Electrical catalyst

.
by
Tadej Bajda a.k.a.Tamal Krishna
das Krsko, Slovenia
.
.
Abstract
Description of a fictional device, cylindrical in shape, for starting a low energy nuclear reaction. Using an environment of hydrogen and nickel charecteristics, similiar to one in an E-Cat. Imagining hydrogen molecul as a spring resonant system and simply using frequency and power of electricity as a catalyst.
.
.

862 comments to Electrical catalyst

  • orsobubu

    Charlie Zimmerman,

    in my opinion your mistake is interpreting the history of humanity as a scientific-technical matter rather than as a social development. In fact, this is the era of imperialism, based upon the capitalist system of production, and capitalism is not a mere economic issue, it is a social relationship instead, and history is determined by the struggle among social classes. It is not thanks to the development of trade that guns don’t pass, on the contrary, after the guns have passed, the trade develops. With the wrong setting as yours, aside from Rossi’s merits, there is no doubt that you prepare the ground for big disappointments.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in June 18th, 2013 at 9:20 PM
    Wladimir,

    1. Since a QRT electron consists of three electron-type quarks that have no mass,

    Joe,
    I did not say that the three quarks of the electron have no mass.
    I said they are not so massive like the quarks of the proton (their mass is smaller).

    In QRT the structure of the electron is k,z,k , similar to u,d,u of the proton.

    The mass of the quark k is smaller than the mass of the quark u, and the mass of the quark z is smaller than the mass of the quark d.

    regards
    wlad

  • Charlie Zimmerman

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    In the past you have said that you felt the ECAT would be a technology that stand side by side with wind, solar, and other existing forms of power generation. This confuses me. It seems like the technology represents so much promise that it must eventually supplant all other forms of electric generation.

    Why would an expensive and ugly solution like solar stand up to your low cost and “invisible” technology.
    Why would environmentally disturbing and expensive technologies like wind generation stay around.
    Electrical power from fossil fuels must also go.
    I suppose oil for transport may be necessary for air and large ground transport for a while, but personal transport is moving to electric power and will ultimately get their recharges (or event direct power) from your ECATs.

    Why are you so modest about how world changing this technology really is? You should be screaming from the rooftops!:) You have saved the world from global warming. You have saved our air from the stink of burning gas. You have saved our forests and nation parks from oil and gas drilling. You have saved the world. Be proud. First we harnessed fire. Then we harnessed fossil fuels. Then we harnessed information. Your invention represents the next new EPOCH in human history. This is no time for modesty.

    Thank You,
    Charlie Zimmerman

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Reviewing your postings it appears that three general levels of COP have been reported:

    a. around 3 for the independent testing
    b. around 6 or better for older eCat technology
    c. around 20 for the newer eCat technology

    1. Is this essentially correct?

    I assume the category a above was a new eCat technology provided for independent testing modified so the output was unconditionally stable to assure a successful testing regime but would output sufficent excess power to establish the validity of eCat technology.

    2. Is this essentially correct?

    I also assume category b above was the older eCat design and that a COP of 6 was the level you would specify to and the typical level was around 8 to 12.

    3. Is this essentially correct?

    I assume the newer eCat system will probably have an effective COP consistent with category c above. At this COP level, electricity generation becomes promising.

    4. Is this essentially correct?

  • Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. Since a QRT electron consists of three electron-type quarks that have no mass, a charge of +/- 1/3 and 2/3 (I am assuming), and +/- 1/2 spin, how do you explain the following:

    i) the mass of an electron from massless electron-type quarks

    ii) only one generation for each of the two electron-type quarks (instead of three as per the QCD quarks) – symmetry seems lost

    2. What is the nature of the new force of interaction between the three electron-type quarks that compose the electron?

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gillis:
    The certification is in course upon two plants.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Neri B.:
    Pretty close, I cannot give numbers right now, but I hope we are close.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Neri B.

    Dear Andrea,
    any update on the “big surprises” you mentioned few weeks ago? How close they are?
    Neri B.

  • Herb Gillis

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    You mentioned recently that the “certification guys” have access to industrial plants now in operation. How many such plants are now in operation?
    Kind Regards; HRG.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gio:
    Thank you, very kind. Somebody will try soon to write another black page of the tale, diffusing false information. But we have solid shoulders, after 30 years of fights.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    Thank you for the information,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I have been approved to proceed with the Village Water Purification prototype. As I previously posted, maximum power consumption is 100W. Please keep small electricity generation open as a design possibility for your future work. Hope to work with you in the future.

  • gio

    Dear Ing. Rossi

    don’t write that” you are no more indispensable”!

    You made an extraordinary invention, but first of all, you wrote an extraordinary story…..a great story of resurrection!!!

    I approached your invention , because of your great tale!!!

    That’s what has caught my attention…first of all!

    I’m sure that you’ll write many other chapters!

    Una stretta di mani …..virtuale:)

    gio

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe
    June 16th, 2013 at 10:10 PM
    Wladimir,

    Why do you believe that modern science is wrong about the nature of the electron, i.e. that it is NOT like a proton (a baryon)?

    Joe,
    The electron is a lepton, it does not interact with the strong force, as happens with the hadrons.

    But as the electron is a fermion, it needs to be formed by quarks.
    Obviously they must be quaks which do not interact throuogh the strong force (they are not massive as the quarks of the proton).

    Modern Science consider the electron as a fundamental particle. But this consideration is possible only by considering the space as empty, as proposed by Einstein.

    There is no way to consider the electron to be a fundamental particle from the hypothesis of a non-empty space (an aether with structure formed by elementary particles, as proposed in my QRT).

    The experiment published in 2011, which proved that space is not empty as Einstein believed (because light had been created by the space in the experiment), reinforces my supposal that the electron is not a fundamental particle, and so as it is a fermion it needs to be formed by quarks.

    Because of the experiment published in 2011, the journal Nature had published in March 2013 the paper The quantum vacuum as the origin of the speed of light, where the authors propose that space is formed by particles and antiparticles.
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1140%2Fepjd%2Fe2013-30578-7#page-1

    So, AGAIN the journal Nature had published a plagiarism on an idea proposed in my book Quantum Ring Theory.

    regards
    wlad

  • Andrea Rossi

    Fabio82
    Absolutely yes: our USA Partner has all the know how, with the industrial secrets. I am no more indispensable: just useful for the future evolution on which I am now working in the USA.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Fabio82

    Dear Andrea, the future of your invention is deeply connected with your person, if something bad should happens to you, is there anyone who could replace you?
    I hope you all the best!
    Many thanks

  • Joe

    Wladimir,

    Why do you believe that modern science is wrong about the nature of the electron, i.e. that it is NOT like a proton (a baryon)?

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Yes, my position is changed. After the publication of the Report of the Third Indipendent Party the aggressivity against my person has changed register. The snakes prepared the ground for forces of another order of magnitude. Now I am running real risks, not deriving from the clowns and their snakes, but from higher echelons, supplied by deadly force. I got specific information. I am safe in the USA, not outside. Snakes are marginal . Now they are just keeping up stupidities, like ” in Uppsala Rossi one year ago made a test that did not go well ” ( yes, is true: one year ago I made a test in Uppsala that we have not been able to make because a welding of the reactor broke up: so, what?), or like ” 13 years ago ( !!!) LTI made a contract with DOD to supply Seebeck Effect generators that did not work” , but it is a misrepresentation: in the year 2000 LTI agreed with DOD to test an industrialized version of a prototype working by the Seebeck Effect: such prototype, made by myself in 1000 hours, therefore extremely expensive, had reached 20% of efficiency; we had to make an industrialized version, economically sustainable, but I have not been able to do it, in fact the efficiency of the thermoelectric modules after industrialized production fall down to 5%, made by modules of 2 to 5 Watts of power, destined to be combined to make any power. The research has been made with the clear knowledge of the fact that the passage from a manufacturing made handycraft by me to an industrialized version could not work. The honesty of our work has been so clear, that DOD continued for years to work with LTI for other issues.
    The snakes and the clowns, unfortunately, are not our enemies, they are a piece of cake ( snakes are delicious boiled, with some mayonnaise and champagne).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in June 15th, 2013 at 12:25 PM
    Wladimir,

    1. If permeability particles are responsible for holding aether particles together, why do they not do that in all times and places?

    RESPONSE:
    I think the phenomenon depends on motion: the velocity of the photon moving in the aether

    2. Since all particles are composed of aether particles, how does QRT distinguish one particle from another, e.g. a photon from an electron?

    RESPONSE:
    The electron is formed by 3 quarks (formed by positive and negative particles of the aether), similar to the structure of the proton

    The photon is formed by a particle and and its antiparticle moving in helical trajectory

    regards
    wlad

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: Thanks for sharing, those of us who believe in your work appreciate your answers. In the past you have denied any kind of conspiracy against your work and your E-Cats, has your position changed on this subject? Please inform us of the “dirt plays” so we can help you discredit the snakes.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Bertoldo:
    I am not able to answer, because we did not test this possibility. It is a niche market that can be taken eventually in considration .
    Interesting, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Michel:
    The results of the industrial plant are available to the certification guys, who also can visit the plants in operation.
    We are doing progress also on this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Michel

    Dear Dr Rossi,

    If I understand well, certification of the domestic e-cat depends on collected data from industrial 1MW plans: don’t you think the process could take years if those results are still hidden by your Customers ? We are are all so impatient to buy a 10kW reactor !

    Michel

  • bertoldo

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    E’ possibile alimentare l’e-cat con una stufa pirolitica in stile LuciaStove (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsH_Gh-n2Mg)? almeno cosi il carburante è completamente autonomo e possiamo utilizzare anche gli scarti alimentari …Cordiali Saluti

    And ‘possible to power the e-cat with a stove pyrolytic style LuciaStove (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsH_Gh-n2Mg)​​? at least that the fuel is completely independent and we can also use food scraps … Best Regards

    P.s. ho utilizzato google translate .

  • Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    We have not been slowed down and we reached a COP, without taxpayers’ financing, 6 times the COP reached, in 40 years and a hundred billions of the Taxpayers money, from the hot fusion guys. And we have not been slowed down even if an army of snakes has tried, and is trying, to boycott our work with all the possible dirt plays. And when I say all the possible dirt plays you can’t imagine what I am talking about. Nonetheless we are making good working plants.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Enrico Billi:
    Good point,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    (lavolale, lavolale)

  • Enrico Billi

    Dear Andrea,
    research center and universities teach us a lot of things about what is not possible in physics (with all theoretical explanation) or “negligible”. But when they find out they have taught something wrong, they even think they can make a patent on it.

    If Michigan University can do so, why can’t you go on your way? Best wishes for your work.
    LavoLaLe lavoLaLe!

    Enrico Billi

  • Joe

    Wladimir,

    1. If permeability particles are responsible for holding aether particles together, why do they not do that in all times and places?

    2. Since all particles are composed of aether particles, how does QRT distinguish one particle from another, e.g. a photon from an electron?

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Italo R.

    Dear Dr. Rossi, thinking about the development of the E-Cat technology in recent years, one could argue that this development has been slowed down (or at least showed to the public in that way) to avoid excessive trauma in the world energy systems. That is for example, the actual achieved COP could be much higher and stable but it is kept (or showed) low, waiting for better times.
    Am I wrong?

    Kind Regards,
    Italo R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Henk:
    The Carnot cycle has an efficiency that can oscillate between 30 and 40%, depending on the pressure and temperature of the steam. In our case we expect 30-33%.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Henk

    Dear Andrea,

    What efficiency of heat to electricity conversion do you get with the Carnot cycle?

    I tried to find some other technologies, I don’t know if you’re interested, but I found some:
    http://www.encontech.nl/develop.html
    http://www.fkf.mpg.de/498740/88_Thermoelectronic-Energy-Conversion-Stephanos
    http://www.johnsonems.com/?q=node/13

    regards,
    Henk

  • Andrea Rossi

    Chris Johnson:
    Very interesting, thanks,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    I am not authorized to give any information so far, but as soon as possible I will.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Can you tell us about the 1 MW plant that was shipped to the USA — has it been installed and put to use yet? If so, how is it operating?

    Many thanks!

    Frank Acland

  • Giuliano Bettini

    Caro Andrea,
    il programma di Class Tv Msnbc è stato messo sul web. In Italiano.
    “Prometeo – Fusione fredda: E-Cat è l’energia del futuro?”
    The Class Tv Msnbc program was put on the web. In Italian.
    “Prometeo – Cold Fusion: E-Cat is the energy of the future?”
    18:56 minutes (doesn’t start at 00:00 but after a few minutes).
    http://meteo.libero.it/web/portale/video/prometeo-fusione-fredda-e-cat-e-lenergia-del-futuro/?tab=6
    Some inaccuracies, but it seems a positive program.
    Regards
    Giuliano.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in June 13th, 2013 at 1:43 AM

    Wladimir,

    How can many e(+) and e(-) be grouped into Q(+) and Q(-) respectively since particles with like charge repel each other?

    Joe,
    in QRT they are glued by the permeability particles p(+) and p(-).

    regards
    wlad

  • Chris Johnson

    As far as natural gas heating, have you looked at flameless catalytic heating?

    You can Google Natural gas catalytic infrared heater for more info.

    The American Catalytic site says “Catalytic heaters oxidize natural gas, propane and butane flamelessly, emitting medium to long wave infrared energy. A platinum catalyst forces combustion below the gas ignition point (1400 Degrees F) generating surface temperatures of 600 – 1000 Degrees F.”

    This sounds like it might be a useful heater for your system.

  • Robert Curto

    Dr. Rossi, please
    Google:
    Global Wind Day

    Maybe someday, there will be a:

    Global E-Cat Day

    Robert Curto
    Ft. Lauderdale, Flordia
    USA

  • Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gills,
    Interesting idea.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Herb Gillis

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    With regard to the problem of efficiency losses due to exhaust from a gas-driven hot-cat (especially for electricity production), do you think it might be better to use a stronger oxidant than air- – such as pure O2 or oxygen enriched air, or even peroxide? You once mentioned the heating needed was highly localized in a narrow region of the reactor. A two component stream of natural gas and pure O2 would deliver a highly focused and concentrated heat source, given an optimally designed nozzle.
    Kind Regards; HRG.

  • Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea,
    Is it correct that uptil now nobody has informed the patent offices about the third party report ?
    If someone sends them a copy of a newspaper, or just one letter, it is listed online.
    I find this very strange.
    Kind regards,
    Koen

  • Joe

    Wladimir,

    How can many e(+) and e(-) be grouped into Q(+) and Q(-) respectively since particles with like charge repel each other?

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gian Luca:
    The industrial 1 MW E-Cats are already for sale in the world.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Svein Utne:
    Please forward this question to Hydrofusion.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Prof. Joseph Fine:
    The question should be forwarded to Hydrofusion. They decided to follow this thread.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    Maybe.
    Warm Regards,
    A.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Joe wrote in June 11th, 2013 at 1:07 PM


    Wladimir,

    Do the elementary particles e(+) and e(-) of the aether in QRT have mass? (In your article A Model of Photon, they have mass. But, in your article Stability of Light Nuclei, you specifically state at the beginning of the article that they are massless.)

    Dear Joe,
    you already had made such a question in 2011 (or 2012, I dont remember).

    The prevaliling concept of mass of a particle in Modern Physics is that of Newton.
    The concept of mass is not well established in Physics yet.
    Newton did know nothing on antiparticles. His concept of mass is regarding particles.

    When a particle and an antiparticle meet together, we cannot apply to them the Newtonian concept of mass.

    A photon is composed by a particle Q(+) and its antiparticle Q(-), each of them composed by several elementary particles e(+) and e(-) of the aether.
    The photon is massless because it is composed by particle and antiparticle. When it stops, its mass disapears, because Q(+) and Q(-) anihilate one each other.
    But when the photon moves, it has inertia (its interaction with the particles of the aether).

    A particle e(+) has mass (it interacts with the aether).
    But two particles e(+) and e(-) together may have a behavior as they should be massless.

    So, we can say that the particles e(+) and e(-) have mass, and we also can say that they are massless, depending on what is the criterium from which we are considering them: either the Newtonian concept, or the non-Newtonian concept.

    regards
    wlad

  • Enrico Billi

    Dear Andrea,
    today i read a news that could confirm your method to obtain strong reactions with special nichel nano-powder:

    http://phys.org/news/2013-06-polymer-nanoreactors-nanocrystals-uniform-sizes.html

    At nanoscale the crystals can became nanoreactors… they could have special properties. Let me know if with the gammarays from lighting i am setting in order the puzzle or i’ve just lost my way.

    lavoLaLe lavoLaLe
    Enrico Billi

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    The overall efficiency of your electrical production device will be limited by the Carnot efficiency and the efficiency of what converts thermal energy to electrical energy. In addition to these limitations, there can be system inefficiencies such as “hot air going up the chimney” that further reduces overall efficiency.

    So with a stated operating temperature of 350C (for the high temperature side) and a low temperature side of between 20 and 100C, this corresponds to a certain Carnot efficiency. I assume a 70% thermal-to-electric conversion efficiency — could be higher or lower.

    Assuming you feedback the electricity to control the eCat, this suggests you must have a COP greater than around 7 to have a useful device (where it does not consume all of its produced electricity). Agreed?

  • Joseph Fine

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    One licensee (Hydrofusion) has offered to provide a demo E-Cat (or Warm Cat) to a European customer w/o that customer’s initial capital expediture (CAPEX). Instead, the customer/producer will be charged part of the value of the heat produced. The demo would also showcase the E-Cat to potential new customers.

    The proposed demonstration E-Cat (or Demo-Cat) would be electrically driven using resistance heaters. Are any of your licensees considering a similar offer for a Natural Gas driven E-Cat? Comparing costs of electric and gas heat, it should be more profitable to use a Natural Gas driven system (Gas-Cat).

    The market will decide.

    Natural regards,

    Joseph Fine

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>