Excess neutron shell model of Nuclei

by Bhagirath Shantilal Joshi
Msc Solid state Physics, Gujartat University, Gujarat, India
MS Computer Engineering, Univ of Lowell, Lowell, Mass, USA

Direct Download

Abstract

Review of the periodic table and existing research on isotopes of the various elements of the periodic table is conducted and the attempt is made here to visualize the process of element formation.

The role of Neutron in element formation is investigated and found to be vital for existence of elements . In the new light, the new model of nucleus is proposed which explains the stability of the  nuclei and reason for multiple stable isotopes of elements.

Review of the Periodic Table

The inspection of the periodic table of elements reveal an interesting fact that for all elements other than Hydrogen, for element to be stable, number of Neutrons are always greater or equal, to the number of Protons in the nucleus.  The periodic table is analyzed with respect to the abundance in nature for the elements.

The fusion of Hydrogen to produce Helium can be envisioned as follows:

1H + 1H + 1H + 1H →  2H + 2N + 2e+ (1)

where 2e+ later annihilating to produce additional gamma radiation.

Since tremendous force is needed to keep four protons together during the formation of helium and emit 2 positrons, it is unlikely.  The mass of neutron is more than the mass of proton and this fact  alone negates the likeliness of the above scenario.

In another scenario, the formation of helium may be envisioned as four neutrons coming close together to form a stable nuclei of Helium as follows:
4N → 2N + 2P + 2e (2)
Here the mass of Neutron is higher than the Proton.  The Neutron releases electron to form proton. Also justifies the reason for the  Proton to be lighter than the Neutron.
Thus it is assumed that
  1. Neutrons are the building blocks for elements in nature.
  2. In the elements , other than hydrogen, neutron and proton form a pair (np) and keeps distinct identity.
  3. Excess neutrons stay at the center of the nuclei but keeps their distinct identity.
Using the above assumption the periodic table is analyzed by finding excess neutrons for all  stable isotopes of elements as follows:
Excess neutrons = Atomic mass – 2P where P is the number of Protons for the element
The relative abundance of Isotopes is obtained from the research papers and wikipedia and is included in the Table 1, 2 ,3. The relative abundance is indicative of the preferred state for the element (nuclei) in nature.
The following facts are found as a result of analysis:
For Odd atomic number nuclei:
  • Abundance of isotope is close to 100% when excess neutrons are odd count.
  • If the excess neutron count is even, the isotope is radio active.
  • Majority elements have only one Isotope.
  • Only Potassium has three isotopes, the one with 2 excess neutron is radio active with 0.001 relative abundance.
For Even atomic number nuclei:
  • Elements He, C, O, Ne, Mg, Si, S are close to one in abundance with no excess neutron and maximum three isotopes.
  • Element Be has one excess neutron and one isotope, 100% abundance.
  • All other higher elements require four or more excess neutrons for the element to be abundant in nature and has up to 10 stable isotopes.
  • Element Ca is exception with 0 excess neutron and 97% abundance. However it is unstable with >E+21 a Half life.
Atomic number 43 (Tc) and 61 (Pm) has no stable isotopes in nature.
Thus from the above analysis, it looks like that all nuclei, stable or otherwise,  prefers to keep at least one neutron at the center of the nuclei from its excess count. The remaining excess neutrons stay very close to the center keeping its own identity. The other neutrons pair up with each proton and stay close together to the proton (like heavy hydrogen) but maintains its separate identity.

The nature prefers, for more complex nucleus, more neutrons than protons and creates a delicate balance to form a stable nuclei.

This balance of forces is so critical that in case of element F (the stable isotope is with  9 proton and 10 neutrons) The isotope 18F with 9 Protons and 9 Neutrons, with in 20 minutes decays and forms 18O which is stable with 8 protons and 10 Neutrons and gives up a e+ positron to convert proton to neutron and e+ and e- reaction produces Gama radiation.

Equation   18F → 18O + e+

Thus the existence of Neutron is vital to the existence of the universe itself, because without neutron, elements may not have been possible and hence the intelligence as we know today.

Structure of Neutron

The fact that Gravitational binding forces (Fg) of masses in the nucleus needs to be more than the destructive electromagnetic forces (Fem) created by the electrically positive environment of the nucleus,  (Fem < Fg) excess neutrons are required in the nuclei. However, even at the center of the nucleus neutrons keep their distinct identity, rather than lumping together to form one heavy neutron. Therefore, neutron can not be just a fuzzy mass but a well defined structure able to hold induced charges with precise demarcation of boundary with an insulating layer, more like a free standing capacitor. Which suggests that at least three particles with two sets of characteristics are required to create a neutron. For our model here, that has to be two particles capable of holding charges and one particle which provides insulation between these particles, similar to that of dielectric layer in the capacitor. Thus in this postulated model the neutron looks and behaves neutral for all practical purposes. However, within nuclei keeps separate and distinct identity and does not combine with other neutrons to form a one central heavy body.

The proposal here defers from the model independent analysis predicting the structure having negative charge on the surface, Positive charge in the next lower level and than neutral  mass. My model suggests that neutron is a free standing charged capacitor. This helps in keeping the distance between excess neutron in the nuclei. Otherwise there is nothing stopping these neutrons from lumping together to form a mini neutron star with in the nuclei. This model of Neutron is justified from the known fact that Neutron is heavier than Proton.

For elements other than Hydrogen, the nuclei becomes a chaotic environment. For Example, in case of

4He, two protons require their space and wants to be separate from each other as far as possible, and two neutrons are caught between the two protons as shown in figure 1.  From the reference frame of protons it is envisioned that Neutrons spin on its axis at very high rotational speed. One clockwise and other anticlockwise.

Model of nuclei

A new model of nuclei is proposed as shown in the figure 3. A spherical shell of excess neutrons with one neutron at the center of the shell surrounded by paired proton neutron (pn) shell.

For the stable nuclei system the electromagnetic forces needs to be balanced and gravitational forces maximized.  From the example of 4He above, it is envisioned that  elements are built, in this model, by Heavy Hydrogen nuclei (pn) as a building block and just enough excess neutrons to provide needed gravitational force for stability.

Energy levels (orbitals) in pn outer shell follows the similar shell structure of electrons, with K,L,M,N,O being primary shell and s, p, d, f, g sub shells with similar total charge particle capacity. However for excess neutron shell it differs, where a single neutron stays at the center of the nuclei when in excess. The energy level for that central neutron in this model is called “Foundation neutron” (Fn).

The Table 4 shows the placement of neutrons in each shell.

Nuclei Stability Analysis using above model

For Odd atomic number nuclei:

In the ‘p-n shell’ the outermost pair has no symmetry, however the excess neutron shell is symmetrical for all odd atomic number elements giving the stability and abundance. Referring to table 2 and table 4 , isotopes, with one excess neutron, has relative abundance in nature of 1 or close to 1,  The excess neutron takes the place of Fn.  The isotopes with 2 excess neutrons are all radio active which can be attributed to the asymmetry of neutron in unfilled K shell, which can hold up to 2 neutrons. When the K shell is completely filled as in the case of 41K, the nuclei is stable. Table 2 outlines isotopes and abundance for majority of elements, all follow the same principle and model fits perfectly with the exception of 14N with atomic number 7. Iodine has 21 excess neutrons, as we see in table 4, the outer most excess neutron shell is symmetrical, making it stable. All other elements follows.

For Even atomic number nuclei:

The stability is obtained from the pn shell. However, excess neutron shell  becomes asymmetric and depending on which sub shell, there is a room for additional excess neutrons and hence exhibits many stable isotopes with relative abundance. Theoretical probability calculation may prove this fact.

Instability and radio activity in heavy elements:

The neutron proton (np) pair in nuclei has capability to grow indefinitely. However as the heavier elements are built the inner excess neutron shell is large enough to interact with lower np shells, thus giving instability to the nuclei. e.g. for 238U there are 148 total neutrons and 54 excess neutrons.  A nuclei with 111 excess neutron will completely fill up the O shell. All elements after 209Bi are radio active, this shows that interaction of neutrons form excess neutron shell(inner shell) with pn shell is destructive when the N shell is half filled. Thus there is a upper limit to the size of the  inner excess neutron shell and this may be the reason for non existence of super heavy stable elements in nature.

Conclusion

This proposed model of nuclei, explains the stability and relative abundance of the nuclei. The nuclei(except for H and He) in this model is a shell with in a shell, where an innermost shell structure is formed with excess neutrons with one Fundamental foundation neutron (Fn) and the rest arranged in shell structure. Protons, form pair with neutron and form shell enclosing this excess neutron shell as shown in figure 3. The stability of the nuclei is a direct result of symmetrical placement of neutrons in the outer most shell of excess neutron shell. The same shell is responsible for many stable isotopes in even atomic number nuclei. The additional isotopes are possible if the outer shell of excess neutron shell holds odd number of neutrons. The nature of neutron is postulated here, the proof of which depends on future experiments.

References

Numerous Scientists’ and scholars’ exhausting work in development of periodic table, investigation of Isotopes is utilized and due credits are given. The list is too large to print here, but due credits are mentally given to all scientists.

by Bhagirath Shantilal Joshi

796 comments to Excess neutron shell model of Nuclei

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Marius:
    He,he,he..
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Marius

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I thought you might enjoy this one: http://www.cfeis.com/images/pseudoscepsticks_cartoon.jpg

    Best wishes,
    M.

  • Bill Nichols

    Andrea…

    You mentioned your first customer is satisfied with the delivered 1 MW plant.

    We know any new technology and concept(s) are a learning curve.

    3 Questions:

    1.) Has this customer provided feedback to you from their acceptance test, plus their use so far with the system that would assist you in future demonstrations to your prospective clients?

    2.) If yes, are you incorporating any of them, how quickly in future demonstrations to clients?

    3.) Again, if yes, can you broadly explain in what basic areas they are (maybe a few possible examples could be Calorimetry, more expansive and/or vigorous engineering protocols, other areas)?

    My experiences are these would be things I would be trying to pursue and learn from; incorporate a vigorous learning and customer feedback process. Its the scientist-manager in me…not to mention what a productive life is in itself.

    Thanks.

    Kind Regards,

    Bill Nichols

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Italo R.:
    We are working and we are in a stage that does not allow to give precise data so far. We will give data as soon as we will have them consolidated.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Italo R.

    Dear Ing Rossi, you have written:
    “…YES! We are working with him for the production of electric power…”
    It’s great! I hope that your important goal is near to be reached for this plant.
    Is it possible for you (only if you can…) write something about the values of the most important parameters in the plant reached till now?
    In example the output thermal and electric powers, and the maximum selfsustain time?
    As we say in Italy, “stiamo tutti pendendo dalle sue labbra”
    Thank you very much,
    Italo R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Francesco Benetti:
    Interesting, but the efficiency is too low for us: it can work with waste heat, where whatever you recover is a plus. I know very well this technology ( Seebeck Effect), because I made a research for the US DOD in 1999, through Leonardo Technology Inc., regarding a thermoelectric device I patented in that period.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Neil Taylor:
    YES! We are working with him for the production of electric power. As I said, from him there is really to learn.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Mr. Rossi,

    I and the whole world are very curious for even little snippts of information on your world changing e-Cat systems. Sir, can you tell us with a simple Yes or No as to wether or not your initial customer is now happy with their purchase of your 1MW e-Cat plant?

  • Francesco Benetti

    Dear Andrea, hoping to do something useful, I would like to share info related to the Rotary Heat Engine (RHE). RHE is a thermoelectric device which offers the ability to convert waste heat to electricity. In particular RHE seems able to use waste heat at less than 150℃, which could be interesting to be used in combination with Ecat. Even the dimension could be interesting, since its size Is declared to be one square meter. You can find all info about the company and their product here http://www.davinci-mode.co.jp/e/rhe.html
    kindest regards.
    Francesco

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Roberto:
    Your pre-order has been accepted. When we will start the sales you will receive an offer and you will be free to confirm or cancel the order.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • roberto

    Dear Andrea,
    would you please take this e-mail as my commitment to buy one 10 KW E-CAT as soon as it becomes available as part of initial 10.000 selling program?
    Warm regards
    Roberto

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Don:
    Your pre-order has been accepted. When we will start the sales you will receive an offer and you will be free to confirm or cancel the order.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Don

    I read that you are taking names, trying to get 10,000 for orders of home units. Where do I sign up!!

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Arnaud:
    I cannot give additional information regarding what happens indside the reactor.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Paul,
    Received, thank you.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Paul

    Dear Ing. Rossi,
    I’ve just sent a reserved mail to your address info@leonardocorp1996.com
    I believe it could be of your interest.
    Please confirm reception
    Thanks
    Warm regards
    Paul

  • Arnaud

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I read the interresting article from Ethan Siegel : http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/12/the_nuclear_physics_of_why_we.php

    There is someting inside the article which seems very interresting to have your answer about it. In the article it claims that
    “Or was the whole thing faked, with natural copper powder added to natural nickel powder and passed off as “products” of the reaction? (Remember, from above, that copper is naturally found with 70% Cu-63 and 30% Cu-65 isotopic abundance.) What do you suppose was the ratio of copper “created” by this e-Cat? Analysis of the “final sample” showed that it contained the exact same 70-30 split of copper-63 to copper-65 found in nature.”

    1) Is this claim true ?
    2) If it true, how can you explain it ?

    Thank you,
    Arnaud.
    PS : I’m reading all the news from eCat since end 2010 and very enthousiast to see it once working.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Italo R. wrote in December 16th, 2011 at 1:45 AM

    fine your new logo for E-Cat, I like it!
    May I suggest to reverse left with right sides?
    In that way it would show, or suggest a “movement” toward the future.
    In this moment instead the arrow looks to the past..”

    Dear Italo,
    The arrow is formed by the letters “E” and “C”, and so there is no way to reverse it (the letters would lose their right form).

    Besides, what is the “right” side toward which the “movement” of the future is going on ? We use to imagine that such “movement” goes to the right because we write with the right hand.
    We can interpret it as the eCat (the arrow) is pulling the infinite.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear James Arness:
    Very interesting. I can’t, anyway, give information about what happens inside the reactor during the operation.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Neil Taylor:
    That People is good. They attended our October 2nd test.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Italo R.:
    Yes, I like it too. I conserve it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Italo R.

    @ Wladimir Guglinski:
    fine your new logo for E-Cat, I like it!
    May I suggest to reverse left with right sides?
    In that way it would show, or suggest a “movement” toward the future.
    In this moment instead the arrow looks to the past..
    Italo R.

  • This should blow all the naysayers away, that is if they can follow it:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VymhJCcNBBc

  • James Arness

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I just read a worrisome article by an american astrophysicist, Ethan Siegel. He contends that even though stars contain both nickel and hydrogen not even the densest among them are able to reproduce your supposed E-Cat reaction, fusion by nickel and hydrogen giving copper. Still, copper IS made in stars, but then through neutron capture. From that information, if true, could we then draw the conclusion that the real mechanism at operation in the E-Cat as a matter of fact is neutron capture?

    For further reading I refer to Siegel’s article that can be found here:
    http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2011/12/the_nuclear_physics_of_why_we.php

    Kind regards, James Arness

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Albert wrote in December 15th, 2011 at 5:44 PM
    …then, the COP of the whole system would be infinite and…”

    http://wladigpinturas2010.blogspot.com/2011/12/ecat-infinite-energy.html

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Albert,
    Of course you are right, but I prefer to be very conservative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Here’s the latest.

    E-Cat Weekly — December 15, 2011 – Despite appearances of nothing going on, there were around 37 unique stories posted that touch on Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat from the near dozen dedicated sites as well as at least 6 mainstream stories. The main highlight was reaching the goal of 10,000 pre-orders for the home E-Cat modules. (PESN; December 15, 2011)

  • Albert

    Dear Ing. Rossi, first of all may I wish you health, which is very important for you and also for us people who are eagerly waiting for your technology to become available to all.
    About energy generation by e-Cat. I do not know if I am thinkng the right way, but once the e-Cat commences producing electrical energy, the original electrical power source required to start-up the e-Cat could be switch off and electricalpower taken from the e-cat power itself. Hence, if you need one KWatt of electrical power to produce 2 KWatts of electrical power out of the e-cat system, then, using one KWatt from the output will produce a net output of Kwatt available to you. Hence, since the e-cat/electrical-generator tandem is generating electricity without any purchased electrical power, then, the COP of the whole system would be infinite and the only running cost to produce electricity by e-cat power is the cost of the nickel+hydrogen, which is insignificant.
    God be with you.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Nixter:
    Thank you very much: I am delighted to see that you noticed that I always do what I say. It has been, as I already said, the most important lesson I got from my father: ” Think well before saying a thing, but once you said it you have to do it”.
    The answer to your questoion is simple: the more plants will be in operation, the more this tech will be recognized. Too much persons are talking where it’s just matter of working. I think in a year the revolution will spread. We are working much more than you can imagine and making extremely important allegiances.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gaifas:
    Yes, we heat up the factory where we work with an E-Cat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Gentile Andrea Rossi,

    voglio ringraziarla per tutto ciò che la sua ricerca ha già determinato. Chi in qualche modo ne è informato, anche quelli che non hanno interesse nel fenomeno fisico, è “catalizzato” dal susseguirsi delle notizie relative all’argomento e chi segue le discussioni in questo e nei cento altri blog/siti dedicati e magari trova il modo di approfondire i temi con gli interessanti documenti che via via emergono (scientifici ed economici) le deve già qualche giorno di .. ferie :). Oltre a rivalutare in un lampo tutto il lavoro nel campo delle LENR “bloccato” fin da Fleishmann e Pons nello scenario della ricerca Lei ci da la possibilità di immaginare una rivoluzione per l’umanità che ancora pochi ritengono possibile.

    Come chiunque (sano di mente) sono personalmente interessato ad avvalermi immediatamente di qualsiasi tecnologia possa toglierci dalla morsa dei combustibili fossili ma non ho (ancora?) prenotato l’e-cat (capirà, non è da tutti acquistare a scatola chiusa, se però Lei desiderava solo capire la reattività di una certa fascia di mercato mi consideri certamente e quando il prodotto sarà disponibile sarò suo cliente).

    Detto questo, per alimentare la letteratura leggera (ma non solo) sarei curioso, visto quanto affermato dal simpaticissimo prof. Focardi, di sapere se Lei sta attualmente in qualche modo utilizzando la sua invenzione per il riscaldamento degli ambienti (o per altro) riducendo già l’uso di gas/gasolio.

    Auguro buone feste ed i migliori risultati per l’anno nuovo a Lei ed ai suoi collaboratori.
    Giancarlo Gaifas

  • Joseph Fine

    Bob Dingman, Andrea Rossi,

    I agree with your comment(s) about the international patent. If the energy catalyzer does not work, no harm is done by granting the patent. The patent does not have to be rescinded as it would be worthless. It only prevents someone else from building junk. Not granting a patent on the grounds that it is theoretically impossible is like believing that the Sun orbits around the Earth or that heavier-than-air flight is impossible. Just impossible until proven otherwise.

    Joseph Fine

  • Nixter

    Mr Rossi, I noticed that you have been very accurate in your predictions and estimates related to your E-Cat invention and it’s deployment. As many times before, when you said that you planned to perform a test on Oct,28th,2011, you did so on time, you have kept your word, you did what you said you would. With this positive pattern of behavior of yours in mind, I ask, can you please say (predict), when, do you think your E-Cat will be recognized as 100%,(OK 90% is good enough!), legitimate and functioning? How do you think this will happen? How much time will it take until we can know that their are multiple owners of your 1Mw plants that are happy and satisfied?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Bob Dingman:
    Thank you for your intelligent comment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Paul:
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Paul

    Dear ing. Rossi,
    at what address may I write you for reserved matters?
    warm regards
    Paul

  • Bob Dingman

    To those people who feel Andrea Rossi is directly responsible for the delays associated with the release of his Ecat technology, Please remember that what is holding up the information release is the fact that an international patent has yet to be granted. Please direct your angst at the bureaucrats who have not managed to fulfill their most basic duty, to provide patent protection so that Rossi can share his technology with the world. Clearly, there is only (1) proven nickel-hydrogen fusion reactor system in use at this time. Either Rossi is the first or someone else is. Rarely are patent applications this cut and dry. Grant the patent now, the world is in desperate need of the technology. If future evidence were to reveal something is amiss, the Patent can always be rescinded. We need to direct our frustration where it belongs, with the patent office.

  • Gherardo

    Dott.Rossi,
    I understand from your answers that you are targeting a conversion of 1 MW thermal to 500 KW electrical hence 500-160 = 340 KW net.
    That would be great news. Anyway we’ll wait your electricity numbers when you are confident on them.
    Thanks for your response.
    Gherardo

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gherardo:
    If you make electric energy using electric energy in our system the guaranteed COP is 2, so far.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Gherardo

    Dott.Rossi,
    you said “To make 1 thermal MWh/h of energy you will need 160 kWh/h (thermal or electric).”
    At the moment there is a big difference in the net usable power because we are saying that going from thermal to electric can cost up to 3 times.
    Could you clarify if what is needed by the 1MW plant is electric power or 160KW thermal power is good enough?
    Also I didn’t understand if 330KW is a gross number and we have to subtract 160KW to get usable external output (170KW).
    Thanks, Gherardo

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Eric Ashworth:
    Thank you and thanks to all our Readers for the patience,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Aussie Guy:
    To make 1 thermal MWh/h of energy you will need 160 kWh/h (thermal or electric). This system will yield 300-330 kWh/h of electric energy. This, with the best available conversion system we got so far. In sustained mode this can be upgraded, but only in a real scenario we can get real numbers. For now, conservatively, is better take these numbers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • AussieGuy

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    May I inquire a little more about your 330 kWh/h yield goal for a 1 MW thermal E-Cat plant?

    Is this the net / usable electrical output after internal plant requirements such as control systems, primary and secondary pumping, heat exchanger fans and E-Cat input power requirements are met?

    or

    Is this the gross electrical output before internal plant requirements are met?

    What would you estimate the internal plant load to be for a Ac kWh plant that links to a 1 MW thermal E-Cat?

    Thanks in advance for the data you have shared and for your time in answering this request. It would seem you are close to delivering a Ac kWh system that is well matched to your E-Cat LENR technology. Well done.

    AG

  • Dear Andrea, Great to see you overcame the attack and congratulations to your technical people in rectifying the problem. Best web site yet on exchanging information on physics. Regards, Eric Ashworth.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    The Yukawa’s meson and the Higgs’ boson

    In 1935 Yukawa published his theory of mesons, which explained the interaction between protons and neutrons, and was a major influence on research into elementary particles.

    In 1949 he received the Nobel Prize in Physics, after the discovery by C. P. Powell, G. Occhialini, and C Lattes, of Yukawa’s predicted pion in 1947.

    According to Yukawa’s idea, a meson would be jumping between two protons, so that the partnership proton+meson would play the role of a neutron.

    Today the physicists know that the neutron has the quark structure (d,u,d), and the meson does not play any role within the structure of the neutron.

    Therefore, in spite of he had predicted the existence of the meson, actually the meson does NOT play the role supposed originally by Yukawa.

    Such “coincidence” is very significant, because it shows that in spite of a particle is predicted by a theory (because the author wrongly supposed that it plays some role in the Nature), but its detection does no mean the theory is correct, because the particle actually does not play that role imagined by the author.
    In the case of Yukawa, he predicted the existence of a meson, but there are many other mesons existing in Nature. Therefore the meson was detected by experiments because many other mesons exist (and so inevitably one among several mesons would be detected), and not because Yukawa predicted its existence.

    Perhaps in the upcoming years we will see the repetition of a similar coincidence. Because today the physicists are trying to detect the Higgs boson, believing that such boson is responsible for the mass of particles.

    And suppose that when the proton is broken in several particles, one of them is like predicted by Higgs theory.
    But suppose that such particle does not play any role so that to give mass to the particles.
    Well, then the particle will be detected in the Large Hadron Collider, and the “coincidence” will play again its role: the physicists will be sure that such particle is the Higgs boson, and it is responsible for the mass of particles.

    So, as already happened in the case of Yukawa’s meson, it’s possible we may see to repeat in upcoming years a similar coincidence: physicists will credit to a particle (that has nothing to do with the mass of the particles), the property of giving mass to all the particles of the universe.

    It seems God is playing a joke with the physicists.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gherardo:
    About your guess, I can’t make any comment.
    The yield of 330 kWh/h of energy from a plant of 1 Thermal MW of power is what we are working for.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Frank Acland:
    A Customer who buys a plant has the right to make all the tests he wants, obviously.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Paolo Accomazzi:
    I will publish the theory when I will have the protection of a granted patent, because the theory indroduces to the cinfudential issues of the technology.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Paolo Accomazzi

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    more than a month ago you said that after the 1 MW plant test your intention was to say something about the theory, the mechanism or the physics behind the ecat.

    I’m sometimes returning here hoping to read something about theory. I know this is not important for you, maybe only a waste of time. I’m convinced that your invention just works and you don’t need to have some theory ready, heat comes out from ecat even without a scientific publication with all equations explained.

    I’m just curios about how you explain the mechanism of ecat.

    Thank you for you attention

    – Paolo

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>