Categories

Peer Review

All the articles published on the Journal Of Nuclear Physics are Peer Reviewed. The Peer Review of every paper is made by at least one University Physics Professor.

How repulsive gravity contributes for cold fusion occurrence


Wladimir Guglinski
Mechanical Engineer graduated in the Escola de Engenharia da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais- UFMG, (Brazil), 1973, author of the book Quantum Ring Theory-Foundations for Cold Fusion, published in 2006

Abstract
Quantum Ring Theory (QRT) proposes a new model of neutron, a new hydrogen model, a photon model, a model structure for the aether, a model of electron, a model of proton, and a new nuclear model named Hexagonal Floors Model.
Here we analyze the Rossi-Focardi cold fusion experiment by considering the nuclear properties of the Hexagonal Floors Model.

259 comments to How repulsive gravity contributes for cold fusion occurrence

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    From Wikipedia – “Water, while under pressure, is heated up to a high temperature (approx. 250-500 °C). As the hot water goes through the nozzle (usually a de Laval nozzle) and the pressure reduces, the water flashes to steam pressing on the nozzle, and leaving at high speed. By the recoil the rocket accelerates in the opposite direction to the steam. The nozzle of hot water rockets must be able to withstand high pressure, high temperatures and the particularly corrosive nature of hot water.

    The simplest design has a pressurised water tank where the water is heated before launch, however, this gives a very low exhaust velocity since the high latent heat of vapourisation means that very little actual steam is produced and the exhaust consists mostly of water, or if high temperatures and pressures are used, then the tank is very heavy.

    More complex designs can involve passing the water through pumps and heat exchangers and employing nuclear reactors or solar heating, it is estimated that these can give a specific impulse of over 195 s Isp, still below the up to 465 s a modern hydrogen engines deliver. Solar or nuclear heated steam rockets have been proposed for use in interplanetary travel. Although the performance is low, high mass fractions are easy to achieve, and water is expected to be very easy to extract and purify from ice deposits that are found around the solar system.”

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    I have not experience in rockets, but sounds quite exotic, as you correctly said.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Another, be it exotic, application for eCat. Assume you can generate 600C steam. The corresponding pressure is about 4400 psi. Consider the application of a space borne rocket acting as a towing or pushing unit. The impulse material is water, the fuel is Ni-H. A six month duration constant “burn” using onboard water as the propellant material. Because the energy density of Ni-H is so high, it should make a very powerful and efficient rocket.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Yordan Georgiev:
    I leave to the IT guys this issue. The declinations are complex and differentiated. Our work will generate many jobs from the possible declinations.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Mr. Rossi,
    We can’t wait for the wide spreading of the ECAT family of products around the world! Keep up the good work!

    The supremacy of the technology you are developing will introduce exponential growth which will require heavy use of IT for managing it. Have you had enough time to prepare the IT aspects of the future growth!?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven Karels:
    We know the issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Have you considered nano-powder Nickel? I have seen 20 nanometers average diameters readily available. It is becoming commercially available in large quantities? It might change or improve your product?

    Steve

  • Robert Curto

    Dear Readers, if this link works, you will be able to convert.

    http://www.onlineconversion.com/temperature.htm

    Robert
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    We are working to make products.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I submit this to you because I have the “feeling” that eCat has fallen off the interest of commercial companies and the general public. I recall your last public demonstration was Oct 2011. I have heard nothing since nor anything from your fellow competitors except for a low power (10s of Watts) ongoing demonstration at MIT. You apparently have one (military?) customer who received the fist 1MW eCat system and then nothing else. I understand the need for certification but I think you are losing media attention. I suggest you do something to get their attention and to revive the scientific controversary that served you well in the past. Maybe another demonstration, release of product descriptions/specifications, or begin interviewing on the mass media circuit, as opportunity presents? Maybe a demonstration of the 600C eCat, when it is ready? Something to “blow their socks off” and rekindle interest.

  • Robert Curto

    Dear Readers, I have never
    done this before.
    If it works, you may enjoy
    reading this link:

    http://energy.aol.com/2012/05/22/tidal-electricity-will-be-flowing-in-maine/

    Robert
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

  • Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, the Maine Tidal Electricity Project will cost 45 million to produce 3.6 MW.
    The cost will be 21.5 cents per killowatt hour !

    Is the World ready for the E-Cat…..I think so !

    Robert
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

  • Andrew

    You probably know of them already but US Engines Corp. make stirling/differential engines which seem to be very well suited to a pair if 1Mw cats, and they are just round the corner from you in Tampa!

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Robert Curto:
    The important is that we can contunue to work in peace, let alone History.
    God is History, we are His tools.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, this is what I think about on your Birthday:
    Every Generation has a few people go down in History Books, for good or evil, Einstein, Hitler, etc.

    Our Generation has a excellent Candidate, for the good page.
    If anyone out there does not know his name, you are not paying attention !

    Robert
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    As you can imagine, we have considered these options. The situation is not this easy, for many reasons. We will analyze your suggestion.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    A set of ideas came to me regarding your industrial eCat (110C and 600C) units. As I understand your design, you employ many, many eCat reactors working in both serial and parallel to output the thermal energy (steam). A high COP is desired to reduce the cost of input power. The COP is determined by the thermal output compared to the electrical input power. Self-sustaining mode of operation occurs for a period of time on the eCat reactors (i.e., no eletricial input power is needed for heating the eCat reactor) and are assumed to occure independently of each other.

    While it may be cheaper and easier to control each eCat electrically, you may wish to consider using some of the eCat thermal power from one eCat to reduce or eliminate the need for electrical power to heat another eCat. The goal is to raise the average or overall COP for the ensemble of eCats.

    For the 600C eCats, you could use the produced electricity to do this function but at a reduced efficiency (45%?) because of the losses incured when converting heat to electricity. Industrial power generation is always looking to improve efficiency and reduce costs. Perhaps the plumbing and steam control costs will be prohibitive, but that can be analyzed.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven Karels:
    Your responses never have been any “hard” and are always welcome, as well as all the sincere and honest comments, whatever they say.
    The control system of the E-Cat is able to modulate it. The precise way the modulation is done is in a phase of patent application in course, but it will be duly described in the instruction manuals. It is also still subject to approval from the certificators, so that it is premature to explain the details.
    Thank you for your question,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    First of all, please accept my apology if my responses were “hard” as that is what happens when we are passionate about a subject.

    What I was trying to point out was:

    a. If eCat’s only control variable is input electrical power and, during self-sustaining mode of operation, the input electrical power goes to zero, you have no control over eCat. From your responses, this is obviously not the case.

    b. If other parameters are controlled such that, when the input electrical power is near-zero, you can still maintain control of eCat, you may wish to explicity state that or people, much as I did, will come to the incorrect conclusion about eCat’s safety.

    c. Alternatively, you may wish to state if eCat is operating in the self-sustaining mode of operation and the demand suddenly decreases, the eCat will be able to reduce output without employing the “release hydrogen” method that you used in previous demonstrations.

    As always, I support eCat and attempt to provide a reflection of what others, including your critics, might say so you can counter them and their mis-statements/lies.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Sandy Mc Clintock:
    I suppose you are referring to the Oct. 28th test: the reason why we could put in operation 50% of the modules was due to leakages from the gaskets. The issue has been resolved with a new kind of gaskets, now the 1 MW plant is working properly.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Sandy McClintock

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    I noticed that the 1MW Prototype ecat is reported to have generated around 470KW in a recent test. Is that due to the fact that half the ecat modules failed to ‘fire-up’.
    If this is the case then it would be useful to count the power that was input into these non-operating ecat modules when calculating the COP. Would this lead to a real-world COP of 3 or 4 rather than 6?
    Sandy McClintock

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Hank Mills:
    We are making extremely important tests and we will have important news soon. Not this week, though. We are still resolving problems. We are working very hard, even if the earthquake made us lose some time. Nevertheless, we are working. The tests are in course and they are very important.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Hank Mills

    Hello Andrea,

    Can you provide us an update on the important news about the high temp E-Cat that is to be released this week?

    Thank you.

    Sincerely,
    Hank Mills

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Tim Monroe:
    You are right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Tom Monroe

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I noticed several posts discussing the “self-sustained mode” of your reactors – I had a few thoughts about it.

    As I understand self-sustained mode, it uses the heat generated by the reactor and feeds it back into the reactor to continue the reaction.

    At some point, it will be practical to generate electricity from the reactor. At that point, it seems to me that the need for self-sustained mode will diminish, as electricity can be stored and re-applied as needed.

    If the efficiency of the electrical generation (and any loses incurred during storage, instrumentation, heat escaping, etc) exceeds inverse of the COP, then the reactor + generator would be able to run continuously for an extended amount of time with no input – with any excesses being usable byproducts of the reaction (of course, if it was possible to cycle between normal and self-contained modes, this would increase the COP, and any usable output).

    But I would guess this is only likely to happen in large-scale operations for the forseeable future.

    I wish you the best of luck sir, this is an exciting and revolutionary technology, and I’m happy that its coming about during my lifetime.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    The E-Cats have all the control system necessary for a safe operation. Such system is described in the operation manuals that are delivered together with the E-Cats.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    The question which you will ultimately need to address before eCat can be used commercially is “Is the eCat out-of-control when running in the self-sustaining mode of operation?” Logically, no input control equates to “out-of-control”.

    The conventional definition of COP is output power (thermal for eCat) over input power (electrical for eCat?). If input electrical power (heating) is the only control over eCat thermal output, I can see situations where an eCat operating in the self-sustaining mode is producing too much thermal energy compared to the demand. This would require either dumping the unwanted thermal power to a waste thermal load or allowing the plant to receive the excess heat and produce more energy (in the case of an electrical power plant) than what is demanded. This would not be acceptable.

    Another possibility is there is another eCat control parameter not yet revealed by you that can effectively control the eCat output thermal power being produced without a corresponding change in electrical power input. But so far, either that does not exist or you have not revealed it.

  • Gerard Dubosson

    Dear Mr Rossi,

    Thank you for this web site which has, for me, a main quality: making nano-breaks in some scientific glass ceilings.

    A car engine has an efficiency ratio between 0.2 and 0.3. Such efficiency ratio is mathematically defined as the ratio between usable energy (mechanical for a car) and the total of energy input, e.g. chemical for a car.
    I understand that 6 is the ratio between the heat energy produced by the E-Cat and the electrical energy input over a certain period of time.
    But there is a lot of confusions caused by inappropriate and variable definitions of “COP”, as some very fast people consider it to be a ratio between a yet-unknown future electrical output of your device and its electrical input, without considering the E-Cat “Ni-H” burning… “ex falso quodlibet”
    May I suggest that you use “COHP”, coefficient of heat production? COHP=6

    Best wishes,
    Gerard Dubosson

  • Steven N. Karels

    Hank,

    Nice, logical input on the adequacy of a COP of 6. I agree. What I cannot receive an answer to is if the reactor happens to be in a self-sustaining mode, which I understand to be that no electricity or power is input during that time other than the frequency generator and/or pumps. If that is a correct understanding of COP, then the effective COP during that self-sustaining mode in near infinite (denominator goes to zero). So where is control over the eCat output power level. Suppose the eCat is in a self-sustaining mode of operation and I want to cut its output in half — because the demand has dropped. What control do I turn to decrease output?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Hank Mills,
    Thank you, important considerations: actually, somebody talks of COP 6 like it is nuts. Like to look at Jesus walking on the surface of the lake’s water and say:” He can’t swim”. Most do not know what we are talking about.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Henk:
    Thank you for your insight. Interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Franco:
    I must repeat that our cop cannot go above 6, also considering the s.s.m.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    No.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    One of you posts stated
    “Dear Hank Mills:
    Basically I agree with you.
    About 50% of the time goes self sustained in our tests.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.”

    During those periods of self-sustained modes, if the unit is producing more heat than requested (e.g., the demand drops), how do you control it? Infinite COP (self-sustaining mode) means loss of control? Please clarify.

  • Franco

    Dear Ing. Rossi

    You said and wrote that tha COP of E-Cat is 6 but You say also that now E-Cat operates for about 50% in self-sustained mode during Your tests (operation in stable conditions I suppose).
    From the above, during 24 hours of continue operation, real average COP (in my opinion) shoul be considered double, 12.

    Probably You will say “We grant a COP of six…” but the input electric energy consumed seems to me to be half in a day in this case.
    What do You think about?
    Kind Regards

    Franco

  • Joe

    Ioannis,

    An interesting article on earthquakes, volcanoes, and electricity is the following:

    http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2011/09/09/earthquakes-and-volcanoes/

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Henk

    Andrea,

    I understand Stirling engines require high temperature to generate energy. Can this probably also make it interesting for cars?

    A car with stirling engine works only as a hybrid, because with a stirling engine you can’t give extra power at times (to speed up quickly). With the E-cat the battery of the (hybrid) car can be charged (so you don’t need charging points). While driving you use the stirling engine for motion and the electricity from the charged accu (to speed up).

    An existing stirling engined hybrid car (by Dean Kamen) uses fuel. So it’s not really green. Biofuel isn’t the sustainable solution for cars. Cars on hydrogen isn’t the solution as well (unsave gas, needs to much space). The E-cat could be the solution. I think it’s nice that compared with electrical cars, it’s being moved by steam as well and it doesn’t need to be charged on the electricity net. When the technology improves, when COP improves, cars can even be fully driven by steam (the extra energy that isn’t used, when the car drives slowly, can be used to charge the battery and you can power your house with it).

    Henk

  • Hank Mills

    The Very High COP of the E-Cat

    Recently, there has been a lot of talk and discussion about the COP of the E-Cat. The term COP stands for coefficient of performance. Basically, it means how much power you put in compared to how much you get out. With the E-Cat, you are guaranteed to get out six units of power (thermal) for everyone one unit of power (electrical) you put in. This means that a minimum COP of 6 is guaranteed.

    A few individuals have been trying to spread lies saying that a COP of six is low. However, it is not. A COP of six is actually very high. For decades hot fusion scientists have attempted to build reactors that can exceed a COP of 1.1, and have not been able to do so. They have not been able to do so despite billions of dollars in funding. However, the current models of E-Cat that are soon to be commercialized can produce an average COP of six which is tremendously higher than any attempt at hot fusion has ever been able to produce. In addition, this COP of six can be produced utilizing only tiny amounts of fuel, without producing any nuclear waste, and without producing any radiation that can escape the reactor.

    With a COP of six and 600C steam the E-Cat technology can change the world. A higher COP is not required. Consider the following example.

    A one megawatt plants produces one megawatt of output power in the form of steam, while consuming 166 kilowatts of electrical power. With 600C steam a turbine can produce electricity with approximately 45% efficiency or greater. However, to be conservative lets say the efficiency is only 40%. This means that 400 kilowatts of electrical energy is produced. 400 kilowatts of output minus 166 kilowatts of input equals 234 kilowatts of excess power.

    Basically, a first generation one megawatt E-Cat can produce 234 kilowatts of excess power. This is enough power to run a small neighborhood of homes. It is also enough power to run a medium sized business or a shopping mall. This power will be produced with almost zero fuel cost (maybe $20 dollars a year), no pollution, no nuclear waste production, and the only cost will be the purchase of the system and maintenance.

    The price of the first systems will be economical, but not as low as the price will be once the scale of production is increased. Once they are mass manufactured the price will go down even more. Eventually home E-Cats that can produce electricity will be mass manufactured, and the price will go down to the point that energy will be dirt cheap.

    However, a COP of six is not the limit. In the past E-Cats have produced COPs of 200 or more during periods of self sustained operation. During self sustained operation the electrical resistor is turned off, which is what consumes the majority of the input power. The only power consumed is from the radio frequency generators, sensors, and whatever pumps are needed. The result is that a huge amount of output can be produced with very little input.

    Right now, an E-Cat cannot run forever in self sustained mode. Every so often power has to be applied in the form of a “drive.” Otherwise, the reactors can become unstable, the nickel powder can melt, and the reactor can go dead. Resolving this is just a matter of engineering and research. I am sure that in future generations of E-Cat the self sustaining periods can be made longer, and the COP will become even higher.

    So in fact, the E-Cat can produce a very high COP right now, but only for certain periods of time. Then the COP will go down when an input is applied. This is not a big deal, because the average COP will always be at least six. A few years from now, the average COP may be 10 or 20.

    But again, a COP of 10 or 20 is not needed. A COP of 6 is very high.

    It is high enough to produce all of the world’s electricity.
    It is high enough to desalinize ocean water.
    It is high enough to provide all of the world’s heating.
    It is high enough to be incorporated in vehicles.
    It is high enough to end the energy crisis, and end the use of fossil fuels.

    A COP of 6 is high, regardless what the skeptics or competitors say.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Joannis:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Hank Mills:
    Basically I agree with you.
    About 50% of the time goes self sustained in our tests.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Hank Mills

    Hello Andrea Rossi,

    I am glad to hear that the new high temperature E-Cat utilizes a period of self sustained operation. This is very encouraging. Already the COP of the E-Cat is very high (hot fusion scientists cannot even obtain a COP of 1.1) and with 600C steam production is capable of revolutionizing our civilization. However, I think in time future engineers that go to work for Leonardo Corporation (the company will eventually get very large as more and more E-Cats are sold) will be able to find ways to extend the periods of self sustained operation. Although this is not really “needed” to use the E-Cat to power the world, it will dramatically reduce the input power needed. Also, self sustained operation is just pretty cool to think about!

    What is the longest period of time that a high temperature E-Cat has operated in self sustained mode so far?

  • Dear Phillip Newell,

    Thank you very much for yours interest!

    —————————————-
    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    In regards to the recent earthquakes in Italy, I would like to inform you as also all the participants of this blog that the last 30 years took place an alternative research of earthquake prediction in Greece (50% of Europe Earthquakes occur in Greece. The best Laboratory?!?!). The method is based on the measurement of Earth’s Electric Field (µHz ELF Waves). Back in 2004, when I was living in Athens, I met personally Dr. Thanassoulas (Geophysicist) who invited me to discuss a connection of another researcher’s theory (based on ELF waves) for the detection or production of Gravitational waves as also shielding effects against Gravity, where at that time I was following on theoretical as also on experimental level (where it was possible but mostly with negative results).

    As I knew before I met him as also after our meeting, he assured me that the earthquake prediction puzzle is solved! He made a 6 years uninterrupted experiment in Greece by installing three measuring stations on three different locations in Greece (It needs at least three stations to detect the event on the surface of earth). The entire research and expenses were covered entirely by himself (no Governmental money) as also was helped by some volunteers for the maintenance of the stations.

    Dr. Thanassoulas as also his research is very well known in Greece where the establishment (Seismologists and accepted Science) put many obstacles on the way of acceptance (Establishment tends to ignore and to discard new ideas). He is another example of technology or Science suppression (Working and with all evidences on line). Can you imagine that you could receive by SMS the next earthquake event with accuracy of Location, Magnitude and Time (days before)? The accurate prediction is already a reality! If we put aside his ingenious research (very difficult and complex scientific problem), can you imagine how many lives could be saved if they new earlier such kind of events? (Earthquakes, Volcano eruptions). Do not forget that earthquakes are considered as a chaotic events by official Science.

    A couple of months ago, I gave a training at the company where I work to some Japanese Service Engineers. Well, I told them openly to share this information in their country (although it is known, since Dr. Thanassoulas research is almost in every University’s library worldwide. Check it in his web site.) for their own good. Japan suffered, suffers and will suffer for such kind of natural catastrophes. The same applies for Italy, Greece, Indonesia and other places of the world.

    Believe it or not, is true!

    Dr. Thanassoulas Web Site: http://www.earthquakeprediction.gr/ (Everything on line!)

    I already placed the above link on my Web Site, as a move of support.

    God bless the World or better Real Science bless the World! (Of course I believe to God, but God will do nothing if we as mankind act as idiots.)

    I know that is inappropriate the above information on this blog, but I felt that I should share it! Please do not misunderstand the words about God.

    As Thales said “The wisest in the entire creation is the TIME, because it discovers everything!” 600 B.C. Another meaning of this is that the Creator (God) made the world with wisdom, even if we fail to see or understand it!

    Mr. Rossi, my sympathy for the Italian people.

    Best Wishes

    Ioannis Xydous

    Electronic Engineer

    Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
    Aether’s Detection Experiment: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/AetherDetection/

    E-mail: SEPP@ioannisxydous.gr

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Hank Mills:
    Yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    In Bologna the earthquake this morning has been not irrilevant, although it has been much worse in the town of Mirandola ( province of Modena). My factory has been hit. We are working anyway. No damages have been signaled from the University of Bologna, even if also there the earthquake has been felt.
    Thank you for your kind feeling,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    p.s. I thank as well the many persons who wrote us to know about my factory, my employees, my family and me. We all are well, thank to God, not so many persons in our Region.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Neil Taylor:
    I cannot give information about the process, negative or positive.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Mr. Rossi,

    I just posted this comment on http://www.e-catworld.com in response to a Linda’s statement concerning the need for a perfect lattice structure for LENR and wanted you to see it for your expert opinion and insight.

    I have been thinking about such a perfect lattice structure and I wonder if “Aerosol’s” could play a role here? I know they are primarily Silica, but could possibly provide the perfect atomic lattice structure needed for other attached elemental atoms or perhaps under the right conditions (with a proper catalyst) suffice by itself?

    Aerosols consist of a fine network of bubbles, with cell walls just a “few atoms thick”. Inside these cells is simply air, “or whatever gas” (Hydrogen in the case of LENR) the designer wishes to include.

    Aerosols can also withstand the high temperatures Mr. Rossi is talking about for his e-Cats.

    Just thinking a bit out of the box here and wondering on things that may help us all out of this energy jam.

    I applaud your optimism and continued R & D…

    Thanks,
    Neil Taylor

  • Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    Another Earthquake in Italy, we hear.

    Please tell us that you and your family are well.

    Best regards,

    Joseph

  • Steven N Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I just heard about the Italian earthquake this morning. Any word on damages to your facilities and/or the University of Bologna?

    Steve

  • Dear Ioannis Xydous and all Engineers looking for work

    Engineeer.net operates a engineering jobs board free to all engineers looking for work. We have thousands of jobs for engineers posted from hundreds of Companies. Go to http://www.engineer.net and either search or scroll the main page to see the jobs you can also register and post your resume which will allow clients (Companies)to search the resume database for you.
    Best of Luck
    Phil Newell
    VP Engineer.net

  • Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Does the high temperature E-Cat utilize periods of self sustaining operation?

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=""> <strike> <strong>