by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA
Abstract
Recent accelerator experiments on fusion of various elements have clearly demonstrated that the effective cross-sections of these reactions depend on what material the target particle is placed in. In these experiments, there was a significant increase in the probability of interaction when target nuclei are imbedded in a conducting crystal or are a part of it. These experiments open a new perspective on the problem of so-called cold nuclear fusion.
Introduction
Experiments of Fleischmann and Pons made about 20 years ago [1], raised the question about the possibility of nuclear DD fusion at room temperature. Conflicting results of numerous experiments that followed, dampened the initial euphoria, and the scientific community quickly came to common belief, that the results of [1] are erroneous. One of the convincing arguments of skeptics was the lack in these experiments of evidence of nuclear decay products. It was assumed that “if there are no neutrons, therefore is no fusion.” However, quite a large international group of physicists, currently a total of about 100-150 people, continues to work in this direction. To date, these enthusiasts have accumulated considerable experience in the field. The leading group of physicists working in this direction, in our opinion, is the group led by Dr. M. McKubre [2]. Interesting results were also obtained in the group of Dr. Y. Arata [3]. Despite some setbacks with the repeatability of results, these researchers still believe in the existence of the effect of cold fusion, even though they do not fully understand its nature. Some time ago we proposed a possible mechanism to explain the results of cold fusion of deuterium [4]. This work considered a possible mechanism of acceleration of deuterium contaminant atoms in the crystals through the interaction of atoms with long-wavelength lattice vibrations in deformed parts of the crystal. Estimates have shown that even if a very small portion of the impurity atoms (~105) get involved in this process and acquires a few keV energy, this will be sufficient to describe the energy released in experiments [2]. This work also hypothesized that the lifetime of the intermediate nucleus increases with decreasing energy of its excitation, so that so-called “radiation-less cooling” of the excited nucleus becomes possible. In [5], we set out a more detailed examination of the process. Quite recently, a sharp increase of the probability of fusion of various elements was found in accelerator experiments for the cases when the target particles are either imbedded in a metal crystal or are a part of the conducting crystal. These experiments compel us to look afresh on the problem of cold fusion.
Recent experiments on fusion of elements on accelerators
For atom-atom collisions the expression of the probability of penetration through a Coulomb barrier for bare nuclei should be modified, because atomic electrons screen the repulsion effect of nuclear charge. Such a modification for the isolated atom collisions has been performed in H.J. Assenbaum and others [6] using static Born-Oppenheimer approximation. The experimental results that shed further light on this problem were obtained in relatively recent works C. Rolfs [7] and K. Czerski [8]. Review of earlier studies on this subject is contained in the work of L. Bogdanova [9]. In these studies a somewhat unusual phenomenon was observed: the sub-barrier fusion cross sections of elements depend strongly on the physical state of the matter in which these processes are taking place. Figure 1 (left) shows the experimental data [8], demonstrating the dependence of the astrophysical factor S(E) for the fusion of elements of sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of the matter that contains the target nucleus 7Li. The same figure (right) presents similar data [7] for the DD reaction, when the target nucleus was embedded in a zirconium crystal. It must be noted that the physical nature of the phenomenon of increasing cross synthesis of elements in the case where this process occurs in the conductor crystal lattice is still not completely clear.
Figure 1. Up – experimental data [8], showing the energy dependence of the S-factor for sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of matter that contains the nucleus 7Li. Down – the similar data [7] for the reaction of DD, when the target nucleus is placed in a crystal of zirconium. The data are well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV.
The phenomenon is apparently due to the strong anisotropy of the electrical fields of the crystal lattice in the presence of free conduction electrons. Data for zirconium crystals for the DD reactions can be well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV. It is natural to assume that the corresponding distance between of two atoms of deuterium in these circumstances is less than the molecular size of deuterium. In the case of the screening potential of 300 eV, the distance of convergence of deuterium atoms is ~510ˆ12 m, which is about an order of magnitude smaller than the size of a molecule of deuterium, where the screening potential is 27 eV. As it turned out, the reaction rate for DD fusion in these conditions is quite sufficient to describe the experimental results of McKubre and others [2]. Below we present the calculation of the rate process similar to the mu-catalysis where, instead of the exchange interaction by the muon, the factor of bringing together two deuterons is the effect of conduction electrons and the lattice of the crystal.
Calculation of the DD fusion rate for “Metal-Crystal” catalysis
The expression for the cross section of synthesis in the collision of two nuclei can be written as
where for the DD fusion
Here the energy E is shown in keV in the center of mass. S(E) astrophysical factor (at low energies it can be considered constant), the factor 1/E reflects de Broglie dependence of cross section on energy. The main energy dependence of the fusion is contained in an expression
that determines the probability of penetration of the deuteron through the Coulomb barrier. From the above expressions, it is evident that in the case of DD collisions and in the case of DDμcatalysis, the physics of the processes is the same. We use this fact to determine the probability of DD fusion in the case of the “metal-crystalline” DD-catalysis. In the case of DDμ- catalysis the size of the muon deuterium molecules (ion+) is ~5×10ˆ13m. Deuterium nuclei approach such a distance at a kinetic energy ~3 keV. Using the expression (1), we found that the ratio of σ(3.0 keV)/σ(0.3 keV) = 1.05×10ˆ16. It should be noted that for the free deuterium molecule this ratio [ σ(3.0keV)/σ(0.03keV)] is about 10ˆ73. Experimental estimations of the fusion rate for the (DDμ)+ case presented in the paper by Hale [10]:
Thus, we obtain for the “metal-crystalline” catalysis DD fusion rate (for zirconium case):
Is this enough to explain the experiments on cold fusion? We suppose that a screening potential for palladium is about the same as for zirconium. 1 cmˆ3 (12.6 g) of palladium contains 6.0210ˆ23(12.6/106.4) = 0.710ˆ23 atoms. Fraction of crystalline cells with dual (or more) the number of deuterium atoms at a ratio of D: Pd ~1:1 is the case in the experiments [2] ~0.25 (e.g., for Poisson distribution). Crystal cell containing deuterium atoms 0 or 1, in the sense of a fusion reaction, we consider as “passive”. Thus, the number of “active” deuterium cells in 1 cmˆ3 of palladium is equal to 1.810ˆ22. In this case, in a 1 cmˆ3 of palladium the reaction rate will be
this corresponds to the energy release of about 3 kW. This is quite sufficient to explain the results of McKubre group [2]. Most promising version for practical applications would be Platinum (Pt) crystals, where the screening potential for d(d,p)t fusion at room temperature is about 675 eV [11]. In this case, DD fusion rate would be:
The problem of “nonradiative” release of nuclear fusion energy
As we have already noted, the virtual absence of conventional nuclear decay products of the compound nucleus was widely regarded as one of the paradoxes of DD fusion with the formation of 4He in the experiments [2]. We proposed the explanation of this paradox in [4]. We believe that after penetration through the Coulomb barrier at low energies and the materialization of the two deuterons in a potential well, these deuterons retain their identity for some time. This time defines the frequency of further nuclear reactions. Figure 2 schematically illustrates the mechanism of this process. After penetration into the compound nucleus at a very low energy, the deuterons happen to be in a quasi-stabile state seating in the opposite potential wells. In principle, this system is a dual “electromagnetic-nuclear” oscillator. In this oscillator the total kinetic energy of the deuteron turns into potential energy of the oscillator, and vice versa. In the case of very low-energy, the amplitude of oscillations is small, and the reactions with nucleon exchange are suppressed.
Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of the mechanism of the nuclear decay frequency dependence on the compound nucleus 4He* excitation energy for the merging deuterons is presented. The diagram illustrates the shape of the potential well of the compound nucleus. The edges of the potential well are defined by the strong interaction, the dependence at short distances Coulomb repulsion.
The lifetime of the excited 4He* nucleus can be considered in the formalism of the usual radioactive decay. In this case,
Here ν is the decay frequency, i.e., the reciprocal of the decay time τ. According to our hypothesis, the decay rate is a function of excitation energy of the compound nucleus E. Approximating with the first two terms of the polynomial expansion, we have:
Here ν° is the decay frequency at asymptotically low excitation energy. According to quantum-mechanical considerations, the wave functions of deuterons do not completely disappear with decreasing energy, as illustrated by the introduction of the term ν°. The second term of the expansion describes the linear dependence of the frequency decay on the excitation energy. The characteristic nuclear frequency is usually about 10ˆ22 sˆ-1. In fusion reaction D+D4He there is a broad resonance at an energy around 8 MeV. Simple estimates by the width of the resonance and the uncertainty relation gives a lifetime of the intermediate state of about 0.810ˆ22 s. The “nuclear” reaction rate falls approximately linearly with decreasing energy. Apparently, a group of McKubre [2] operates in an effective energy range below 2 keV in the c.m.s. Thus, in these experiments, the excitation energy is at least 4×10ˆ3 times less than in the resonance region. We assume that the rate of nuclear decay is that many times smaller. The corresponding lifetime is less than 0.3×10ˆ18 s. This fall in the nuclear reaction rate has little effect on the ratio of output decay channels of the compound nucleus, but down to a certain limit. This limit is about 6 keV. A compound nucleus at this energy is no longer an isolated system, since virtual photons from the 4He* can reach to the nearest electron and carry the excitation energy of the compound nucleus. The total angular momentum carried by the virtual photons can be zero, so this process is not prohibited. For the distance to the nearest electron, we chose the radius of the electrons in the helium atom (3.1×10ˆ11 m). From the uncertainty relations, duration of this process is about 10ˆ-19 seconds. In the case of “metal-crystalline” catalysis the distance to the nearest electrons can be significantly less and the process of dissipation of energy will go faster. It is assumed that after an exchange of multiple virtual photons with the electrons of the environment the relatively small excitation energy of compound nucleus 4He* vanishes, and the frequency of the compound nucleus decaying with the emission of nucleons will be determined only by the term ν°. For convenience, we assume that this value is no more than 10ˆ12-10ˆ14 per second. In this case, the serial exchange of virtual photons with the electrons of the environment in a time of about 10ˆ-16 will lead to the loss of ~4 MeV from the compound nucleus (after which decays with emission of nucleons are energetically forbidden), and then additional exchange will lead to the loss of all of the free energy of the compound nucleus (24 MeV) and finally the nucleus will be in the 4He ground state. The energy dissipation mechanism of the compound nucleus 4He* with virtual photons, discussed above, naturally raises the question of the electromagnetic-nuclear structure of the excited compound nucleus.
Fig. 3. Possible energy diagram of the excited 4He* nucleus is presented.
Figure 3 represents a possible energy structure of the excited 4He* nucleus and changes of its spatial configuration in the process of releasing of excitation energy. Investigation of this process might be useful to study the quark-gluon dynamics and the structure of the nucleus.
Discussion
Perhaps, in this long-standing history of cold fusion, finally the mystery of this curious and enigmatic phenomenon is gradually being opened. Besides possible benefits that the practical application of this discovery will bring, the scientific community should take into account the sociological lessons that we have gained during such a long ordeal of rejection of this brilliant, though largely accidental, scientific discovery. We would like to express the special appreciation to the scientists that actively resisted the negative verdict imposed about twenty years ago on this topic by the vast majority of nuclear physicists.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks Prof. S.B. Dabagov, Dr. M. McKubre, Dr. F. Tanzela, Dr. V.A. Kuzmin, Prof. L.N. Bogdanova and Prof. T.V. Tetereva for help and valuable discussions. The author is grateful to Prof. V.G. Kadyshevsky, Prof. V.A. Rubakov, Prof. S.S. Gershtein, Prof. V.V. Belyaev, Prof. N.E. Tyurin, Prof. V.L. Aksenov, Prof. V.M. Samsonov, Prof. I.M. Gramenitsky, Prof. A.G. Olshevsky, Prof. V.G. Baryshevsky for their help and useful advice. I am grateful to Dr. VM. Golovatyuk, Prof. M.D. Bavizhev, Dr. N.I. Zimin, Prof. A.M. Taratin for their continued support. I am also grateful to Prof. A. Tollestrup, Prof. U. Amaldi, Prof. W. Scandale, Prof. A. Seiden, Prof. R. Carrigan, Prof. A. Korol, Prof. J. Hauptmann, Prof. V. Guidi, Prof. F. Sauli, Prof. G. Mitselmakher, Prof. A. Takahashi, and Prof. X. Artru for stimulating feedback. Continued support in this process was provided with my colleagues and the leadership of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, and I am especially grateful to Prof. R. Parkey, Prof. N. Rofsky, Prof. J. Anderson and Prof. G. Arbique. I express special thanks to my wife, N.A. Tsyganova for her stimulating ideas and uncompromising support.
References
1. M. Fleischmann, S. Pons, M. W. Anderson, L. J. Li, M. Hawkins, J. Electro anal. Chem. 287, 293 (1990).
2. M. C. H. McKubre, F. Tanzella, P. Tripodi, and P. Haglestein, In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2000, Lerici (La Spezia), Ed. F. Scaramuzzi, (Italian Physical Society, Bologna, Italy, 2001), p 3; M. C. H. McKubre, In Condensed Matter Nuclear Science: Proceedings Of The 10th International Conference On Cold Fusion; Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 21-29 August, 2003, Ed by P. L. Hagelstein and S. R. Chubb, (World Sci., Singapore, 2006). M. C. H. McKubre, “Review of experimental measurements involving dd reactions”, Presented at the Short Course on LENR for ICCF-10, August 25, 2003.
3. Y. Arata, Y. Zhang, “The special report on research project for creation of new energy”, J. High Temp. Soc. (1) (2008).
4. E. Tsyganov, in Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 1981–1989. Original Russian text published in Yadernaya Fizika, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 2036–2044.
5. E.N. Tsyganov, “The mechanism of DD fusion in crystals”, submitted to IL NUOVO CIMENTO 34 (4-5) (2011), in Proceedings of the International Conference Channeling 2010 in Ferrara, Italy, October 3-8 2010.
6. H.J. Assenbaum, K. Langanke and C. Rolfs, Z. Phys. A – Atomic Nuclei 327, p. 461-468 (1987).
7. C. Rolfs, “Enhanced Electron Screening in Metals: A Plasma of the Poor Man”, Nuclear Physics News, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2006.
8. A. Huke, K. Czerski, P. Heide, G. Ruprecht, N. Targosz, and W. Zebrowski, “Enhancement of deuteron-fusion reactions in metals and experimental implications”, PHYSICAL REVIEW C 78, 015803 (2008).
9. L.N. Bogdanova, Proceedings of International Conference on Muon Catalyzed Fusion and Related Topics, Dubna, June 18–21, 2007, published by JINR, E4, 15-2008-70, p. 285-293
10. G.M. Hale, “Nuclear physics of the muon catalyzed d+d reactions”, Muon Catalyzed Fusion 5/6 (1990/91) p. 227-232.
11. F. Raiola (for the LUNA Collaboration), B. Burchard, Z. Fulop, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.31, 1141 (2005); Eur. Phys. J. A 27, s01, 79 (2006).
by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA
Dear ing. Rossi good evening.
A question: What is still missing at the zero hour?
I.e. how long still serves for the production of E-Cat from 10 kW?
Thanks to you.
F.T.
Dear Giovanni Guerrini:
Thank you for your considerations. I’d wait that plants are in operation, to get real data.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mi correggo e mi scuso,nei 60 miliardi di spesa sono compresi gli idrocarburi per autotrazione e riscaldamento,quindi i conteggi sono errati.Comunque anche questi potranno essere sostituiti.Mi scuso ancora,l’entusiasmo a volte rende distratti,ma resto un uomo felice per i Suoi numeri.
Saluti
P.S. Nella foga dei numeri ho dimenticato il costo di ricarica e manutenzione,posto che sia di 1 cent/euro perkWh (?),comporterebbe una spesa di 2.800.000.000 eu/anno.Dico bene? Non intacca il risultato.
Caro Dott Rossi,ogni volta che lei presenta dei numeri faccio un salto sulla sedia e mi rende felice.Riguardo la futuribile centrale da 7,5 MW elettrici,ho fatto un paio di conti e mi corregga se sbaglio.L’Italia consuma circa 350,000 GWh/anno di cui l’80% tra importati e prodotti in patria da combustibili fossili vale a dire 280,000 GWh/annui,il restante 20% da rinnovabili.Questo ci costa una bolletta con l’estero di oltre 60 miliardi di euro/anno.Ora,una sua centrale da 7,5 MW produrrebbe circa 64,5GWh/annui,vale a dire che per coprire il fabbisogno di 280,000 GWh/annui occorrerebbero 4,320 centrali che al costo di circa 23 milioni di euro l’una sarebbe un investimento di 99,360,000,000 euro.Viene da sè che il sistema Italia rientrerebbe in un anno e mezzo dell’investimento,e da lì in poi….caviale e champagne !
Per una futura collaborazione commerciale,può contare su di me,metto a disposizione anima e corpo.
Calorosi saluti Giovanni Guerrini
Dear Eli:
Thanks to you for your attention and for the interesting link.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Rob:
No, the mechanism is not this. For now we prefer maintain confidential the effect that generates energy in the E-Cat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
In last Friday’s interview at your office in Florida you explained that:
1) the Nickel reaches temperatures of approx. 1500 degrees, just below melting point of Nickel
2) the heat exchange is occurring via lead that converts the low energy gamma radiation into heat.
Does this mean that the nickel powder (plus catalyst) is pre-heated to 1500 degrees by using an electrical heater element and that the heat exchange to the water flow is occurring only via the low energy gamma radiation using lead?
Thanks so much for the recent video interview Mr. Rossi! Here’s a link to it. Thanks,
Ruby and Eli.
http://coldfusionnow.org/?p=15088
Dear Dan Michelson:
Thank you very much for your kind and generous proposal, but, for confidentiality reasons, we can work only with our personnel. I will remember this comment of yours for any future needs.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mr. Rossi,
Are you looking for anyone with experience in control systems to help in the design of the electronic controls for the ECAT? I have substantial experience and actually designed/redesigned modules for an employer that were/are used by National Instruments. I have all of the tools and test equipment required for creating prototypes and doing complete hardware/software development. I am willing to donate my time and prototype development costs to help you with this effort.
I can forward you my resume outlining my experience if you have any interest.
Regards,
Dan
> Helmut H.
You might be interested in what is being discussed at
http://www.e-catworld.com in the March 4 post titled
pardon: fusion, not fission.
@Robert Mockan
If it is allowed to speculate here, i see an analogy to heating with wood, and the airflow has similarities to the functionality of electrical energy input for the E-Cat:
During the start phase you need a maximum of airflow to get the wood burning. Once it has catched fire, the heater can be closed and the airflow can be reduced. Compared to the starting phase the amount of air can be reduced quite dramatically, but not below a certain level, because then the flame dies and the reaction stops.
I also have the gut feeling, that Ing. Rossi’s E-Cat works with the principle of resonance. Everybody knows, that soldiers are not allowed to march over a bridge. A tiny amount of energy can destroy much stronger structures, if the energy is applied where the resonance of the sturcture is.
The dumb version of fission is, to try to force atoms together with sheer power. The clever method, the method working with mother nature instead against her would be, to use the resonance frequency of the involved atoms r substances, to lift them into an extraordinary state where suddenly things become possible, that seem impossible. Like a few men destroying a bridge just by walking over it…
Dear Francesco Toro:
Thank you,
A.R.
Dear Robert Mockan:
The control system does it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
A device that requires a minimum temperature of the reactant to function, that has a gain of 6 not dependent on temperature, requires a forcing function that is independent of temperature. Rather, the E-Cat fuel must be reactive to the forcing function with a linear dependence on the electrical power input. If activation involves heating the reactor to the operating temperature, there has been an assumption that the average input power after the 1 hour activation is being used to maintain the reactor temperature and provides input power to overcome heat loss from the reactor through the insulation of the reactor. But that is an incorrect assumption if the forcing function is not temperature dependent.
Mr. Rossi, what is driving the fuel to produce thermal power with a gain of 6 over the input electric power?
Dear ing. Rossi good morning
After your welcome technical answer, honestly I was expecting, I’ve posted a post at Green Style with the following text:
“”I regret to tell you that when you put the numbers you need to be more precise. I followed all the video evidence techniques of ing. Rossi and the data in my possession show that the average COP, after the initial phase of the reaction, trigger remains FIRMLY to 6. It means that for a consumption of 1 Kw/h electric you get 6 Kw/h. It is therefore obvious convenience for small domestic installations. The data have been verified in the presence of external technical observers and, personally, by Prof. Focardi, during two experiments. I would like to know where you got the information published in this article that I believe strongly misleading.””
Now I wait reply (if it ever will)
Kind regards
Francesco Toro
Carissimo ing. Rossi buongiorno
Dopo la tua gradita risposta tecnica, che sinceramente io mi aspettavo, ho inviato un post a Green Style con il seguente testo:
“”Mi spiace segnalarvi che quando mettete dei numeri dovete essere più precisi. Ho seguito tutti i video delle prove tecniche dell’ing. Rossi e i dati in mio possesso dimostrano che il COP medio, dopo la fase iniziale di innesco della reazione, resta STABILMENTE A 6.
Ciò significa che per un consumo di 1 Kw/h elettrico si ricavano 6 Kw/h termici. E’ quindi evidente la convenienza anche per impianti domestici di piccola taglia.
I dati sono stati verificati in presenza di osservatori tecnici esterni e, personalmente, dal Prof. Focardi, nel corso di ben due esperimenti. Vorrei sapere da dove avete avuto i dati da voi pubblicati in questo articolo che ritengo fortemente fuorviante.””
Ora aspetto la risposta (se mai ne daranno).
Cordiali Saluti
Francesco Toro
PS.da intendersi consumo medio alla massima potenza,il consumo in attivazione è una altra cosa.
Sig Toro,http://ecat.com/ecat-products/ecat-1-mw/ecat-1mw-technical-data
Nella scheda tecnica del reattore da 1 MW,per tale potenza termica/h in uscita è indicato un consumo medio di 167 kWh elettrici,ovvero e cat= 10 kWh term consumo medio 1,67 kWh el.
Saluti G Guerrini
Dear Helmut H.:
We are resolving this problem, probably there will be no minimum, whatever the energy production is, the COP remains 6 (after the 1 hour necessary for the activation).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ing. Rossi,
can you tell us, after the E-Cat has been activated, how low the MINIMUM heating power, of the E-Cat working with a COP of 6, is?
Dear Francesco Toro:
I cannot follow all the comments that are published everyday everywhere, so please consider only the data you read directly from us.
Therefore, please read the last comment I released on this blog on this issue, just today, which is the repetition of what I wrote many times.
The COP is always 6, once the E-Cat is activated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Gent.mo Ing. Rossi buonasera
Leggo dal sito: http://www.greenstyle.it/e-cat-domestico-consumera-12-kwh-e-potra-funzionare-24-ore-al-giorno-7980.html#ixzz1oB3yxzfB
“”L’E-Cat consumerà energia elettrica. Intanto, sarà necessaria durante l’accensione per raggiungere lo stato di funzionamento ottimale: si parla in questo senso di 2,8 kWh. Inoltre, ci sarà un consumo fisso che varierà dal suddetto sistema on demand: al minimo l’E-Cat non avrà bisogno di energia, mentre al massimo della potenza i consumi schizzeranno a 2,7 kWh. Il consumo medio, secondo Rossi, dovrebbe approssimarsi verso gli 1,2 KW. Quindi ammettendo un uso costante del reattore per 24 ore, ci sarebbero 28,8 kWh di consumi giornalieri.
Queste informazioni possono aiutarci a capire quale e quanta dovrebbe essere la vantaggiosità dell’affare E-Cat. Chiariamoci, 2,7 kWh non sono poi così pochi, ma da pregresse dichiarazioni apprendiamo che la potenza di un E-Cat domestico dovrebbe aggirarsi attorno ai 10 KW. In pratica, il reattore restituirebbe più di tre volte l’energia immessa, ecc. ecc.”
Gradirei sapere se questi dati sono reali in quanto non corrisponderebbero a quelli in mio possesso. Questo balletto di cifre penso debba essere chiarito una volta per tutte.
Grazie per la Sua cortesia.
Sinceri saluti
Dear Ditta Sistemix:
Please send pre-orders and commercial requests to
info@leonardocorp1996.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Vorremmo avere un indirizzo email per il preordine e per un eventuale collaborazione commerciale.
Grazie
Dear Mats Heijkenskjold:
1- yes
2- yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Emily Sutton:
I am glad to be useful.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mario P.:
Shouldn’t be, but, of course, if necessary the professional help will be given.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Is there nothing in the e-cat (in the period of 6 months) that can go wrong so we need professional help??
Warm Ragards
Mario P. from Belgium.
Dr. Rossi,
Thank you so much for your offer. I am thrilled and honored. I will be keeping in contact with you as I discuss this proposal with professors and organizations within the university. We will collaborate on a finite list of questions and concerns, and I will send them to you as soon as possible.
Emily Sutton
Dear Mr Rossi,
Regarding control of heat power output:
My house needs at the moment about 800W heat power during the day, but during the night 3500W. Of course this is a slow gradual change during the 24 hours.
Is it possible for the E-cat to adjust the power according that need? Or do I need to get rid of excessive heat?
You mentioned the E-cat needs about 2.5kW during start up.
With 230 V, the current will be above 10 A. This is little too much for a long period. On the very limit for the 10 A fuse.
Are there any possibility to have 400 V 3-phase connection, to reduce the current?
Best regards
Mats Heijkenskjold
Dear Gianni Saba:
First of all, thank you for your pre-orders.
I think the different energy sources have to be integrated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Hamdi Ucar:
We did it already.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Pietro F.:
No, I do not know them.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Buongiorno sig. Rossi,
una curiosità, é una vostra società?:
LEONARD ONLINE SERVICES LLC
1591 SAVANNAH HWY
CITY: CHARLESTON
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Is it possible to send some ‘ash’ (transmuted elements) of the e-cat to some universities/public scientific institutions for their scientific curiosities without exposing secrets of the device?
If some scientific reports will be published to support of e-cat working, you will have strong public support, therefore it will ease your work and broaden your options.
If opposite happens, that is no report will be published, it allows to you (who knowing the truth) to better evaluate the situation and anticipate it.
Dear Ing. Rossi,
as you know, I’m follwing your reserch from last year and I’m waiting the result with forward. I want know if this new tencology can replace, in the future, the idropower and nuclear power plants.
I’ve already required 2 10kw e-cat.
Good work and Warm Regards.
Dear Bob Norman:
1/3 of the mass that reacts that way ( the effect is much more complex), therefore extremely small amounts…anyway when we will publish the theory it will be cleared.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi
About a year and a half ago when I first started reading about your great invention there was a lot of discussion on transmutation of Nickel to Copper. I believe that about 1/3 of the Nickel was converted as what was stated.
Now that you have completed your home system design and optimized the 1MW system, do you see any chance in the amount of transmutation with your optimized designs?
I look forward to seeing your home system on the market.
Best Regards,
Bob
Dear Hughd:
No, you need 2.5 kWh/h as a peak, the average consume to make 10 kWh (thermal) id 1.6 kWh (electric).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
True,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Antonello Lai:
Why don’t you write in English your interesting comments?
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dopo la sua risposta sono ancora più convinto che Lei si stia muovendo con “metodo”. Infatti Lei mi ha dato la terza risposta che io volutamente non ho inserito. Non volgio scrivere pubblicamente e quindi non lo farò, quale sarà il principale problema che Lei si troverà ad affrontare appena il primo e-cat verrà nelle mani di “alcuni personaggi”, perchè dalla sua risposta capto che Lei ne è molto consapevole. Produrne tanti e velocemente è giustamente fondamentale, ma se posso consigliare anche se sono più che certo che già Lei lo stia facendo, conservi bene questo archivio del forum, Le sarà utile quando gli “snake” proveranno a mordere.
Mr. Rossi: From reading your explanations about the changes in your corporate/management structure, to me it sounds like you are making that very critical corporate transition from a one man show to a structure that will take advantage of the talents of many people. True?
Dear Mr. Rossi.
In your response to John Di Rico you state that “We need 2.5 peak power to activate the E-Cat.”
Does this mean that to start up the E-Cat 1.6 kW x 2.5 = 4 kW will be required for some length of time?
If so this will require a 240V, 20 amp circuit to first supply 4 kW and then follow with a steady 1.6 kW to operate a 10 kW E-cat.
If this is the case a 120V circuit is normally fused at 30 amps and could not be used. It would be very beneficial if a 120V 30 amp circuit could be used.
Best regards,
Hughd
Dear John Di Rico:
We need 2.5 peak power to activate the E-Cat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Omega Z:
1- yes
2- yes
3- moreless yes
4- no, because the amount is negligible
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Daniel G. Zavela:
Please contact us in September to be put in contact with the area licensee.
You can anyway make a pre-order now, writing to
info@leonardocorp1996.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Giovanno Guerrini,
Right.
Warm Regards,
A.R.