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.

Is proton the harmonic mean of up and down quark fermi-gluons!

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

Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file

Introduction
Estimated or phenomenological [7, 8] masses of up and down quarks are 1.3 to 3.3 MeV and 4.1 to 5.8 MeV respectively.
Standard model assumes that proton constitutes 2 up quarks and one down quark. Neutron constitutes 2 down quarks and one up quarks.
In any way their estimated or phenomenological [7, 8] mass sum is not matching with the nucleons rest mass.
In any way their sum is not matching with the nucleons rest energy.
There should be some reason for this mismatch. This clearly indicates that there is something missing from the standard model.
In standard model there exists 8 gluons having `color’ charge with no rest mass and in between the quarks strong interaction is mediated by these gluons.
If gluons has no rest mass and up and down quarks mass sum is small (compared to the nucleon rest mass) how to generate the existing nucleon rest mass? To over come this difculty [1] it is suggested that there exists integral charge quark fermions, integral charge quark bosons, integral charge (massive) quark fermi-gluons and integral charge (massive) quark boso-gluons.
Note that fermi-gluon means massive gluons having fermion behavior and boso-gluon means massive gluons having boson behavior.
(Effective) fermi-gluons play a crucial role in baryons mass generation and boso-gluons play a crucial role in mesons mass generation.

Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file

294 comments to Is proton the harmonic mean of up and down quark fermi-gluons!

  • Adolf Schneider

    Mr. Rossi

    We like to inform you that we have stored two links (english/german) with the schedule of the last E-Cat-convention in Zurich from Sept. 08/09, 2012. All the presentations can be downloaded via hyperlinks (underscored texts).

    The link to the english texts is: http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Kongress080912N-e.pdf
    The link to the german texts is: http://www.borderlands.de/Links/Kongress080912N.pdf

    Best wishes
    Adolf Schneider

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Brian:
    1- it is the same
    2- together
    3- not for testing, but only for visits for selected persons.
    Yes, we are extremely busy: not only because we are continuing the tests, but also because we are preparing the plant we will deliver in the next months to our Customers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Brian

    Mr. Rossi

    I hope that all is well with you. I had some questions about the testing that is being conducted.

    1. You mentioned earlier that there might be some academic publication of E-Cat results by universities in October. Is this separate from the validation testing that is happening during the next two months or is it the same?

    2. Are the validations of the “regular” e-cat and hotcat being released together or being handled separately?

    3. There was a report from you conference that a 1MW would be shipped soon to a customer that would make it publicly available for testing. Can you confirm if this is true?

    Thank you again for taking the time to answer. We know that you are very busy.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gene Quong:
    We are measuring the energy in different ways, to get data undisputably reliable. Within 2 months we will publish the data obtained wiithin the third party indipendent tests in course.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Gene Quong

    “Perception is reality”

    To measure the input electrical power you could use an actual utility smart meter to measure the kilowatt hours. These meters communicate by RF digital signals which could be captured. This would be the ultimate reference standard since this would represent real-life billing by an utility.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Michael Coles:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Michael Coles

    I certainly hope that your invention(s) will help the entire world’s ecomony and reduce the natural consumption of oil. I wish you the best sir.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gherardo,
    Go back to what I wrote: I said 1500 Celsius, not 100. I said that if the reactor exceeds a T of 1 500 °C Ni melts and the reactor stops. This makes it intrinsecally safe.100 C is the temperature of the steam, not of the reactor’s core.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Gherardo

    Dott.Rossi,
    at the beginning it was discussed that the e-cat was intrinsically safe since if the temperature would exceed a given value above 100 C degrees the internal mix would loose the capability to generate a reaction and so stop any further rise.
    Now how is that related to the high temperature e-cat that possibly performs in the high 1000 C degrees?
    Do we have the same behaviour?
    Hope you can answer without disclosing anything critical.
    Keep us updated for Zurich.
    Thanks, Gherardo

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Ecco Liberation:
    1- yes
    2- this depends on the University, not on me: I cannot decide for them. While point 1 depends on me, point 2 does not.
    3- probably
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Steven N. Karels: Water Purification: I totally agree with you for small scale applications, especially when the need is immediate. I applaud your efforts.

  • Ecco Liberation

    Dott. Rossi, please correct if I’m wrong. If I understand correctly there will be:

    1) Disclosure on September 8th (during the Zurich conference) of a validation by a third party entity (private company?) already performed earlier this Summer;
    2) Disclosure within Mid-October of a University validation
    3) Additional disclosure of a third party validation to be yet performed, very soon, with videos, etc.

    That would be three different independent validations. Am I correct?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Brian:
    Yes, we will have another third party validation very soon of which a video will be produced and diffused.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Brian

    Mr. Rossi

    Would it be possible for you to publish some official pictures or videos of the Hot-Cat in action? I’m sure many of us would love to see it.

    Thanks
    Brian

  • Steven N. Karels

    Bernie,

    We are in agreement regarding Water production using eCat technology. Obviously, if the techiques to produce clean, drinkable water uses a fossil fuel for its energy source, then conversion to eCat technology should produce less costly water and in the process by environmentally cleaner. Water purification can be divided into two major divisions: large scale inductrial and Point Of Use (POU).

    My argument should have been better stated in that I was talking to POU applications. A typical Mayan Indian village, I understand, is about 1000 people in size. Unless someone were to introduce electricity generation and the needed infrastructure into their villages, my argument is that eCat just to boil water for purification probably does not make sense on the small (10 person) scale. I agree that the addition of a heat exchanger to pre-heat the water can improve efficiency and therefore increase the amount of pure water (distilled) being generated. But I suggest that for POU applications where the heated water is not used for any purpose other than drinking, it makes little sense compared to more conventional filtered approaches. Comments?

  • LCD

    Ing. Rossi
    I’ve been trying to analyze your business strategy. In my humble opinion while i believe that industrial plants at first with some measure of IP protection is wise, i think that ultimately your best strategy for long term succeess is to license your IP to companies for a percentage ownership. This strategy ferrets out would be competitors and puts them to work for you.

    The reason why i think this is the best course of action is because the nature of the technology is such that it probably cant be protected long term by patents and it is too inexpensive to fight against every possible infringer.

    Good luck and thanks for bringing the tech to us.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Thank you, very useful info.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Are you sure of your numbers? I am ignorant of the matter.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Prof. Joseph Fine:
    Can you send your scheme of honey-hotcat?
    Consider that I have to exchange heat with the total external surface of every hot cat plus with the surface of the internal surface of the torus. I am not able to contain more than 100 modules in a drum with a diameter of 1.2 m x 0.4 m. of length.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    According to my analysis of a probable hexagonal array of modules or ‘honeycomb’, there may be room in the ‘Hot-Cat’ container for more than 100 modules. Without going into details, would you consider operating a higher power version with 150 or 200 modules, or would you consider installing extra modules as spares? So, for example, if you install 200 modules, when the ‘A’ modules run out, you can switch to the ‘B’ modules.

    That is, you can run 1 MW for 12 months by switching to the spare modules after 6 months. Or, alternatively, generate 2 Megawatts for six months.

    I believe the geometry. But I am in shock. A good kind of shock, to be sure.

    Best regards,

    Joseph Fine

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Steven N. Karels: Re: Your “USE OF ECAT TECHOLOGY TO PRODUCE POTABLE WATER”
    I certainly applaud you helping Mayan Indians in Guatemala with the filtering system, if they have no potable water it will mean life and death to them. Please understand the words below are not in any way meant to criticize or discourage your good works.

    But I must disagree with your numbers and your conclusion that the E-Cat will not be a cost effective way to provide clean water. Granted you might be talking about helping 10 people at a time and I am talking thousands.

    A current modern desalination plant, depending on the energy cost will produce 1000 gallons of water for $3.50 or .0035 cents per gallon. The filer system you suggested costs $130.00 for two years.(Not sure if this includes energy costs) This provides subsistence water for 10 people at 1.8 to 3.7 liters per person. So if we use the high number 3.7 liters or one gallon: 1 gallon per person times 10 people times 730 days equals 7,300 gallons times .0035 cents per gallon or $25.55, compared to your cost of $130. The important thing is we are talking bare subsistence water use, I think we can do better.

    Why do I think the E-Cat can change the water game? Because up to half of that $3.50 per thousand gallons above is energy cost. If the energy cost can be reduced to .25 cents we have $2.00 water cost per thousand gallons. Per the article below water cost in the US for a family of 4 using 100 gallons per person (I agree that is outrageous) per day is $24.12 a month in Chicago, 65.47 in Boston and $160.00 in Guatemala City. If desalination water costs $2.00 times the 12,000 gallon used (4x100x30days) we have $24.00 a month water. Project this to water starved areas around the world and we have a revolution in health, agriculture and quality of life.

    http://www.livescience.com/4510-desalination-work.html

    http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/2010/world/the-price-of-water-a-comparison-of-water-rates-usage-in-30-u-s-cities/

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Robert Curto
    Thanks
    A.R.

  • Robert Curto

    Dear Dr. Rossi, here’s wishing you have a safe and wonderful trip to your conference.

    I know Santa will be happy to meet his Elves !

    And here’s also hoping you return with some enjoyable reports for us to read.

    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
    USA

  • Svein Utne

    Steven N. Karels
    I do not have the right numbers, but the water you heat to boil; will need to be cooled so it will condense back to water again, and down to room temperature. This condensing and cooling energy can be used to pre heat the new water that should be boiled, and most of this boiling energy will be reused.
    I take this only from memory, but I think about 90% of the energy is reused, so the number of liter of distilled water one ecat can produce per day is maybe ten times more that what you estimated.
    Regards
    Svein

  • Greg Leonard

    Dear AR and Steven Karels
    The heat required to boil the water does not allow for the cooling condensate being used to pre-heat the incoming water in some form of heat exchanger.
    I would guess that at least half the heat could be reclaimed, so at least doubling your estimate for production of distilled water

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Koen Vandewalle:
    We have all the resources necessary for a development of our technology, based on our businessplant. I do not think we will have delays as for the industrial apparatuses. For the domestic ones, certification will be possible, I think, after the industrialplants will have produced enough statistics.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    If your numbers are right, you are right too.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Guest:
    You are right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Guest

    Dear mr. Rossi

    With a compact 1200 degC / 200 KW E-cat I’m sure one could convert a normal engine to a steam driven engine. Having cylinder tops removed and replaced with some high temp heatexchangers one could use water injection into cylindertop exchanger, creating flashing high pressure steam, i.e. pressure to drive cylinders….

    ref hobby builders on the internet building steam cars today. But present steam generating technology take up too much space….

    regards
    Lande

  • Steven N. Karels

    USE OF ECAT TECHNOLOGY TO PRODUCE POTABLE WATER

    To boil 1 kilogram of water (initial temp = 20C) requires 2,596 kJ of energy.

    A 10KW eCat can therefore produce in one hour, 13.8 liters of distilled water or 331.2 liters in one day.

    The recommended water intake for humans is between 1.8 and 3.7 liters per day.

    So, one 10kW eCat can provide distilled water for between 89 and 184 people.

    An alternative approach would be water filter units that remove (filter out) debris and also have a silver particle and graphite system to neutralize toxins and the kill water-borne diseases. These are available at a cost of $85USD to purchase and a filter replacement cost of about $25USD where the filter lasts 1 or 2 years, A single filter unit meets the needs of 10 people, My church is working to sponsor providing Mayan Indians in Guatemala with such filters. So an equivalent number of such filter to equal one eCat’s output is between 9 and 19.

    Unless electricity or heat is the primary purpose and the water is a secondary benefit, I don’t think eCats are a cost effective way to provide clean water.

  • Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    do you have enough resources in all thinkable ways (e.g. money, time, personnel, IT, manufacturing capacity,…) to develop and materialize -for the moment- all your ideas on e-cat technology ?

    The time “waiting” for the certification of the home e-cats and the patents allowed you to invent the hot-cat. This time was not lost.

    Do you think that further delay and restrictions on the sales of mass produced e-cats and hot-cats – in consideration of the above – are harmfull for the world ?
    In other words: do you think that the technology is mature, but that conflicts of interest are now the most important restrictions that hinder the mass production ?

    Kindest Regards,
    Koen

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear David Calissano: yes, the Sterling Engine now is a possibility.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
    First of all, the certification process must be completed in Europe or in the USA at least before we make an installation, and this is valid also for Africa: it is deonthologically unacceptable to install a not certified apparatus in a Country just because in that Country the safety issues are not addressed.
    We have no experience in desalination yet, and this operation can be made only after we will know exactly the problem. After that, there are many problems to think about, first of all the problem of the defence of the technology, that in those situations can be very critic: who makes secure the place? That is an action that will be possible only after our plants will be already diffused, the Intallectual Property well defined and our experience in desalination consolidated. We got the idea and we will take in account it: when we will set up our system of charity we will think about this and will look not for charity organizations, but directly to the utilizers, as well as we will give the money for children cancer care directly to the families, to avoid to pay wages of “non profit” organizations managers, secretaries etc instead of paying healthcare
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Herb Gillis, Mr. Rossi: Good idea, I am very interested. Maybe work through an existing charity that is already involved in third world water problems? If agreed I will proceed to try to find a charity working on problem, Ok?

  • Joe

    Wladimir,

    In my last response to you, I allowed for your belief that the proton does not move with respect to the aether. But the aether is also not space. And the proton most definitely does move through space when orbiting an electron. This is why your neutron must contain a dual dynamic in its aether – one orbiting with the proton, another not orbiting with the electron. If you confuse aether with space, then a proton – or any body – would have to be infinitely massive in order to remain motionless in an orbit. And since a proton has a finite mass, it must necessarily be moving through space although not necessarily through aether.

    All the best,
    Joe

  • david calissano

    Dear Ing.Rossi thanks so much for your quick answering. I think also that you found a pratical way to use the stirling engine. It’s right? That’s great!! As italians says, you catch 2 pigeons with one bean. You’ll change the word litterally. Best wishes.
    David Calissano

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    Sorry, I cannot give this information.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear david calissano:
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    please contact
    aldo.proia@prometeon.it
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gaston Leforge:
    Is a case worth to be studied.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Gaston Leforge

    Dear Mr Rossi,

    What do you think about the following suggestion :

    5 Universities from 5 different countries create a website to collect enough money, in order to buy one ECAT 1 MW unit. Then, they divide this 1 MW unit between them to study 10 kW units, and diffuse the resulting knowledge on their website.

  • david calissano

    Egregio dottor Rossi , complimenti per il lavoro , siamo davanti a una svolta,ne sono convinto e questo grazie a lei.Volevo domandare se ci sarà la possibilità di collaborare con leonardo inc o prometeon srl in un futuro e, se si ,se esiste un indirizzo mail per candidarsi o qualcosa del genere.Ringraziando in anticipo le porgo i migliori auguri.
    David Calissano

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    I have been wondering about your “vibrations” used within the eCat. As I understand the approach, you send periodic bursts of RF energy into the eCat as part of the control mechanism.
    Is there a magnet or a magnetic field applied within eCat during operation? If so, I could see the RF pulses at the Larmar frequency for a given magnetic field strength could align the hydrogen nuclei resulting in a change in reaction rate. If true, then the repetition rate of the RF pulses might be able to control the eCat reaction rate. Comments?

  • Herb Gillis

    Andrea Rossi; Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Regarding the issue of desalination:
    Why not collaborate to set up a non-profit charity to fund the installation of e-cat technology in a specific third-world country where the need for fresh water is particularly acute? This would provide a test-bed for the technology, would help introduce it to the broader world, and it seems to me that certification requirements would be minimal (perhaps none at all). It would also create a favorable image for Leonardo Corp., and its collaborators, that would set the stage for more rapid approval and acceptance of the technology at the commercial level. I would be interested in hearing your comments on this.

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>