The Quantum Space Theory (QST) could explain the LENR

.
by
F. Santandrea
R&D systems analyst – Labor s.r.l. Rome Italy
E-mail: f.santandrea@labor-roma.it
.
U. Abundo
Physics teacher – Leopoldo Pirelli I.T.I.S. high school Rome Italy
E-mail: interprogetto@email.it
.
.
The QST theory elaborated in 1994 by F. Santandrea, now under revision, contains some topics concerning the LENR recently submitted and appreciated from LENR researchers, QST could giving an unifying point of view on the whole Physics.
For further detailed please refer to the following link QST updated topics:
Ten years later the same basic ideas were independently approached by U. Abundo employing  the tools offered by the J.Von Neumann’s Cellular Automata from a point of view focused on information traveling, please refer to the following link:
The well known Widom-Larsen theory, basically focused on the cooperating behavior of the electrons in condensed matter (tuned with the theory of G. Preparata) may be regarded as a special case, under specific conditions, of what is predictable by the QST.
According with QST, it is naturally predictable the loss of identity of the electrons confined into condensed matter lattice, while the properties of space have priority and permit/control existence and behavior of electrons, so giving a natural coherence to the assumptions of Widom-Larsen.
Into the present new approach to space and particles structure, the latter become just expression of stable resonance frequencies of space; the same electron, particles and generally condensed matter are “electromagnetic objects” constituted of standing waves into the space quantum found by TSQ.
.
.

366 comments to The Quantum Space Theory (QST) could explain the LENR

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Seppo:
    Good point. We are working already with heat exchangers, using the primary and the secondary circuit and the behaviour is stable. Obviously the temperature in the circuits of the heat exchanger depends on the flow rate. BUT: we cannot yet say we are ready, even if the real efficiency we are obtaining ( also today in Ferrara ) are much better than what has been indicated in Pordenone; I have underprofiled the results, to be conservative: very much so.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Koen Vandewalle:
    Ad impossibilia nemo tenetur.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    Congrats to you and your team with the achievement of the double self sustain mode. Do you foresee that this will be the standard in some future ? You solved every problem uptil now, so I see no reason why you could not invent something to make it work 100% SSM.
    Even if the invention is invented, the inventor will not rest.
    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  • Dear Andrea Rossi,
    It could be that the Hot Cat behaves differently when put to real work, i.e. when the energy generated by it is utilized by transferring the heat efficiently away by fluid, air stream or by conduction. Do you see any problems with controlling that? Has it been tested already? Any views on this aspect?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    1- yes
    2- no, the average is referred to the time during which the power in was on
    3- I never calculate the convective energy to be conservative
    4- see above
    5- see above
    6- I know, but I applied the reducing K that we prefer to maintain for this parameter, anyway see above for the corrections also here; please consider that these numbers are mainly for our internal use, not for scientific publication, so we applied our internal codes referred to the margins we usually maintain considering constructive parameters.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    In the worst case, yes, but the fire has to last enough time to allow all the reservoir of coolant be consumed. A very unlikely situation in a proper installation: industrial plants will be installed in proper buildings, with the anti-fire systems. But in a long and catastrophic situation, yes.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Markus K.:
    I cannot answer to your question.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Hank Mills

    PESN’s article about the conference and the test results (with hopefully no typos) is located at the following link.

    http://pesn.com/2012/10/15/9602206_Penon_High-Temperature_E-Cat_Test-Results_Posted/

  • Markus K.

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    thank you for the presentation. Very interesting!
    I was thinking about your control principle with heating resistors and i don’t understand how the system can work:
    Because every stable control system needs a negative feedback loop.

    But from what i know about your Ecat, there is a positive feedback loop: if the reaction in the core begins to heat, the temperature rises and as the temp rises the reaction increases. There is no negative feedback that would reduce temperature if it goes above the target temperature, because you have no cooling, only heating resistors.
    In my understanding electrical heating with hot resistors can not apply a negative feedback loop once the reactor becomes overly hot and needs to be turned down. It’s like if i want to control a wood heater which i ignited with some paper, by burning less additional paper.
    The control can only work by being able to subtract a kind of energy the process needs (in the case of burners either the fuel or oxygen).

    And since you do not inject the H2 from outside, the regulation of H2 can be excluded.

    But on the other hand, the pictures from your Hot-Ecat did show only connections for heating resistors and no other electrical stimulation (like coaxial cables for a high freuqency wave generation inside the core).

    From my understanding of control systems and from what we have seen and learned from you, your system cannot run stable because there is no negative feedback loop.
    Offering a heating system only heat to regulate it, is against the principle of positive feedback loops.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I downloaded the link below and I found some possible errors for which I have questions.

    Here are my baseline parameters that I assume to be accurate:
    Cylinder length: 33 cm
    Cylinder diameter: 8.6 cm
    Operating Temp: 1050 C
    Room Temperature: 25 C
    Test duration: 336 hrs
    Time to full temp: 4 hours (assume no heat output)
    Time to shut-down: 4 hours (assume no heat output)
    NOTE: these two assumptions are wrong but makes the math easier)
    At Temperature period: 328 hrs
    ASSUME: emissivity = 0.96

    Question 1: You had a surface area of 891 cm**2. I compute a surface area of 891.58 cm**2. This is the area of the circular surface of the cylinder, not counting the end areas. Using The Thermal Wizard (TTW): Area = 0.0891584 m2. I assumed your rounded downward just to be conservative?

    Question 2: You stated and average power consumption of 2.4 kW. You reported the Total Energy Consumed as 278.4 kW. Should not the average Power (2.4 kW) times the At Temperature Period (328 hrs) = 787.2 kWh?

    Question 3: You reported an Energy Production Rate (incorrectly labeled ENERGY PRODUCED) of 14.337 kWh / h. The Stefan-Boltzmann law in heat transfer is P = A * emissivity * SB * (To**4 – Tbackground**4). If we assume your area (891 cm**2), we should compute 14.672 kWh/h. TTW: Convective = 798.77W; Radiative = 14.8508 kW; Total = 15.6 kW. What is the correct Energy Production Rate?

    Question 4: Total Energy Produced. You reported 3,268 kWh. The Energy Production Rate of 14.672 kWh/h and the duration of 328 hrs we should compute Total Energy Radiated of 4812.4 kWh? From TTW: 15.6 kW * 328 h = 5.116 MWh. Which value is correct?

    Question 5: Using the Total Energy Radiated (4812.4 kWh) and dividing by the Average Power Consumption (2.4 kWh/h) times the At Temperature Period (328 h) I compute a COP of 6.11. Assuming 15.6 kW; for worst case COP: 15.6 kW / 5 kW = 3.1. Average COP= 15.6 kW / 2.4 kW = 6.5. What is the correct average COP?

    Question 6: You apparently define Power Density as power produced per kilogram of fuel? You reported 163.4 MW / kg. I compute (14.337 kWh / h divided by 20 grams of fuel) * 1000 grams / kilogram as 716.85 kW/kg or 0.71685 MW/kg. Note the Energy Density would be 235.13 MJ/kg. Using the TTW number; Power Density = 15.6 kW*1000 g/kg / 20 g = 0.78 MW/kg. Energy Density = 0.78 MW/kg * 328 h = 255.84 MWh / kg

    NOTE: I made lots of mistakes in writing this submission. I took many tries to (hopefully) get it right!

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    What will happen if an eCat is in storage and a fire consumes the building. I assume some heat will be generated and the core will eventually melt or the seals will fail and the hydrogen released?

  • Here’s another report of the conference:

    Penon High-Temperature E-Cat Test Results Posted – Andrea Rossi, the inventor of the Energy Catalyzer, has shared the results of an extended test of a high temperature module. If the results are verified by the group of third party scientists working towards validating the technology, it could mean the “hot cat” is a true breakthrough with huge implications for all of human civilization. (PESN; October 15, 2012)

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Giovanni V.:
    Thank you, I will pass it on to the editor.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Giovanni V.

    Andrea

    Regarding the website http://www.ingandrearossi.com/ pay attention, there is still a small error. In the Italian version the link for the page “Il boom mediatico del refluo petrolio” leads to a page with only title in Italian and the rest in English.
    Regards

    giovanni

  • Andrea Rossi

    THE WEBSITE
    http://www.ingandrearossi.com
    HAS BEEN ADJUSTED, AFTER THE ATTACK.
    BOTH VERSIONS IN ENGLISH AND ITALIAN HAVE BEEN REINSTATED.
    WARM REGARDS,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear jean:
    No, it is impossible to foresee.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • jean

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Would be nice to have a domestic e cat here in Paris. Even if I read you many times saying is a question of certification procedures that you can not master, i guess you may formulate a foreseen…can you tell us if would be a matter of months or years? One year ago you were promising to the blog to be ready for this winter….. man is getting colder and colder here! 😉
    keep going with the good job,
    sincéres salutations,
    jean

  • Avi

    Hi
    About your answer:
    “When we will have plants in operation in enough quantity”-
    How much time you think it will take?

    Thanks

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Avi:
    When we will have plants in operation in enough quantity.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Michel:
    I have to correct you: the total energy consume has been kWh 278.4, as written in the report. Therefore, 3,268/278.4 = 11.7, as written in the report. Attention: the comma signs the thousands.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Michel

    Dear Dr Rossi,

    I think there is a typo about the input power :

    ” TOTAL ENERGY CONSUMED
    kWh 278.4 ”

    –> 278.4 Wh (not kWh) then : COP = 3.268/0.278 = 11.7

    Congratulations for this new achievement,

    Michel

  • Avi

    Hi
    When you think the public will feel the impact of the ECAT?
    (in energy low costs, for example)

    Thanks

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Italo R.:
    I passed your comment to Eng. Fabiani.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, congratulations for the conference in Pordenone, it has been great and very interesting!
    I wish to write to you about the control of the steam temperature of each module.
    In slides there is indicated that the control is only proportional type.
    This type of control (type P alone) isn’t sufficient for having the value of temperature equal to the value you want (set-point), so temperature can vary during the time, it is never constant.
    To avoid this, it is necessary adding the integral action (the controller become type PI). In this way the steam temperature will be really constant and stable without fluctuations.
    The other action that it would be useful to add, is the derivative action, so the control would be type PID. This anticipative action is used for thermal processes, to compensate delays in reply. So it could cut the values out of control during disturbances in the reactor.
    I would like to know what your Ing. Fabiani thinks about, thank you.
    Kind regards,
    Italo R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Herb Gills:
    No, such design is not possible.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dan Galburt:
    1- No, the E-Cat was in open space at 25 °C
    2- see 1
    3- see 1
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dan Galburt

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I looked at your recent Hot Ecat test results that I believe were released to give followers confidence that the Hot E-cat is generating excess energy with a high COP. I find your measurements of input power to be reasonable, but feel that your calculation of net radiant power is questionable because of insufficent information.
    Your radiant power calculation, while not completely correct, would be reasonably accurate if the surfaces facing the E-cat are relatively cold. If the E-cat is enclosed in a container as it was in an earlier test, it is likely that the surfaces of the inside of the container would rise well above room temperature. Some of the radiant flux would pass directly out of any holes in the container but most would hit it’s inside walls. For this reason if such a container is used in your most recent test it would be impossible to accurately calculate the total net energy dissipated by the E-Cat with the information given in your report.

    My questions are:

    1. Was the E-Cat placed within a container during the most recent test?

    2. If the answer to 1 is yes, can you estimate the temperature of container’s inside surfaces?

    3. If the answer to 1 is yes, can you estimate the emissivity of the containers inside surfaces?

    Very Best Regards,

    Dan Galburt

  • Herb Gillis

    Andrea Rossi:
    Congratulations on your recent presentation of the Hot Cat data. The high COP was very reassuring.
    I am curious if it is possible to design an LENR device, such as an Ecat system, that will operate as a traveling wave reactor? For example; if you fabricated a linear column of Ecat fuel charge [inside a suitable container with a source of hydrogen] and heated just one end of it (to initiate localized reaction at just one end) will the heat generated by the initial reaction cause a wave of reaction to travel down the linear column of the fuel charge (without further external heating)? It would seem to me this might provide an alternative way to solve the stability problem in self-sustained mode (ie. by continuously adding more fuel ahead of the wave). Does this sound reasonable?

  • praos

    To Mr Manuel Cilia
    Producing of clinker uses heat for two processes:
    1) Heating to sinthering temperature (cca 1400 C); about 50%;
    2) Decomposition of CaCO3 (at up to 1000 C); about 50% ot the total.
    From these considerations alone it follows that more than 80% of the heat is used at temps <1000 C. Moreover, most of the heat from 1) could be recuperated, and fusing of components at temperatures over 1000 C is an exothermic reaction. So my guess is that 1050 C eCat could directly provide more than 90% of the process heat in cement-making.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Luigi Versaggi:
    Thanks,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Luca Salvarani:
    We are close to the production of electric power, as you correctly said. We have to complete issues, among which the control systems. About this issue: a very smart, genial person wrote somewhere that we have hired to deal with a so much important issue ” an informatic “. This comment merits consideration, because we always have to learn from intelligent persons: it is time to stop the bad attitude that humanity has, leaving important duties to not fit persons, and I agree with this guy ( from now, “The Intelligent”). For example, the Mankind left the duty to develope the Relativity to an employee of a patent office… The Intelligent has, for the benefit of all of us, introduced this important issue, it was time. But this bad attitude of Humanity has deep roots in the past: for example, 1979 years ago Somebody, a big boss, gave the duty to make the Destiny of the world to the son of a carpenter, who at the age of 33 still had to walk on the water ’cause was unable to swim.
    (by the way: Eng. Fabiani comes from the Army, and is electronic and informatic engineer, and has been hired because has invented a system to control our reactors far more genial than the other proposed to us)
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Manuel Cilia:
    Please contact
    info@leonardocorp1996.com
    We will put you in contact with our Australian Licensee.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Mr Rossi,
    Thank you for the release of the preliminary data. I have a client in the cement manufacturing business, they require 1300 degree temp to produce the clinker product for cement. Will it be possible to use a hot cat to reach 1000 degree and them co fire gas to add the extra 300 degrees. This would greatly reduce their energy requirements as currently they are using coal to reach the required temp.

    Thank you

  • Luca Salvarani

    Caro Andrea

    Volevo solo ringraziarla per il grande lavoro che sta facendo e che ha ottimamente presentato a Pordenone. In particolare le sue ultime parole sono state davvero molto belle. La cosa che più mi affascina è la produzione di elettricità dall’hot cat: quali sono i problemi che deve ancora affrontare prima di riuscirci? Lo chiedo perchè apparentemente dovrebbe essere una risultato quasi già raggiunto date le performances in termini di COP e stabilità e sicurezza che è già riuscito ad ottenere con l’hot cat.
    Ad ogni modo un grosso in bocca al lupo!

  • Caro Ing. Rossi grazie!
    Grazie per aver deciso di far restare il “core” della ricerca e delle produzioni di punta dell’E-Cat in ITALIA.
    Questa sua decisione mi rende ancora più fiero di essere stato il primo a creare su Facebook una pagina dedicata a Lei ed all’Energy Catalyzer.

    Thank you for having decided to keep the research and the production of the E-Cat in ITALY.
    This decision makes me even more proud to be the first to create a page on Facebook dedicated to you and to the Energy Catalyzer.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Italo R.:
    Yes, we have been attacked again. Somebody is trying to forbid the publication of that important information. We are working on it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Drew:
    The Report has been made very fast and skipping many passages, like for example elevation to the 4th of the room T, calculation of “epsilon”, errors of instruments etc. Therefore, to save time and be conservative, we cut the 30%. This was an internal test, our interest was to go to the essentials. Actually, I know that making an exact calculation of all the data the COP is higher, but let’s play it down. By the way: next Monday we will start the safety certification of the Hot Cat to prepare its industrial production.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • drew

    Dear Andrea,
    Please can you explain why you have deducted 30% of the energy produced for your COP calculations at the latest postings on ecatworld? It seems excessively cautious.
    How long now have you had a ‘hotcat’ running continuously?
    Many thanks in anticipation

  • Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, only to let you know that the internal pages of your site aren’t readable.
    Apparently you haven’t yet repaired them.

  • Andrea Rossi

    DEAR READERS: SINCE ANOTHER PERSONALATTACK IS IN COURSE REGARDING MY PAST, PLEASE GO TO
    http://www.ingandrearossi.com
    TO GET THE STORY- BY THE WAY: THIS SITE HAS BEEN DEVASTATED IN THESE DAYS AND ALL THE PAGES IN MY DEFENSE HAVE BEEN CANCELLED. WE REPAIRED IT.
    WARM REGARDS,
    ANDREA ROSSI

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Hank Mills:
    Thank you. Can you please send us as a comment the link to PESN page with the corrected report? Also correcting the ssm time ( 218 hours, not 118) and with the note regarding the conservative cut.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Regards Andrea Oct 12 comment, I think everyone knows you are extremely busy and up against a formidable pressure with regards your new technology, especially anyone who has dealt with new technology and I emphasize the word new. I probably don’t need to tell you this but they are more scared of you than you are of them because they have more to lose than you with regards your e-cat becoming common knowledge. Who are they, question mark. I know you probably know but its best for others to work out the answer on their own. All the best Eric Ashworth

  • Hank Mills

    Hello Andrea,

    Despite the issues of typos, I found your report to be encouraging and exciting. It makes me very eager to see the third party report. If their results are the same as yours, I think that it will be very obvious you have invented a paradigm shattering technology with the hot cat.

    Here are a few questions for you in regards to the test and report…

    First, how long of duration were the individual periods of self sustain? How many periods were there?

    Second, during the periods of self sustain, approximately how many watts were used by the RFGs?

    Third, after the reactor was stabilized at 1050C, what was the maximum temperature variation above or below that figure?

    Fourth, does the out put power total in the report include power lost via convection and conduction?

    Fifth, do you happen to have a graph of the temperature of the reactor surface and the input power during one of the periods of self sustain that you could share with us?

    I just want to say that it seems you are getting great results from the Ecat, and I think you should be congratulated. Thank you for all of your hard work.

    I’ve had a few stressful days lately, but your report helped lift my spirits.

    Now we just have to wait for the report from the third party to provide confirmation. It may end up being one of the most important test reports ever released in the history of science.

    Fourth,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Manuel Cilia:
    The ssm is regulated by the control system.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Mr Rossi,
    I know you must be under a lot of pressure but the time will come soon when you can take a breath.
    In your test setups for the hotcat you are switching between self sustain mode and a control mode, is this a new type of control system that you might be implementing into future designs to increase COP or is it purely for testing purposes.

    Thank you

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    a- no, the modules are regulated to give 10 kW each of power
    b- yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Giovanni V:
    Thank you: I think today is born a plant.
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  • Giovanni V.

    Dear Andrea,

    I was attending today to your conference at the Polo Tecnologico in Pordenone. A part few problems at the beginning due to bad audio connection to the second room where the conference has been video presented and where we found likely seats; we could follow all and we would like to thank you very much for what you have done untill now. Your credibility has very much increased during the last year, now you can show that you are a team and not only a one man show as it was in the past. We were impressed to see, for the first time shown to the pubblic, the Hot-Cat module. I think you should carefully consider the offer made by the Polo Tecnologico’ s GM to localize some of your activities also there, our Region Friuli Venezia Giulia has very good people and good Universities around.
    We count on you to make available this wanderfull and promising technology asap.

    Very best regards
    Giovanni

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Your ecat.com technical specifications show for the Thermal 1MW eCat:

    Power Ranges 20 kW-1 MW
    Modules 52
    Power per Module 20kW

    To me this implies that the unit may be run with 1 module operating full output and the rest turned off to all 52 modules running full power to provide 1.04MW.

    (a). Is this correct?

    You previous said the Thermal eCats could be controlled linearly so that less than full power could be commanded.

    (b). Is a total output power less that 20kW therefore possible?

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>