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

 

21,379 comments to United States Patent US 9,115,913 B1

  • Andrea Rossi

    Deana Lasasso:
    Yes,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

    Manuel Cilia:
    Thank you for your suggestion,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dear Dr Rossi
    If you can get the plasma in the Ecat to start to rotate I would presume you could produce a magnetic field and thus enable you to produce an external electric field just like a generator.

  • Deana Lasasso

    In the paper
    http://www.researchnet.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_paricle_interactions
    it seems that the 437.2 peak plays a crucial role for the generation of the particles-antiparticles: am I correct?

  • Anonymous

    If you do not show the Ecats working in yoyr customers means the Ecat does not exist.

  • Rodney Nicholson

    Please do what you want with this, Andrea (!)

    THOUGHTS ON CLIMATE:

    This is a topic I have been interested in seemingly for ever, and, like everyone else, look forward to the planet remaining habitable indefinitely into the future. So, over the years I have ‘conducted’ a few minor investigations of my own to try to clarify my understanding. Those that immediately come to mind I make note of below:

    First: Around 1980 the ‘El Nino’ effect was first discovered – or at least first became widely publicized – so, as an economist, I set up a meeting with the leading climatologist at a large local university to discuss El Nino with him to try to determine if the phenomenon might have material economic effects I should know about. The discussion evolved into one about climate in general, and the climatologist said – as was the conventional wisdom at the time – that we are now very gradually moving in the direction of a new ice age, so temperatures will be very slowly cooling.

    I asked him how it was possible to know that, because the ice age cycle is so long that the changes in temperature, even from one century to the next, must be minuscule. He answered: “It is easy to tell if the climate is in a warming or cooling phase. The long term historical record clearly shows that during a warming phase the climate is remarkably stable, with no records being set at either end of the scale. But cooling periods are quite unstable, and are marked, not only by records being set at the lower end of the scale, but at top end also.” In the past few decades we have seen a more unstable climate which, then, is usually associated with a cooling climate. Indeed, within the past year, right here where I am now, we have had all time records at both the high end and – in the past two months – low end also, with apparently clear implications. Presumably ‘the long term historical record’ has not changed since 1980?

    Second: everyone knows, presumably, that many thousand years ago the very great majority of Canada and an appreciable proportion of the northern United States was covered with an ice sheet that varied in depth in Canada from 3,000 feet to 12,000 feet of solid ice, representing an accumulation of between 50,000 feet and 200,00 feet of unmelted snow. What is sometimes not appreciated is that almost all this accumulation had already melted many thousands of years before the start of the industrial revolution: Taking Toronto as a specific example, discussions I had with the geology department at the University of Toronto revealed that at the peak of the ice age, ~21,000 years ago, the ice sheet extended south of Toronto about 700 miles into the United States. At Toronto itself, the ice at the peak was 5,000 feet thick. The ice front had retreated all the way to Toronto by 12,000 years ago – to be clear, all that 5,000 feet of ice at Toronto had melted ~11,800 years before the industrial revolution had started. And the retreat did not stop then. Since the peak, the ice front has retreated at a rate averaging between 200 yards and 300 yards per year. So, if you happen to know of a glacier that is retreating faster than that, then it is retreating faster than the very long term average. If it is retreating more slowly than 250 yards per year then it is retreating more slowly than the long term – 21,000 year – average rate.

    Where I am sitting right now (In Alberta) the ice was 3,000 feet deep 21,000 years ago. It had, similarly, all melted several thousand years before the start of the industrial revolution. The point of this paragraph is simply to point out that to attribute the melting of glacial ice to human activity is clearly ridiculous. And also to point out that if someone believes they need to quote melting glacial ice to support their view that this has been caused by human activity, then they must have very little other worthwhile evidence or they would be stating their more sensible evidence instead. It may be significant that I have never seen anyone in the ‘anthropological global warming’ lobby ever point out that the melting of the glaciers is not evidence supporting their case. And if they were honest about the whole topic, they would. Which is one of many issues that causes me to suspect their motives.

    Third, is the satellite measurements of earth’s atmospheric temperatures which I believe measure radiation emitted by oxygen at an altitude of about 20,000 feet. (Correction of this will be appreciated). Many years ago the news had been that the satellite data indicated a very very slow cooling of this part of the atmosphere, but that the cooling had been so slow the change was not statistically significant. Later, I had heard that finally there was a sufficient accumulation of observations to confirm that the very small cooling trend had now achieved statistical significance. I have not seen or heard anything more about this for some years. Hopefully someone here will have more up-to-date information on this. However, it is of great interest to me that when this satellite data was shown to indicate cooling, not warming, the response of the climatology fraternity was not to say something like: “Wow, that seems to conflict with our theory”, but instead were saying: “Well, obviously there is an error in their equipment, and we must now set out to find it.” Again, evidence, in my judgment, of a lack of objectivity. But the point is that these data, showing a very slight cooling trend, are consistent with the Milankovitch Ice Age Cycle model – showing a 100,000 year cycle the result from a combination of three factors: changes in the tilt of earth’s axis of rotation relative to the sun, the gravitational effects of Jupiter on earth each time earth passes closest to Jupiter, and precession. Melting of glacial ice is a function of the ice age cycle, of which this particular cycle is just one of about twenty in the past two million years. Very long story.

    Fourth: interested in climate issues, I spent some time years ago taking a look at the annual average temperature data for a small sample of weather stations with historical records extending back at least 100 years. I plotted these data and observed pronounced cycles in almost all of them over that period. Generally speaking, IIRC, they showed a cool period in the late 1800s, a warm period in the late 1930s, a cool period in the 1970s and a warmer period in the 1990s. But what I found most interesting about this data was that when you looked at 100-year trend, while some stations showed a gradual uptrend (higher peaks, higher troughs), in several of them the long term trend was FLAT: temperatures were no higher than in the 1880s to 1930s period. Now that seems odd, if we are supposed to be undergoing GLOBAL warming. I need to do more work on this issue sometime, but I have other more important priorities for now.

    Fifth, the disingenuous nature of the ‘science’ was well demonstrated to me by an observation platform and ‘museum’ at a well-known glacier not far from where I live. The information displayed says that “the glacier peaked in extent in 1846 and has been in retreat ever since.” On reading this I went into the museum and asked to speak to someone thoroughly knowledgeable about the geology of the area, and when he appeared I asked him: “where was the glacier 21,000 years ago?” His reply: “Oh. It was about 3,000 feet above our heads and above, even, the tops of the surrounding mountains.” So I asked him why his display gave the erroneous information that the glacier had peaked in extent in 1846, when in reality it had peaked 21,000 years ago and been receding almost continuously since then. He shrugged his shoulders and said that he had not put the display together.

    The display made no mention of the ice age, nor of the fact that well over 99% of the ice had already melted long before the start of the industrial revolution. It is difficult not to come to the conclusion that there is ‘an agenda’ here, and that the agenda is NOT the communication of the whole truth.

    There is a saying that goes something like: “Cheat me once, shame on you. But cheat me twice, shame on me.” When I find people being intentionally deceptive about the facts, my reaction is to think: “So now I know I cannot trust anything you tell me.” That doesn’t mean that everything he says will be false, but that it is very possible much of it will be. It has made me realize that I simply cannot trust anything I hear from these people with such a clearly dishonest agenda.

    Sixth, there is the very recent paper, a heads-up for which was posted here several weeks ago, indicating that the surface temperatures of all rocky objects with atmospheres in the solar system could be explained very accurately using just two parameters neither of which is the carbon dioxide content of their atmospheres. Based on this analysis the earth’s surface temperature is exactly what you would expect it to be even though the atmosphere’s CO2 content is a mere 0.04%. Similarly, the surface temperature of Venus is exactly what would be expected, even though its atmospheric CO2 content is 94%. The quantity of solar irradiance at the top of their atmospheres, in combination with the adiabatic pressure effects (based on the total density of the atmosphere, irrespective of its molecular composition) appear to explain, according to this extraordinarily detailed paper, the near surface temperatures of all these bodies to within a couple of degrees. To anyone a bit familiar with adiabatic temperature effects (for reasons I will not go into I am much more familiar with this than probably 99.9% of the population) this is obvious. It had of course never occurred to me that the surface temperature could be predicted accurately with just these two variables, but as soon as it was pointed out I immediately realized it is ‘intuitively obvious’. (Of course ‘intuitive obviousness’ does not guarantee correctness.)

    Seventh, I believe there are known 1500 year temperature cycles thought to be related to a cyclical upwelling of the oceans, the underlying causes of which are not understood. It is clear that there is a great deal that is not understood. And in my judgment there is more than enough that is not understood to make making definitive judgments about where the climate is headed is a fool’s game. A few climatologists are predicting the onset shortly of a new ‘Little Ice Age’. But few if any of the ‘conventional wisdom’ climatologists have predicted it or seem to understand it at all. If it turns out to be true than they will deservedly become a laughing stock. Let’s wait and watch to see what happens on this one.

    There are other issues I could raise also. But I have gone on much too long already. Suffice it to say that none of the efforts I have made to try to come to a personal conclusion about this issue convince me that the cycles in climate we know about are caused by human activity. The paper mentioned above is very well worth reading, even if you only understand half of it. The ‘anthropological climate change’ groups have responded to it by attacking it. That is not the behaviour of people who are confident in the validity of their own work. They would be more convincing if, instead, they were to explain very carefully where, precisely, it is wrong. (As I noted it is intuitively obvious to me.) And if they are unable to demonstrate the errors, become a little less strident in the way they express their opinions.

    So, I am not persuaded from the evidence I have seen – and especially for the data in the paper described – that there is enough evidence to come to a firm conclusion in either direction on this issue.

    Rodney.

  • Eric Ashworth

    Dear Brokeeper, Good point, I also pray that the $150 million power plant in Texas succeeds together with an added prayer for a $150 million grant towards the proven E-Cat technology being included into the D.O.Es. current innovative energy programme because clean, cheap, safe energy seems to be a top priority throughout the world and climate change being such a big issue should if nothing else help the prayer to be answered. As an interesting piece of information carbon capture is a Canadian innovative technology with lots of problems and as far as I am concerned should not be mentioned alongside LENRs just as wind and solar should not they are none comparable with regards efficiency, sustainability and cleanliness. Regards Eric Ashworth.

  • eernie1

    Dear Colin Watters,
    I forgot to mention that I enjoyed your British humor about London snowfall. It is a good example of statistics used for directed purposes since snow occurs about once a year in London.
    Humorous regards.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Rod Walton:
    Thank you for the update from the last issue of Power Engineering
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Rod Walton

    Power Engineering March 11 2019
    At the ABB convention on energy emerges important perspective for future blue collars dealing with robotics and A.I.
    Rod Walton

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dominick:
    In Folio 25r there is a very interesting drawing with a study for a machine to displace water with an efficiency very close to 100%, very advanced in those times.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Brokeeper:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards
    A.R

  • Dominick Navarete

    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    I read here that you are reading the Atlantic Codex of Leonardo Da Vinci: do you know if there is anything related to energy generation?
    Thanks,
    Dominick

  • Brokeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    You and your team have our prayers.

    Hope this link works:
    https://www.inc.com/kevin-j-ryan/net-power-zero-emissions-plant-global-warming.html

    God Bless,
    Brokeeper

  • Andrea Rossi

    Brokeeper:
    We are working very well and I think we are at the eve of a strong expansion.
    We need your prayers too.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • eernie1

    Dear Colin Watters,
    Thank you for your information about snow fall days in London. Again in my empirical observation it appears that here in Chicago, the colder the winter the less snow fall we get. The two largest snow events( Jan 1969 and Jan 1999) occurred right after record warmth due to the moisture brought up from the Gulf of Mexico by low pressure systems passing south of the city. Have you noticed any discernible change in temperature levels since your childhood?
    Snowy regards.

  • Brokeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    https://www.inc.com/kevin-j
    ‘A $150 Million Power Plant Was Just Built in Texas. Humanity Should Pray It Succeeds’.

    For 5,000 homes in La Porte, Texas will equate to $30,000 per home. Imagine the cost savings a direct electric/heat generating domestic E-Cat would cost per home? ‘Humanity Should Pray It Succeeds’.

    Brokeeper

  • Andrea Rossi

    Heinz Sause:
    No, the position is irrelevant.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Heinz Sause

    Dear Andrea,
    Does it matter if the reactor of the Ecat is positioned in vertical ot in horizontal position?
    Thanks,
    Heinz

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

    Michael:
    Because I don’t find a link between the so called Rossi Effect and the Van Der Waals force. I must say that I had taken it in consideration, though.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Red Shields:
    We are working on producing directly electricity from the reactor with a new system.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Colin Watters:
    This appears to be in contradiction with the comment about New England…
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Colin Watters:
    Interesting,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Colin Watters

    Dear Andrea,

    @eernie1 asks for readers experiences of climate change. Here in southern England we have about half the snow days now compared to when I was a child in the 1960s and 70s. This is supported by data from the UK Met office.

  • Colin Watters

    Dear Andrea, the NASA report @eernie1 refers to can be found here.

    https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

    In some parts snow fall is increasing but in others it’s decreasing. They point out that the overall it’s increasing but perhaps not for much longer.

  • Red Shields

    Dr Rossi,
    I did not inderstand: are you working to invent a new kind of P.V. or to invent a new system to generate electricity directly from the reactor we saw on http://www.ecatskdemo.com ?

  • Michael

    Dear Andrea,
    Why didn’t you considr the Van Der Waals force in your paper http://www.researchnet.net/publication/330601653_E-Car_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
    Cheers,
    Michael

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Have you considered a future application for the eCat-SK of space travel via photon thrust? Consider an eCat-SK emitting light which then reflects off a concave mirror to direct the eCat-SK generated light to the rear of the spacecraft. This would be similar to a solar sail but the force would be independent of the distance away from the Sun. Conceptually, a band of photovoltaic cells around the transverse axis of the eCat-SK would generate the power to control the eCat-SK reaction while longitudinal axis generated light would be directed to strike a highly reflective mirror to reflect the light to the rear of the spacecraft and thus generate forward thrust. The eCat-SK generated light provides the momentum change needed to accelerate the spacecraft and would result in an exceeding high specific impulse. The radiation pressure is related to the intensity of the light being emitted divided by the speed of light. The effective pressure can be doubled by perfect reflection over absorbed or open emission. Thoughts?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Juliana McOwen:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    This is intriguing. I hope our Readers will contribute.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Juliana McOwen

    I like this blog very much so much great information about LENR.
    Thank you,
    Juliana

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frederic Maillard:
    1- partially
    2- yes
    3- yes
    4- maybe
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Iggy Dalrymple:
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Please go to
    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
    There is well explained why this peak is very important . See in particular the par. 4
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Marco:
    Thank you for your insight, I cannnot comment in positive or in negative.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Marco

    Regarding the question of Katia Spruel,
    maybe you are putting RF pulses into the charge and you hope to have a rf pulse back of higher energy? The normal magnetic resonance behaviour would be having back an RF pulse of lower or at least equal energy, but maybe the ECat can act as an energy amplifier?

    Magnetic regard,
    Marco.

  • Carrol Osvaldo

    I watched http://www.ecatskdemo.com
    What does the 437.2 peak mean?

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    Dear Dr Rossi,
    You will appreciate this recent report from “Dr Gabe Mirkin’s Fitness & Health Newsletter” that states that of all forms of exercise, tennis players live the longest.

    http://www.drmirkin.com/fitness/how-exercise-prolongs-your-life.html
    Best regards,
    Iggy

  • Frederic Maillard

    Dear Dr Rossi,

    If I remember well you wrote you had a customer with an order of a total of 40 MW to supply with heat.
    1) is this power already partialy ou fully supplied to this customer ?
    2) if partialy or fully supplied, is your customer happy with the qualty of what is supplied ?
    3) are they happy with the financial savings ?
    4) is there any chance they will openly publicize their satisfaction before one year ?

    Many thanks if you can answer,
    Best wishes and good luck
    FM

  • eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    NASA data showed that world temps dropped by 1/2 degree C from 2016-2017. Antarctica ice mass increased. This due to solar activity. We may need your heat sooner than we thought. Little ice age on its way. Empirically I have noticed, in my 88 years, no obvious change in climate direction. People who are crying wolf should rethink their stance on global warming. If any of your readers have noticed any change in climate temperatures during their lifetimes, I would appreciate telling me their experiences for my information. This is off topic but may have some bearing on your decision for future development of your device.
    Regards

  • Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    What the rock and troll music says is not an issue. I understand that our friends and sustainers are anxious to know more about our Clients and sooner or later this will happen.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Stephen:
    Thank you for your insight and suggestions.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Brokeeper:
    Thank you for your kind comment: unfortunately there is information I cannot give and I’m sorry for that. I always try to give as much as I can, as clearly put in evidence by my last paper
    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Sam:
    Thank you for your smart comment,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Sam

    Hello DR Rossi

    You acknowledged Woman’s day and
    say you are working with smart people.
    This is a link to ten smart woman.

    https://www.wired.com/story/10-women-science-tech-household-names/

    Regards
    Sam

  • Brokeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    I have noticed lately more comments are answered either “it is NDA”, “please refer to/read, I can’t answer now or .… etc.”. I know you enjoy answering most of these comments perceiving many are new followers to your technology or, like myself, unaware the answer may be found elsewhere. Being as busy as you have been (always), would it be more effective to avoid redundancy by providing a few guidelines at the top of the comment section a list of criteria, suggestions or directions to follow prior to entering one’s comment? Or, as in the past, ‘F8’ (auto reply function key) may work. 😊
    I’m constantly amazed of your and your team’s progress to give this world hope and a better place to live. God bless.
    As always with much respect,
    Brokeeper

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>