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


United States Patent US 9,115,913 B129,263 comments to United States Patent US 9,115,913 B1Leave a Reply 

Copyright © 2021 Journal of Nuclear Physics  All Rights Reserved Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa 
Dear Andrea,
When the ECat SKL is first introduced to the market, for the initial companies that you are involved with, will the energy product be sold directly to the public or will the energy be used indirectly to manufacture a product that is sold to the public?
Regards,
Keith Thomson.
Frank Acland:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Even if you cannot announce it to the public, do you have an internal goal date for making the ECat SKL presentation?
Best regards,
Frank Acland
Norma:
Yes: that is, I think, one of the main targest we have to focus on.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Patrick McInerney:
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Readers:
Please go to
http://www.rossilivecat.com
to find comments published today in other posts of this blog,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Anonymous:
I am still using my hands on it, obviously together with my great team collaborators.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi:
Are you still making yourself the Ecat SKL, or you just designed it and it is made by others ?
I strongly liked your answer to Raffaele Bongo.
Patrick
Dr Rossi,
Will the Ecat be able to supply energy to the hydrogen production plants ? If yes, the hydrogen economy could be enormously accelerated.
Thank you if you can answer,
Norma
Prof:
Thank you for the update,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
KeithT:
Thank you for your comment. I strongly recommend the book “MaxwellDirac Theory and Occam’s Razor: Unified Field, Elementary Particles, and Nuclear Interactions” of Giorgio Vassallo, Andras Kovacs, Antonino Oscar Di Tommaso, Francesco Celani, Dawei Wang ( 2019, Amazon Books )
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Carmelo Garding:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
Can you confirm that all the facts narrated on “An Impossible Invention” of Mats Lewan are true ?
Carmelo
Dear Andrea,
In the paper of F. Celani, A. O. Di Tommaso, and G. Vassallo; The Electron and Occam’s Razor, 2017, There is conjecture that the electron is not pointlike, instead having physical structure, the paper describes a Zitterbewegung (ZBW) model of the electron;
“According to the model proposed in this paper, the electron characteristics may be explained by a massless charge distributed on the surface of sphere that rotates at the speed of light along a circumference with a radius equal to the reduced electron Compton wavelength (≈0.386159 pm)”.
The charge is described as a sphere orbiting about the axis of rotation but having a counter rotation so that the charge sphere surface always remains in the same orientation and all points on the sphere surface travel at the speed of light.
The paper describes that when an electron moves from a rest state having a circular orbit to one moving along an axis, the charge follows a helical path at the speed of light, this requires the initial at rest circular orbit ZBW radius to reduce.
Electrons should no longer be viewed as moving points but moving structures with orientation, this has implications.
Every electron of this planet is moving, the earth rotates once a day, the ground speed at the equator moving faster than the poles, the earth travels around the sun once a year, the sun is moving relative to the galaxy it is within, the galaxy is moving relative to the local group, the local group is moving in an expanding universe, so an electron charge moving at light speed is moving relative to what. Likely in an expanding universe all electrons are moving, once moving what natural process would bring them back to a rest state.
Within your ECat SKL there is the possibility that the AharonovBohm effect is utilized to manipulate electrons, to prod and flip the electron axis of spin to all be on the same spin handing, same axial direction, subsequent electron interactions leading to energy release. This implies that before manipulation all of the electron axis’s were in random orientation, 50% of axis spins pointing in the opposite direction to the other 50%, but these electrons are also moving at a fraction of light speed, this means there is axis’s pointing towards the centre of the universe with the electron charges moving at light speed in circular orbits, and moving electrons with their axis’s at 90 degrees to the centre of the universe where the charges orbiting at light speed must be moving in slightly elliptic eccentric orbits, as the axis angle tends towards being radial the eccentric orbits tend towards circular.
As a group of electrons are accelerated towards the speed of light, and as the electron charge already travels at the speed of light, the random orientated axis’s must be subject to precession until the rotation axis aligns with the direction of movement, the eccentric orbits centralise, the helical charge path straightens out, the ZBW radius reduces towards zero.
The implication is that all the electrons in any experiment must also be moving, the question is at what fraction of light speed. This means no experiment to determine the characteristics of an electron has ever been carried out on an electron at rest. Also experiments with groups of electrons in structural alignment in comparison to groups in random orientations may show different characteristics.
There are likely other interesting implications, the difficulty is stepping back from the details to see the bigger picture of how they all fit together, and where science / potential technologies will then lead.
Regards,
Keith Thomson.
Dr Rossi,
Here are the last stats on Researchgate related to your papers as of now:
Readings: 63000 ( of which 58300 only for http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_ECat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions )
Reccomendations: 3648
Citations: 22
Total Research Interest Index: 1043
Again congratulations
Prof
Rod Walton:
Thank you for the update,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Tamal:
Thank you for the link,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi,
have you heard of a phenomena called “Hessdalen lights”, link to wikipedia description:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hessdalen_lights
It seems like light balls are popping up, moving around and disappearing naturally to some unknown reason.
Best regards,
Tamal
On Power Engineering issue of January 5th 2021:
EIA: US renewable consumption surpasses coal first time in modern power age
Rod Walton
Hermes Atar Trismegistus:
No,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dave:
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
I too like your answer to Raffaele Bongo,
Dave
Dear Andrea,
Do you use a Parametric oscillator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parametric_oscillator
on the plasma in your ECat SKL?
Best Wishes, Hermes
Physicist:
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
I like your answer to Greg,
Physicist
Greg:
The electron’s memristance is the ratio of the electron’s magnetic flux Φ and its charge e
electron’s memristance = Von Klitzing constant = Φ/e = 2π/α
see also:
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/1.4982413
Gregory Daigle:
The orientation of the modules does not affect their operation.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
1 very well
2 yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi,
In your 100 SKL industrial plant, is the orientation of the modules critical to their proper functioning? That is, does a stable output require a specific constant orientation, or is the output independent of orientation or change in orientation?
I ask because if a stable orientation is important and the plants encounter rolls/pitches as might be encountered in ships, or in zerog environments as might be found in spacecraft, then performance in those instances might be an issue. The same might apply to small groupings of modules under acceleration/deceleration as encountered in road vehicles.
Warm regards,
Greg Daigle
Dr Rossi:
I like your answer to Joseph Fine: it helps to better understand your paper.
One question: what does mean ‘memristance’ ?
Greg
Dear Andrea,
Regarding your work in this period:
1. How is work progressing on constructing the ECat SKL industrial plant?
2. Do you have an imposed deadline by which to have it completed?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Jaroslaw Bem:
Thank you for your help ! By the way: Ansatze, as well as Zitterbewegung, are German words used universally in Physics.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Svein H. Vormedal:
Yes, we do have important connections.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Emma:
Working. Time is running away so fast…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Joseph Fine:
Both equations 34 and 35 of Hestenes paper tell us that the fine structure constant is just the square of the elementary charge. This can be easily demonstrated using natural units where ħ=c=1, Ɛ0=1/4π, μ0=4π. Z0=4π is just the numbers of solid angles in a sphere, while ZH is two times the electrons’ intrinsic memristance (the Von Klitzing constant).
Hestenes’ ZBW electron model has many differences with the one used in the Researchgate paper. As an example, the ZBW frequency of his model is two times the value of the ZBW frequency used in
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_ECat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
wherein the ratio of the toroid radii is also different.
Other interesting papers on ZBW models: “Quantum mechanics from selfinteractions” and “Electron Structure Ultradense Hydrogen and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions”, while about photon model you can see:
https://www.cns.caltech.edu/people/faculty/mead/Nature_Of_Light_What_Are_Photons.pdf
Thank you very much for your attention to our work and also for the corrections.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi,
How did you spend these Christmas and New Year holidays ?
Emma
Dear Andrea
First, a happy new year to you and your employees.
As is well known, today China accounts for about 50% of today’s coal consumption, India for 12%.
I wonder if you have any serious connections with Chinese companies who are interested in your technology?
Regards: Svein H. Vormedal.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
My congratulations for the progress in theory explaining the Rossi Effect.
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_ECat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
Andrea, you always strive for perfection. I can help you in this way. I propose some corrections to your paper on http://www.researchgate.net
Corrections
Section 5
There is:
This consideration is supported by the observation that deuteron has a much smaller magnetogyric ratio then proton.
There should be:
This consideration is supported by the observation that deuteron has a much smaller magnetogyric ratio than proton.
Section 5
There is:
It’s important to note that this radius value, as proposed by Holmid, Maruani and Hestenes[2],
There should be:
It’s important to note that this radius value, as proposed by Holmlid, Maruani and Hestenes[2],
Section 4
There is:
Consequently, considering the strong chemical similarity of deuterium and hydrogen, this large macroscopic difference in spectral emission under the same conditions reveals its nuclear origin.
There should be:
Consequently, considering the strong chemical similarity of deuterium and protium, this large macroscopic difference in spectral emission under the same conditions reveals its nuclear origin.
Section 6
There is: Van der Graaf electron accelerator
There should be: Van der Graaff electron accelerator
Conclusions
There is:
In this paper, three different, not mutually exclusive Ansätze, for longrange particle interactions in ECat SK have been proposed.
There should be:
In this paper, three different, not mutually exclusive approaches, for longrange particle interactions in ECat SK have been proposed.
“Ansätze” is the German word.
I wish you a good luck with the presentation of your masterpiece.
Best regards,
Jaroslaw Bem
Errata on Errata
In your paper:
‘ ECat SK and longrange particle interactions ‘
My double word typo finds should have said:
On page 10:
—> ” The relativistic massenergy m is the sum of the rest mass m0 and “the the” kinetic energy Ek <—
and on page 11:
Calling the fourgradient and γt the unit vector along the time axis of the Minkowski spacetime, we can define a scalar field S that is “the the” fourdivergence of the electromagnetic fourpotential A : <—
Somehow, errors can occur even in corrections.
Joseph
Dear Andrea Rossi,
A Happy and Healthy New Year to you, your team and your readers!
I found the following interesting reference while looking for papers on ZBW (zitterbewegung) or, simply, zitter:
Zitterbewegung structure in electrons and photons
David Hestenes
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.11085.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2cqMuw9kgDKJFcV5Nj4ZSe_7P3DFIiPQm7umWbXZYdQH8AfYidpZLK2CI
While I understand “a few” of the equations, I don’t claim to understand the entire paper.
See the equations for the “Finestructure constant” in the paper. See Eqs. (34, 35)
😉
I don’t know if you referenced this paper (or prepaper) in your work.
” ECat SK and longrange particle interactions ”
Here are my extremely minor corrections in the text of your recent paper:
I saw two incidences of the typo “….the..the…”
On page 10:
—> ” The relativistic massenergy m is the sum of the rest mass m0 and “the the” kinetic energy Ek Calling the fourgradient and γt the unit vector along the time axis of the Minkowski spacetime, we can define a scalar field S that is “the the” fourdivergence of the electromagnetic fourpotential A : <—
Again, my/our best wishes for the new year. (And the following years!)
Joseph Fine
Chuck Davis:
Thank you for your insight and suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea, For net metering arrangements with utility companies, one potential scenario would be to operate the ecat continuously until it has produced your expected annual power requirement and then turn it off for the rest of the year. In the net metering contracts that I am familiar with, the settlement date occurs
annually so on that date the account is reviewed and if the power produced is equal to the power consumed then the consumer will not incur any charges for power. You could of course produce extra power to be distributed over the grid and the utility company will pay you a small percentage of what they charge consumers and then turn around and charge the regular rate for that electricity! Using the scenario proposed above would put pressure on the utility companies to pay a reasonable price for excess generated power and therefore allow ecat owners to earn some income to offset the cost of buying and installing an ecat!
Warm regards,
Chuck Davis
CC:
Yes. Obviously after almost 40 years there has been an evolution, but the roots are there.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
The Italian ENI is advertising their system to turn the organic fraction of wastes into fuel: is that a heritage of the technology you sold to ENI in the year 1983, also described in the Amazon book “Ecat il nuovo fuoco” of Vessela Nikolova ?
Very interesting book, by the way.
Happy New year,
CC
Prof:
Thank you for your update,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Harley Umstead:
Thank you for your attention to our work,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr Rossi,
Kudos to your answer to Raffaele Bongo. It also helps to better understand your paper.
Harley
Dr Rossi:
Your paper
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_ECat_SK_and_long_range_particle_interactions
reached 58000 readings.
And counting,
Cheers
Prof
Dear Readers:
Please go to
http://www.rossilivecat.com
to find comments published today in other posts of this blog,
Warm Regards,
A.R.