.
by
.
U.V.S.Seshavatharam
Honorary faculty, I-SERVE, Alakapuri
Hyderabad-35, AP, India
Email: seshavatharam.uvs@gmail.com
.
S.Lakshminarayana
Dept.of Nuclear Physics, Andhra University
Visakhapatnam-03, AP, India
Email: lnsrirama@yahoo.com
.
.
Abstract
Point of ‘big bang’ can be considered as the center or characteristic reference point of cosmic expansion in all directions.
If so, the existence of ‘preferred direction’ in the universe may not be wrong.
Based on the Mach’s principle, it can be suggested that, within the ‘Hubble volume’ overall distribution of ‘Hubble mass’ will explain the
observed physical phenomena.
With the discovered applications it is very clear to say that, without a joint and unified study of cosmology and atomic & particle physics, one should not deny the concepts of black hole cosmology.
The most interesting thing is that, at any given cosmic time, if the universe is a primordial growing black hole, then certainly its ‘Schwarzschild radius’ can be considered as its characteristic minimum size at that time.
Clearly speaking, “forever rotating at light speed, high temperature and high angular velocity small sized primordial cosmic black hole gradually transforms into a low temperature and low angular velocity large sized massive primordial cosmic black hole”.
Independent of the redshift observations and considering the proposed relations, with a great confidence now one can start seeing/observing the universe as a primordial expanding and light speed rotating black hole. Based on the proposed relations and concepts of black hole cosmology, definitions of cosmic homogeneity and cosmic isotropy must be re-addressed.
It is also clear that, now the black hole universe is expanding in a decelerating mode at a very small rate in such a way that with current technology one cannot measure its deceleration rate.
Finally it can be suggested that cosmic acceleration and dark energy can be considered as pure mathematical concepts and there exists no physical base behind their affirmation.
For the most serious cosmologists this may be a bitter news, but it is a fact.
Authors hope that, by 2015 definitely this subject will come into main stream physics.
With reference to Black hole cosmology, it can be suggested that, characteristic nuclear charge radius and the characteristic angular momentum of the revolving electron increase with cosmic time.
In addition, characteristic nuclear charge radius is more fundamental than the reduced Planck’s constant.
The key point to be noted is that the Planck’s constant can be considered as a cosmological constant.
.
.
Alessandro Coppi:
This is an issue to be assessed by the publisher. The publication will not be made by us.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Timycelyn1:
I will have to control the operation of the 1 MW plant closely, but also participate to the R&D.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
now that the 1MW plant has been delivered to your Customer, are you able to return to focusing your attention on the rest of the research you are pursuing, or does the 1MW plant still take up your time?
Best wishes
Tim
Hi Andrea, when the ITP2 will be released, we can imagine an huge number of requests for the paper at the same time, and the web server could be overloaded, becoming unavailable.
Are your IT guys aware on this issue?
Best regards
Alessandro Coppi
Discussion on entanglement in the JoNP blog posted in ZPEnergy:
http://zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3571
.
Steven N. Karels:
This issue has been described in the Patent granted to Andrea Rossi in Italy with priority April 2008.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
The 1 MW units do not carry transportation troubles.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Koen Vandewalle:
Of course small units are a viable option; the choice to limit the market to big units is dictated by commercial strategies integrated with IP issues. The destiny of the E-Cat is to be produced, if it works, in a mass of small and big models: your comment matches with Argon’s I answered to few minutes ago.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Argon:
If and when the so called Rossi Effect will be produced in millions of apparatuses, it will be available universally as a car engine today. At the time of Dr Diesel it was not so easy to have engines, even small, in a classroom…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea! I respect your inventing merit and copyright. However, i would like to see alive the Rossi-Focardy effects creation of energy in the Ni-H systems and show this fact for my friends and students. Even simple and without the resources to long working model of a power of several watts. As an example, is a model internal combustion engine for school . They twisted and smoked, they can be taken apart and repaired, but for commercial engines are not competitors in any case, and not threatened anybody’s patents or business. Also the question of finance for the purchase of large E-сat will be perceived our potential sponsors much closer after meeting with the current model
Dear Andrea,
Can you please explain now, after a few years, the reason why 1 MW was the minimum size of output that you offered to customers ?
As people know, the (original) 1MW plant consists of modules of +/- 30kW.
Since your R&D allows to have better control on the Rossi-Effect, nowadays it may be possible to have a continuous and guaranteed output with units smaller than 1 MW. Do you think that smaller units are a viable option ?
Kind Regards,
Koen
Dear Andrea,
Good news about the movement of the 1MW plant from your factory to the customers’ factory! Is transporting the plant a difficult procedure? I hope it is not something that is easily damaged.
Best wishes,
Frank
Dear Andrea Rossi,
It seems to me there must be an optimal size for the nickel particles used in the Rossi effect. I suppose too large a particle and the surface area effect decreases. Too small a particle and the small particle melts by the generate energy before the thermal energy can be conducted away. Comments?
Mark Saker:
The 1 MW plant is in the factory of a Customer of IH. As far as I know, the Customer will not allow any video for the time being. IH has not jurisdiction in the factories of the Customers as for what is related to videos to be published. Eventually specific visits, as I already said, will be allowed, but it is too soon to talk about this. Report of the ITP: I do not think it will take too long before the publication, but this is just a supposition of mine.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
Presently the manufacturing is made in the USA. I am not informed about a dislocation. In the USA you can find very skilled and efficient employees at any level.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
You say that E-Cat production will be an international concern — do you expect to be manufacturing E-Cat plants outside the United States? If so, where do you anticipate production facilities will be located?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Dear Andrea,
‘If’ the report is positive, will you be able to supply at least some video or a photo of the new 1MW plant running to release at the same time
At the very least, it will give the media a nice video-bite to play on the news? Perhaps you could speak with IH marketing (although I would hope they have thought of this already)!
I really hope the report is released soon, I’m getting far too anxious! 🙂
Bob:
Yes, this is an issue on course in our R&D program. When we will have results worth to be communicated, we surely will give information. So far we are distant from valid results, honestly.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi
Can you share with your readers any information about progress or setbacks in the effort to integrate the e-cat into a gas turbine aircraft powerplant?
Thanks
Bob
Thomas Florek:
Yes, I have known William Mc Donough in the factory of IH in Raleigh, and he explained to me the cradle-to-cradle concept. Very smart guy and a brilliant speaker. I agree with the basics of his philosophy.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hello Andrea,
Recently people who follow news about the ECat have been discussing William McDonough, who has collaborated with Tom Darden in various projects. Mr. McDonough’s “Cradle-to-Cradle” site encourages industry to develop and enrich ecosystems (as opposed to minimizing harm).
It would seem to be a Phenomenological approach to the industrial process.
Are you familiar with William McDonough’s work such as “Cradle-to-Cradle”?
JC Renoir:
I am very sorry, but whatever I say could be wrong and if I give just a guess, it could be taken as an information.
I do not think it will take long, though.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
JC Renoir:
No, we made the control systems by our electronic engineers. We designed and produced all the control system inside our factory.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
DTravchenko:
I will continue my R&D work.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
DTravchenko:
Yes, one. She is a nuclear physicist.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
I do not know, sorry.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Do you think the TRP has been completed, or do you think it is still being worked on?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Another question:
Are there women in the ITP?
DT
Dr Rossi:
What you will do if the results of the Independent Third Party will be positive?
Warm Regards,
DT
Are the control systems of the 1MW plant made by some specialist like National Instruments or similar?
Please, Dr Rossi: is there a term upon which you could bet 1$ for the publication of the Independent Third Party Report?
silvio caggia wrote in September 10th, 2014 at 6:25 AM
@Wladimir Guglinski
Only for sake of truth, the “simple” explanation is based on QM, the “less simple” is a complete reformulation of phisics from the fundamentals as you ask, so in contrast with QM and Relativity. ======================================
Dear Silvio,
by reformulation of physics I mean from fundamentals agree to the logic.
In my oppinion go back in the time is not agree to logic.
I dont see advantage in replacing an old theory as Quantum Mechanics, developed from some absurd postulates as the Bohr Principle of Complementarity, by other new theory developed from new absurd postulates.
regards
wlad
Joe wrote in September 10th, 2014 at 12:35 AM
Wladimir,
Since you believe that aether and space are identical with each other, how would it be possible for you to know that there is a greater density of aether near a star since the measuring rod that exists near the star is contracted due to gravity to the same degree that aether is condensed? In other words, the greater density would look average (d=1) when measured using a contracted rod. (The only solution, of course, is to consider space as nonphysical and therefore beyond the influence of physical processes.)
=============================================
Joe,
the fact that the physical properties of the aether cannot be measured by experiments does not mean that they do not exist.
It is only a limitation of the technology available.
Michelson did not succeed to detect the existence of the aether with his experimment, but today new experiments made via new technologies are proving its existence.
regards
wlad
Dear Andrea, thanks for the answer
obviously, as Italian this makes me very sad and disappointed, you are our new gioconda that gets out of hand.
Roberto
Nero of Florence:
R&D and ITP work are both on course: the results are still pending and at last could be either positive or negative.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea, always you are telling of “negative or positive” … This is good for ITP and NDA, but… you must know how the e_cats – warm and hot 😉 – operate and what they are producing… What about this? I think you may be more affermative… all in your clear responsability… I apologize for my poor english and… good luck for your R&D… and busyness!
I do not think that AR will be served a Golden Tapire …
Warm Regards,
CM
@joe
For sake of truth, in Reciprocal System time is ONLY an ASPECT of motion, 3Dtime is a deduction from postulates, not an ad hoc postulate. Material sector (3Dspace+clock time) and Cosmic sector (3Dtime+clock space) are ONLY PROJECTIONS. As you say Time and Space are mental objects. The only real thing is Motion.
Giuliano Bettini:
…, but if the results will be negative, the Golden Tapire will be served to me.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Roberto:
eventually, I think, if the results are positive, Italy will receive a “golden tapir”, to have lost an opportunity.
http://nonciclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/File:Tapiro_d'oro.jpg
Regards,
Giuliano Bettini.
Roberto:
If the results of the R&D and tests on course will be positive, the development of this technology will be based on an international concern. I must invite you to remind that the results could also be negative.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Roberto:
sorry, I don’t think so. 🙁
Giuliano Bettini.
@Wladimir Guglinski
Only for sake of truth, the “simple” explanation is based on QM, the “less simple” is a complete reformulation of phisics from the fundamentals as you ask, so in contrast with QM and Relativity. Regards
Dear Andrea,
As italian, I’ll give you a very direct question, Italy will have a direct and tangible benefit from your new technology compared to other countries?
Roberto
Wladimir,
Since you believe that aether and space are identical with each other, how would it be possible for you to know that there is a greater density of aether near a star since the measuring rod that exists near the star is contracted due to gravity to the same degree that aether is condensed? In other words, the greater density would look average (d=1) when measured using a contracted rod. (The only solution, of course, is to consider space as nonphysical and therefore beyond the influence of physical processes.)
All the best,
Joe
Silvio,
Let us assume that time is physical.
In that case, it would be described as linear since we observe events evolving in one temporal direction. But a linear dimension also implies a potential negative direction – a going backwards in time. But since we do not observe such a backwards evolution of events, we can safely and scientifically (since science is based on observation) conclude that time is therefore not a linear dimension. And what is more, if it is not a linear dimension, it is most certainly not an entity consisting of three linear dimensions. The Reciprocal System by Larson is really just an enforced symmetry on what we popularly call 3D space and 1D time, rendering a 3D time and 1D space. But such an act is gratuitous, a mere concoction that will most certainly fail in predicting physical phenomena. Any theory that is solid is derived from first principles – built from the bottom up. The Reciprocal System was built in a lateral movement – a horizontal work rather than the needed vertical one.
All the best,
Joe
Hank Mills:
1- no
2- no
3- I am not involved in this
4- we are considering how to prepare certified operators: this is an important issue
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
1 – Are there any E-Cat reactors in China at this time?
2 – As Chief Scientist, do you get to choose who is hired to head the Chinese research project?
3 – Where will the funding for the Chinese research project originate?
4 – Have you considered opening an E-Cat acadamy for when the tech starts entering the market in a big way? Those who enrolled could study theory, operation of reactors, construction, safety, etc. Then they could be certified to work E-Cat related jobs in manufacturing, maintenance, servicing, inspecting, etc. I’d be interested in enrolling.
Thank you.
Eric Ashworth wrote in September 9th, 2014 at 12:10 AM
The two objects must have the same identical resonance. What would Wladimir think of this. As I have said this subject is fascinating. Regards Eric Ashworth
=========================================
Eric,
my friend Dr. Claudio Nassif is the author of a new version for the Theory of Relativity, by introducing the concept the aether in the Einstein’s theory.
Nassif already published 4 papers in the most prestigious journals of Physics, as for instance in the International Journal of Modern Physics D.
His theory is named Symmetric Special Relativity – SSR.
In his theory Nassif shows that there is in the aether a sort of propagation of longitudinal waves with speed several times faster than the speed of light. They can cross the universe in few seconds.
And Nassif supposed that such very fast interaction could be the cause of the entanglement in the Alain Aspect experiment.
However such explanation supposed by Nassif cannot work, because such very fast interaction propagates itself LONGITUDINALLY along the aether.
But in order to change the polarization of a photon there is need to apply a rotation in the photon. In order words, there is need to change the angular momentum. But the longitudinal propagations faster than light are not able to produce a change in the angular momentum of a photon, because they are longitudinal.
That’s why your idea (similar to that supposed by Nassif) cannot explain the “apparent” entanglement in the Alain Aspect experiment.
regards
wlad
Eric Ashworth wrote in September 9th, 2014 at 12:10 AM
The two objects must have the same identical resonance. What would Wladimir think of this. As I have said this subject is fascinating. Regards Eric Ashworth
=========================================
Eric,
the polarization of a photon cannot be changed via resonance with other photon
regards
wlad