Radioactivity Physics Fundamentals

by
Will Schmidt

.


Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file
.
Introduction
The purpose of this article on radioactivity is to explain and describe the following subjects:
.
• What radioactivity is
• How radioactive decay processes work
• When radioactive decay is initiated
.
Radioactivity is like the atomic nucleus speaking.

This article is really about the neutrino.  How can such a small particle with no electric charge and very little mass (if any) control the destiny of the world and all living things?
Listen, the radioactive nuclear atom will tell you.  This article will explain how the neutrino works and what it does.  What the neutrino really is, has not yet been discovered.
There are three types of neutrinos: the electron neutrino, the muon neutrino, and the tau neutrino.  They will be mentioned in examples below.
There are three major classes of radioactivity processes:
.
• Radioactive beta decay
• Alpha particle decay
• Decay of proton particles
.
These radioactivity processes will be described below and include:
.
• Radioactivity decay of the free neutron.
• Radioactivity decay of the proton (if any)
• Pion particle decay
• Muon particle decay
.
By these radioactivity  processes, nuclear structure is unfolding.
H. Becquerel discovered the ionizing effects of radioactivity radiation in 1899, and Rutherford showed that alpha particles were emitted as well as beta electrons.
.
Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file
.

442 comments to Radioactivity Physics Fundamentals

  • Hurley

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    I hope you are having fun with the business. Here is a quote from Green Turbine I received end of July. I know you have looked at them but thought I would forward it anyway.

    From Green Turbine
    Dear Mr. Hurley,
    Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding the Green Turbine.

    The Green Turbine is a steam-powered micro-turbine. As such it requires a steam boiler that generates super-heated dry steam within specific temperature and pressure ranges to operate.

    A 1.2 GT model currently sells for 5000 Euros. We will be releasing a 15KW model in Q 4 2013. It will sell in the 15000 EU range.

    The balance of system components can be supplied by Green Turbine as well. However you can procure these locally to reduce costs. An Inverter will be required which can also be sourced locally.

    I am including a steam requirements table as well as a list of components with approximate costs (excluding the Inverter) for your perusal.

    Please feel free to contact us again should you have any further questions?

    Sincerely,
    Brent MacKinnon

  • Andrea Rossi

    Joseph J:
    The safety certification allows industrial apps.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    As a heat source, the E Cat can heat anything.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Joseph J

    Dear Andrea

    Thanks for your reply but with “only for industrial application” you meant a company or a building that is heated with an E-Cat, or rather an energy company that delivers heat to several buildings?

    Kind Regards

  • Marco

    Dear Mr.Rossi,
    i read that there is a relatively new type of electrolysis called High-temperature electrolysis (also HTE or steam electrolysis); do you think that could be possible to use your devices (e-cat or Hot-cat)for the production of hydrogen in this type of reaction?
    Warm regards
    Marco from Rome

  • Andrea Rossi

    Joseph J:
    In the USA yes, but only for industrial application. As for the domestic application, while the certification process is in course and we continue to test our work, along a rigorous and difficult validation percourse, it is impossible for me to talk about what we are doing and the results. We will share any result, bad or good, when we will have consolidated outputs to communicate.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph J

    Dear Andrea
    In the north are the cold days just around the corner.
    Is there a chance that the E-CAT technology will be used for the production of hot water, such as district heating somewhere?
    Kind Regards

  • Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gills:
    Sorry, I cannot give this information: I repeat that the uses and operation of the E-Cat remains in the development phase. We are utilizing a number of controls and testing a variety of uses, this is a very rigorous process, made by expert scientists. It is simply too soon to speculate on what the results of our work will be. I remain confident in our work and our Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Herb Gillis

    Dear Dr. Rossi:
    Ordinary nickel metal is crystalline. Have you looked at any amorphous (glassy) forms of nickel? There are at least a few alloys of nickel that are amorphous (ie. Vitreloy, and Metglas). Their mechanical and electrical properties are quite unusual. It stands to reason that it would be easier to produce micro-defects in a glassy metal than in one that is already crystalline. If such micro-defects are indeed the reaction sites, then perhaps starting with an amorphous nickel would provide better ways to initiate and control the Rossi effect.
    Regards; HRG.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Stefano:
    I already answered many times to this issue in this blog.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    I cannot give this information. I should have to give info regarding the nanotechnological choices.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Stefano

    Dear Ing. Rossi,
    Still cngratulation for your achievements. We are all very interested and optimistic on your developments.
    I understood you are very caution in selling the apparatus because you are afraid that the “principle”, the secret cathalyst, will be “stollen” and different companies could start producing apparatuses making profit, given the weak coverage granted by the patents. So costumers are few, secrets, and chosen very carefully. My first question/comment is the following: considering the worst scenario that somebody will steal the secret and Leonardo will not gain too much from the businness (however, still enough to cover the expenses and earn money selling the “original” e-cats). Everybody in the world will acknowledge that the “Rossi effect” is real AND your personal success will be maximal from now on forever. This will grant you anyway thousand of dollars in books, interviews, TV talk, seminairs, conferences, and so on (even academic positions in any University). So, my straight question is related to the ethical/political/businness choices made by Leonardo corp.. Why do not tell the “secret”, make available that type of knowledge to the world community? Why do not let make other laboratories replicate freely the results? Leonardo still will sell original e-cats (although still under development), and you should not bother of competitors. If you would release the secret, the world will really change (in better): more e-cats available in short time, less grennhouse effects, (think about desalination of water and similar humanitaries applications), menkind will gain a lot. Still you (and Focardi) will be acknowledged for the discovery. Still Leonardo will gain covering part of the market. It seems to me that this slowing process, this secreting of what happens inside the reactor, this attempting to ameliorate a product in order to gain advantage on competitors is really not ethical and it is a choice made against the interests of the whole human menkind. One day,this argument could be used against you or Leonardo Corp.
    Given that you are not a real businnessman, but an inventor, you owe to the menkind to choice differently. Let other laboratories work indipendently on the discovery. You will see how many declination on the e-cat will appear. More applications, more solutions.
    In any case, I did not want to make a straight judgment (before judging someone else, we should walk at least one week with his shooses). It was just the menkind perspective I was telling.
    Kind regards
    Stefano

  • Silvio Caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    When you say “collective phenomenon” do you mean cluster physics?
    (I refer to the question/answer from/to giuliano bettini)

  • Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    The uses and operation of the E-Cat remains in the development phase. We are utilizing a number of controls and testing a variety of uses, this is a very rigorous process, made together with expert scientists from different Countries. It is simply too soon to give technological information or speculate on what the results of our work will be. I remain confident in our work and our Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Joe:
    As a matter of fact, I did not write that a particle is a standing wave, but I cannot enter in the specifics of these theoretical issues.
    There is a considerable speculation about the process I used, highlighted in the third party indipendent report published on Arxive Physics (“Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded niickel powder”). While we test our work, it will be impossible for us to talk about what we are doing and about the theory . When we will have discoveries to share ( bad or good), it will be done.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joe

    Dr Rossi,

    A widespread belief exists that a particle is essentially a standing wave.

    I disagree with this view.

    While interoperability exists between particle and wave, the two concepts must not be confused. When you mention vibrating quantum fields, these are necessarily of a wave nature and not a particle nature. I contend that particles have no dynamisms at all and that they are purely static in behavior. But the concept of static should not insinuate a standing wave.

    There are two ways to create a standing wave:

    i) a single wave moving through an oncoming medium

    ii) two opposing waves moving through each other.

    In (i), the standing-wave particle would have to carry its own very specific medium in order to retain all its special properties. How could the electron, for example, exist in a vacuum, a plasma, or any gas, liquid, or solid, otherwise?

    In (ii), if there were even the slightest perturbation in even one of the two opposing waves, the stationary state would cease to exist immediately – and the standing-wave particle with it. How would the electron, for example, withstand constant assaults on its physical integrity?

    Also, a particle has the property of charge. How does the standing-wave concept of a particle explain this phenomenon of charge?

    All the best,
    Joe

  • Koen Vandewalle

    Andrea,

    I suppose that inner and outer tubes from the E-Cat HT can have separated and different electric potentials.
    Just, an idea: Maybe a very high voltage oscillator can be made with the tubes of the E-Cat HT as a capacitor and an external coil to enhance the Rossi Effect.

    Kind Regards,
    Koen

  • Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    The problem is that a theory must respect the foundamentals. All the theories that I have seen so far regarding the LENR treat virtual particles as if they were real, but they are not: they are bookkeeping virtualities that indicate how quantum fields are vibrating during a particle interaction; in a Feynman diagram what is real is only what is at the source of the reactions and at the end of them.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Thank you for the interesting anecdote. I enjoyed it very much. I am looking forward with much interest to your disclosure about the theory of your effect.

  • Martyn Aubrey

    —————————————

    Subject: Setting the heat output of the e-cat by controlling the COP of the Mouse
    From: Martyn Aubrey (xxxx@yahoo.com)
    To: info@leonardocorp1996.com;
    Date: Thursday, 22 August 2013, 14:40

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    I think that you may still be having problems with the control and stability of the output from the e-cat.

    Ironically, I believe that the problem now is not about trying to achieve a greater output from the e-cat, but how to limit the output to a manageable level.

    I am assuming that you followed my suggestion to use the feedback of heat between two LENR reactors to increase the temperature in the e-cat.

    As I understand from your description of the “Cat & Mouse” configuration (An excellent idea!), the larger Mouse is electrically heated to the point the LENR starts. The Mouse generates the heat which then brings the smaller “Whiskey Glass” sized Cat up to the temperature to start the Cat’s LENR.

    Some of the heat from the Cat is fed back to the Mouse to reinforce the LENR reaction in the Mouse.

    Two Feedback loops are created: One from the Mouse to the Cat and back to the Mouse again, and one from the Cat to the Mouse and back to the Cat again (one loop in each direction).

    The Mouse has a gain of just over Unity (COP = 1.1), so there is just enough gain to provide amplification to provide positive feedback, but a low enough gain to be reasonably controllable.

    The Cat, with the larger COP, becomes the main generator of the heat. Some of this heat is used in the feedback loop and some is available to be transferred to a load and there used for some form of work (heating/power).

    However, the problem with the above system, or any system which employs positive feedback, is that the output will always rise upwards unless it is constrained.

    In the case of the e-cat, heat is generated by the LENR process *****inside the confines of the positive feedback loop*****, i.e. inside the two reactors, the Mouse and the Cat.

    Unlike an electrical amplifier, the gain cannot be restricted by limiting the supply rail voltage or just lowering, or removing the input signal.

    The positive feedback loop will always push the heat level upwards, driven higher by the continuing LENR, even if the gain in the loop is minimal and the external electrical heating voltage switched off. The only natural limit would be the nickel melting at 1050 degrees Celsius.

    ***** It is not possible to reduce the heat amplification without temporarily breaking the feedback loop.*****

    The key to controlling the output temperature of the e-cat is controlling the gain of the positive feedback loop between the Mouse and the Cat (in both directions). This could be done if the COP of the mouse can be set at different values.

    Would it be possible to make the Mouse with either a variable COP, or a switchable COP (e.g. OFF (or Low) for cooling, 1 for a stable temperature and 1.1 (or greater) for increasing the temperature)?

    It is important to differentiate between changing the COP of the Mouse, and changing the level of the electric drive to the resistance coils.

    Changing the COP of the Mouse will control the overall feedback gain of the e-cat Cat & Mouse assembly, but reducing or removing the input drive to the heating coils will only reduce or remove the extra energy entering the system.

    The heat in the system would continue to build up due to the LENR heat generated and the rising heat feeding back between the Cat and the Mouse, irrespective of any new energy entering the system.

    I believe that to control the feedback, you have to be able to break, remove or inhibit the heat feedback path between the Mouse and the Cat to limit/control the positive feedback loop gain.

    This may be possible by varying/increasing the physical distance between the Mouse and the Cat, or placing a block (isolated with an inert gas maybe?) between the Cat and Mouse. You know best about the construction of the e-cat, so you may already be thinking of a solution.

    An example of control of the e-cat output by varying the Mouse COP:

    Mouse COP>1:
    To raise the output temperature of the e-cat, the Mouse is allowed to heat up normally and its gain set above Unity, thus allowing the positive feedback heating loop to work.

    Mouse COP=1 (Unity):
    To keep the temperature stable at the desired level, the Mouse COP is set to Unity. If the output temperature falls below the specified level, then the COP would be allowed to rise again until the temperature is restored.

    Mouse COP<1:
    To lower the output temperature of the e-cat, the Mouse COP is set to below Unity. The heat input for the Cat will then drop and the Cat output will be allowed to fall to the required level.

    Management of the e-cat output temperature may be made even more effective if the controlling software is used to anticipate the target temperature and gradually reduce the feedback gain as the temperature rises, slowing the temperature rise as it approaches the target and bringing the increase rate to a gentle halt.

    If my assessment is correct, I believe that you will be able to produce an e-cat which requires an electrical input to initially heat up the resistive coils in the Mouse, then once the Cat-Mouse positive feedback heating loop is active, will be able to sustain the LENR process and produce the Working Heat with minimal further electrical input.

    I have marked two important statements above with asterisks. Please read them carefully.

    I hope that this information helps you.

    Kind Regards,
    Martyn Aubrey

    —————————————

    Subject: Setting the e­-cat output using the COP of the Mouse – The e-cat "On Load"
    From: Martyn Aubrey (xxxx@yahoo.com)
    To: info@leonardocorp1996.com;
    Date: Friday, 23 August 2013, 14:00

    Dear Dr. Rossi,

    Further to my email yesterday, I now realise that the situation I described was primarily for the off-load case where the e-cat could be thought of as "idling" or "ticking-over".

    Looking at the system again this morning, it becomes a little clearer about how the system would work when it is connected to a load.

    For the e-cat to produce the extra heat to be transferred to the load, the COP of the Mouse needs to be adjusted even higher from the resting state.

    The increased feedback between the Mouse and the Cat will increase the heat produced by the LENR and therefore available for external use.

    Increasing the Mouse COP, and hence the feedback to increase the e-cat output power, would be analogous to pressing the accelerator pedal of a car to get the engine to produce more power to accelerate the vehicle forward.

    The level of the output power would then be set to match the power needed in the load.

    Looking again for a moment at your current Cat & Mouse e-cat configuration:

    I think that the Mouse COP for your existing Cat & Mouse design has been carefully chosen at 1.1 to achieve a fine balance point.

    Sufficient feedback is produced to provide just enough heat in the Mouse-Cat system to sustain the LENR in the Cat and for the Cat to provide extra heat for the load.

    By keeping the Mouse COP very low the configuration is feedback-limited, so as not to allow the Cat to run away and overheat, but the primary energy source is still the external electrical drive to the resistive heating coils in the Mouse, not from the increasing LENR generated heat self-sustained by the feedback loop.

    Andrea, if you follow my suggestion from yesterday of adjusting the Mouse COP to control the heat generated in the e-cat, you should be able to self-sustain the LENR.

    You will also be able to control the on-load heat output of the e-cat assembly over a wide range with good stability.

    I hope this email clarifies the ideas I sent to you yesterday.

    Best Regards,
    Martyn Aubrey

  • Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    What are you referring to, exactly?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    The answers will be given when the work involved will have been finished.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dteven N Karels:
    I said that “validation” for a theory is an oxymoron. Important now is to control its sustainability, which means to control that doesn’t violate the foundamentals of Physics.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Giuliano Bettini

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    “I am studying with Scientists the issue, and the study will reach its summit in October.”
    Very, very important news IMO.
    I hope:
    1) that the “Scientists” are important people, all well known;
    2) that they have access to the reactor and in particular to the measurement of Gamma spectra;
    3) that they can, in other words, clearly identify/confirm the type of nuclear reaction that is occurring, and the reasons for which it occurs.
    Scientific Regards,
    Giuliano Bettini.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Regarding the upcoming theory validation, you stated “It is not a small achievement, for me.”. May I understand that if validated, this will be a major achievement for you? Occassionally, you statements are unclear to me regarding their intent or meaning.

  • Silvio Caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    When you say “collective phenomenon” do you mean cluster physics?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Nothing in particular, but I will find confirmation if or not our theory is sustainable. It is not a small achievement, for me.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Could you tell us what will happen at the summit of your your study in October?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  • Andrea Rossi

    eernie1:
    I want to tell you an anectode: when I was 11 years old, I was attending the first year of the middle school in Italy, in a school of Milan whose name is “Parini”. Close to that school, in Piazza Cavour, there was a library, whose name was “Libreria Cortina”. At those times I knew nothing of Physics ( I was 11 years old), let alone nuclear physics: I had my problems with very basic Mathematics: Parini was a very hard and difficult school. Walking from the school to the bus stop in Piazza Cavour I saw a book, a small book, with a blue cover, very anonimous to look at, with a title: ” Enrico Fermi: Particelle elementari” ( elementary particles). I did not know what the heck could mean “Particelle elementari”, but I was extremely attracted from that book, and I asked to my mother to buy it for me. She said ” it is no use to you, you can understand nothing”. But I insisted, and she, amused, bought it for me. Obviously, when I tried to read it I understood nothing, but I conserved it for all my life, because I was convinced that sooner or later that book had something to tell me, until, in 1990, I succeeded to read it, and understood it perfectly. It has been a foundamental reading for the work I am making now.
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    Yes, a validation of the theory is in course, but “validation” for a theory is an oxymoron…better say a study of sustainability, to check that there are not violations of consolidated Physics principles . I am studying with Scientists the issue, and the study will reach its summit in October. I think no Physics principles have been violated, I just studied as well as I have been able the existing ones.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Valery Tarasov:
    I cannot answer to this question,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Valery Tarasov

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    From my theory the positrons should be registered in the e-cat. Have they been detected ?
    Best wishes,
    Valery

  • Koen Vandewalle

    Andrea,
    Do you mean Scientists validating the theoretical model, or a new real world validation of a design of E-Cat(HT) ?

    Based on your enthusiasm, I guess the validation is on the theoretical model. Once this is achieved, the further design and developement of E-Cat systems will be much more efficiënt. It will allow to build and control huge Rossi Reactors.

    Keep on working !
    Koen

  • eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Thank you for your reply to my question. Its back to the drawing board for me. My first thoughts involved electron capture by the Nickel nuclei. My second thoughts involved electron capture by a Hydrogen proton to produce the slow neutrons that could enter into a Fermi type reaction with the nickel. If I feel that a Fermi reaction is possible as hinted by you, I must hunt for a source of slow neutrons, perhaps by way of your secret ingredient.It is interesting to note that Fermi used a radioactive source to provide the initial neutrons in his experiments. He also was awarded a number of patents involving nuclear fission devices, which were issued 10 years after submission because of secrecy concerns. Most were posthumous because he died in 1954. He also thought initially that he had created a new atom until the analysis of the reaction ash showed the fission byproducts. He was a very interesting scientist. My regret was that I started a relationship with the University of Chicago in 1954 and never had a chance to meet him.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    Remote control is obviously available, but we demand a constant attending for the first units in operation.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Koen Vandewalle:
    We cannot give now a precise number, since the validation work is in course.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Koen Vandewalle

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Does your theoretical model allow you to calculate, or even better, simulate the maximum performance of the Rossi Effect ?

    With maximum performance, I mean number of Joules out per Joule in, ever achievable with the Rossi Effect in optimal theoretical circumstances.

    If affirmative, then please, would you give us an order of magnitude or even a precise number, based on current and complete knowledge today ?

    Of course, real world performance remains a secret and depends on the technology used to create the effect and the quality of the used materials and equipment.

    Kindest Regards,
    Koen

  • Peter Forsberg

    Additional reference material to Frank Znidarsic’s theory.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taGwnOmp8gA

    Regards

    Peter

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Will your production units for industrial use be able to be run in an unsupervised mode, that is, without constant or periodic observation? Obviously there is the six month maintenance but what other observations or interventions are needed?

    Will there be remote sensing available from the production unit, such as temperature, input power being consumed, reactor pressure, estimate of remaining time on the charge or power (like a fuel indicator)?

    What controls will there be? I assume a control to shut-down and start-up? Output power increase or decrease – on/off or linear response?

  • Peter Forsberg

    Dear Wladimir,

    What is your take on Frank Znidarsic’s theoretical explanations for the quantum transition and the implications of this on LENR and gravito magnetism?

    For reference:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzwkP8xfa0g

    Regards

    Peter

  • Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gills:
    Sorry, I cannot answer to this question.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    eernie 1:
    No, it does not.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Thomas Florek:
    If I gotta play drums in your Jazz band, its name could be ” The fused ones”.
    I would like to find the time for this…maybe in future. Now I have not even the time to listen music, let alone play.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    The Rossi Effect, as a matter of fact, belongs to the cathegory of LENR, like Cats belong to the cathegory of animals.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    You have mentioned the “Rossi Effect” recently. Is this going to be label you will use to describe the E-Cat reaction — instead of LENR, cold fusion, etc.

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  • The “Rossi Effect” is an excellent name. I think it would be a great name for a Jazz Band. :-)

  • eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Does your effect involve electron capture?

  • Herb Gillis

    Dear Dr. Rossi:
    It would appear that the Rossi effect would have to be something different from (above and beyond) the P&F effect.
    Have you ever observed a significant Rossi effect from something other than metallic nickel (ie. a compound of nickel, or a metal other than nickel)?
    Kind Regards; HRG.

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Andrea Rossi wrote in August 20th, 2013 at 11:38 PM

    Eric Ashworth:
    There are no cospiracies: all we have to do is make good products, and the market will use them. In our work and in the Rossi Effect there is nothing strange or exoteric or anything that can put in crisis the rules of Physics. I work using the well known rules, that we studied very well. No new physics have to be expected from my work, just a better use of the Physics we already have.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    COMMENT
    However, the scientific community is not sure that from current Physics it is possible to explain the Rossi Effect, because from the principles of current theories it seems that there is violation of the mass-energy conservation.

    So, the conspiracy exists. If the conspiracy had not existed, all the mainstream journals of the world would be speaking about the eCat.

    The eCat will change the world.
    But ask to anybody among the people in the cities worldwide if they had already heard about Rossi’s eCat. They will respond NO.

    I had never heard anything about the eCat in TV here in Brazil. The magazines that share novelties in the advancement of science do not write a word about the eCat.

    Such silence about the eCat cannot be credited to other cause than conspiracy.

    Sure that such conspiracy will be won by the strategy used by Andrea Rossi, putting the eCat in the market.

    However, if had no conspiracy, the eCat shall be subject of talking in all the corners of the world.

    I also know that it is not a good strategy to assume that the conspiracy exists, and I understand why Andrea Rossi cannot speak about it.

    regards
    wlad

  • Andrea Rossi

    Giuliano Bettini:
    Here have named my process the “Rossi Effect” referring to the collective phenomenon ( whose mechanism has now been completely understood).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

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>