In regards to your post about electric car patents, I’d like to say there is a huge difference between that sort of technology and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions.
1) Electric cars have existed for well over a hundred years. If my history is correct, the first cars for a short period of time were all electric before the internal combustion engine began to dominate.
2) All of the concepts of electric cars are absolutely established scientific reality – electric motors, batteries, and even on board computers. LENR, on the other hand, is considered absolute pseudo-science by mainstream scientists. To this day if you go to a random university and bring up the topic of LENR with a physics professor I’d wager that 95% of them claim it to be impossible, 4% of them claim it to be unproven, and 1% to be open minded if you promise everything they say will be off the record.
3) There’s not a single technology in a Tesla Roadster or any other electric car on the market today that has any potential to dramatically change the world. They are a conglomeration of existing ordinary technologies and NOTHING MORE. They aren’t going to solve the energy crisis, help the environment to any significant degree, or provide any breakthrough in transportation (they don’t fly through the sky). However, LENR is a truly BREAKTHROUGH technology that holds the potential to change all aspects of human civilization. An unlimited source of dirt cheap and completely pollution free technology that’s both COMPACT and PORTABLE will have FAR reaching impacts. Moreover, even if you ignore the practical implications and potential of LENR, the scientific discoveries that explain how the reactions can take place could continue spawn a revolution in understanding of how our universe works.
To be blunt, the SK is without exaggeration ten thousand times as important of a product than any electric car, any new lithographic process for producing computer chips, or even any pharmaceutical being developed. This puts it into a category that in my opinion gives you a moral obligation to ensure that the knowledge and know how is shared with the world. I’m in no way whatsoever opposed to you making money if the SK is what you have claimed. For goodness sakes, we live in a world where untalented, vulgar pop stars can do sickening things and end up making millions of dollars by profiting on the media attention. If they and others can make money for producing NOTHING, you deserve to make a FORTUNE (even more) for inventing the SK which could do so much good for the world. But I think regardless how it impacts the potential for profit, positively or negatively, the fact this technology is real MUST be proven beyond any doubt to the world and the basic phenomena behind it’s operation revealed.
Holding back knowledge that could prove the reality of LENR is like being the first caveman to master fire yet instead of explaining the process to others, that caveman decides to have all his neighbors bring their meat to his cave where he will cook it in secret. If there were already a dozen ways to make fire keeping yet a new method confidential wouldn’t be an issue, but when all cavemen are ignorant that fire exists it’s an issue that must be resolved.
@ Brian and Leanne Balding
January 9, 2019 at 3:19 PM
This is not the first time it has been suggested on this blog that the inventor who has spent many, many years conducting experiments to figure out how to make LENR a reality, should – now he has already accomplished all the most difficult work – donate his IP for free to everyone.
I may be mistaken, but the impression I have had when this was previously suggested is that those making this suggestion – carefully worded, of course, not to give the game away – just cannot wait to get their hands on the rights in the expectation that they may be able to find a way to make a ton of money out of it themselves while, if that is the way it works out, leaving the inventor with nothing.
Mr Rossi has been working very long hours, for many many years (I am under the impression he initiated this project nearly 30 years ago) to try to find a way to create, and finally now to perfect, an invention which will, in due course: A) appreciably reduce energy costs for everyone across the globe; B) help diminish substantially carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere; and C) raise productivity and living standards worldwide in a magnitude that may be unprecedented.
In your opinion, Brian and Leanne Balding, is the above list of benefits inadequate for Mr. Rossi to bestow upon the world? Do you seriously think it is appropriate that he give away rights to his invention to those who have contributed NOTHING to its creation? Do you expect me to believe that you would do this had you invented the Ecat?
I believe it is appropriate that those choosing to devote a substantial investment of their own personal ingenuity, time, effort and financial resources to provide the rest of us with benefits should, when successful, be rewarded. And rewarded very approximately in proportion to the size of their contribution. That is why the countries of western nations created patent protection. There are other political systems that ‘work’ on different principles but, in every case, all they have ever produced is poverty for all, other than for a few within their political leaderships:
For example, not long ago the monthly salary of fully qualified and practising medical doctors in Cuba was $30. (Yes, MONTHLY.) A minority of them recently enjoyed a pay raise to a positively whopping $67 a month. Please read about it here:
Or take the Ukraine – a nation with the potential to be massively productive in agriculture – where, after nearly a century under an alternate system, GDP per capita is approximately $2000, compared with a range generally between $50,000 and $80,000 among the nations of western Europe, the inhabitants of which, incidentally, are not materially different genetically (so that can not be used as an excuse): goo.gl/bgba7
The message is clear: where there are no powerful incentives for innovation, resource conservation and impressing the hell out of customers, there will be no innovation, nor any inclination to pay attention either to customers or to the conservation of resources. The results are entirely predictable.
I am fortunate to live where serious incentives encourage residents to exert effort in pursuit of reward, and where, in consequence, nearly everyone – not just doctors, inventors or CEOs – earns orders of magnitude more than medical doctors in Cuba: The incomes of coffee shop workers here are more than thirty times greater than those of the average Cuban physician.
So, when the time comes, I will be more than happy to pay Mr. Rossi the royalty on my domestic E-cat. And I very much hope he will profit very substantially from his patent protection. He has, after all, devoted enormous effort and ingenuity to this task over a period of decades, outperforming, essentially on his own, legions of government-sponsored scientists, while enduring ridicule or, at best, incredulity, from perhaps a majority in the science professions, while at the same time incurring appreciable financial risk on a project which must, at the outset, have seemed to have only a tiny likelihood of success.
Patrick Ellul:
First and foremost, thank you for your continuous attention to the work of our Team.
You say the average power stations are better provided of pollution control system; since I worked for many years in that sector, allow me to correct you, because:
1- the power stations fueled by fossil fuels ( all of them, no exception) have not systems to reduce the percentage of carbon dioxide, therefore the main source of the so called “global warming” is not affected by their anti-pollution systems…yeah, I know, they talk of CO2 capture, but it’s not working, yet.
2- it is much more easy to control the emissions of a car engine, because of the small amount of cfm, with the catalytic apparatuses, than the emissions of the power stations, because with the increase of the flow rate the problems increase exponentially ( I was an expert of electrostatic precipitators and made patents on this field in the seventies)
3- when we read that enormous amounts of MW have been installed of eolic and solar plants, we always forget that a kW of power does not correspond to 1 kWh/h of energy when we talk of solar and wind, because the rate of service is, at the best, the 10% , because the sun is not always there enough to fulfill the power of the plant , as well as the wind. Be sure that the 90% or more of the electric energy pumped in an electric car comes from fossil fuels as an average in the world, the rest being mainly hydro and nuclear. The guys that write in the advertising ” We use only clean energy” are just kidding the dummies: they buy energy from plants fueled mainly by coal, oil, gas, then paint it green with a layer of a marginal amount of energy made with windmills and solar panels. This is the truth.
But we live of myths, much easier than serious analysis and studies: ” electric cars do not pollute “, ” we must stop all the fossil fuel stuff and go only solar “, ” LENR is impossible ” ( lucky me that didn’t know ), like to say ” red sky in the evening, good weather tomorrow “. Yeah!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Electric cars reduce pollution because the average power station is better equipped to filter and dispose of pollutants than the car engines; besides, electric cars reduce noise pollution.
In future, electric cars will be fueled by alternative energy sources, among which the Ecat: I am very looking forward the presentation on http://www.ecatskdemo.com
Wishing you all the best,
Patrick Ellul
Brian and Leanne Balding:
Quite superficial analysis.
Mr Elon Musk has first collected billions from investors and eventually, when the production of Tesla turned up to be much less than expected and invested for, made the move to say that he will not sue companies that will copy Tesla’s patents. This, obviously, is exactly the contrary of our situation. By the way, because made curious from your comment, I asked to an acquaintance of mine, that is the CEO of a company involved in the electric cars manufacturing, which company or companies manufacturing electric cars is/are using the patents of Tesla: he said “none”.
I asked also to him: ” Why don’t you give for free to your competitors your patents, so you will be the good guy for the cause ?” When he finished to laugh, he answered: ” Had I done this, our shareholders would have made a class A action asking to be refunded by the billions “.
This said, Elon Musk has all my respect and esteem for his courage and ingenuity and I wish him and Tesla a successful 2019.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
P.S.
Is somebody out there that can explain to me why electric cars save pollution, since to charge a battery we have to plug it in an outlet that gets electricity mainly from oil, gas and coal fueled plants with efficiencies that are never over 35% ? Mah!
You have taken as a model the Big Pharma to explain why the intellectual property cannot be given up, to avoid to lose the investments. Now, look at Elon Musk: he donated his Tesla patents to accelerate the diffusion of electric cars. This is the right model to follow, not the greed of Big Pharma.
Best Regards,
Brian and Leanne Balding
Through my online research I’ve discovered that the existence of a fire ball (plasma ball) with a double layer on the surface (protons in the enterior and electrons on the outside) is critical for the negative resistance phenomena to take place. The plasma ball acts almost as a capacitor or a source of energy to sustain the negative resistance. During this same time period, the plasma ball sustains itself by absorbing radiant energy (mostly heat) from the general plasma environment and begins to produce a self-generating oscillation. This oscillation is basically the conversion of heat into electrical current by the plasma ball.
Due to the production of anomalous energy (in various forms) allegedly generated by a number of different devices producing plasma balls, it is logical to assume that in addition to zero point energy extraction LENR reactions are taking place near the double layers where positive ions and electrons can interact. If this is the case, this amazing self organizing plasma structure in the QX would take the heat generated, convert it to electrical current, and project this electricity through the discharge. A portion of this electrical current (perhaps a significant amount) is converted in the general plasma into heat and light! What remains can be collected as electricity.
No steam boilers, no thermo-electric panels, no photothermalvotaic devices with tiny gaps: the plasma ball ON IT’S OWN converts the heat generated by LENR into electricity. The light and heat are primarily massive losses, but future versions of the QX could be designed to minimize the production of heat/light and boost direct electrical output.
So fundamentally to maximize the energy produced by the plasma ball (if LENR produces a significant portion of the heat) the proper fuel mixture should be utilized. The first step seems to be choosing one or more noble gases. Argon is obvious the FIRST choice. However, additions of other gases like neon could also optimize the formation of the plasmoid.
Next, once the noble gases have been selected, we need to look at the fuels that would be undergoing nuclear reactions. The two most obvious that come to mind are hydrogen (protium with no neutrons) and deuterium (with a neutron). My understanding is that deuterium has a higher cross section for nuclear reactions than hydrogen. Moreover, in spinning up the plasmoid, adding some quantity of deuterium would allow for another layer of positive ions to form with a different mass.
Finally, we need to think about what the hydrogen and deuterium would interact with, in addition to possibly themselves. My guess is that lithium is an ideal fuel for a number of reasons. Basically, in a large number of experiments by different parties, it seems to be susceptible to nuclear reactions with hydrogen/deuterium at very low energies (a few hundred eV) far below what is predicted by traditional nuclear physics (hundreds of KeV minimum). Another fuel that should not be totally ignored are the NANO-PARTICLES produced via sputtering from the electrodes. These metal particles of nickel, manganese, or potentially even other metals such as platinum could also undergo nuclear reactions, although at a lower rate than lithium.
Everything else is basically about helping sustain resonance (design of the power supply so it acts like a tank circuit), possibly applying low powered frequencies to the plasma ball after the initial pulse to help sustain it, and to keeping the plasmoid free floating and away from the electrode surfaces which would produce massive erosion.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
What must be the minimum conditions for having a plant with Ecat?
Obviously excluding a single domestic service, would it be possible, for example, for non-industrial applications such as large condominiums or for a group of school buildings and so on?
In these examples there is always a person responsible for common plants such as heating, water, conditioning, etc.
Georgianne Mcanallen:
Yes, it is ready and industrialized. Very reliable too.
Thank you for your suggestion, the name has not yet been chosen, the choice will be communicated during the presentation of January 31st.
Again, to attend go to http://www.ecatskdemo.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
Is the remote control system already ready to operate? Did you decide the name of it?
If I am in time: I propose ROBOCAT.
Cheers
G.M.
Can you tell us where is made the remote control system, both for the central command in your headquarter and on board of the Ecat in the location it operates?
Congratulations for the fascinating site http://www.ecatskdemo.com
All the best,
Greg
I found the following paper very interesting. It details how the position of a “fireball” of plasma can be manipulated to be kept off the surface of an electrode with either a “magnetic mirror” or a “magnetic cusp” configuration.”
If you utilize permanent or electromagnets to keep the “fireball” in the SK off the electrode, I hope you will discuss the details in the upcoming presentation.
Ruby:
No, it is not possible, but anybody will be able to attend and interact with us going to http://www.ecatskdemo.com
You can visit this website also now to see how it will work.
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
I think you have already tremendously optimized the QX/SK, and I’m sure there are optimizations we cannot even guess. However, looking back at the work of Winston Bostic on Plasmoids/Spheromaks, the work of Chernetsky on the Self Generating Discharge Tube (there were several variations), and the work of Paulo and Alexandra Correa on the Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge device, I have a few suggestions that you may or may not have already tested.
1) Winston Bostic did extensive testing on plasmoids and specifically spheromaks – torodial vortexes of plasma that were being experimented with to produce nuclear fusion. These self sustaining spheromaks would become more stable, form easier, and produce up to ten times the x-rays when at least five percent of argon was added to the plasma. The key here is that the positive ions of the argon organize into layers within the inner body of the torus while the electrons remain on the exterior. By utilizing noble gases and other gases of various atomic weights, you can create a “whip” like effect which can more easily “spin up” the plasmoid. Even utilizing a certain percentage of deuterium which would be of a higher atomic weight than ordinary hydrogen due to the extra neutron could be useful.
2) The correct application of external magnetic fields can help a spheromak or plasmoid form. Obviously, they can be produced at sharp tips or points on a cathode from the magnetic field they self generate. I’m guessing the only practical place to place external magnets (permanent or electromagnets) on the QX/SK would be axially directly behind the nickel electrodes.
3) These types of structures when they self oscillate produce longitudinal electromagnetic waves which cannot effectively be received by ordinarily positioned antennas. Either a spherical antenna must be positioned nearby OR a straight length of conductive antenna needs to be positioned so that the longitudinal waves can travel down the entire length. If you have not done so already, I urge you to measure for longitudinal waves to determine if they are an additional source of energy you can tap into.
Italo R.:
I am working on this. Sooner or later this issue will fade, mainly with the increasing of the plants installed. Nobody wants to be the guinea pig of the harassments deriving from this revolution at its beginning. But it will pass.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
Is it possible to attend personally the presentation of January 31st, even paying to be there?
If yes, I will email you my address.
Thank you if you can answer,
Ruby
I asked the question “For the Ecat SK 20 kW module, does it contain a single plasma zone or multiple plasma zones?”
You answered “Multiple and complex”.
As there was some discussion around the same time regarding balls of plasma, I am unsure if you interpreted what I was asking as being about multiple balls of plasma i.e. discrete higher energy plasma zones within an overall plasma zone.
I would not be surprised that the plasma zone does not have a uniform appearance, as my understanding is that you have an cylindrical zone containing a plasma, and within this plasma you have your active ingredient (the magic sauce) spread along the length of the plasma, and within this active ingredient there will be random induced nuclear activity, the results would be random bursts of localised energy emissions further heating the pre-established plasma with possible miniature very localised magnetic field loops driving plasma movement, so that there would be an appearance (when magnified) all along the length of the plasma zone of plasma bubbling and writhing similar to the surface of the sun, i.e. the plasma zone could be viewed as one not of uniform appearance but one comprising of “multiple and complex” balls of plasma.
However I was asking about the number of individual plasma zones inside a SK 20 kW module, i.e. like the plasma zone as described in the original Ecat QX, not what was inside an individual plasma zone. (Plasma zones whether they are in individual housings or a multicore housing and in turn within the SK housing).
If it is possible for you to clarify that if your answer related to multiple balls of plasma within a zone or to multiple plasma zones within a SK 20 kW module.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
If all your customers are secret, there are little chance of making Ecat known to the world in short time.
If instead there were some customers (even small, even few, 3 or 4) who agreed to make themselves known and share with the world their experiences with Ecat, there would soon be a great and positive notoriety in the world. An explosion!
Wouldn’t you like it?.
In Italy we say, as you know “La pubblicità è l’anima del commercio” and also for the Ecat could be used that motto
You could encourage these customers by giving them a discount higher than 20% (30%, 40% ??) for a limited period of time (6 months, one year?).
This is a suggestion you’ve already received on JoNP and it seems you have liked it.
In this case you could present this proposal during the next presentation.
Ecat is a so GREAT invention that we all desire its diffusion in a time as short as possible.
Obviously in the reality there could be circumstances, facts and things that you know (and we don’t), so the previous proposal couldn’t be acceptable in that way.
Anyway we are sure that you will try to manage all things in the best way for you and for Ecat.
Dear Andrea Rossi:
Very nice the spot on http://www.ecatskdemo.com
Looking at it I became moved and inspired: a veil that covers the spirit of the future and that magnificent music of Richard Strauss, the dawn of a New World…or a New Fire!
Dear Andrea, I watched on http://www.ecatskdemo.com the teaser of the presentation scheduled for January 31st at 9 AM ETS.
So, if I understood correctly: when the countdown of the watch will have reached ZERO on all counts we will have to click on a link that will appear and we will be in, right?
Kim
TheFutureIsNow:
1- I don’t know what are you referring to
2- where has it been stated?
3- this is a confidential field. I cannot answer in positive or in negative
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Brian and Leanne Bolding:
1- I think that all the technologies that limit emissions can help. Our tech is among them.
2- All the former demos had were measurements with a scientific purpose. This is a commercial introduction of a product in the market.
3- Because nobody would invest seriously in the development of a company without an intellectual property. Ask the same question to the pharmaceutical industries: why do not they donate their patents?
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Yrka:
All the Universities you cited are excellent, but let me say also, though, that for what concerns Physics and Engineering you have in Russia too Universities ranked among the best of the world: maybe your family can save money choosing one of the best Universities in Russia.
I wish good luck to your grandson!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
My grandson, Denis, is an excellent student of college heating engineering, (maybe you remember, I wrote to you a couple of years ago, and you congratulated him).
He told his grandson about the great meaning of your research. He nodded so politely, well, yes, interesting, cool. But I see he did not understand the applied meaning of the formula E = MC2. I do not pedogog.
Advise where to continue education? In Milan, Bologna, or Sorbone, it’s probably expensive, we are not rich, but we are ready to pay for his desire to learn. Maybe German universities, or the USA? Advise. I’ll be very grateful.
We are following your work long time since.
1-Do you think your technology can help to limit the global warming?
2-Which is the difference between the demo described on http://www.ecatskdemo.com and the former demos you made?
3-If yes, why don’t you donate to the world your technology?
Brian and Leanne Bolding
Dear Andrea,
1. Regarding details about the plasma being “multiple and complex”: Are you familiar to the work of the Safire project? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IAiMpmGx-M&t=75s
2. Do you believe that your theory about the LENR process of the E-cat SK matured sufficiently so it can be discussed at the presentation at the end of January?
I look very much forward to the presentation!
Kind regards, Gerard
1) Can you tell us if you believe the plasma balls in the SK are the same phenomena as the “creatures of light” that were witnessed moving inside some of the powder based E-Cats of the past?
2) It was stated that when these balls of lights appeared the output would increase dramatically and melt downs could take place. Does this mean that these plasma balls are producing energy?
3) Do you think nano-versions of these plasma balls are present in the lattice of a hydrogen loaded metal when thermal or other stresses release and form cracks which produce charge separation?
It seems to me these plasma balls on different scales could be a unifying mechanism of at least some forms of LENR.
Luciano Frizzera:
Thank you for your kind attention to our work.
To attend the presentation is very easy:
on January 31st 2019 at 9 AM New York time ( 15.00 in Italy ) go to http://www.ecatskdemo.com
Then click the link you find there and you will be inside the presentation.
If you try now, you will find an introductory spot.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi, Dr Rossi,
I am a follower of your good work since the year 2013, I am a professional in the field of sustainable tourism in the Trentino Region, in Italy.
Thanks to your determination, your work is now matured to a level that can be useful to help reduce the global warming. For this reason I will watch with attention the presentation of January 31st.
Can you give instructions how to attend?
I wish you the success you merit,
Luciano Frizzera, Rovereto (Trento, Italy)
Dear Andrea,
In regards to your post about electric car patents, I’d like to say there is a huge difference between that sort of technology and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions.
1) Electric cars have existed for well over a hundred years. If my history is correct, the first cars for a short period of time were all electric before the internal combustion engine began to dominate.
2) All of the concepts of electric cars are absolutely established scientific reality – electric motors, batteries, and even on board computers. LENR, on the other hand, is considered absolute pseudo-science by mainstream scientists. To this day if you go to a random university and bring up the topic of LENR with a physics professor I’d wager that 95% of them claim it to be impossible, 4% of them claim it to be unproven, and 1% to be open minded if you promise everything they say will be off the record.
3) There’s not a single technology in a Tesla Roadster or any other electric car on the market today that has any potential to dramatically change the world. They are a conglomeration of existing ordinary technologies and NOTHING MORE. They aren’t going to solve the energy crisis, help the environment to any significant degree, or provide any breakthrough in transportation (they don’t fly through the sky). However, LENR is a truly BREAKTHROUGH technology that holds the potential to change all aspects of human civilization. An unlimited source of dirt cheap and completely pollution free technology that’s both COMPACT and PORTABLE will have FAR reaching impacts. Moreover, even if you ignore the practical implications and potential of LENR, the scientific discoveries that explain how the reactions can take place could continue spawn a revolution in understanding of how our universe works.
To be blunt, the SK is without exaggeration ten thousand times as important of a product than any electric car, any new lithographic process for producing computer chips, or even any pharmaceutical being developed. This puts it into a category that in my opinion gives you a moral obligation to ensure that the knowledge and know how is shared with the world. I’m in no way whatsoever opposed to you making money if the SK is what you have claimed. For goodness sakes, we live in a world where untalented, vulgar pop stars can do sickening things and end up making millions of dollars by profiting on the media attention. If they and others can make money for producing NOTHING, you deserve to make a FORTUNE (even more) for inventing the SK which could do so much good for the world. But I think regardless how it impacts the potential for profit, positively or negatively, the fact this technology is real MUST be proven beyond any doubt to the world and the basic phenomena behind it’s operation revealed.
Holding back knowledge that could prove the reality of LENR is like being the first caveman to master fire yet instead of explaining the process to others, that caveman decides to have all his neighbors bring their meat to his cave where he will cook it in secret. If there were already a dozen ways to make fire keeping yet a new method confidential wouldn’t be an issue, but when all cavemen are ignorant that fire exists it’s an issue that must be resolved.
@ Brian and Leanne Balding
January 9, 2019 at 3:19 PM
This is not the first time it has been suggested on this blog that the inventor who has spent many, many years conducting experiments to figure out how to make LENR a reality, should – now he has already accomplished all the most difficult work – donate his IP for free to everyone.
I may be mistaken, but the impression I have had when this was previously suggested is that those making this suggestion – carefully worded, of course, not to give the game away – just cannot wait to get their hands on the rights in the expectation that they may be able to find a way to make a ton of money out of it themselves while, if that is the way it works out, leaving the inventor with nothing.
Mr Rossi has been working very long hours, for many many years (I am under the impression he initiated this project nearly 30 years ago) to try to find a way to create, and finally now to perfect, an invention which will, in due course: A) appreciably reduce energy costs for everyone across the globe; B) help diminish substantially carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere; and C) raise productivity and living standards worldwide in a magnitude that may be unprecedented.
In your opinion, Brian and Leanne Balding, is the above list of benefits inadequate for Mr. Rossi to bestow upon the world? Do you seriously think it is appropriate that he give away rights to his invention to those who have contributed NOTHING to its creation? Do you expect me to believe that you would do this had you invented the Ecat?
I believe it is appropriate that those choosing to devote a substantial investment of their own personal ingenuity, time, effort and financial resources to provide the rest of us with benefits should, when successful, be rewarded. And rewarded very approximately in proportion to the size of their contribution. That is why the countries of western nations created patent protection. There are other political systems that ‘work’ on different principles but, in every case, all they have ever produced is poverty for all, other than for a few within their political leaderships:
For example, not long ago the monthly salary of fully qualified and practising medical doctors in Cuba was $30. (Yes, MONTHLY.) A minority of them recently enjoyed a pay raise to a positively whopping $67 a month. Please read about it here:
http://www.medicaldaily.com/cuban-doctors-get-salary-raises-67-month-after-government-cuts-100k-redundant-jobs-272310
Or take the Ukraine – a nation with the potential to be massively productive in agriculture – where, after nearly a century under an alternate system, GDP per capita is approximately $2000, compared with a range generally between $50,000 and $80,000 among the nations of western Europe, the inhabitants of which, incidentally, are not materially different genetically (so that can not be used as an excuse): goo.gl/bgba7
The message is clear: where there are no powerful incentives for innovation, resource conservation and impressing the hell out of customers, there will be no innovation, nor any inclination to pay attention either to customers or to the conservation of resources. The results are entirely predictable.
I am fortunate to live where serious incentives encourage residents to exert effort in pursuit of reward, and where, in consequence, nearly everyone – not just doctors, inventors or CEOs – earns orders of magnitude more than medical doctors in Cuba: The incomes of coffee shop workers here are more than thirty times greater than those of the average Cuban physician.
So, when the time comes, I will be more than happy to pay Mr. Rossi the royalty on my domestic E-cat. And I very much hope he will profit very substantially from his patent protection. He has, after all, devoted enormous effort and ingenuity to this task over a period of decades, outperforming, essentially on his own, legions of government-sponsored scientists, while enduring ridicule or, at best, incredulity, from perhaps a majority in the science professions, while at the same time incurring appreciable financial risk on a project which must, at the outset, have seemed to have only a tiny likelihood of success.
Sincerely,
Rodney Nicholson.
Patrick Ellul:
First and foremost, thank you for your continuous attention to the work of our Team.
You say the average power stations are better provided of pollution control system; since I worked for many years in that sector, allow me to correct you, because:
1- the power stations fueled by fossil fuels ( all of them, no exception) have not systems to reduce the percentage of carbon dioxide, therefore the main source of the so called “global warming” is not affected by their anti-pollution systems…yeah, I know, they talk of CO2 capture, but it’s not working, yet.
2- it is much more easy to control the emissions of a car engine, because of the small amount of cfm, with the catalytic apparatuses, than the emissions of the power stations, because with the increase of the flow rate the problems increase exponentially ( I was an expert of electrostatic precipitators and made patents on this field in the seventies)
3- when we read that enormous amounts of MW have been installed of eolic and solar plants, we always forget that a kW of power does not correspond to 1 kWh/h of energy when we talk of solar and wind, because the rate of service is, at the best, the 10% , because the sun is not always there enough to fulfill the power of the plant , as well as the wind. Be sure that the 90% or more of the electric energy pumped in an electric car comes from fossil fuels as an average in the world, the rest being mainly hydro and nuclear. The guys that write in the advertising ” We use only clean energy” are just kidding the dummies: they buy energy from plants fueled mainly by coal, oil, gas, then paint it green with a layer of a marginal amount of energy made with windmills and solar panels. This is the truth.
But we live of myths, much easier than serious analysis and studies: ” electric cars do not pollute “, ” we must stop all the fossil fuel stuff and go only solar “, ” LENR is impossible ” ( lucky me that didn’t know ), like to say ” red sky in the evening, good weather tomorrow “. Yeah!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Electric cars reduce pollution because the average power station is better equipped to filter and dispose of pollutants than the car engines; besides, electric cars reduce noise pollution.
In future, electric cars will be fueled by alternative energy sources, among which the Ecat: I am very looking forward the presentation on http://www.ecatskdemo.com
Wishing you all the best,
Patrick Ellul
Jerald Arnsberger:
Thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea:
love your answer to Brian and Leanne Balding.
Godspeed,
Jerald
Brian and Leanne Balding:
Quite superficial analysis.
Mr Elon Musk has first collected billions from investors and eventually, when the production of Tesla turned up to be much less than expected and invested for, made the move to say that he will not sue companies that will copy Tesla’s patents. This, obviously, is exactly the contrary of our situation. By the way, because made curious from your comment, I asked to an acquaintance of mine, that is the CEO of a company involved in the electric cars manufacturing, which company or companies manufacturing electric cars is/are using the patents of Tesla: he said “none”.
I asked also to him: ” Why don’t you give for free to your competitors your patents, so you will be the good guy for the cause ?” When he finished to laugh, he answered: ” Had I done this, our shareholders would have made a class A action asking to be refunded by the billions “.
This said, Elon Musk has all my respect and esteem for his courage and ingenuity and I wish him and Tesla a successful 2019.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
P.S.
Is somebody out there that can explain to me why electric cars save pollution, since to charge a battery we have to plug it in an outlet that gets electricity mainly from oil, gas and coal fueled plants with efficiencies that are never over 35% ? Mah!
You have taken as a model the Big Pharma to explain why the intellectual property cannot be given up, to avoid to lose the investments. Now, look at Elon Musk: he donated his Tesla patents to accelerate the diffusion of electric cars. This is the right model to follow, not the greed of Big Pharma.
Best Regards,
Brian and Leanne Balding
Angelo V.:
Thank you for your suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
TheFutureIsNow:
Obviously no answers or comments in positive or in negative in fields that we deem confidential.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Through my online research I’ve discovered that the existence of a fire ball (plasma ball) with a double layer on the surface (protons in the enterior and electrons on the outside) is critical for the negative resistance phenomena to take place. The plasma ball acts almost as a capacitor or a source of energy to sustain the negative resistance. During this same time period, the plasma ball sustains itself by absorbing radiant energy (mostly heat) from the general plasma environment and begins to produce a self-generating oscillation. This oscillation is basically the conversion of heat into electrical current by the plasma ball.
Due to the production of anomalous energy (in various forms) allegedly generated by a number of different devices producing plasma balls, it is logical to assume that in addition to zero point energy extraction LENR reactions are taking place near the double layers where positive ions and electrons can interact. If this is the case, this amazing self organizing plasma structure in the QX would take the heat generated, convert it to electrical current, and project this electricity through the discharge. A portion of this electrical current (perhaps a significant amount) is converted in the general plasma into heat and light! What remains can be collected as electricity.
No steam boilers, no thermo-electric panels, no photothermalvotaic devices with tiny gaps: the plasma ball ON IT’S OWN converts the heat generated by LENR into electricity. The light and heat are primarily massive losses, but future versions of the QX could be designed to minimize the production of heat/light and boost direct electrical output.
So fundamentally to maximize the energy produced by the plasma ball (if LENR produces a significant portion of the heat) the proper fuel mixture should be utilized. The first step seems to be choosing one or more noble gases. Argon is obvious the FIRST choice. However, additions of other gases like neon could also optimize the formation of the plasmoid.
Next, once the noble gases have been selected, we need to look at the fuels that would be undergoing nuclear reactions. The two most obvious that come to mind are hydrogen (protium with no neutrons) and deuterium (with a neutron). My understanding is that deuterium has a higher cross section for nuclear reactions than hydrogen. Moreover, in spinning up the plasmoid, adding some quantity of deuterium would allow for another layer of positive ions to form with a different mass.
Finally, we need to think about what the hydrogen and deuterium would interact with, in addition to possibly themselves. My guess is that lithium is an ideal fuel for a number of reasons. Basically, in a large number of experiments by different parties, it seems to be susceptible to nuclear reactions with hydrogen/deuterium at very low energies (a few hundred eV) far below what is predicted by traditional nuclear physics (hundreds of KeV minimum). Another fuel that should not be totally ignored are the NANO-PARTICLES produced via sputtering from the electrodes. These metal particles of nickel, manganese, or potentially even other metals such as platinum could also undergo nuclear reactions, although at a lower rate than lithium.
Everything else is basically about helping sustain resonance (design of the power supply so it acts like a tank circuit), possibly applying low powered frequencies to the plasma ball after the initial pulse to help sustain it, and to keeping the plasmoid free floating and away from the electrode surfaces which would produce massive erosion.
Any thoughts or comments?
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I want to propose the following name for the SK Control System:
eCatTron
Best Regards
Italo R.:
The answer depends on the specific situations. One does not fit all.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
What must be the minimum conditions for having a plant with Ecat?
Obviously excluding a single domestic service, would it be possible, for example, for non-industrial applications such as large condominiums or for a group of school buildings and so on?
In these examples there is always a person responsible for common plants such as heating, water, conditioning, etc.
Sincerely,
Italo R.
TheFutureIsNow:
Thank you for your insight.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Greg:
All is made in the USA, both Ecat and the control system.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Georgianne Mcanallen:
Yes, it is ready and industrialized. Very reliable too.
Thank you for your suggestion, the name has not yet been chosen, the choice will be communicated during the presentation of January 31st.
Again, to attend go to
http://www.ecatskdemo.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
Is the remote control system already ready to operate? Did you decide the name of it?
If I am in time: I propose ROBOCAT.
Cheers
G.M.
Can you tell us where is made the remote control system, both for the central command in your headquarter and on board of the Ecat in the location it operates?
Congratulations for the fascinating site http://www.ecatskdemo.com
All the best,
Greg
Hello Andrea,
I found the following paper very interesting. It details how the position of a “fireball” of plasma can be manipulated to be kept off the surface of an electrode with either a “magnetic mirror” or a “magnetic cusp” configuration.”
http://www.physics.ucla.edu/plasma-exp/references/publications/PSSTechnol/PSST-21-2012.pdf
If you utilize permanent or electromagnets to keep the “fireball” in the SK off the electrode, I hope you will discuss the details in the upcoming presentation.
Ruby:
No, it is not possible, but anybody will be able to attend and interact with us going to
http://www.ecatskdemo.com
You can visit this website also now to see how it will work.
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
TheFutureIsNow:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hello Andrea,
I think you have already tremendously optimized the QX/SK, and I’m sure there are optimizations we cannot even guess. However, looking back at the work of Winston Bostic on Plasmoids/Spheromaks, the work of Chernetsky on the Self Generating Discharge Tube (there were several variations), and the work of Paulo and Alexandra Correa on the Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge device, I have a few suggestions that you may or may not have already tested.
1) Winston Bostic did extensive testing on plasmoids and specifically spheromaks – torodial vortexes of plasma that were being experimented with to produce nuclear fusion. These self sustaining spheromaks would become more stable, form easier, and produce up to ten times the x-rays when at least five percent of argon was added to the plasma. The key here is that the positive ions of the argon organize into layers within the inner body of the torus while the electrons remain on the exterior. By utilizing noble gases and other gases of various atomic weights, you can create a “whip” like effect which can more easily “spin up” the plasmoid. Even utilizing a certain percentage of deuterium which would be of a higher atomic weight than ordinary hydrogen due to the extra neutron could be useful.
2) The correct application of external magnetic fields can help a spheromak or plasmoid form. Obviously, they can be produced at sharp tips or points on a cathode from the magnetic field they self generate. I’m guessing the only practical place to place external magnets (permanent or electromagnets) on the QX/SK would be axially directly behind the nickel electrodes.
3) These types of structures when they self oscillate produce longitudinal electromagnetic waves which cannot effectively be received by ordinarily positioned antennas. Either a spherical antenna must be positioned nearby OR a straight length of conductive antenna needs to be positioned so that the longitudinal waves can travel down the entire length. If you have not done so already, I urge you to measure for longitudinal waves to determine if they are an additional source of energy you can tap into.
BG:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Donna:
Thank you, you got the spirit of the teaser.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Italo R.:
I am working on this. Sooner or later this issue will fade, mainly with the increasing of the plants installed. Nobody wants to be the guinea pig of the harassments deriving from this revolution at its beginning. But it will pass.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
Is it possible to attend personally the presentation of January 31st, even paying to be there?
If yes, I will email you my address.
Thank you if you can answer,
Ruby
KeithT:
Sorry, I am not going to give this information.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I asked the question “For the Ecat SK 20 kW module, does it contain a single plasma zone or multiple plasma zones?”
You answered “Multiple and complex”.
As there was some discussion around the same time regarding balls of plasma, I am unsure if you interpreted what I was asking as being about multiple balls of plasma i.e. discrete higher energy plasma zones within an overall plasma zone.
I would not be surprised that the plasma zone does not have a uniform appearance, as my understanding is that you have an cylindrical zone containing a plasma, and within this plasma you have your active ingredient (the magic sauce) spread along the length of the plasma, and within this active ingredient there will be random induced nuclear activity, the results would be random bursts of localised energy emissions further heating the pre-established plasma with possible miniature very localised magnetic field loops driving plasma movement, so that there would be an appearance (when magnified) all along the length of the plasma zone of plasma bubbling and writhing similar to the surface of the sun, i.e. the plasma zone could be viewed as one not of uniform appearance but one comprising of “multiple and complex” balls of plasma.
However I was asking about the number of individual plasma zones inside a SK 20 kW module, i.e. like the plasma zone as described in the original Ecat QX, not what was inside an individual plasma zone. (Plasma zones whether they are in individual housings or a multicore housing and in turn within the SK housing).
If it is possible for you to clarify that if your answer related to multiple balls of plasma within a zone or to multiple plasma zones within a SK 20 kW module.
Regards,
Keith Thomson.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
If all your customers are secret, there are little chance of making Ecat known to the world in short time.
If instead there were some customers (even small, even few, 3 or 4) who agreed to make themselves known and share with the world their experiences with Ecat, there would soon be a great and positive notoriety in the world. An explosion!
Wouldn’t you like it?.
In Italy we say, as you know “La pubblicità è l’anima del commercio” and also for the Ecat could be used that motto
You could encourage these customers by giving them a discount higher than 20% (30%, 40% ??) for a limited period of time (6 months, one year?).
This is a suggestion you’ve already received on JoNP and it seems you have liked it.
In this case you could present this proposal during the next presentation.
Ecat is a so GREAT invention that we all desire its diffusion in a time as short as possible.
Obviously in the reality there could be circumstances, facts and things that you know (and we don’t), so the previous proposal couldn’t be acceptable in that way.
Anyway we are sure that you will try to manage all things in the best way for you and for Ecat.
Sincerely,
Italo R.
Dear Andrea Rossi:
Very nice the spot on http://www.ecatskdemo.com
Looking at it I became moved and inspired: a veil that covers the spirit of the future and that magnificent music of Richard Strauss, the dawn of a New World…or a New Fire!
Dear dr. Rossi,
does the photo at the link http://www.ecatskdemo.com show a covered ECAT SK?
Kim:
Correct.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, I watched on http://www.ecatskdemo.com the teaser of the presentation scheduled for January 31st at 9 AM ETS.
So, if I understood correctly: when the countdown of the watch will have reached ZERO on all counts we will have to click on a link that will appear and we will be in, right?
Kim
TheFutureIsNow:
1- I don’t know what are you referring to
2- where has it been stated?
3- this is a confidential field. I cannot answer in positive or in negative
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Rod Walton:Thank you for the information,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Gerard McEk:
1- no
2- I don’t think so
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Brian and Leanne Bolding:
1- I think that all the technologies that limit emissions can help. Our tech is among them.
2- All the former demos had were measurements with a scientific purpose. This is a commercial introduction of a product in the market.
3- Because nobody would invest seriously in the development of a company without an intellectual property. Ask the same question to the pharmaceutical industries: why do not they donate their patents?
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Yrka:
All the Universities you cited are excellent, but let me say also, though, that for what concerns Physics and Engineering you have in Russia too Universities ranked among the best of the world: maybe your family can save money choosing one of the best Universities in Russia.
I wish good luck to your grandson!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Andrea Rossi.
My grandson, Denis, is an excellent student of college heating engineering, (maybe you remember, I wrote to you a couple of years ago, and you congratulated him).
He told his grandson about the great meaning of your research. He nodded so politely, well, yes, interesting, cool. But I see he did not understand the applied meaning of the formula E = MC2. I do not pedogog.
Advise where to continue education? In Milan, Bologna, or Sorbone, it’s probably expensive, we are not rich, but we are ready to pay for his desire to learn. Maybe German universities, or the USA? Advise. I’ll be very grateful.
Yury Isaev
Engineer
Tyumen, Russia
We are following your work long time since.
1-Do you think your technology can help to limit the global warming?
2-Which is the difference between the demo described on http://www.ecatskdemo.com and the former demos you made?
3-If yes, why don’t you donate to the world your technology?
Brian and Leanne Bolding
Dear Andrea,
1. Regarding details about the plasma being “multiple and complex”: Are you familiar to the work of the Safire project? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IAiMpmGx-M&t=75s
2. Do you believe that your theory about the LENR process of the E-cat SK matured sufficiently so it can be discussed at the presentation at the end of January?
I look very much forward to the presentation!
Kind regards, Gerard
Please google “improving turbine performance in harsh desert environments”
Rod Walton
Dear Andrea,
1) Can you tell us if you believe the plasma balls in the SK are the same phenomena as the “creatures of light” that were witnessed moving inside some of the powder based E-Cats of the past?
2) It was stated that when these balls of lights appeared the output would increase dramatically and melt downs could take place. Does this mean that these plasma balls are producing energy?
3) Do you think nano-versions of these plasma balls are present in the lattice of a hydrogen loaded metal when thermal or other stresses release and form cracks which produce charge separation?
It seems to me these plasma balls on different scales could be a unifying mechanism of at least some forms of LENR.
Luciano Frizzera:
Thank you for your kind attention to our work.
To attend the presentation is very easy:
on January 31st 2019 at 9 AM New York time ( 15.00 in Italy ) go to http://www.ecatskdemo.com
Then click the link you find there and you will be inside the presentation.
If you try now, you will find an introductory spot.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi, Dr Rossi,
I am a follower of your good work since the year 2013, I am a professional in the field of sustainable tourism in the Trentino Region, in Italy.
Thanks to your determination, your work is now matured to a level that can be useful to help reduce the global warming. For this reason I will watch with attention the presentation of January 31st.
Can you give instructions how to attend?
I wish you the success you merit,
Luciano Frizzera, Rovereto (Trento, Italy)
Dear R:
Please go to http://www.rossilivecat.com to find comments published today in other posts of this blog.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
KeithT:
Multiple and complex.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
TheFutureIsNow:
The IP of Leonardo Corporation is in good hands also if I die.
Thank you and not thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Italo R.:
Yes, that’s why I have chosen “Also sprach Zarathustra” of Richard Strauss.
Warm Regards,
A.R.