.
by
Wladimir Guglinski
retired, author of the Quantum Ring Theory
.
In the book Quantum Ring Theory I had proposed a double-field model for elementary particles (composed by two concentric fields), therefore a field model fundamentally different of the mono-field model considered in the Quantum Electrodynamics (QED).
The inner field, named principal field Sp, gyrates and induces the outer field, named secondary field Sn. In the book, published in 2006, it was considered that the outer field Sn gyrates.
In this model, the outer field Sn is responsible for the electric charge of the particles as the electron, the proton, etc.
Later in 2010 I changed the double-field model, by considering that the outer field Sn does not gyrates. However, in 2014, after a long discussion with the reader Mr.Joe in the Comments of the Journal of Nuclear Physics, he drew our attention to two key points:
- An outer field Sn induced by the rotation of an inner field Sp must have rotation.
- A mono-field model violates the monopolar nature of the electric charge in the even-even nuclei with Z=N, because they have null magnetic moment, but as all the nuclei have rotation then the even-even nuclei with Z=N would have to have non-null magnetic moment (because the rotation of the positive charge of the proton would have to induce a magnetic moment). Therefore QED violates the monopolar nature of the electric charge in the case of the even-even nuclei with Z=N.
- A double-field model in which the outer field Sn gyrates would have to induce a magnetic field in the case of even-even nuclei with Z=N, if we consider the field Sn in the classical sense of Euclidian space. But the space considered in Quantum Ring Theory is not Euclidian, in order that the rotation of the field Sn never induces magnetic fields, and this is the reason why the even-even nuclei with Z=N have null magnetic moment.
Here we will analyse these questions in details.
.
.
Roman Rodiovov:
Yes, we made also that kind of check. All the radiation measurements we made gave OUTSIDE the E-Cat the same results published on the Lugano Report.
For what concerns the measurements we made INSIDE the E-Cat, the data are confidential.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Did you check for possible e-cat radiation using detection of photo emulsion tracks? As far as I know multiple LENR experiments in Russia had some “strange radiation” that does not detected by usual radiation detection devices such as Geiger counter, but which produced tracks in photo emulsion.
Dear Andrea,
We all know that Dr Parkhomov claims to have replicated the Rossi Effect and it is likely he really did because he was driven by data from your works.
Is the Rossi Effect all there? I mean, is his settings the same as yours or have you added some extra “things” that make a significant difference in the core reaction ?
God bless you
Marco
Dear Prof. Bert Abbing:
I think you are right, but I prefer not to participate to this discussion, because the measurements of the Lugano Test have been designed and made by the Independent Third Party. I was away for most of the time and I never participated to the measurements. I did not participate at all to the work of analysis, evaluations, discussions about the measurements that the Professors of the ITP made after the test in Lugano and before the publication. As a consequence of these facts, I do not think it is proper for me to participate to this discussion.
Thank you for the important attention of yours and your group.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
maybe you are interested about the short email note that we have sent today to Mats Lewan, Frank Akland and daniele Passerini. We can’t stand that a work like yours is denigrated in a blog I have discovered today in the most possible unscientific way. Here is the thread.
Dear Dr. Lewan I have written this letter to Daniele Passerini and in CC to Frank Akland regarding the horrible blog page by “GSVIT”
https://gsvit.wordpress.com/2015/03/02/tpr2-calorimetry-of-hot-cat-performed-by-means-of-ir-camera-2/
appeard today. I think that this short considerations could interest also you.
Regards,
Bert
Dear Danele, Dear Frank
I ( we ) write here some observations about the disgusting blog page you ( and Levi ) have have indicated to me.
Those pages ( and all the site ) are purposely designed to appear as scientific to a layman so to divulge disinformation and ill formed concepts.
They pretend to be written by an “official institution” that should appear seroius and scientific for the outsider and the common man.
In fact the “institution” ins NOT a research institute and does non have any contact with internationally recognized research institutions or any University.
No surprise if they received NO answer from any of the research group.
The most disgusting thing is that their page appear purposely written in a way, mixing up real information from literature, omitted information and absolutely FALSE statements so to “demonstrate” a ( false ) conclusion. This demonstrate that the group that have written this pages is far to be scientific but has an agenda and a precise goal.
Let us review just some of the points:
The main FALSE information they try to transmit is that when measuring a temperature with a non contact thermometer one should use the “Spectral emissivity” and NOT the total normal emissivity.
This statement is absolutely WRONG. Due to the fact that detector sensitivity is far to be a flat function and usually differs from pixel to pixel in an IR camera all that information is handled by the internal software of the instrument and to the user is requested ONLY to input the value of the TOTAL NORMAL EMISSIVITY which is “the ratio of the energy radiated by the material at a temperature T and the energy radiated by a black body at the same temperature” over ALL wavelengths. ( you can find that in ANY textbook ! eg:G. Gaussorgues Infrared Thermography )
So all the argumentations in the blog page about integrating only in the “measurement window” are ILL-FORMED, wrong and misleading !
Note also that is just by chance that Allumina has a constant spectral emissivity in the window of sensitivity of the detector. Many other materials have not ! And the “spectral emissivity” is NOT available for many materials. This would limit tha use of non contact thermometers just to few special cases, and this is not true ! Total Normal Emissivity tables for materials are available from many vendors showing similar values independently from the detector!
The authors of the also MISS to explain WHY if the AA of the TPR2 would have done such a tremendous error ( they have NOT ) all the measures done with the DUMMY ( uncharged ) reactor match the input power ! THIS was in fact a calibration and a confirmation that the method was good.
Another point they MISS to cite is that when they have measured the emissivity of the with the reference dots of the external allumina pipes the have found a values ( 0.69…. 064 ) that are in PERFECT agreement with the literature. Note that is even possible for the TPR reader note that the reference dots have a higher emissivity then the pipe because the are much britgher that that.
Is NOT surprising on the other hand that MFMP have obtained different values. Cement materials, even if they have a high percentage of alumina can have a very different emissivity because the presence of metals ( Mg ).
The TPR authors have analyzed the material by X-ray spectroscopy and found that was pure alumina, so they applied correctly the data for that material.
Is quite WIERD that the blog page authors have found an emissivity near to 1 ( in contrast to any emissivity table ! ) at that low temperature. Or the material was not pure or they have done an error ! ( bad thermal contact of the PT100 or K probe could eventually lead to that ! )
In conclusion.
We have found that blog page far to be scientific and probably part of a “disinformation plan”. They make evident theoretical and experimental errors probably on pourpose.
We will ignore it and go on working.
Bert Abbing
Robert Curto:
Wait….
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
Thank you: Dr Parkhomov is continuing a very important work.
He doesn’t talk too much, works hard, makes results: a real Russian.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Yes, we are continuing the R&D of the Hot Cat. And we are working also on the safety certification of it. Very important evolution has been made after the Lugano test results.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Do you have any time to do R&D on the Hot Cat?
Kind regards,
Frank Acland
Dr. Rossi , I send a very interesting document of Dr Parkhomov entitled:
Investigation of the heat generator similar to Rossi reactor
“This paper describes development and tests of a device that is similar to the well-known high-temperature Rossi reactor. The experiments confirmed that at the temperature about 1100◦C and more this device produces more energy than it consumes. Performed measurements demonstrated no ionized radiation above the background level from the working reactor.”
VII. Conclusions
Experiments with the replication of the high-temperature Rossi heat generator loaded by a mixture of Ni and lithium aluminum hydride demonstrated that these devices produce more energy than they consume at the temperature about 1100◦C and more. There was no ionized radiation above the background level observed while operating the reactor. Neutron flux density was not larger than 0.2 neutron/cm2·s.
http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/03/05/alexander-parkhomov-paper-published-in-journal-of-unconventional-science/
Dr. Rossi,
Frank Acland March 5 at5:50P
In reply to your question about your mental health.
You show the World every day that your mental health is in excellent condition !
Robert Curto
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
USA
Buck:
Interesting. Thank you.
I am sure, as I always said, that all the energy sources will be integrated, with advantage for all. The approach of the Arab News is intelligent, though, and the skepticism is in the right and smart measure.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mark Saker:
1- yes, I think, but must be tested
2- I am not able to answer this question now, but I assume several
3- Not now, maybe in future. An expert could get sensitive information
4- Good idea!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Flesheatingemu:
I am here with my Team, of course and I have all the help I need. It is my choice to overstay, to give all I can.
Communications can be sent to
info@leonardocorp1996.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
To the readers of the JoNP:
My book “The Missed U-Turn – The duel Heisenberg vs Schrödinger” is available as ebook in the Amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00UBGN93I
Regards,
Wlad
Dear Andrea,
If you were to sell a 5MW low temp plant in the future, would you still only need one control room container to 5 reactor containers.
How many 1MW plants could one control container look after?
I really enjoyed reading your description of the noises the reactor makes. Would there be any possibility of you making an audio recording of the reactor or do you think that would possibly give away important information? Perhaps you could edit certain noises you think are too revealing? If you could record with a stereo microphone that would be AMAZING. I could listen to it at work for relaxation 🙂
Dr. Rossi, if you are only getting 4 hours of sleep a day, it sounds like you could use a lab assistant or ten. Surely you deserve some help on such an important mission. Where should we email our CVs? 🙂
Bion Alex Howard
Dear Andrea,
I saw the following Editorial in Arab News, a 39 year old newspaper (in English) with a circulation of about 51,000, coming out of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. It is owned by a member of the House of Saud.
I find it interesting that the editor chose to cite Cold Fusion in this piece extolling the importance of Saudi businesses’ need to strongly consider funding R&D in the pursuit of improving their businesses. My first thought is that if the House of Saud wanted people to ignore Cold Fusion as a disruptive technology then it would likely choose to exclude it. However, they chose to end their point on the attainability of Cold Fusion by saying “never say never”.
Being on the LENR side of the fence, I think it a reasonable policy for Arab News (House of Saud) to point to the importance of elevating the importance of R&D in preparation for the day when Oil does NOT drive the economy.
What are your thoughts?
——
“Some answers today seem frankly unreachable. The issue of Cold Fusion, generating a nuclear reaction at room temperature, rather than with the immense heat currently required, is one such inquiry. Just as medieval alchemists sought the Philosopher’s Stone that would turn base metal into gold, so Cold Fusion currently seems unattainable. But never say never.” (See the 4th paragraph)
Link>> http://www.arabnews.com/editorial/news/714186
Link>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_News
Link>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turki_bin_Salman_Al_Saud
Curiosone:
The MFP ( Main Free Path) is supposed to be the space a nucleon has inside the atomic nucleus to orbit independently along the “independent particle model”. Good sense says that there is not MFP in a nucleus, because strong forces would force the nucleon to react with other nuclea. To defend the independent particle model, it has been pulled out the exclusion principle of Pauli, which forbids any interaction that puts particles into states that are already occupied. Yes, but the Pauli principle is not a force, therefore cannot eliminate the strong forces, so it seems to me that the MFP is an error.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
DTravchenko:
Yes, we did, and substantial too. Obviously I cannot release particulars. Inside the container where are the computers, we have also a small electronic laboratory where our electronic engineer can modify the boards of the computers of the reactors to make them follow suite the requested operative modifications.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
One container contains the E-Cats, pumps heat exchangers and the satellitar informatic system of every E-Cat. The second container contains the central control system, the general electric panels, general switches etc, plus the computers to read all the data and, obviously, the chairs and the desks. One of the desks is mine, from it I am writing this comment to answer to you, as well as all the comments I sent and will send in 2015. I make the trip from one container to the other not less than 100 times every day, but for the 60% of time I am in the container where are the computers. Together with me are several components of the Team. Both containers are installed inside the factory of the Customer.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Yes, I am worried about you more than ever now (hehe)!
You mention 2 containers. In the photos you released on your web site, it seemed that there was one container containing the reactors, etc., and people working inside another container. Is this second container a workshop/factory for you?
Many thanks,
Frank
JC Renoir:
Here is a strong private police security 24 hours per day. The factory is filled by cameras and many signs which say ” Smile: you are on camera”.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
To obtain statistics about predictability you need experience. We cannot have experience, since this plant is the first of industrial size ( 1 MW) to be observed in operation 24/7/350. This is also why we prefer not to publish data before at least one year of operation. I sleep 4 hours per day, but very well. This life will go on for all this year and possibly a slice of the next. But it is worth. During the long nights I can hear the voice of the plant ( just speaking of mental health….-he,he,he): the voice of the plant is a blend of huge bubbling of water, pumps tictocs, bips of computers and blinking leds, bzzzzs of electric stuff…all this is not constant, but is dynamic, it’s an integral. I get data also from it. Obviously the gauges of the control system make the job, but the voice raises my instinct. I invented him, not the gauges. ( Whattaya think about my mental health, after this? He,he,he,he…)
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi:
What do you think of the MFP and the independent particle model?
Thank you,
W.G.
Dear Andrea:
During this test of the 1 MW plant have you and your Team made modifications to the technology after the experience of the work of the E-Cat?
Warm Regards,
DT
During the nights do you have security in the factory of the customer where the 1 MW plant is in operation ?
JCR
Ecco Liberation:
The whole of the work of Parkomov is very interesting; obviously, I do not know the particulars, beside what I have read and seen in the internet.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
It’s interesting (and a bit painful) to read about your high anxiety levels surrounding you work with the 1 MW plant. I hope it does not affect your mental and physical health!
Is the E-Cat such an unpredictable machine to cause you so much anxiety? Or is your anxiety more about the reliability of the controllers breaking down?
I hope you are able to sleep well!
Frank Acland
Dr.Rossi:
Which aspects of Dr.Parkhomov’s work do you find particularly worth mentioning?
Regards, EL.
Brandon Hurd:
Thank you for your delightful words. I gave all the possible information, with exception of issues that we deem critical to pass from a laboratory replication to an industrial manufacturing. I have been enchanted by the work of Dr Parkhomov: simply genial, as for what I could see in the internet. Also the work of Brian Ahern merits to be observed with great attention.
The persons you cited have helped us with their honest sustain; in particular I have appreciated the intellectual honesty of Peter Gluck: he started hostile, because his opinion regarding our former work was not positive ( but he was sincere and did not have an agenda); eventually, with remarkable honesty, he published his change of opinion; maybe in the future he will again turn into negative his mood toward us, but he gave strong evidence of his intellectual honesty.
About the future: the commercial strategic decisions are totally premature, because all will depend on the results and we need to wait the end of this test period. Every moment here we do not know what will happen the next moment. I am in the plant ( inside the 2 containers wherein is everything) from 5.30 a.m. through midnight and there is no moment without anxiety. I understand it is difficult to imagine how difficult this is.
For now my future is in the next 10 minutes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi
Thank-you very much for all the answers you provide to readers’ questions on this forum. I believe such openness on your part is greatly appreciated by all the readers. I think your spirit of openness together with the daily sharing of news and opinions regarding LENR by people like Franck Acland, Mats Lewan, Vessela Nikolova, Peter Gluck, the MFMP and many others, is what gives a lot of readers, hope for a better future – one in which LENR will play a very big part.
There are many people who wait patiently for that better future to take a big leap forward. The wait is occasionally rewarded with news, such as, for example with your recent publication of the photo’s of the 1MW plant. Let me say, it looks very impressive – a true “work of magnificence.” Also, may I say congratulations on the release of your official website. I think probably, the release of the photo’s of the 1MW plant over-shadowed the fact that you had just put up a very professional and informative website. Well done – it looks great.
I have a question for you with regard to the 1MW plant. What will happen when the testing phase of your 1MW plant is complete, assuming the results are posisitve?
Will Industrial Heat “announce” the technology to the world? By that stage, it should be well considered to be a “proven” technology, especially if your results are positive and your customer confirms that fact.
I guess the alternative approach would be a more “low profile” next step towards mass manufacture. I think many people would be very dissapointed with a low profile approach since people want this technology to be “announced” to the world. After all, this technology will eventually benefit all mankind and that will be something, which you will be very proud of I am sure.
Warm regards
Brandon Hurd
Cape Town, South Africa
Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
Thank you for the interesting link.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
This is the release of a new book related to the E-Cats:
“Hot-Cat 2.0: How last generation E-Cats are made”
http://fusionefredda3.com/novita/un-nuovo-libro-ci-racconta-lultima-generazione-degli-e-cat
Robert Curto:
I knew him, when in Italy I manufactured biomass fueled power generators: they manufactured esterification plants. I was interested to to treat the vegetables to make fuel oil. He was a very decent person.
Depression is a very dangerous enemy and can hit anybody. He was a hard worker. I am very sorry, for him, fir his family, for his employees. But his company is very solid.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
in all the areas, because we now have to maintain in stable operation for ever a 1 MW plant, giving to a Customer all the energy he needs to make his production. Here the anxiety is exponentially higher and all the particulars go to a stress. We are learning, though.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Very interesting response to Hank Mills. May I ask in what areas has work on the E-Cat progressed by an order of magnitude since 2014?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Dr. Rossi, a very sad story.
Google:
THE DEATH OF GUIDO GHISOLFI
Click on:
Beth Renewables CEO Guido Ghisolfi dies in apparent suicide
Robert Curto
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
USA
Vernita:
Curious question: I put the same years ago, in 2010 to be exact, during a meeting in NRL Dr Nagel attended to, because Nagel is a rare name.
It is worth, at this point, to explain who Ernst Nagel was and why he connects with us.
He wrote an important book: ” The structure of science, problems in the logic of the scientific explanation” ( Cambridge, 1961): I studied throughly this book, because it was the basic text to sustain the exam of ” Filosofia della Scienza” with Prof. Ludovico Geymonat at the Università degli Studi of Milan ( Italy), where I got my doctorate in Phylosophy. I sustained this exam, a very difficult one and I loved this book, because it was the positivistic and structural counterpoint of the Husserl’s phenomenology.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Andrea:
I saw in the blog of ecat-thenewfire.com that there is an interview to Prof. Nagel: do you know if he is a parent of Ernst Nagel ?
Thank you
Pekka Janhunen:
Thank you. When I stay idle not working I feel guilty. I do not know why, but that is it. It has always been so. Probably my mother instilled this in me in my first years of life: everywhen she saw me doing nothing, sitting in an armchair, she used to say: ” Are you a parasite?”. This sank in my brain: in this period I work in the plant from 5.30 a.m. through midnight, but when I return in the motel to sleep I feel guilty to leave the plant. In any case, the work I made has been born also by the books I studied: this is why I am fond in particular of “Models of the Atomic Nucleus” of Norman Cook and its rigorous companion “Nuclear Models” of Greiner-Maruhn ( both published by Springer and available by Amazon). The first, I learnt by heart, the second I study every day and both gave me an enormous help. It has been a process of trial and error, but directed by a theoretical strategy, wrong or right as it may be. This is why I reccommend to everybody, mainly young people, to study with rigor. If it is true what Edison said, that an invention is composed by 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration, it is also true that the brain weights less than 0.5% of a human body: this means that quantity is not proportional to importance.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Koen Vandewalle:
Thank you for your opinion.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Again, Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity is denied by a new experiment
According to the Bohr’s Principle of Complementarity, the photon cannot manifest its wave and corpuscular nature at the same time.
According to that principle of the Quantum Mechanics, the photon manifest its wave feature in some experiments, and its corpuscular feature in other experiments, but never the two features at the same time.
The first experiment was made by Ephraim Steinberg in 2011:
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3295
The new experiment was published in the Journal Nature:
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/150302/ncomms7407/abs/ncomms7407.html
So, new experiments are proving that some principles of the Quantum Mechanics are wrong.
This new experiment corroborates (again now in 2015) the photon model proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.
regards
wlad
Dear Andrea,
Now that Hank Mills has slightly prepared the floor I dare to say the following. Warning: may look sentimental to some.
It is probably no accident that especially you, Andrea Rossi, succeeded in developing the E-cat. The work has seemingly required an enormous, almost but not quite superhuman, amount of dedication and commitment, humbleness in front of nature, and relentless willpower to utilize the possibilities it offers.
Typically it is 100 times more laborious to make new R&D, compared to repeating something that has already been done or doing reverse engineering. Other groups are now beginning to slowly succeed with reverse engineering. That gives some small indication of the magnitude of the original effort involved.
I could be wrong, but it is my guess that in general such amount of willpower and dedication can only stem from a most genuine love of humans and of mankind by fundamentally altruistic motives.
End of sentimentality warning.
Best regards, /pekka
Dear Andrea,
While on the road today, in order to go and solve someone’s tech troubles, I just had the same thought as Hank Mills, you just answered to.
Do you have knowlegde if millions (or better: many billions)are being spent in LENR research by hundreds (or better: (ten thousands) of scientists and engineers worldwide to harness the Rossi Effect ? Maybe by competitors of yours ?
My opinion is that there should be such investments. Urgently.
If this does not happen, this has also a reason: they have no idea how and where to search. In that case, Billions and trillions are worth nothing for the world.
My honest and humble opinion.
Kind Regards,
Koen
Paul:
The book “Hot Cat 2.0” has been a surprise for me: I heard about it this morning, after it has been signaled to me. I didn’t yet read it, I bought a copy this morning, so I am not able to answer, I do not know how the classification has been made.
I take the chance you give me to wish “good luck” to the Authors of the book!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea,
In the recently published book “Hot Cat 2.0” the e-cat evaluated in the Lugano report is considered a “Type 4 design”. Based on this designation what number design is the current Hot Cat?
Paul
Hank Mills:
Thank you for your sympathy. As I said many times, to give away the IP would mean to stop any serious investment. We aleady disclosed a huge amount of information along the Lugano test.
By the way: the work made until 2014 has been less by an order of magnitude respect the work we are making now on the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer of IH.
Fortunately, now I work with a strong team.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I’m only now starting to realize the challenges you faced and the almost incalculable number of tests you must have performed to produce stable E-Cats that do not destroy themselves. You, as an individual with minimal assistance, achieved so much due to your huge sacrifice to test these systems continuously and regularly for years. Right now, there are dozens of part-time scientists and others working to replicate, but no individual or team seems willing or able (perhaps do to a lack of money, resources, other commitments, family issues) to perform the type of rigorous testing you did.
You cannot talk about the inside of the reactor. Also, you cannot talk about wave forms, magnetics, pulse width modulators, etc. But one problem is that in the replications you indicate are taking place, the tests seem to be ending quickly due to mechanical failure. Sometimes, reactors only seem to last seconds after excess heat may be showing up. If you cannot talk about basic structural issues, I will understand. But if you have a tip or two about enhancing the durability of these reactors so the nickel-LiAlH4 reaction (Rossi Effect) can be slightly better observed after the anomalous heat starts being produced, any information would be appreciated.
Of course, maybe that information should be earned by trial and error testing. However, I think having the Rossi Effect (which you indicate is already being replicated) made a bit easier to examine and show the world could have some value to you and industrial heat.
Thank you.
Wladimir,
I gave the example of bending light. Photons have no mass but are affected by massive objects. The scientists had to re-define SOMETHING, otherwise their system would look inconsistent. So they concluded that light still travels in a straight line but in a space bent by objects’ mass. And this new definition of gravity affects both massive and non-massive particles. That would be similar to a re-definition of rotation that accounts for both null and non-null nuclear magnetic moments.
All the best,
Joe