By prof. Christos Stremmenos
After several years of apparent inaction, the theme of cold fusion has been recently revitalized thanks to, among others, the work and the scientific publications of Focardi and Rossi, which has been conducted in silence, amidst ironical disinterest, without any funding or support. In fact, recently, practical and reliable results have been achieved based on a very promising apparatus invented by Andrea Rossi. Therefore I want to examine the possibility of further development of this technology, which I deem really important for our planet.
Introduction
I will start with patent no./2009/125444, registered by Dr. Ing. Andrea Rossi. This invention and its performance have been tested and verified in collaboration with Prof. Sergio Focardi, as reported in their paper, published in February 2010 in the Journal of Nuclear Physics [1]. In that scientific paper they have reported on the performance of an apparatus, which has produced for two years substantial amounts of energy in a reliable and repeatable mode and they have also offered a theoretical analysis for the interpretation of the underlying physical mechanism.
In the history of Science, it is not the first time that a practical and reliable apparatus is working before its theoretical foundation has been completely understood! The photoelectric effect is the classic example in which the application has anticipated its full theoretical interpretation, developed by Einstein. Afterwards Einstein, Plank, Heisenberg, De Broglie, Schrödinger and others formulated the principles of Quantum Mechanics. For the interactive Nickel/Hydrogen system it would be now opportune to compile, in a way easily understood by the non expert the relevant principles and concepts for the qualitative understanding of the phenomenon. Starting with the behavior of electrically charged particles in vacuum, it is known that particles with opposite electric charge attract themselves and “fuse” producing an electrically neutral particle, even though this does not always happen, as for instance in the case of a hydrogen atom, where a proton and a electron although attract each other they do not “fuse”, for reasons that will be explained later. On the contrary, particles charged with electric charge of the same sign always repel each other, and their repulsion tends to infinity when their distance tends to zero, which implies that in this case fusion is not possible (classical physics).
On the contrary, according to Quantum mechanics, for a system with a great number of particles of the same electric charge (polarity) it is possible that a few of them will fuse, as for instance, according to Focardi-Rossi, in the case of Nickel nuclei in crystal structure and hydrogen nuclei (protons) diffused within it, Although of the same polarity, a very small percentage of these nuclei manage to come so close to each other, at a distance of 10-14 m, where strong nuclear forces emerge and take over the Coulomb forces and thus form the nucleus of a new element, either stable or unstable.
This mechanism, which is possible only in the atomic microcosm, is predictable by a quantum-mechanics model of a particle put in a closed box. According to classical physics no one would expect to find a particle out of the box, but in quantum mechanics the probability of a particle to be found out of the box is not zero! This is the so called “tunneling effect”, which for systems with a very large number of particles, predicts that a small percentage of them lie outside the box, having penetrated the “impenetrable” walls and any other present barrier through the “tunnel”! In our case, the barrier is nothing else but the electrostatic repulsion, to which the couples of hydrogen and nickel nuclei (of the same polarity) are subjected and is called Coulomb barrier.
Diffusion mechanism of hydrogen in nickel: Nickel as a catalyst first decomposes the biatomic molecules of hydrogen to hydrogen atoms in contact with the nickel surface. Then these hydrogen atoms deposit their electrons to the conductivity band of the metal (Fermi band) and due to their greatly reduced volume, compared to that of their atom, the hydrogen nuclei readily diffuse into the crystalline structure of the nickel, including its defects. At this point, in order to understand the phenomenon it is necessary to briefly describe the structure both of the nickel atom and the nickel crystal lattice.
It is well known that the nickel atom is not so simple as the hydrogen atom, as its nucleus consists of dozens of protons and neutrons, thus it is much heavier and exerts a proportionally higher electrostatic repulsion than the nucleus of hydrogen, which consists of only one proton. In this case, the electrons, numerically equal to the protons, are ordered in various energy levels and cannot be easily removed from the atom to which they belong. Exception to this rule is the case of electrons of the chemical bonds, which along with the electrons of the hydrogen atoms form the metal conductivity band (electronic cloud), which moves quasi freely throughout the metal mass.
As in all transition metals, the nickel atoms in the solid state, and more specifically their nuclei, are located at the vertices and at the centre of the six faces of the cubic cell of the metal, leaving a free internal octahedral space within the cell, which, on account of the quasi negligible volume of the nuclei, is practically filled with electrons of the nickel atoms, as well as with conductivity electrons.
It would be really interesting to know the electrons’ specific density (number of electrons per unit volume) and its spatial distribution inside this octahedral space of the crystal lattice as a function of temperature.
Dynamics of the lattice vibration states
Another important aspect to take into consideration in this system is the dynamics of the lattice vibration states, in other words, the periodic three dimensional normal oscillations of the crystal lattice (phonons) of the nickel, which hosts hydrogen nuclei or nuclei of hydrogen isotopes (deuterium or tritium) that have entered into the above mentioned free space of the crystal cell.
It could be argued that the electrons’ specific density and its spatial distribution in the internal space of the crystal structure should be coherent with the natural frequencies of the lattice oscillations. This means that the periodicity of the electronic cloud within the octahedral space of the elementary crystal cell of Nickel generates an oscillating strengthening of shielding of the diffused nuclei of hydrogen or deuterium which also populate this space.
I believe that these considerations can form the basis for a qualitative analysis of this “NEW SOURCE OF ENERGY” and the phenomenology related to cold fusion, including energy production in much smaller quantities and various reaction products.
Shielding of protons by electrons
In the Focardi-Rossi paper the shielding of protons provided by electrons is suspected to be one of the main reasons of the effect, helping the capture of protons by the Ni nucleus, therefore generating energy by fusion of protons in Nickel and a series of exothermic nuclear reactions, leaving as by-product isotopes different from the original Ni (transmutations). Such shielding is one of the elements contributing to the energetic efficiency of the system. From this derives the opportunity, I think, to focus upon this shielding, both to increase its efficiency and to verify the hypothesis contained in the paper of Focardi-Rossi. Of course, what we are talking of here is a theoretical verification, because the practical verification is made by monitoring the performance of the apparatus invented and patented by Andrea Rossi, presently under rigorous verification by many independent university researchers.
In my opinion, the characteristics of the shielding of the proton from the electrons should be defined, as well as the “radiometric” behavior of the system.
In other words, the following two questions should be answered:
- Which is the supposed mechanism that overcomes the powerful electrostatic repulse (Coulomb barrier) between the “shielded proton” and the Nickel nucleus?
- For what reason there is almost no radiation of any kind (experimental observation), while according to the Focardi and Rossi’s hypothesis there should have been some γ radiation (511 KeV) produced by the predicted annihilation of the β+ and β- particles that are being created during the Fusion?
I believe that some thoughts based on general and elementary structures, data and principles of universal scientific acceptance, might shed some light to this exciting phenomenon. More specific, I refer to Bohr’s hydrogen atom, the speed of nuclear reactions (10-20 sec) and the Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg.
I will take Bohr’s hydrogen atom as a starting point (figure 1a), which stays at its fundamental state forever in the absence of external perturbations, due to De Broglie’s wave, accompanying the sole electron.
As stated before, in contact with the metal, these atoms lose their fundamental state, as their electrons are being transmitted to the conductivity band. These electrons, together with the “naked nuclei” of hydrogen (protons), form a freely moving cloud of charges (plasma at a degenerate state) inside the crystalline lattice. That cloud is being defused through the surface to the polycrystallic mass of the metal, covering empty spaces of the non-canonical structure of the crystalline lattice, as well as the tetrahedral and octahedral spaces between the molecules. As a consequence, the crystalline structure is covered by “delocalized plasma” (degenerate state), which is consisted by protons, electrons produced by the “absorbed atoms” of hydrogen, as well as by the electrons of the chemical valence of Nickel of the lattice, at different energy states (Fermi’s band). (Fig. 2)
Fig.1b
In this system, if one considers the probability of the creation inside the crystalline lattice of temporary (not at the fundamental state) “pseudo-atoms” of hydrogen with neutral charge, for example at a time of the order of 10ˆ-17 sec, then that possibility is not completely ill-founded. (Fig 1b)
Fig.2
According to the Uncertainty Principle of Heisenberg, the temporary atoms of hydrogen will cover during that small time interval Δt, a wide range of energies ΔΕ, which means also a wide range of atomic diameters of temporary atoms, satisfying the De Broglie’s condition. A percentage of them (at fist a very small one) might have diameters smaller than 10ˆ-14 m, which is the maximum active radius of nuclear reactions. In that case, the chargeless temporary atoms, or mini-atoms, of hydrogen together with high energy but short lived electrons, are being statistically trapped by the Nickel nuclei at a time of 10ˆ-20 sec. In other words, the high speed of nuclear reactions permits the fusion of short lived but neutral mini-atoms of hydrogen with the Nickel nuclei of the crystalline lattice, as during that short time interval the Coulomb barrier (of the specific hydrogen mini-atom) does not exist.
Afterwards, it follows a procedure similar to the one described by Focardi and Rossi, but instead of considering the capture of a shielded proton by the Ni58 nucleus, we adopt the hypothesis of trapping a neutral temporary atom, or a mini atom, of hydrogen (with a diameter less than 10ˆ-14 m) which transforms the Ni58 nucleus into Cu59 (copper/59, short lived isotope*).
It follows the predicted “β decay” of the nuclei of the short lived isotope of copper, accompanied by the emission of β+ (positrons) and β- (perhaps the electrons of the mini atoms trapped inside that nucleus during the fusion). These particles are being annihilated with an emission of γ radiation (two photons of γ of energy 511 KeV each, for every couple of β+ and β-).
In other words, whoever has experimented with this system should have suffered the not-so-harmless influence of those radiations, but that never happened. The radioactivity measured at the experiments is almost zero and easily shielded.
In any case, a rigorous, in my opinion, theoretical approach for the interpretation of that phenomenon with quantum mechanical terms, would give clear quantitative answers to the above stated models. With my Colleges of theoretical chemistry, we are already planning to face the problem using the time-depended quantum mechanical perturbation theory, bearing in mind the following:
- The total wave function (of the nucleus and the electrons) of temporarily, non-stable states.
- The total time-depended Hamiltonian, for temporarily states.
- Searching for the resonance conditions at that system.
Such an approach had a successful outcome at a similar problem of theoretical chemistry and we hope that it will be valid in this case as well.
Let’s go back to the intuitive, with ideal models, approach, in order to give a qualitative explanation for the (almost) absent radiations of the system, by using:
- First of all the Boltzmann’s distribution (especially at the asymptotic area of high energies).
- The photoelectric effect
- The Compton effect
- The Mössbauer effect
We have already mentioned that from the temporary mini atoms of hydrogen, the ones with diameter less than 10ˆ-14 m, have a larger probability of fusion. But, in order for them to be created, high energy bond electrons should exist at the “delocalized plasma” of the crystalline lattice.
1. Boltzmann’s statistics:
There are reasons to believe that the H/Ni system, at first at temperatures of about 400-500oC, contains a very small percentage of electrons in the “delocalized plasma” with enough energy to create (together with the diffused protons), according to the wave-particle duality principle, the first temporary mini atoms of hydrogen, that will trigger the fusion with the nickel nuclei and the production of high energy γ photons (511 KeV).
2. Photoelectric Effect:
It is not possible, the HUGE amount of energy (in kW/h), that the Rossi/Focardi reactor produces, as measured by unrelated scientists in repeated demonstrations (at one of them by the writer and his colleagues, Fig 3), to be created due to the thermalization of the insignificant number of γ photons at the beginning of the reaction.
Fig.3
I believe that, as stated above, these photons are the trigger of fusion at a multiplicative series, based on the photoelectric effect inside the crystalline structure.
The two γ photons can export symmetrically (180°) two electrons from the nearest Nickel atoms. The stimulation, due to the high energy of γ, concerns electrons of internal bands of two different atoms of the lattice and has as a prerequisite the absorption of all the energy of the photon. A small part of that energy is being consumed for the export of the electron from the atom and the rest is being transformed into kinetic energy of the electron (thermal energy).
The result of that procedure is to enrich the “delocalized plasma” with high energy electrons that will contribute multiplicatively (by a factor of two) at the progress of the cold fusion nuclear reactions of hydrogen and nickel and at the same time transform the hazardous γ radiation into useful thermal energy.
3. The Compton Scattering:
It gives the additional possibility of multiplication, this time due to secondary photons γ, in a wide range of frequencies, as a function of the angular deviation from the direction of the initial photon of 511 keV. That has as a result the increase of the export of electrons, due to the photoelectric phenomenon at the crystalline mass, in many energy/kinetic levels, which gives an additional possibility of converting the γ radiation into useful thermal energy.
4. The Mössbauer effect:
It gives another possible way of absorbing the γ radiation and transforming it into thermal energy. It is based on the principle of conservation of momentum at the regression of the new Cu59 nucleus/ from the emission of a γ photon. Relative calculations (Dufour) showed that this mechanism has an insignificant (1%) contribution.
It follows that, according to given data, the Photoelectric phenomenon and the Compton Effect, could explain the absence of radiations in the Focardi-Rossi system, which, from the amount of producing energy versus the consumption of Ni and H2, as well as from the experimental observation of element transformations, lead undoubtedly to the acceptance of hydrogen cold fusion.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The author wishes to acknowledge Aris Chatzichristos for the contribution in formulating this paper in English
References:
(1)www. journal-of-nuclear-physics.com /Focardi Rossi/ (A new energy source from nuclear fusion)
* I believe that the phasmatometric tracing of copper is the most definitive sign of nuclear fusion: From the relative bibliography (HANDBOOK OF CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS, 66TH edition), it follows that the stable non radioactive isotopes of nickel are the following five:
58, 60, 61, 62 and 64. These, when fused with a hydrogen nucleus, are being transmuted relatively to Cu-59, Cu-61, Cu-62, Cu-63 and Cu-65. From these isotopes of copper only the last two (Cu-63 and Cu-65) are not radioactive, i.e. they are stable. The other three Cu-59, Cu-61, Cu-62, are being transmuted again to Nickel, with an average life expectancy of some hours and the most unstable Cu-59 in 18 seconds.
By prof. Christos Stremmenos
Dear Mr. Rossi,
You mention that 500 degree Celcius is the maximum temperature you are sble to achieve for intrisic reasons. Do you see this as being the maximum temp you will be able to achieve with this Ni-H reaction forever? Or do you think with more engineering and devlopment this could be increased?
Thank you very much!
Best regards,
Frank
OK,
I understand that you can not discuss the details surounding the catalyst.
But will you later be able to discuss this, or will this part forever be a company secret?
And is not the catalyst function important for the theoretical physics explanation behind it all?
Dear Koen Vandewalle:
If you ask not to public a comment, I will not public it. Otherwise it is automatically published.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Tomasz Rojewski:
Yes, it is summary time. If you turn off you do not comsume Ni.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Fabio Sanzani,
Thank you and AUGUSI to your sister!
Warm regards,
A.R.
Tanti auguri! In ritardo …, adesso so che compie gli anni nello stesso giorno di mia sorella.
Ancora auguri ed in bocca al lupo!
F.Sanzani
Dear Mr. Andrea Rossi
You said that on 100g of Ni Your reactor works for half year.
is it summary time? for example if I want to provide heat for my apartament only for 6h per day can I just turn off reactor every day?
total opereting time is still six months?
Warm Regards
Tomasz Rojewski
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Andrea,
Are you the first person in line to read and moderate this website? Can I write things here without beïng published ?
Kind regards,
Koen Vandewalle
Dear Mr Jason:
max 50 bars.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Michael:
Thank you!
Warm regards,
A.R.
Caro Enrico Maria Podesta’:
Grazie infinite,
A.R.
Dear Mr Lande:
I cannot give info regarding the catalysts.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Michael L:
I cannot fove this information.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Wladimir Guglinski:
Unfortunately I cannot go over 500 Celsius, for intrinsic reasons.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi wrote:
“Dear Mr Paul Esteban:
The Sterling engine needs temp. above 700 Celsius, we can’t reach them.
Warm regards,
A.R.”
Dear Dr. Rossi,
I think in the future you will be able to make a new SuperE-Cat model, by putting two E-Cat in series into such SuperE-Cat, as follows:
1- in the first stage one E-Cat receives cold water
2- in the second stage the second E-Cat receives 500ºC water coming from the first stage, and so temperatures higher than 500ºC could be obtained.
Is it be viable?
Dear Andrea Rossi,
You wrote that you first purchase the Nickel which has the known proportion of the 5 natural isotopes of Nickel and then you make a special treatment which results in the powder containing only Ni62 and Ni64. And then you use these 2 isotopes for your E-Cat reactor. May I ask you these questions (if it is not too confidential for you to answer):
Do you make an isotope separation of Nickel yourself?
Do you make a special nuclear reaction to the whole 5 isotopes in the Ni powder that results in only these two isotopes, before to put them into the reactor?
Does your reactor make these transmutation alone within the H-Ni reaction?
If not, wouldn’t be easier or cheaper to buy these 2 isotopes already available in the market in powder form?
Best regards,
Michael L
Dear Andrea Rossi,
You wrote that you first purchase the Nickel which has the known proportion of the 5 natural isotopes of Nickel and then you make a special treatment which results in the powder containing only Ni62 and Ni64. And then you use thise 2 isotopes for your E-Cat reactor. May I ask you these questions, if it is not too confidential for you answer:
Do you make an isotope separation of Nickel yourself?
Do you make a special nuclear reaction to the whole 5 isotopes in the Ni powder that results in only these two isotopes, before to put them into the reactor?
Does your reactor make these transmutation alone within the H-Ni reaction?
If not, wouldn’t be easier or cheaper to buy these 2 isotopes already available in the market in powder form?
Best regards,
Michael L
Dear mr. Rossi
Congratulations with this exciting emerging technology!
Rearding the “catalyst”:
1. Is the primary function of this compound to split H2 to H+ ions or what more does it do?
2. Is this material and it’s function known to science or is this also part of this new discovery and is not yet fully explained in physics?
regards and good luck to your Company!
Tanti auguri! Buon compleanno!! E buona fortuna!!!
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Kudos to you and your partner Sergio Focardi for your all the research and hard work you have done all these years despite all the opposition from mainstream scientists and corporate media. I’m so glad that your prototype is now ready for market production.
I wish you all the success in this challenging enterprise towards this safe, clean, cheap and abundant nuclear source of energy.
Best regards,
Michael
what is the steam pressure your generating.
Dear Augustin L. Gonzalez:
500 Celsius
Warm regards,
A.R.
Hello Mr. Rossi
What is the heighter temperature of steam achieved by the E-cat?
Dear Andrea Rossi,
thanks a lot for beeing so open and communicative, it is a pleasure to follow the latest developments and your answers here. Concerning the production of electrical energy from your device, did you have a look into the latest developments from BSST? Big car manufactures are putting lots of money into producing electrical energy from waste heat:
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/37621/?p1=A3&a=f
I think this technology could be applicable to your device.
kind regards,
Martin
Hello Mr. Rossi,
The theoretical analissys of the nuclei fussion needs resonance of the Ni positive nucleis and the neutral temporary H nucleis. The above explaination is very pausible and complete. There is also a posibility of radio emissions contained within the E-cat metal structure. This is my humble opinion.
Dear Mr Paul Esteban:
We are far from it, and I cannot five these kind of information, so far.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Paul Esteban
I do not think it is necessary, the modular concept is safer.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Paul Esteban:
The Sterling engine needs temp. above 700 Celsius, we can’t reach them.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi, to use a Stirling engine is it possible to put two or more e-cat in series?
Dear Mr. Rossi, by your theory is it possible to project and produce a single 1MW e-cat?
Warm Regards,
Paul Esteban
Dear Mr. Rossi, is this theory quite near to yours?
Elementi in gioco:
nano particelle di Nichel;
idrogeno atomico;
pressione 20-30 bar;
temperatura 400 – 500 gradi C°;
catalizzatore segreto;
Problema: come fa il nucleo dell’idrogeno (un protone) a vincere la repulsione elettrostatica con il nucleo di Nichel (28 protoni) e fondersi con esso.
Principi fisici ipotizzati:
cattura elettronica K;
effetto termoionico;
L’effetto termoionico (causato dal calore generato dalle termo resistenze) indotto in un materiale (il catalizzatore) miscelato alle nano particelle di nichel e all’idrogeno atomico (scisso per la perfusione dell’idrogeno molecolare all’interno del reticolo delle nano particelle di nichel) produce all’interno della miscela una costante nube di elettroni liberi, aumentando così la probabilità di reazioni di cattura K e la formazione di neutroni virtuali, i quali venendosi a trovare a strettissimo contatto con le nano particelle di Nichel ne penetrano i nuclei con una frequenza tale da generare una amplificazione dell’eccesso di calore rispetto al modello già proposto da Piantelli e Focardi.
Fasi del processo di reazione:
La pressione provoca la perfusione dell’idrogeno molecolare all’interno del reticolo delle nano particelle di nichel con la sua conseguente scissione in idrogeno atomico.
La temperatura produce l’effetto termoionico nel materiale cosiddetto catalizzatore (ad esempio ossido di bario) che a sua volta genera la liberazione di elettroni liberi dotati di energia cinetica all’interno della miscela. Per ottimizzare l’emissione termoionica il materiale emettitore o catalizzatore quindi deve essere miscelato alle nano particelle di nichel e all’idrogeno.
La presenza di una forte concentrazione di elettroni intorno agli atomi di idrogeno destabilizza il suo elettrone orbitale avvicinandolo al nucleo e favorendo così la cattura K e la formazione di un neutrone virtuale per un tempo sufficiente alla reazione.
Il neutrone virtuale formatosi per cattura K da parte del protone dell’idrogeno penetra nel nucleo di Nichel senza risentire della barriera di Coulomb e con un successivo decadimento Beta- lo trasforma, o direttamente o attraverso successivi decadimenti dei vari isotopi del nichel, in rame stabile.
N.B. – A conferma di ciò il Prof. Focardi accenna brevemente a particolari comportamenti e camuffamenti di particelle, in questo caso del protone dell’idrogeno, ed esclude quasi del tutto la presenza di decadimenti Beta +, ipotizzando quindi che la reazione provochi solo decadimenti Beta– con emissione di raggi gamma a bassa energia
By Enzo De Angelis on http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=18734659&postID=5587092200339105127&isPopup=true
Warm Regards,
Paul Esteban
Dear Guy Ben-Zvi:
You can contact me at
info@leonardocorp1996.com
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Roger Barker:
In November we will start our commercial activity, open to the market.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Col Andrews:
I do not think E-Cats can be used for this purpose.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Rossi and Focardi,
Congratulations, I have only gust come across your site and E-Cat recently and find your E-Cat fascinating and I wish you all the success with its future development.
I am an engineer and normally net surf about Thorium energy systems, it is such a shame it was tossed over 50 years ago for Uranium reactors.
While most prefer to shun anything nuclear after Fukushima I think the world will have no choice about nuclear energy at least in the short to midterm future – yes even Germany!
Why Thorium?
– the ADS reactor is SUB CRITICAL = stop the power input = stop the reaction = NO MELTDOWN = no Fukushima or Chernobyl
– Thorium is abundant and easy to mine and is 100% used in the reaction
– Thorium reactors can consume weapons grade uranium & plutonium and other high radioactive waste products
– Waste is far less and far less radioactive than current nuclear reactors
– Almost impossible to get weapons grade material from Thorium reactions.
– When developed, have the potential to be modularised and could produce energy at 10% of current costs
Even if your E-Cat fulfils the enormous potential that is has, and I truly hope for the planets sake it does, I believe we will still need Thorium reactors to consume weapons grade uranium & plutonium and other high radioactive waste products. To this end I am writing with 1 question in mind.
The current ADS type Thorium reactor development is hampered by development of high-energy accelerators or cyclotrons, is it possible that the E-Cat reaction could replace the accelerator to provide the neutrons to starter the ADS reactors?
Dear Sir,
It is so good to be able to communicate with you directly. I would like to just confirm your intended time frames for the commercial release of your product. Am I right in saying:
1) The 1MW E-Cat will be available in October but ONLY to your existing customers i.e. Defkalion
2) The 1MW E-Cat will be available on the market for the rest of us from November.
Thanks
Roger Barker PhD
I don’t work for the He Ion division (the microscope is called Orion) but I can get you in contact with the right people or have them contact you. These are very new and very special microscopes, only a handful have been made and sold so far. Very expensive…
I thought you would prefer to have a demo first…
Can we email off line?
Guy
Can you send an offer? I can buy one.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Rossi
If you want access to Zeiss He Ion microscope i can help you.. I am a Managing Director of one of Zeiss companies. Also Ion beam or ebeam microscopes. But These are probably available at the Bologa or upsala universities.
Let me Know if i can help.
Guy
Dear Mr Malcom Lear:
What you are asking for is extremely confidential.
Warm reards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I’m so glad you have confirmed important aspects of your theory in your reply to Mr Charlie Zimmerman. Could I go further and ask if your theory can predict possible reactions involving other elements and if so have you had the time to confirm these.
Again many thanks for your time answering questions in this blog.
Dear Dr Joseph Fine,
Just see the answer to the other comment of yours.
Sorry for the confusion caused reversing.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Charlie Zimmerman:
1- yes
2- yes
3- yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
I reversed: I wrote 135 cubic cm are necessary to have a power of 1 kW.
Or, if you prefer,
the density is 7.4 w/cc
Warm REGARDS,
a.r.
Mr. Rossi,
Amazing progress so far and congratulations on having fully formulated the theory even if it has to be kept a mystery from us:) Hopefully you can provide a little confirmation of some information you have already provided without disclosing your theory.
If I am correct, sir, you are saying that only NI62 and NI64 ‘react’ to form copper – presumably through some process that allows it to pick up the proton of Hydrogen. I also understand that you have a theory to explain what is happening.
* Is my understanding correct that only NI62 and NI64 transmute to copper?
* Does your theory explain why only these two isotopes react.
* Does your theory explain why the resultant Cu63 and Cu65 apparently does not react to produce zinc?
Thanks
A.R.
Hmmm.
On the other hand, this may be a valid number – but in units of cc/kw.
There must be a lot of non-energy producing volume between 300 functioning E-cats.
135 kW/cc is probably erroneous. Perhaps it really is 135 cc/kW!
Since there are 10^6 cc in a cubic meter, you only need 135,000 cc, or 0.135 of a cubic meter, to produce 1 MW.
That is impressive!
J.F.
Dear Mr Paul Esteban:
1- I did not meet Dr Dennis Bushnell
2- I think Dr Bushnell explained his point of view with equilibrium and candor. I appreciate his honest interview. I do not agree upon the theoretical issue, I do not think we have a beta decay, but I will explain my theory after the start up of our 1 MW plant.
I hope Dr Dennis Bushnell will read this comment: this is valid as a voucher to visit ou 1 MW plant in operation.
Thank you, Paul Esteban, for your very useful comments.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
That’s kw/cc. :^)
J.F.
Dear Ivan Antipov:
The maximum power density we can reach so far is 135 cc/kW.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
Thank you for the advice. I will get it.
Warm regards,
A.R.