United States Patent US 9,115,913 B1

 

uspto_seal_big

 

Sigillo

 

Alloro del brevetto

.

Read the whole US Patent
Download the ZIP file of US Patent

 

14,636 comments to United States Patent US 9,115,913 B1

  • Andrea Rossi

    CCl4j:
    Thank you for your sustain,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Freddie Macnab:
    Thank you,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    I agree,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    JPR:
    Yes, and is going well again, a little different now.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Gio:
    I strongly sympathyze with you and all the persons that counted on the QuarkX presentation, but it is better to recess a little now and triumph later, then the contrary.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • JPR

    Has the QuarkX been restarted up?

  • Gio

    Andrea
    please, please, in order not to diminish your credibility, TRY to not postpone the announced demo in February….
    Every delay will be seen as a sign of inconsistency of what you say and pretend.

    If you will not publish this post of mine, never mind. I just wanted to let you know the mood of the LENR enthusiasts and believers.

    Ciao

  • Italo R.

    Dr. Rossi,

    > “We will win also this time. We have to.”

    Every failure is a hassle, but it increases your knowledge. So you have to consider it positively. Toward Sigma 5

    Best Regards,
    Italo R.

  • Harvey

    Dear Andrea,

    On January 20th, I posted a link to the recent paper by Leif Holmlid and as of this moment you have not responded. Is there any problem?

    Regards,
    Harvey

  • Freddie Macnab

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    I agree on your decision to delay the presentation of the QuarkX after the verdict: you will be more focused and will make a masterpiece!
    We of the silent majority understand the strong pressure you are sustaining,
    Cheers,
    Fred

  • CCl4j

    Dr Rossi,
    Your strategy to wait the end of the litigation before launching the QuarkX is intelligent.
    Godspeed,
    C.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Patrick Ellul:
    The latest issue is related to the overheating, therefore to the control.
    I think we have understood and we are ready to restart. Tonight , in this very moment, I am working on it with the engineers of my great Team. We will win also this time. We have to.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Patrick Ellul

    Dear Andrea,

    Is the latest issue with your QuarkX:
    a) related to the fuel
    b) related to the reaction
    c) related to the control
    d) related to heat exchange / dissipation
    ?

    Best regards.
    Patrick

  • Andrea Rossi

    Peter Gluck:
    Thank you for your link,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Andrea,

    A new blog issue is at:

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2017/01/jan-22-2017-lenr-technology-or-not.html

    A new interesting week starts soon

    Cheers,
    Peter

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Readers:
    Please go to
    http://www.rossilivecat.com
    to find comments published today in other posts of this blog.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    JPR:
    I am working on it, we understand the problem, now we have to solve it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Good luck on the planning, implementation of the Demonstration. It takes a lot of work to make a smooth, predictable public demonstration. Some thoughts and things to consider for such a demonstration:

    a. Repeatability: During my 48 years as an engineer, when I presented a radical new idea or product to Management or to a customer, I would practice run the complete demonstration around 10 times, to refine it, detect any unusual results, and to make sure the demonstration “behaved” properly.
    b. Numerosity: I understand you have up to three QuarkX units. If so, a decision needs to be made how many do you simultaneously run for the demonstration? More than one adds validity to the demonstration, but then the results will likely be different so you will need to address the differences. If the results are exactly the same, that may decrease the audience’s perception of validity.
    c. Accuracy: All input, output and measurements must be calibrated. The calibration data must be made available and preformed in a manner that is simple, yet highly accurate. Since you are proposing a water-based demonstration (heating water without a phase transition), you will need to calibrate the electrical input measurement system, the temperature measurement devices (each one), the water flow instrumentation, and any other measurement devices I may have failed to mention.
    d. Enclosure: The experiment should be a closed system that is visible so the viewers can see that no hidden (cheats) are in use. Plus no external energy transfer devices are affecting the experiment.
    e. Dummy or Unfueled system: You need to decide if a simultaneous “dummy” or unfueled unit is run under the same conditions to demonstrate the difference. The positives are that it presents a clearer image of the excess energy that actual unit is producing. The downsides are more likelihood of errors and unforeseen differences that need to be explained.
    f. Environment: The demonstration area needs to be large, clean, with chairs for the attendees, a single source of input power (an extension cord running from the wall, etc. Attendees should be able to walk around the demonstration unit. It should not have the “feel” of a laboratory experiment or a garage project.
    g. Documentation: professional quality handouts should be available in sufficient quantities for more than the number of attendees. USB drives should be provided for the calibration and other pre-demonstration tests that will be released.
    h. Legal: Your lawyers need to review all documents and statements for public release.
    i. Oral presentation: Prepared and practiced many, many times so the presentation is viewed as professional and may be clearly understood. This takes a lot of time and practice. Practice in front of an actual audience, preferably trusted outsiders who can critically advise as to what is not working in the presentation.
    j. Personnel Depth: Have an alternative presenter prepared in case the primary presenter becomes sick or not available.
    k. Attendees: Invite them early with a fixed date for the demonstration. Try not to “slip” the date. Invite persons of importance to gain credibility for the demonstration. Trained and well-recognized industry leaders (e.g., SRI, professors involved with LENR). Request RSVP. Have some small, but adequate meal or food and drink (non-alcoholic), especially if the length of the demonstration is over 30 minutes.
    l. Duration: Consider how long a demonstration is appropriate. 8 hours is way too long for the attendees to observe. A few minutes is not credible. Be long enough to capture the effect without being boring.
    m. Automation: If possible, automate the demonstration to smoothly run the demonstration. Consider multiple startups, operation and shutdowns if possible, although it adds more risk that something unusual will occur. The operation time length should be of sufficient duration to demonstrate the effect.
    n. COP Selection: Don’t run the demonstration at an unusually high COP (i.e. 200) or too low a COP (e.g. 2). Choose some target value that clearly demonstrates excess energy even assuming worst case calibration errors but ‘feels” adequate. I would suggest a COP range of 5 to 20.
    o. Water: Consider using a clear water container using store-bought distilled water that you periodically pour into the container to keep the supply of water both visible and observable. Using tap water, critics might suggest you used something another fluid and dispute the results. Allow a random participant to taste the water and to pour it into the source tank. On the input and output side, weigh and record the water weights as a secondary check on the flow rate measurements, as you did in the 2010 demonstration.

    A successful public demonstration takes a lot of work and time (months to properly prepare) but will be invaluable. Do all that you can do to quash the inevitable critics.

    My thoughts. Good luck on a successful demonstration. You get one chance to make a good first impression.

  • JPR

    Did you fix the QuatkX problem?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Daniel G. Zavela:
    Thank you for your kind attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Dr. Rossi,

    Best of luck with both your battle fronts. May peace break out soon for you.

    Best Regards,

    Daniel G. Zavela

  • Andrea Rossi

    Peter Gluck:
    Thank you for your link,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Bernard Koppenhofer
    The work to bring the QuarkX to the market goes on anyway. It is, together with the litigation, what absorbs all my time.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Bernard Koppenhofer

    Dr. Rossi: Don’t understand, how can you equate the importance of getting your reactors to market and winning the court case. Seems to me your reactors to market is so much more important to you and the world.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Patrick Ellul:
    It depends on many factors, but, honestly, the evidence we have collected puts us in a positive mood. I cannot say more at this point.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Domenico Canino:
    Thank you for the link,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    JPR:
    We are working on it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • JPR

    Dear Andrea:
    Problem fixed in the QuarkX?
    JPR

  • domenico canino

    Dear Andrea,
    an italian scientist try to explain the “Rossi effect”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XBG68Kgd_0
    regards

  • Patrick Ellul

    Dear Andrea,
    What impact would a loss in the court proceedings have on you and the e-cat QuarkX?
    Best regards,
    Patrick

  • Andrea Rossi

    Jude Rabalais:
    It depends upon the amount of work we do for the litigation, that in these last days has escalated enormously. The organization of a demo well done takes a lot of time and work.
    Probably we will have to delay the presentation of the QuarkX until after the verdict of the litigation, that is expected by July. I matured this thought today returning from Raleigh, where work for the litigation has been made.
    The presentation of the QuarkX must be perfect and to make it perfect I have to work on it with maximum focus, that now I have not. I am under too much pressure. I must first win one battle, then make the next and the litigation is now.
    Probably we will start in March to receive visits of experts to make together with them closed doors measurements and tests.
    This is the idea I formulated today examining the situation.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steve L.:
    No comment about issues to be disclosed in Court. I can only say that we are convinced that there are bases for us to be very optimist, due to the evidence we have collected.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Ing. Michelangelo De Meo:
    We are working as hard as possible to give our contribution. I am very, very sorry for that wonderful people.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    JPR:
    We have problems to resolve.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Lars Lindberg:
    I am returning to the factory after three days in Raleigh. Must study the situation. The big problem is that now the litigation has reached a very high pressure, I am engaged in it 7-8 hours per day as an average, now.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Peter Gluck:
    Thank you for your ink,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Andrea,

    This is my blog’s first issue published in the Trump Era.

    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2017/01/jan-20-2017the-history-of-science.html

    Tomorrow comes (I hope so) the second one.

    Cheers,
    Peter

  • Lars Lindberg

    Dear Mr Rossi.
    Is there a risk the problem reported from the factory will cancel the demo in February?

  • Harvey

    Dear Andrea,

    The link below is to a recent paper entitled “Mesons from Laser Induced Processes in Ultra Dense Hydrogen H (0)” by Leif Holmid published in PLOS ONE on January 12. I am not a physicist, but his conclusions are very clear.

    http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169895

  • Jude Rabalais

    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi
    Is it confirmed your demo in the next couple if months?

  • Ing. Michelangelo De Meo

    Gennaro Mariniello
    13 hours ago
    Dear Andrea Rossi
    by layman but confident in the success of its ‘energy solution’ I ask what will still be a long time of implementation. I think of the many thousands of people in Italy in the current disaster might tonight as on subsequent not suffer from cold and dark ..

  • Steve L.

    Dr Rossi

    Is this a possibility, that Industrial Heat seems to be set up to be patent trolls.

    could you comment?

    Steve

  • Andrea Rossi

    Arthur B.:
    This will depend on the legitimate paying Customers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Arthur B.

    Dear Andrea,

    I am very sorry I forgot to address my last to to your attention. Hear it is again.

    It sounds like to me that when the next public demonstration comes we’re going the get a fully commissioned and operational industrial plant producing heat for ligitimate paying customers.

    Arthur B.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Peter Gluck:
    Thank you for your link,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Andrea,

    A new EGO OUT Issue is accessible via:
    http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2017/01/jan-19-2017-pacifist-for-day-lenr-info.html

    Success and all the best,
    Peter

  • Andrea Rossi

    Ashford C.:
    I prefer not to comment.
    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>