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

 

22,450 comments to United States Patent US 9,115,913 B1

  • Szymon Blachuta

    Dear Dr Rossi,
    1- do your customer reccommend you to other?
    2- is the progress in selling heat spurred by such reccommendations?
    Szymon Blachuta

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    Yes,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I apologize — I had two questions marked “a)” in my previous post. Was your answer “yes” to both of them?

    Thank you!

    Frank

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    a) yes
    b) yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Eusebia Lilburn:
    Thank you for your attention to our work,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Eusebia Lilburn

    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interaction
    It is in point of fact a nice and useful piece of information. I’m glad that you simply shared this helpful info with us. Please stay us informed like this. Thank you for sharing.

  • Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    You say you are working with a global partner. May I ask:

    a) Does your global partner have experience bringing industrial and domestic products to market?
    a) Will your global partner be able to help you with the authorizations and safety certifications for E-Cats?
    b) Do you think the partner will be able to help with faster approval for domestic E-Cats?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

  • Andrea Rossi

    Eric Ashworth:
    Thank you for your insight, offered to our Readers.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

    Yrka:
    Thank you for your opinion,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Sohl:
    Thank you for your kind attention to the work of our Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    A.B.:
    No,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • A.B.

    Dr Rossi,
    Do you use a cold cathod in the Ecat SK we saw in http://www.ecatskdemo.com ?

  • Sohl

    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
    is the most interesting paper treating of LENR I ever have read.
    Thank you for publishing all that information.
    Regards,
    Sohl

  • Yrka

    Dear Dr. Andrea Rossi.

    You answered Frank Eckland about the terms of the domestic E-Cats:
    “… I would say at the most a few years.”
    Earlier you wrote (I mean domestic E-Cats) that you are not afraid of competitors, because Leonardo has proven technology, low prices and will sell a large amount, so reverse engineering is not terrible, competitors simply will not catch up.
    Perhaps in “a few years”, competitors will be able to equalize these advantages. Or do you rely on patent protection? But China will not stop the patent.
    Maybe you need to sell technology? This is also commercialization.
    “Dog in the hay” – not the best type of business.

    Sorry for the sharpness.
    Tired of waiting for the long-promised domestic E-Cats.

    Regards and hopefully.
    Yury Isaev
    Engineer.

  • Eric Ashworth

    Dear Andrea, Maybe your readers will find this interesting. For me LENR technology not only provides a cheap, clean source of energy but holds a fascination because it demonstrates a level of physics that I believe is able to disprove flawed theories put forward by the accepted regime that dictates what is true and what is false within the study of physics. This I know also confuses a lot of people, especially those not involved in the study of academic physics i.e. those who are able to free think outside of dogma without persecution. Thereby I can inform readers that my views are based upon a limited none academic career but one of free thought, experimentation and patented embodied theory regarding a generalized understanding of energy. Fortunately the JONP exists providing a much needed place whereby a sharing of information is able to take place without censorship being imposed. Albeit, physics being a sensitive, highly censored subject, within academia, due to its ability to reveal a closely guarded secret, becomes self evident to those involved in specific fields of study. I feel fortunate to be able to put my views forward for consideration without undue animosity.

    To recap a unified field can be demonstrated by a mechanical mechanism that produces binary spinning flows of air whereby each oscillate within their inner and their outer chamber (one flow per chamber) and that upon eventual contact they transition from curvature flow forces to a linear flow force and because this activity generates a super negative at the pole potentials i.e. the origin of the flows, an interior back flow is set in motion at the super positive pole potential that is contrary to the combined linear down flow and that is labeled an ‘economy flow’ of a binding force that has to transition itself from that of a positive condensed flow force to that of a rarefied negative flow force i.e. the same flow but of a different force in space and time. I could give this single back flow two names but to overcome confusion and keep things true I give it one name because its the same flow but simply transitioned due to its environments that it encounters (a flow force that glues). I also believe the atom contains a binary flow having an internal circulation and an external circulation. The external circulation when at the atomic level is the electro magnetic field and represents the external mass of the product. This external flow is identical to the internal flow direction and represents the negative field with its positive and negative potentials of its flow in accordance to its position of its flow potentials in space and time. When a single rotor rotates, its propellers draw in any exterior material by the force of the inputted flow but should the exterior material such as a solid wall be unable to be drawn in then the spinning rotor is drawn towards it, because an increase in negativity is created between the flow and the exterior material, not difficult to understand. Therefore the mechanism had to be designed specifically to overcome this negative zone of attraction, a problem instigated by the creation of its super negative potential spilling into its immediate exterior environment caused by its required integral multi propeller assembly and by which was overcome by inducing oscillations onto the surrounding outer environment of the downward flow force potentials, creating a necessary insulation. The method is simple but ingenious. The propulsion unit has to have a specially designed fuselage around the exterior that accommodates complimentary chambers designed specifically to induce exterior oscillations around the downward propelling exterior linear flow force at the time, when the curvature forces become linear. These vibrational induction chambers produce what is referred to as the ‘static barrier layer’ that insulates the exterior flow of the mechanism from exterior objects and thereby provides the mechanism with a necessary system of identity, in the same way as an atom. The exterior linear flow carries the vibration within and without its field as it encompasses the craft. Consequently, the mechanism is able to demonstrate the ‘static and mobile mechanics of energy interaction’. A technology that has been acknowledged as one before its time and denied its demonstration and its explanation. How I described the mechanism, being somewhat of a layman, was as a compressed atom, being unfamiliar with the term mass defect with regards its integral propeller assembly.
    The static and mobile aspects of the energy refers to both structure and flows i.e. mobile propellers/static frame, mobile flow/static boundary. The system is binary in all aspects so as to create a unified field. Because energy is a binary system of opposing states it can involve varying degrees of mobility and inactivity on the two dimensions of its being i.e. in the embodied atomic state and its none embodied state. Mass defect comes in varying degrees of energy, from being totally defective to totally effective with regards these states. Mass is in reference to the two states. Defect is in reference to the space/distance between its two dimensions of charge. Energy must posses a distance and therefore a time dimension of interaction. Neutrons have total mass defect i.e. totally defective energy being devoid of distance and thereby time, rendering them unable to provide a source of energy. Electrons have minimal mass defect making them highly effective providers of energy (an interesting thought: if a neutron represents the most dense state of material substance what would be its absolute opposite if the whole state of being relies upon the something and the nothing i.e. a binary unchangeable situation whereby opposites attract and the planck length could maintains order by necessity). The mechanism is able to demonstrate these two states in both dimensions i.e. the static embodied solid mechanism and the none solid mobile flows allowing these basic interactions to be observed, measured and used as a springboard from which a greater understanding of energy can be realized by those involved in physics and thereby, I believe, able to project the understanding into the none physical aspect between which the physical exists being between both the point and the periphery i.e. a binary state of none existence with regards to energy but one not without influence within the material world. So here is just one such embodied technology described as ‘before its time’, able to help explain energy, be able to efficiently lift a huge amount of weight and yet we read of a company that seeks greater efficiency with regards an aircraft design that requires artificial intelligence to overcome a known problem. Time to embrace these new technologies or are we not quite there yet?. And as a footnote I believe that Richard Feynman provided a clue to potentiality when he described that a positron moving backwards in time and space would be annihilated by an electron but visa versa an electron moving forward would become a positron. To move forward is to become more restricted i.e. condensed and positive thereby eventually turning outside in. To move backwards is to become more rarefied and negative and thereby turning inside out, this also,I believe, applies to the proton/neutron but requires detailed explanation. Atoms contain mini environments. Without understanding volume and size environments and relationships with regards charge potentials I think it difficult to understand energy. Interacting electro magnetic fields can, I believe, be considered as time zones that create flux tubes and that involve chirality. A complex situation indeed that requires a greater explanation and one which I shall attempt to provide. Regards Eric Ashworth

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland:
    No, I’d not say many years, I’d say several years at the most.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    Are you still convinced that it will be many years after industrial E-Cats are deployed, that you will be able to produce domestic E-Cats?

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

    xyz:
    Yes, it could be.
    No, I am not.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Roberto Ridolfi:
    I think that it has been important the fact that theoretical hypothesis have been surrogated by the experiment described in the article and by the video of it ( http://www.ecatskdemo.com ).
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Roberto Ridolfi

    Dear Andrea,
    your paper
    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
    continues to be the most read paper of nuclear physics. How do you explain it?
    Roberto

  • xyz

    Watching
    http://www.ecatskdemo.com
    I noticed that it seems to be ready for a massive production, also for domestic use, especially if you will be able to make both heat and electricity. It will be a global game changer.
    Are you not afraid of it?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gian:
    Thank you for your friendly sympathy.
    Answers:
    1- yes
    2- yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Caro Andrea.
    dopo più di 8 anni di frequentazione via e-mail, quasi mi considero di famiglia e mi permetto di rivolgermi a te usando il tu.
    1)Ritieni di poterci informare su quando il primo eCat-SK dell’ultima versione fra quelli forniti recentemente potrà entrare in funzione?
    2) potrà già essere utilizzato alla sua massima potenza?

    A te un calorosissimo saluto e la riconoscenza per quanto con tanto impegno e sacrificio hai fatto e fai nell’interesse di tutta l’Umanità.
    English synopsis:
    1- has already been put in operation the Ecat SK we watched on http://www.ecatskdemo.com ?
    2- is it already working at its max power ?

    Che Dio ti aiuti. Gian

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gerard McEk:
    1- it is premature, I will have precise ideas within June, based on the scheduling of our work on it
    2- yes
    3- yes
    4- yes
    5- yes !
    Thank you for your kind attention to the work of our Team,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

    Saju Abraham:
    Good question: we have to abide to the first principle of thermodynamic, therefore all the electric energy that will be extracted from the plasma will have to be subtracted from the thermal energy, but the electric energy has more value, because to make one Wh of electric energy you need to spend about 3 Wh of thermal energy, when you have to turn into electricity the thermal energy.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Gerard McEk

    Dear Andrea,
    1. Can you give us some comment on your investigations on the direct electricity production of the Ecat?
    2. Are you happy with the sales of heat so far?
    3. Is the production of the E-Cat heat-plants satisfactory?
    4. Are your customers, using your heat, still satisfied?
    5. Have you still time to play tennis with your wife?
    I really do hope things are going well. Good luck to you and your team.!
    Thanks. Kind regards, Gerard

  • Saju Abrahan

    Respected Dr Andrea Rossi,
    when you produce electric energy directly from plasma will it affect the heat efficiencyof the Ecat, or will be electricity just a by-product?
    Regards,
    Saju Abraham

  • Steven N. Karels

    Chuck Davis,

    Thank you for your input. The impact of mankind in heating and power production will always have a negative impact on the atmosphere. But consider the following:

    1. Look at the amount of energy per day our atmosphere endures because of our sun.
    2. Current electrical production technology (Carnot Cycle) is about 40% efficient. So 60% of the thermal production goes into the atmosphere. So, under you analysis, they have 60% going into the atmosphere, compared to 25% from eCat.
    3. Remote power production has transmission line loss so even more thermal energy is lost and therefore the initial production of plant energy is that much higher.
    4. Even solar energy can have an impact on more heating of the local atmosphere.

    Bottomline – there is no “free Lunch”. Energy production will have an effect, but perhaps not as significant as the greenhouse gas effect?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Nick:
    1- USA
    2- R&D on the production of electric energy directly from the plasma of the Ecat.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Nick

    Dear Andrea:
    1- where are you working in this moment?
    2- what is that you consider the most important thing you are making now?

  • Chuck Davis

    @Steven N. Karels,
    Steve, based upon your hypothetical 50% efficiency, assume that over a large number of houses configured in this manner, we can estimate an average of 25% of thermal energy would be dissipated into an already overheated atmosphere.
    Warm Regards,
    Chuck Davis

  • Andrea Rossi

    Rodney Nicholson:
    Again, thank you for the suggestion,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

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

  • Andrea Rossi

    Anonymous:
    Thank you for your opnion,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Norma:
    Maybe, partially, yes, in the sense that it makes operations otherwise should be done by humans, even by means of logic procedures: it has also to make choices in some situations.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Norma

    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
    Do you think that the remote control of the Ecat SK by which you control from your headquarters the Ecats operating even oversees can be considered A.I. ?
    Best Regards,
    Norma

  • Anonymous

    My opinion? Your production of direct current from the Ecat is pure B.S.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    When my Chevy Volt battery pack drops below 80% storage, it is considered end-of-life and will be replaced. But it still would be useful for non-automotive applications.

    Assume an eCat-SK electric with a thermal capacity of 100kW which runs at 50% efficiency for conversion to electricity. Assume approximately 1kW constant power consumption for the Controller and system control.

    A home will require not more that 200Amps at 220VAC or 44kW of electrical power (200Amp rated electrical panels). So the 100kW eCat-SK electric will provide sufficient power to run one home.

    Assume two such old battery packs, one being charged by the eCat-SK electric and the other powering the Controller and system control. The eCat-SK electric would switch every few hours between charging one battery pack, to using the stored power to run the Controller and system electronics, and charging the other battery pack.

    Plus the excess heat (50kW) could be used to heat the house, heat water, or just exhausted.

    The control of the eCat-SK electric is therefore, totally independent of the eCat-SK electric output. This might find application in remote locations (e.g., cabin in the woods?) As the battery technology becomes cheaper, this architecture could become more wide spread. Thoughts?

  • Rodney Nicholson

    ……….. and possibly you might also consider offering to put up one million euros ‘in escrow’ as your guarantee that your system will indeed replace their use of coal without producing any emissions, harmful or otherwise.

    With ‘seriously challenging’ regards,

    Rodney.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Rodney Nicholson:
    Thank you for the suggestion.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Rodney Nicholson

    = = = = = = = = = = = =
    Pekka Janhunen:
    Thank you for this serious proposal, but the issue in it is that the inventor has to explain in detail his invention and in primis the sum is ridiculous (in our case), in secundis to win the prize you have to explain BEFORE the details of the IP to the jury.
    The idea of the mayor is intelligent, though, and surely will attract smart proposals from many inventors.
    Warm Regards,
    = = = = = = = = = = = =
    Hi Andrea:

    I suggest you contact them and explain that you would be very happy to replace their coal fired heating with a non-polluting source at a price 25% less than their current coal costs. But that the video demonstrations you have already made would have to suffice for documentation, as you are, of course, not willing to share your IP.

    In addition, you might suggest to them that, in the event you were selected as the winner, you would donate the prize money to the charity of their choice.

    The worst they can do is just say one word: “No.” A little better, they might even say: “No, but thank you.”

    Alternatively, they might possibly say “Yes” after reviewing your video documentation with experts in the field.

    Should you win, even the news media would finally have to start taking a serious interest in your work.

    Rodney.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    Thank you for this serious proposal, but the issue in it is that the inventor has to explain in detail his invention and in primis the sum is ridiculous ( in our case ), in secundis to win the prize you have to explain BEFORE the details of the IP to the jury…
    The idea of the major is intelligent, though, and surely will attract smart proposals from many inventors.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Jean Paul Renoir:
    Very difficult to answer, but I think the most probable path is in paragraph 4 of the paper you cited.
    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

    Roth:
    Well, I think that part of the control system could be defined A.I., but a full application of A.I. will have to be developed and I already am in contact with a Swedish engineer to develop this part of R&D. For sure this is an issue we are following with great attention.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Roth

    Dr Andrea Rossi,
    Have you already applied A.I. to the Ecat?

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>