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
I have an “understanding problem” which you maybe can correct or explain.
How can the E-Cat generate 1kWh at 1 Cent if the input-energy of electricity is 1/6th of the heat-output?
One kWh of electricity costs between 12 and 25 Eurocents depending on the country. 1/6th of 12 cents still is 2 cents and in countries where the electricity costs 25 Cents per kWh, 1/6th is more than 4 Cents.
And please remember: Todays heat production is often done by burning fossil fuel like gas or oil which can be purchased at only 5 cents per kWh
Regards,
Lars
Dear Teguh Azlianto:
Thank you!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Lars Baudot:
We have finished all the modules of the 1 MW plant. Now we are testing them with a complex protocol. All is going on along schedule, so far the start up of the 1 MW plant is scheduled for October.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
I can not wait to hear about finalization of the 1MW plant in October 😉 Please let me ask this:
You say that you have multiple E-Cats running already and I read somewhere that you have 100 out of total 300 pcs required for the 1MW plant already finished.
Why does it take until October to build the other 200 pcs, is the production so complex?
Or is the development not yet completely finalized and the first 100 pcs are just internal prototypes that can not be used for the 1MW plant?
Best Regards,
Lars
Dear Mr. Andrea Rossi
congratulation to you, Mr. Rossi. i wish i could see your E-cat with my own eyes in front of me someday and i have so many interest to learn about your device. I have ever think that the fusion reaction may work with other element. And you did it. It’s great. lol
Thankyou.
Dear Maryyugo:
We did not sign any R&D contract with the University of Uppsala.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Georgehants:
Thank you for your considerations.
I prefer to leave to our Readers further considerations.
Warm Regard,
A.R.
Dear Mr Rossi, thank you, nothing more could be asked.
Do you agree that,
If just a few more scientists beyond the top half a percent would realise that everything is Quantum and as they have for 60 years, stop trying to hide something that frightens them to death because they don’t understand the first thing about it.
Say Quantum to the average scientist, science teacher, and they go into a stupor of confusion.
The best academic institutions have spent the last 50 years arguing about if it should be the Copenhagen interpretation or one of a dozen other theories, but in general sidestepping its reality to science.
Any eight year old can understand everything about Quantum in a few minutes, it simply says, nothing is as it seems, but is infinitely more wonderful, and exciting for mankind to discover.
Quantum means WE DON’T KNOW THE ANSWERS, and a completely open mind on everything is demanded.
Any new science interpreted without Quantum could be deemed a Perpetual Motion Machine, if the energy is originating outside of known science.
Quantum computers where denied and laughed at by main-line science and journals before, not physicists but mathematicians, showed that it could be done and would break any classical code in seconds, now everybody’s, at it.
At present Quantum Biology and Quantum Brain are the latest issues, although proven to be correct are fought against tooth and nail, by a science entrenched in an illogical psychological block against the UNKNOWN.
Everything is QUANTUM, not classical, any scientist looking for answers must look beyond present day fears of facing the truth and be brave and honest enough to say, we have spent long enough trying to hide reality and at last embrace the wonderful unknown world and opportunities of the QUANTUM.
Dear Georgehants:
The publications on the Journal Of Nuclear Physics do not depend absolutely on the fact if I consider them right or wrong. The peer reviewing is totally indipendent from me and I disagree with many of the things that have been published; nevertheless I have maximum respect for them and never I comment negatively. The very interesting papers of Wladimir Guglinski have been published so far. Actually, it seems to me that another one is under reviewing, but Dr Guglinski must understand the the work in our Journal is totally made for free, so I cannot push the reviewers, and we made this choice not to be bound to publish advertising and not to be conditioned. Besides, we usually publish a paper of an Author that has not been already published from us before a paper of an already published Author. If you want an opinion from me regarding the papers of Wladimir Guglinski, my opinion is that his work is very interesting and serious.
We have many papers to publish in line, the Authors must be patient. By the way: we do not apply the copyright, so all our Authors know that they are totally free to publish their papers wherever they want, pending our publication.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
dear Mr, Rossi,
Free republic have an article asking,
Rossi Rejects Paper Due to Carbon Catalyst Theory?
Andrea Rossi promissed to publish
in June
a paper by W. Guglinski
in his blog Journal of Nuclear Physics ,
but Rossi did not fulfill his promise
Could you please clear up this confusion for us.
Dear Mr Rossi,
Dear Andrea,
Thank you for your answer. So power with modulations min-max, we speak of minutes, on-off cycling 1-hour range.
So a system or modification to quick start a cold or switched off e-cat could still add some value ?
Will you consider development licenses other than the cooperation with Bologna University ?
For fast and deep market penetration, a huge range of all sorts of modified versions could be useful to fit or add with existing (known) systems and new possible devices. Cannot be done all by one man.
The question is a bit: should we rebuild the steam age, and with as much as possible electric mobility via conversion to electricity, or will the e-cat power reasonable mobile applications without (much) steam ?
Kind regards.
Koen Vandewalle
Dear Bob Dingman:
No.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Frank Acland,
Thank you for the info, I check it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mr. Rossi,
Have you kept the equipment and first prototypes of your E-Cat research and development.
These things will be historic and much sought after.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
If your invention the E-Cat fulfils its great promises it will not only be a new and sorely needed source of cheap and clean energy for mankind. It will also be an injection of new inspiration to improve and extend the theory of our microcosmos.
Therefore it is quite understandable that much speculation has been spent on possible theories that could model the E-Cat mechanism. Awaiting detailed information about it, one thing we can do is to exclude what is incompatible with established facts thereby narrowing down the range of possible theories.
One of the main contenders to explain LENR phenomena is a theory by Widom–Larsen. According to this theory collective phenomena in a metal lattice can under the right circumstances produce neutrons that transmute nearby atoms to other isotopes. Many of these isotopes will not be stable and will decay into stable end products. Doing so they will emit various kinds of radiation, notably highly energetic gamma radiation. What greatly increases the prospect for future use of the E-Cat in small scale applications is that deadly gamma rays are not observed in connection with its operation. So can this remarkable fact be explained by the W-L theory? Yes, says Widom and Larsen, the very same collective phenomena can cause “gamma suppression” meaning that the energetic gammas are transformed into heat and soft X-rays that can be stopped by a very moderate amount of shielding.
Fine, let us now look at an E-cat running at full steam assuming that the W-L theory is correct. Nickel atoms are absorbing neutrons that turn nickel into radioactive copper. The radioactive copper emits gamma radiation to form more stable atoms. The gamma rays are transformed by collective phenomena into heat before hurting anybody.
Now we remove the hydrogen from the E-Cat and we flush it with cold water thus stopping the collective phenomena that are the assumed basis for production of heat. But the radioactive copper isotopes that have been produced will continue to decay and the gamma suppression is not in operation any more. Instead of being your best friend in an instant the E-Cat has turned into your worst enemy. As we all have seen during the demos this does not happen.
It would therefore seem that the Widom-Larsen theory in it present form will not be able to fully explain what we know about the physics of the E-Cat.
On June 27th, 2011 at 3:18 a.m., I posted a comment on Journal of Nuclear Physics to A detailed Qualitative Approach to the Cold Fusion Nuclear Reactions of H/Ni article in which I pointed to the developments realized by Brillouin Energy, a Delaware corporation, in the USA. That comment was never answered.
Now it appears that Brillouin Energy is fielding calls from new investors and will be working with Los Alamos National Lab to replicate their work.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/07/brillouin-energy-will-replicate-at-los.html
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/07/robert-e-godes-explains-brillouin.html
Robert E. Godes, the Chief Technical Officer at Brillouin Energy also formulated his views on The Energy Catalyzer, your outstanding, epoch-making invention.
Do you intend to comment their work or method in this blog for your readers?
Keep going on in good faith,
Nick Pourmi
P.S.: “When a thing is new, people say: ‘It is not true.’ Later, when its truth becomes obvious, they say: ‘It is not important.’ Finally, when its importance cannot be denied, they say: ‘Anyway, it is not new.'” (William James, 1896)
Dear Mr. Rossi,
I am familiar with a company that is offering an interesting induction heating technology that utilizes ordinary 50-60hz grid power, very high efficiency, and minimal electronics. This heater is supposed to produce heat much faster than traditional heating elements. Do you think such a technology could be useful to you? Perhaps it could be used to quickly heat the reaction vessel to start up an E-Cat.
You can check out the company’s website: http://www.hephaheat.com
Contact info is on the site — I have contacts within the company should you need any help.
Best regards,
Frank Acland
Dear Signor Rossi:
If someone injected a micro stream of hydrogen gas into a vessel of liquid nickel could the reaction that you discovered take place?
Warm regards,
Bob Dingman
Dear Eernie:
Thank you. I am now in the USA and my 1 MW plant is growing wonderful.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Bob K:
Sorry, I have not the crystal ball. All I know now is that in October I will start up a 1 MW plant.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Charles Richer:
I am sorry, I do not ubderstand your question.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Martin: now I am focused exclusively on my 1 MW plant .
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Stefano Cicchiello:
“Etere” has nothing to do. Time is the limit of energy production, since you make kWh/h.
Warm Regasrds,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi
Sir I would like it could be possible to read some others very well documentend and discussed publications on this Blog .
It is possible to have some indication about the role of the time , possibly ? Or about “etere” ?
Thank you for all you done
Thank you again Sir.
Dear mr Rossi,
Does your work at this moment only exist of producing and testing e-cats for the 1 mw plant? Im very curious if there are already new models (or ideas) of the e-cat with modifications.
Best regards,
Martin
For higher output temperature does the substrate need to be longer because of maximum temperature gradient of reactive material or because of thermal resistance of stainless steel.
Mr. Rossi, you have guaranteed the input to output power ratio of the reactor at 1 to 6. Defkalion will produce Hyperions at ratios of 1 to 20 and 1 to 30. Looking into your crystal ball, with further modifications and testing, what do you feel the limits of next generation energy catalysts to be? What might be the ratios of power in to power out 2 years from now?
Thanks, Bob
Dear H. Hansson;
Thank you for your kind compliment.If I have any talent it is to the credit of my beautiful and intelligent Swedish American wife who kept me on the right road for 45 years and gave me two very successful children. In my career I have seen a number of people who have been unfairly dealt with because their ideas were different from the accepted dogma.Because of this I will do as much as I can to support Rossi and his ideas.Remember that at the present time any speculations from supporters or critics are only educated guesses which will be proved or disproved in October.I am hoping that Rossi and his very impressive team will score a winning goal for humanity.Isnt this an exciting time!Go Rossi!!!
Dear Koen Vandewalle:
I understand: designing properly the circuit the transitory can take few minutes, with a system of by-passes. The reactor has to be cooled anyway, if it is in operation, idle or not, so you need by-passes if you want not use the thermal energy. Otherwise you have to shut it down. The ratio can be any, depending how you use the by-pass. I hope to have understood your question exactly and answered properly.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear kgb27r:
Thank you for the info,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear mr Andrea Rossi,
Here is the link of a closed system steam car of the 20’s:http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/at-the-garage/steam-cars/1922-stanley-steamer/
Regards
Toussaint françois
Dear Mr Rossi,
Dear Andrea,
You write that reasonable start and shutdown cycle takes an order of magnitude of one hour.
But how fast can it go from running on idle but with nuclear reaction going on to upper maximum and back ?
With back, I mean not emergency shutdown, but to idle again which is capable of very fast speedup again.
And what is a reasonable ratio between maxpower and idle in de state mentioned before, given the fact idling is the base-state from which a maximum re-acceleration is possible and not using too much cooling resources and a reasonable efficiency > 1.
Kind regards,
Koen Vandewalle
Dear Mr Epode:
I do not know what our Greek Customer will do with their plant, after we will deliver it to them.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Caro Ing. Rossi, il primo impianto da 1Mw, come ho letto dal sito della Defkalion, avrà un circuito chiuso a Glicolo e cederà calore tramite uno scambiatore. Volevo sapere che temperatura raggiungerà il Glicolo nel circuito chiuso a regime di funzionamento?
Distinti Saluti
Enrico
Dear Carlos and “L”,
The Man can weaponize a stick but that is hardly reason to start doubting the benefits of new energy solutions. Professor Freud formulated a theory of exaggerated, unfounded fear of weapons (read it).
The main difference between “before” and “after” will be strategic, not technical or tactical. Conflicts related to energy resources will appears as completely unnecessary.
Of course the military will benefit from the technological progress for the operation of ships, heavy vehicles to reduce the problems around logistics (Consider Tanks operated by a steam engine that can run on some few liters of tap water). Currently about 75% of all troops works with support functions (including shipping of fuel).
Dear Ivan:
We already made public tests and the measurements have been made by top level Physics from top level Universities. As I said, no more public tests will be made, since by October we will start up our 1 MW plant.
The Patent Office has totally different parameters.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi , you know your device will be replicated sooner or later, doing a black box public test where all could messure an suggest messuremets will help the office of patents to not to belive cold fusion is imposible and pattent your device.
Thanks Ivan
Dear L
I believe you’re completely wrong. Do you really think one should delsy the introduction of a new technology that can save the life of millions of people (please see tons of other posts about water purification, no pollution, global warming, just to make a few) just because military can copy the patent?
The e-cat is already out of the bag…
It is possible by the way that military applications of ‘cold fusion’ are secretly existing since a few years and even being secretly used.
Of course fire can burn and destroy but is the balance of its existance for humanity positive or negative?
Dear Mario Voltaggio:
I cannot answer to questions regarding the catalizers.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Michael,
I already answered this question.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
Thank you!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Charlie Zimmerman:
Yes.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Mr. Rossi,
Im not quite sure what you intend to do with the 1MW power plant. If it is to force a patent then it’s actually a good plan. However you must have realized it will take a long time for the U. S., NRC, etc to approve any reactor once the world realizes your invention is real, which I believe is true. However as a parent I worry about the wrong people getting their hands on your secret catalyzer and making dangerous weapons.
I dont see at this point how your invention, however harmless you may make it, cannot be used for exceptionally dangerous and easily hideable weapons that could harm all of us.
If this is the case I would implore you to not release your catalyzer secret until we are able to develop defenses, and controls for any type of weaponization that may be derived from the invention.
That much power requires a lot of responsibility, and shoul be treated with all the respect it deserves. Once this invention is responsibly introduced to the world, the advances in adjacent scientific fields such as medicine, propulsion, etc will be tremendous, quick, and equally game changing.
God bless
L
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Your method of isotopic enrichment/depletion is a momentous discovery unto itself, that seems to have hugely exciting applications outside of your field.
Do you have any plans to patent/commercialize this process as well?
Best Regards,
Charlie Zimmerman
Dear Mr. Rossi:
Congratulations! Have you looked at the Cyclone Steam engine as a possible fit for transportation? Please see web site below.
http://cyclonepower.com
Dear Dr. Andrea Rossi,
Science moves increasingly to decipher the universe, understanding more and more of its characteristics, however, conjecture based on scientific theories that, by chance, are wrong or misinterpreted, as a result could give an understanding of the universe at the mercy of these conjectures.
Changes occurring in the understanding of nuclear composition must be changed completely established several paradigms.
You will see a different understanding of the nuclear understanding of the Standard Model Atomic and develop interpretations of various events will be shown that many complex issues are taken as simple to explain without resorting to subjective theories and statistics. It will be shown, too, a Nuclear Model and from this new understanding of the atomic nucleus are the physical phenomena to provide a logical interpretation over the statistical interpretation of quantum physics, currently understood as inherent to quantum events.
Many scientific efforts have achieved success by creating principles that made us understand the universe of the atom, plus this constant search for truth, science could become more successful, coming to believe, that whatever was about physics, already had a plausible explanation .
Numerous experiments had already presumed as the influence of the electrons, thus the electrons have been considered responsible for most physical phenomena and the atomic nucleus was not considered as the true responsible for many of these phenomena.
Not only is the atomic nucleus that was a bit away from the universal theater, then, what of the positron, the antimatter, which does not appear much, was considered missing, succumbed by the prevalence of matter over antimatter.
Other actors, the neutrino and antineutrino, this remarkable little fundamental process of formation of the Universe, because they have a discrete relationship with matter, they had recognized their importance.
This paper will present a new vision, with explanations based on a new Model Nuclear attempting to quantify the importance of actors and trainers of the atom from this new interpretation, trying to establish a new understanding of the universe.
Mr Rossi’ time to move on,
do you think that the availability of cheap power will allow the Capitalist society to at last free the real producers and workers i.e. dustmen, factory workers, etc. to have their livelihoods secured with a good level of housing, food, luxuries, etc. etc. without having to finance the rich and powerful.
Time to mix Capitalism with reality and realise that only the workers, create anything, People should rejoice loss of jobs to be able to spend their lives doing as they choose or helping others, not fearing unemployment and how to pay the mortgage.
Technology and enhanced production should lead to more people out of work, and not idiotically trying to find new dead end circular jobs for them to do.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Do you have any plans to make your huge invention public domain at sometime?
Best regards,
Michael
Gentile Dr. Andrea Rossi,
il potassio metallico è utilizzato nella vostra cella?
Dear Mr. Rossi,
“eernie1” has written a number of the best posts on this plog. We should carefully note what he writes. The problems is that this industry is just in its infancy. When compared with the mature automotive industry where everyone knows each others, if not personally, then through mutual business contacts. This very new e-Cat business lacks the web and the network to build an efficient infrastructure. The lack of market coordination will hamper the development of the e-Cat, quite unnecessarily. When the news of the first successful public e-cat demonstration hits the world… your email servers will go down.
Therefore, a solution to the above problems should form a vital part of your business plan. You have the chance to start a industry forum that sets the standard and forms a hub for sub-contractors and suppliers of peripherals. Allowing market mechanisms to remove some off the workload of your shoulders …and your email servers.