by
U.V.S. Seshavatharam
DIP QA Engineer, Lanco Industries Ltd, Srikalahasti-517641, A.P, India
E-mail: seshavatharam.uvs@gmail.com
Prof. S. LAKSHMINARAYANA
Department Of Nuclear Physics, Andhra University, Vizag-530003, AP, India.
E-mail: lnsrirama@yahoo.com
Abstract
In the previous paper [1] it is suggested that there exists integral charge effective quark fermi-gluons and quark boso-gluons.
Effective quark fermi-gluons generates charged ground state baryons and quark boso-gluons generates ground state neutral mesons.
In this paper it is suggested that with a binding energy of 939 MeV any 3 (effective) quark fermi-gluons couples together to form a charged ground state baryon.
Square root of any 2 quark fermi-gluons or cubic root of any 3 quark fermi-gluons can be called as `hybrid’ quark fermi-gluons.
Hybrid quark fermi-gluons of up and down are 746 MeV, 779 MeV and 813 MeV. Out of 6 quark fermi-gluons, for a three quark bound system (with binding energy 939 MeV) different combinations of quark fermi-gluons and hybrid quark fermi-gluons can be possible and hence different ground state baryons can be generated with different quark flavors.
If n=1, 2, 3,.. excited energy levels follows
X sum of 3 quark fermi-gluons rest energy.
Another interesting thing is that light quark bosons like up boson mass=1.94 MeV and down boson mass=4.2 MeV couples with these ground or excited states to form doublets and triplets.
3 up quark fermi-gluons having rest energy 3×685 MeV and binding energy 939 MeV generates a ground state charged baryon of rest energy (3×685)-939≈1116MeV.
Up boson mass =1.94 MeV couples with this charged state and generates a neutral baryon at 1118 MeV.
Two up and one down quark fermi-gluons having binding energy 939 MeV generates charged (2×685+885)-939≈1316MeV .
One up and two down quark fermi-gluons having binding enegy 939 MeV generates charged (685+2×885)-939 1516MeV.
Thus 1177 MeV and 1377 MeV ground state charged baryons can be generated.
This idea can be applied to other heavy quark fermi-gluons.
Up boson mass =1.94 MeV couples with this charged state and generates a neutral baryon at 1118 MeV.
Two up and one down quark fermi-gluons having binding energy 939 MeV generates charged (2×685+885)-939≈1316MeV .
One up and two down quark fermi-gluons having binding enegy 939 MeV generates charged (685+2×885)-939 1516MeV.
Thus 1177 MeV and 1377 MeV ground state charged baryons can be generated.
This idea can be applied to other heavy quark fermi-gluons.
Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
Yes, but after many1, many2, many3 …manyN problems of certification.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear K.D.:
I do not agree: we must create jobs, not just sell technology. The big mistake of the industrialized Countries has been the illusion to be able to create richness without maintaining manufacturing and jobs. We must return to make real work, to make real jobs, based on technology, research and development. An Intellectual Property Owner without a manufacturing system is like a General without an Army: can’t win any war, whatever the strategy.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear psi:
Thanks,
Warm Regards,
A.
However, my estimated 1.25 million per e-cat megawatt installed may not include turbines—????, which might significantly alter the comparison. In any case, it seems safe to say that if even the basic e-cat unit for high temperature steam can be sold for 1.25 million, then neither wind nor any other existing technology (with the possible exception of the still very unproven Rohner noble gas engine) can match it.
Robert Curto asks: Dr. Rossi, in an area NW of Danville, Illinois they will construct a 200MW Wind Farm at a cost of 444 million dollars.
That is 2.22 million per one MW.
Can E-Cat beat this price ?
I think so !
I think so too, especially if one realizes that the wind farm will probably generate, according to wind energy proponents, only 30% of its rated power perhaps 75% of the time (http://www.windenergyplanning.com/wind-turbine-efficiency/).
If the e-cat will function pretty much 24-7 at a high percentage close to its rated capacity (say, 75%), we can see how huge the advantage it might have. it appears that
wind = 2.2 x 3.3/.75 = 8.8 million/MW actual capacity.
e-cat = 1.25/.75 = 1.66 million/MW actual capacity.
These figures suggest the e-cat beats wind by a factor of more than 5, before considering environmental questions, which appear to entirely favor the e-cat. Like I said, Ing. Rossi, I want to shake your hand….: )
Dir Ivan
I don’t think Mr. Rossi must build or even own manufacturing facilities. There, in US are many existing but not working production plants.
There might be plants, working at 30% or 50% capacity, ready to take any orders.
The plant I worked, is standing empty for seven years, because ours competitors bought only design of two machines for $40 million, but the property and buildings for which corporation is asking $10 million have no buyer.
Mr. Rossi: Can you visualize a day when you will sell only the reactor core, the size of a “D” battery, to insert into appliances, similar to how we use “D” batteries now? Only your “D” battery could power our house? How many years?
Dear Mark Saker:
1- within September
2- not true, I never said that
3- depends on the delta T you need, then the calculation is pretty easy: to raise of 1 °C 1 kg of water you need 1.14 Wh, provided you remain in the liquid state.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Scott Beach:
1- I never used the “solid state” definition
2- the number of modules depends on the requested power.
Warm Regards,
A.R,
Dear hank Mills,
Thank you for this interesting information. I will study it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ivan:
Thank you, but remember that before a domestic apparatus is able to produce electricity many hurdles have still to be overcome. Not so for the industrial plants.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I hope you will answer but understand if you cannot.
1. Will the report be sent to PESN for public viewing within the month of July, August or after?
2. You mentioned that the new ‘solid state’ reactor will be used within the home Ecat. Will this change of reactor have an effect on the certification time?
3. I am interested in how many litres of circulating water i.e. a hottub or small swimming pool, a 10KW reactor could heat to 40 degrees. Perhaps another reader can answer the third question to save you the time!
Thankyou for taking the time to answer my questions
Mark
Dear Dr. Rossi, there are no words to fully express the potential of your inventions. I believe that you could even just sell the instrucctions to build the ecat, and only manufacture the catalizer.
This way you and your associates could became mega rich.
And the rest of us reach the dream of enegy grid and (greed) independence.
Kind Regards.
Ivan.
Dear DR. Rossi, Yes I am very interested in your manufacturing facilities, as I am sure every home in this planet will dream to have an e-cat. your manufacturing facilities have to be really big and sofisticted to cope with the huge demand. The e-cat is a technology disrruptive product as such the demand will be huge.
I personally dream the day I could disconnect from my electricity provider. another reason your product is so desirable is that will eliminate proverty in the world, a day your product does not go in the market means millions of people dead of suffering as consecuence of poverty.
Thanks for your work.
Ivan.
Dear Andrea,
Perhaps while we wait on the report, perhaps you could answer a question about a side issue.
I’ve been reading about the materials considered for use in the “Next Generation Nuclear Plant”, because these high temperature and corrosion resistant materials need to be capable of surviving the plant’s 60 year expected lifespan. They will have to endure 1,000C temperatures and high pressure environments.
Here are a couple interesting links about the materials that may be considered for use in these reactors.
http://www.ewp.rpi.edu/hartford/users/papers/engr/ernesto/barthc2/EP/Other/Archive%20PDF%20Files/report11-28.pdf
https://inlportal.inl.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_3310_277_2604_43/http%3B/exps3.inl.gov%3B7087/publishedcontent/publish/communities/inl_gov/about_inl/gen_iv___technical_documents/aging_and_environmental_summary_13sep06.pdf
Could you tell us what material is used for the reactor core walls in the high temperature E-Cat?
Thank you.
Hank Mills
Dear Dr. Rossi:
Cyclone Power Technologies (of Pompano Beach, Florida; http://www.sunbiz.org/pdf/19041551.pdf) has built a steam engine that can operate on steam that ranges in temperature from 600 degrees Fahrenheit to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit.
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ICX3KPiPhcI
How many of your solid-state Energy Catalyzers would it take to produce enough steam to power this steam engine?
Dear Andre Blum:
1- We will give information in our report
2- The theory in due time will be explained
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Greg Leonard:
Yes, we are working very strongly, in this very hot Summer.
Important news are arriving.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Italo R.:
I hope not, I don’t think.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
is it possible that all this time for obtaining the certifications on domestic e-cat could depend on some “bad influence” coming from competitors or power lobbies?
I hope it isn’t so, the entire mankind needs your invention in a very short time!
Dear AR
In answering Yes to Gherardo to are showing that you are creating new possibilities each new day. We hope the first home ecat to be the highest specification possible.
Meanwhile
cleale, cleale
Dear mr Rossi,
The name Solid State E-Cat, if I have not missed prior mentioning of that name, was coined by Hank Mills in an excellent article of his hand.
1) Do you feel this accurately describes the current product? How do you refer to that improved version of the e-Cat yourself? Or: what do you prefer us to call it?
Another question I have is:
2) In the past you have said that you have gained better understanding of the process taking place and that you will publish it in due time. Will the report that you say you will bring out somewhere in the coming weeks reveal anything on your theory?
Thank you, wishing you all the best,
Andre
Dear Gherardo:
1- yes
2- not yet
3- depends on the certification timing
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ronnie Johnston:
It is not impossible.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi
Is it possible that the new 600 degree unit (paired with a suitable turbine/piston) might be able to produce enough electricity to sustain itself, giving infinite COP?
Yours hopefully.
Ronnie Johnston
Dott.Rossi,
I’m writing again after a long time.
I’ve heard of the so called Solid State E-Cat (SSEC). My compliments !
Questions:
1) is the Home e-cat also evolving to SSEC?
2) householders dream would be a SSEC delivering up to 6 electric Kw or heating a boiler when has spare power. Delivering power to the grid would be the last function if no workload is needed. Are you planning this way or what else?
3) any (new) timeframe for delivering Home e-cat? with what functions?
All the best, Gherardo
Dear Ivan:
The manufacturing facilities are top secret, at least so far. I do not see, anyway, why there is interest in our manufacturing facilities. Can you imagine the daily mess we could have there if their address is published?
Our industrial E-Cats are for sale already and in construction, the domestic ones still need certification.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Rossi, We all desperately wating for news on the ecat and its manufacturing facilities. could you please let us now when we will be able to buy your devices, it will be in months, one, two, three years?
please give us a clue!
Dear Robert Curto:
Thank you for your considerations.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi, in reguards to the amount of land needed for a 230MW Solar Plant. Solar Plant needs 2,100 Acres.
I understand E-CAT will need 20,000 sq. ft. One Acre equals 43,560 sq. ft.
So E-CAT will need less than one Acre !
This is yet another HUGE advantage for
E-CAT
And it will not disturb the home of the Desert Tortoise, the Mohave Ground Squirrel, the Desert Bighorn Sheep, and lets not forget the Mojove Fringe-Toed Lizard.
This is my opinion:
Coal Plants are bad news.
Nuke Plants produce
Radioactive Waste, that stays Radioactive for a hundred thousand years.
Where are we going to put this stuff ?Well at a cost of a few billion, we drilled a hole in the bottom of Yucca
Mountain.
When it was ready, the people in the State of Nevada said, we do not want this Radioactive Waste.
So it remains empty.
Meanwhile the Nuke Plants scattered all over the US have been storing the Radioactive Rods at the bottom of a Pool, on site for 60 years !
If Yucca Mountain opened tomorrow, it would create a big problem.
How are you going to transport this stuff to Nevada ?
By Plane, I don’t think you want to see a Plane, full of Radioactive Waste crash in New York City.
Thousands of Trucks ?
Have you ever heard
of a Train hitting a Truck ?
So the Field is wide open for
E-CAT.
Also I understand you are working with Siemens.
They are a World Class Powerhouse, in electronics, and electrical engineering.
They have 360,000 employees in 190 Countries.
If you have been in business since 1847, and growing every year, you gotta be doing something right.
Robert Curto
Ft. Lauderdle, Florida
USA
Sidebar to John:
You are very knowledgeable about Solar Power,
(and God knows what else)
I enjoyed reading your post, and thanks for helping me with mine.
Dear Roberto Nolè:
Thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
The following large scale solar power generating projects appear to have capital costs in the range of $4 million per MW of peak electric generating capacity. However the intermittency of solar radiation greatly reduces average total solar power output as compared to its peak output.
Some new nuclear power plants may cost $6 million per MW to build, but that does not include the massive additional costs of storing radioactive waste for thousands of years, and the costs of accidents and radioactive pollution.
Of course E-Cats are still rated in thermal output capacity, but the 600C E-Cat2 should be able to generate electric power with at least 40% efficiency, minus the electric power it consumes to operate. Therefore it might take four MW of E-Cat2 thermal power to generate
one net MW of electric power.
List of a few solar projects:
Fort Irwin Solar Project
Fort Irwin Solar Project will be the largest renewable energy project in the Department of Defense’s history. The initial development plan is expected to result in more than 500 MW of renewable energy with one billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) of clean, renewable solar energy generated per year by 2022. The $2-billion Fort Irwin Solar Project will create employment and additional revenue for local businesses.[15]
[edit]Ivanpah Solar Power Facility
The 392MW Ivanpah Solar Power Facility, located 40 miles (64 km) southwest of Las Vegas, is the world’s largest solar-thermal power plant project currently under construction.[16] BrightSource Energy received a $1.6 billion loan guarantee from the United States Department of Energy to build the project, which will deploy 347,000 heliostat mirrors focusing solar energy on boilers located on centralized solar power towers. The project is controversial for its environmental impacts, including the elimination of some desert tortoise habitat.[17] [16][18]
[edit]Mojave Solar Park
The Mojave Solar Park is a solar thermal power facility under construction in the Mojave Desert in California, which is located 100 miles northeast of Los Angeles near Barstow. The 280 MW concentrating solar power (CSP) plant will cost an estimated $1.6 billion and should be completed in 2014. Abengoa has successfully secured a $1.2 billion loan guarantee from the US government for the project.[19]
[edit]Antelope Valley Solar Ranch
The 230 MW Antelope Valley Solar Ranch is a First Solar photovoltaic project which is under construction in the Antelope Valley area of the Western Mojave Desert,[20] which is due to be completed in 2013. The project has received a $680 million government loan guarantee and will involve 350 construction workers. It features an innovative utility-scale deployment of inverters with voltage regulation and monitoring technologies, which will “enable the project to provide more stable and continuous power”. Electricity from the Antelope Valley Solar Ranch project will be sold to Pacific Gas & Electric Company.[21][22]
[edit]Land use issues
Solar thermal power plants require large amounts of land. According to the Bureau of Land Management, there were proposals to cover nearly 40 square miles of public land in California. If all of the proposed projects were built, they would generate approximately 3500 megawatts.[23] The requirement for so much land has spurred efforts to encourage solar facilities to be built on already-disturbed lands, and the Department of Interior identified Solar Energy Zones that it judges to contain lower value habitat where solar development would have less of an impact on ecosystems.[24] Sensitive wildlife impacted by large solar facility plans include the desert tortoise, Mohave Ground Squirrel, Mojave fringe-toed lizard, and desert bighorn sheep.
Some of the land in the eastern portion of the Mojave Desert is to be preserved, but the solar industry has mainly expressed interest in areas of the western desert, “where the sun burns hotter and there is easier access to transmission lines”, says Kenn J. Arnecke of “FPL Energy”. A sentiment shared by many executives in the industry.[25]
Dear Dr. Rossi, I got the numbers from a Newsletter I receive from Clean Edge News.
They were founded in 2000, and is the world’s first research and advisor Firm devoted to the clean tech sector.
Correct:
$1.4 Billion
230MW
2,100 Acers
$6,086,950 I calculated by hand.
Then I went to the Internet and divided 1.4 Billion by 230MW.
The correct number is:
$6,086,956.52
I rest my case.
Robert
Caro Sig. Rossi, le scrivo in italiano perchè non conosco l’inglese,quindi non mi interessa che venga pubblicato, ci tengo a dirle che la “Febbre” che il suo E-Cat ha prodotto si stà alzando e finalmente arriva anche all’uomo della strada, meschino nella sua esistenza, tenuto all’oscuro di tutto, e questo è già un motivo per ringraziare tutti voi, che come antichi monaci difendete l’unico motivo per cui possiamo considerarci umani, la possibilità di diventare liberi e consapevoli.
Continuate così, noi semplici tifiamo per voi. Saluti
Dear Robert Curto:
Are you sure of the numbers?
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
You are right: only facts count.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
[…] July 7, 2012This is very brief, but I thought this would be of interest to readers here. This exchange was just posted on Rossi’s Journal of Nuclear […]
Mr. Rossi: Congratulations on your progress. Please do not let the upcoming release of information distract you from continuing your production and selling safe E-Cats in the market place. The skeptics and “powers to be” are already attacking the information even before it is released! The market place will decide you success.
Dear Dr. Rossi, is the World ready for E-CAT ?
What is happening in the energy field is staggering to me.
For example:
Los Angles county has approved the construction of a 1.4 Billion dollar 230MW Solar Plant One, on 2,100 Acres !
If my math is correct, (I had to do it by hand, my calculator is not big enough)
That is $6,086,950 per MW.
Besides a gigantic gap in price, how much would a 230MW Plant need ?
Because if is a lot smaller then 2,100 Acers, perhaps it could be located much closer to the demand area.
Robert Curto
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida USA
Dear Prof. Azimuth:
Photos will be published along with the report.
WQarm Regards,
A.R.
Please ing. Rossi post some pictures of your twenty 600° reactors at works.
Warm (600°) Regards
Prof. Azimuth
Dear Mark Saker:
I suppose you mean ready for the domestic models, since the industrial 1 MW ones are already in the market. Yes, we will.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I hope when you are ready for market, you will host your own conference with production machines. I look forward to that day!
thanks
Mark
Dear Italo R.:
We cannot absolutely make our strategy and progress depend on the calendar of conferences. The report will be published when the validation will arrive to a consolidated point. We are working hard and well and, unfortunately, we have not time to participate or dedicate efforts to conferences.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Gentile dr. Rossi, molti di noi si stanno domandando se il report sui test del nuovo reattore potrà essere qui pubblicato prima del congresso in Korea, e anche prima del convegno di NI la prima settimana di agosto.
In tal caso i congressisti di quei convegni avrebbero certamente qualche altra cosa di cui parlare!!
Cordialmente,
Italo R.
Dear Dr. Joseph Fine, good point.
I believe the same applies to Solar Power.
The E-Cat works
24-7-365
Robert
Robert Curto, A.R.
And the wind doesn’t blow all the time. The windfarm capacity is probably less than 50%.
Joseph
Dear Robert Curto:
We are well below that price/MW.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi, in an area NW of Danville, Illinois they will construct a 200MW Wind Farm at a cost
of 444 million dollars.
That is 2.22 million per one MW.
Can E-Cat beat this price ?
I think so !
Robert Curto
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
USA
Bhagirath Joshi,
Wrote July 2nd… In response, you pose some basic important questions and state ‘this is where everything gets complicated’. I believe that any subject can be made as complicated as one would like to make it, especially if you assume something and then to proceed to ‘race off’ on that particular tangent. For instance, 0 = matter + antimatter. Technically with a lack of information this equation is correct. I shall try to explain why this is incorrect when dealing with the aether. Firstly you have to define labels matter/antimatter is a label. If matter is aether then according to these labels there is opposite aether. Thereby aether must be in various states and if so what’s the tools to use to find this out. I say maths and geometry are the only tools that specifically deal with aether because without aether there would be no tools or need for them. So this opposite, what is it?. It can’t be the same position, can’t be the same potential, can’t be the same density but it is aether, so lets examine it with regards to geometry because this is to do with the space aspect or the grand design by which aether occupies space. What I theorize is that aether can be of a diametrical dimension of a position and thereby have a degree of density or it can be of a circumferential dimension of a position and alternatively have a degree of rarelyness or it can be of a radial dimension in the form of a transforming mobile link. This is the basic geometry of a unit of energy comprised of aether. Three differing states of aether in vortex format labeled matter surrounded by aether labeled antimatter. Why antimatter?, because antimatter has no geometric design. It’s static with no structure and thereby able to be easily manipulated by animating forces. Antimatter has three main functions in the grand scheme, one being to provide the material to provide structure. The other being to provide identity to the aether of structur. All structure possesses a vibration of a quality that polarizes the free aether/ antimatter that is always present (identity/matter requires protection to remain identifiable). Antimatter is inert aether and contains no identity. The other important function is, as previously stated, its ability to be manipulated by animating forces that occupy the higher dimension. I suppose its been said many times by these animating forces ‘what a good idea I will have to try it out’ or you could say embody it in the matter aspect of aether. Getting back to 0 = matter + antimatter. This statement is correct if you believe these two states of aether can co-exist on the same plane. Positive and negative do and they cancel one another out to form a neutral but neutral is not nothing. What we are dealing with here is a contradiction i.e. a design that contracticts a none design of a substance labeled aether. None design requires no protection. A geometric design of aether that when constructed requires protection for a duration of time from that out of which it is constructed. Consequently, matter and antimatter coexist upon their respective dimensions/planes. They do form a unity that is comprised of a mutual contradiction. 0 = Nothing, can never exist as long as these two states of aether are present. Matter is simply antimatter geometrized with its protective jacket. If there is one thing that cannot be destroyed it’s aether. You cannot destroy a contradiction. Einstein puzzled over why matter does not flow together. Why does it remain separated?. The answer is simply. All life whether it be the life of an atom or that of a person resonates to a unique vibration and it’s the vibration that produces the protective jacket. A science not too long ago dealt with ‘frauer lines’ and the colour spectrum i.e. gaps found between the colours and within the colours. Same subject, identity of colour and frequencies within of the colour.
Regards the ‘Lifter information’, I do find it interesting with regards sequential attractive forces. First time I have come into contact with it. Question. Could it be related to static electricity and what Tesla was investigating towards the latter period of his life?.
I know there is great interest in the God particle but are we going to get a glimpse of the Antigod particle also?. Should make an interesting story.
I have said this before that this whole subject is fascinating with many twists and turns. Photon propulsion was investigated in the 70s. What was established was that you can produce ‘short life’ structure with regards fusing aether that almost instantaneously fizzes out. The short duration of the structure was sufficient to form a base upon which the sequential formation of structure bounced. By forming the four densities in rapid formation propulsion was achieved. Basically, It’s spheres of light fusing and then exploding upon one another. The science is extremely dangerous and requires an infinity magnetic field to contain the aether substance. If you doubt my information. Simply send me your e-mail address and I shall send you the details. Not recommeded to reproduce. Hoping you find this information interesting best regards Eric Ashworth.
P.S. If you cannot embody a theory then it remains on the plane of mind and is speculative, that is why the embodiment of a theory is so important especially with regards this subject.