Chuck Davis:
Rome has been made in 900 years. Hot fusion probably in more than 1000 years. Let us start in months making heat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
As gas turbines (in combination with alternators) at the moment are used to deliver/cover the peak load of the electricity production (at the moment with a higher cost for the thus produced electricity), and as the need of these peak load units rises with the increasing use of renewable energy sources (like wind and solar), thus stabilizing the grid (maintaining the frequency to the wanted value), the use of the E-cat SK in combination with a gas turbine and an alternator is a very smart solution, also because you will deliver the peak load electricity with a much reduced price! Congratulations to you and your team.
The industrial E-Cat will consume on average 160 KW of electrical energy among your future customers.
Is it up to your customers to pay the bill or will these charges be borne by Leonardo Corporation?
All my support for your work
Best regards
Very interesting that you are already using the SK with a gas turbine.
1. If you can get it working well, will you market the SK as an electricity generator?
2. If so, do you plan to sell electricity to industrial customer in the same way you plan to sell heat?
3. Will you use the SK also as a fluid heater?
4. How many persons are working with you on the SK/turbine configuration?
5. What is the current projected timeframe for the first product presentation?
You posted “Yes” to whether you had an eCat configured with a gas turbine engine.
1. Please confirm this is correct.
2. If Yes, is the output of the gas turbine thrust or mechanical energy or something else?
3. If Yes, what is the longest duration for which you have operated this combination?
4. If yes, what was the level of output and how did you measure it?
Dear Andrea,
For your readers, a 150 seconds introductory video by GE about how gas turbines are used to generate electricity: https://youtu.be/zcWkEKNvqCA
Regards
Patrick
Your positive reply to Chuck Davis’ question, “Do you already have a gas turbine operating?” is a tremendous step forward toward the production of clean power.
Congratulations! I hope we can see some pictures of the system and output data this year?
Dear Andrea, Thank you for your last comment and I do appreciate being able to use your JONPs to publish my understanding and I am aware that many people will not be able to follow. Really this technology is for the future but there is a connection to LENRs with regards virtual particles but as many people are aware there is more than one way to make a discovery and therefore I publish my information as a subject of interest but obviously it will only be of interest to certain readers of your journal.
Regar, Eric Ashworth
Clark Kent:
Because we already have the certifications for the industrial applications, we still do not have the certification for the households.
I am convinced that it will be easy to have the certifications necessary for the households after several year of good work in the industries, that now is starting.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Fulco:
You forgot to say that the real god of the JoNP blog are the Readers and their comments.
I learnt a lot from them.
Thank you for your attention to this blog,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Andrea Rossi,
I am reading this blog, that I have discovered recently and have taken some numbers: more that 42 000 comments, 2 100 pages, plus 6 000 pages from the links to the comments: this is a veritable encyclopedia of the LENR. I think this opera has to be added to your achievements.
Godspeed,
Fulco
Mr Rossi:
You now are giving your Ecats only to industries, selling the heat, while we the people will not have the Ecats in our houses: can you explain why?
Clark Kent
Eric Ashworth:
You are welcome to propose your insights, as all our Readers are. Obviously, everybody is responsible for what he writes and the fact that I publish an insight does not mean that I agree with it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, Thank you for your comment and I realize your time is limited with the development of your eCat SK. I put my comments forward in an attempt to explain what I am aware of but it is not easy in a few words, maybe impossible but I shall continue to try and explain in more detail using the Woodwards mach engine and how it ties the technology into a constructive whole. Regards Eric Ashworth
Dear Stanyslav, Thank you for your interest and questions. (1) Mathematics originate from the understanding of energy i.e. interactions but because few people realize i.e. the majority of the general public, the subject of energy remains a mystery and to them unfathomable and therefore of no interest. (2) You will find no biography of myself but it is known in certain official departments that although operate globally are unrecognized as a functioning operating unit i.e. an office of the plenipotentiary, see plenum definition Free Dictionary. (3) This theory originates from an embodied mechanism that explains by demonstration many aspects of energy interactions. The mechanism has several patents and been acknowledged as a technology before its time. (see previous posts). (4) Are there any publications behind this theory?. Not that I am aware of but this question is without doubt a most important question. All books contain information but how does the information get into a book?. This from what I have deduced is a great mystery to many people but some people are able to intuitively know how. (5) Yes the theory is based entirely upon both maths and geometry. (6) There is no such thing as modern physics, the physics of energy is of geometry and maths, it is the same today as it has been since Time immemorial. (7) Yes I do see perspectives with regards the theory and the mechanism behind it even though it is not allowed to be demonstrated in universities or research establishments. For me the JONP is a much needed publication, allowing people to share information. Nobody gets paid for providing information, its voluntary and this is what makes the information unbiased. I intend to provide more information as I realize it is a difficult subject to walk into but if people are able to connect the dots together, some people will see the picture. I see the connection to LENRs can I explain, am I able?. Regards Eric Ashworth
It is difficult for me to envision of 100kW eCat SK reactor that can sustain the temperatures you report without damaging or melting the containment structure. Is the containment structure transparent?
Could I kindly ask your objective opinion about geometry interpretation of physics from Eric Ashworth?
Can the biography of Eric Ashworth be found somewhere and how did he come to this theory?
Are there any publications and math behind this theory?
How does this theory relate with modern physics?
Do you see any perspectives in this theory?
Dear Andrea, This information should be of interest to both yourself and people who are aware of the Fine Structure Constant. Said to be the greatest mystery in physics. See numerological explanations/ Richard Feynman in the Wikipedia Fine Structure Constant section. This I feel is most important because, I believe, it relates directly to virtual particles and EVOs and help explain the following important information The Fine Structure Constant was given in 1929 as 137 and late 1930s as 136 by Arthur Eddington. Richard Feynman said it was close to .08542455. My figure is .085841 but this figure has certain degree of mobility. Eddington can be deduced from the formulae a-1 = 16+0.5 x 16 x 15 i.e. 16-1 = 136 and I think this figure is correct, 1.5 (16+1) x16=24 (4×6) 4 cubes i.e. 4’Sets’ x15 (16-1)=360. These figures relate to the two major ‘End Sets’ that have a circulatory path. Pi = 4 because it takes four densities to form a structure i.e. within ‘Sets’ and of ‘Sets’ in one flux tube and four flux tubes each containing four ‘Sets’ to form the overriding structure. There are four ‘Sets’ in a flux tube so 16 structures but one set is with regards a coming and one is with regards a going, therefore there is the positive ‘Set’, the neutral ‘Set’ and the negative ‘Set’. 3.14159 is a part of 4. Thereby .085841 is the flux, therefore divide by 2 = .0429205 one of these represents the circumferential force and one the diametrical force. .085841 being less than 1 requires an extra force for the fourth energy structure of field identity and must be external and of a higher order. .429205 of absolute size positive energy and .419205 of absolute volume negative energy plus .14159 of structuring force energy plus 1 negative, 1 neutral and 1 positive provides 4 being a full ‘Set’ of a flux tube. (The proton is comprised of four spirals i.e. flux tubes each spiral represents a specific density, the electron being the least dense thereby the electron is the plasma field and there are three more fields i.e. the negative, the neutral and the positive which, of which form a structure i.e. cubic neutral/proton with its poles of positivity and negativity and into which these four flux tubes descend i.e. the electro magnetic field of the two exterior interacting cubes, one positive one negative. .429205 divide by .14159 equals 1 negative, 1 positive and 1 neutral plus .0313228 of encapsulating force/field identity/VP. .85841 divide by .14159 equals 6.0626456 a cubic neutral of a field plus .0626456 of encapsulating force. Conclusion: .062645 being six digits, not seven being cubic represents an exterior influential force of .062645 magnitude more than the value of the cubic neutral field. Thereby 1 neutral field of energy being the quality of x4 mobile structures must be part of a greater structure that is 95.777795 times greater and that a proton and electron must always be a part of a systemic system of a field. 95.777795 x .062645 = 5.9999999. it seems that 95.7777.95 describes energy because it originates from an understanding of energy. This is complicated without diagrams.
___________________Field Identity___________________
______positive___
______neutral____
___negative______
-77 95 7777 95 95 7777 95 95 7777 95 95 7777 95 77+
Alpha (last) > Direction> (first) Omega
9 = completion —— 5 = half — — 7 = mobility/transmutation
9 and 5 are interchangeable digits. Half is half but two is one i.e. 1 energy unit.
As the plasma enters at Alpha of the flux tube it begins to structure in the plasma ‘Set’ being 7777 and continues through 3 more ‘Sets’ by going through 3 minor transitions as it passes over 3 minor ‘end sets’. The 4th major transition occurs between the 7 and 9 of Omega. The last 77+ represents two more passes to occur, on the first pass the liquid and the gas dimensions of the structure boil off and the solid loses a percentage of mass becomes a moon. On the next two passes the solid is reduced to a comet then a meteorite whereupon it becomes an active particle. This phenomena produces EVOs or Virtual Particles dependent upon the structure under annihilation.
95.777795 divided by 6 equals15.962965 i.e. 16 or four energy fields in four states of neutrality. Therefore 16 minus 15.962965 equals .037035. .037035 divide by 3 i.e. negative, positive and neutral equals .012345. This figure represents the progressive state of systemic energy i.e. structuring plasma. 0 to 1 = 15 degrees, 1 to 2 = 30 etc. both in its dense state and in its fine state i.e. the encapsulating force.
To structure plasma into structure it has to negotiate 6 x 15 degrees as it ascends the flux tube i.e. descends into the cube. Each flat requires a 15 degree turn that eventually ties it into a knot i.e. see knot theory. Therefor to make solid plasma requires 24 turns in the first Alpha ‘Set’. There are four ‘Sets’ in a flux tube therefor 96 turns but the last turn is deconstructing i.e. going i.e. half and the first turn is constructing i.e. coming i.e. half, therefore 95. Consequently when an existing structure enters a flux tube, like a hydrogen atom, it is shredded as it bounces over the minor ‘end sets’ towards its final annihilation at the apex of the pyramid being a major ‘End Set’. Flux tubes create and ultimately destroy by creating either EVOs or VPs.
Using the Lorentz force formulae: Force = qE + qV x B Where E = Electric field, V = Velocity, q = structure and B = Magnetic field. The force, I believe relates to the manufactured fine structure/particle or dense solid structure. Q = qE + qV i.e. Tangent/trajectory which relates to turns i.e. 15 degrees. Thereby every structure is subjected to 95 tangential forces as it runs through four ‘Sets’.
Degrees: 15 – 30 – 45 – 90 = 1 ‘Set’ x 4 = 360 degrees i.e. 1 flux tube. This represents full power of one unit with regards an interaction between two cubic neutrals but full power of one flux tube is a potential of an overriding system that contains four flux tubes i.e. one power. In other words you are a part of the system or you are the system i.e. either a potential or a power. Finished structure contains gravity. Unfinished contains a degree of. Hydrogen is a finished structure. A flux tube creates an image of what it is a part of i.e. a structure and simultaneously over a distance/time destroys its creation. Consequently a hydrogen atom is drawn to the destructive aspect of the flux tube within the electromagnetic fields of the two interacting neutral cubes. The Earth being the negative cube within which hydrogen is produced. The Earth is somewhere in the 3rd’ ‘Set’. The 1st and 2nd ‘Set’ prehistory being negative ‘Sets’ of the flux tube, to cross over requires a major transition.
Hydrogen atom/Structure = 4 not 3.14159 because of its flux tubes with its ‘End Sets’ but it interacts with the field of two neutral cubes one positive and one negative thereby it produces soft virtual particle/potentials. 4 x 90 degrees = 360 degrees divide by 95.777795 + .14159 = 3.90029. Thereby the sum equals more than its parts because it is never an entirely isolated unit from its system/progenitor. .09971 is an exterior connection of the central ‘End Set’ within Earths central position. Therefore .049855 is the positive and .049855 the negative pole connection when the structure splits into plasma, only to recombine. I intend to add to this information but too much at any one time defeats the object. Any questions I will answer if able. Regards Eric Ashworth
Loredana:
Not only that, but also ENI is making an analogous plant. My patent has been granted in 1978 and has expired on 1998. The US patent for the same technology has expired few months ago, so now the technology is free at disposal of whomever wants to make use of it. This is the spirit of patents.
I am glad to read that it is still useful.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi:
There is a Swiss company, whose name is GRT, that is proposing in Italy a technology to turn plastics into fuel by a process that is evidently a copycat of your patent!
Are you aware of it?
Best Regards,
Loredana
Dr Rossi,
I watched on YouTube the demonstration of the Ecat in Stockholm on Nov 24.
It is an event of remarkable importance, the measurements have been convincing.
I was sceptic about the Ecat, but now I am convinced.
Cheers
Ross
Dr Andrea Rossi,
Has your 13 module 1 kW Ecat QX been made obsolete from the realization of the single module Ecat QX?
Will it be possible to assemble 1 kW single module ecats to make 1 MW plants?
Some is saying you are trying a single module 1 MW Ecat: is it true?
Regards,
Jim Rosenburg
Frank Acland:
Very complex to answer. Thousands of particulars. I cannot enter in the particulars. The SK, for example, is not ready. The sale of heat presumes many separate organizational issues assessed. Authorizations issues have to be assessed. Etc.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Chuck Davis:
Rome has been made in 900 years. Hot fusion probably in more than 1000 years. Let us start in months making heat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
The Ecat is going to change all the game also in the field of transportation: is that correct?
Chuck Davis
Dear Dr. Rossi,
As gas turbines (in combination with alternators) at the moment are used to deliver/cover the peak load of the electricity production (at the moment with a higher cost for the thus produced electricity), and as the need of these peak load units rises with the increasing use of renewable energy sources (like wind and solar), thus stabilizing the grid (maintaining the frequency to the wanted value), the use of the E-cat SK in combination with a gas turbine and an alternator is a very smart solution, also because you will deliver the peak load electricity with a much reduced price! Congratulations to you and your team.
Kind Regards,
Daniel De Caluwé
(Belgium).
Frank Acland:
1- yes
2- premature
3- yes
4- all the Team
5- for the SK we do not know yet,for the QX Jan 2018.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Raffaele Bongo:
The energy consumed by us will be paid by us.
Warm Regards
a.R.
Hello A. Rossi
The industrial E-Cat will consume on average 160 KW of electrical energy among your future customers.
Is it up to your customers to pay the bill or will these charges be borne by Leonardo Corporation?
All my support for your work
Best regards
Raffaele
Dear Andrea,
Very interesting that you are already using the SK with a gas turbine.
1. If you can get it working well, will you market the SK as an electricity generator?
2. If so, do you plan to sell electricity to industrial customer in the same way you plan to sell heat?
3. Will you use the SK also as a fluid heater?
4. How many persons are working with you on the SK/turbine configuration?
5. What is the current projected timeframe for the first product presentation?
Best regards,
Frank Acland
Eric Ashworth:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Daniel G. Zavela:
I think yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Patrick Ellul:
Thank you for the link,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven N. Karels:
1- yes
It is too soon to give further information.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi.
You posted “Yes” to whether you had an eCat configured with a gas turbine engine.
1. Please confirm this is correct.
2. If Yes, is the output of the gas turbine thrust or mechanical energy or something else?
3. If Yes, what is the longest duration for which you have operated this combination?
4. If yes, what was the level of output and how did you measure it?
Dear Andrea,
For your readers, a 150 seconds introductory video by GE about how gas turbines are used to generate electricity:
https://youtu.be/zcWkEKNvqCA
Regards
Patrick
Dear Dr. Rossi,
Your positive reply to Chuck Davis’ question, “Do you already have a gas turbine operating?” is a tremendous step forward toward the production of clean power.
Congratulations! I hope we can see some pictures of the system and output data this year?
Best of luck with your impressive R&D work.
Best Regards,
Daniel G. Zavela
Dear Andrea, Thank you for your last comment and I do appreciate being able to use your JONPs to publish my understanding and I am aware that many people will not be able to follow. Really this technology is for the future but there is a connection to LENRs with regards virtual particles but as many people are aware there is more than one way to make a discovery and therefore I publish my information as a subject of interest but obviously it will only be of interest to certain readers of your journal.
Regar, Eric Ashworth
Millie Lucas:
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Zero:
Thank you for your opinion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
I think that you will never deliver any Ecat, either industrial or domestic. Forget the Ecat!
Cheers
Zero
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
http://www.ingandrearossi.com is a must for anybody wants to understand where the Ecat comes from.
Godspeed,
Millie
Clark Kent:
Because we already have the certifications for the industrial applications, we still do not have the certification for the households.
I am convinced that it will be easy to have the certifications necessary for the households after several year of good work in the industries, that now is starting.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Fulco:
You forgot to say that the real god of the JoNP blog are the Readers and their comments.
I learnt a lot from them.
Thank you for your attention to this blog,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Andrea Rossi,
I am reading this blog, that I have discovered recently and have taken some numbers: more that 42 000 comments, 2 100 pages, plus 6 000 pages from the links to the comments: this is a veritable encyclopedia of the LENR. I think this opera has to be added to your achievements.
Godspeed,
Fulco
Mr Rossi:
You now are giving your Ecats only to industries, selling the heat, while we the people will not have the Ecats in our houses: can you explain why?
Clark Kent
Brokeeper:
He,he,he
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Eric Ashworth:
You are welcome to propose your insights, as all our Readers are. Obviously, everybody is responsible for what he writes and the fact that I publish an insight does not mean that I agree with it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Chuck Davis:
1- yes
2- the power density is the highest I ever reached. Premature to give numbers.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi:
1- do you already have a gas turbine operating?
2- if yes, which dimensions vs power?
Regards,
Chuck Davis
Dear Andrea, Thank you for your comment and I realize your time is limited with the development of your eCat SK. I put my comments forward in an attempt to explain what I am aware of but it is not easy in a few words, maybe impossible but I shall continue to try and explain in more detail using the Woodwards mach engine and how it ties the technology into a constructive whole. Regards Eric Ashworth
Reply Stanyslav,
Dear Stanyslav, Thank you for your interest and questions. (1) Mathematics originate from the understanding of energy i.e. interactions but because few people realize i.e. the majority of the general public, the subject of energy remains a mystery and to them unfathomable and therefore of no interest. (2) You will find no biography of myself but it is known in certain official departments that although operate globally are unrecognized as a functioning operating unit i.e. an office of the plenipotentiary, see plenum definition Free Dictionary. (3) This theory originates from an embodied mechanism that explains by demonstration many aspects of energy interactions. The mechanism has several patents and been acknowledged as a technology before its time. (see previous posts). (4) Are there any publications behind this theory?. Not that I am aware of but this question is without doubt a most important question. All books contain information but how does the information get into a book?. This from what I have deduced is a great mystery to many people but some people are able to intuitively know how. (5) Yes the theory is based entirely upon both maths and geometry. (6) There is no such thing as modern physics, the physics of energy is of geometry and maths, it is the same today as it has been since Time immemorial. (7) Yes I do see perspectives with regards the theory and the mechanism behind it even though it is not allowed to be demonstrated in universities or research establishments. For me the JONP is a much needed publication, allowing people to share information. Nobody gets paid for providing information, its voluntary and this is what makes the information unbiased. I intend to provide more information as I realize it is a difficult subject to walk into but if people are able to connect the dots together, some people will see the picture. I see the connection to LENRs can I explain, am I able?. Regards Eric Ashworth
Dear Andrea,
When offered, here is a potential domestic customer:
https://metro.co.uk/2018/07/14/queen-wants-someone-to-bring-down-her-1100000-heating-bill-7715172/
With much respect,
Brokeeper
Steven N.Karels:
The gas turbine configuration resolves the problem. We are working on this issue for other configurations.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
It is difficult for me to envision of 100kW eCat SK reactor that can sustain the temperatures you report without damaging or melting the containment structure. Is the containment structure transparent?
Eric Ashworth:
Honestly, I am not following, but maybe there are persons interested to your insight.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Iggy Dalrymple:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Rossi,
When you speak of a single module, do you mean a single reactor?
Best regards,
Iggie
Dear Eric Ashworth and readers of this Journal,
Could I kindly ask your objective opinion about geometry interpretation of physics from Eric Ashworth?
Can the biography of Eric Ashworth be found somewhere and how did he come to this theory?
Are there any publications and math behind this theory?
How does this theory relate with modern physics?
Do you see any perspectives in this theory?
Regards,
Stanyslav
Dear Andrea, This information should be of interest to both yourself and people who are aware of the Fine Structure Constant. Said to be the greatest mystery in physics. See numerological explanations/ Richard Feynman in the Wikipedia Fine Structure Constant section. This I feel is most important because, I believe, it relates directly to virtual particles and EVOs and help explain the following important information The Fine Structure Constant was given in 1929 as 137 and late 1930s as 136 by Arthur Eddington. Richard Feynman said it was close to .08542455. My figure is .085841 but this figure has certain degree of mobility. Eddington can be deduced from the formulae a-1 = 16+0.5 x 16 x 15 i.e. 16-1 = 136 and I think this figure is correct, 1.5 (16+1) x16=24 (4×6) 4 cubes i.e. 4’Sets’ x15 (16-1)=360. These figures relate to the two major ‘End Sets’ that have a circulatory path. Pi = 4 because it takes four densities to form a structure i.e. within ‘Sets’ and of ‘Sets’ in one flux tube and four flux tubes each containing four ‘Sets’ to form the overriding structure. There are four ‘Sets’ in a flux tube so 16 structures but one set is with regards a coming and one is with regards a going, therefore there is the positive ‘Set’, the neutral ‘Set’ and the negative ‘Set’. 3.14159 is a part of 4. Thereby .085841 is the flux, therefore divide by 2 = .0429205 one of these represents the circumferential force and one the diametrical force. .085841 being less than 1 requires an extra force for the fourth energy structure of field identity and must be external and of a higher order. .429205 of absolute size positive energy and .419205 of absolute volume negative energy plus .14159 of structuring force energy plus 1 negative, 1 neutral and 1 positive provides 4 being a full ‘Set’ of a flux tube. (The proton is comprised of four spirals i.e. flux tubes each spiral represents a specific density, the electron being the least dense thereby the electron is the plasma field and there are three more fields i.e. the negative, the neutral and the positive which, of which form a structure i.e. cubic neutral/proton with its poles of positivity and negativity and into which these four flux tubes descend i.e. the electro magnetic field of the two exterior interacting cubes, one positive one negative. .429205 divide by .14159 equals 1 negative, 1 positive and 1 neutral plus .0313228 of encapsulating force/field identity/VP. .85841 divide by .14159 equals 6.0626456 a cubic neutral of a field plus .0626456 of encapsulating force. Conclusion: .062645 being six digits, not seven being cubic represents an exterior influential force of .062645 magnitude more than the value of the cubic neutral field. Thereby 1 neutral field of energy being the quality of x4 mobile structures must be part of a greater structure that is 95.777795 times greater and that a proton and electron must always be a part of a systemic system of a field. 95.777795 x .062645 = 5.9999999. it seems that 95.7777.95 describes energy because it originates from an understanding of energy. This is complicated without diagrams.
___________________Field Identity___________________
______positive___
______neutral____
___negative______
-77 95 7777 95 95 7777 95 95 7777 95 95 7777 95 77+
Alpha (last) > Direction> (first) Omega
9 = completion —— 5 = half — — 7 = mobility/transmutation
9 and 5 are interchangeable digits. Half is half but two is one i.e. 1 energy unit.
As the plasma enters at Alpha of the flux tube it begins to structure in the plasma ‘Set’ being 7777 and continues through 3 more ‘Sets’ by going through 3 minor transitions as it passes over 3 minor ‘end sets’. The 4th major transition occurs between the 7 and 9 of Omega. The last 77+ represents two more passes to occur, on the first pass the liquid and the gas dimensions of the structure boil off and the solid loses a percentage of mass becomes a moon. On the next two passes the solid is reduced to a comet then a meteorite whereupon it becomes an active particle. This phenomena produces EVOs or Virtual Particles dependent upon the structure under annihilation.
95.777795 divided by 6 equals15.962965 i.e. 16 or four energy fields in four states of neutrality. Therefore 16 minus 15.962965 equals .037035. .037035 divide by 3 i.e. negative, positive and neutral equals .012345. This figure represents the progressive state of systemic energy i.e. structuring plasma. 0 to 1 = 15 degrees, 1 to 2 = 30 etc. both in its dense state and in its fine state i.e. the encapsulating force.
To structure plasma into structure it has to negotiate 6 x 15 degrees as it ascends the flux tube i.e. descends into the cube. Each flat requires a 15 degree turn that eventually ties it into a knot i.e. see knot theory. Therefor to make solid plasma requires 24 turns in the first Alpha ‘Set’. There are four ‘Sets’ in a flux tube therefor 96 turns but the last turn is deconstructing i.e. going i.e. half and the first turn is constructing i.e. coming i.e. half, therefore 95. Consequently when an existing structure enters a flux tube, like a hydrogen atom, it is shredded as it bounces over the minor ‘end sets’ towards its final annihilation at the apex of the pyramid being a major ‘End Set’. Flux tubes create and ultimately destroy by creating either EVOs or VPs.
Using the Lorentz force formulae: Force = qE + qV x B Where E = Electric field, V = Velocity, q = structure and B = Magnetic field. The force, I believe relates to the manufactured fine structure/particle or dense solid structure. Q = qE + qV i.e. Tangent/trajectory which relates to turns i.e. 15 degrees. Thereby every structure is subjected to 95 tangential forces as it runs through four ‘Sets’.
Degrees: 15 – 30 – 45 – 90 = 1 ‘Set’ x 4 = 360 degrees i.e. 1 flux tube. This represents full power of one unit with regards an interaction between two cubic neutrals but full power of one flux tube is a potential of an overriding system that contains four flux tubes i.e. one power. In other words you are a part of the system or you are the system i.e. either a potential or a power. Finished structure contains gravity. Unfinished contains a degree of. Hydrogen is a finished structure. A flux tube creates an image of what it is a part of i.e. a structure and simultaneously over a distance/time destroys its creation. Consequently a hydrogen atom is drawn to the destructive aspect of the flux tube within the electromagnetic fields of the two interacting neutral cubes. The Earth being the negative cube within which hydrogen is produced. The Earth is somewhere in the 3rd’ ‘Set’. The 1st and 2nd ‘Set’ prehistory being negative ‘Sets’ of the flux tube, to cross over requires a major transition.
Hydrogen atom/Structure = 4 not 3.14159 because of its flux tubes with its ‘End Sets’ but it interacts with the field of two neutral cubes one positive and one negative thereby it produces soft virtual particle/potentials. 4 x 90 degrees = 360 degrees divide by 95.777795 + .14159 = 3.90029. Thereby the sum equals more than its parts because it is never an entirely isolated unit from its system/progenitor. .09971 is an exterior connection of the central ‘End Set’ within Earths central position. Therefore .049855 is the positive and .049855 the negative pole connection when the structure splits into plasma, only to recombine. I intend to add to this information but too much at any one time defeats the object. Any questions I will answer if able. Regards Eric Ashworth
.
Frank Acland:
No. If the SK will not be ready, we will start with the QX anyway.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Do you need to have both the SK and QX ready before you go into production and make your public product demonstration?
Kind regards,
Frank Acland
Loredana:
Not only that, but also ENI is making an analogous plant. My patent has been granted in 1978 and has expired on 1998. The US patent for the same technology has expired few months ago, so now the technology is free at disposal of whomever wants to make use of it. This is the spirit of patents.
I am glad to read that it is still useful.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi:
There is a Swiss company, whose name is GRT, that is proposing in Italy a technology to turn plastics into fuel by a process that is evidently a copycat of your patent!
Are you aware of it?
Best Regards,
Loredana
Eric Ashworth:
No, I did not spam any comment and your comment is not in the spam either. You can try to resend
Warm Regards
A.R.
Frank Acland:
Yes. The QX is ready, the SK not yet. But we are working hard on it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Ross:
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
I watched on YouTube the demonstration of the Ecat in Stockholm on Nov 24.
It is an event of remarkable importance, the measurements have been convincing.
I was sceptic about the Ecat, but now I am convinced.
Cheers
Ross
Dear Andrea,
If the SK is not ready, is the QX ready?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Dear Andrea, Did you spam my last comment sent a few moments ago. Regards Eric Ashworth
Jim Rosenburg:
1- yes
2- yes
3- maybe: an evolution of the SK
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Andrea Rossi,
Has your 13 module 1 kW Ecat QX been made obsolete from the realization of the single module Ecat QX?
Will it be possible to assemble 1 kW single module ecats to make 1 MW plants?
Some is saying you are trying a single module 1 MW Ecat: is it true?
Regards,
Jim Rosenburg
Frank Acland:
Very complex to answer. Thousands of particulars. I cannot enter in the particulars. The SK, for example, is not ready. The sale of heat presumes many separate organizational issues assessed. Authorizations issues have to be assessed. Etc.
Warm Regards,
A.R.