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3603&mode=&order=0&thold=0

  220. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie:
    Thank you for your opinion. I already made my point on the issue, but what you say will be taken in due consideration.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  221. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I fully agree that, in your personal situation, the loss of protection for your IP would be detrimental to the task of your industrial partners for collecting development funds. However if the necessary information for development was not encumbered by protective legal measures, there would be a mad dash by many groups to take advantage of this in order to take part in the ensuing market for the devices if the information can show unequivocally that the device is feasible. Big corporations, big governments, big educational institutions would pour in funds to capture a segment of this market or for their own use, when unconstrained by requirements to adhere to provisions of a legally protected IP. As examples, the development of aircraft, nuclear power and generic drugs accelerated because there was weak IP protection or no protection.
    If I were in your situation, I would probably do exactly what you are doing. However I was never accused of being altruistic.
    Regards.

  222. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie:
    Thank you for your continue and appreciated attention.
    We already have work on course for the purposes you described. It is not a matter of NDA ( NDAs give to intellectual property the same protection that an umbrella gives under the Niagara Falls), it is a matter of agreements for the expliotation of the technology. Nobody is going to make huge investments in a technology without a well protected intellectual property.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  223. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 15th, 2015 at 9:33 PM

    Wladimir,

    1. ———————————————
    In QRT, do non-rotating particles exist? (These would obviously be lacking gravitational fluxes n(o).)
    ————————————————

    Joe,
    I think any elementary particle without rotation cannot exist

    2. ———————————————
    Perhaps there exist two varieties of F(g):
    i) strong
    ii) residual

    In the case of (i), at very short distances, F(g) is responsible for binding quarks together.
    In the case of (ii), perhaps a lack of perfect coherence (“friction”, as you call it) in the gravitational fluxes n(o) of strong F(g) causes an amount of gravitons g to be continually left out to extend into the immediate environment outside the nucleons. The density of these gravitons g within these outer fluxes n(o) would obviously be smaller, and therefore residual F(g) would take on the usual characteristic of a smaller force than strong F(g).
    ————————————————

    It’s a very interesting suggestion, Joe

    I did not propose a model of quarks because there are no experiments involving quarks, and so there is no way to compare the theoretical model with the results of experiments

    Unlike, there are many expeiments measuring the nuclear properties of the nuclei, and so a theoretical model can be confronted with the results of the experiments

    regards
    wlad

  224. Wladimir Guglinski

    From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    To: randolf.pohl@mpq.mpg.de; aldo@phys.ethz.ch; t.w.haensch@mpq.mpg.de; franz.kottmann@psi.ch; graf@ifsw.uni-stuttgart.de; skarsten@phys.ethz.ch; paul.knowles@unifr.ch
    Subject: the puzzle of the proton’s radius
    Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:09:59 -0200

    To:
    Dr. Randolf Pohl, Max-Planck-Institute of Quantum Optics, Garching, Germany
    Dr. Aldo Antognini, Institute for Particle Physics (IPP), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Prof. Dr. Theodor W. Hänsch, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich
    Dr. Franz Kottmann, Laboratory for Particle Physics, Paul Scherrer Institut Villigen PSI, Switzerland
    Prof. Dr. Thomas Graf, Universität Stuttgart, Institut für Strahlwerkzeuge, Stuttgart, Germany
    Karsten Schuhmann, Institute for Particle Physics (IPP), ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Dr. Paul Knowles, Département de physique, Université de Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

    Dear Professors

    Regarding the puzzle of the proton’s radius, in the page of the Paul Scherrer Institute it is written the following:

    “Very interesting proposals explain the discrepancies by physics beyond the standard model. Other explanations suggest a proton structure of higher complexity than assumed today which only reveals itself under the influence of the heavy muon.
    http://www.psi.ch/media/proton-size-puzzle-reinforced

    A model of proton with higher complexity is proposed in the book Quantum Ring Theory-QRT, published in 2006 by the Bauu Institute Press.

    According to the model proposed in QRT, the rotation of the three quarks of the proton induces a flux composed by gravitons with the speed “c” of the light. In the book it is named flux n(o).
    The rotation of the three quarks take the shape of a ring, and the flux n(o) crosses the ring formed by the three quarks.

    The flux n(o) becomes stronger when the proton interacts with other particles, because there is an overlap between the flux n(o) of the proton and the flux n(o) of the other particle. A free proton has the radius in order of 0,8 fm, as measured by the experiments of proton-electron scattering. The shrinkage in the proton’s radius depends on the mass of the other particle, because the intensity of the total flux n(o) crossing the ring of the proton depends on the mass of the other particle.

    Therefore, when the proton interacts with heavier particles, the flux n(o) becomes stronger, and this is the reason why the radius of the proton has shrinkage.

    In the article ANOMALOUS MASS OF THE PROTON published in the book QRT, it is calculated that the radius of the proton within the nuclei is 0,275 fm. From this radius of the proton it is calculated the electric quadrupole moment of the deuteron, and the result is the same obtained from experiments.
    The paper ANOMALOUS MASS OF THE PROTON is also published in the blog Journal of Nuclear Physics:
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516

    As the muon is very heavier than the electron, then from this higher complexity model of proton we have to expect that in proton-muon scattering the experiments will measure a proton radius very shorter than 0,8 fm. I expect a a proton’s radius between 0,3 fm and 0,6 fm.

    In the case the experiments to be carried out by the MUSE project confirm my prediction getting a radius between 0,3 fm and 0,6 fm, I hope the theorists will realize the need of considering seriously my heavier complexity model of the proton, formed by a flux of gravitons crossing the ring formed by the rotation of the three quarks.

    Regards
    Wladimir Guglinski

  225. eernie1

    Dear Andrea.
    Your development of the E-Cat, if it can be successfully integrated into the world’s power structure, would be a monumental achievement. However, IMHO a greater achievement would be the construction of a new basic understanding of Physics through defining the mechanisms of the device. This understanding could unlock nuclear secrets that can lead to even more efficient and useful energy sources for the good of mankind. There is no doubt in my mind that better materials and methods would be developed to assure an unlimited source for any human endeavor utilizing energy such as space exploration.
    I think you hold in your hands the best source of clues for achieving this understanding. That is the relatively large amount of nuclear ash that you must be accumulating through the operation of the past devices under a variety of operating scenarios. Perhaps, if you could have these ashes assayed by a trusted scientific group, under a NDA, you as well as society eventually can benefit greatly.
    Some questions I must ask. Was the assay conducted by the 3PT team and their results, mitigated by materials added to and not connected to your primary operative fuel composition? Were their results really indicative, as far as you know, of the reactions taking place in the device? Do you have more assay results that you cannot reveal and do they provide more clues to the process? If possible, a simple yes or no would be very helpful to those scientifically exploring possible solutions or verifications.
    Regards and be on the lookout for those who would try to divert your efforts, including those who seem to be friendly to your work.

  226. Salve Dr Andrea
    Sono un suo Fan, la seguo da diversi anni giornalmente sia sul blog che sulle varie news. . . pensi che sono in lista per 4 e-cat domestici “spero per un futuro immediato” …
    la mia domanda è: a quando il cambio di era? non è curioso di vedere cosa accade pubblicando integralmente i progetti in rete? scavalcare ogni pregiudizio economico, prospettare un vero e proprio cambio di era, fine delle guerre, fine del petrolio… chissà come sarà la vita nel mondo..

  227. Andrea Rossi

    Sergio Caterina:
    Thank you for your kind words.
    So far let’s fly down and think to make our 1 MW plant work well and please remember that this technology will integrate, if it works well, in the existing system.
    About publishing the know how, it would stop any serious investment. I already commented many times this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  228. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I know it is not in your nature to retire from your work on the E-Cat, and I don’t expect this to happen, but let me pose a hypothetical:

    If you decided tomorrow to move on to do something different with your life, could you leave feeling confident that your Team would have the skill and knowledge to bring the E-Cat successfully to the marketplace?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  229. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Absolutely yes: as I answered also to Mark Ellenbroek, I am very useful to the Team, but not indispensable as I was one year ago.
    This said, it’s quite unlikely that I will retire, at least not as long as God leaves me on this World.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  230. Jonjon

    Hi Andrea,
    Having seen the white hot glowing Hot-cat photos on the internet, have you ever tried to catch this energy by photo-voltaic cells?
    Some multi-wavelength capturing cells on high tech market offer remarkable efficiency.

  231. Andrea Rossi

    Jonjon:
    yes, but the efficiencies are low.
    Consider that in industrial applications the heat is exchanged and the heated medium takes away the energy, so that you have no more glowing surfaces, but steam.

  232. Andrea Rossi

    Mark Ellenbroek:
    I am very useful to my Team, but I am not indispensable.
    Besides, this technology is not an either or and it will be a support, not an enemy.
    Thank you for your attention:
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  233. Marc Ellenbroek

    Dear Andrea,
    At this moment you are working on a device which may well become the most important invention of the century. More and more scientists are recognizing your work and it will not take long before the E-cat will enter the market, I hope.
    The E-cat will be disruptive to the energy market in the world. Many will profit by it, but also many (very rich) will be bankrupted. Those who will suffer will be forceful enemies of the work you are doing and they will try to stop you getting it on the market. They will use any means to do this, which may also be dangerous for you.
    Apart from the personal tragedy, it would be a catastrophe for your work when something would happen to you. I am sure you realize that.
    My question to you is: Have you taken action to avoid that if something would happen to you, your invention would ever be lost?

  234. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    dear Dr. Rossi there are new groups that work on cold fusion reactors .

    Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works group created widespread publicity in October 2014 with its claim that it would be delivering a working prototype of a fusion reactor within five years. It also created a wave of enthusiasm and excitement among science and technology enthusiasts. All this comes from the work of your team.

  235. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the information!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  236. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. In QRT, do non-rotating particles exist? (These would obviously be lacking gravitational fluxes n(o).)

    2. Perhaps there exist two varieties of F(g):
    i) strong
    ii) residual

    In the case of (i), at very short distances, F(g) is responsible for binding quarks together.
    In the case of (ii), perhaps a lack of perfect coherence (“friction”, as you call it) in the gravitational fluxes n(o) of strong F(g) causes an amount of gravitons g to be continually left out to extend into the immediate environment outside the nucleons. The density of these gravitons g within these outer fluxes n(o) would obviously be smaller, and therefore residual F(g) would take on the usual characteristic of a smaller force than strong F(g).

    All the best,
    Joe

  237. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 15th, 2015 at 12:51 PM

    Wladimir,

    If you define the strong nuclear force as the interaction between gravitational fluxes n(o), then what is the force responsible for holding the three quarks of a nucleon together?
    ——————————————————

    I did not propose a model for quarks.
    There would need to study the subject, in order to verify if a quark has its own gravitational flux n(o), and it interacts with the other quarks via strong force.

    The rotation of the 3 quarks would induce the gravitational flux n(o) of the protona and electrons

    regards
    wlad

  238. Andrea Rossi

    Michael Kors:
    Yes, I did.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  239. Joe

    Wladimir,

    If you define the strong nuclear force as the interaction between gravitational fluxes n(o), then what is the force responsible for holding the three quarks of a nucleon together?

    All the best,
    Joe

  240. Dr Rossi:
    Did you find in the books of Norman Cook and of Greiner – Maruhn bases for your theoretical explication of the Rossi Effect?

  241. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: It is long overdue for you to put some limits on Mr. Guglinski’s comments. Thank you.

  242. Wladimir Guglinski

    My reply to Vlad in the ZPenergy

    Dear Vlad,
    I write herein in the ZPenergy not only for the readers of the present days. I write also for the readers of the future.
    When in the future the aether will be finally accepted by the scientific community, the science historians will be looking for the historical events that marked the rejection of the ether in Physics, and one of their sources for searching for historical records will be the pages of the ZPenergy.

    regards
    wlad

  243. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    You wrote in a recent comment you posted in this blog:
    “..there are some events you do not know and are forcing my silence” ( Sic !!!)
    Please do not be ridiculous.
    I gave you an enormous room in this blog, so that you had all the possibility to explain your theories, that I think are completely wrong, but nonetheless I wanted to publish them . I wanted to help you anyway to explain yourself, because I see that you are putting enthusiasm in what you say, wrong or right as it might be. I share the statement that Evelyn Beatrice Hall attributed ( wrongly) to Voltaire, which sounded like ” I do not agree with you, but I am ready to be killed to defend your right to speak”.
    This said, recently you tried to involve me in your discussions, and I warned you that I want not to be involved, therefore I am simply spamming all the comments of yours in which you try to involve in your theories me and Professors that never heard about you and are totally not interested in aetheric issues.
    I am continuing to publish all your comments, as I did today, and to spam any comment from you that tries to involve me in a discussion regarding your theories.
    The two Professors that you are insulting and bullying with arrogance do not know me, do not know you, do not have, I suppose, any intention to answer to all your stuff. I simply suggested to you ( very humbly, not having your tremendous nuclear Physics background) to read their text because I supposed you could learn more about photons, in a rigorous way. You, instead of studying that book, are insulting the Authors who are, I repeat, totally strange to whatever you do and do not know what I wrote to you in this blog and what you wrote everywhere. They teach nuclear Physics in one of the most important Universities of the world ( Institut fur Teoretische Physik der Johann Wolfgang Goethe – Universitat Frankfurt). The book we are talking about is “Nuclear Models” of W. Greiner and J.A. Maruhn. Conjugating the reading of this book with “Models of the Atomic Nucleus” of Prof Norman Cook I have improved my work.
    I will not return on this point, therefore, in a nutshell: do not involve me again in your comments, if you want me not to spam them. The only thing that ” is forcing your silence” (sic!) is that you force me to spam the comments that involve me in discussions regarding your theories.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  244. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in February 14th, 2015 at 2:11 PM

    Wlad,
    You do not have to answer this blog, but I…
    —————————————————-

    Dear Eernie
    there are some events you do not know and are forcing my silence.

    Let me explain why I cannot accept Dirac’s theory.

    In the Quantum Ring Theory the electric and magnetic fields are formed by a flux composed by the motion of particles e(+), m(+), p(+), g(+), G(+) , and their antiparticles.

    The electric and magnetic fields of the proton and the electron are formed by the those fluxes. The electric and magnetic fields of the atomic nuclei is also formed by those fluxes.
    And there is no way to consider a flux composed by electrons and positrons in my model of proton, electron, and nuclear model.

    I am very sorry Diract is not alive.
    If he were alive, I am sure Dirac would be very interested in my theory, and he would realize that my theory is more complete than that proposed by he (after all , he never proposed a nuclear model formed by the structure of aether formed by electrons and positrons).

    regards
    wlad

  245. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 14th, 2015 at 3:26 PM

    Wladimir,

    In your new QRT, you replaced the magnetic force F(M) with the gravitational force F(g). Is F(g) created by the same gravitons g that create the gravitational fluxes n(o)?
    ————————————————

    Joe,
    Yes.
    Look at the Figure 5.1 at the page 10 of my paper.
    The flux n(o) of the central 2He4 rotates and has “friction” with the rotation of the flux n(o) of the proton, both the fluxes n(o) being formed by gravitons g(+).

    This “friction” of fluxes n(o) is the resposible for the strong nuclear force, as I show in the page 207 of my book Quantum Ring Theory, in the article Strong Nuclear Force as Consequence of Gravitational Interactions.

    Obvisously such “friction” is not in the sense of the ordinary friction known in the Classical Physics.

    regards
    wlad

  246. Danielsen

    Dr Rossi:
    Are there any solar energy based plants you consider interesting in particular?

  247. Andrea Rossi

    Danielsen:
    Yes: the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System è [ 392 MW CSP ( Concentrating Solar Power)] in the Mojave Desert in California; another, analogous, is the Solara ( Arizona Solar One), 250 MW, near Gila Bend, Arizona: this is interesting in particular for the molten salt energy store system, the biggest in the world, that in future could be useful also for the E-Cats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  248. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, what do you think about using tungsten tube filled with tungsten foam for containing the “fuel” for hot-cat?

    In the recent tests made by Parkhomov and MFMP, they have had several problems due to the fragility of alumina and for hot-spots.
    Using tungsten for containing the reaction, and a foam for having a great internal surface for the powder would help for a correct running with less problems.

    I have read it here:
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/15/the-ultimate-dog-bone-axil-axil/

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  249. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    I cannot give any suggestion regarding the technology to build a reactor resistant and reliable for long periods. As I already said, the manufacturing of the shielding of our Hot Cats is part of the IP know how. To know if a system works or not you have just to try it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  250. Joe

    Wladimir,

    SR says that two clocks suffer the same time dilation due to a common relative velocity. Each clock sees the other clock as ticking slower. But if they meet, each clock would expect the other clock to be younger (a smaller elapsed time). This paradox invalidates SR. If there is no difference in age, an aether must then exist which acts upon both clocks dilating their proper time in such a way that keeps them the same age. And if there is a difference in age, SR is falsified since SR claims that each clock sees the other as younger – and not one younger, the other older. Of course, only an aether could allow for an age difference.

    NB. Although it does not apply to our discussion here, talking about relativistic velocities necessarily invokes the Composition Law for Velocities:

    s = (v + u)/(1 + (vu/c^2))

    (This is for the case of collinear motion.)
    We must be careful to avoid the simple Galilean addition of velocities.

    All the best,
    Joe

  251. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi,
    I am sending to the JoNP these very interesting articles. What do you think of the theory of Carl Oscar Gullström – PhD at the Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Uppsala ?

    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/limits-gullstrom-theory-neutron-tunneling/

    Andrea Rossi Vindicated? Cold Fusion Takes Another Step Towards Credibility
    http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Andrea-Rossi-Vindicated-Cold-Fusion-Takes-Another-Step-Towards-Credibility.html

  252. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for your links.
    I think that the papers of Gullstroem are worth to be studied.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  253. Joe

    Wladimir,

    In your new QRT, you replaced the magnetic force F(M) with the gravitational force F(g). Is F(g) created by the same gravitons g that create the gravitational fluxes n(o)?

    All the best,
    Joe

  254. eernie1

    Wlad,
    You do not have to answer this blog, but I think Dirac was trying to describe more than the properties of light particles with his theory of the EPO. As an example, his theory suggested that the neutron was the primary cluster of EPOs that emerged from the sea of ground state EPOs when an external force was applied to space. This neutron then degenerated into a proton and electron thereby answering the question of why a proton and electron have the same amount of charge(negative and positive). This was his answer also to the question of why there seems to be much more matter than antimatter. The antimatter resides inside the neutrons and protons within the EPOs that constitute them. It also is an answer to why there are equal numbers of electrons and protons in the universe, and why the number of neutrons are not proportional to the other particles. He also suggested that gravitational forces arise from the attraction of the aligned bipolar EPOs. The electric and magnetic fields he used in his description arose naturally through his use of the spinor field base in his theory as well as the spin quantum number associated with the Fermions.
    For myself, his theory provides as close and acceptable a unified theory as any other I have studied. As you and others have stated there are questions that can be asked of any accepted paradigm, and as shown by the differences among other contributors to this site can lead to interesting discussions.
    Regards and happy hunting theory grounds.

  255. Curiosone

    Can you give us an example of the operation of the 1 MW plant in operation? For example: what happened Yesterday ? Anything anomalous? And today?
    W.G.

  256. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yesterday we had problems with the control system, eventually fixed.
    Today ( Saturday) I can see that so far all is ok.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  257. JCRenoir

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    If in the geographic area where the 1 MW Ecat is operating happens a black out, what happens to the plant? I mean: safety systems, computers, etc, since I assume the reactors can also go in self sustaining mode.
    JCR

  258. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    We have a back up.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  259. Dear Andrea,

    today i got this new replication news from Russia. Do we facing a new “Space Race”? Can we call it “Low Energy Nuclear Race”

    http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Andrea-Rossi-Vindicated-Cold-Fusion-Takes-Another-Step-Towards-Credibility.html

    LavoLaLe lavoLaLe
    Enrico Billi

  260. Andrea Rossi

    M.Sc. Enrico Billi:
    Thank you for your information, very interesting and important. Of course the quest is on! Thanks to the great work of my Team, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S.
    Lavolale, Lavolale!

  261. Joya del Sol

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    I am returning to your website/blog after a few years. Last time I was here, you were going to test the E-cat at your 1st industrial customer’s premises. However it seems your plans for commercial launch have slowed down. I am still curious though about the current schedule of your planned commercial launch for the general public and when the world at large can experience the wonders of your technology. Please share your current plans for the E-cat.

    Thanks and Regards,
    Joya Del Sol

  262. Andrea Rossi

    Joya del Sol:
    It is not true that several years ago we were testing a 1 MW plant in the premises of an industrial Customer. I never said that.
    We are doing it now. The future will depend on the final results of the tests on course. The results could be positive, as we hope, but also negative, as I have to say. This plant is the first commercial plant in operation in the world making thermal energy necessary to an industrial manufacturing concern, inside the premises of the Customer. This plant’s efficiency is not just measured on the base of scientific calculations, as happened up to now, but mainly on the base of the energy costs related to the manufacturing system of the Customer: what counts for the Customer are not the scientific calculations, but the money he makes ( or loses) using the E-Cat instead of a regular plant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  263. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 5:01 PM

    Wladimir,

    I think that SR might allow knowledge of which twin is faster, but I do not know if SR can allow knowledge of the absolute speed. (After all. that is why SR exists.) Maybe it depends on the Lorentz beta factor.

    For example,
    ——————————————————————-

    Joe, the puzzle is not reagarding to get knowledge of which thin has faster speed. The puzzle is concerning why one of them ages faster in the empty space.

    For instance, consider that Joe and Peter are in a planet with relativistic speed V having a motion toward a right direction in the space.

    And Peter exits the planet in a spacecraft with the same relativistic speed V having a motion in the contrary direction of the planet motion in the sapce (tbe spacecraft moves in the left direction in the space).

    So, as the space is empty, both Peter and Joe move with relativistic speed V in the space.
    Would one of them age faster ?

    regards
    wlad

  264. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    the reason why the even-even nuclei with Z=N have null magnetic moment is explained in the page 11 of the present paper:

    ———————————————————————
    So, the even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero because the rotation of the body-rings of the protons within the principal field of the nucleus does not induce magnetic moment due to the rotation of the nucleus. Therefore the even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero because:

    a) In spite of the electric charge of the secondary field Sn of the nucleus is positive, however because of the property of the field Sn shown in Fig. 4.2 there is no induction of magnetic field by the rotations of the field Sn.

    b) There is not induction of magnetic moments by the body-rings of deuterons within the principal field Sp of any even-even nucleus with Z=N, since each pair of deuterons cancell each other their magnetic moment.
    —————————————————————————-

    Joe,
    also note that the gravity force Fg , in the present paper, responsible for the agglutination of the nucleons within a nucleus, is similar to the strong nuclear force considered in the Standard Model, because the strong nuclear force can have gravitational origin (the strong nuclear force is a sort of dynamic gravity, a hypothesis shared by some physicists).

    What did you think about the paper?

    regards
    wlad

  265. Paul

    Andrea,

    It looks like you are not the only one interested in LENR+ jet engines:

    From e-catworld: Here’s an interesting announcement about anupcoming workshop that is posted on the Russian Cold Nuclear Transmutation and CMM site (Google translated from the Russian):

    19/02/2015 in CIAM workshop report “Physical and mathematical model of radiant heat in the combustion chambers of gas turbine engines and heat generation in the generators of Rossi – Parkhomov, which means the Rossi Effect as replicated by Alexander Parkomov.

    On Thursday, February 19, 2015 at the Central Institute of Aviation Motors. PI Baranova, a regular meeting mezhotrasle-new scientific and technical seminar “Applied Problems of Mechanics-tinuous medium in aircraft engine.” Will make a report:

    “Physical and mathematical model of radiant heat in the combustion chambers of GTE and heat generation in the generators of Rossi – Parkhomov. ”
    (Authors: MJ Ivanov, VK Mamaev, MA Surin).

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/09/workshop-on-rossiparkhomov-heat-at-ciam-russian-aviation-engineering-institute/

    Paul

  266. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Good. Alexander Parkhomov merited this. I am honoured from this strong interest in Russia for our work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  267. Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Honestly, do you think that the fall of the oil prices are due also to the Lugano Report, as many say?
    Gregg

  268. Andrea Rossi

    Gregg Tiedeman:
    No.
    Oil has nothing to fear from this technology, provided it will be consolidated during the next year by the 1 MW plant. As I always said, all the energy sources can be integrated and work collaboratively. I am sure it is not and never will be an ” either or “.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  269. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    You have stated that you think the results of A. Parkhomov are valid and interesting. That is significant to me, because according to his data he achieved several minutes of self sustained operation at around 1200C with no input power when the resistor burned out. Of course the difference between his setup and your reactors are night and day: his are test rigs that burn out quickly, but yours have been designed to operate for months at a time. However, can you clarify if his results – specifically including short lived self sustain – should be achievable by qualified expert scientists using the same basic setup and fuel? Or are his results interesting because they were a random event that should not have happened?

  270. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    All I know of Alexander Parkhomov’s replication test is what I read and saw in the internet. He made a remarkable work.
    I can add nothing to this comment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  271. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, if you or your readers are interested in the 912 million dollar World’s most advanced x-ray-shooting super Lab then Google:
    NSLS-II
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale Florida
    USA

  272. Andrea Rossi

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

  273. Marco Serra

    Dear Dr. Rossi
    I’m currently restoring my house after a fire almost destroyed it :(
    For heating I’m using a boiler with radiators in each room.
    The question arising now is: should I switch to an alternative heating system (stove or fireplace) considering that it will pay for itself in approx. five years ?
    My wife, who does not know the Rossi Effect, say yes. I say no, because I believe house heating expenses will be much much lower in 5 years.
    Now I have to make a decision. Can you kindly help us sharing your opinion ?

    Many thanx in advance
    God bless you
    Marco

  274. Andrea Rossi

    Marco Serra:
    To answer you I’d need a cristal ball. I cannot give guarantees, but we hope within the term you cited the domestic applications will be on.
    For what concerns stoves and fireplaces, I am not an enthusiast of them, since the combustion of wood in such devices, with small combustion rooms and a very short retention time of the uncombusted molecules, is usually very polluting. There is a metropolitan legend that says that to burn wood is environmentally friend: the contrary is true, wood generated smoke is very polluting ( traces of dioxin are there too) if it is not burned in a plant with an efficient post-combustion system. Besides, I am all but convinced that you will pay back them in five years.
    This, obviously, is not related to the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  275. Rodneynano

    Andrea Rossi,
    1- Best book you ever read?
    2- Best movie you ever saw?
    3- Best place you ever have been?
    4- Best professional day of your life?
    5- Best work you ever did?

  276. Andrea Rossi

    Rodneynano:
    1- Physics: “Models of the Atomic Nucleus” ( Norman Cook, USA); literature: “War and Peace” ( Lev Tolstoi, Russia)
    2- ” The Concert” ( 1999)
    3- USA
    4- When the 1 MW E-Cat will have been approved by the Customer after 1 year test
    5- The 1 MW E-Cat that has been manufactured by the Team of IH ( see point 4)
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  277. Robertgennick

    Dr Rossi:
    Can you inform the teams that are trying to replicate your results which is the treatment you do on alumina to make the reactors?
    Thank you,
    R.

  278. Andrea Rossi

    Robertgennick:
    Sorry, this is one of the most important know hows related to the operation of the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  279. Dear Andrea,
    recently i started to follow a new technology about heat pumps involving controlled cavitation effect.
    A company developed a new kind of heat pumps calledBernoulli system with a minimum COP of 3.1

    In the past you said e-cat technology can self-sustain the reaction, so finally how much is the minimum COP reachable practically with your e-cats?

    LavoLaLe lavoLaLe
    Enrico Billi

  280. Andrea Rossi

    M. Sc. Enrico Billi:
    I said that the 1 MW E-Cat has long periods of self sustaining. The data will be published when the test will be finished ( please see my answer to Bernie Koppenhofer minutes ago).
    Lavolale, Lavolale!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  281. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: Could you give us a hint about when the 400 days started for your industrial reactor now in use? Everyone is getting bored watching MFMP blow up reactors. (:

  282. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Alexander Parkhomov replica is very interesting, though !
    As I said, the tests of the 1 MW plant delivered to our Customer will end between November 2015 and February 2016.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  283. Wladimir Guglinski

    The Vacuum Catastrophe – Zero-Point Energy

    QED is the most precise physical theory we have; its predictions have been verified to 1 part in 10 billion! The zero-point field is the “ground state” of the electromagnetic field. In this ground state, the equations indicate that no ordinary physical photons are present, yet electromagnetic energy is present. The energy for a given frequency is ½ hf , one half of the usual energy of a photon. Sometimes the zero-point field is described as consisting of “virtual” or very short-lived photons, that appear and disappear before it is possible to detect them. The presence of zero-point fluctuations has been verified experimentally with very accurate measurements of the Lamb Shift, other atomic energy level shifts, the magnetic moment of the electron, and the Casimir force. QED predicts that the number of ZP quanta (½ hf ) of frequency f is proportional to the square of the frequency. This gives an energy density for the vacuum that goes as the cube of the frequency.

    Special relativity requires that any observer going through space cannot tell how fast she is going in an absolute sense. Thus the zero-point fluctuations must look the same, independent of her velocity as she travels through space. Therefore the Doppler shifted frequency spectrum must look the same as the unshifted frequency spectrum. This requirement of special relativity results in an energy density of the zero-point fluctuations identical to that predicted by QED, namely an energy density proportional to the cube of the frequency. Summing over all the frequencies present, gives a total energy density in the vacuum of which is proportional to 1/L4 where L is the shortest wavelength of the ZP fluctuations allowed. If we take L as zero, then we obtain an infinite energy. Applying quantum principles to general relativity (geometrodynamics) suggests that at lengths shorter than the Planck length (10**-35 m), the nature of space-time fluctuates, and therefore no meaning can be ascribed to a length shorter than the Planck length. Thus we could use the Planck length as a cutoff.

    The energy density of the ZP fluctuations in empty space (according to QED) is about 10**114 joules/cubic meter if we use the Planck length (10**-35 m) as a cut-off.

    General Relativity and Vacuum Energy
    In general relativity, any form of energy has an equivalent mass, given by E = mc**2, and is therefore coupled to gravity. This enormous zero-point energy density is equivalent to a mass density of about 10**92 kg/cc, and would be expected to cause an enormous gravitational field. This large field leads to some major problems with general relativity, such as the collapse of the universe into a region of space that is about 1 Planck length across. Thus we have an inconsistency in two very important and well-verified theories, QED and General Relativity. A brief discussion of this problem is given in the excellent book “Lorentzian Wormholes” (Springer-Verlag, 1996, p. 82) by Matt Visser.

    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3598&mode=nested&order=0&thold=0#15495

    .

  284. Wladimir Guglinski

    JR wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 12:56 PM

    1) ————————————————-
    The point here is that the measurements do not require any sort of new “aether” to explain them; they all saw phenomena that were predicted by conventional physics.
    —————————————————–

    Dear JR
    Marcel Urban, François Couchot, Xavier Sarazin, and Arache Djannati-Atai have different opinion than yours.
    They are the authors of the paper The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light, where they propose that space is filled by particles and antiparticles: “We show that the vacuum permeability μ 0 and permittivity ε 0 may originate from the magnetization and the polarization of continuously appearing and disappearing fermion pairs”.
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1140%2Fepjd%2Fe2013-30578-7#page-1

    Obviously I dont need to remmember you that their proposal is a plagiarism of my model of aether composed by particles and antiparticles, published in my book Quantum Ring Theory in 2006.

    2) —————————————————————-
    He seems to not understand what is meant by longitudinal vs transverse in the context of waves more generally, as light does not have transverse propagation (unless it’s some random redefinition of the word). Anyway, I know of now meaningful argument stating that transverse waves must exist in a medium.
    ——————————————————————–

    My God !!!!
    Dr. JR does not know what is a transverse propagation!!!!

    Dear Dr. JR,
    transverse waves are those ones which suffer polarization. Light can be polarizated. That’s why light has transverse propagation.

    Electromagnetic waves such as light exhibit polarization, Sound waves in a gas or liquid do not exhibit polarization, since the oscillation is always in the direction the wave travels.
    Light which can be approximated as a plane wave in free space or in an isotropic medium propagates as a transverse wave — both the electric and magnetic fields are perpendicular to the wave’s direction of travel.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarization_%28waves%29

    It seems you never te tired to come back to say nonsenses, Dr. JR

    3) ———————————————————-
    I’ve explained why his discussion of the “proton radius puzzle” is misguided, but he’s now changed his claim. In the past he claimed that the proton radius was very small, about 0.3fm.
    ————————————————————–

    I changed nothing.
    The radius of the proton 0,275fm calculated in my paper Anomalous Mass of the Neutron was made for the heavy nuclei, where the flux of gravitons crossing the ring of the proton is very strong, and causes a big shrinkage in the proton’s radius.

    A free proton is crossed only the flux of gravitons of the own proton, and that’s why it has radius in order of 0,8fm.

    I hope that in the experiment to be made via scattering proton-muon the radius of the proton will have a big shrinkage, because the mass of the muon is very higher than the mass of the electron, used in the older experiments via scattering proton-electron.
    That’s why I expect that proton’s radius will be measured between 0,3fm and 0,6fm.

    However,
    let’s stop crap, and let us wait the experiments.

    If the measurements will get a value very shorter than 0,8fm, I will be very eaglier hoping to hear an explanation from the experts of the Standard Model.
    Then I will be glad to hear your opinion, Dr. JR.

    4) ————————————————-
    I’m not sure where this came from, but it will not be tested by upcoming experiments (which are looking only at a free protons), and none of these experiments involve building a new accelerator, as he claims.
    —————————————————-

    So,
    I am a lier:

    Next stepts
    Another goal is to repeat the scattering experiments, but instead of shooting electrons at protons they’ll shoot muons at protons. This project, the Muon Scattering Experiment, or MUSE, is set to take place at the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland. The facilities there will allow researchers to simultaneously measure electron- and muon-scattering in one experiment.
    http://www.livescience.com/28707-shrinking-proton-puzzle-new-experiments.html

    5) ————————————————-
    I don’t have the endurance to try and understand his arguments about special relativity, but it seems clear that others are aware that his comments there make no sense.
    —————————————————–

    But of course never somebody will be able to surpass the nonsense you said along the discussion about the shape of fhe nucleus 10Ne20 in the Figure 1:
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7407/full/nature11246.html
    when you had proposed a New Geometry, claiming that the shape of the 10Ne20 in the Figure 1 is spherical, because an ellipsoid has spherical shape.

    The record of nonsense is your, DR. JR.
    Dont be afraid.
    Never somebody will take it from you.

    regards
    wlad

  285. Dr Rossi:
    Do you think we will see an imdustrial E-Cat generate electric emergy within the mext three years?
    Thank you for your answer
    Viktor

  286. Andrea Rossi

    Viktor:
    Yes.
    Warm regards
    A.R.

  287. Joe

    Wladimir,

    I think that SR might allow knowledge of which twin is faster, but I do not know if SR can allow knowledge of the absolute speed. (After all. that is why SR exists.) Maybe it depends on the Lorentz beta factor.

    For example,

    Scenario 1:
    Object 1 travels at v = 0.
    Object 2 travels at v = 10m/s.

    Scenario 2:
    Object 1 travels at v = 1,000m/s.
    Object 2 travels at v = 1,010m/s.

    Both scenarios have the two objects with the same relative velocity: 10m/s (in the same direction, of course).

    Now, if the beta factor in scenario 1 is the same as that in scenario 2, then there is no way to evaluate the absolute speeds of the objects. But if the beta factor in scenario 1 is different from that in scenario 2, then absolute speeds can be evaluated. (In this latter case, SR would be denied validity.)

    So if QRT wants legitimacy, it must explain how absolute speeds can actually be evaluated (with the use of the aether as an absolute frame of reference) over and against the impossibility of doing so using the paradigm of SR.

    All the best,
    Joe

  288. Danielsen

    Dear JR,
    I appreciated very much your comment.
    Thank you.
    Please continue.
    Danielsen

  289. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 1:46 AM

    Wladimir,

    Without an absolute frame of reference such as an aether, would it still be possible to determine which of the twins was moving faster?
    ————————————————

    Joe,
    such question you need to do the experts in Einstein’s theory.
    I confess I cannot se how.

    regards
    wlad

  290. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 1:46 AM

    Wladimir,

    Without an absolute frame of reference such as an aether, would it still be possible to determine which of the twins was moving faster? Perhaps by emitting signals to each other in an agreed frequency, the slow twin would receive signals in a smaller frequency due to the dilated time in the fast twin’s frame of reference. (Conversely, the fast twin would receive signals in a larger frequency from the slow twin.) Both of them would then know who the slow or fast twin is?
    —————————————————————

    Dear Joe,
    there is a point: we dont know the velocity of the planets in the aether.

    But consider the following:
    the twin paradox makes sense only if the spacecraft has relativistic speed.
    As the planets have non-relativistic speed, and as Peter is within the spacecraft moving with relativistic speed, therefore Joe will age faster, because he is in the planet moving with non-relativistic speed regarding the aether.

    In the case the planet is moving with relativistic speed, then if the spacecraft exits the planet with relativistic speed in the contrary direction of the motion of the planet, then the speed of the spacecraft will be slow regarding to the aether.
    So, in this case Peter will age faster, since Joe will age slowly because he is moving with the planet with relativistic speed regarding the aether.

    regards
    wlad

  291. JR

    Wladimir has been repeating several of his incorrect statements about theory, experiment, etc… Since I and others have explained why these claims are wrong, I haven’t bothered repeating those explanations. But I thought I’d comment on a few new things he’s claiming:

    1) Experiments prove that his aether exists. As he *finally* admits, all things people call “aether” are not the same. So the fact that aether was shown not to exist long ago by Michelson and Morley only applies to the version of “aether” that they were studying/testing. Similarly, the fact that recent experiments are able to interact with the “quantum vacuum” is a test of the quantum vacuum as it’s understood in modern physics and doesn’t test any new predictions of Wladimir’s aether. He simply claims that if something exists in space, then it must be the thing he says exits in all space. Of course, it’s not quite right to say that it exists in all space, only that when you introduce an external probe or field you can create and observe virtual particles. But this is a subtlety that’s not too important here. The point here is that the measurements do not require any sort of new “aether” to explain them; they all saw phenomena that were predicted by conventional physics.

    He claims that transverse waves must exist in a medium. However, he simply asserts this as fact but gives no explanation, just an analogies to other kinds of waves (which he gets wrong). He seems to not understand what is meant by longitudinal vs transverse in the context of waves more generally, as light does not have transverse propagation (unless it’s some random redefinition of the word). Anyway, I know of now meaningful argument stating that transverse waves must exist in a medium.

    I’ve explained why his discussion of the “proton radius puzzle” is misguided, but he’s now changed his claim. In the past he claimed that the proton radius was very small, about 0.3fm. He somehow believed that a discrepancy between precise measurements giving 0.88fm and ultra-precise measurements giving 0.84fm was evidence that the real radius was closer to 0.3fm. That was obvious nonsense, but he always claimed that the next measurements would give his very small radius. Now he’s changed his prediction – a frequent occurrence – to say that a free proton is large (0.8fm) and a proton in a nucleus is much smaller (0.3fm). I’m not sure where this came from, but it will not be tested by upcoming experiments (which are looking only at a free protons), and none of these experiments involve building a new accelerator, as he claims. The good news is that measurements that are now decades old have looked for a change in size of the proton in nuclei, and find that such changes must be small (well below 10%, though it’s hard to set limits that are significantly more precise), ruling out his idea of a much smaller proton in nuclei. So it doesn’t matter if the people doing new experiments know about his prediction or not; they won’t be testing his new prediction and, based on past performance, if they did he would just change it again. Of course, that’s the scientific method – make predictions, test the model, improve the model. It’s just that most people give up on a model that has yet to make any successful predictions and has to constantly be updated to fix clear flaws.

    I don’t have the endurance to try and understand his arguments about special relativity, but it seems clear that others are aware that his comments there make no sense.

  292. Wladimir Guglinski

    Peter Forsberg wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 7:40 AM

    Dear Wladimir,

    This is unfortunate. Since they do not perform their experiment to test a prediction of your theory, it is not likely that your theory will get at boost even if it validates your theory in this regard.

    Science dogma is not only about truth. It is also about influence. You will likely not succeed if you do not achieve that as well.
    ————————————————————-

    Dear Peter,
    Galileo waited 400 year to receive a pardon request from the papa, in the name of the Church.

    As happened 500 years ago, when the priests had persecuted hereges, today the scientists persecute the defenders of the Scientific Truth, in the name of the Science.

    regards
    wlad

  293. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    I made my point and want not to return to this discussion. It is too much audacious, from my point of view, to talk of disproving the Relativity Theory on these bases.
    I have not time for further discussions on this issue, until I will read something I will be really interested to. In the meantime I remain adherent to the Special Relativity Theory.
    For this reason, while the JoNP’ s blog will continue to publish your comments, independently from my point of view, please do not involve me in your discussions. Let me anyway invite you to study “Nuclear Models” of Greiner – Maruhn ( Springer, Berlin 1996, available on Amazon) in particular pp 75- 206, to get some useful foundamentals regarding photons. Unless you think you do not need it, in this case just disregard this humble suggestion of mine.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  294. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 11th, 2015 at 1:46 AM

    Wladimir,

    Without an absolute frame of reference such as an aether, would it still be possible to determine which of the twins was moving faster? Perhaps by emitting signals to each other in an agreed frequency, the slow twin would receive signals in a smaller frequency due to the dilated time in the fast twin’s frame of reference. (Conversely, the fast twin would receive signals in a larger frequency from the slow twin.) Both of them would then know who the slow or fast twin is?
    —————————————————————

    Joe,
    if the planet is moving in the right direction with with speed V, and the spacecraft exits the planet in the left direction with speed v, then the velocity of spacecraft regading the aether is V-v.

    If the spacecraft leaves the planet in the right direction, its speed regarding the aether is V+v.

    if the spacecraft leaves the planet in a direction orthogonal to the motion of the planet, the speed of the spacecraft regarding the aether is (V² + v²)^1/2.

    regards
    wlad

  295. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir,

    From previous posts:

    “Peter:

    Who will conduct the experiment regarding proton radius? Was the experiment designed by someone who wants to test prediction of your theory? Does the group testing the proton radius know about your theory and its prediction regarding proton radius?
    ————————————————–

    Wladimir:

    No, Peter, they do not know.”

    This is unfortunate. Since they do not perform their experiment to test a prediction of your theory, it is not likely that your theory will get at boost even if it validates your theory in this regard.

    Science dogma is not only about truth. It is also about influence. You will likely not succeed if you do not achieve that as well.

    Regards

    Peter

  296. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 9:37 PM

    Valeriy Tarasov:
    Albert Einstein based his theory on experimental results.
    Thousands of experiments have confirmed the SRT; to cite some:
    —————————————————————–

    Albert Einstein is reported to have said: No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

    Non-transverse electromagnetic waves prove he is wrong

    regards
    wlad

  297. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Without an absolute frame of reference such as an aether, would it still be possible to determine which of the twins was moving faster? Perhaps by emitting signals to each other in an agreed frequency, the slow twin would receive signals in a smaller frequency due to the dilated time in the fast twin’s frame of reference. (Conversely, the fast twin would receive signals in a larger frequency from the slow twin.) Both of them would then know who the slow or fast twin is?

    All the best,
    Joe

  298. Dear Andrea Rossi,
    I am just curious. In connection with your answer to Peter Forsberg about Einstein’s Relativity Theory, let say Special Relativity Theory, I would like to ask you – which experimental data have convinced you that SRT is correct ?
    Best wishes,
    Valeriy Tarasov

  299. Andrea Rossi

    Valeriy Tarasov:
    Albert Einstein based his theory on experimental results.
    Thousands of experiments have confirmed the SRT; to cite some:
    - the muon experiment
    - Rossi and Hall experiment
    - Hafele and Keating experiment
    Now: do you want an experiment to validate the SRT you do probably everyday, as well as most of our Readers , even if they perhaps don’t know? The GPS you use to reach a destination is a proof of the SRT. Make the experiment now, set up your GPS to go somewhere: if it works, it is a proof of the SRT, if it does not work, change it ( the GPS, not the SRT).
    On the contrary, no repeatable experiment has been able to give evidence that the SRT is wrong.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  300. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 6:51 PM

    Wlad,
    I cannot believe the father of the relativistic wave function would need to couch his theory in semantics. One of the reasons he combined the electron and positron was to create an entity that possessed an integer spin thereby giving it the characteristics of a Boson, allowing it to reach the speed of light like the photon, without the increase of mass to infinity as his formula required for Fermions(fractional spins).
    ————————————————-

    Dear Eernie,
    I have no interest in the Diract theory, because he proposed it with the aim of explaining the phenomena concerning the light ONLY.

    Unlike, with the structure of aether proposed in my Quantum Ring Theory I propose to explain other phenomena, as the formation of magnetic and electric fields, the gravity, etc. And what is the most important: how the particles of the aether contribute for the formation of the structure of the atomic nuclei and their stability.

    There is no way to apply a structure of aether formed by positron-electron, proposed by Dirac, in my nuclear model.

    regards
    wlad

  301. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 2:05 PM

    Wladimir,

    How does QRT resolve the Twins Paradox?
    ———————————————–

    Joe,
    the paradox exists only when we consider it from the Einstein’s theory, because as he considered the space as empty, you cannot consider any referencial frame at rest, and there is no way to make distinction between the two twins.

    But having the aether as a referencial frame at rest, we can refer each one of the twins regarding the aether, as follows:
    * The two twins Joe and Peter are in a planet with speed v regarding to the aether
    * The twin Peter goes away the planet in a spacecraft moving with speed V.
    Being V> v, Joe will age faster than Peter.

    regards
    wlad

  302. eernie1

    Wlad,
    I cannot believe the father of the relativistic wave function would need to couch his theory in semantics. One of the reasons he combined the electron and positron was to create an entity that possessed an integer spin thereby giving it the characteristics of a Boson, allowing it to reach the speed of light like the photon, without the increase of mass to infinity as his formula required for Fermions(fractional spins). It also allowed a description of the charge difference between a proton(composed of approx. 700 EPOs) and an electron(1/2 the apparent mass of an EPO). Each particle was also surrounded by a large number of EPOs thereby transferring any photonic reaction at light speed. The photonic nature of the EPO was demonstrated by the fact that when the phases of the two waves were properly aligned, the EPO resolved into two photons of a total energy of a little more than 1Mev.
    There are more considerations including a possible solution to dark energy which are hinted at in his theory, but that is another story.
    Regards and further delightful thoughts.

  303. Wladimir Guglinski

    Peter Forsberg wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 2:36 PM

    Dear Wladimir,

    Who will conduct the experiment regarding proton radius? Was the experiment designed by someone who wants to test prediction of your theory? Does the group testing the proton radius know about your theory and its prediction regarding proton radius?
    ————————————————–

    No, Peter, they do not know.
    The experiment will be conducted because some years ago a new experiment made with Lamb shift in muonic hydrogen detected a proton radius shorter than that required by the Standard Model. The older experiment was made via scattering proton-electron.
    https://indico.mitp.uni-mainz.de/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=14

    Now they are bilding an accelerator, in order to make an experiment via scattering proton-muon.

    According to my theory, the proton has a variable radius, because the 3 quarks of the proton form a ring crossed by a gravity flux.
    When the gravity flux becomes stronger due to the interaction of the proton with other nucleons, the radius of the ring has shrinkage.

    A free proton has radius in order of 0,8fm.
    When it interacts with other nucleons, the proton’s radius has a shrinkage.
    Within the nuclei the proton’s radius is 0,27fm, calculated in my paper Anomalous Mass of the Neutron
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Anomalous%20mass%20of%20the%20neutron.pdf

    regards
    wlad

  304. Wladimir Guglinski

    There is no honesty in the scientific community

    Peter Forsberg wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 2:46 AM

    Dear Wladimir,

    Science is like an oil tanker. Alternative theories or alternative interpretations of existing theories are like small waves. Even if they are right, they will not move the oil-tanker.
    ——————————————————–

    Dear Peter,
    There is no honesty among the academic physicists.
    They betray the scientific method.

    Non-transverse (longitudinal) propagation requires a medium.

    For instance, the longitudinal waves in the surface of a lake requires a medium: the water
    The sound cannot propagate in the vacuum. The longitudinal waves of the sound requires a medium: the air.

    Non-transverse electromagnetic propagation cannot travel in the Einstein’s empty space. Longitudinal electromagnetic waves requires a medium.

    In resume: waves require a medium. They cannot travel in the empty space.

    We can give any name to such a medium: quantum vacuum, aether, substance, etc., but no matter what name we call it, it cannot be empty, and obviously it must have a structure.

    In Modern Physics there is explanation on how the light (transverse electromagnetic propagation) can travel in the Einstein’s empty space because as the light is considered a duality wave-particle, then the light can move in the empty space (without medium) in its shape of particle mode.

    Here in this tutorial is written:
    All electromagnetic waves are transverse
    http://www.antonine-education.co.uk/Pages/Physics_2/Waves/WAV_02/Waves_2.htm

    The discovery of the existence of non-transverse electromagnetic waves requires the rejection of the Einstein’s empty space, because non-transverse waves cannot move without a medium.

    The discovery of non-transverse electromagnetic propagations obliged the theorists to find a theory for that sort of waves:
    Electromagnetic Waves in the Vacuum with Torsion and Spins
    http://www22.pair.com/csdc/pdf/helical6.pdf
    In the Abstract the authors say:
    These waves are not transverse

    However,
    the description of the longitudinal electromagnetic waves by equations do not solve the puzzle:
    how they can travel in the Einstein’s empty space ???

    After all, a wave cannot travel without a medium.

    Andrea Rossi said:
    “Einstein’s Relativity Theory explains us that space-time depends on an observer’s related speed. This excludes an aetheric medium . To admit Aether implies to waive the Relativity Theory.”

    Then I would like to hear from Andrea Rossi how he explains the existence of non-transverse electromagnetic waves moving in the Einstein’s empty space.

    regards
    wlad

  305. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir,

    Who will conduct the experiment regarding proton radius? Was the experiment designed by someone who wants to test prediction of your theory? Does the group testing the proton radius know about your theory and its prediction regarding proton radius?

    Regards

    Peter

  306. Joe

    Wladimir,

    How does QRT resolve the Twins Paradox?

    All the best,
    Joe

  307. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    You wrote this in an earlier post:

    “As a matter of fact, in Nuclear Physics, in particular when you enter in the world of the nuclear models, you find a lot of artifices like this: when a model becomes shaky because eventually it does not explain some parameters, the stunch sustainers of the shaky model usually invent an adjustment factor that resolves the problem; usually happens that the new adjustment factor acts like an elephant in a Chinese porcelains boutique, extending the properties of the model democratically to every elementary particle, independently from the model.”

    Don’t you think that dark energy and dark matter should be counted as such fiddle factors? No one has ever managed to directly detect or create neither.

    In my opinion these are elephants with a very large energy and mass.

    Regards

    Peter

  308. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    He,he,he…maybe !
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  309. Wladimir Guglinski

    Peter Forsberg
    February 10th, 2015 at 2:46 AM

    Dear Wladimir,

    If you want to have success with your theory, you must make a prediction that cannot be done with existing theory. And you must make sure that you, or someone else conducts an experiment that validates your prediction. Without this no one of importance will listen to your words.
    ————————————————-

    Dear Peter
    Actually the new interpretation on Eistein’s Relativity represents a very small importance in my work.

    There are some phenomena neglected by the physicists which cannot be explained via Einstein’s theory.
    For instance, there are electromgnetic propagations moving in the aether through longitudinal waves:
    Koryu Ishii T. and Giakos G. C. , (1982), Transmit Radio Messages Faster than Light, Microwaves & RF.

    I call the sound of aether those longitudinal electromagnetic waves, because they are electromagnetic propagation which move like the water waves in the surface of a lake (in the aether they have spherical propagation, while in the lake the water waves have a superficial propagation).
    There is no way to explain them by considering the Einstein’s empty space.

    But the most important part of my work is concerning:
    * the model of photon, which is able to explain all the properties of the light, as the EPR experiment, etc.
    * the new model of neutron formed by proton+electron
    * the new model of hydrogen atom, where the electron move with helical trajectory in the
    electrosphere of the proton.
    * the new nuclear model

    I am waiting the results of an experiment to be conducted in 2015 or 2016, where the radius of the proton will be measured via scattering with mesons.
    According to my nuclear model, the radius of proton in those experiments must be found between found between 0,3fm and 0,6fm, while from the Standard Model the radius of the proton must be found in the order of 0,8fm.

    I dont think the physicists will accept my theory only because the experiments get a radius between 0,3fm and 0,6fm.
    However the confirmation will represent a strong evidence for my work.

    Many predictions of my work had been confirmed by experiments between 2008 and 2014.

    The most important is the prediction according to which even-even nuclei with Z=N have non-spherical shape, shown in my book Quantum Ring Theory published in 2006.
    Along 80 years the nuclear theorists had considered that those nuclei must have spherical shape.

    The journal Nature published a plagiarimm of a prediction of mine nuclear model, in 2012, concerning the non-spherical shape of those nuclei:
    Plagiarism in the Journal Nature
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3402

    And the European Physical Journal published a plagiarism of my model of Aether in 2013.
    New experiment (April-2013) corroborates Aether proposed in Quantum Ring Theory
    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3464

    regards
    wlad

    regards
    wlad

  310. Wladimir Guglinski

    Alexvs wrote in February 10th, 2015 at 3:29 AM

    Dear Mr. Guglinski

    Could you write please your opinion upon the Stern-Gerlach experiment?
    —————————————-

    Dear Alexvs
    in my book Quantum Ring Theory there is a paper entitle The Stern-Gerlach Experiment and the Helical Trajectory.

    You can find many papers in Peswiki concerning my QRT:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Quantum_Ring_Theory

    Cold fusion mystery finally deciphered
    Similarity between Wave Structure of Matter and Quantum Ring Theory
    PowerPedia:Successes of the Bohr atom
    PowerPedia:Quantum Ring Theory at Temple University
    PowerPedia:Quantum Ring Theory burnt in a Brazillian university
    PowerPedia:Foundations for Cold Fusion
    Heisenberg’s Paradox
    Article:Cold Fusion and Gamow’s Paradox
    PowerPedia:on the indistinguishibility of Quantum Mechanics
    PowerPedia:magnetic monopole – new experiment corroborates Quantum Ring Theory
    PowerPedia:quantum computer will never be constructed
    PowerPedia:… and Schrödinger wins the duel with Heisenberg
    PowerPedia:the mistery on the Andrea Rossi’s catalyzer

    PowerPedia:Don Borghi’s experiment
    PowerPedia:Cold Fusion Theories
    PowerPedia:Cold fusion, Don Borghi’s Experiment, and hydrogen atom
    PowerPedia:Einstein and entanglement: Guglinski interviews Dr. John Stachel
    PowerPedia:Are there five fundamental forces in Nature?
    Article: How zitterbewegung contributes for cold fusion in Pamela Mosier-Boss experiment
    Repulsive gravity within the hydrogen atom

    Script on the film Quantum Ring Theory:

    PowerPedia:Guglinski’s Model of the Photon
    PowerPedia:Guglinski on the De Broglie Paradox
    PowerPedia:Demystifying the EPR Paradox
    PowerPedia:Zitterbewegung Hydrogen Atom of Quantum Ring Theory
    PowerPedia:New model of neutron: explanation for cold fusion
    Article: How magnet motors work
    Article: AN INCOHERENCE OF RELATIVITY ELIMINATED WITH A PHOTON MODEL

    Article: New nuclear model of Quantum Ring Theory corroborated by John Arrington’s experiment
    Article:Quantum Field Theory is being developed in the wrong way

    regards
    wlad

  311. Alexvs

    Dear Mr. Guglinski

    I have read your posts and theories with attention. Not agreeing 100% to your theories I must conceed however that what you call non-luminiferous aether, for me simply SPACE, is a brilliant basis to understand the physical behaviour of particles and light. Space is something that exists. MUST have a structure because it has physical properties (volume, electric/ magnetic permeability).
    I like very much your interpretation of Michelson-Morley experiment and agree with you in your regard about the revision of the experiment itself.
    Could you write please your opinion upon the Stern-Gerlach experiment?
    Please, continue your interessant work.

    Greetings

    Alexvs

  312. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir,

    I find your theory regarding the helical trajectory through the non-luminiferous-aether interesting. I was obviously already aware about the Michelson-Morley experiment, otherwise I would not post things on this forum. But it was nice with a recap from your point of view.

    But unfortunately I am not learned enough in physics and have not studied your theory deeply enough to have an opinion regarding your theory’s validity.

    And Andrea is also right that I misused the term “aether”. What I am interested in is a theory of physics that is on a lower level than Einsteins theory of relativity and your quantum ring theory.

    If you want to have success with your theory, you must make a prediction that cannot be done with existing theory. And you must make sure that you, or someone else conducts an experiment that validates your prediction. Without this no one of importance will listen to your words.

    Science is like an oil tanker. Alternative theories or alternative interpretations of existing theories are like small waves. Even if they are right, they will not move the oil-tanker. Only by making a new prediction of SIGNIFICANCE that directly contradicts existing theory you will create a big wave that can change the course of the oil tanker.

    By significance I mean that the prediction should have major practical applications, like the atom bomb or the photo electric effect.

    Regards

    Peter

  313. Wladimir Guglinski

    eernie1 wrote in February 9th, 2015 at 6:29 PM

    Wlad,
    The more you describe your idea of the Ether(Aether),the more in my opinion it resembles the sea of EPOs that Dirac proposed made up the Ether. He proposed a combination of a negative wave(electron)and a positive wave(positron)rotating at the speed of light,
    ———————————————————

    Dear Eernie,
    in spite of my idea of the Aether resembles the Dirac’s EPOs, in my opinion a photon composed by positron-electron cannot reproduce all the properties of the photon.

    Eernie,
    Dirac proposed a photon composed by positron+electron because they are two particles detected by experiments.
    Dirac did it because he hoped his theory would be more acceptable if he would propose a model of photon composed by particles already detected experimentally.

    He knew that his theory would have a biggest rejection if he would propose a model of photon composed by particle and antiparticle of the Aether (as is proposed by me).
    So,
    in order to reduce the resistance against his model of photon, he had proposed a model formed by positron and electron.

    regards
    wlad

  314. Wladimir Guglinski

    Why did Einstein never think about a physical model of photon?

    Einstein supposed that a corpuscular model of photon would have to be composed by one particle moving by rectilinear trajectory in the sense of Newton.

    But such model of photon is incompatible with the Maxwell equations of the light propagation.

    However, when Einstein faced the puzzle of the photoelectric effect, he arrived to the conclusion that the photon would have to have a corpuscular nature. That’s why he proposed the quanta of light.

    But as the quanta of light are incompatible with the Maxwell equations, Einstein spent about 40 years of his life looking for equations so that to conciliate the Maxwell equations with the concept of quanta of light.
    He did never succeed to find those equations.

    The puzzle concerning the controversial nature of the light was easily solved in the Modern Physics as follows:
    the physicists consider the light as a duality wave-particle. Sometimes the light is wave, and sometimes it is particle.
    Along the week days Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday the light behaves as a wave.
    And along Thursday, Friday, Saturday, the light behaves as a particle.
    At Sunday the light rests.

    One of the strong reasons why Einstein did never try to discover the structure of the photon is because he was sure that the photon cannot have a physical structure.
    He had arrived to that conclusion because the polarization of light has a statistical feature.
    But a corpuscular particle moving with Newton’s classical motion cannot have statistical feature.
    Therefore it was impossible for the photon to have a physical structure.

    Other restrictions against the concept of a corpuscular photon moving with Newton’s rectilinear motion are the following:

    1. Light composed of corpuscles would violate the principle of least action.

    2. A corpuscular photon would have to have mass, in which case its rest mass could not be zero.

    3. According to Relativity Theory the photon is massless.

    4. A corpuscular photon would violate gauge invariance.

    All those restrictions are applied to the classical model of photon moving with a Newtonian motion.

    But all those restrictions cannot be applied to a model of photon composed by a corpuscle formed by particle and antiparticle moving with helical trajectory. This is shown in the page 77 of my book The MIssed U-turn, from Newton to Rossi’s Ecat.

    So,
    we realize why Einstein had so many reasons why to give up of trying to discover a physical structure for the photon.

    And this is the reason why in Modern Physics are adopted some strange solutions, unsatisfactory under the viewpoint of phylosophical coherence, as the concept of duality wave-particle.

    The incoherences of Modern Physics are an heritage from the Newton’s classical theory. Because Einstein and the physicists of the 20thCentury tried to develop their theories by starting from the classical rectililenar motion of a particle in the sense of Newton.

    Eisntein had the audacity to reject some laws of the Newton’s Mechanics. So, he kept the Maxwell’s Equations, and changed the Galileo’s transformations.

    But Einstein did not realize that the puzzles of the photon would require to also reject the Newtonian rectilinear trajectory of a particle.

    regards
    wlad

  315. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 9th, 2015 at 7:49 AM

    Peter Forsberg:
    Time has a direction because the speed of light cannot be overcome.
    —————————————————————–

    Dear Peter,
    Einstein discarded the aether, and in return he had to create a new physical entity, in order to replace the lack of a real physical entity existing in the nature: the aether.

    Actually the time does NOT exist.
    What exists is the non-luminiferous aether.

    The speed of light cannot be overcome because when a body moves it has interaction with the non-lumineferous aether, and when the speed of the body approaches to the speed of light, the mass of the body tends to infinite.

    Einstein had proposed that light speed cannot be overcome by proposing a postulate.
    And postulates do not work via physical mechanisms.
    So, Einstein’s Special Relativity is something like a phantasmagoric theory, since some fundamental physical mechanisms are missing in this theory.
    His theory developed from the empty space is phantasmagoric.

    Unlike, the interaction between a body and the non-luminiferous aether works through a physical mechanism.
    A theory developed from the non-luminiferous aether works via physical mechanisms.
    The ghosts of the Einstein’s Relativity are expelled from a theory interpreted from the concept of non-luminifeous aether.

    regards
    wlad

  316. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Peter Forsberg,
    let us understand better the mechanism of the photon interaction in the Michelson-Morley experiment.

    They actually did not try to detect a difference of light speed. They actually tried to detect a difference of frequency between the light going against the motion of the Earth, and the light going in the same direction of the planet’s motion.

    A body is composed by atoms.
    And the atoms are involved by a field of aether.

    The interferometer used by Michelson and Morley is formed by atoms, and it moves with 30km/s.
    Ahead the motion of the interferometer, there is a microscopic contraction of the aether fields which involves the atoms situated in the frontal surface of the interferometer.
    And at the back of the motion of the interferomenter there is a microscopic dilation of the aether fields which involves the atoms situated at the back surface of the interferometer.

    Consider a photon moving with a frequence “f” in contrary direction of the motion of the interferometer.
    When the photon enters the region where there is the contraction of the aether about the atoms of the interferometer, the photon has a decrease of speed equal to 30km/s. As the interferometer has a speed 30km/s, then the frequence of the photon does not change, regarding to the interferometer.

    Now consider another photon with the same frequence “f” moving in the same direction of the inteferometer.
    When the photon enters the region where there is a dilation of the aether about the atoms of the interferometer, the photon has an increase in the speed equal to 30km/s. As the interferometer moves with 30km/s, the frequence of the photon does not change.

    That’s why Michelson-Morley experiment did not detect a difference in the photons frequence.

    Einstein had interpreted the dilation of the non-luminiferous aether as a dilation of the space-time, as he had interpreted the Lorentz transformations.

    The equations developed by Einstein from the Lorentz transformations are correct, from the mathematical viewpoint, because he had considered a postulate: the speed of light is invariant regarding any observer moving with speed V (and his postulate is consequence of the contraction-dilation of the aether about the atoms of a body, when the body moves with speed V).

    However the physical interpretation of the constant speed of light, considered in the Einstein’s Special Relativity, is wrong.
    And therefore from the phylosophical view point the Einstein’s Relativity is wrong, because he had considered the space as empty.

    That’s why Einstein’s Relativity introduces so many phylosophical incoherences.

    You have to note that when Einstein developed his Special Relativity he knew nothing about atoms and the structure of the photon.

    Einstein postulated the constant speed of the light (independent of the speed of the observer), because he decided to eliminate the luminiferous-aether of the 19th Century, since to consider that luminiferous-aether there is need to consider a light moving with longitudinal waves, and such luminiferous-aether would have to have a tenacity in the magnitude of the tenacity of the steel, if one would like to claim that from the luminiferous-aether the light could move with transverse waves.

    regards
    wlad

  317. eernie1

    Wlad,
    The more you describe your idea of the Ether(Aether),the more in my opinion it resembles the sea of EPOs that Dirac proposed made up the Ether. He proposed a combination of a negative wave(electron)and a positive wave(positron)rotating at the speed of light, out of phase and polarized, with one end of the EPO negative and the other end positive. All space, he postulated, was filled end to end with the EPOS negative end to positive end and extending from one end of space to the other. The EPOs would exist in their lowest energy state, below what he envisioned as a zero point level. In order to be observed, a quantity of the EPOs would have to be excited by an external energy to escape this ground state and produce a thermodynamic effect. He postulated that they would emerge in clumps and arrange themselves as neutrons which would then decay to a proton by ejecting an electron wave from one of the EPOs which then formed a basic Hydrogen atom. The rest of what we call matter then would be formed from this production of H through the processes we are familiar with in our Cosmological studies. Since the spin number of the EPOS is an integer, it is not constrained by the uncertainty principal and can occupy each others positions even though possessing the same Quantum features. When photons are generated by the various physical processes they travel through the EPO strings at a rate controlled by the rotation of the waves(speed of light=c).
    Can you please comment since this description for me provides an insight to what the real constituents comprise the Ether?
    Regards and please continue your intriguing research.

  318. Wladimir Guglinski

    Peter Forsberg wrote in February 9th, 2015 at 2:00 AM

    Dear Andrea,

    I agree with you that the word aether might not be the best to use. It has a lot of connotations that are not palatable to physicists.
    ————————————————————-

    Dear Peter,
    there are two sort of aethers: the luminiferous-aether of the 19th Century, and the non-luminiferous-aether proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.

    I suggest you to read my comment posted as The origin of misunderstanding in Einstein Special Theory of Relativity herein in the JoNP.

    regards
    wlad

  319. Wladimir Guglinski

    The origin of misunderstanding in Einstein Special Theory of Relativity

    In the 19th Century the physicists believed that the space is filled by a luminiferous-aether, where the light would move as wave propagation similar to water waves in the sufrace of a lake, when we throw a stone in the lake.

    When a wave moves with velocity “V” in the surface of a lake, and an observer in a boat moves with speed “v” in contrary direction to the propagation of the waves, if the observer measures the speed of the wave he obtains a value V+v. If the observer moves in the same direction of the wave propagation, he obtains a value V-v.
    So, the speed of the observer influences the speed of the wave measured having the apparatus of measurement at rest within the boat.

    Michelson and Morley had made an experiment so that to detect a difference of speed in the light velocity, due to the influence of the speed of the Earth, which moves with 30km/s.
    They made the experiment by measuring the speed of light when it moves in the contrary direction of the Earth’s motion, and when it moves in the same direction. So, if the light should be a propagation of waves in the luminiferous-aether (like the water waves move in the surface of a lake), then obviously Michelson and Morley would have to detect a diference.

    However, the experiment did NOT detect any difference.

    Enstein faced the puzzle, and decided to discard the hypothesis of the luminiferous-aether not only because of the negative result obtained by Michelson-Morley experiment. He actually discarded the luminiferous-aether because of 3 things:

    1- A water wave moving in the surface of a lake has longitudinal propagation. And the light moving in the luminiferous-aether also would have to move by longitudinal propagation.
    However from experiments we know that light has a transversal propagation

    2- For a light moving as TRANSVESE wave in the luminiferous-aether, such medium would have to have a tenacity equivalent of that of the steel.

    3- Michelson-Morley did not detect the difference in the light speed, and therefore they did not detect the luminiferous-aether.

    .

    So, what the Einstein’s Special Relativity actually had discarded is the luminiferous-aether considered in the 19th Century.
    Einstein Special Relativity does not discard a non-luminiferous aether.

    And the real aether which fulfils the space is non-luminiferous. Let us see why.

    The reasons why the aether is non-luminiferous:

    1) The photon is composed by two corpuscles, a particle and its antiparticle.

    2) The two corpuscles of the phton have a circular motion perpendicular to the propagation of the photon

    Therefore a model of photon composed by two corpuscles moving with helical trajectory in the aether has a TRANSVERSE propagation.
    So the aether actually is non-luminiferous, because in the luminiferous-aether the light would be moving with longitudinal propatation.

    With this photon composed by two corpuscles moving with helical trajectory the aether does not need to have the tenacity of the steel, as is required by the luminiferous-aether.

    And how does explain the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment?

    When a body as a planet moves, the motion causes the following changing in the non-luminiferous aether:

    a) Ahead the direction of the motion, there is a contraction of the aether

    b) At the back of the motion, there is a dilation of the aether

    So, when a photon is moving in contrary direction of the motion of the planet, the photon experiences a decrease in its velocity, because it is moving in an aether with biggest density.
    This occurs because it is constant the flux of aether crossing within the circular motion of the two corpuscles of the photon. As the density of the aether had a growth, then the speed of the photon must decreasing, in order to keep constant the flux of aether within the photon.

    And when the photon is moving in the same direction of the motion of the planet, the photon expeiencies a growth in its velocity, because it is moving in an aether with lower density.
    Now the photon needs to increase its speed, because as the density of the aether has decreased, the photon needs to move faster, in order o keep constant the flux of aether within the photon.

    Why the equations of the Special Theory of Relativity (STR) works well

    Einstein developed the equation of the STR by considering the Lorentz Equations.

    Well, but the Lorentz equations just consider that there is a dilation of the space-time when the light is moving with regard to an observer.

    Therefore, we realize that Einstein’s equations of the STR actually describe the motion of a photon composed by two corpuscules moving with helical trjectory in a non-luminiferous aether.

    The equations of the STR do not describe the motion of light in the luminiferous-aether of the 19th Century.
    Actually the equations describe the motion of light in a non-luminiferous aether.

    Such misunderstanding on the interpretation of the Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity was caused by the following sequence of facts:

    a) The theorists did not know the structure of the photon

    b) Einstein decided to discard the aether because he did not know how the light moves in the non–luminiferous aether

    As we see, the missing of the non-luminiferous aether in the Modern Physics is responsible for so many misunderstandings.

    For instance, in the field of the Nuclear Physics the nuclear theorists did not succeed to find any satisfactory model of nucleus, in spite they are trying along more than 100 years.
    The reason of the unsuccess of the Standard Nuclear Physics is because it is missing the contribution of the non-luminiferous aether into the structure of the nuclei.

    If the theorists do not bring back the non-fluminiferous aether for Physics, they will never succeed to find a theory free of paradoxes.

    regards
    wlad

  320. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    I understand your point of view.

    Regards

    Peter

  321. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  322. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    The theory of relativity is no more wrong at the base than Newtonian mechanics and Newton’s law of universal gravitation. Both are models of the world that are very useful, so cannot be said to be wrong. All models have flaws. But both of these also leave unanswered questions. E.g. what exactly is an object and why does time have a direction?

    Until there is a theory that explains everything that has been exlained by earlier theories plus makes some prediction that earlier theories cannot, I agree with your metaphor of tennis balls and tanks.

    My hunch is that the basic rules of the universe is something simpler than the standard model. The standard model will then be more of an emergent phenomenon. So, I am happy that some people try to throw tennis balls on tanks.

    Regards

    Peter

  323. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    Time has a direction because the speed of light cannot be overcome. What exactly is an object is more a phylosophical issue than a physics one: remember Hegel’s distinction between the “thing in se” and the “thing per se” ? Quantum theory has defined pretty well what objects are made of, both in real and virtual terms. I agree with the rest of your comment, and I agree that every theory has its essence in the fact that can be overcome. Otherwise, it would be a religion. This is why this journal hosts very audacious theories, like Wladimir Guglinski’s one, even if we do not agree in toto with him. If you are making a rehearsal, a military exercitation, to shoot “tennis balls” toward a tank can be someway useful: to sharpen the aim, for example; but if you have to fight in a real battlefield, as we have to, that is a suicide.
    Thank you for your comment,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  324. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Andrea,

    I agree with you that the word aether might not be the best to use. It has a lot of connotations that are not palatable to physicists.

    Regards

    Peter

  325. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    The core of the issue is that I am convinced that Aether does not exist, unless somebody is able to give evidence of the fact that Einstein’s Relativity Theory is wrong at his base. I never saw anything of the kind. The critics I saw so far against the Relativity Theory are less than tennis balls thrown to a division of tanks.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  326. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in February 8th, 2015 at 2:03 PM

    Wladimir,

    2. Newton is able to explain an apple falling from a tree. Einstein is not able to do this. Curvature of space, if we even accept such a concept, provides no mechanism for imparting an impulse to an object.
    ——————————————————

    Joe,
    Einstein’s proposal of the gravity to be due to the curvature of the space is one of the most wrong ideas proposed along the History of Physics.
    Probably that’s why the own Einstein tried to bring back the aether to Physics after 1916.

    regards
    wlad

  327. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 8th, 2015 at 8:17 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Einstein’s Relativity Theory explains us that space-time depends on an observer’s related speed. This excludes an aetheric medium. To admit Aether implies to waive the Relativity Theory. I am not going to explain to you the thousands papers written on this issue, because, obviously, I have not the time to return on this, but
    ————————————————————-

    Dear Andrea,
    unfortunatelly the own Einstein would disagree to what you claim.

    In the page 135 of my book The Missed U-Turn, from Newton to Rossi’s Ecat it is witten:

    —————————————————————
    It was not Einstein who has buried the aether definitively because, starting in 1916, he reconsidered his rejection of the aether and undertook to bring it back into Theoretical Physics. This historical fact, which physicists try to hide from people, is narrated in the recent book by Walter Isaacson on the life of Einstein, where he tells that the father of relativity wrote a letter to Lorentz in 1916, in which Einstein related his latest conclusion regarding the polemic existence of the ether: “I agree to you that the general theory of relativity admits a hypothesis of the ether’s existence”.
    Here is the passage in the Isaacson book:

    So, it’s not surprised that, after some years, Einstein had started to step back from some of his anterior and most radical ideas. For instance, in the famous work of 1905 on the special relativity, he disqualified as “superfluous” the concept of aether. But after analysing the general theory of relativity, he concluded that the gravitational potentials of that theory have characterized the physical qualities of the empty space and have fitted as a way capable of transmitting disturbances. He passed to refer himself to that as a new way of conceiving an aether. “I agree to you that the geingral theory of relativity admits a hypothesis of the ether’s existence”, he wrote to Lorentz, in 1916.
    —————————————————————-

    Unfortunatelly,
    it seems Dr. Prakrash has given up to publish my book The Missed U-turn.
    I suspect that he was blackmail victim by Dr. JR.

    .

    The fact that Einstei tried to bring back the aether to Physics after 1916 is also described by Kostro:
    http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Journal%20Reprints-Relativity%20Theory/Download/3313

    Unfortunatelly,
    even Einstein did not succeed to bring back the aether to Physics again, because the concept of aether is not of interest of the powerful energy producers in the world.

    The powerful energy suppliers tremble with fear of thinking that Tesla’s dream, to supply the world with the free energy of eether, may one day become reality.

    regards
    wlad

  328. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    As I said, I deem useless this discussion. You made very well your point, I have nothing to add to what I have already said. Obviously, I will continue to publish your considerations related to your point of view.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  329. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 8th, 2015 at 7:55 AM

    Peter Forsberg:

    As a matter of fact, in Nuclear Physics, in particular when you enter in the world of the nuclear models, you find a lot of artifices like this: when a model becomes shaky because eventually it does not explain some parameters, the stunch sustainers of the shaky model usually invent an adjustment factor that resolves the problem; usually happens that the new adjustment factor acts like an elephant in a Chinese porcelains boutique, extending the properties of the model democratically to every elementary particle, independently from the model.
    ————————————————————

    Dears Peter and Andrea
    any nuclear model must be able to explain a fundamental premise, as I explain ahead:

    a) The nuclei are formed by protons and neutrons, and the protons have positive electric charge

    b) The nuclei have rotation

    c) Due to rotation the electric charge of the protons induces a magnetic moment

    d) Therefore even-even nuclei with Z=N cannot have magnetic moment zero, because in spite each magnetic moment of a pair proton-neutron is cancelled by an opposite magnetic moment due to a symmetric pair proton-neutron, however the rotation of the protons induce a magnetic moment

    e) But the experiments show that even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero

    Therefore any nuclear model must be able to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have null magnetic moment. This is a fundamental premise to be explained by any nuclear model.

    If by considering a nuclear model there is not way to explain such fundamental premise, the model cannot be right. It must be discarded.

    There is not any one nuclear model based on the Standard Model able to fulfill such fundamental premise.
    And therefore all the nuclear models of the Standard Nuclear Physics are wrong.

    Then of course that a wrong nuclear model always requires new adjustment factor which acts like an elephant in a Chinese porcelains boutique.

    Unfortunatelly,
    nowadays the theorists use neglecting the fundamental premises required so that to consider as satisfactory a theoretical model.
    This is the reason why today the Standard Nuclear Physics faces the worst crisis of its history.

    regards
    wlad

  330. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 8th, 2015 at 8:17 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:

    1) ———————————————————-
    Einstein’s Relativity Theory explains us that space-time depends on an observer’s related speed. This excludes an aetheric medium. To admit Aether implies to waive the Relativity . In any case, please consider that to sustain your theory you have to disproof Einstein’s Relativity. Many tried, not quite successfully. Good luck!
    ————————————————————-

    No, Andrea
    I dont need to disproof Einstein’s Relativity.
    A theory is disproved by experiments.

    This is just what prescribes the scientific method.

    According to Einstein’s theory, the space is empty. And so the space cannot have a structure
    But the experiment published by Nature in 2011 shows that the space is not empty. And therefore the space must have a structure.

    Therefore Einstein’s theory is wrong.
    It is not me who is saying it.
    The experiments are proving that Einstein’s theory is wrong.

    2) ——————————————–
    I am too much convinced of the correctness of the Einstein’s Relativity, that I studied very, very well.
    ————————————————

    Einstein developed some equations which describe the phenomena with accuracy.
    But the success of his equations does not imply that the space is empty.

    As said the own Einstein, all the experiments which confirmed a theory do not confirm definitively the theory. But only one experiment can prove a theory be wrong.

    In this sense Einstein was right.
    And the experiment published by Nature in 2011 proved that Einstein’s theory is wrong.

    Dear Andrea,
    I am loyal to the scientific method, which prescribes that theories must be either proved or disproved by experiments.

    I am no loyal to theories.

    regards
    wlad

  331. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. The article mentions vacuum, but scientists have never created a true vacuum. Not even close.

    2. Newton is able to explain an apple falling from a tree. Einstein is not able to do this. Curvature of space, if we even accept such a concept, provides no mechanism for imparting an impulse to an object.

    All the best,
    Joe

  332. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 7th, 2015 at 7:04 PM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    What our opinion differs upon is the probability we associate to the existence of Aether: for me it is, say, 0.0something%, for you it appears to be 99.99%.
    —————————————————

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    any divergence of opinions in Science is decided by conducting experiments.

    My opinion is supported by the experiment published in the journal Nature in 2011: Moving mirrors make light from nothing
    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110603/full/news.2011.346.html

    Light cannot be generated from the Einstein’s empty space, because light cannot be generated from nothing

    And anything which is “NOT nothing” must have a structure.

    Your opinion was acceptable before 2011, when there no existed any experiment proving that the space is not empty.

    But after 2011 any claim against the existence of the Aether sounds as a dogma.
    And dogmas must be discussed in the field of the Church.

    Before 2011 your opinion had 99,99% of chance to be right.
    After 2011 your opinion has 0% of chance to be right.

    regards
    wlad

  333. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Einstein’s Relativity Theory explains us that space-time depends on an observer’s related speed. This excludes an aetheric medium. To admit Aether implies to waive the Relativity Theory. I am not going to explain to you the thousands papers written on this issue, because, obviously, I have not the time to return on this, but I am sure you read them already and the fact that you are still convinced that Aether exists makes useless a discussion. I have honestly to add that your opinion has been shared by important scientists too. Again: in Physics you never have to say that something is impossible, but associate a probability factor to the possibility that something is right. You are very generous with this probabilistic factor related to Aether, I am not. I am too much convinced of the correctness of the Einstein’s Relativity, that I studied very, very well. In any case, please consider that to sustain your theory you have to disproof Einstein’s Relativity. Many tried, not quite successfully. Good luck!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  334. Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir and Andrea,

    I too believe that it will prove more fruitful eventually to view the fundamental level of space as something akin to an aether.

    Regards

    Peter

  335. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Forsberg:
    Welcome back !
    Yes, that could be an interesting line of thought; to name the zero point field “aether” risks to become a semanthic issue, though. In analogy, we all agree that life on the moon does not exist, but, if eventually we name ” some sort of life” any chemical reaction, we invent a methodology that makes everything and the contrary of anything true ( or not true).
    As a matter of fact, in Nuclear Physics, in particular when you enter in the world of the nuclear models, you find a lot of artifices like this: when a model becomes shaky because eventually it does not explain some parameters, the stunch sustainers of the shaky model usually invent an adjustment factor that resolves the problem; usually happens that the new adjustment factor acts like an elephant in a Chinese porcelains boutique, extending the properties of the model democratically to every elementary particle, independently from the model.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  336. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi this is the year of LENR , many scientists try to replicate the E cat. It’s becoming viral.

    http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/01/2015-could-be-year-of-lenr-breakout-and.html

  337. Andrea Rossi

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

  338. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in February 7th, 2015 at 9:11 AM

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    My solid opinion is that “Aether” does not exist.
    —————————————————————

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    the aether was detected experimentaly:
    A vacuum can yield flashes of light
    http://www.nature.com/news/a-vacuum-can-yield-flashes-of-light-1.12430

    A structure for the aether was proposed in a paper published by the European Physical Journal, in 2013, where the authors propose that the aether is formed by particles and antiparticles, as proposed in my book Quatum Ring Theory, published in 2006:
    The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1140%2Fepjd%2Fe2013-30578-7#page-1

    The scientific community uses to call the aether by other name: quantum vacuum.
    But no matter what name we give to the aether, the fact is that the space is not empty as proposed by Einstein, and therefore the aether exists, and by consequence the aether has a structure.

    Obviously the structure proposed in the paper published by the European Physical Journal is incomplete, because those authors proposed a simple structure only with the aim for explaining the emission of light by the space, while I had proposed a structure for the space with the aim for explaining several other phenomena, including the stability of the atomic nuclei.

    Of course in the future the theorists will arrive to the conclusion that a more complex structure is need than that proposed in the European Physical Journal, and they will finally arrive to the conclusion that the structure of the aether proposed by me is correct.

    I respect your opinion, dear Andrea Rossi.
    However I cannot neglect the results of experiments, as that which detected the existence of the quantum vacuum (aether), and so I prefer to keep my opinion that the aether exists.

    regards
    wlad

  339. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    As I said, I respect your opinion and your sincere passion. It is for this passion and for the cospicuous amount of time you dedicate to your studies that our reviewer has decided to publish your paper. Said this, as you know, in Physics nothing is impossible in absolute to exist, but everything is associated to a due probability to exist somewhere, sooner or later. What our opinion differs upon is the probability we associate to the existence of Aether: for me it is, say, 0.0something%, for you it appears to be 99.99%.
    To give you some solace, I must confess to you that many times I am wrong.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  340. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, have no fear of someone taking you “out.”
    Anyone with one ounce of brain power knows that would have ZERO effect on the development of the E-Cat.
    You have already given IH enough of your brain power so that they could continue without you, and everyone that would do you harm is well aware of that fact.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  341. Wladimir Guglinski

    To the readers of the JoNP:

    With the present paper “Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism” published now in the JoNP, my opinion is that we have an entire theory for a complete explanation for the cold fusion phenomena thanks to the the combination between the present paper published herein and the other paper published in Peswiki in 2014:

    “Cold fusion mystery finally deciphered”
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Cold_fusion_mystery_finally_deciphered

    I am very thankful to Andrea Rossi and his staff of the JoNP

    regards
    wlad

  342. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    You are very welcome.
    Obviously, as I already wrote on this blog, I do not agree with your Aether theory and the theory we are elaborating regarding the so called Rossi Effect is totally different. My solid opinion is that “Aether” does not exist. Nevertheless, I respect your work and the sincere enthusiasm you put in it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  343. JonJon

    Milva,
    Andrea must exercise extreme caution, when appearing in the public. Not hard to imagine there are “dogs” would want him D##d or detained.
    This is a dangerous time for him.

  344. Milva

    Hi Dear Andrea, how are you?
    reading your Journal you seem very active and energetic as always! But how do you do ?! :-)
    Considered that for so long I have not written to you, I would like to know a few things, if you will take the patience to answer:
    1. are you coming to Padua in April for the 19th ICCF! It should be a very great event with your presence, considering that this year this annual event will take place in your native Country (I try to whet your emotions, as you see :-) ),
    2. What you are doing has aroused enormous interest in LENR. Nobody has the courage to say that the LENR does not exist, now ! Indeed, there are people who try to reproduce, with some success, your experiments, as simple as it seems the formula. But I just cannot believe that everything is there, as expressed in TPRII?  Considering how hardly you worked to keep the secret and preserve your IP, if everything was in those simple formulas it would be really reductive ?!
    3. But it seems that what you have revealed is sufficient to create positive replicas, even if not industrially exploitable with these values?
    4. Considering that now the road is open, maybe that someone else will add some ideas, some new technology; so it will quickly take off towards the final goal that we all hope!
    5. I also wanted to know something about the certifications of your apparatuses. You do not talk about it anymore. Has you continued with that and with which results ?
    6. Is there any possibility that soon something will be ready also for the market household, too?
    Many thanks and… I wish you good job.
    Warm regards
    Milva

  345. Andrea Rossi

    Milva:
    First of all, thank you for your kind attention.
    Answers:
    1- I cannot leave the 1 MW plant in operation in the USA
    2- The replications made are very interesting. Our IP is related to apparatuses that are able to produce energy in a reliable way and in amount useful for industrial and domestic real utilizations
    3- I can just take notice of what is happening
    4- Maybe
    5- We got already the safety certifications necessary for the industrial application, about the domestic apparatuses we are continuing to work upon this issue too.
    6- Soon I do not think, sooner or later yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  346. Andreas Moraitis

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    This new paper has been found by a blog user:

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.01474

    Best regards,
    Andreas Moraitis

  347. Andrea Rossi

    Andreas Moraitis:
    thank you for the important information, this is another replication of the so called Rossi Effect and a confirm, in general, of the LENR.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  348. JCRenoir

    I read your statement on Ecatworld regarding the zombie. Which is the position of Industrial Heat?
    JCR

  349. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    Industrial Heat has published today on Ecatworld a statement I fully share.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  350. JCRenoir

    Has the action of the zombie had any effect on your present work?
    JCR

  351. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    Not at all. Our present work is too important to have even the time to think about zomberies.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  352. Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Can you give a definition of “isospin” in a nutshell ( not the one you can find on Wikipedia)?
    Thank you for your patience,
    W.G.

  353. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I agree.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  354. Curiosone

    I saw the answer you gave to the zombie: well done: ” non ti curar di lor, ma guarda e passa” ( Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy- Inferno).
    W.G.

  355. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    “isospin” defines the symmetry between proton and neutron. It is a quantic number that corresponds to the spin of quarks in a specific situation.
    Isospin is so called because has the same mathematical structure of the spin.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  356. Frank Acland

    Thank you for the clarification about the 400 days.

    If you don’t mind, could I ask:

    a) Is the 365/400 days requirement a contractual obligation you must fulfill?
    b) If so, are you currently within this obligation for the 400 days that have started?
    c) If you go over the 35 days, does the clock restart, and a new 400 day period begin?
    d) Is there a required average COP level you must achieve during the 365 days of operation?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  357. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    I am sorry, but what you are asking for are particulars of a contract between IH and the Customer that are under NDA.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  358. JonJon

    Hi Andrea,
    To an engineer, the 400 days is called Type test (routine, sample and type test of a new product ). As there is currently no standard manual for LENR, for example IEC,AS/NZS, are you setting up a benchmark standard for LENR operation and safety?

  359. Andrea Rossi

    JonJon:
    We are setting up a benchmark for what concerns the E-Cats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  360. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Has the 400 day period you mentioned in the reply to georgehants started already?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  361. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  362. Marco

    Dear Andrea,

    since a typical boiler for hot water and house warm up is 20-30 Kw, is it a huge problem developing a single e-cat with this power? Is the problem only due to control difficulties or also COP is affected?

    So this take me to the next question: you said that the smaller the ecat, the simpler is to control it. Does this mean also higher COP? In other words could you increase COP producing smaller (e.g. 5Kw) ecat?

  363. Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    To make a module of 20-30 kW is not a problem, there are not particular problems.
    The power of the modules does not affect the COP, it is the reliability of the control that becomes an issue increasing the power beyond a limit within which we got reliability.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  364. georgehants

    Dear Mr Rossi, you say that you have a “production plant”, does that mean that the 1mw unit is producing energy that is literally being used in a productive capacity at the customers premises.
    Allowing that there must be “down time” while you do the necessary changes and improvements as you proceed?

  365. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    Yes, the 1 MW plant is for to generate energy necessary to the Customer of IH to make its production in his premises.
    Yes, for the first 400 days of operation is allowed now and again a “pit stop” to make adjustments and improvements, along with regular maintainance. The important is that within 400 days the plant makes its full production for at least 365 days. This means that during the first period of 400 days we have at our disposal a maximum of 35 days of stop to make improvements, adjustments and maintainance. The operation is intended 24 hours/day, 7 days/week.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  366. Bernie Morrissey

    Congratulations on your accomplishments.
    Bernie

  367. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Morrissey:
    Good question. Yes, the basics are the same, the electronics are different, due to the fact that the control system for a unit is much simpler.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  368. Congratulations for the important work of your team of Industrial Heat. Millions of persons, Andrea, are looking for your results. A real plant, at last, not the usual toy on a table we are looking at since 25 years. A real plant that makes real work. A real commercial breakthrough. This is the reason of envy and ferocity against you from the usual gang. Godspeed, Andrea: the world is with you.
    Sammy

  369. Bernie Morrissey

    Dear Andrea,
    Congratulations small your accomplishments. I was wondering if one of the hundred reactors would be the same as one of the home units.
    Bernie

  370. JonJon

    Hi Andrea,
    If everything is going smoothly for you and I.H, by the beginning of next year, how many 1MW units can your production line make a month?

  371. Andrea Rossi

    JonJon:
    Enough.
    Everything is organized. Obviously potential will be turned into actual when the results will be consolidated. For the moment they are not.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  372. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You use the term “Prototype” when describing the installed 1MW thermal plant. I have seen general practice to call a non-customer delivered unit a Prototype while a delivered unit is either Pre-Production or Production, In my work experience, a Pre-Production unit is generally hand assembled by engineers with some technician support while a Production unit is generally assembled by technicians who occasionally may require some engineering support (i.e., a production line process).

    Perhaps you might try the same distinctions if they apply. A Prototype unit generally has connotations of being unreliable, poorly documented and troublesome compared to Production units.

  373. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    On the base of your comment, I definitely used the wrong English translation.
    Let me then correct, and write that the 1 MW plant that has been delivered to the Customer is a production plant, the number one of the production made in the USA by Industrial Heat and our magnificent team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  374. Andrea Rossi

    Sailmenn:
    Sorry, your message is gone in the spam and I have not been able to recover it, but here is the answer.
    You asked if it wouldn’t be better to make a simpler 1 MW plant with bigger reactors instead of a 1 MW plant with 100 reactors.
    The answer is no, based on our R&D and calculations. We have a very consolidated experience about the safety of the E-Cat modules and they also have been already safety- certified. For the time being we have to maintain this configuration of the plant. Obviously bigger reactors are more difficult to control: allow me a naif example: a tiger is more difficult to menage than several tens of cats…
    Thank you for your question.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  375. Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea,
    you wrote:
    ”Hot Cat or E-Cat are the same thing, just in different configuration.”
    >oxforddictionaries.com. Definition of configuration in English: “An arrangement of parts or elements in a particular form, figure, or combination.”<
    What causes the difference between the low temperature reactors and the Hot Cat? Because of the fuel? Control system? Engineering? Other?
    Thermal Regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  376. Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    I am sorry, I cannot give these details so far.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  377. Dr Rossi:
    So: the 1 MW plant is made by 30 000 components: stunning! A dramatic evolution respect the tabletop toys we have seen in 25 years of LENR attempts. The New Era really begins !!!
    Godspeed,
    Elliott

  378. Andrea Rossi

    Elliott Crain:
    Thank you: this is the achievement of my Team.
    Let’s wait for the results after the year long operation, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  379. Hugh DeVries

    Andrea,

    There needs to be an official focal point for recording and expanding the terminology for the ECAT with product numbers, specifications, etc. I am led to believe this central point of communication is the website ECAT.com –but this seems to add some confusion.

    “ECAT.com is a domain owned and operated by Hydro Fusion. ECAT.com is designated as The Official ECAT Website by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation. – See more at: http://ecat.com/about#sthash.sg7md4qG.dpuf.”

    This opens up some questiona that need to be addressed.

    Has the “ECAT” acronym been trademarked? Hydro Fusion claims they own the “ECAT.com domain. Who is in charge of approving the content of the ECAT.com website? There appears to be model number reference to the ECAT HT. Should the patent terminology be consistent in the website? How does it tie in when defending Intellectual Property rights?

    Best regards,
    Hugh DeVries

  380. Andrea Rossi

    Hugh DeVries:
    1- Ecat is a registered trade mark
    2- Hydrofusion is a Swedish commercial Licensee of Leonardo Corporation and is licensed to use the trade marks of the same in the way they deem it useful
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  381. Alexvs

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    Could you define what is exactly the so called Rossi Effect?
    How is it different from Pons-Fleischmann or Paneth-Peters Effect?

    Regards

    Alex

  382. Andrea Rossi

    Alexvs:
    1- The so called Rossi Effect is described well in the Report of the Independent Third Party.
    2- Pons-Fleishmann is an electrolysys induced LENR, Rossi Effect is a LENR induced by other means ( see 1).
    3- The Paneth-Peters Effect was a fusion of deuterium inside micropowders of Pd, quite similar to what Fleishmann- Pons made.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  383. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie:
    Hot Cat or E-Cat are the same thing, just in different configuration. The distinction is conventional. The structure is the same. Both work on the base of the so called Rossi Effect.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  384. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I am quite familiar with all your previous tests of the low temperature E-Cat which you have employed in the 1 Meg unit used in the present factory device. And I know you have publically allowed observations and published your data when they were displayed. However none of the tests on the low temperature devices were performed outside your venue or by third party investigators like the tests performed on the Hot-cat by the third party group. Again, am I missing some coexisting basis, where testing the Hot-cat by the 3pt format, then also can be related to the low temperature device as proof of its viability?
    Regards.

  385. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Being on your team performing that job must be the most facinating, fullfilling career possible — despite it being long, tedious work.

    Congrats on your exciting occupation!

  386. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Thank you. You are right, but the work, albeit long, is all but tedious.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  387. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    When you refer to this 1 MW plant as a ‘prototype’, do you mean it is a test plant that will see limited commercial use, or is the intent for it to be a fully functioning commercial plant intended for long-term use?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  388. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland,
    When I say “prototype” I mean that it is the first fully functioning commercial plant intended for long term use, supplied to a Customer that uses it for generate the heat necessary to make the production of his industry..
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  389. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    Does Industrial Heat have a team or group of researchers looking at a more inherent, fundamental method of controlling the output of a reactor? To be more precise, I mean methods such as adding elements or chemicals to the core, adjusting geometries, or adding the LENR version of control rods rather than the other perfectly valid method of extensive computer control. I dream of a series of E-Cats that are self sustaining, but always bouncing back from a set maximum temperature.

  390. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    That’s the job of my Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  391. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie:
    Please go through this very blog, to find the many tests made with the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  392. Paul

    Andrea,

    Which system has the shorter “Mean Time to Repair”, the reactors (and controllers) or the plumbing?

    Steam under pressure can be very unforgiving.

    Paul

  393. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    We still have not statistics to answer your question. So far we are in a R&D mode, in which maintainance goes in parallel with corrections, modifications, etc.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  394. Congratulations to you and your team: great work, we all are with you with our spirit! :)

  395. Andrea Rossi

    Deborah Rivera:
    Thank you from the whole Team,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  396. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    You have submitted the Hot-Cat to third party testing and allowed the results to be published. I have been curious about the fact that the cool E-Cat has never been investigated or replicated and the results published by third party individuals. Have I missed something?
    Regards and congratulations.

  397. Do you think that the E-Cat could retrofit coal power plants to revitalize them after the new anti pollution requirements?

  398. Andrea Rossi

    Blake Broughton:
    Yes, that is a field where we could be useful, but the big issue, on the base of the experience we had dealing with coal fired power plants, is the very, very long and difficult procedure to change the authorizations. Power plants have extremely complex and precisely defined authotization papers and to change them is very complex. I say this on the base of a specific experience I had on this issue in California in 2012.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  399. Paul

    Andrea,

    What do you do all day when babysitting the 1MW plant?

    E-Cat Stokers will probably have less to do than Maytag repairman.

    Paul

  400. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    control of temperature, steam, flow rates, correct operation of pumps, electromagnetics, just to give an example; obviously I cannot enter into particulars, but consider that the 1 MW plant has about 30,000 components and an orchestra of more than 100 reactors to put in harmony, trying to reach the “perfect harmony”. It is not easy, considering that this is a prototype.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  401. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    I am continuing to find comments not to be spammed in the first page of the daily 30 pages or so of spam. For obvious reasons of time,I can only check the first page. This makes me suppose many comments are unduly spammed by the anti-spam robot. To make it worse, when a comment is spammed the robot puts automatically in the black list the address from which the comment arrives, so that if another comment arrives from the same address, it is automatically spammed again. I apologize for this, but without the robot I could not menage this blog: imagine to receive six, seven hundreds of comments per day and pick up the good ones…
    I invite all the Readers that find spammed their comments to send them again from another address, or inform us about the disfunction writing to
    info@journal-of-nuclear-physics.com
    If you send here your comment, it will be published.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  402. Andrea Rossi

    Jamee Gamp:
    You can put all the questions you want to the Author.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  403. Hello Sir, would you mind if i ask you a few questions on these topics please?

  404. gian

    Caro Andrea
    Please read this, made with Google translate, and tell me how do you feel to be considered at these levels from the highest echelons in the world.
    Leggi questo (io me lo sono goduto con google translate)
    e poi confidami come ci si sente ad essere arbitro dei
    destini delle grandi potenze. anzi del mondo.

    http://www.kp.ru/daily/26323.7/3203639/

    With sympathy, but please be safe, you never know…
    Best wishes,
    Con simpatia, ma sii prudente, non si sa mai.
    Caldi,no roventi saluti

  405. Andrea Rossi

    Gian:
    Thank you for your email, but at the moment I have only one thing to do: work, work, work, with my wonderful Team, to merit all this: I do not think I deserve it still, until the tests are finished; remind that the final results could be positive, but also could be negative. Now we have to work, work, work.
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  406. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, on E cat Word was published the new report of prof. Alexander Parkhomov .

    His conclusions :

    Experiments with the replica of the Rossi high temperature heat source loaded mixture of lithium aluminum hydride and nickel, have shown that at temperatures of about 1100°C or higher, this device actually produces more energy than it consumes.
    The level of ionizing radiation during reactor operation does not significantly exceed background rates. Neutron flux density does not exceed 0.2 neutrons/cm2

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/01/31/new-report-from-alexander-parkhomov-with-new-data-details/

  407. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De meo:
    Thank you for this link too. Definitely, the work of Dr Parkhomov is valid.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  408. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, in Russia you are popular as President Obama. Look at this Russian link.
    Congratulations.

    http://www.kp.ru/daily/26323.7/3203639/

  409. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo de Meo:
    Thank you for the link to the video of the Parkhomov Experiment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  410. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr Rossi:
    From what I read in the blogosphere, LENR, thanks to your work, are beginning to be taken in consideration also from exponents of the mainstream science.

  411. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    I agree: the work made by my Team has produced also a change of mind in most of the mainstream scientists, that from a position negatively biased passed to a more possibilistic opinion. The work of Dr Parkhomov also has been important.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  412. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi , here is the report and the video of the experiment that was successful of Dr. Alexander Parkhomov, which concludes:

    Similar experiments with generators of heat at high temperature Rossi loaded with a mixture of lithium aluminum hydride and nickel , have shown that at temperatures of about 1100 ° C or above this device actually produces more energy than it consumes .
    The level of ionizing radiation during operation of the reactor does not exceed the background radiation . Density of the neutron flux does not exceed 0.2 neutrons / cm2

    https://yadi.sk/i/8f_JV8ygeMQSc

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTa3uVYuvwg

    Prof. Alexander Parkhomov work has been very important.

  413. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Let’s make a distinction: President Obama is among the greatest Presidents of the History of the USA. I am an inventor that works ( with a wonderful Team) 16 hours per day to make sure a 1 MW LENR activated thermal energy generator works well and reliably: my results can be positive, but also negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  414. I discovered your Theoretical feasibility of cold fusion according to the ITP. You also have a lot more traffic.
    Continue your important job, we all are with you!

  415. Andrea Rossi

    Sammy:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  416. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, even Wired has returned to speak of’ E-Cat. Do not miss this article!!

    http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-01/30/cold-fusion-energy-advances-2015

  417. Andrea Rossi

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

  418. On January 28, a link to paper by U.V.S.Seshavathara was given on this blog (http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/paperinfo.aspx?journalid=169&doi=10.11648/j.ijrse.s.2015040401.11). If I understand the paper correctly, they propose the following reaction to explain the energy production of the E-cat:

    Li7 + Ni58 –> Ni62 + 3p

    and they claim that the reaction is 3.64 MeV exothermic. However, when I compute the energy balance of this reaction, I obtain that it is -0.44 MeV endothermic. Either I calculated wrong or I misunderstood the paper or the paper is wrong.

    I just want to bring this to attention of readers of this blog.

  419. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers of the JoNP:
    Today has been published the paper of Wladimir Guglinski “Aether structure for the unification between gravity and electromagnetism”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  420. Hello again Andrea!

    We have started a new category for replication, now when the Russian researcher Alexander Parkhomov has started- I think many will follow.

    Would you be interested in writing down your most important experiences of safety and construction. And let me publish them as an important topic of security.

    This would be a good thing for everyone. I think this evolution will not be stopped, people willwhether we like it or not try to copy the rossi effect in their garage during those next 10 years.

    Example issue
    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1081-Safety-before-you-start/

    Best David

  421. Andrea Rossi

    David:
    Sorry, but I cannot get any liability about safety related to third parties that want to replicate the so called Rossi Effect.
    As I already wrote in this blog many times, it is absolutely necessary that the experiments are made by professionals with the due knowledge of all the safety regulations and laws.
    Should I give instructions, I automatically could get liabilities. These experiments are dangerous and must be done by professionals expert of the art and of the safety issues involved. This is all I can say and underline. I strongly suggest to non experts of the art and of the safety issues connected to it not to make any experiment: I say this not to avoid competition ( competition will come in any case from proper concerns), but to avoid that somebody gets hurt. This is the sole thing that , responsibly, I can write and say.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  422. LENR-to-Market Digest — January 30, 2015 – Highlights this week include: New report by Alexander Parkhomov showing excess heat in E-Cat variant; Jack Cole Reports Excess Heat, too; Sven Kullander Plaque for 1 MW E-Cat Plant; Report from Cold Fusion 101 at MIT; Science Journal special section on LENR; “Other Nuclear” (PESN; January 30, 2015)

  423. Andrea Rossi

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

  424. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Here is a post with some new data from Alexander Parkhomov’s tests done this month on a reactor. They are consistent with data reported in his December tests.

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/01/28/parkhomov-updates-report-with-some-new-data-images/

    Also a video of his reactor and experiment (2 hours long!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTa3uVYuvwg

    What are your thoughts on Dr. Parkhomov’s apparent success on replicating the ‘Rossi effect’?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  425. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    At this point I suppose I can say that the replication of Prof. Parkhomov is serious, very serious.
    I am delighted of the fact that an expert of the art, using what has been published, has been apparently able to replicate the Effect. I think this is a good thing for all.
    Parkhomov is a product of the Russian scientific school, and I am honoured to have been studied from professionals belonging to that level of excellence. Now we have a mainstream scientific environment Prof, not confined in the LENR entity, that has replicated seriously my work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  426. Hi Andrea,

    While I understand how busy you are changing the world, I wanted to be sure to invite you to another small benefit we are planning.

    “Tom & Doug” will be headlining a benefit concert on Saturday March 21 in Princeton NJ. The beneficiary this time is this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpMOJHXn5zI

    We’ll have a drum kit available, just in case there are any Special Guest Drummers.

    -thomas​

  427. Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    He,he,he…I am very sorry, but I have to stay night and day, every day, with the 1 MW plant: I have to direct tens of thousands of components of the plant, playing in the same “orchestra” to reach the perfect harmony, as in the movie “The Concert”.
    And this will be at least until the end of the year.
    I wish great success to your benefit show and I am sure you will find a better drummer ( it doesn’t take too much).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  428. To all readers of JONP.

    The second edition of my book ‘An Impossible Invention’ about Andrea Rossi, the E-Cat and LENR, containing corrections and a few updates, is available both as e-book and paperback through Amazon:
    http://www.amazon.com/Impossible-Invention-Energy-Source-Change-ebook/dp/B00O38417S/

    If you already read the book, feel free to write a review on the Amazon listing page.

    The e-book version of the second edition is offered for free to anyone who bought the first edition. To get a copy, please send an email to mats@animpossibleinvention.com .
    Thanks,
    Mats Lewan

  429. Andrea Rossi

    Mats Lewan:
    Thank yoy for this information regarding your book.
    WRm Regards
    A.R.

  430. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    I read today on Ecatworld the translation of the report regarding the replication of the Rossi Effect made by Prof. Parkhomov: very impressive. Congratulations, Prof. Parkhomov.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  431. Dr Rossi:
    What yoiu write in this blog is truly a great and helpful piece of information. I
    am satisfied that you just shared this useful information with
    us. Please keep us informed like this. Thanks for sharing.

  432. Andrea Rossi

    Phyllis:
    Thank you: I do my best, confined in the intellectual property circled carts, though!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  433. U.V.S. Seshavatharam

    Respected Sir/Madam,

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

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

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

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

    Thanking you,
    yours obediently,
    UVS.Seshavatharam.

  434. Andrea Rossi

    U.V.S. Seshavatharam:
    Thank you for your publication, whose reference will be surely interesting for our Readers as it has been for me.
    After the important work of the Russian Alexander Parkhomov now this publication from an Indian scientist: I am really delighted of the fact that the work of our team is useful in the world.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  435. Respected Andreea Rossi Sir

    Respected sir,

    How are you sir.

    With your kind blessings and encouragement, SciencePG published our paper on E-CAT.

    http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/paperinfo.aspx?journalid=169&doi=10.11648/j.ijrse.s.2015040401.11
    [1]

    HTTP://ARTICLE.SCIENCEPUBLISHINGGROUP.COM/PDF/10.11648.J.IJRSE.S.2015040401.11.PDF
    [2]

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

  436. Dr Rossi:
    The Russian Scientist Alexander Parkhomov has published the results of his replication of the Rossi Effect: any comment?
    Thank you for your work,
    E.P.

  437. Andrea Rossi

    Evelynpi:
    Russian Scientists normally are serious. It appears that the work of Prof. Parkhomov is serious too, but I do not know enough particulars to express a precise opinion. Surely what he writes and says is worth our attention. The history of his life gives evidence of a history of a serious and hard work. His publications are important.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  438. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Pekka Janhunen,
    The reason for the reaction Li6+ep->He4 + He3 + e + 3.51 MeV not being included in reaction 10e is VERY specific: I forgot to add it. :) .
    Thanks for the suggestion/correction.

    I say that Hyd is “picometrically neutral” only because its maximum charge displacement 0.4 [pm], about 3 thousands of the shortest internuclear distance in a pure Ni crystal at room temperature. This should give penetrating properties much higher than any charged particle, towards that of a neutron. I do not know the cross section of Hyd at their average speed (also unknown) in a Nickel lattice or in alumina. I agree with you that Hyd should not be able to cross many microns of a solid state reacting matrix. I have never done detailed “scenario” numbers, perhaps I should. Clearly, as you say, if the nuclei of the matrix do not react (Ni62 seems to be among these) the Hyd should only be scattered elastically and their free path increase.

    Thanks for your questions.
    Best regards
    Andrea Calaon

  439. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Prof. Carlo Rubbia said yeaterday that alternative energies are useless and that the only resource to go for is gas and the technology to break its molecule to get cheap and clean hydrogen. What do you think?

  440. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    I do not agree. The technology cited by Prof. Carlo Rubbia is surely very interesting, but I think that all the possible energy sources have to be integrated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  441. Curiosone

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    When do you think the test phase of the 1 MW plant delivered to the customer will finish?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  442. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Not before November 2015, not later than February 2016, I suppose.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  443. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    Why the COP you are getting from the 1 MW plant is higher than the COP resulted in the Lugano Test made by the ITP?
    Godspeed,
    JCR

  444. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    We make a strong self sustained mode, that, obviously, substantially affects the COP. The Professors of the Independent Third Party wanted not to use the ssm, for the reasons they explained clearly in the report.
    I must remind you that at the end of our tests the final results could be positive, but also negative and we cannot give final results until the tests will have been completed.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  445. Dear Andrea Rossi:
    I am reading this blog from the very beginning in 2011 and everyday for me to read of you is inspiring.
    Thank you for all you are doing for us,
    Sammy

  446. Andrea Rossi

    Sammy:
    Let me correct your delighting comment: it’s not about what I am doing, it’s about what my Team is doing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  447. Is the Customer of IH utilizing the 1 MW plant delivered to him?

  448. Andrea Rossi

    Brenton:
    The Customer is utilizing the 1 MW plant and to the necessary extent we are providing technical assistance. This is all the information I am able to provide, until I’m given further permission from the Customer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  449. Dear Andrea Calaon,
    Is there some specific reason why reaction Li6+ep->He4+He3+e+4MeV is not included in reaction 10e on page 20? I would imagine that one to be a faster reaction than the ones given because it does not involve the weak interaction.
    regards, pekka

  450. Dr Rossi:
    What do you think of all the attempts to replicate the Rossi Effect?

  451. Andrea Rossi

    Brant Erholm:
    I am interested in all the development of energy technologies and this is a positive development for the industry.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  452. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    The E-Cat Australia web site states that domestic e-cats will be available mid-2018 (http://e-cataustralia.com/order-and-buy/domestic-10kw)

    Is this projection based on the latest information you have?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  453. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    At this time it is too early to tell when we will finish our testing and a product will be available for sale; there is also the safety certification issue to complete.
    I will continue my R&D efforts and work with the Team to ensure we are able to bring the domestic E-Cat to market. This will be done as fast as we can, but there is considerable work to be done.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  454. Giannino Ferro Casagrande

    Molto , molto bella la risposta a Frank Acland !!! Rammentare l’immenso Sergio assieme al prof. Kullander , che io non ho mai conosciuto , ma che immagino la statura umana , è una cosa che mi fa gioire nerl seguire ( in silenzio ) da anni il sito JdFN ….. Giannino da Udin !!!!!!!!!

  455. Andrea Rossi

    Giannino Ferro Casagrande:
    Thank you for your kind attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  456. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I assume you are happy with the performance of the plant, since I doubt you would honor Dr. Kullander with such a plaque if it was not performing well.

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  457. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Sven has inspired us to arrive to the top. This does not imply that we are there already and does not mean that after the test period the results will be positive: it means that we have to reach positive results with every positive effort.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  458. John

    Dear Andrea,

    Actually, I was referring to the photograph of the plaque that you sent to Frank Acland. It seems to contain no commas at all. Perhaps a stylistic choice? Also, I believe it is called “The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences” instead of “The Swedish Royal Academy of Science”.

    Minor nitpicks, I know. What I really want to see is a photo of the plaque on the plant itself, and maybe something for Professor Focardi as well?

    Best Regards,

    John

  459. Andrea Rossi

    John:
    The plaque has been written by an English mother language Professor.
    I suppose he has chosen that kind of punctuation for a stylistic choice, as you correctly write. About the “Swedish Royal Academy of Science” I think that it is not uncorrect.
    You are right about the proposal to put a plaque also for Prof. Sergio Focardi. It’s on its way.
    About the photos of the plant, I already answered and I sympathise with your will.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  460. Hi, Andrea Rossi:
    Magnificent skill, we all are defending your job.
    Salvatore

  461. Andrea Rossi

    Salvatore:
    Thanks,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  462. John

    Dear Andrea,

    I was wondering, why does the plaque text contain periods where there should be commas?

    Sincerely,

    The Punctuation Police

  463. Andrea Rossi

    John:
    My typos in the comment, the plaque is correct. Thank you for your attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  464. Greg Leonard

    Dear AR
    A very worthy tribute.
    I look forward to seeing it when the pictures of the new plant are published

  465. Andrea Rossi

    Greg Leonard:
    I agree.
    About the photos: you will find them here asap.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  466. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Joseph Fine,
    thanks for reading the “article” and for the comment about the already used name.
    I think will change from neuter (-um) to masculine (-us) (always in the second declension): Hydronius.
    The shortening will remain Hyd, which suggests how the particles so far managed to “hide” from the researcher’s’ eyes. And Hyd could also be the Hyde version of Dr Hydrogen when using the electron potion.
    Regards
    Andrea Calaon

  467. Andrea Rossi

    To all our Readers:
    One year ago Prof Sven Kullander passed away. We applied to the 1 MW plant installed in the factory of the Customer of IH the following plate, in memory of this giant of the scientific world:
    ” To Prof. Sven Kullander.
    The first industrial plant working with the new LENR technology is dedicated to Prof. Sven Kullander, professor emeritus in high energy physics in Uppsala University and member of the Swedish Royal Academy of Science.
    His scientific spirit and great skill, human and cultural standards and neverending enthusiasm have been of monumental value for the completion of this plant .
    Andrea Rossi and the whole Team that manufactured this plant “

  468. Dear Andrea Calaon,
    Thank you for your kind answer. In the paper you say that Hyd is “picometrically neutral”. If this is taken to mean that its effective size with respect to reactions with metal nuclei is 1 pm, then Hyd’s mean free path in nickel is only 10 microns. If the Hyd (assuming it exists) mostly reacts inelastically with a nucleus it encounters (that is, if it usually causes a nuclear reaction of some sort instead of being scattered elastically), then Hyds should not be able to leak outside the device although there should be some transmutations taking place in the innermost few tens of microns layer of the Al2O3 reactor wall unless Al and O would be for some reason “inert” nuclei with respect to such process.
    best regards, pekka

  469. Andrea Rossi

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

  470. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Calaon,

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

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

    Thanks for your interesting article.

    Joseph Fine

  471. Andrea Calaon

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

  472. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

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

  473. Andrea Rossi

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

  474. Dear Andrea Calaon,

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

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

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

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

  475. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

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

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

  476. Andrea Calaon

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

  477. Andrea Rossi

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

  478. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  479. Joe

    JR,

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  480. Andrea Calaon

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

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

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

  481. I see this blog has a great success, probably due to your E-Cat. To further increase your success you should show photos of the 1 MW plant!
    Hope this suggestion helps :) Take care.

  482. Andrea Rossi

    Sammy:
    I’ll see what I can do.
    Thank you for your attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  483. Do you think the E-Cat will be useful for electric vehicles?

  484. Andrea Rossi

    Electric Vehicles:
    It will take time, at least several years, before seing E-Cats coupled with car electric power modules, but our team will start experiments in this field too probably in 2016.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  485. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

    I did mean to say the following:

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  486. JR

    Joe,

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

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

  487. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

    This is illogical.

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

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  488. I finally got another digest compiled.

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

  489. Andrea Rossi

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

  490. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

    followed by

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

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

    I did not say that

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    And who did put water in the meteorites?

    The god Neptune or Poseidon?

    .

    regards
    wlad

  491. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

    followed by

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

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

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

    How do you know this?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  492. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Joe,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The ratio between the areas A and S is:

    A/S = 3×10^17/5×10^8 = 10^8

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  493. Hi Andrea:

    A quick question, but only if you feel it is appropriate to address the matter. If not please send to trash.

    In very general terms, is your success in finding a method for generating substantial quantities of excess heat based:

    A) Principally, on a careful consideration of your knowledge of nuclear processes and logically deducing what might well stand a chance of working? or:

    B) Principally, on trying all kinds of experiments with all kinds of substances in many combinations, finally finding a combination that worked?

    If it reflects both, would you like to make a guess as to what proportion each contributed?

    The first of the above reflects an astonishingly superior level not only of knowledge but also of understanding. (The difference between knowledge and understanding is, in my opinion, often underestimated!) The second reflects a remarkable degree of tenacity!

    Thank you.

    Rodney Nicholson.

  494. Andrea Rossi

    Rodney Nicholson:
    A) first, then a trial and error process that could be defined by B). More A than B in the first period, eventually a mix of an evolving A modified by B and vive versa. Not easy to digest, I know. This is why the E-Cat is a very complex apparatus and the 1 MW plant is made by tens of thousands of components.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  495. orsobubu

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

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

  496. Andrea Rossi

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

  497. BroKeeper

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

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

  498. Andrea Rossi

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

  499. georgehants

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

  500. Andrea Rossi

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

  501. Gian Luca

    Dear A.R.

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

  502. Andrea Rossi

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

  503. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

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

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

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  504. Andrea Rossi

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

  505. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

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

  506. Andrea Rossi

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

  507. Andreas Moraitis

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

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

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

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

    Best regards,
    Andreas Moraitis

  508. Andrea Rossi

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

  509. Curiosone

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

  510. Andrea Rossi

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

  511. Enrico Billi

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

    Enrico Billi
    blog: billienrico.wordpress.com

  512. Andrea Rossi

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

  513. Curiosone

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

  514. Andrea Rossi

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

  515. JCRenoir

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

  516. Andrea Rossi

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

  517. DTravchenko

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

  518. Andrea Rossi

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

  519. DTravchenko

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

  520. Andrea Rossi

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

  521. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

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

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

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

  522. Andrea Rossi

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

  523. Dr Rossi:
    I never wrote here, but I want to thank you for what you are doing with your fantastic work. We all wait for the domestic E-Cat and you cannot imagine how many persons are sustaining you everywhere.
    Godspeed,
    Saul

  524. Andrea Rossi

    Saul Schiffelbein:
    Thank you, we are working very hard on it and it is a pleasure read messages like yours.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  525. Dave Lafleur

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

  526. Andrea Rossi

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

  527. Dave Lafleur

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

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

  528. Andrea Rossi

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

  529. Dr Rossi:
    Congratulations for your work. Why don’t you sue the two or three morons that continue to insult your work and your character?

  530. Andrea Rossi

    Joey Conlans:
    To sue zombies is a waste of time and money.
    Our plants speak for the Team I have the honour to belong to.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  531. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

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

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  532. Andrea Rossi

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

  533. Ian Walker

    Dear Dr. Rossi

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

    Kind Regards walker

  534. Andrea Rossi

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

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

  536. Andrea Rossi

    Giorgio:
    Likewise,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  537. Jane Gooders

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

  538. Andrea Rossi

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

  539. Joe

    Steven,

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

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

  541. Andrea Rossi

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

  542. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

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

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

  543. Andrea Rossi

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

  544. Andrea Rossi

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

  545. Hugh DeVries

    E-CAT semantics revisited:

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

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

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

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

    Best regards,
    Hugh

  546. Steven N. Karels

    Wlad, Joe and JR,

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

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

  547. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

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

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

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

  548. Andrea Rossi

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

  549. Dima Redko

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

  550. Andrea Rossi

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

  551. Hugh DeVries

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

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

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

    Best regards.
    Hugh

  552. Andrea Rossi

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

  553. Andrea Rossi

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

  554. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  555. leDahu

    Dear Andrea,

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

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

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

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

    Is there any engineering study available in that regard?

    Thanks for you kind attention.

    Bernard

  556. Andrea Rossi

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

  557. Greg Leonard

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

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

  558. Andrea Rossi

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

  559. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

    Joe, didnt you read the paper?

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

    .

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

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

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

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

    1- There is not repulsion between protons and neutrons

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

    regards
    wlad

  560. Greg Leonard

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

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

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

  561. Andrea Rossi

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

  562. JR

    Joe,

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

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

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

  563. JonJon

    Andrea,
    Is LENR cold fusion or cold transmutation?

  564. Andrea Rossi

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

  565. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  566. JCRenoir

    Dear Dr Rossi:
    What do you tink about the article of Ing. Ventola on Ecatnewfire?
    JCR

  567. Andrea Rossi

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

  568. DTravchenko

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

  569. Andrea Rossi

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

  570. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I wanted you to be aware that at E-Cat World I have started a Knowledge Base project that I hope will serve as a useful reference for all topics connected with LENR. It is built on the MediaWiki software, so it operates much like Wikipedia.

    Anyone is able to add or edit entries (if they abide by the rules): http://kb.e-catworld.com/index.php?title=E-Cat_World_LENR_Knowledge_Base

    Please use it and contribute if you wish!

    Best wishes,

    Frank

  571. Andrea Rossi

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

  572. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi , the Russians are working hard!! The scientist Yuri Nikolaevich states that are at a high level with LENR and think to realize industrial devices .
    What do you think ?

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/01/short-interview-with-yu-n-bazhutov.html

  573. Andrea Rossi

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

  574. orsobubu

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

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

    Please Andrea confirm and reassure about LENR astonishing futuristic perspectives

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

  575. Andrea Rossi

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

  576. orsobubu

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

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

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

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

  577. Andrea Rossi

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

  578. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  579. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wlad,

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

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

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

    26,1 x 10^-7 /cm² per second.

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

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

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

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

    .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    .

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  580. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Dr. JR,

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

    sorry

    regards
    wlad

  581. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, sending the great news.
    The Russians have replicated the experiment of ‘ cat and producing abnormal heat of 2.5 times. It ‘s great!!

    http://www.proatom.ru/modules.php?file=article&name=News&sid=5779

    A seminar on LENR with Parkhomov on Jan 27th
    On the russian site proatom.ru, a conference is announced on January 27. Parkhomov will present what looks like his E-cat replication, and “SN Andreev” “academic secretary of the Institute of General Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences” will present “The study of LENR- a new direction in science”, a review of LENr studies outlining priority for future research.

    VNIIAES invites you to a seminar opponents and stroronnikov LENR
    January 27, 2015 g, Tuesday, at 14-00, VNIIAES (Ferghana, 25) in the room. 614 will host a seminar: “The study of low-energy nuclear reactions – a new direction in science.” Everyone is welcome, Order badge: prosvirnov@vniiaes.ru , have passport

    Speakers:
    AG Parkhomov, candidate of physical and mathematical sciences, Moscow State University, “The study of high-temperature heat source analogue of Russia”. The world’s first Russian scientists repeated experience with the release of nickel hydrogenation anomalous heat is 2.5 times greater than the costs (without the participation of A. Rossi).

    SN Andreev, academic secretary of the Institute of General Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences, doctor of sciences. “The study of low-energy nuclear reactions – a new direction in science.” Reviewed the results achieved in the study LENR and outlined the priorities for future research.

    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/news/index.php/News/51-A-seminar-on-LENR-with-Parkhomov-on-Jan-27th/

  582. Wladimir Guglinski

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

    Wladimir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    regards
    wlad

  583. JCRenoir

    Dr Rossi:
    Do you think it could be possible to make an industrial or domestic E-Cat, working every day for domestic or industrial customers, without using catalyzers, but only the fuel described in the Lugano Report?
    JCR

  584. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    Interesting. I cannot comment, since I have not knowledge of the particulars, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  585. Curiosone

    Dr Rossi:
    Seems that several replications of the Rossi Effect have been made: congratulations!
    Godspeed,
    W.G.

  586. Marco Serra

    Dear Dr. Rossi
    in this days when the Rossi Effect seems to be almost easy to replicate (even if in its raw essence) I wonder how much your secret catalyst is a well kept secret. Do the people of your team know it?

    God bless you

    Mrco Serra

  587. Andrea Rossi

    Marco Serra:
    There is a very big difference between the replication of the patented effect and the construction of an industrial plant, a difference that takes years of enormous work, a very difficult one. Sooner or later, obviously, this gap will be filled up by the Competition, but n the meantime our team will have reached an economy scale that will make the competition not that much convenient. This is the strategy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  588. gian

    E questo è l’originale.

    http://vpk.name/forum/s188.html

    Sono rimasto fortemente impressionato da quanto i russi (questi russi) apprezzino gli e-cat e da quello che pensano dei rapporti fra Andrea Rossi e gli USA.
    Sarei veramente grato se Lei volesse fare commenti.
    Seguo la Sua attivitò da fine 2010.
    Molto caldamente auguro a Lei ed alla sua ricerca ogni bene.

  589. Andrea Rossi

    Gian:
    Honestly, in this period “rest” is not an option for our Team.
    About the link: I like also to remind the important article of Dr Vitaly Uzikov about our work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  590. gian

    I think you could be interested in

    http://coldfusionnow.org/interview-with-yuri-bazhutov-by-peter-gluck/.

    Andrea, Lei quando si riposa?
    Con stima e simpatia
    Gian

  591. Andrea Rossi

    Gian:
    Thank you for the link : it is really interesting to read the opinions from Russian scientists regarding our work.
    The sole comment O want to write is that I hope this technology not will integrate with all the other sources, but also will help a peaceful integration between all the players. It is unavoidable that the relationship between all the main Countries of the world will reach a new peaceful order, for the good of the mankind. Industrial competition will generate market evolution in fovour of anybody. This is the essence of future, we hope.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  592. Marco Serra

    Dear Sundar Narayan,
    You are certainly aware of a most recent and precise determination of G using laser-cooled atoms and quantum interferometry performed by an italian team. As reported on Nature in 2014 (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v510/n7506/full/nature13433.html)
    they obtained the value G = 6.67191(99) × 10−11 m3 kg−1 s−2 with a relative uncertainty of 150 parts per million

    Best Regards
    Marco Serra

  593. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Joseph Fine,

    I’m speechless, as expected. Thank you very very much !

    Best Regards,
    Koen

  594. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    Yes, I too read that paper and is very intriguing.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  595. JR

    Joe,

    I don’t know enough about the details of big bang nucleosynthesis to say. The high densities and temperatures complicate things enormously, as the densities increase the probability of fusion, while the temperatures lead to photo-dissociation of the deuteron, so the temperature-dependent equilibrium complicates things and makes it very different then what’s going on in the universe now.

    However, the temperatures at the point you’re discussing (where there are predictions of the n/p ratios based on thermal equilibrium type arguments) are far too high to have significant deuteron formation. So what happens with deuteron formation depends on later stages when things are cooler.

    Electrons and especially neutrinos are again different. At incredibly high densities (very early on), neutrinos interact enough that they are in equilibrium with matter, but as densities decrease the weak neutrino interaction decouples them from other matter. So the timescales (and density/temperature scales) relevant for determining the neutrino population are different from everything else.

    Those are general issues related to how one deals with the early universe; as I say, it’s not my area of expertise so while I know that these considerations are critical, I can’t provide details or numerical estimates.

  596. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers of the JoNP:
    Today has been published on the Journal of Nuclear Physics the paper ” The gravitational constant and its relationship to the properties of virtual particles” by Dr Sundar Narayan (Lambton College, Sarnia, Ontario- Canada).
    JoNP

  597. Peter Wolstenholme

    Dr. Rossi:
    Of course you are probably right as e-cats will be closely scrutinised by hostile folk. But Alessandro Coppi and I merely drew your attention to the facts relating to the Low Voltage Directive in the European Union, and the CE mark.
    Best Wishes,
    Peter W.

  598. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Wolstenholme:
    You are right, as well as Alessandro Coppi, but the E-Cat is not an apparatus that can be dealt with a self-certification like a low voltage appliance.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  599. Peter Wolstenholme

    In fact the CE low voltage directive covers apparatus working between 50 V and 1000 V. a.c. and a similar d.c. range. Not really low! If a manufacturer of mains- voltage devices checks carefully that his products meet the various relevant specifications he is permitted to affix the CE mark without needing a third-party testing laboratory. (I suspect that in the US one would require UL certification.)

  600. Andrea Rossi

    Peter Wolstenholme:
    To put a device like the E-Cat for sale to the public without a major certification would be a suicide.
    Warm Regards.
    A.R.

  601. Joe

    JR,

    Your statement about a sparsity of neutrons in the Universe (when compared to 1H1) is the only logical explanation for the preponderance of 1H1 in the Universe.

    It has been determined that there were about seven protons for every neutron at the beginning of the Big Bang nucleosynthesis (BBN), primarily due to their relative mass.
    Question: How are the relative numbers of electrons and neutrinos in the Universe determined? They could not possibly be determined solely by their relative mass as in the case of the baryons.

    All the best,
    Joe

  602. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, the invitation to read an interesting article engineer electric fan.

    The Rossi Effect is visible also without the catalyst
    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/rossi-effect-visible-without-catalyst/

  603. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you, very interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  604. Robert Curto

    JR, Thank you for your comment, intelligent as always.
    Wlad thinks I am your friend ! (I wish)
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  605. Alessandro Coppi

    Hi Andrea, what I am going to say could be a nonsense, but at least for Europe the safety certification in this case should be restricted to the low voltage direttive CE, this imply that it is not mandatory a third party certification, but the IH itself can apply the mark.

    Best regards
    Alessandro Coppi

  606. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    No, it is not so. We need a safety certification made by a major certifier. By the way, the E-Cat is not a low voltage apparatus.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  607. Dear sir (senior)!

    With great admiration I observe Your work and I want to ask the following questions:

    Do you have the distributor of Your firm in Israel?

    Besides, Can Your firm produce devices for building electricity energy providing with automatic control of device loading?

    Can You send Your answer to my question to my E-mail
    rvorobyov@walla.co.il
    with the attributes of Your firm – address, E-mail, etc?

    Sincerely,

    Dr. Roman Vorobyov.

  608. Andrea Rossi

    Roman Vorobyov:
    We do not sell anymore commercial licenses.
    So far we do not produce devices able to make electricity.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  609. Frederic Maillard

    Dear Dr. Rossi
    When do you think you will get the e-cat certified in China for industrial usage, if not granted yet ?
    Best wishes
    FM

  610. Andrea Rossi

    Frederic Maillard:
    Soon.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  611. Dear Andrea Rossi,
    (Not related to E-cat)In Norman Cook’s book that you recommended, I did not understand the angular momentum part. It looks to me that a ground state lattice nucleus should not rotate, because rotation would increase its energy. If so, then the orbital angular momentum of all its nuclei should be zero, and the total angular momentum would just be a sum of the spins. Did you understand this angular momentum issue when you read Cook’s book?
    regards, pekka

  612. Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    The independent -particle model implies that there is a total angular momentum value j for each nucleon that is made by the sum of the spin s and its orbital angular momentum. The j value is an observable quantity that has been measured also for ground state isotopes. Ground states do not imply absence of orbital momentum.
    See also Greiner-Maruhn ” Nuclear Models” Springer 1996 pp 11-40.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  613. Regarding Dr. Joseph Fine’s link to this very interesting article …….. :

    https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140624-fluid-tests-hint-at-concrete-quantum-reality/

    ….. can someone please clarify for me whether the article is implying that if the de Broglie interpretation of quantum mechanics proves to be correct (using the word ‘correct’ cautiously!) then it can be taken as serious evidence for the existence of an aether?

    And that it is on the waves of this vibrating aether that photons propagate, giving them the appearance of possessing wave properties, when in reality they are particles only, riding on these aether waves? Or might the waves some kind of non-aether wave?

    And, as a further consequence, that Occam’s Razor should be applied cautiously!

    Or am I completely off on a tangent here?

    Struggling-for-some-sort-of-understanding regards,

    Rodney Nicholson
    (My understanding is limited because I am an economist not a physicist. But I did a fair amount of physics in my final three years of UK high school.)

  614. Regarding Dr. Joseph Fine’s link to this very interesting article …….. :

    https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140624-fluid-tests-hint-at-concrete-quantum-reality/

    ….. can someone please clarify for me whether the article is implying that if the de Broglie interpretation of quantum mechanics proves to be correct (using the word ‘correct’ cautiously!) then it can be taken as proving the existence of an aether?

    And that it is on the waves of this vibrating aether that photons propagate, giving them the appearance of possessing wave properties, when in reality they are particles only, riding on these aether waves?

    Or am I completely off on a tangent here?

    Struggling-for-some-sort-of-understanding regards,

    Rodney Nicholson
    (My understanding is limited because I am an economist not a physicist. But I did a fair amount of physics in my final three years of UK high school.)

  615. JR

    Wlad,

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

    Even if you generated a large background of neutrons, their lifetime is only about 15 minutes so they will all decay away unless the neutron+proton fusion rate is extremely high. But the neutron-proton interaction has an extremely short range and so there is little chance that they will come close enough to interact at any reasonable densities, yielding a fusion rate that is negligible compared to the decay rate.

    Joe – Does this sufficiently answer your question? It really has much more to do with the neutron lifetime than the details of proton+neutron fusion.

  616. Joe

    Wladimir,

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

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

    All the best,
    Joe

  617. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Robert Curto

    please tell to your friend Dr. JR that he can win a US 500.000 prize, if he solves the puzzle on the mystery why the hydrogen exists in the Universe, since it seems impossible to explain why all the hydrogen of the Universe was not converted to deuterium thanks to the fusion proton-neutron due to the background of neutrons of the enviroment.

    regards
    wlad

  618. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Joe,
    I was thinking about the puzzle of the deuterium formation, and I got the following conclusions:

    1) The deuteron cannot be formed via the perforation of the flux n(o) of the proton by a neutron with energy in order of 2MeV. Because with this energy of the neutron, when the neutron enters into the field Sp(p) of the proton there is no way for the neutron to be captured by the proton (they do not succeed to get spin-interaction, in order to form the deuterium).

    2) The neutron can be captured by the proton only if the neutron has low energy when it enters within the field Sp(p) of the proton. But a neutron with low energy cannot perforate the flux n(o) of the proton and neutron, and so the deuterium cannot be formed by low energy neutrons (if the neutron needs to enter within the field Sp(p) by perforating the flux n(o) of the proton).

    3) There is only two ways for the formation of the deuterium:

    3.a) Via hot fusion within the stars, between two protons. The fusion produces 2He2, which decays in deuterium (it happens only in 0,01% of the 2He2 decay, because in 99,99% of the decays the 2He2 decays in two protons).

    3.b) Via cold fusion, when a neutron with low energy enters within the field Sp(p) of a proton by the “hole” in the field Sp(p). In this case the deuterium can be formed by low energy neutrons of the background of neutrons, because the neutron and the proton succeed to get spin-interaction.
    However, it is a very very rare phenomenon, because:

    3.b.1- The neutron needs to hit the “hole” of the field Sp(p) of the proton

    3.b.2- The neutron needs to move along the direction of the z-axis of the field Sp(p) of the proton. If the neutron hits the “hole”, but it does not move along the z-axis direction, the neutron will not hit the proton, and they cannot have spin-interaction, and therefore they cannot form the deuterium.
    So, the probability of fulfilling the two conditions is very small (there is need to hit the “hole” and at the same time to move along the z-axis direction).

    Therefore,
    we realize that the formation of the deuterium is very hard, because in the hot fusion in the stars it occurs less then 0,01% of the 2He2 decay, and via cold fusion (due to the background of neutrons of the enviroment) the formation of the deuterium is also very hard to occur.

    regards
    wlad

  619. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    It appears that on other related sites, people are proposing replicating to some degree the Rossi effect by means of amateur and home-based experiments.

    1. Do you think this is a safe and wise thing to do?

    I would assume, even with the eCat ingredients used in The Report, that it is possible for the reaction to get out of control and an explosion to occur. \

    2.Wouldn’t it be best to suggest the experiments be limited to those with the proper facilities to conduct such a potentially dangerous experiment?

    2. Or do you feel that even with no sophisticated control system, a water-cooled experiment is always safe?

  620. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I already answered to these questions. In a nutshell: replications made by professionals are safe. By not professionals are dangerous.
    That’s all I can say.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  621. Claud

    Dear Andrea, excuse me for the question slightly mischievous: having you now only theoretical and r&d responsibility, are you quite sure that the operating management of your firm are doing their best to obtain quickly the safety certification for the small cat to start in a short the massive production of this new product?
    Hoping it truly, my best regards
    Claudio Rossi

  622. Andrea Rossi

    Claud:
    I am sure 100% that all the members of our Team are working at the maximum of their possibilities to reach the best results reachable at the maximum possible level. Each one of the team related to his specific duties is making the best possible work.
    Nothing to add.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  623. Joseph Fine

    Koen Vandewalle,

    The following links may help answer your question which, ideally, will lead to further questions.

    The first several links refer to the D-Wave Systems Company’s commercial ‘quantum’ computer. It is an advertisement, but perhaps is a good starting point. Other links are to key papers by Richard Feynman and Seth Lloyd. These should keep you busy for several hours or days. Lloyd’s paper suggests the Universe may be a quantum computer.

    http://www.dwavesys.com/d-wave-two-system

    http://www.wired.com/2014/05/quantum-computing/

    http://www.nature.com/news/computing-the-quantum-company-1.13212

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/quest-for-quantum-computers-heats-up/

    http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall05/frs119/papers/feynman82/feynman82.html

    http://arxiv.org/abs/1312.4455

    //////////////
    The universe as quantum computer
    Seth Lloyd

    This article reviews the history of digital computation, and investigates just how far the concept of computation can be taken. In particular, I address the question of whether the universe itself is in fact a giant computer, and if so, just what kind of computer it is. I will show that the universe can be regarded as a giant quantum computer. The quantum computational model of the universe explains a variety of observed phenomena not encompassed by the ordinary laws of physics. In particular, the model shows that the the quantum computational universe automatically gives rise to a mix of randomness and order, and to both simple and complex systems.

    //////////////

    Hope these will be helpful.

    Best regards,

    Joseph Fine

  624. Wladimir Guglinski

    ERRATA:

    Joe,
    In my previous comment to you, where it is written:

    In my book Quantum Ring Theory it is shown that, in order to form the 1H2, there is an energy of 2,2MeV so that to perforate the fluxes n(o) of the proton and of the neutron.

    the correct is:

    In my book Quantum Ring Theory it is shown that, in order to form the 1H2, there is need an energy of 2,2MeV so that to perforate the fluxes n(o) of the proton and of the neutron.

    regards

  625. Wladimir Guglinski

    US 500.000 prize for any nuclear physicists who solves a puzzle

    I will register notarized that will pay the US 500.000 prize for a nuclear physicists who presents a solution for the puzzle explained ahead, via any current nuclear model which works with the principles of the Standard Nuclear Physics.

    The puzzle:

    1- There is no Coulomb repulsion between proton and neutron

    2- There is a background of neutrons in the enviroment

    3- There is attraction proton-neutron via the strong force

    4- So, as there is no Coulomb repulsion proton-neutron, and there is attraction via strong force, then according to the principles of the Standard Nuclear PHysics the low energy neutrons of the neutron backbround would have to hit the protons of the hydrogen in the enviroment, and so deuterium would have to be formed.

    5- Therefore, along billion years, in the Earth the water of the oceans and rivers would have to be composed by heavy water D2O, instead of H2O. Also, all the hydrogen in the Universe would have to be changed to deuterium, and therefore hydrogen could not exist in the Universe.

    .

    I have the following properties:

    One flat in the beath, in Cabo Frio-RJ city – US 150.000

    One flat in Juiz de Fora-MG city – US 100.000

    One house in Paulinia-SP city – US 150.000

    One house in Cataguases-MG city – US 100.000

    .

    According to the notarized, I will sell the four properties if the puzzle is solved, and the nuclear physicist who solve the puzzle will receive the prize.

    regards
    wlad

  626. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe
    January 9th, 2015 at 10:40 PM
    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “[...] in order to form the deuterium 1H2 there is need 2 sort of energy:

    1- the energy necessary to win the Coulomb repulsion
    2- the energy necessary to perforate the flux n(o)”

    This explanation does not tell us why a QRT Universe would consist of mostly 1H1 rather than 1H2.
    =====================================================

    you are wrong.

    The explanation explains it very well

    In my book Quantum Ring Theory it is shown that, in order to form the 1H2, there is an energy of 2,2MeV so that to perforate the fluxes n(o) of the proton and of the neutron.

    The thermal neutrons of the background (with energy smaller than 1MeV) cannot interact with the proton of the hydrogen, so that to form the 1H2.

    When I go back to my house, I will scann the page of the book QRT, and put it here.

    regards
    wlad

  627. Joe

    Valeriy,

    I originally asked Wladimir the following:

    “Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?”

    The Universe contains mostly 1H1 (about 90%, and in molecular and ionized forms) and a much smaller amount of He. The rest is trace elements. None of the isotopes of H or He decays into 1H1. They stop at 1H2, 2He3, 2He4, etc. The 1H1 has had enough time (billions of years) to get hit by traveling neutrons and be converted into 1H2 and 2He3. But obviously that did not happen. 1H1 is still omnipresent in the Universe.

    How does the standard nuclear model explain this lack of conversion?

    All the best,
    Joe

  628. Andrea Calaon

    A reading suggestion for all Italian speaking about the essence of Quantum Mechanics:
    Ghirardi G. Carlo, Un’ occhiata alle carte di Dio. Gli interrogativi che la scienza moderna pone all’uomo

    It is a bit over explaining in some parts, but goes into the core of the QM problems without bias for Hidden Variables and likes.
    The author is absolute world top-class: He is one of the authors of the Ghirardi–Rimini–Weber theory (GRW).

    An English version would be appropriate I think …

    By the way, this is in short what I think: Hidden Variables are non-local because particles are in essence lightlike. Hidden Variables are also NOT CONTEXTUAL because the accepted formalism of spin is Wrong (as unbelievable as it may seem, reed Hestenes …) and the Kochen-Specker theorem does not apply.

    Buona lettura

    Regards

  629. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “[...] in order to form the deuterium 1H2 there is need 2 sort of energy:

    1- the energy necessary to win the Coulomb repulsion
    2- the energy necessary to perforate the flux n(o)”

    This explanation does not tell us why a QRT Universe would consist of mostly 1H1 rather than 1H2.

    All the best,
    Joe

  630. Dear Readers,
    I am looking for an opportunity to perform the experiments proposed in the article to test h-space theory. Any ideas and suggestions are welcome.
    Best wishes,
    Valeriy

  631. Dear Wladimir Guglinski,
    I am afraid, the short answer to your question without describing the relatively large part of h-space theory will not be convincing for you. Any way, in h-space theory the existence of hydrogen in the universe is explained by the fact that it is most stable complex of proton and orbital electron, and in turn, proton is most stable complex comprising two positrons and one electron (I see this sentence will attract anger of many physics textbooks readers :) ).
    I did not understand this part of your question – “Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?”
    Best wishes,
    Valeriy

  632. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Joseph Fine,

    can you give us a link to some understanding of a quantum computer ?

    Could the universe be built with spherical layers of Q-bits ?

    Just a thought.

    Kind regards.

    Koen

  633. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    I did not know the paper you sent the link of, and it appears to be interesting.
    I need to study it.
    Thank you for sending it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  634. Joseph Fine

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I saw this article a few days ago (* See link below).

    https://www.quantamagazine.org/20140624-fluid-tests-hint-at-concrete-quantum-reality/

    Did you knew about this version of Quantum Theory? If so, does it help you to understand and/or explain the Rossi Effect (even if you cannot explain it to your readers at this time)?

    Very real regards,

    Joseph Fine

  635. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi , in the following link an interesting article in an important magazine written by

    Maxim Kalashnikov on how the world has changed , and what awaits them: they talk of you also in Russia!

    http://yug.svpressa.ru/society/article/109141/

  636. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    So…a Kalashnikov is looking at me: have I to be worried or delighted? ( He,he,he…).
    I love Russia and Russian culture. I hope Russia will work peacefully with all the world, and that all the world will work peacefully with Russia, as well as I hope that all the energy sources will be integrated to the benefit of mankind of all the world.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  637. Jack

    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    thank your for your answer at my previous question and my best wishes for a great 2015 to you and your team.

    You said that, in the most positive scenario, the commercial phase will likely start shortly after the end of the test period of the 1 MW plant.
    If everything goes as expected, again in the most positive scenario, how long should this test still last?

    Thank you again and good work, Jack.

  638. Andrea Rossi

    Jack:
    In the best scenario could be November 2015/ January 2016.
    Wishes of a great 2015 also to you from our Team,
    A.R.

  639. guest

    Andrea,

    In the Lugano report it is mentioned that the Hot E-Cat was run at 1400 C. At this temperature, the nickel lattice structure would break down from crystalline into an amorphous structure similar glass. Also at this temperature, the Lithium would be a gas. Aluminum would a liquid. Does the solid-solid phase transition from crystalline structure to amorphous structure in the nickel provide a plausible starting point for any theories?

    Thank you for your hard work hope to hear back,
    guest

  640. Andrea Rossi

    Guest:
    In the Lugano Report is mentioned that for a very short period they had a peak at 1,400°C.
    I cannot give information about what happens inside the reactor.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  641. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    you could invite Valeriy Y.Tarasov in order to come here to explain how from his h-Space Theory it is possible to explain the existence of hydrogen in the universe:

    Since background neutrons continually hit the nuclei of atoms, how does Standard Nuclear Physics explain the persistence of 1H1 in the Universe in a very large proportion? Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?

    May you do it, Andrea?

    regards
    wlad

  642. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    You invited Dr Tarasov to answer you: I think he will do it if he deems it opportune.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  643. WaltC

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    1) You mentioned that you have domestic E-Cat models that are ready to work once they are certified– I’m guessing they are the furnace room, hot water, Boiler Replacement type E-Cats?

    2) Is there also thought on the horizon of a “Portable E-Cat”– something like a portable room heater which produces 3x more heat than it consumes in electricity? (For heating individual rooms, garage spaces, cabins, etc.)

    3) For some reason, I have it stuck in my head that the “Certifiers” would be different for the two types of domestic E-Cats– one being viewed as a piece of furnace room equipment and the other being viewed as an appliance– but maybe that’s not true. Is there any reason to think that certification of a “Boiler Replacement domestic E-Cat” would be harder/easier/different than certification of a “Portable domestic E-Cat”?

    I have uses for both types of domestic E-Cats, once they are available.

    Thanks, as always! WaltC

  644. Andrea Rossi

    Walt C:
    1- I prefer not to give this information before the product is ready. The form will be the one with more commercial potential, for obvious reasons.
    2- Not in the first wave
    3- Certifications will have to be specific for every model
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  645. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    dear Dr. Rossi, I invite you to read this interesting article on the history of the history of cold fusion.
    I also invite readers to read it.

    Low Energy Nuclear Reactions: Papers and Patents

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-h-bailey/low-energy-nuclear-reacti_b_6189772.html

  646. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the very interesting article on Huffingtonpost: is not biased, equilibrated and correct from his neutral point of view. To his references merit to be added the work of Brian Ahern and of Alexander Parkhomov, together with the theoretical papers of Carl Oscar Gullstroem of the Uppsala University.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  647. Jack

    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    with “we are close to go commercial massively” what do you mean? Weeks? Months? Years? What is your guess?

    Thank you,
    Jack.

  648. Andrea Rossi

    Jack:
    I guess after the end of the test period of the 1 MW plant, if all goes well, but, as I always said, the results can be positive, but also negative. We have not experience consolidated statistics to foresee the outcome.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  649. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, the nasty way of having treated you during all these years has surely been unpleasant but, as you say, in a certain way you have to thank all those people.
    We can note a sense of solace in your words. I can deduce that the 1MW plant is going very well, if I can say that…

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  650. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    You can say whatever you deem opportune.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  651. Wladimir Guglinski

    Question for all the nuclear physicists of the world:

    Since background neutrons continually hit the nuclei of atoms, how does Standard Nuclear Physics explain the persistence of 1H1 in the Universe in a very large proportion? Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?

    regards
    wlad

  652. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 28th, 2014 at 7:47 PM
    Wladimir,

    1. ===========================================
    Since background neutrons continually hit the nuclei of atoms, how does QRT explain the persistence of 1H1 in the Universe in a very large proportion? Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?
    ============================================

    Joe,
    I’m on the beach, and this is the reason why I did not respond you earlier.
    I am responding now from a lan house.

    Joe,
    your question obviously cannot be explained by considering any nuclear model based on the Standard Nuclear Physics.
    According to the Standard Nuclear Physics, 1H1 could not exist in the Universe.

    Why dont you ask to Dr. JR to come here to explain it to us?

    But according to Quantum Ring Theory, as I already told you, for a neutron entering a nucleus the neutron needs to perforate the flux n(o).

    As I told you, according to my new nuclear model in order to form the deuterium 1H2 there is need 2 sort of energy:

    1- the energy necessary to win the Coulomb repulsion

    2- the energy necessary to perforate the flux n(o)

    However, according to the Standard Nuclear Physics in order to form any nucleus there is need only the energy so that to win the Coulomb repulsion.
    As there is no Coulomb repulsion between a proton and a neutron, then according to the Standard Model the 1H2 can be formed by neutrons of the background of neutrons.

    .

    2. ============================================
    How does QRT explain the following phenomenon:
    For the lighter nuclei, continually adding a neutron will create a continual decrease in the half-life of the isotopes.
    But for the heavier nuclei, starting from about 10Ne20, there is an alternating decrease and increase in the half-life of the isotopes.
    ===============================================

    Joe,
    as you know,
    according to my new nuclar model, the heavier nuclei are formed by several hexagonal floors composed by 1H2 captured by the central 2He4.

    In the case of the light nuclei, when a neutron is additioned to a nucleus, it is captured by the flux n(o).
    The neutron needs to have a spin-interaction with a deuteron, in order to be kept in the nucleus.
    For instance, in 3Li7 the neutron and the deuteron have spin-interaction.
    If you put a second neutron, in the 3Li8 the second neutron has not a deuteron available so that to get spin-intereaction, and so the second neutron is expelled via the centrifugal force.

    In the case of the heavier nuclei, the excess neutrons are captured:

    1) between two 1H2 of a hexagonal floor (the neutron is not captured by the flux n(o) of the 2He4).
    For instance, in the oxygen 8O17 the neutron is captured between two 1H2.

    2) between two hexagonal floors, when the space available between two 1H2 in the same hexagonal floor is totally filled with neutrons.

    10Ne20 has one complete hexagonal floor and one incomplete hexagonal floor.
    Then the stability of the excess neutrons depends on the positiono of the neutron taken in the nucleus

    regards
    wlad

  653. Curiosone

    I have seen that some group of your competitors think the catalyzer is iron oxyde. Is it true? Are they on the right track?
    Can you give some answer?
    Thank you,
    W.G.

  654. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Yes, I read it on the blog of Vessela Nikolova. Well, they are trying, so let them try: if they are roses, they will blossom ( a little bit rusty, maybe).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  655. JCRenoir

    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
    How will you spend the New Year first day?
    JC Renoir

  656. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    No, it is impossible. To make an E-Cat work regularly for months you need more than that. As I said, the E-Cat is a much more complicated thing than commonly is imagined. The substantial underevaluation of what we did has given us a strong advantage, since instead of changing the game, the imitation attempts on course try to fix old schemes, thinking that if we did something working the difference must be something very small, close to evanescent. This attitude gave us a strong advantage in the competition. For years I have been considered an imbecile who has been lucky God knows why, who makes things without understanding what the heck is doing ( in the best of cases). Or, more kindly, a fraudster. Obviously this has been a big advantage for our Team. I can say this now, since we are close to go commercial massively. I think now is too late to catch us.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  657. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    When you will have a patent granted or an economy scale that will make you free to disclose theory and operation of your plants, you think you will be able to reconcile the results of Lugano regarding the Ni 62?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  658. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  659. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, thank you for your reply.
    Therefore if the authorities appreciated the importance of the lives that possible could be saved if your small unit was available quickly,then they could fast track the safety certificate as a priority for the benefit of mankind?

  660. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    Ask them.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  661. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, the question must be asked.
    If a safety certificate was given now, do you have a small Cat technically reliable and capable of driving water purifiers where needed.
    You have said you are ready to produce domestic units by the million.
    Best wishes

  662. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    We have domestic E-Cat models ready to work, if this is your question.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  663. Henry Ethancourt

    Hello… Some of you may have noticed this well-balanced appraisal of the 2nd report. En français.

    http://www.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/article/nucleaire-la-3eme-voie-161405

    Henry

  664. Andrea Rossi

    Henry Ethancourt:
    Thank you very much for this link.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  665. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Two quick questions if you don’t mind.

    a) You said your team was able to reduce the volume of reactors — did they have to shut down the plant to make this change?

    b) When did the 1 year test begin.

    Many thanks!

    Frank

  666. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    As you know, I cannot give information about the operation of the plant, nor about its timing. Due information will be given only when the tests will have been completed.
    The reduction of the volume of the reactors is not necessarily made when the plant is shut down, because the reactors can be worked on separately, while the others are in operation.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  667. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,

    you wrote: “the confidential field of the complex (very complex) control and regulation system”.

    Just a speculation of mine: Any transmutation, and the integration of all transmutations happening in the reactors, all different in time, location, temperature, consecutive order, and last but not least: pobabilistic behaviour of the particles, demands to be taken care of in the control system.

    Do you really believe that this will become mainstream heating technique for domestic applications, which need for maintenance just replacement of the charges or the nickel ? I don’t.

    It seems to me that the cartridges or reactors will be as complete devices, like harddisks of computers, with their own fine-tuned computer and firmware, which need to be recycled with the fuel, and need to be tuned with every single charge.

    Complexity can be a very strong disadvantage in many ways.

    I think that the chosen name: “industrial heat”, is a very correct one for a very long time.

    Kind regards,
    Koen

  668. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    You are right on this: the domestic E-Cats are totally different things.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  669. Alessandro Coppi

    Rossi effect fantasious explanation:
    With regard to the hard to explain need of external heat to sustain an exothermic reaction, I imagine that the Rossi effect does not happen in the inner of the charge, but the heat adducted produces a cloud of atoms such as the tetracarbonilnichel can do, and the triphase winding supplied by the voltage, produces a rotating magnetic field such the one in the asyncron electric motors, in that way the atoms of the cloud will rotate, and could change their spin, so that antimatter comes in the real dimension from vacuum.
    The exothermic annihilation phenomena involve the space near the surface of the charge, and not the surface itself.
    Cutting off the external heat surge, the cloud of atoms disappear and the effect shut off.

    Spero che l’E-cat rappresenti per Lei quello che le rane hanno rappresentato per Volta.
    Alessandro Coppi

  670. Andrea Rossi

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

  671. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    How satisfied are you with the performance of the 1 MW plant so far?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  672. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    I cannot give any information regarding the performance. I can say that I am optimist about the behaviour of the I MW plant along the 1 year test. I can say that nothing happened that could turn me pessimist. So far. I must add, under the permanent direction of Orsobubu, that the final output could be positive, but also negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  673. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, I enclose an interesting article by a Nobel prize.
    There are no impossible things.
    There are just things that we have never tried to do.

    Nuclear energy in an atomic lattice
    - Order of causality
    a short article ( almost the abstract of an earlier scientific paper ) written in 1991 by Nobel Julian Schwinger ( 1918-1994 ).

    http://22passi.blogspot.it/2014/12/energia-nucleare-in-un-reticolo-atomico.html

  674. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for this interesting 3D version of the E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  675. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, I wanted to tell this interesting article that shows your patent in 3D and also said the path of cold fusion in the world.

    http://eco-energie-montreal.com/post/e-cat-lugano-reaction-nucleaire-basse-energie-evenements-derniers-mois

  676. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the interesting link to the Julian Schwinger paper, published on 22 Passi by Daniele Passerini.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  677. Gian Luca

    Dear A.R.
    very interesting the interview of Vessynik on her blog.
    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/exclusive-interview-with-andrea-rossi/
    I would like to know how many italians scientists work in IH or in
    your research staff.
    Thanks a lot and newly…..happy e fruitful 2015.

  678. Andrea Rossi

    Gian Luca:
    The Italian scientists of our Team are two, which means me plus another one, specialized in electronic control systems: thanks to him we have been able to avoid to get external help for the confidential field of the complex (very complex) control and regulation system. Outsourcing the knowledge of the controls we need would be a leak of IP.
    Thank you for the link.
    Warm Regards and a Fruitful 2015 to you
    A.R.

  679. I have been since long time a reader of this blog and very interested to the LENR technology of Mr Rossi. When will you be available for public investors?
    Caroline Collini

  680. Andrea Rossi

    Caroline Collini:
    As the chief scientist of the Team, I am not the right guy to receive that kind of questions.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  681. Marco

    Dear Andrea,

    have you performed, or at least designed, a test with molten sodium salts, instead of water, as I suggested a while ago?

    I think that molten salts can extend SSM duration and/or stability…

    Regards, Marco.

  682. Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    In this period we are focused on the 1 MW plant and the development of the gas fueled Hot Cat. The experiment suggested by you is in the list of our R&D program, though.
    Thank you for your suggestion,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  683. BroKeeper

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    I have wondered if you are focusing on developing ways of storing E-Cat’s excessive heat during low-peak demand hours. Batteries are still very bulky, expensive and degenerative.
    Perhaps you might be interested in this cheap and radically improved concept of storing energy in the form of pressurized air with efficiencies now approaching 90%from ‘LightSail Energy’ and scientist Danielle Fong:

    http://www.lightsail.com/
    http://fortune.com/2014/12/31/danielle-fong-lightsail-energy/
    http://www.engineering.com/DesignerEdge/DesignerEdgeArticles/ArticleID/7474/Compressed-Air-Energy-Storage–A-Moonshot-Project.aspx
    http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/blogs/wiredenterprise/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/lightsail-diagrams.pdf

    If energy can be stored at these efficiencies then the output requirements could be reduced significantly for oscillating demands. 10KW Cats could be met by 5KW Cats or reduce the number of 10KW Cats to reduce overall plant size.
    Warm regards,
    BroKeeper

  684. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    Thank you for the information,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  685. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    I can say that the ratio between volume and power has still room to be reduced. The tale of the Incredible Shrinking Cat is not yet at “The End”. About the design of the assembly, it is so far confidential.
    Warm, not Shrinking, Regards,
    A.R.

  686. Joseph Fine

    Dear Andrea,

    Are the 100+ modules of the 1-MW plant arranged in a hexagonal ring (honeycomb) array, a rectangular array, or an offset-rectangular array (every other row offset by 1/2 the intermodule distance)?

    Has total volume been minimized, or can the volume be further reduced following current tests? ( Volume reduction may not have been the primary goal of your design and subsequent designs may improve on its geometry. )

    (‘ The Tale of the Incredible Shrinking Cat’ )

    Volumes of regards,

    Joseph Fine

  687. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    So you have redesigned the plant as you have worked on it?

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

  688. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Not just me, but our Team did.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  689. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    In November you mentioned that the current 1 MW E-Cat plant you are working on has a volume of reactors of half a cubic meter (500 liters of volume) — which would mean a power density of 2 kW per liter.

    Today you mention a power density of 10 kW per liter (excluding heat exchangers). Is this for a different system?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  690. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes, the volume of the reactors has been reduced to about 1l/10kW.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  691. Dear Andrea,

    I really liked your answer to David Kaiser. Gift to mankind, eh? I thought you handled that very nicely.

    God’s Speed, Andrea Rossi,

    Charlie Sutherland
    PS: Protecting IP is difficult even for me, and I just make soap.

  692. Andrea Rossi

    Charlie Sutherland:
    Thank you
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  693. tommaso di pietro

    Dear Dott. Rossi,
    did you begin to collect data on megawatt plant actually in operation?
    If so when?
    How long will it be now to publish the final results?

    Thanks in advance

  694. Andrea Rossi

    Tommaso Di Pietro:
    We will give information regarding the data of the 1 MW plant delivered to our Customer in due time, when the operation will have been stabilized and consolidated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  695. Stefano

    Chiedo scusa se faccio una banale domanda commerciale ma vorrei sapere, dopo aver registrato il mio nome per 2 unità abitative e aver aspettato molto tempo, quando è prevista la definitiva commercializzazione di E-CAT per abitazione civile?
    Capisco che è una domanda banale e noiosa ma da anni sono in trepida attesa per questo incredibile e straordinario successo del Dr. Rossi a cui vanno i miei più sinceri Auguri di Buon Anno!

    Stefano

  696. Andrea Rossi

    Stefano:
    You asked, in Italian, when the domestic E-Cat will go in the market.
    Surely it will go in the market. The “when” depends on a factor that does not depend on us, which is the safety certification. We are working strong on it, as well as on the technology of the same, very well developed. Once obtained the certification we will unleash all the strategy to produce the E-Cats in economy scale, to make them competitive beyond any attempt of reverse engineering.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  697. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi, (Hopefully the math is correct this time)

    As I understand your cost goal of $100/kW for a mass produced eCat furnace, that mean an equivalent 90,000 BTU furnace (about 27kW) would cost around $2700 (not including installation, plumbing, etc). This would be approximately 3 times more expensive than a natural gas furnace.

    a. Do you have a cost goal for the annual fuel costs so a comparison might be made?

    Here in New England, an average heating season may cost around $4500 in fuel costs for a typical residential home. So if we assume a five year breakeven point analysis, then the oil furnace cost would be ($1,000 + 5 * $4500) = $23500. For the eCat to be competitive, the five year fuel cost would be $23500 – $2700 = $20800 or $4160 per year. Assuming a 27kW unit, the yearly cost per kW for fuel must be $154 per kW.

    b. Do you think this level of eCat fuel cost is achievable?

  698. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Yes.
    Maybe better.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  699. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    As I understand your cost goal of $100/kW for a mass produced eCat furnace, that mean an equivalent 90,000 BTU furnace (about 97kW) would cost around $9700 (not including installation, plumbing, etc). This would be 10 times more expensive than a natural gas furnace.
    a. Do you have a cost goal for the annual fuel costs so a comparison might be made?

    Here in New England, an average heating season may cost around $4,500 in fuel costs for a typical residential home. So if we assume a five year breakeven point analysis, then the oil furnace cost would be ($1,000 + 5 * $4,500) $24,500. For the eCat to be competitive, the five year fuel cost would be $24,500 – $9,700 = $14,800 or $2,900 per year. Assuming a 97kW unit, the year cost per kW for fuel must be $29 per kW.

    b. Do you think this level of eCat fuel cost is achievable?

  700. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    90,000 BTU = 90 x 0.252 x 1.163 kW = 26.37684 kW
    Now remake the math.
    In any case, it is soon to talk of these particulars.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  701. georgehants

    Dear Mr. Rossi, the other day you took time to give a comment regarding area 51.
    I would appropriate your comment regarding the below link.
    http://www.cufos.org/cometa.html
    Best wishes

  702. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    Thank you for the link.
    Interesting. I am inclined not to take too seriously the UFO issue and do think that is more likely the explication that my friend ( very expert of the issue) told me. Anyway, you know that for us nothing is impossible, but everything is possible if associated to the proper calculus of probabilities for it to be possible.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  703. KD

    Mr.Rossi
    You answered to Robert Curto:
    I can give you our power density: about 10 kW/l, plus the heat exchangers.
    The costs will be known after a massive production will have been started. Potentially 100 $/kW.

    Is it approximate cost of production of the reactors or price to customers?.

  704. Andrea Rossi

    KD:
    The price to Customers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  705. Robert Curto

    Thanks Dr. Rossi, I certainly agree with your answer.
    However, 2,000 acres = 3.125 square miles.
    How much land would be needed for E-Cat to provide power for 97,000 homes ?
    The cost for this Solar Plant is 2 billion dollars.
    How much would it cost for E-Cat to provide power for 97,000 homes ?
    Robert Curto

  706. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    It depends in the place: in Sweden, for example, the demand of heat is much higher than in Southern Italy…
    I can give you our power density: about 10 kW/l, plus the heat exchangers.
    The costs will be known after a massive production will have been started. Potentially 100 $/kW.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  707. H. Hansson

    Dear Mr Rossi,

    I agreed with you..

    Helping the MFMP-Team is a waste of time, The whole point with independent tests is that they are INDEPENDENT… Leave that to Dr. Alexander Parkhomov… the Russian guy that probably replicated your eCat on the couch. Assisting clueless MFMP will just start a new round of “manipulation” blame and you have won nothing.

    As you “sold” your invention to a US. Company marketing and schedule is really not your problems any-more. I’m not worried, Americans usually do the right thing but only after exhausting all other options. Eventually the business model will adopt to the market needs. The discussion of VHS/JVC and Betamax/Sony is interesting but not relevant for your eCat.

    Microsoft is a very bad example to drag into this discussion. The reason they succeeded with their Windows OS was that Windows was easy to copy.. When business started to use PC,.. Windows OS was the choice as staff already had that on their home PC:s.

    For 30 years I was Windows friend but have found out that Ubuntu Linux is much better and totally free of both fees, virus and pop-ups.. and runs the PC much, much faster. It is simply a much better OS.

  708. Andrea Rossi

    H Hansson:
    Thank you for your insight.
    Warm Regsrds,
    A.R.

  709. Jonjon

    Bernie Koppenhofer,

    I.H and Rossi need a world patent or a safety certifications for the home unit. With either a patent or a safety certification, they can mass produce, compete and protect their IP, else can’t do but focusing on R&D and collecting data for certification(s) or selling a few large units to a few trusted close-by customers.

  710. Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: You know I have followed the E-Cat development for over four years and I respect your genius. However, from where I sit the energy field is exploding with new technology, I would suggest IH drastically increase their research and development. Remember Betamax? Sony had the best technology, but did not succeed in the market place.

  711. Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Our Team is working very well and very fast. Probably not all can understand the difference between a bench prototype and a 1 MW plant that works 24/7/350. Think about that.
    Happy New Year, Bernie!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  712. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, your Readers may want to Google:
    2014 THE YEAR OF CONCENTRATING SOLAR POWER

    Solar Power now provides power for 2 million homes.
    I could be wrong but this is the way I read it.
    Solana Plant, cost 2billion dollars, covers 2,000 acres, provides power for
    97,000 homes.
    Can E-Cat beat that ?
    I think so.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  713. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Thank you for the interesting information. The E-Cat has to be integrated with all the existing energy sources.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  714. David Kaiser

    Dear Dr. Rossi

    I think a little help to the MFMP-Team would not harm your business model. But please consider this; we are on the brink of a breakdown of our society. What is Happening now with the Oil Prices, the financial syste, with Russia and China, can trigger a new worldwar. If this is happening, to whom you will sell the E-Cats?

    I got just one wish left from Christmas, please….

  715. Andrea Rossi

    David Kaiser:
    Our team is making all the investments and R&D necessary to bring to the market this technology and the first 1 MW industrial plant already hit the market, thanks to our Team. Obviously the loss of Intellectual Property would stop any serious investment. Look at Microsoft’s business model ( from which we all have to learn) and learn how the Intellectual Property is at the essential base of any substantial investment that can bring to the common benefit a new technology. When our domestic small E-Cats will hit the market we will not have anymore a reverse engineering problem, as I already explained, because the economy scale will allow prices that will make competition not convenient. We are working on it. Requests of gifts as the one you are making are not generous attempts to give to the mankind a new technology, but attempts to get for free the fruits of 20 years of work, through what for you is an unimmaginable series of troubles, sacrifices and a good share of insults, blackmails, threats of any kind and also attempts to make me pass again through what I passed through 20 years ago, utilizing the same system and some of the same persons: the play did not succeed because what 20 years ago was enough to destroy me, today can’t even scratch me, due to the fact that such experiences either kill you or make you much stronger.
    The First Principle of Thermodynamics should have teached to you that free meals do not exist. You can’t make the “Kaiser” with the Army of the others. Should I take seriously your request of Christmas gift, nobody could invest seriously in this technology and it would remain a social game. Quite a dangerous one.
    I wish you a wonderful 2015, as well as, again, to all our Readers.
    A.R.
    p.s.: thank you for calling me “Dear Dr Rossi” this time…under a different pseudonym and in a different blog you had called me in a completely different way not much time ago…sic transit gloria mundi!

  716. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You posted “I have only one 1 MW plant to attend to, and it is the one installed in the factory of our Customer, where I always work and where members of the team rotate. Today I am here with two of them, for example.”

    My experience has been that it is invaluable to have a second unit, of exactly the same design and construction, before a one-of-a-kind unit is fielded to a customer location. So either the customer’s location and your workplace are in the same town/city or your travel and per diem budget must be very high.

    Either case, it is invaluable to have a second system, a “Gold Standard” unit, to compare operation and flaws against the customer’s unit. If you do not have such a unit, then changes made by you and your people at the customer’s unit may be lost. This makes duplication very difficult and costly. What happens to one unit should happen to both units and should be fully documented.

  717. Andrea Rossi

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

  718. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, as you know the Engineers of Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project (MFMP) are trying to replicate a Hot-Cat also based on the experiences of Professor Parkhomov.
    Obviously it’s a very difficult thing to be capable of switching on the “New Fire” as you have done, and moreover it can also be very dangerous.
    If I remember well, you said that you have had many explosions during tests in your reactors before finding the safest construction.

    But I am aware that those people know very well what they are doing and we hope that they will soon reach their goal.

    Perhaps within one or two years it will be possible buying at Home Depot one DIY kit for a domestic hobby work, and there will be lot of people trying their LENR in their cellar.
    Fantasy?

  719. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    When we will sell small and domestic E-Cats they will be manufactured massively in million pieces and their price will make useless reverse engineering. The replication of the effect will be normal operation
    Warm Regards
    AR

  720. Andrea Rossi

    Dainel De Caluwè:
    Thank you very much and very best Wishes to you too!
    A.R.

  721. Daniel De Caluwé

    Dear dr. Rossi,

    After the very successfull 2nd third party report, and its impact that it already had in 2014, I wish you for 2015 a sequence of further successes, and very ‘positive results’, with all your projects and especially with the 1MW plant that you’re testing, and the further development of the gas driven Hot Cat.

    And, of course, also very best wishes to all the Readers

    Kind Regards,

  722. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers:
    Yesterday we experienced a stop of this blog for all the day, many comments have been lost in the spam.
    Who sent comments yesterday can resend, the problem has been fixed.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  723. orsobubu

    Given the special period of the year, I’m pointing you to a very interesting story, a little magic and which has several parallels with Rossi’s one. I state that personally I have no interest in UFOs or something.

    In 1970 the pilot Bruce Gernon, flying to Miami, ran into a thunderstorm formation, still far from the goal, so he performed a deviation from the route entering a strange cloud. In the instants that remained inside, the plane went to meet various phenomena, and coming out it was standing just above the target, thus having walked the last 100 miles in a few seconds. The story is well documented by the reports of the instrumentation and control tower. It has obviously been cataloged under the series of scams related to the Bermuda Triangle and concocted to make money selling books, or explained as tail wind at best:

    http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=21569

    But an engineering professor from Omaha, David Pares, took seriously the story and interpreted it in a completely different way:

    http://www.paresspacewarpresearch.org/Bruce_Gernon/The_Flight.htm

    Not only, taking up the Alcubierre theory on local space warp, he realized some devices which replicated the phenomenon on a small scale and low power levels; at present he is preparing to build a demonstrative vehicle based on this technology:

    http://m.omaha.com/living/working-toward-a-warp-drive-in-his-garage-lab-omahan/article_b6489acf-5622-5419-ac18-0c44474da9c9.html?mode=jqm

    https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/space-warp-drive

    This also seems a scam, but actually the warp drive has already been taken seriously by NASA:

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21929300.300-meet-the-nasa-scientist-devising-a-starship-warp-drive.html#.VKP-6skggwA

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_G._White_%28NASA%29

    Pares’ story is similar in some ways to Rossi’s and worth at least to read it, remembering that even inventions by Wrights, Edison and countless others should have seemed like magic when they were disclosed!

    I leave you here alone in 2014 while, with my space-warp/Ecat-powered vehicle I’m already here in 2015 hehe, best wishes to Andrea, his Team, IH and all readers!

  724. Andrea Rossi

    Dear Orsobubu,
    I want to complete the answer to your comment with an anecdote regarding the UFO. As you know, UFO is an acronym for “Unidentified Flying Object”: as such, UFO are nothing exotic or extraterrestrial, they are just flying objects whose identity has not been individuated. If we understand this, what follows is very funny. Most of you have probably heard about that Area 51, in the desertic territory of western US, where many UFOs appeared and where they say special labs have been set up to understand misterious things…
    Talking with an expert of the matter, several years ago I knew that in that area was on course R&D for warfare flying objects ( new kind of airoplanes, drones, and similar things); when such things started to fly, people around started asking what the heck was going on and some smart guy of the Area, to keep away noxious curiosity from military activity, whispered in the wind “this is an UFO infested area, but don’t tell this to anybody, it is a top secret”. So the metropolitan legend ( or, more appropriately, the desertic legend) spread around and the Area 51 became a UFO secrecy tomb. Funny, isn’t it?
    Happy New Year, Unknown Permanent Friend ( UPF)
    Andrea

  725. To Andreas Rossi:
    I was reading your paper “New source of energy from nuclear fusion”. One thing is not clear to me. Do you have anode & cathode and the ionic current involved in this setup, or do you just thermally heat the vessel ? Our theory of small DDL hydrogen atoms* would apply to a classical electrolytic experiments a’la Fleischmann & Pons, where one does deal with ions (protons would convert to small hydrogen near cathode).
    Thanks, Jerry

    * DDL atoms are described in J. Maly & J. Vavra, “Electron Transition on Deep Dirac Levels I,II”, Fusion Technology, vol.24, 1993, and vol.27, 1995

  726. Andrea Rossi

    Jerry Vavra:
    We do not make electrolytic process to obtain the so called Rossi effect.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  727. orsobubu

    Gherardo, another funny joke is if you read ECAT backward in italian: TACE, in english: he shuts up. So, the italian phrase “ECAT? Rossi tace”, in english is “The ECAT? Rossi shuts up”. In fact, that’s what really happens.

  728. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    Thank you for your intriguing comment and sincere wishes for a positive 2015.
    Andrea Rossi

  729. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    A Happy New Year to you and all my fellow readers of JONP. Since you are working with your team at 4 a.m., I discern that you must have at least two 1MW plants, one at the customer’s location and another at your corporate facility. Sounds like a good team and great leadership. I hope all stay motivated and each one avoids burn-out.

  730. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Wrong, I have only one 1 MW plant to attend to, and it is the one installed in the factory of our Customer, where I always work and where members of the team rotate. Today I am here with two of them, for example.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  731. domenico canino

    Dear Dr Rossi:
    what do you know that we don’t know about the energy market movement? We know that Rockefeller sold all theri petrol financial assets, that all the big petrol companies sold back to Putin their petrol assets in Russia, that Siemens has closed the division of solar panel production,that Bill Gates decidede to invest heavy money in LENR after read Mats Lewan’s book an impossible invention.This scenary is not under NDA and is not an industrial secret, you can give us your opinion.

  732. Andrea Rossi

    Domenico Canino:
    It appears you know about the energy market more than I do. Marketing is not my turf. What I would dare to add to your list, is the heavy effect that on the oil market had the foundings in the field of the fracking technology based hydrocarbons mining. Probably other Readers of the JoNP are more qualified than I am to answer properly to your question, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  733. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers of the JoNP:
    It is 4 a.m. of the last day of the year: from the 1 MW plant, where we of the Team of Industrial Heat are working, Happy New Year to all of you, hoping that the 2015 will make all of us useful to the Mankind. The general situaton in the world is difficult, but difficult situations create fields that bring up forces to make History.
    Happy New year to All of you, from the Great Team !

  734. Marcel Baumann

    Dear Mr. Rossi
    I hope for you and for all of humanity, that 2015 will finally be the year when mainstream is convinced that the Rossi effect is real, and that your work and the work of your team and the work of Frank Acland will be rewarded with respect and with honor.
    Good luck! (I guess that many scientists are reading this in secret…trying to find an explanation for the Rossi Effect)
    Happy new year!

  735. Andrea Rossi

    Marcel Baumann:
    Thank you and happy New Year to you,
    A.R.

  736. Giovanni Guerrini

    Dear Andrea,
    I wish to you,your family,your team and to all readers,a happy 2015 (8760 hours)

    and I wish that 8400 of these will be very,very and again very happy !

    Best wishes Giovanni

  737. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni Guerrini:
    Thank you very much, and 8760 hours of happiness to you and, obviously, all our Readers:
    Andrea Rossi

  738. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, thanks for giving us this interview year-end. I read the book of Vessela Nikolova and it’s exciting. The advice from newspaper reader. 2015 will be the year of Hot Cat.
    Happy New Year.

    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/exclusive-interview-with-andrea-rossi/

  739. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you and Happy New Year to you and, as always, to all the Readers of the JoNP,
    A.R.

  740. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    “Independent research and development, known as IR&D, is a contractor’s own investment in basic and applied research and development.” Also known as IRAD. Accounting wise, it is how your company categorizes the research you and your team do.

  741. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Thank you for the explication. I learnt from you a new thing. Yes, different sizes are in the 2015 IRAD.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  742. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    A while ago you mentioned the possibility of a small eCat reactor (~100W) and a larger eCat reactor (~100kW). Are these goals still active in your 2015 IRAD?

  743. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    What the heck does mean IRAD ??
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  744. jhs

    I haven’t seen if has been posted yet but here: http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Lugano-Confirmed.pdf
    you can find a complete translation of the full text.
    My personal opinion is that it looks professional and far away from the “modus operandi” of a scam.
    I think that we will need more details about that experiment and future developments.

  745. Andrea Rossi

    JHS:
    I agree
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  746. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    when people do write about “simplicity”, e.g. of the visible design, maybe they just mean “beauty”.
    I just wish you both for 2015.
    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  747. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    Thank you, likewise to you and our Readers,
    A.R.

  748. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I hope you have a wonderful New Year’s day and that next year is
    indeed fortuitous for you.

    Regarding the analysis I posted on JONP, I do believe, regardless of
    how close to truth it was, it was an excellent analysis. I think this
    shows the benefit of the “catalyst” in the LENR+ reactions. Keep that
    a trade secret as long as you can.

  749. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I saw that prof. Alexander Parkhomov has a brilliant career as a Russian nuclear physicist, also worked at the Space research in Russia; he comes with more than a hundred publications in peer reviewed scientific magazines. Very interesting.
    Thank you and Happy New year to you and our Readers,
    A.R.

  750. hassan mirzaee

    About the replication of the Rossi Effect made independently by the Russian University: I think it is worth to read full text. It looks very serious.

  751. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Prof. Alexander Parkhomov has replicated the Rossi Effect: from Russia, with love.
    You should be very welcome here.
    Happy New Year,
    D.T.

  752. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    Thank you and Happy New Year to you, to all our Russian Friends and to all the Readers of the JoNP.
    Andrea Rossi

  753. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Some of the differences between the eCat reactor (The Lugano experiment) and the experiment performed by Prof. Parkhomov (the Russian experiment) are:

    a. the Lugano eCat had the dimensions of 200 mm in length, an outer diameter of 20mm and an estimated (by me) inner diameter of 12.7mm or 1/2″ while the Russian experiment had a length of 120mm, an outer diameter of 10mm and an inner diameter of 5 mm. So the ratio of the eCat to the Russian interior volumes is different by a factor of 10.
    b. The Lugano eCat had 1 gram of fuel which I estimated to contain 0.55 grams of nickel, up to .389 grams of iron, and 0.061 grams of LiAlH4. The Russian experiment had 1 gram of nickel and 0.1 grams of LiAlH4. So the Russian experiment had 1.64 times the amount of LiAlH4 than the Lugano experiment.
    c. The Lugano experiment used IR measurements of the surface temperature of the reactor while the Russian experiment used a phase transition of water (i.e., boiling) and loss of mass to estimate heat generation.

    The Russian report estimated the interior pressure of the reactor at 100 atm. Given the ratio of the volumes and the mass of the LiAlH4, one would estimate the interior pressure of the Lugano experiment at around 6 – 10 atm – a valve previously reported to be in the correct range for eCat operation.

    My conclusion is that the Russian experiment lacked the “catalyst” that enables LENR+ reactions are lower pressures. So this is a partial replication of the Lugano experiment.

  754. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    As I said, until I do not know the particulars, I cannot comment on this interesting experiment. The calorimetry used is the same that Prof. Focardi and I used in our initial experiments in 2008, or at least it seems so.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  755. Curiosone

    The test made from the Russian scientist Alexander Parkhomov in his university laboratory seems to me very important

  756. BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    Are you still planning to refuel the customer’s E-Cats after six months or have you considered increasing the maintenance times? If so, how much have hoped to extend it?

    Respectfully,
    BroKeeper

  757. Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    We are working to increase the maintainance time.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  758. Hank Mills

    http://www.ehs.wisc.edu/chem/LessonsLearned-LabExplosion.pdf

    Here is one of the reports I have found of accidents with lithium aluminum hydride in an academic setting.

    It shows the compound is indeed very dangerous – even in the hands of chemists.

  759. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    With the independent replication of the Rossi effect by a Russian scientist and with him using a rather simple experiment, it seems to me that the Rossi effect could be duplicated by the “masses”. Specifically, with an Alumina tubing, some alumina cement mixture, a few grams of nickel powder, some LiAlH4 and some heater wire, one could run the “non-professional eCat” for an extended period of time (say one year) and then analyze the “ash” products. Thoughts?

  760. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I do not know the particulars of the replication made by the Russian scientist and I do not know how simple it is. The E-Cat is an extremely complex apparatus, though. Independent scientists can do all the experiments and analysis they deem opportune, without us having any voice on their laboratory work, whatever it is.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  761. Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    For professionals in a laboratory – not amateurs dangerously playing around – what is the best reference you have found for the safe handling of lithium aluminum hydride?

  762. Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    Professionals know how to handle those materials in a laboratory. With non professionals I cannot get the liability to teach how to handle dangerous materials in the context of very dangerous experiments. The sole good sense based suggestion I can give to non professionals is to avoid to make this kind of experiments, unless directed by expert professionals, perfectly aware of all the safety issues implied by this kind of work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  763. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. Since background neutrons continually hit the nuclei of atoms, how does QRT explain the persistence of 1H1 in the Universe in a very large proportion? Should not 1H1 turn into 1H2, 1H3, etc, with all of these isotopes later decaying into 1H2, 1H3, or 2He3, but never back into 1H1?

    2. How does QRT explain the following phenomenon:
    For the lighter nuclei, continually adding a neutron will create a continual decrease in the half-life of the isotopes.
    But for the heavier nuclei, starting from about 10Ne20, there is an alternating decrease and increase in the half-life of the isotopes.

    All the best,
    Joe

  764. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    dear Dr. Rossi, the Russian researcher of Lomonosov Moscow State University, who says he has replicated the ECAT has different skills in different and interesting publications.

    SKILLS AND EXPERTISE (11)

    Radioactivity, Radiation Detection, Radiation, Radiation Physics,Ionizing Radiation
    Radiation Protection, Nuclear Astrophysics, Radiation Measurements, Radiation, Dosimetry, Gamma Spectrometry,Dark Matter

    http://www.researchgate.net/profile/A_Parkhomov/publications

  765. Andrea Rossi

    ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the information regarding the replication of the Rossi Effect made by an independent scientist.
    Quite interesting indeed.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  766. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, I am sending you a report of a Russian researcher who says he REPLICATED end the Cat and confirm the “effect Rossi”. This is FANTASTIC !!!

    Test of the replication design of High-temperature E-cat reactor of Rossi
    Aleksandr Georgievich Parkhomov
    Report at the workshop on Cold Fusion and Light Ball at the People’s Friendship University of Russia [1]
    (Translation from Russian language by Stoyan Sarg/Bob Greenyer)

    Conclusion (by A. Parkhomov): The replication test of the High-temperature E-cat reactor of Rossi loaded with a mixture of nickel and Lithium-aluminum-hydride shows that at temperature of 1000°C and greater this device really produces greater output energy than the input one.

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y3Bxr_aE2iosEKpGFUZiQgAcuT8AFN78RFCAlR-JqNw/edit?pli=1

  767. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, what do you think of the tweet of the astrophysics Neil De Grasse,
    who said that December 25 is known as the birthday of Isaac Newton ?
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale Florida
    USA

  768. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Neil De Grasse: “Carneade, chi era costui?”
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  769. Wladimir Guglinski

    Robert Curto wrote in December 28th, 2014 at 9:25 AM

    I do not know him personally, but I pray for him to come here to answer you, and to give to the Readers of this blog the counterpoint from the point of view of the Standard Model, that I think is the right way ti go.
    ———————————————

    Dear Robert,

    in spite of to claim that a sphere has an elipsoidal shape is a masterpiece among the nonsenses said by Dr. JR, however the best among the masterpieces is his assumption saying that neutrons cannot be expelled from a nucleus due to the centrifugal force, because the centrifugal force is a ficticous force, and so it cannot expell the neutron out of the nucleus.

    Robert,
    as you are sure that Dr. JR is an infallible expert in Physics, I invite you to make the following experiment:

    1) Take your car, and put it moving with 200km/h.
    2) With the car moving with 200km/h, you can drive the car with no problem in a curve where the maximum speed allowed is 40km/h.

    Dr. JR is sure you can make the turn without flipping over the car, because the centrifugal force is a ficticious force, and therefore the centrifugal force cannot expel your car out of the road.

    Please, do it, and prove us that Dr. JR is right.

    We will be waiting you come back here to tell us about the comprovation of the Dr. JR assumption.
    If you survive… of course.

    Good luck

    regards
    wlad

  770. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 28th, 2014 at 1:41 AM

    Wladimir,

    How does QRT explain the instability of 4Be10?
    Since 4Be9 is stable due to the spin-interaction between a neutron and a deuteron, why can not the remaining deuteron have spin-interaction with another neutron?
    ———————————————

    Joe,
    first of all,
    I would like Dr. JR come here to explain why 4Be10 is not stable by considering the nuclear models based on the Standard Model.
    After all,
    since 4Be9 is stable due to the spin-interaction between a neutron and a deuteron, why can not the remaining deuteron have spin-interaction with another neutron, by considering the Standard Model?

    Joe,
    look at the Figure 14 at the page 18 of the paper Stability of Light Nuclei, published in the JoNP, where is shown the structure of 4Be8:
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Stability%20of%20light%20nuclei.pdf

    The 4Be8 is not stable because due to the perfect symmetry of the nucleus the two deuterons D1 and D2 are captured by the central 2He4, because of the spin-interaction. So, the 4Be8 is desintegrated in two alpha particles 2He4.

    In the case of 4Be10, each deuteron of the 4Be8 captures a neutron. However, with the capture of the neutron, because the mass of each 1H2-n is greater, they move away from the central 2He4 by the action of the centrifugal force, and the 4Be10 gets stability.

    The 4Be10 gets stability along 1,39×10^6 years, which is its half-life.
    After 1,4 million years the 4Be10 decays to 5B10, by beta decay.

    regards
    wlad

  771. Robert Curto

    Wlad, Probably Dr. JR has not time to answer you again, after all the answers
    he already gave you, and thinks to answer you further is worthless.
    I do not know him personally, but I pray for him to come here to answer you, and to give to the Readers of this blog the counterpoint from the point of view of the Standard Model, that I think is the right way to go.
    Robert Curto

  772. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    I dont understand why Dr. JR did not come here to explain why the nuclei do not capture neutrons from the background of neutrons.

    After all, Dr. JR claims that it is possible to explain everything by considering the Standard Model.

    I would be very glad if Dr. JR comes here to explain why the oceans and rivers are not formed by heavy water D2O.
    Because if he does not come here, the readers may be stay with the wrong impression that Dr. JR does not know to explain the puzzle.

    Dear Robert Curto,
    may you please invite to Dr. JR to come here for explaining to us how this puzzle is solved by the Standard Model ?

    Please, Robert,
    convince Dr. JR to come here to give us the pleasure of hearing his wise explanation.

    Many thanks

    wlad

  773. Wladimir Guglinski

    Wladimir Guglinski
    December 27th, 2014 at 6:48 PM

    Joe wrote in December 27th, 2014 at 4:27 PM

    A neutron must have some specific energy in order to settle stably within a nucleus. That is why a shell model exists for the nucleus, just like one does for the electrosphere of the atom.
    ———————————————–

    Joe,
    and what about the proton?

    There is not any shell around the proton, according to the Standard Model. Surrounding the proton there is only its positive electric field.

    So, as the neutron has no charge, any low energy neutron would penetrate in the proton’s electric field, and they would form the deuterium, because the proton and the neutron have attraction through the strong force, according to the Standard Model.

    Therefore there would not exist hydrogen in the universe, because all the protons would be converted to deuterium by the capture of a neutron from the background of neutrons existing in the enviroment.

    And the oceans would be formed entirely by heavy water composed by D2O, instead of H20.

    We could perform the Fleischmann-Pons with the water of the oceans, without the need of doing distillation for the obtainment of the heavy water.

    regards
    wlad

  774. Joe

    Wladimir,

    How does QRT explain the instability of 4Be10?
    Since 4Be9 is stable due to the spin-interaction between a neutron and a deuteron, why can not the remaining deuteron have spin-interaction with another neutron?

    All the best,
    Joe

  775. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 27th, 2014 at 4:27 PM

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “And because protons and neutrons have attraction by the strong force, when the neutron hits the nucleus it must be captured.”

    It is true that neutrons are always hitting the nucleus, but they are not always captured since we do have isotopes which are stable. A neutron must have some specific energy in order to settle stably within a nucleus. That is why a shell model exists for the nucleus, just like one does for the electrosphere of the atom.
    ———————————————–

    Joe,
    the shell model is wrong, because it is unable to explain a lot of nuclear properties. If the shell model was correct, there would not need to propose other nuclear models, as the Collective Model, The Model of Layer, the Fermi’s model, the model of Clusters, etc.
    Each one of these models are proposed because no one of them is able to explain all the nuclear properties.

    Concerning the shell model, for instance there is no way to explain the levels of energy of the nuclei.

    Also, the calculation of the binding energy of the nuclei by the shell model is possible only after the oxygen nucleus. The shell model does not work for the lightest nuclei.

    Besides, light nuclei have no sufficient quantity of nucleons, in order of forming a shell model. A shell model needs to have the shape of a orange’s peel.

    For instance, consider the 3Li6. It has only 6 nucleons. There is no way to form a shell shape. Then a neutron with any low energy could be captured by 3Li6, transmuting to 3Li7.

    But also 3Li7 cannot have the shape of an orange’s peel, and so 3Li7 would have to capture a neutron from the background of neutrons, transmuting to 3Li8, which is no stable. 3Li8 transmutes to 4Be8, which decays in two alpha particles.
    Therefore 3Li6 and 3Li7 could not exist in the nature.

    4Be9 has only 9 nucleons. It also cannot have the shape of a orange’s peel. So 4Be9 would have to capture a neutron, and transmute to 4Be10, which is no stable and transmutes to 5B10.
    As 4Be9 is the unique stable isotope of beryllium, then beryllium could not exist in the universe.

    There is a lot of puzzles impossible to be explained via the nuclear models based on the Standard Nuclear Theory.
    If you succeed to solve the puzzles of Nuclear Physics, you will win the Nobel Prize in Physics.
    Good luck
    .

    regards
    wlad

  776. Tom Conover

    Dear Dr Rossi,

    Here is a link to a google translation of the Lugano replication for interested readers. It seems to be quite interesting.

    Tom

    https://www.scribd.com/doc/251130826/Parkhomov-Alexander-Rossi-Replication-Paper-2014-12-25

  777. Andrea Rossi

    Tom Conover:
    Thank you for the link. Yes, it is quite interesting.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  778. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “And because protons and neutrons have attraction by the strong force, when the neutron hits the nucleus it must be captured.”

    It is true that neutrons are always hitting the nucleus, but they are not always captured since we do have isotopes which are stable. A neutron must have some specific energy in order to settle stably within a nucleus. That is why a shell model exists for the nucleus, just like one does for the electrosphere of the atom.

    All the best,
    Joe

  779. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi is now that the plant Hot Cat is put on the market to save the world from extinction.

    Beautiful animation that explains the history of our civilization, how it has changed with the advent of oil, which has reached the limits and what we can do.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uA2WYGIFwwo

  780. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you very much, very interesting and well done.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  781. KeithT

    Dear Andrea,

    For the current generation of thermoelectric generators of 5% to 8% efficiency, if these were driven by an Ecat you would require a COP of from 12 to 20 just to break even.

    With your current success of achieving self sustain mode of up to 2 hours, with further research and development is there a possibility of achieving a sufficiently high COP for either the Ecat or Hot Cat to enable current commercial thermoelectric generators to be used for mall scale electricity production.

    Kind regards,

    Keith Thomson.

  782. Andrea Rossi

    Keith T.:
    Excuse me, but why have I to pull a cart with square wheels?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  783. Andrea Rossi

    AlainCo:
    Thank you for the important information.
    I do not know the particulars, therefore cannot comment, but it is possible that the so called “Rossi Effect” is replicable after the data published in the Report of Lugano.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  784. Dear Mr Rossi,

    you are probably aware of a successful replication tentative of your technology by a Russian scientists “Alexander G. Parkhomov” using mass calorimetry.

    https://yadi.sk/i/sZBuzGRWdeE4c
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/12/27/lugano-confirmed-replication-report-published-of-hot-cat-device-by-russian-researcher-alexander-g-parkhomov/

    what is your opinion on that result.

    do you think it would be possible for your company to organize a similar test of your E-cat, with Pr Parkhomov, or at least following the same protocol.

  785. Wladimir Guglinski

    Steven N. Karels wrote in December 26th, 2014 at 3:33 PM

    Wlad,

    Remember the iron is my estimate based on The Report. It could be much lower. Perhaps the iron is added for magnetic reasons? Such as to increase the inductance?
    —————————————————

    Steven,
    as Andrea Ross never responds any question concerning the interior of the eCat, I asked to God, and He told me the following:

    In the last page of the Lugano Report is writen:

    Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel also contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these are not found in the ash.

    As the percentage of Fe is smaller than the percentage of Ni, then all the quantity of Fe is transmuted before the consumption of Ni.

    But the eCat continues working after the total consumption of Fe, and therefore the iron does no play any fundamental role in the Ni-Li reactions, even concerning the inductance.

    The iron only contributes producing heat because it has fusion with 3Li7. However the portion of the heat produced by Fe can be produced by Ni if iron is not used in the fuel.

    regards
    wlad

  786. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 26th, 2014 at 9:33 PM

    Wladimir,

    Since there exists a shell model of the nucleus in standard physics, would not therefore every nucleon, including neutrons, need a certain amount of energy to be able to place itself within the nucleus in a stable way?
    ————————————————–

    why?

    The shape of the distribution of protons and neutrons in the nucleus has nothing with the penetration of a particle into the nucleus, because the repulsion on the proton happens in the electrosphere of the nucleus. The charge of electrosphere of the nucleus is the same no matter what nuclear model is considered (the charge of the electrosphere depends only on the quantity of protons of the nucleus).

    The proton cannot penetrate into the nucleus because it has positive charge. And as the nucleus has positive charge, the proton is repelled by the positive electrosphere of the nucleus.

    The neutron has no charge, and therefore it can penetrate the positive electrosphere, and hit the nucleus, no matter what is the kinetic energy of the neutron.

    And because protons and neutrons have attraction by the strong force, when the neutron hits the nucleus it must be captured.

    regards
    wlad

  787. Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, Feed-in Tariff is in effect in 50 Countries.
    It allows home owners, and small business owners, who generate their own electricity with wind, solar, etc. to sell the electricity they do not need back to the Grid !
    I believe E-Cat will have an easy time to qualify for this benefit.
    E-Cat will not need any help, it will supply more electricity then they need.
    But this will be a bonus on top of a bonus.

    I can see millions of E-Cat owners selling electricity to the Grid at a cost of less then their present cost.
    What ever they pay the E-Cat owners is 100% profit.
    I think they call this a win win situation.
    For more information Google:
    Feed-in Tariff
    And read 10 or 20 websites.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale Florida
    USA

  788. Andrea Rossi

    Robert Curto:
    Thank you for your information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  789. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Since there exists a shell model of the nucleus in standard physics, would not therefore every nucleon, including neutrons, need a certain amount of energy to be able to place itself within the nucleus in a stable way?

    All the best,
    Joe

  790. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    by considering the nuclear models of the Standard Model, actually there would be no any stable element existing in the nature.

    For instance, the stable isotopes of neon are 20Ne, 21Ne, 22Ne.

    By capturing a neutron from the background of neutrons, 20Ne would transmute to 21Ne.

    21Ne would capture a neutron and transmute to 22Ne.

    22Ne would capture a neutron and transmute to 23Ne

    But 23Ne is no stable, and transmutes to 23Na.

    So, stable isotopes of neon would have do not exist in the nature.

    .

    Beryllium has only one stable isotope: 4Be9

    But it would have to capture a neutron, and to transmute to 4Be10.

    4Be10 is not stable, and decays to 5B10.

    So, no one stable isotope of beryllium could exist.

    .

    Carbon has two stable isotopes, 12C and 13C.

    By capturing a neutron, 12C would transmute to 13C.

    By capturing a neutron, 13C would transmute to 14C.

    But 14C is no stable, and decays to 14N.

    So, no one stable isotope of carbon could exist.

    .

    By considering the nuclear models based on the Standard Model, we would be living in a universe without stable elements.

    regards
    wlad

  791. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    according to my Quantum Ring Theory,
    in order to penetrate into a nucleus, a neutron must perforate the gravitational flux n(o) of a nucleus:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_1-_3_fields_of_the_proton.png

    So, according to my QRT, only neutrons with a minimum energy can enter into a nucleus.

    However,
    the neutron has no charge, and so from the nuclear models of the Standard Nuclear Physics any low energy neutrons would have to succeed entering into a nucleus, and be captured. There would not be a minimum energy required for a neutron entering a nucleus.

    Therefore many nuclei could not exist.
    For instance, the stable 10Ne20 could not exist, because it would capture a neutron from the background of neutrons, and transmute to 10Ne21.
    Also 10Ne21 could not exist, because it would capture a neutron and would transmute to 10Ne22.

    I would like to invite some nuclear physicists, like Dr. JR, Dr. Wilfried Nörtershäuser, Dr. S.Lakshminarayana, Dr. Martin Freer, etc., so that they come here to explain how is possible the existence of stable isotopes like 20Ne and 21Ne (among a lot of other isotopes, as for instance 24Mg, 25Mg, 56FE, 57Fe, etc, etc, etc… all they could not exist).

    However,
    unfortunatelly it is a waste of time to invite the nuclear physicists to come here to explain some questions, when the questions defy the Standard Nuclear Physics.

    Joe,
    dont you think there is a lack of honesty among the nuclear physicists in general ?

    Do you think is it possible to advance the Physicis from such lack of honesty?

    regards
    wlad

  792. Wladimir Guglinski

    Steven N. Karels wrote in December 26th, 2014 at 3:33 PM

    Wlad,

    Remember the iron is my estimate based on The Report. It could be much lower. Perhaps the iron is added for magnetic reasons? Such as to increase the inductance?
    —————————————————

    Dear Steven,
    only two persons know it: Andrea Rossi, and God

    regards
    wlad

  793. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 26th, 2014 at 3:53 PM

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “It is the charge of the electricitons which give the electric charge of the proton.”

    Since protons and electrons are different sizes, how do you explain that they have the same charge?
    ————————————————-

    Joe,
    this is explained in my paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism, submitted for publication in JoNP six months ago.

    Be patient and wait the publication.

    regards
    wlad

  794. Joe

    Wladimir,

    You write,
    “It is the charge of the electricitons which give the electric charge of the proton.”

    Since protons and electrons are different sizes, how do you explain that they have the same charge?

    All the best,
    Joe

  795. Steven N. Karels

    Wlad,

    Remember the iron is my estimate based on The Report. It could be much lower. Perhaps the iron is added for magnetic reasons? Such as to increase the inductance?

  796. Giannino Ferro Casagrande

    Sono già da un paio d’anni che seguo con gran simpatia l’evolversi continuo di queste entusiasmanti ricerche sulle LENR ! Ho conosciuto Lei egregio signor Rossi di persona quando ha esposto alcuni risultati sula fusione fredda a Pordenone ! Sin dall’inizio ho sottoscritto il mio impegno ad acquistare un E.CAT di tipo casalingo , quindi sono uno tra i primi ! Ora questa mia proprio per augurare a Lei e a tutta la Vostra squadra al lavoro sul grosso dispositivo da 1 MEGA ,assieme a tutti i lettori ed interventisti del sito JONP i più fervidi auguri per le ricorrenze delle festività ed in calce Le chiedo quali possibilità abbiamo noi piccoli clienti usufruttuari di poter disporre di un E-CAT casalingo ! Giannino di Udin

  797. Andrea Rossi

    Giannino Ferro Casagrande:
    We are working very hard also on the small modules, whose technology is becoming stronger by the day, but stoll is pending the safety certification .
    We are working also on that…
    Thank you for your attention and kindness.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  798. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 26th, 2014 at 2:25 AM

    Wladimir,

    Do you think it is possible that gravitational fluxes n(o) also exist in the electrosphere, and not just in the nucleus, of an atom? They would be much weaker in strength since their radius would be much greater than the radius within the nucleus. This might explain similarities between the organizational structures of the electrosphere and those of the nucleus, such as the presence of shells.
    ——————————————-

    Joe,
    the gravitational flux n(o) exists in the electrosphere. For instance, you can see it in the electrosphere of the proton, in the figure:

    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_1-_3_fields_of_the_proton.png

    Regarding the formation of the electric field of the proton, in the figure we have:

    1- Electric field (yellow)

    2- Flux n(o): the blue lines in the electric field

    3- Electricitons captured by the flux n(o): the figure shows only 4 electricitons, but there is an imense amount of them captured by each flux n(o). It is the charge of the electricitons which give the electric charge of the proton.

    4- The electricitons move with the speed of light along the flux n(o). They have the shape of a ring, and the flux n(o) crosses into the ring.

    regards
    wlad

  799. Andrea Rossi

    To the Readers of the JoNP:
    I am continuing to receive comments asking information regarding the fuel, the composition of the powders, etc, and I am very embarassed to have to continue to answer ” I cannot give information about this issue”. To avoid this, from now on all the comments asking from me information about fuel and operation inside the reactors, beside all the information (very substantial) already given, such comments will be automatically spammed, without answer.
    On the contrary, assumptions and theoretical speculations made from the Readers are welcome, obviously on the base of the fact that the publication of such speculations, theories and assumptions are totally independent from my position.
    Again wishes for a Great 2015 to all,
    Andrea Rossi

  800. Wladimir Guglinski

    Element % by Weight
    Nickel 55.0
    Iron 38.9
    Aluminum 4.3
    Lithium (total) 1.2
    Hydrogen (no Deuterium) 0.6
    Total 100.0
    ———————————————–

    Steven
    I dont understand why Rossi put so much iron in the fuel.

    In spite of the iron also is transmuted by reaction with 3Li7, however the iron causes a litle decrease in the COP, because Ni is the best fuel.

    I guess he put so much iron in the eCat sent to be tested in Lugano with the aim to suggest to everybody that iron plays some important role in the reactions.

    I think Rossi does not put iron in the fuel of the eCat used for the 1Mw plant

    regards
    wlad

  801. Wladimir Guglinski

    Steven,
    perhaps 3Li7 is not formed.

    Probably 3Li6 captures a proton, transmuting to 4Be7.

    The newborn 4Be7 has only the electrons of the 3Li6 isotope: 1s1, 1s2, 2s1.

    The electron 2s1 of 4Be7 is shared with one Ni atom, and the proton of 4Be7 is captured by the orbit of the electron 2s1.

    regards
    wlad

  802. Joe

    Wladimir,

    Do you think it is possible that gravitational fluxes n(o) also exist in the electrosphere, and not just in the nucleus, of an atom? They would be much weaker in strength since their radius would be much greater than the radius within the nucleus. This might explain similarities between the organizational structures of the electrosphere and those of the nucleus, such as the presence of shells.

    All the best,
    Joe

  803. Herb Gillis

    Andrea Rossi:
    Do you think it might be useful to study the reactions of LENR under “hot fusion” conditions- – by using a Farnsworth Fusor? It would be relatively easy to construct such a device with a mix of hydrogen and Ni + Li vapors, and then look for isotope changes. Do you think the reaction might follow a different course than under “cold fusion” conditions?
    Merry Christmas; HRG.

  804. Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gillis:
    Sincerely, I have not enough knowledge of Hot Fusion to answer you.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  805. Wladimir Guglinski

    Steven N. Karels wrote in December 25th, 2014 at 10:16 AM

    Wlad,

    Element % by Weight
    Nickel 55.0
    Iron 38.9
    Aluminum 4.3
    Lithium (total) 1.2
    Hydrogen (no Deuterium) 0.6
    Total 100.0
    ———————————————–

    Dear Steven,
    then you are right.

    it seems 3Li7 generation is via capture the proton of the hydrogen.

    So, it seems the hydrogen has 3 contributions:

    1) it plays a role similar to a catalyst

    2) The oscillation of the proton can also play a second role: to help the excitment of the nuclei 58Ni, 60Ni, 62Ni, 64Ni

    3) 3Li7 is generated by the hydrogen

    regards
    wlad

  806. Wladimir Guglinski

    On the missing of gamma emissions in Rossi-Effect and the Focardi Prophecy

    Here is analysed the question concerning the nature of the reactions occurring in the Rossi-Effect , by considering the missing of gamma emissions by the eCat.

    .

    1 ) How Quantum Mechanics, Standard Nuclear Physics, and Quantum Electrodynamics were developed

    QM, Standard Nuclear Physics, and QED were developed after 1905, and therefore from Einstein’s concept of empty space (considered confirmed by the scientific community when an experiment of 1919 had measured the light deviation during an eclipse).

    In 2011 the journal Nature published the paper A vacuum can yield flashes of light, proving that the space is no empty, but actually the space must be filled with a “substance” with structure, formed by particles and antiparticles capable to be transformed in photons.
    http://www.nature.com/news/a-vacuum-can-yield-flashes-of-light-1.12430

    So, it is reasonable to suppose that something is missing in the three theories mentioned above, and therefore they are incomplete.
    Here we try to understand how this lack in the Standard Nuclear Physics reverberates in the field of cold fusion.

    .

    2) Two sort of reactions for the energy production

    There are two sort of known reactions able to produce energy :
    - Chemical
    - Nuclear

    According to the Standard Nuclear Physics, nuclear reactions produce gamma emission via gamma decay.
    As there is not gamma emission by the eCat , then there are only two ways so that to explain the Rossi-Effect:

    a) FIRST WAY: it is by considering that Rossi-Effect is produced by nuclear reactions, however there is not yet a complete understanding of the Standard Nuclear Physics , and this is the reason why, in spite of in special conditions (as those occurring in cold fusion phenomena) nuclear reactions can occur without gamma emission, however the nuclear theorists consider impossible to have nuclear reactions without gamma emission, because they have not a complete understanding of the Standard Model.
    —————————————————
    Note: it is of interest to call attention to the fact that from this FIRST WAY there is NO VIOLATION of any fundamental law of Physics, because the missing of gamma emission is consequence of some unknown mechanisms existing not considered up to now in the Standard Model, since the theory is incomplete.

    b) SECOND WAY: it is by considering that Rossi-Effect is produced by chemical reactions. As chemical reactions do not emit gamma rays, a theory based on chemical reactions is acceptable for the explanation of the Rossi-Effect, from the viewpoint of the missing of gamma emission

    Let us analyse those two WAYS from which the Rossi-Effect is possible to occur without the gamma emission.

    .

    3) Rossi-Effect occurrence from nuclear reactions

    As the space is no empty, there is need to consider that the space has a structure composed by elementary particles and antiparticles as electricitons, magnetons, gravitons, etc.

    From a structure of the non-empty space formed by those particles and antiparticles there is no way to develop a concept of electric field with SPHERICALshape. In other words, by considering the non-empty space the shape of the electric field of elementary particles as the proton and the electron must be NON-SPHERICAL . The Figure 1 shows the electric and magnetic fields of the proton.
    FIG. 1:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_1-_3_fields_of_the_proton.png

    As the radius of the electric field has the magnitude of the Bohr’s radius 10^-11m, and the radius of the nucleus is 10^-15m, of course the Fig. 1 does not show the real proportion between the fields. The Fig. 2 show a better proportionality (but of course not real yet):
    FIG. 2
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_2-_3_fields_in_real_proportionality.png

    However, the proton is composed by quarks, and (due to their oscillation into the structure of the proton combined with the spin of the proton) the body of the proton acquires a chaotic rotation. As consequence, in average the electric field of the proton takes a SPHERICAL shape.

    Note that the spherical shape of the proton is a statistical behavior of the actual non-spherical shape of its electric field.

    The statistical spherical shape of the electric field of the proton (and also of the electron) is the shape considered as fundamental in the development of Quantum Mechanics, and also in the development of Quantum Electrodynamics. And as the Standard Nuclear Physics was developed from the principles of Quantum Mechanics and the fundamental concepts of considered in QED, we realize that the spherical shape of the electric field considered as fundamental by the nuclear theorists in the Standard Nuclear Theory actually is a statistical behavior, and so the spherical shape can change from some special conditions.

    The structure of the electric field of the nuclei is similar to the structure for the proton shown in the Figure 1, and so in average the electric field of any nucleus has a sheperical shape as consequence of the statistical behavior, and this spherical shape is just considered in the Standard Nuclear Physics.
    In another words:

    - The electric field of the nuclei is non-spherical

    - However, from the statistical viewpoint, the electric field of the nuclei is spherical, due to the chaotic rotation of the nuclei.

    As we note from the non-spherical shape of the electric field of the nuclei shown in the Figure 1, there is a “hole” in the electric field, and in special conditions (as occurring in cold fusion) particles as protons and neutrons can penetrate into a nucleus via that “hole” with energy lower than that required from hot fusion process.
    And, if a nucleus captures a low energy neutron via the “hole” in the electric field of the nucleus, and after the capture the nucleus decays , there is no emission of gamma rays during the decay, because the nucleus was not excited with high energy as happens in the cases when a neutron enters with high energy into a nucleus not via the “hole” in the electric field.

    Therefore, from such new consideration of the non-empty space for the development of a new concept of electric field, the Rossi-Effect can occur without gamma emission, by considering some special conditions not considered in the Standard Nuclear Physics, because the Standard Model was developed from statistical considerations about the shape of the electric field.

    From the explained above, we realize that the nuclear theorists have not a deep understanding on the Standard Model, because what they have is a statistical interpretation of the electric Coulomb barrier of the nuclei.

    CONCLUSION 1:
    The nuclear theorists have not an entire understanding of the Standard Model. And then we realize that Focardi Prophecy is correct: those ones who conclude that Rossi-Effect is impossible to occur via the Standard Model had inferred their wrong conclusion from their lack of comprehension of the Standard Model.

    CONCLUSION 2:
    It’s important to note that when we consider that Rossi-Effect occurs via nuclear reactions, there is NO VIOLATION of any fundamental law of Physics . Because the missing of gamma emission is not due to any phenomenon disagree to the fundamental laws of Physics, but actually the missing of gamma emission is due to a misunderstanding of the Standard Model, since the spherical shape of the Coulomb barrier considered in the Standard Model is due to a statistical behavior not conserved in the special conditions of the cold fusion phenomena, as Rossi-Effect.

    .

    4) Rossi-Effect produced from chemical reactions

    The energy produced from chemical reactions is calculated by taking in consideration the attraction between the positive charge of the nuclei and the negative charge of the electrons in the electrosphere of the atoms. Therefore the energy of chemical reactions is based a fundamental law of Physics: the Coulomb attraction between electric charges.

    In the Lugano Report the experimetalists had concluded that the energy produced by the eCat cannot be produced by chemical reactions, a conclusion inferred from the Ragone plot of energy storage ( , page 26, Figure 13, where it is written: “The E-Cat, which would be far off the scale here, lies outside the region occupied by conventional sources“). In the Summary and concluding remarks at the page 30 it is written: ”We have a device giving heat energy compatible with nuclear transformations” .

    So, from the Ragone plot there is not any chemical reaction able to produce the amount of energy produced by the Rossi-Effect in the eCat. Therefore, if an author of a theory on the Rossi-Effect discards the nuclear reactions as cause of the heat produced in the eCat, we have the following situation:

    a) As nuclear reactions are discarded, then only chemical reactions can be the cause of the heat produced by the eCat.

    b) But as no one among the all known chemical reactions is able to produce the quantity of heat produced in the eCat, then the author of the theory must propose the existence of a new sort of unknown chemical reaction, never seen before.

    c) The existence of this new unknown chemical reaction proposed by the author of the theory violates a fundamental law of Physics: the energy produced by this new chemical reaction is beyond the calculation obtained via Coulomb law.

    CONCLUSION 3:
    Any theory which with the aim of explaining the Rossi-Effect by discarding nuclear reactions violates a fundamental law of Physics.

    5) FINAL CONCLUSION :

    5.1) A theory with the aim of explaining the Rossi-Effect by considering nuclear reactions does not violate any fundamental law of Physics, and such theory is according to Focardi Prophecy: those ones who claim that it is impossible to explain Rossi-Effect from the Standard Model actually did not understand in deep the Standard Nuclear Theory.

    5.2) A theory which aim is of explaining the Rossi-Effect by discarding nuclear reactions violates a fundamental law of Physics: the Coulomb law.

  807. Tommaso di pietro

    Dear Dr Rossi,
    Who will analyze The data of 1
    MW plant in operation?the prof of TPR 1 and 2 or another scientists?
    Thanks in advance and merry christmas for you and your family

  808. Andrea Rossi

    Tommaso Di Pietro:
    The Customer we have delivered the plant to has been granted from us a specific performance that is exclusively measured from him by means of the ratio between the electric energy that the plant consumes and that he pays and the thermal energy necessary to his production. What the Customer cares of is how much costs to him make his producton using our plant : if the cost is
    much lower as expected, the Customer will be satisfied and the test will be positive.
    Separately, our Team will take from the plant operation all the data necessary to complete program of R&D using the more than 100 computers that not only regulate the operation of the plant, but also supply the data we want to improve the technology.
    Such R&D endeavour is made by our internal scientists and technologists.
    Being in a commercial phase, the sole independent party that makes the final verdict is the Customer.
    Thank you for your question.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  809. Steven N. Karels

    Wlad,

    You asked about the estimated fuel content. This is what I previously posted:

    4. Page 28: “From all combined analysis methods of the fuel we find that there are significant quantities of Li, Al, Fe and H in addition to the Ni.”
    5. Page 28: “… from the ICP-AES analysis which shows the mass ratio between Li and Al is compatible with a LiAlH4 molecule.”

    Element % by Weight
    Nickel 55.0
    Iron 38.9
    Aluminum 4.3
    Lithium (total) 1.2
    Hydrogen (no Deuterium) 0.6
    Total 100.0

  810. I am impressed with your work, real I am a fan.
    You overcome hurdles that should have destroyed anyone else, but you got reinforced by that experience. I am sure your 1 MW plant in the factory of the customer of IH will sign a history page.
    I read you love music, we have good stuff, if you need something we are glad to be at your service.
    Godspeed in 2015
    Gary Aeling

  811. Andrea Rossi

    Gary Aeling:
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Happy New Year also to you and, obviously, to all our Readers.
    A.R.

  812. Bob

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    Is some or all of the water heated by the 1MW plant returned to the plant for reheating?

    If it is, can you tell us the temperature of the water before it returns to the 1MW plant?

    Best wishes for the New Year.

    Bob

  813. Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    All the data regarding the operation of the 1 MW plant will be published after the end of the test. As I said many times now, I cannot give any data before that.
    Best wishes for the New Year to you and all our Readers,
    A.R.

  814. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Will you have to spend Christmas with your 1MW plant? Or can you leave it alone some days?

    Merry Christmas to you and your team!

    Frank Acland

  815. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Also tomorrow I will spend some time with the 1 MW plant.
    Merry Christmas to you and your team and, as usual, to our Readers,
    A.R.

  816. Joe

    Wladimir,

    I am sorry about the loss of your brother. My condolences to you and his family.

    Joe

  817. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Bill Gates Sponsoring Palladium-Based LENR Technology
    Rossi you were right your work is moving the giants!!

    http://www.kitco.com/ind/Albrecht/2014-12-23-Bill-Gates-Sponsoring-Palladium-Based-LENR-Technology.html

  818. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you for the information. Yes, our work has really moved the giants.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  819. Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi,
    have you asked Santa to give you some gift?
    What do you hope for you for next year?

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  820. Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    8 400 straight hours of stable work with long ssm periods with the 1 MW E-Cat of our Customer.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  821. Andrea Rossi

    Stainless Dteel Flanges manufacturer:
    Thank you for the information,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  822. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dears Joe and Steven,

    sorry the delay in answering your questions.
    I was out of the internet along 4 days, because my brother Aleksander (Sacha) was very bad in the hospítal, victim of cancer. He died yesterday.

    Joe,
    when a particle enters within a nucleus, there is need two sort of energy for its penetration into the nucleus:

    1) The energy required to win the Coulomb barrier

    2) The energy necessary to perforate the flux n(o) of the nuclei ( this is the reason why also a neutron requires an energy so that to enter within a nucleus).

    Energetically low neutrons cannot enter within a nucleus. It this would be possible, there would not exist stable nuclei with small quantity of neutrons, as for instance 58Ni, 60Ni, 62Ni.All they would be converted to the stable 64Ni, by capture of low energy neutrons, because low energy neutrons exist in the enviroment all the time (background of neutrons).

    This is a fundamental questions not responded by the Standard Model
    From the principles of the Standard Model, 58Ni, 60Ni, 62Ni could not exist in the nature

    In the case of the hydrogen and helium isotopes, there is need 3 sort of energy:

    1) The energy required to win the Coulomb barrier

    2) The energy necessary to perforate the flux n(o) of the nuclei

    3) The matching energy. This energy promotes the overlap between the two principal fields Sp(p) of two protons.

    These 3 sort of energy are shown in the TABLE 6.1 at the page 121 of my book Quantum Ring Theory.

    The calculation of the binding energy of the isotopes 1H2, 1H3, 2He3, 2He4 is made in the page 114 of the book, by taking in consideration the 3 sort of energy mentioned above.

    .

    So, dear Joe
    obviously the puzzle: why gamma rays are not emitted in cold fusion ?
    cannot be responded by the principles of the Standard Model.

    The answer for the puzzle requires my new nuclear model.

    That’s why the subtitle of my book is FOUNDATIONS FOR COLD FUSION

    .

    Joe,
    I would like to hear from the other authors of cold fusion theories the answer for your question.
    For instance, from Stoyan Sarg, Hagelstein, Widon-Larsen, Robert Godes, etc…

    Rober Godes said in a thread:

    “I am glad to see that Cu63 does not appear to have changed much between start and finish seen on page 52. As I had predicted, as noted above, Cu65 is actually higher than Cu63 in the ash after the experiment”
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/12/21/robert-godes-of-brillouin-on-beta-decay-of-nickel-in-the-lugano-test/

    But I cannot see how Rober Godes can be glad if somebody asks him why there is not emission of gamma rays in the nuclear reactions proposed by him

    regards
    wlad

  823. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    Please accept my condolences for your Brother Sacha.
    Warm Regards,
    Andrea Rossi

  824. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 22nd, 2014 at 2:45 PM

    Wladimir,

    How would your model account for the unexpectedly small amount of gamma rays present in the Rossi Effect?
    ————————————————————–

    Joe,
    let us consider the decay:

    60Co -> 60Ni + gamma-rays
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt-60

    First of all, we need to note that 60Co has a half-life of 5,2 years.

    Then the first question is:

    why 60Co decays so fast to 60Ni in the Rossi-Effect?

    Let us try to find answers for those questions.

    The 60Co is produced artificially by neutron activation of the monoisotopic and mononuclidic cobalt isotope 59Co:

    59Co + n → 60Co

    However,
    such artificial activation by 59Co + n → 60Co is made via neutrons with high energy (because the neutron do not enter within the 59Co via the hole in the Coulomb barrier of the 59Co.
    So, the newborn 60Co is highly energetically excited, and this is the reason why its half-life is 5,2years.

    But in the Rossi-Effect, when occurs the neutron capture in the reaction 59Co + n -> 60Co , the neutron enters within the 59Co nucleus via the hole in the Coulomb barrier of the 59Co.
    The neutron captured by 59Co in Rossi-Effect has lower energy than that required when the neutron is captured by 59Co in the artificially by neutron activation of the 59Co made in laboratories.

    Therefore the 60Co obtained in the Rossi-Effect is not so excited as in the case of the 60Co obtained in the laboratories.
    This is the reason why in the Rossi-Effect we have:

    1) in the decay 60Co -> 60Ni there is no emission of gamma-rays.

    2) when the 60Co is formed by 59Co + n , the half-life of the 60Co is very short, because the newborn 60Co is not highly excited as occurs in the reaction 59Co + n occurring in the laboratories.

    regards
    wlad

    regards
    wlad

  825. Stefano Landi

    Dear Andrea.
    1) so according, to your answer, I understand that there are not specific improvements of the e-mouse/e-cat system in these last months?
    2) Please would you mind to tell the official start date of the 1 MW plant?
    3) Marry Christmas

    Stefano

  826. Andrea Rossi

    Stefano Landi:
    1- Sometimes understanding is a subjective process
    2- I already answered to this question
    3- Merry Christmas to you and to all our Readers, as always
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  827. Dear Dr Rossi,
    You are making a wonderful work for mankind, I understand your necessity of protection of the intellectual property and your reserve to talk of the 1 MW plant data before the tests are finished; keepup the good work! We are manufacturers of flanges that surely could be useful for your plants. And you can look our website http://cnflanges.com/ about stainless steel flange manufacturer. Thank you very very much.

  828. Wladimir Guglinski

    Steven N. Karels wrote in December 22nd, 2014 at 5:26 AM

    Wlad,

    If hydrogen is not involved in the fusion reactions — then there is insufficient 7Li to account for the heat generation. A means of regenerating 7Li is needed. It seems to me the only way to resolve this need is to propose the fusion of the hydrogen with 6Li. Comments?
    ————————————————-

    Dear Steven,
    I did not understand the table in the end of the last page of the Lugano Report:

    Results as weight present of the samples
    2 fuel 2.13 mg 50ml
    Li 670nm % = 1.17

    Did you?
    what is the total percentage of littium in weight in the fuel?

    regards
    wlad

  829. Andrea Rossi

    Alexis:
    To give data regarding the 1 MW before their consolidation would expose us to dangerous situations should the data change or worse. For this reason it would be not appropriate, under a professional point of view, to give data when the result could be transitory or substantially wrong.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  830. Pietro F.

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

  831. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    The data of the performance of the 1 MW plat will be published at the end of the tests, when they will be consolidated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  832. Pietro F.

    What is the the average COP of the 1 MW plant delivered to the Customer of IH?

    Regards

    Pietro F.

  833. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    Please see my answer at 9.24 p.m. of Yesterday,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  834. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Among the mainstream Physicists that are not biased against the LENR who do you think is in the world the most important for his theoretical contribution to integrate LENR in the Standard Model?
    D.T.

  835. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    Norman Cook, US scientist, Prof in the Kansai University ( Osaka, Japan). His book “Models of the Atomic Nucleus” ( Springer 2010) is foundamental.
    It is inspiring. I am reading it in these days for the eleventh time, mixed with Nuclear Models ( Springer 1996) of Walter Greiner and Joachim Maruhn.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  836. JCRenoir

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Can you give us as a Christmas gift a photo of the 1 MW plant?
    JPR

  837. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    I am very sorry, but it is not possible, and I am sad for this, because it is a magnificence. It is necessary we end the testing period before data and images of it will be communicated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  838. Curiosone

    Dear Dr Rossi:
    I read that the Higgs boson has been discovered from photons that decayed from it: but in other sites I read that the Higgs interacts only with massive particles, so how can degenerate into photons, that are massless?
    Thank you for your generous patience.
    W.G.

  839. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Apparently you should be right, but it is not so. As a matter of fact, concatenating Feynman diagrams, is possible to theorize virtual massive elementary particles build up in the interacting fields: such virtual massive particles ( nothing other than resonances of waves, like waves of the ocean that make up tsunamies piling up one upon the other) can indirectly connect Higgs bosons with photons; virtual particles are bookkeeping devices that indicate how quantum fields are vibrating on course of stable elementary particles interactions, but the resonances make massive virtualities for about 10^-23 s that are enough for the Higgs field to indirectly resonate with the electromagnetic field: imagine a piano in a room that can resonate only with another specific piano and not with an arp, but this specific piano is able to resonate with an arp, so that the first piano indirectly resonates with the arp and from the sound of the arp you can understand that in another room there is the first piano, due to the fact that the specific piano can be put in resonance only by the first piano before resonate with the arp.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  840. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Are you able to personally devote much time to the Hot Cat R&D? Or are you still tied up with the 1MW plant at the customer site?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  841. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Thanks to our great Team, I can work on both the fronts with my Teammates!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  842. KeithT

    Dear Andrea,

    Both the electrically driven low temperature Ecat and electrically driven high temperature hot cat have been seen in tests, you have stated that you are developing a gas powered high temperature hot cat; are you also developing a gas powered low temperature Ecat ?

    Kind regards,

    Keith Thomson.

  843. Andrea Rossi

    Keith T.:
    Yes, of course, it is in the thread of the Hot Cat R&D: gas fueling is an evolution of the Hot Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  844. KeithT

    Dear Andrea,

    Between the electrically driven low temperature Ecat and electrically driven high temperature hot cat, which has the higher COP?

    Kind regards,

    Keith Thomson.

  845. Andrea Rossi

    KeithT:
    I will answer to this question after the R&D we are making on both of them will have been completed: for the low temperature the R&D is on course by means of the 1 MW plant delivered to the Customer of IH, for the Hot Cat intense R&D is on course by means of new prototypes upon which we are making exponential progress by the day. Within about 1 year we will have consolidated data. I deem meaningless to give transitory data.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  846. giovanniontheweb

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    I happened to listen to Dr. E. Storm’s theory about “cold fusion”, to my understanding, his actual view claims that most of the energy is coming from hydrogen merging and therefore we should be looking for radioactive tritium as result of the reaction. Secondly, it looks like that the fact of having hydrogen “trapped” inside a “metallic Pd/Ni net” lower the fusion temperature by a factor of 10exp6 at least, yet the temperature we read belongs to the system “net + fuel” and as the “net” is much heavier than the “fuel” we expect the last oscillating faster. The question is, will it be more adapted using EF field to provoke the right kinetics instead?

    My Best Regards

    Giovanni Fois

  847. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanniontheweb:
    Obviously I cannot comment this issue, in positive or negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  848. Joe

    Wladimir,

    How would your model account for the unexpectedly small amount of gamma rays present in the Rossi Effect?

    All the best,
    Joe

  849. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Are you familiar with a product being developed by the US Utility NRG called the ‘Beacon 10′? It is the invention of Dean Kamen (of Segway fame) who is working in partnership with NRG on the product.

    Basically it is a Stirling engine-based generator that is designed to produce electricity from a home’s natural gas source.

    The first model will apparently be a 10kw model which will be suitable for commercial buildings. A smaller 2.5 kw for home use is in the plans.

    I see no reason why, technically, this could not work with E-Cat heat.

    You can read more about it here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2014/07/02/dean-kamen-thinks-his-new-stirling-engine-could-power-the-world/

    I thought you might find this interesting, if you were not already aware of it.

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  850. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Thank you for the information: no, I am not familiar with it, even if I contacted them a year ago or so and they were not ready with a product for our needs.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  851. Hi Andrea.
    What has become to the jet engine that you acquired?

    Wishing you, Andrea, and all the readers a wonderful Christmas period and New Year.

    Jean Pierre

  852. Andrea Rossi

    Jean Pierre:
    That is one of our R&D rows, but presently we are focused on the 1 MW plant. Nevertheless, that is an important job to do too.
    Same wishes to you and again to all our Readers,
    A.R.

  853. Neri B.

    Dear Steven N. Karels,
    you have to consider that 1 gr of Lithium is what has been input but you know nothing of what was inside reactor before charging it with 1 gr powder.
    I mean there could be a bit Lithium deposited on the internal surface of the most internal cylinder of the reactor and this could have taken part in the reaction.

  854. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Dear Dr. Rossi, I send the link to an interesting interview engineer Mats Lewan that followed the ‘ E cat.
    I would like to do to her readers and best wishes for a Merry Christmas .

    http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/interview-mats-lewan-why-ecat-works/

  855. Andrea Rossi

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

  856. Pietro F.

    Auguri e buon lavoro.

    Pietro F.

  857. Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    Thank you, and as always the Wishes are also to you and all our Readers,
    Andrea Rossi

  858. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Steven N Karels,

    In the Don Borghi experiment, where the hydrogen into the reactor is submitted to similar conditions of those occurring in the Rossi’s eCat, the hydrogen is ionized, and a plasma of free protons and electrons is formed.
    Along the time there is fusion p+e -> n

    In order to discover if the hydrogen in the eCat is converted to neutrons as occurs in the Don Borghi experiment, there is need to perform an experiment, by putting hydrogen gas into the empty Rossi’s reactor.
    This experiment would be a replication of the Don Borghi experiment, in the case the hydrogen be converted to neutrons.

    In the case the hydrogen be converted to neutrons in the Rossi’s eCat, the hydrogen cannot play any role in the cold fusion reactions… I guess…

    regards
    wlad

  859. Steven N. Karels

    Wlad,

    If hydrogen is not involved in the fusion reactions — then there is insufficient 7Li to account for the heat generation. A means of regenerating 7Li is needed. It seems to me the only way to resolve this need is to propose the fusion of the hydrogen with 6Li. Comments?

  860. Wladimir Guglinski

    ERRATA:

    In my last post, where it is written

    b) Due to the increase of the temperature within the reactor, the hydrogen molecule tends to move very fast and chaotically along all directions, having collision with the walls of the reactor and also with the elements of the fuel.

    the best is:

    b) Due to the increase of the temperature within the reactor, each of the hydrogen atoms tends to move very fast and chaotically along all directions, having collision with the walls of the reactor and also with the elements of the fuel.

  861. orsobubu

    Wlad, I would love you succeeded in explain the Rossi effect without having access to the complete experimental datasets, on the basis of theoretical deduction. I already know mrs. Pamela will reply this way:

    “Hi, Wlad, thanks for the suggestions. We have several experiments in line waiting to be realized. When we have time to test your suggestion I’ll warn you. Hug.”

    Good, since you frequent this JONP place you’ve made lots more friends

  862. Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    he,he,he..
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  863. KeithT

    Dear Andrea,

    Do you use the same prepared powder for both the low temperature Ecat and the high temperature hot cat devices.

    Kind Regards,

    Keith Thomson.

  864. Andrea Rossi

    Keith T.:
    No.
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  865. Wladimir Guglinski

    Dear Steven N Karels,

    I was thinking about the role played by the hydrogen in the eCat, and perhaps finally I understood it.

    My conclusion is:

    1- The hydrogen is not involved in the fusion reactions
    2- The hydrogen does not play a role as a catalyst
    3- However it is possible the hydrogen plays a role similar to a catalyst, as follows:

    a) The proton has magnetic moment +2,793

    b) Due to the increase of the temperature within the reactor, the hydrogen molecule tends to move very fast and chaotically along all directions, having collision with the walls of the reactor and also with the elements of the fuel.

    c) However, due to the magnetic pulse produced by the coils, the proton also gets another sort of motion: a fast oscillation toward the axis of the reactor (as consequence of the interaction between the magnetic moment of the proton and the magnetic pulse created by the 3 coils).

    d) Such component of the proton’s motion, oscillating along the axis of the reactor, causes the alignment of the z-axes of the nuclei Ni and 3Li7 toward the axis of the reactor. Perhaps this is the reason why the eCat does not need to have a source so that to create a constant vector magnetic field along the axis of the reactor, so that to align the z-axes of the nuclei Ni and 3Li7 along the axis of the reactor (and it can be the response for the question: why any DC current was not found, according to the Lugano Report).

    e) The oscillation of the proton can also play a second role: to help the excitment of the nuclei 58Ni, 60Ni, 62Ni, 64Ni, helping the magnetic pulse induced by the 3 coils.

    regards
    wlad

  866. Wladimir Guglinski

    Steven N. Karels wrote in December 21st, 2014 at 7:47 AM

    Dear Wlad,

    Note the negative energy got 62Ni and 64Ni.
    If these are correct, then the following may be observed
    1. The overall energy release is limited by the amount of hydrogen available in the eCat.
    2. Aluminum plays a role in the energy generation as it is converted to silicon.
    3. This would explain why the reaction stops at 62Ni.
    4. It is not clear why The Report indicates 64Ni was consumed.
    5. Why did iron not show a shift in its isotopes (or was it just not reported)?
    6. Is the iron a magnetic catalyst for the other parts of the reactions?

    Thoughts?
    ——————————————————

    Dear Steven

    In my opinion the best fuel for the eCat is composed by isotopes of Ni and Li.

    But of course Andrea Rossi could not put in he reactor only Ni and Li isotopes, because it would be very easy to everybody to conclude what are the reactions in the reactor, after the publication of the Lugano Report.

    In order to confuse everybody who is reading the Lugano Report, Andrea Rossi put some other elements in the fuel.
    For instance, he put Lithium Aluminum Hydride, because LiAlH4 produce free hydrogen by heating, and by this way maybe Andrea had intended to suggest that hydrogen contributes for the reactions.
    But perhaps hydrogen plays a role as a catalyst, in spite of I cannot see how.

    In the last page of the Lugano Report is written:
    Sample 2 was the fuel used to charge the E-Cat. It’s in the form of a very fine powder. Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel also contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these are not found in the ash.”

    So, we conclude that Fe, Ca, Mg, Cl, indeed had fusion with 3Li7.

    However, Andrea Rossi already had tested those elements (Fe, Ca, Mg, etc.), and he concluded that, in spite of they are able to produce heat by cold fusion, nevertheless the COP is very lower than that obtained by using Ni.

    So, the best fuel is Ni+Li. That’s why Andrea Rossi calls it nickel technology.
    The other elements found in the fuel of the Lugano Report had been put in the reactor with the aim of confusing us.

    .

    However, the controversy about the reactions must be solved by a the following procedure:

    1) Put the fuel Ni-Li in 12 eCats.
    2) The first eCat will be turned off after 15 days, and the ash will be analysed.
    3) The second eCat will be turned off after 30 days, and the ash will be analysed.
    4) The last eCat will be turned off after 6 months, and the ash will be analysed.

    By this way the controversy about the reactions can be eliminated, and we will be able to unveil some puzzles, as for instance whether the cascade reactions Ni-Li stops in the 62Ni, or whether the 62Ni isotope continues the cascade giving the reaction 62Ni + n -> 63Ni -> 63Cu.

    regards
    wlad

  867. Gherardo

    Dott.Rossi

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you, your co-workers and forum members.

    2014 wishes were fruitfull so this year I hope “may 2015 be the year of the E-Cat”.

    Today I found funny that ECAT acronim is also used by Escambia County Area Transit near Pensacola (Florida).

    All the best, Gherardo

  868. Andrea Rossi

    Gherardo:
    Thank you and same wishes to you, extended, as usual, to all our Readers, from the Team I work in and me,
    A.R.

  869. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Whereas I cannot comment in positive or negative issues related to the operation of the E-Cat, I totally share the quote from Sir Arthur C. Clarke.
    I too wish you, and again to all our Readers, a healthy 2015, after a peaceful and Merry Christmas.
    A.R.

  870. Jim

    Hi, all is going sound here and of course every one is sharing data, that’s actually fine, keep up writing.

  871. Andrea Rossi

    Jim:
    I take the chance of your comment to remind that all the discussion on course regarding what happens inside the E-Cat during the operation has to be considered totally independent from us. We are publishing the comments as they arrive, with no editing, and the publication of them has nothing to do with any kind of opinion of ours regarding their content. We only spam comments when we deem them unpolite or insulting toward somebody, or when a comment assumes I am sharing any kind of opinion: when I share an opinion I write it. Please note that I never comment on any assumption , in positive or in negative, because I cannot give information of sort about the mechanism of the so called “Rossi Effect”.
    Information about our theoretical bases and operation of the E-Cat, beyond what has already been communicated by us, will be given in due time. Obviously, everybody is welcome to make any assumption and guess he wants.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  872. silvio caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Did you dismiss the idea of onion-cat or this technology is embedded within the “dog-bone” hot-cat?
    It really looks like a leek-cat (it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allium_ampeloprasum)… :-)

  873. Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    Ideas are never dismissed, they always work.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  874. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Wlad,

    These are the reactions I would expect in an eCat based on lithium acting on the various other isotopes present in the eCat.

    Start Result Energy Released
    58Ni + 7Li 59Ni+6Li 1.7492963
    59Ni + 7Li 60Ni + 6Li 4.1377298
    60Ni+7Li 61Ni+6Li 0.5702163
    61Ni + 7Li 62Ni + 6Li 3.3465222
    62Ni + 7Li 63Ni + 6Li -0.41204
    64Ni + 7Li 65Ni + 6Li -1.151829

    27Al + 7Li 28Al + 6Li 0.821346
    28Al 28Si + e 4.2961227

    6Li +1H 7Li 0.0069433
    7Li + 1H 4He + 4He 0.0186231

    54Fe + 7Li 55Fe + 6Li 2.0482114
    55Fe + 7Li 56Fe+ 6Li 3.9473333
    56Fe + 7Li 57Fe + 6Li 0.3961208
    57Fe + 7Li 58Fe + 6Li 2.7946144

    Note the negative energy got 62Ni and 64Ni.
    If these are correct, then the following may be observed
    1. The overall energy release is limited by the amount of hydrogen available in the eCat.
    2. Aluminum plays a role in the energy generation as it is converted to silicon.
    3. This would explain why the reaction stops at 62Ni.
    4. It is not clear why The Report indicates 64Ni was consumed.
    5. Why did iron not show a shift in its isotopes (or was it just not reported)?
    6. Is the iron a magnetic catalyst for the other parts of the reactions?

    Thoughts?

  875. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    concerning your opinion:

    “2. I still think that the target nucleus would need a magnetic dipole moment that is greater than that of the source nucleus.

    you have also to consider that the two nuclei Ni and 3Li7 are very far away one each other (a distance at least two times longer than the distance between 3Li7 nucleus and the orbit 2s1).

    As the magnetic force decreases with the square of the distance, even if the intensity of the magnetic moment of the 2s1 and the magnetic moment of the nucleus Ni was the same, however due to the larger disance the magnetic attraction force between proton and the Ni nucleus would be 4 times weaker than the magnetic attraction force between the proton and the orbit 2s1.

    Besides,
    there is yet the Coulomb attraction between the proton in the newborn 4Be7 and the electron 2s1

    So, concerning the extraction of the proton from the 4Be7, the magnetic moment of the Ni nucleus has not any influence in the mechanism of the extraction.

    regards
    wlad

  876. Wladimir Guglinski

    ERRATA:

    In my comment of December 21st, 2014 at 4:46 AM

    where it is written;

    If this is the case, then the radius of the 2s1 orbit is the maximum radius so that to be possible for a nucleus to have reaction with 3Li7.

    the correct is:

    If this is the case, then the radius of the 2s1 orbit in the Ni nucleus is the maximum radius so that to be possible for a nucleus to have reaction with 3Li7.

  877. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    one cold fusion researcher of the Martin Fleischmaan Memorial Project wrote in their page in the Facebook:

    “- We now understand WHY we need the alumina tubes on the feed wires

    However,
    I suspect that Andrea Rossi uses permanent magnets within those alumina tubes. This can be his secret.

    Indeed, let us think about those alumina tubes, as follows:

    1- There is no need them so much long

    2- Why alminium ? Well, because aluminium is not magnetic. By using aluminium the it is easier to hide the secret (for instance, aliminium does not attract small iron pieces).

    3- However aluminium has interesting properties when it interacts with permanent magnets:
    http://terpconnect.umd.edu/~wbreslyn/magnets/is-aluminium-magnetic.html

    By this way, when the electric power is turn off, and the magnetic pulses stop, the excited Ni isotopes continue being aligned toward the axis of the reactor, and this is the reason why the eCat works in self sustained model along some hours. When the 58Ni, 60Ni, 62Ni, 64Ni lose their excitation, the self sustained mode is ended.

    regards
    wlad

  878. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    actually there is one more step along the transmutation 59Co -> 62Ni:

    59Co + n -> 60Co -> 60Ni ====> 60Ni + n -> 61Ni ===> 61Ni + n -> 62Ni

    I dont know yet why the stable 59Co has reaction with 3Li7, while the stables 63Cu and 65Cu do not have reaction with 3Li7.

    However there is a difference of two protons between 27Co and 29Cu. Then the radius of the 2s1 orbit in 29Cu is larger, and therefore the proton (when it exists the 3Li7) has too much acceleration, and so the neutron is not captured by 29Cu , in spite of the energy of the neutron is not enough to cause the fission of the 29Cu.

    If this is the case, then the radius of the 2s1 orbit is the maximum radius so that to be possible for a nucleus to have reaction with 3Li7.

    So, Ni is in the limit for a receptor to have fusion with the emitter 3Li7.

    regards
    wlad

  879. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. You write,
    “Only 61Ni produces cold fusion, however there is only 1,14% of 61Ni in the fuel, and there is no way to have self sustained mode.”

    So then what is the minimal proportion of 28Ni61 that would allow an SSM? And how do you calculate this proportion?

    2. You write,
    “The magnetic moment of the 2s1 electron is very stronger than the magnetic moment of the nucleus Ni.”

    And that is the problem. The induced magnetic moment of the electron will not allow the weaker magnetic moment of the target nucleus to steal the approaching nucleon from it.

    3. What do you think is the reason for the lack of gamma rays observed in the E-Cat?

    All the best,
    Joe

  880. Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    Is it somewhat valid to think of the energy releasing interactions as being glancing blows between two (or more) nuclei? That is, two (or more) nuclei interact at shallow angles such that the heavier nucleus strips off neutrons from the lighter nucleus.

    This is more like atomic etching or removing of material.

    Conceptually (?), this is some type of atomic-scale milling machine where a collection of heavier nuclei (with sufficient kinetic energy) become a machine tool, milling machine or battering ram. In this case, the material removed from the lighter atoms* – which are being battered – are neutrons. Most, if not all, of the removed neutrons are then absorbed (or fused) into the milling machine tool or the heavier nuclei.

    (* Lighter atoms are “damaged” more by collisions with heavier atoms just as lighter cars are damaged more by any collisions with heavier trucks.)

    This is not only miraculous, to quote Sir Arthur C. Clarke:
    “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”

    Best wishes for a Christmas season full of blessings.

    And also, a happy, healthy New Year to you, your family, your team and your readers.

    Joseph Fine

  881. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in December 20th, 2014 at 3:48 PM

    Wladimir,

    1. —————————————–
    Why would the E-Cat not work full time in the SSM just because the fuel might not be 100% 28Ni61? It would produce less power but it should last just as long.
    ——————————————–

    No, Joe,
    when the electric power is turn off, after a time the isotopes 58Ni, 60Ni, 62Ni, 64Ni lose the excitement, and without excitement they have nuclear magnetic moment zero. Therefore they cannot be aligned toward the axis of the reactor, and they do not produce cold fusion.

    Only 61Ni produces cold fusion, however there is only 1,14% of 61Ni in the fuel, and there is no way to have self sustained mode.

    2. ——————————————
    I still think that the target nucleus would need a magnetic dipole moment that is greater than that of the source nucleus.
    ———————————————-

    What you think makes no sense.
    The magnetic moment of the 2s1 electron is very stronger than the magnetic moment of the nucleus Ni.
    The proton of the 3Li7 is extracted by the electron’s orbit, and not by the nuclear magnetic moment of the Ni nucleus.

    The only task of the nuclear magnetic moment of the Ni is to put the z-axis of the Ni aligned toward the axis of the reactor

    .

    3. ———————————————
    The most important question is, at what point in this whole process is excess energy being created?
    ————————————————

    7Li -> 6Li

    58Ni + n -> 59Ni -> 59Co

    59Co + n -> 60Co -> 61Ni ==> 61Ni + n -> 62Ni

    60Ni + n -> 61Ni

    61Ni + n -> 62Ni

    62Ni + n -> 63Cu

    64Ni + n -> 65Ni -> 65Cu

    Note that the isotopes 58Ni(68,1%) + 60Ni( 26,2%) +61 Ni(1,1%) have as a final result the isotope 62Ni.
    So, while 62Ni is transmutting to 63Cu, however 95,4% of the total Ni isotopes are transmutting to 62Ni, and this is the reason why after the 32 days of the eCat working the ash had 98,7% of 62Ni.
    If the eCat continues working , after some months the percentage of 62Ni will be near to zero.

    Also note that the eCat worked only 32 days.

    Andrea Rossi already had reported that in earlier experiments he had found Cu in the ash. This is because the eCat had worked along 6 months, and there was time available for the 62Ni to transmute to 63Cu.
    The transmutation 64Ni -> 65Cu is not representative, since 64Ni has only 0,9% of the fuel.

    In the Lugano Report is said in the page 28:
    “Even if that particular reaction is excluded, since no gammas are observed, we can tentatively use this number for each step towards 62Ni, and the information from ICP-AES that there is about 0.55 gram Ni in the fuel. We find then that there is about 2.2MWh available from the Nickel transformations. Accordingly, from Nickel and Lithium together there is about 3 MWh available, which is twice the amount given away in the test run.

    However,
    these numbers used are referred to hot fusion.
    In the case of cold fusion, the reactions do not give the quantity of energy given in hot fusion.
    So, instead of 2.2MWh available from Ni transformations, for cold fusion actuallthe value must be inferior than 2.2MWh.

    regards
    wlad

  882. Wladimir Guglinski

    orsobubu wrote in December 20th, 2014 at 1:14 PM

    Wlad, I would love you succeeded in explain the Rossi effect without having access to the complete experimental datasets, on the basis of theoretical deduction. I already know mrs. Pamela will reply this way:

    “Hi, Wlad, thanks for the suggestions. We have several experiments in line waiting to be realized. When we have time to test your suggestion I’ll warn you. Hug.”
    ————————————————

    dear orsobubu,
    actually it not is the Pamela’s style.

    In 2009 she sent a reply, concerning her experiment in the US Navy:

    “Subject: RE: absence of gamma-rays in your experiment, and neutron’s background
    Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 10:29:47 -0700
    From: pam.boss@navy.mil
    To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    CC: m_bernstein@acs.org; hestenes@asu.edu; canmarrai@gmail.com

    Like many, we have very few funds and resources. But we will consider your suggestions and see what we can do as time and money permits.

    Regards,

    Pam”

  883. Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. Why would the E-Cat not work full time in the SSM just because the fuel might not be 100% 28Ni61? It would produce less power but it should last just as long.

    2. I still think that the target nucleus would need a magnetic dipole moment that is greater than that of the source nucleus.

    3. The most important question is, at what point in this whole process is excess energy being created?

    All the best,
    Joe

  884. Andrea Rossi

    Felix Rands:
    Thank you for the interesting information
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  885. Hi Andrea,

    Here is our ragtime-flavored Holiday greeting.

    The very best Christmas wishes for you:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKo7Rt027MQ

    -thomas

  886. Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    Thank you for this delighting gift that, of course, goes with your and my best wishes for a wonderful Christmas to all our Readers

  887. Dear Andrea Rossi,

    http://www.qnergy.com/products_overview

    I think this could be the right business partner to solve the problem of conversion of hot-cat heat into electricity. The company not only has the necessary technology, but also has sufficient production capacity for starters.

    Best regards and Merry Christmas to you, your family and your partners.
    Felix Rends

  888. Wladimir Guglinski

    ERRATA:

    In my comment of December 20th, 2014 at 5:11 AM

    where it is written:

    As after the reaction 60Ni-3Li7 the 60Ni transmutes to 62Ni, the isotope 62Ni requires excitation, so that the eCat continue producing heat.

    the correct is:

    As after the reaction 61Ni-3Li7 the 61Ni transmutes to 62Ni, the isotope 62Ni requires excitation, so that the eCat continue producing heat.

  889. Wladimir Guglinski

    Email sent to Pamela Mosier-Boss

    From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
    To: pam.boss@navy.mil
    Subject: Your version of Fleischmann-Pons experiment improved by using 105Pd
    Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 10:51:55 -0200

    Hi, Pamela

    I have strong reasons in believing that the alignment of the nuclear magnetic moment of the Pd nuclei toward an external magnetic field is responsible for the cold fusion occurrence in the Fleischman-Pons experiment (and of couse also in your version of their experiment. performed by you in the US Navy in 2009).

    Therefore only the stable isotope 105Pd contributes for the cold fusion occurrence in your experiment, since only 105Pd has non-null nuclear magnetic moment.
    All the other isotopes 102Pd, 104Pd, 106Pd, 108Pd, 110Pd, have null nuclear magnetic moment, and so they do not contribute for the cold fusion occurrence.

    I had proposed for the cold fusion researchers of the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project to perform the following experiment, so that to test such hypothesis:

    ========================================================
    THE ALIGNMENT OF NUCLEI AS INDISPENSABLE PRE REQUISITE FOR THE COLD FUSION OCCURRENCE CAN BE TESTED BY EXPERIMENT, as follows:

    1- Fleischmann-Pons experiment will be performed in two different vessels A and B

    2- In both vessels will be used an external source of magnetic field, so that to eliminate the influence of the magnetic fields of the Earth and the Sun

    3 – Magnetic pulses cannot be used in any of the two vessels A and B, in order DO ONT EXCITE the nuclei in both experiments

    4- The vessel A will be filled with the isotope 105Pd and deuterium. As the nucleus 105Pd has nuclear magnetic moment, the 105 Pd nuclei will be aligned toward the vector magnetic field, and the cold fusion must occur .

    5- The vessel B will be filled with the isotopes 102Pd, 104Pd, 106Pd, 108Pd, 110Pd, and deuterium. As all those nuclei have null magnetic moment, and as they will not be excited (because there is not magnetic pulses applied), they cannot be aligned toward the vector magnetic field, and therefore COUD FUSION CANNOT OCCUR.
    ========================================================

    However, the researchers of the MFMP responded the following to me:

    “Given that Pure Pd is over $5833 100g, where do you propose one gets affordable 105Pd?

    If you are able to provide the raw materials, we may be able to conduct an experiment.”

    So, they have no money for performing the experiment.

    Then I would like to know:

    May you be interested to make it in the laboratory of the US Navy?

    Can you make it?

    If I am right, the heat produced by using 100% of 105Pd must be 5 times greater than in the experiment made by you in 2009.

    regards
    W Guglinski

  890. Wladimir Guglinski

    eCat full time in self sustained model

    Joe,
    I suspect that by using a fuel composed by 100% of 61Ni the eCat can work full time in the self-sustained-mode.

    The reason why the reactor filled with fuel composed by 58Ni, 60Ni, 61Ni, 62Ni, 64Ni, after some hours stops to work in the self-sustained-mode is because after some time the excited isotopes 58Ni, 60Ni, 62Ni, 64Ni begin to lose their excitation, and so the reactions Ni-3Li7 stop.

    Then there is need to apply magnetic pulses again in the coils of the reactor, in order to excite the isotopes 58Ni, 60Ni, 62Ni, 64Ni, and that’s why there is need to turn on again the electric power, supplying electric current to the coils of the reactor.

    However, the eCat filled with 100% of the isotope 61Ni will work in the self sustained model only while there is yet 61Ni isotopes available within the reactor.

    As after the reaction 60Ni-3Li7 the 60Ni transmutes to 62Ni, the isotope 62Ni requires excitation, so that the eCat continue producing heat.
    So, when the fuel composed by 60Ni is totally converted to 62Ni, there is need to apply again magnetic pulses, in order to excite the 62Ni.

    regards
    wlad

  891. Andrea Rossi

    Wladimir Guglinski:
    As you know, I cannot give information, in positive or in negative, related to the fuel isue, more than I already did.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  892. John Atkinson

    As time passes the e cat gets closer and closer to a world marketed alternative energy source. There will come a time if it has not already accrued,when big oil will threaten or may even sabotage your efforts.The middle East may also try , as illustrated by North Korea’s treats and computer hacks towards Sony . Since a great deal is dependent on computer operation of the e cats when working in unison, have you and Industrial Heat made plans or possibly consulted with the US for such a contingency? It seems at this point it may be the only great treat to your tremendous success and saving this world from itself..

  893. Andrea Rossi

    John Atkinson:
    Than you for your kind attention.
    We have specialists in our Team who deal with this problem.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  894. Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in December 18th, 2014 at 11:41 AM

    Frank Acland:
    It is an interesting idea: under a theoretical and technological point of view, I do not see why not. The issue is in the price: if the electric energy supplied by batteries will be competitive with other sources, the coupling between high efficiency batteries and the E-Cats will be surely possible. Have you an idea of the cost per kWh supplied by this new generation of batteries? I am curious.
    ———————————————-

    I think the eCat spends so much electric power because there is need to excite 98% of the Ni isotopes used as fuel in the eCat.

    The natural abundance of the stable Ni isotopes is the following:

    58Ni = 68,08%

    60Ni = 26,22%

    61Ni = 1,14%

    62Ni = 3,63%

    64Ni = 0,93%

    Only 61Ni has magnetic moment, and so it does not require excitation so that to be aligned by magnetic field along the azis of the reactor, in order to have fusion with 3Li7.

    All the other Ni isotopes have null magnetic moment, and all they require excitation so that to be aligned, in order to have fusion with 3Li7.

    By using a fuel composed by 100% of 61Ni the electric power could be reduced drastically, because there is no need to excite the 61Ni (the electric power for the excitation of the 98% of the other Ni isotopes would be saved).

    However, I do not know how much extra cost would be necessary to obtain a fuel composed of 100% of 61Ni.

    regards
    wlad

  895. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    There is a great deal of research and development and investment going into battery technology worldwide. I think the trend will be for lower cost per kWh as time goes by.
    I am sure electric vehicles are going to become more and more popular as time goes by. Lack of charging stations for EVs are one obstacle to their widespread use. You should talk with Elon Musk of Tesla. I think together you might be able to work towards a solution!

    Kind regards,

    Frank Aclan

  896. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Very interesting, thank you for the information. I am learning.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  897. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    You asked about the cost per kWh supplied by the new generation of batteries. I have to thank an E-Cat World reader for finding this. According to the Tesla Motors Web site, they can currently deliver electricity from their lithium-ion batteries at 0.21 Euros per kWh.

    http://www.teslamotors.com/en_CA/goelectric#savings

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  898. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Thank you for this interesting information. As you can se, this is a price good for usual batteries utilization, but very high for us. Nevertheless, the use of batteries as storage of energy is very interesting. By the way: I tested a Tesla, is very funny: same acceleration of a Ferrari, but too short autonomy if you want to get driving fun.
    Warm Regards,
    Andrea

  899. DTravchenko

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Gas prices are falling: how are you aware of the drop of the fuels respect the market perspectives for the E-Cat?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  900. Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    Again on the fuels: today this issue has got fuel!
    I do not know what will happen to gas prices and I don’t control them, I only control, together with my wonderful Team, the products for our Customers.
    Prices of fuel will change and the needs of the market will change, this is why we have an excellent business Team to watch the market and ensure we are meeting the Customer’s needs.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  901. Andrea Rossi

    IC Renoir:
    I am not able to provide any information at this time and any information will be shared publicly when appropriate.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  902. Curiosone

    Let me put a hypothetical question: if the oil price will go down enough to make the E-Cat not convenient, what do you think will happen to your and Industrial Heat’s enterprise?
    WG

  903. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    As this is a hypothetical question, my only response would be to guess, which is not something I wish to be on the record about.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  904. Wladimir Guglinski

    Experiment proposed for the researchers of the Martin Fleischman Memorial Project
    https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/posts/886318188065548?comment_id=886327334731300&offset=0&total_comments=8&notif_t=feed_comment

    But it seems they have no money so that to perform the experiment.

    ========================================================
    THE ALIGNMENT OF NUCLEI AS INDISPENSABLE PRE REQUISITE FOR THE COLD FUSION OCCURRENCE CAN BE TESTED BY EXPERIMENT, as follows:

    1- Fleischmann-Pons experiment will be performed in two different vessels A and B

    2- In both vessels will be used an external source of magnetic field, so that to eliminate the influence of the magnetic fields of the Earth and the Sun

    3 – Magnetic pulses cannot be used in any of the two vessels A and B, in order DO ONT EXCITE the nuclei in both experiments

    4- The vessel A will be filled with the isotope 105Pd and deuterium. As the nucleus 105Pd has nuclear magnetic moment, the 105 Pd nuclei will be aligned toward the vector magnetic field, and the cold fusion must occur .

    5- The vessel B will be filled with the isotopes 102Pd, 104Pd, 106Pd, 108Pd, 110Pd, and deuterium. As all those nuclei have null magnetic moment, and as they will not be excited (because there is not magnetic pulses applied), they cannot be aligned toward the vector magnetic field, and therefore COUD FUSION CANNOT OCCUR.
    ========================================================

    .
    REPLY BY MFMP:

    Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project : Given that Pure Pd is over $5833 100g, where do you propose one gets affordable 105Pd?

    Wlad Guglinski dont you think to be important in order to decypher the cold fusion mystery?

    Wlad Guglinski The 105Pd natural abundance is 22, 23%. In the case my theory is correct, and MFMP decides to perform the experiment, there is need to take care, because in this version of the Fleischmann-Pons experiment the energy created by cold fusion will be 5 times greater

    .

    Comment by me here in JoNP:

    So, anyone who is trying to explain cold fusion thinks that there is need only of proposing the nuclear reactions, and the energy produced in each of the reactions.

    Nobody wishes to realize that there is need to understand the cold fusion mechanisms occurring in the phenomenon.

    It is like to want to understand how the planets are attracted by the Sun, without to know the existence of the gravitation.

  905. JCRenoir

    Dear Dr Rossi,
    We all would like to have more information about the 1 MW plant dlivered to the customer months ago!
    Godspeed,
    JCRenoir

  906. Stefano Landi

    Dear Andrea. Please give us an update on the e-cat / e-mouse system you talked months ago.
    Kind regards
    Stefano

  907. Andrea Rossi

    Stefano Landi:
    As you correctly write, I talked months ago of this issue and I have nothing to add to this matter, in general.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  908. Brandon Hurd

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    Has Industrial Heat informed President Obama about the E-Cat? If so, did you get a formal response?

    If not, don’t you believe the U.S. government will want to be involved with the technology when it is ready for mass roll-out in the market?

    Regards
    Brandon Hurd

  909. Andrea Rossi

    Brandon Hurd:
    I am not involved in this kind of issues, but I am sure that Industrial Heat has given all the due information where it is opportune and proper.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  910. Greg Leonard

    Dear AR and Rodney Nicholson,
    To heat an object, the heat source needs to be a some significant higher temperature.
    I can imagine that a gas powered burner would work fine here.
    What I am unsure about is whether the temperature difference between the ‘heater’ ecat and the ‘heated’ ecat will be enough to get the ‘heated’ ecat into self-sustain mode.

    I imagine the gas powered ecat would be extremely useful when the output requirement is simply heat, and in a place far from the electric grid.
    Greg Leonard

  911. Andrea Rossi

    Greg Leonard:
    Surely the heat production for direct use of heat is the more efficient, for the first and second thermodynamic principle.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  912. Steven N. Karels

    Alessandro,

    I recently purchased a Chevy Volt. It requires 12 Amps of 115VAC input power for 10 hours to completely charge the car’s batteries and this results in a range of about 30 miles. So a likewise continuous charge rate might yield a daily range of about 70 miles. This charging rate is equivalent to an electric output rate of 1.3 kW. Assuming typical Carnot efficiencies means a thermal generation of around 4kW. With a COP of 3, then I would guess a 10kW eCat could provide enough power for one vehicle with a daily range of 70 miles. A substantially larger eCat would be required for continuous long distance traveling. But this says the numbers are close. Getting rid of excess heat might be a problem but I suspect could be engineered to handle it.

  913. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    Yes, I too think that batteries could be a storage .
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  914. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I think it is more than just energy cost economics. The use of batteries to store energy is more applicable to temporal energy sources such as photovoltaic or wind sources – batteries would store electrical energy during the time when the energy source is not available. Not so with the eCat which, by its nature, can run continuously for months at a time. The eCat is best suited for Baseline (continuous) electrical generation. The only way I see electricity could be used to provide the input energy for eCat operation (besides control) is if the cost of electricity becomes so low as to be much cheaper than natural gas.

  915. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    All this issue is intriguing, even if not in the immediate future.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  916. Alessandro Coppi

    To complete the idea of Paul, when the car is parking, it will be connected to the grid and upload energy.

  917. Andrea Rossi

    Alessandro Coppi:
    Interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  918. Paul

    Andrea,

    The quickest way to a legal e-cat powered car is to have a suitcase sized e-cat electrical generator (mini-turbine + Generator, Stirling engine + generator, or e-cat direct conversion) in your trunk, recharging the car’s batteries (while at the same time using the batteries to power the e-cat). Since, unlike the car, the e-cat would run 24/7 it could be lower power than the car engine.

    Paul

  919. Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Thank you for your idea.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  920. Giovanni

    Dear Dott. Rossi
    interesting development at: Zenn Motor / EEStorrFanFib
    Best regards and happy Christmas and New Year!
    Giovanni

  921. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni:
    Thank you for the information,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  922. Steven N. Karels

    Frank and Andrea,

    I guess I am not seeing the advantage of high efficiency batteries when generating electricity. Andrea Rossi previously posted that part of the reason of going to gas-power eCats as opposed to self-powering them using produced electricity was the relatively low cost of natural gas compared to the price of generated electricity.

    Even if a high efficiency battery was 100% efficient, it would be no better than using electricity produced by an eCat system to feed-back the power as input to the eCat system. The previous argument on natural gas powered eCats was why consume a precious product such as electricity for heating the eCats when natural gas could do the job at a much cheaper cost per thermal unit. I fail to see why batteries would change this argument.

  923. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Good point, but, as I said, this is just matter of energy price.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  924. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    There is a lot of effort being expended these days into producing better batteries, and other energy storage devices that can be charged by ‘free’ fuels like solar and wind.

    For example, Tesla Motors’ gigafactory (currently under construction) which will manufacture batteries for electric cars is planned to be powered solely by a combination of solar, wind and geothermal.

    What are your thoughts on the possibility having battery driven E-Cats?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  925. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    It is an interesting idea: under a theoretical and technological point of view, I do not see why not. The issue is in the price: if the electric energy supplied by batteries will be competitive with other sources, the coupling between high efficiency batteries and the E-Cats will be surely possible. Have you an idea of the cost per kWh supplied by this new generation of batteries? I am curious.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  926. Regarding:

    Andrea Rossi
    December 17th, 2014 at 3:31 PM
    Koen Vandewalle:
    The gas fueled Hot Cat is a logic evolution of the Hot Cat, due to obvious economic considerations.
    Warm regards
    A.R.

    While it appears some electrical stimulation is essential for the functioning of the Ecat, might it be possible in a multiple unit system for the energy required to heat units not in self-sustain mode to be provided by heat from the units in self-sustain mode? This way, from the heat input point of view, the entire device would be self sufficient and a gas supply would not be necessary? No doubt you have already considered this.

    Rodney Nicholson.

  927. Andrea Rossi

    Rodney Nicholson:
    We are considering this, as you correctly write.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  928. Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,

    Is the original idea of a Gas-Cat yours, based on an industrial need that you have knowledge of ? Or was it an initiative of one of your (potential) customers ?

    It differs a lot from the original E-Cat and the Hot-Cat.

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  929. Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    The gas fueled Hot Cat is a logic evolution of the Hot Cat, due to obvious economic considerations.
    Warm regards
    A.R.

  930. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi ,
    I enclose a very interesting article on one of the first applications that could have the Hot Cat in Italy ie DISTRICT HEATING .
    3 million inhabitants in Italy using heat .
    The Hot Cat would be the ideal system to reduce the cost of heating, cooling and domestic hot water .

    http://www.edilportale.com/news/2014/12/risparmio-energetico-e-sostenibilita/il-teleriscaldamento-in-italia-serve-3-milioni-di-abitanti_43090_27.html

  931. Andrea Rossi

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

  932. Curiosone

    Dr Rossi, thank you for your answer, as usual, but probably you wrote a typo: photons interact with the electromagnetic force!
    W.G.

  933. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Wrong.
    Photons carry electromagnetic force, but they are electrically neutral, therefore cannot interact with the electromagnetic force!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  934. georgehants

    Dear Mr Rossi, you say that you are far ahead of most of your competition.
    Are you taking into account that for many years you had a very small team working on your Research and that now, those who are clever enough to see the potential of your discovery can put many hands to work.
    Would this not mean that the competition could catch you up in a very short time.
    Best wishes

  935. Andrea Rossi

    Georgehants:
    You are right, but we are working at the maximum of our possibilities, independently from what can happen outside. We must think that our competition is as strong as we are, if not better, and act consequently, true or not as it may be.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  936. Curiosone

    Dr Rossi:
    Can you explain which are the forces felt by the different particles?
    W.G.

  937. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    quarks: Electromagnetism (E), Strong (S) , Weak(W), Gravitation (G) , Higgs (H)
    charged leptons: E, W, G, H
    neutrinos: W, G, H
    photons: G
    gluons: S, G
    W+ W- : E, W, G, H
    Z: W, G, H
    graviton: G
    Higgs: W, G, H
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  938. DTravchenko

    Will you attend the ICCF of Padua (Italy) in April ?
    DT

  939. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    I will not be able to attend, because in that period I will be in the USA in symbiosis with the 1 MW plant. I take this chance to say that I wish the greatest success to all the scientists of the ICCF.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  940. keV

    Dear Ing. Rossi,

    Concerning the longevity of the fuel – have you tried vibrating the fuel contents during self-sustain mode to see what effect this vibration has on the reaction. For some reason I have this vision of it only being the surface atoms facing the Hydrogen that are reacting (due to the relatively small amount of powder charge actually consumed) and thought that vibrations may bring fresh material to the top. If the vibration does lengthen the overall output time of a single charge, in the 1MW reactor, single charges could be vibrated in sequence (say one individual charge per day) without decreasing the overall real-time output of the whole 1MW plant significantly whilst extending the charge longevity of all the individual e-cat units.

    Of course all this would depend on vibration making a beneficial difference to longevity of charge power output :¬)

    Just a rambling(and no doubt ignorant)thought; a little different from the usual questions you get these days though!

    Regards,
    Kev

  941. Andrea Rossi

    Kev:
    As you know, I cannot give information regarding the fuel, either in positive or in negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  942. ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi, in a radio important Italian is spoken of ‘ E -cat and the last experiment . You can listen to the interview with Professor Bo Höistad , professor of nuclear physics at Uppsala University , who participated in the experiment .
    Readers who follow her around the world , can read the transcript of what he said the professor on the link below . Congratulations

    http://www.radio24.ilsole24ore.com/player.php?channel=2&idpuntata=gSLAFnX5p&date=2014-12-12&idprogramma=smart-city

    http://22passi.blogspot.it/2014/12/il-ritorno-delle-cat-su-radio24.html

  943. Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Thank you: very interesting.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  944. Giovanni

    Dear Dott. Rossi
    in a previous post of mine, I was pointing to the news (E-Cat world) that the Prime Minister of the Republic of Italy has today (12.12.2014) awarded its High Patronage to the ICCF-19 event. The post has not passed the moderation, perhaps because of the link I have inserted.
    Something is moving…
    My best regards

  945. Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni:
    As I already said, our work of the last 4 years has moved the giants.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  946. Dima Redko

    Dear Andrea,
    How do you think, if the oil prices will continue to fall as fast as they do, will your technology still be competitive when it is finally released, considering the much cheaper oil, gas, and electricity and the high price of 1MW plant 1.5M USD?

  947. Andrea Rossi

    Dima Redko:
    The history of oil prices is a roller coaster…I have not the cristal ball.
    The price of the E-Cat will be adjusted to the market by mass production, in due time.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  948. Herb Gillis

    Andrea Rossi:
    Do you think it would be possible (in principle) to achieve the Rossi Effect in a fully liquid medium [such as a molten metal, metal compound; or molten salt], or is the solid state also a fundamental requirement for the Effect?
    Kind Regards; HRG.

  949. Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gillis:
    Sorry, I cannot answer this kind of questions.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  950. eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    What amazes me is the fact that you have been able to keep the recipient and the location of your delivered unit a secret this long. Even the Manhattan project, one of the most guarded government secrets, had a Russian spy who was divulging information about the atomic project back to Moscow. You must have a very loyal crew(at least 25 indicated by your blogs)who have not succumbed to the possible temptation of easy money or sharing information with an intimate acquaintance. Almost as miraculous as your machine!
    Silent regards.

  951. Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    You are right: our Team is fantastic, also under this point of view.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  952. Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Has your customer been able to use any of the heat you have been making for useful purposes yet?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  953. Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    All I am authorized to say is that the plant has been delivered. Due information regarding the operation will be given in due time.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  954. orsobubu

    Chi fa la spia non è figlio di Maria non è figlio di Gesù quando muore va laggiù

  955. Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    For those of us who love to do independent analyses — Can you tell us the approximate mass of the fuel going into the 100+ reactors for the 1 MW thermal unit? Can we assume a 1 gram fuel mass per reactor?

  956. Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    Due information will be given at the end of the test, with exception of information restricted to those that have the right on it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  957. Robert Curto

    Dear Wladimir Guglinski,
    I read in some blogs you are complaining that Dr. Andrea Rossi has spammed your comments to sway the attention to the fact that you have discovered how the E-Cat works, you also have accused him of giving wrong information, to not allow anybody to explain how the E-Cat works !
    Excuse me, but all this is ridiculous. First of all Dr. Andrea Rossi has always
    said he does not want , or cannot talk about the mechanism that makes the
    Rossi Effect, so he swayed nothing, just said he cannot give this kind of information, secondly he repeatedly said that he does not agree with your theories and that they have nothing to do with the E-Cat, and also he has repeatedly said he adheres to the Standard Model.
    He always gently hosted your comments and published your articles, that all the other Magazines have always refused. He offered you unlimited space on his blog.
    Now he spams several comments of yours, and you insult him !
    I think that anyone with thinking faculty can understand that he spammed your comments because, as I read on the other blog, you have mixed up your theories and the E-Cat connected theory.
    With the E-Cat he probably wants not to involve your theories.
    I would like to hear from Dr. Andrea Rossi, if I have guessed correctly.
    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale Florida
    USA

  958. Bob

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    For the 1 MW plant now in operation, can you tell us whether:

    1. Fuel has been added or removed since the plant began operation.

    2. If there has been no fuel added or removed, is there a time before the expiration of the one year operating period when fuel addition or removal is planned.

    3. Whether the quantity of fuel used has met or not met your expectations for fuel consumed.

    Thanks

    Bob

  959. Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    One of the things we have to test is the duration of a charge under the stress of a 1 MW plant in a long period. We plan not to change the charge until we have a decrease of efficiency, to check which is its real duration under stress. Due information about this issue will be given at the end of the test, probably within one year. Good question.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  960. Robert Curto

    Drs. Joseph Fine and Andrea Rossi, thanks for all your help in getting Roger
    Green’s excellent website on the JoNP.
    I hope if the Readers subscribe to his Newsletter, they will enjoy it as much as I do.
    Thanks to you both,
    (and with a little help from God)
    Robert Curto

  961. Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gills:
    The issue is much more complex than you say; isotopic shifts are caused by reactions and themselves cause further reactions, about which, obviously, I cannot give information, as I wrote many times.
    The role of hydrogen is foundamental. All I meant is just that the main nuclear reactions are not necessarily fusion.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  962. Herb Gillis

    Andrea Rossi:
    Since you believe the energy source in the Ecat is isotopic shifts, can you give us any guidance at all about the role the hydrogen plays? Do you think that at some point the hydrogen could be eliminated?
    Kind Regards;
    HRG.

  963. DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Congratulations for your interview with Salvo TV, that I managed to translate with a friend of mine who speaks Italian. About the part in which you talk of the Universities: which university you think is the best in Italy to study Physics?
    Warm Regards,
    DT

  964. Andrea Rossi

    DTravchenko:
    Should a Russian come to Italy to study Physics, I’d suggest him the Alma Mater of Bologna.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  965. JCRenoir

    Do you think that Aether exists ?

  966. Andrea Rossi

    JC Renoir:
    No.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  967. Curiosone

    Dr Rossi:
    What do you suggest, regarding the LENR, to a university student of Phyisics? What would you suggest him to read?
    W.G.

  968. Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    To a University student of Physics I suggest to let alone LENR and study Physics as his Professors teach the matter to him. What a student has to do is to learn as much as possible and as well as possible . Most University Prof of Physics are very good teachers; I have known many of them, even many that think LENR can’t work, and all of them have a very solid knowledge of Physics foundamentals. The period students spend in University is one of the foundamental pillars of their future, and they have not to play with this fact. First of all they have to learn, and to learn they have to study. I would say that to study at least 6 hours per day, plus the time of the lessons is a good rythm. This does not leave much time to make other things seriously. After they will have got the degree, at that point they can look for diversifications. Example: Picasso has been able to become the Picasso we usually refer to after learning to paint as a Raffaello in the Art Academy he attended; that’s how eventually he became Picasso.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  969. Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you for the correction,
    Warm regards,
    A.R.

  970. Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe,
    I think I finally discovered how occurs the capture of the pair electron-positron by the proton when it is accelerated toward the Ni nucleus in the Rossi-Effect.

    The mechanism is caused by a combination between the disturbance in the helical trajectory of the proton and a shrinkage-dilation in the orbit of the electron 2s1.

    It happens as shown in the Figure bellow:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Shrinkage_of_the_electron%27s_orbit_in_the_Ni-3Li7.png

    FIG. 1:
    Before the Ni and 3Li7 are coupled along the z-axis, the orbit of the 2s1 electron has a small radius, because the orbit is situated in the 3Li7.

    FIG. 2:
    When Ni and 3Li7 are coupled, the orbit of the 2s1 is shared by the two electrospheres of Ni and 3Li7. As the electrosphere of Ni is larger, the orbit of 2s1 has a dilation.

    FIG. 3:
    The orbit 2s1 begins to attract the proton, and the proton begins to attract the orbit 2s1, and therefore the proton is pulling the orbit toward the 3Li7 nucleus.
    At the same time, the component Ft begins to cause a shrinkage in the orbit 2s1:
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:Acceleration_on_the_proton_by_electron_orbit_in_Rossi-Effect.png
    Therefore the orbit 2s1 has displacement toward the 3Li7 nucleus, while the orbit also experiences a shrinkage.

    FIG. 4:
    The orbit 2s1 continues to have shrinkage, and a displacement along the 3Li7 nucleus. The shrinkage and the displacement occur discretely (proportional to multiples of Planck’s constant)

    FIG. 5:
    Finally, the proton crosses the plane of the orbit 2s1.
    Well, then now the proton is pulling the orbit 2s1 toward the Ni nucleus.
    So immediately the orbit 2s1 experiences a large displacement going to take its initial position, like it had earlier in the FIG. 2, and therefore the orbit experiences a very big dilation.
    The large dilation of the orbit 2s1 captures a pair positron-electron from the aether, the proton captures the electron, and the positron is emitted.

    The phenomenon occurs similarly as happens in the atom, when the electron jumps from an energy level to another one. When the elecron jumps, the atom captures a pair “particle-antiparticle” from the aether (the photon), and the atom emits the photon.

    regards
    wlad

  971. ing. Michelangelo De Meo