To Understand The Basics Of Black Hole Cosmology

.
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
.
.
Introduction
In this paper by highlighting the following 28 major short comings of modern big bang cosmology the authors made an attempt to develop a possible model of Black hole cosmology in a constructive way [1-3].
From now onwards instead of focusing on ‘big bang cosmology’ it is better to concentrate on ‘black hole cosmology’.
Its validity can be well confirmed from a combined study of cosmological and microscopic physical phenomena.
It can be suggested that, there exists one variable physical quantity in the presently believed atomic and nuclear physical constants and “rate of change” in its magnitude can be considered as a “standard measure” of the present “cosmic rate of expansion”.
Michael E. McCulloch says [4]: For an observer in an expanding universe there is a maximum volume that can be observed, since beyond the Hubble distance the velocity of recession is greater than the speed of light and the redshift is infinite: this is the Hubble volume.
Its boundary is similar to the event horizon of a black hole because it marks a boundary to what can be observed.
This means that it is reasonable to assume that Hawking radiation is emitted at this boundary both outwards and inwards to conserve energy, and any wavelength that does not fit exactly within this size cannot be allowed for the inwards radiation, and therefore also for the outwards radiation.
According to Hawking, the mass of a black hole is linearly related to its temperature or inversely-linearly related to the wavelength of the Hawking radiation it emits.
Therefore, for a given size of the universe there is a maximum Hawking wavelength it can have and a minimum allowed gravitational mass it can have.
If its mass was less than this then the Hawking radiation would have a wavelength that is bigger than the size of the observed universe and would be disallowed.
The minimum mass it predicts is encouragingly close to the observed mass of the Hubble volume.
Thus it is possible to model the Hubble volume as a black hole that emits Hawking radiation inwards, disallowing wavelengths that do not fit exactly into the Hubble diameter, since partial waves would allow an inference of what lies outside the horizon.
According to Tinaxi Zhang [5-7], the universe originated from a hot star-like black hole with several solar masses and gradually grew up through a super massive black hole with billion solar masses to the present state with hundred billion-trillion solar masses by accreting ambient materials and merging with other black holes.
According to N. J. Poplawski [8-11], the Universe is the interior of an Einstein-Rosen black hole and began with the formation of the black hole from a supernova explosion in the center of a galaxy.
He theorizes that torsion manifests itself as a repulsive force which causes fermions to be spatially extended and prevents the formation of a gravitational singularity within the black hole’s event horizon.
Because of torsion, the collapsing matter on the other side of the horizon reaches an enormous but finite density, explodes and rebounds, forming an Einstein-Rosen bridge (wormhole) to a new, closed, expanding universe.
Analogously, the Big Bang is replaced by the Big Bounce before which the Universe was the interior of a black hole.
The rotation of a black hole would influence the space-time on the other side of its event horizon and results in a preferred direction in the new universe.
Most recently cosmologists Razieh Pourhasan, Niayesh Afshordi and Robert B. Manna have proposed [12] that the Universe formed from the debris ejected when a four-dimensional star collapsed into a black hole – a scenario that would help to explain why the cosmos seems to be so uniform in all directions.

629 comments to To Understand The Basics Of Black Hole Cosmology

  • silvio caggia

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    even if the 400 days test is not finished, reached the middle of the planned time you can no more talk of possible negative outcome: even if the COP should drop to 1 in the second part of the test, you can half the charge lifetime and consider only the first part of the test. There is no way to have a negative COP in the second half of the test able to cancel the results of the first half.
    So why you insist in speaking of potential negative outcome of the test?
    Half Regards

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Thank you for your imagination.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    The comment on using some eCat reactors to control others is very interesting. To employ the animal analogy and terminology, you have a mouse that activates the cat and the cat scratches the tiger. If we assume a control factor of three, then one mouse would control three cats and each cat would control three tigers. If each eCat (mouse, cat or tiger) output the same power (10kW) and there were eight such groupings (because doubling the factor in three dimensions yields eight) the total number of eCat reactors would be 104 which is close to what you had previously mentioned and would output a combined total of a little more than 1MW of thermal power. Close or just a coincident? Of course, this could be positive or negative or just plain wrong!

  • Steven N. Karels

    E Hergen,

    We can put some “bounds” around the problem you proposed. One gram of matter, if entirely converted to energy would yield around 25 million kilowatt-hours of energy. The unknown factor is the nuclear reaction in the Rossi effect. A rough guess is that the mass defect is about 0.1% of the matter. So one gram would yield about one milligram of mass defect (mass converted to energy). So we would get 25 thousand kilowatt hours. A one kilowatt eCat running continuously for one year would generate 8760 kilowatt hours of energy. So we would expect the maximum time would be less than three years with the above assumptions. Since as the fuel is “used up” there would probably be either a decrease in output or the eCat would have to be driven harder to produce the same output. Let’s assume 50% as a reasonable lifetime. This would therefore be around 1.5 years. This is probably why the 400 day test period of the commercial 1MW unit was selected. Long enough to investigate aging effects.

  • Andrea Rossi

    E. Hergen:
    Good questions.
    We grant the charge for 6 months.
    We have not yet enough statistics to know exactly how long a charge can endure, for this reason, to be sure, we grant 6 months, that is a period we tested repeatedly.
    After 6 month the charge is retrieved by us and entirely recycled after due treatment.
    BUT: we decided to try not to change the charges of the 1 MW E-Cat in operation in the factory of the Customer of IH and try to perform with the original charges all the 350 operative days we have to run through, and see what happens. It will be very interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • E Hergen

    Dear Mr Rossi,

    with a small reactor of 1 kw and 1g of fuel how many month would the reactor approximately run?

    When the fuel gets exhausted, what happens? Will the reactor become instable? Would we see a slowly decline in the energy production or would we see an abrupt stop?

    Thank you for your answers.

  • Andrea Rossi

    A. Bhatt:
    Very interesting, thank you! What NASA does is always interesting.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Herb Gillis:
    I talk only of what I know and have experienced: so far the smaller is 1 kW power. The amount of charge can be about 1 g.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    All these assumptions made me drunk. Let’s talk of pay back time ( the bottom line): 5 years is reasonable. Perhaps we can make better, perhaps we can make nothing. Who knows?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    No problem, I release only info I can.
    I will be permanently merciful to Orsobubu and his accolites.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea Rossi and Steven N. Karels,

    Thank you for clarifying the SSM control processes.

    Dr. Rossi I hope this didn’t cause you to release this information before its intended time. I’m looking forward to its complete description after the test and your exoneration from many closed minds. God bless you and your IH team for this epoch work. Be merciful to all the Orsobubu’s. :)

    BroKeeper

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Let us assume a hypothetical application of a 1MW thermal(steam) generation capability for an industrial customer. Typical electrical energy costs for an industrial large scale customer might be $50USD/MWh (or higher). Assume the application runs continuously for one year (8760 hours). Without an eCat, the customer would pay 8760 * $50 = $438000USD. Assume an effective COP of an eCat running much of the time in SSM of 20 – 80. Assume 20 to be conservative. The new annual electrical cost is now $21900USD or a savings of $416100USD. Assume an initial cost of $1MUSD for the hypothetical eCat plant. Breakeven point is 2.4 years. Breakeven time would actually be somewhat longer due to fuel and maintenance costs but would pay for itself in 5 years or less. Given the arbitrary assumptions, does this seem correct?

  • Herb Gillis

    Andrea Rossi:
    Based on your current understanding what do you believe is the smallest possible Ecat device? By “small” I mean the minimum possible fuel weight that will produce excess heat and have the potential to operate in a self-sustaining mode for some period of time?
    Kind regards; HRG.

  • A Bhatt

    Dear Andrea,

    Have you heard of the em drive that’s being developed? I feel the future could hold some synergy between the ecat and the em drive.

    Here is some info on it if you haven’t already seen it.

    http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/

    Also there are some videos on the subject of you have a moment to breathe.
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GGTjy6atKMs

    Wish you the best and cheering you on as always.

    Best,
    A Bhatt

  • Andrea Rossi

    Fyodor:
    I cannot comment on this issue further.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Paul:
    Sorry, I cannot give further description after what I already said. The E-Cats are complex.
    Warm regards
    A.R.

  • Paul

    Andrea,

    Andrea,

    How many reaction chambers (reactors) are in each boiling chamber in the most recent 1 MW plant?

    ( I believe the 1st MW plant had e-cats with 3 reaction chambers per boiler. )

    Keep the new fire stoked,

    Paul

  • Paul

    Andrea,

    How many reaction chambers (reactors) are in each boiling chamber in the most recent 1 MW plant?

    ( I believe the 1st MW plant had e-cats with 3 relation chambers per boiler. )

    Keep the new fire stoked,

    Paul

  • Fyodor

    Hello Mr. Rossi

    I hope that all is well with you. I had a question about the comment below, to the extent you can answer it.

    “The ssm is enhanced by the fact that with the control system directing multiple reactors we can obtain a synergy between them using some of the reactors to drive others, where the driving ones ( mouse operation) are less than the cat ones. This way the ssm phases are substantially more that the driving ones. This synergy, obviously, is possible only with big plants ( so far).”

    Are we to understand that some of the reactors are not driven by electrical pulses, but are instead driven by heat from other reactors? Or is it a combination of the two, with less electricity needed because the heat from the other reactors can be used to bring the downstream reactors to higher temperatures?

    Thank you for taking the time to answer my question.

  • Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    The ssm is enhanced by the fact that with the control system directing multiple reactors we can obtain a synergy between them using some of the reactors to drive others, where the driving ones ( mouse operation) are less than the cat ones. This way the ssm phases are substantially more that the driving ones. This synergy, obviously, is possible only with big plants ( so far).
    I cannot give the numbers, as correctly Steven N Karels anticipated and, also, after consulting Orsobubu, I have to add that what we have now is not the final result, things can worsen substantially in time and the final results could be either positive or negative ( this last phrase could be substituted by F-Something).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    You read my mind…now I think one minute and decide if I can give Brokeeper a limited answer or not. I must consult my permanent consultant on the matter ( Orsobubu).
    Thank you for your insight, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Patrick Ellul:
    The battery can be a useful energy storage system. About this issue, it is very interesting the article published on the magazine “Power Enginering” ( available for free on the internet), issue of April, pp42-45, where a paramount scenario of the energy storage system is given, from the 36 MW lead-acid battery of Duke in Texas, to flywheels, compressed air systems, pumped storage hydro , thermal energy storage, etc. A very interesting lecture.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Patrick Ellul

    Hi Andrea,
    You often talk about different energy sources working together.
    The e-cat requires electricity to control, or perhaps gas and less electricity.
    Tesla and Elon Musk today announced their new product, the Powerwall battery.
    For $3500 you get a 10 kWh battery that can give 2 kW continuous.
    Detail specs here: http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall
    Do you think that such a battery spec can help the e-cat be more independent of the electricity grid?
    Regards,
    Patrick

  • Steven N. Karels

    BroKeeper,

    While I too would be interested in the answer directly from Andrea Rossi, I suspect he will delay his explanation until the final report, which could be positive or negative.

    That said, suppose the 100+ reactors are statistically independent as to the length of their individual SSM operations. A control system would monitor each reactor and apply whatever control it uses to each of these reactors when they begin to come out of their SSM to coax them back into SSM. We know earlier versions had a ratio of SSM mode duration to non-SSM duration of 3:1. Andrea has reported that this ratio has been greatly increased, apparently through refinement in the control process (experience does help). So it is possible that the aggregate SSM performance reflects the poorest performing reactor and the others are coaxed into restarting SSM in synchronization with that unit by the overall control system. Sort of the speed of a convey is determined by the slowest ship. We would need to know more about the control system and the physics of the reactors to determine if this is optimal. Perhaps Andrea Rossi will grace us with some more technical goodies?

  • BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    You responded to Curiosone: “I can say that the 1 MW E-Cat ( ” She” ) is stable and in ssm mode.” This seems to imply the 1MW plant, as a single unit, ran in self-sustain mode, not just an individual reactor.

    If this is the case then one of two scenarios could be explained. Either you have now been able to synchronize control of all the reactors as one, or the SSM of each reactor is long enough for all 100 reactors to be more often than not in SSM at once. In this case a major breakthrough has been achieved with a significant ratio of output to input far beyond COP 20. Could you enlighten us to which case this may be if not another?

    With much respect, BroKeeper

  • Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    The link to the issue you proposed in your comment is
    http://www.unihydrogen.eu
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gian Luca:
    The control system has been totally designed and manufactured in the factory of Industrial Heat with our engineers. We prefer not to outsource a fundamental part of the intellectual property.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Gian Luca

    Dear A.R.
    with what to keep an eye on the entire system?
    With programs created specifically with LabView (NI)??

    Thanks a lot

  • Andrea Rossi

    Mauro:
    The emission of heat from Li ions batteries, when they are broken for some reason, comes from the passage of electrons that change their quantic status from higher energy fields to lower energy ones. The energy saved in this changement of quantic status is turned into heat. Being this a physic phenomenon carried by electrons and not by nucleons or nuclear elementary particles, it has nothing to do with LENR.
    It is a chemical reaction between the molecules inside the battery when the batteries are broken: the new molecules combine making the electrons go closer to their respective nuclea, therefore “descend” to a lower energy level, emitting heat: this is why such chemical reactions are defined “exothermic”.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    Why, that’s really interesting. Maybe in future there will be the possibility of synergies with this technolofy, as well as with all the other energy sources.
    Can you send us the link of this information?
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Hello Dr. Rossi:
    on April 20, 2015 in front of the Italian Parlament House came H2M ( H2 Mobile ) , the first land vehicle to produce and store hydrogen using renewable energy independently . It was the first time an environmentally friendly vehicle has been parked there.
    H2U – The Hydrogen University- is a foundation that works on the transition from an ‘ industrial economy based on fossil energy to a new economy’ , which refers to the fundamental strategies adopted by life on this planet and that , therefore , draws its energy from sources renewable, solar radiation and terrestrial heat . Energy from the sun is great , but discontinuous due to the Earth’s rotation and metheorological factors . The H2U believes that hydrogen is the accumulator and the ideal carrier of this energy . The importance of using this element , very versatile , will be in the future as to foreshadow a real ” hydrogen economy ” , mentioned by Jeremy Rifkin , calling this step ” third industrial revolution ” .
    Could this technology be helpful to your system ?

  • Mauro

    What about thermal runaway in litium ion batteries heated or beaten ? is it chemical or lenr?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone:
    Now, at 08.40 p.m. where I am, inside the computer container of the plant, I can say that the 1 MW E-Cat ( ” She” ) is stable and in ssm mode. Also the tests on the new version of the Hot Cat that we have set up here are going on giving us many, many data. I’d say that our R&D and test cycle is advancing nicely, but we must remain very conservative, conscious of the fact that the results, at the end, could be either positive or negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    D. Travchenko:
    Some of the non confidential trade marks of the products we used to make the 1 MW E-Cat are: General Electric, Schindler, Square D, Prominent…but most of the plant and its control system has been manufactured entirely in the factory of Industrial Heat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • DTravchenko

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    Can you tell us who are the main suppliers of the components of the 1 MW E-Cat?
    DT

  • DTravchenko

    Naturally I mean the suppliers that are not confidential: I am not a spy !!!
    DT

  • Curiosone

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Can you update us about “Her” ?
    W.G.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Very interesting.
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Joseph Fine

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    The German Companies “Audi” and “Sunfire” announced the synthesis of a liquid fuel called ‘Blue Crude’ from water and CO2. I don’t know how different this is from the much earlier Fischer-Tropsch process. The idea of electrical dissociation had already been thought of, although there may be something new here.

    The energy efficiency of their process is about 70%.

    The only missing steps would be to provide a heat source to produce Steam and provide an electrical source (instead of windmills) to dissociate Steam into both Hydrogen and Oxygen while dissociating Carbon Dioxide into Carbon Monoxide and Oxygen.

    If they could replace the Wind and Solar Power inputs with a Heat Source from the E-Cat,
    the cost of these “Blue” transportation fuels could be reduced further.

    I suggest a possible motto: ” New Fire to Blue Fire! ”

    This may turn into a new customer application for E-Cats.

    See:

    http://www.sunfire.de/wp-content/uploads/sunfire-INTERNATIONAL-PM-2015-alternative-fuel.pdf

    http://www.gizmag.com/audi-creates-e-diesel-from-co2/37130/

    Colorful Regards,

    Joseph Fine

  • Andrea Rossi

    Roberto Frase:
    No, it is the ITER, a project for a hot fusion power generator. A very good description of it and the difference between it and our technology is on the French scientific magazine Science & Vie of April 2015.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Ciao Andrea,
    I am not a physicist: can you explain if what described in the link hereunder is similar to your work?
    Non sono esperto in fisica ma quando ho visto questo documentario che ti linko ho pensato alla seguente domanda
    Quello che stanno costruendo e’ concettualmente simile alle tue ricerche?
    grazie
    Roberto
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3ff_1430238608

  • Andrea Rossi

    Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Our work’s scheduling is not generated from others’ announcements, but from a serious work.
    We will publish the data of our 1MW E-Cat when our test and R&D will have been completed.
    By the way, the fact that we compete with NASA honours us. I think our work has been a catalyst of their work on LENR.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: NASA could be very near to announcing, for publicity reasons, a huge “breakthrough” in LENR. Have you considered announcing interim results of your 400 day test? This interim announcement would bring much wider attention to your ground breaking research. Thank you for working so hard the world is indebted to you.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Hank Mills:
    1- no, this issue is not that simple
    2- the issue is confidential
    3- same as in 2
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Hank Mills

    Dear Andrea,

    The scaling of the physical size of E-Cat reactors have been discussed here before, but I don’t think the issue has been brought up specifically in regards to the Ni-LiAlH4 hot cat. I hope you may be able to answer a few basic questions.

    1 – Would the Lugano reactor performed similarly if it had been scaled down in size? (Obviously, there would have been less total output, but maybe the same COP would have been produced. )

    2 – Do the reactions inside a Ni-LiAlH4 reactor (not asking for any specifics on the various reactions) function similarly in different sizes of reactors?

    3 – As an example, should a charge of only .25 grams of weight in a smaller reactor and a charge of 1.00 grams in a Lugano sized reactor both – if heated to the same temperature, exposed to the same electromagnetic stimulation, etc – produce anamalous heat only differing in total quantity?

    Thank you.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Mauro:
    Hmmm…very shaky…for these guys mathematic seems to be as exotic as a beach on Mars… Maybe more fit for a science- fiction movie than for an R&D, but…you never know!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dan C.:
    Thank you for the insight.
    I cannot add information to what I already wrote on this issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dan C.

    Dear Andrea,

    You had posted there were 56 thermocouples to measure steam, 56 thermocouples to measure water, and 56 pressure gauges. Obviously, Those who read this assume there are 56 E-cats. I do not agree.

    Let me surmise from info on JONP & photos available-
    2 banks of E-cats. Each bank has water in, steam out thermocouples & pressure gauges. That’s (2)

    Each of the 2 banks has 25 modules Each containing 2 reactors in parallel.
    Each module has a common water in, steam out thermocouples & pressure gauges. That’s (50+2)=52

    The final (4) with 2 possibilities.
    1. The heat exchanger(1) and backup E-cat reactors(3) would utilize a pressure gauge, steam in, water out thermocouples.
    or
    2. The heat exchanger is divided into (4) chambers that allows for zone control and more even heating. Each having a steam in, water out thermocouple & pressure gauge.
    The 3 backup E-cats reactors are merely available for change out should the need arise.

    These configurations utilize all 56 thermocouples to measure steam temp, 56 to measure water temp, and 56 pressure gauges & do not require a Tiger.

    Disclaimer: These configurations may not be accurate in full or even in part.
    Perhaps as nothing here is proprietary, Mr Rossi could say if this is somewhat accurate or I wasted 5 minutes in the thought process.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Sure all the data you are asking for will be supplied as soon as the test on course will have been completed.
    Warm Regards
    P.S.
    Your “second” comment has been edited to avoid the spamming, because spamming makes the robot put your address in the “black list”.

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>