by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA
Abstract
Recent accelerator experiments on fusion of various elements have clearly demonstrated that the effective cross-sections of these reactions depend on what material the target particle is placed in. In these experiments, there was a significant increase in the probability of interaction when target nuclei are imbedded in a conducting crystal or are a part of it. These experiments open a new perspective on the problem of so-called cold nuclear fusion.
Introduction
Experiments of Fleischmann and Pons made about 20 years ago [1], raised the question about the possibility of nuclear DD fusion at room temperature. Conflicting results of numerous experiments that followed, dampened the initial euphoria, and the scientific community quickly came to common belief, that the results of [1] are erroneous. One of the convincing arguments of skeptics was the lack in these experiments of evidence of nuclear decay products. It was assumed that “if there are no neutrons, therefore is no fusion.” However, quite a large international group of physicists, currently a total of about 100-150 people, continues to work in this direction. To date, these enthusiasts have accumulated considerable experience in the field. The leading group of physicists working in this direction, in our opinion, is the group led by Dr. M. McKubre [2]. Interesting results were also obtained in the group of Dr. Y. Arata [3]. Despite some setbacks with the repeatability of results, these researchers still believe in the existence of the effect of cold fusion, even though they do not fully understand its nature. Some time ago we proposed a possible mechanism to explain the results of cold fusion of deuterium [4]. This work considered a possible mechanism of acceleration of deuterium contaminant atoms in the crystals through the interaction of atoms with long-wavelength lattice vibrations in deformed parts of the crystal. Estimates have shown that even if a very small portion of the impurity atoms (~105) get involved in this process and acquires a few keV energy, this will be sufficient to describe the energy released in experiments [2]. This work also hypothesized that the lifetime of the intermediate nucleus increases with decreasing energy of its excitation, so that so-called “radiation-less cooling” of the excited nucleus becomes possible. In [5], we set out a more detailed examination of the process. Quite recently, a sharp increase of the probability of fusion of various elements was found in accelerator experiments for the cases when the target particles are either imbedded in a metal crystal or are a part of the conducting crystal. These experiments compel us to look afresh on the problem of cold fusion.
Recent experiments on fusion of elements on accelerators
For atom-atom collisions the expression of the probability of penetration through a Coulomb barrier for bare nuclei should be modified, because atomic electrons screen the repulsion effect of nuclear charge. Such a modification for the isolated atom collisions has been performed in H.J. Assenbaum and others [6] using static Born-Oppenheimer approximation. The experimental results that shed further light on this problem were obtained in relatively recent works C. Rolfs [7] and K. Czerski [8]. Review of earlier studies on this subject is contained in the work of L. Bogdanova [9]. In these studies a somewhat unusual phenomenon was observed: the sub-barrier fusion cross sections of elements depend strongly on the physical state of the matter in which these processes are taking place. Figure 1 (left) shows the experimental data [8], demonstrating the dependence of the astrophysical factor S(E) for the fusion of elements of sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of the matter that contains the target nucleus 7Li. The same figure (right) presents similar data [7] for the DD reaction, when the target nucleus was embedded in a zirconium crystal. It must be noted that the physical nature of the phenomenon of increasing cross synthesis of elements in the case where this process occurs in the conductor crystal lattice is still not completely clear.
Figure 1. Up – experimental data [8], showing the energy dependence of the S-factor for sub-threshold nuclear reaction on the aggregate state of matter that contains the nucleus 7Li. Down – the similar data [7] for the reaction of DD, when the target nucleus is placed in a crystal of zirconium. The data are well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV.
The phenomenon is apparently due to the strong anisotropy of the electrical fields of the crystal lattice in the presence of free conduction electrons. Data for zirconium crystals for the DD reactions can be well described by the introduction of the screening potential of about 300 eV. It is natural to assume that the corresponding distance between of two atoms of deuterium in these circumstances is less than the molecular size of deuterium. In the case of the screening potential of 300 eV, the distance of convergence of deuterium atoms is ~510ˆ12 m, which is about an order of magnitude smaller than the size of a molecule of deuterium, where the screening potential is 27 eV. As it turned out, the reaction rate for DD fusion in these conditions is quite sufficient to describe the experimental results of McKubre and others [2]. Below we present the calculation of the rate process similar to the mu-catalysis where, instead of the exchange interaction by the muon, the factor of bringing together two deuterons is the effect of conduction electrons and the lattice of the crystal.
Calculation of the DD fusion rate for “Metal-Crystal” catalysis
The expression for the cross section of synthesis in the collision of two nuclei can be written as
where for the DD fusion
Here the energy E is shown in keV in the center of mass. S(E) astrophysical factor (at low energies it can be considered constant), the factor 1/E reflects de Broglie dependence of cross section on energy. The main energy dependence of the fusion is contained in an expression
that determines the probability of penetration of the deuteron through the Coulomb barrier. From the above expressions, it is evident that in the case of DD collisions and in the case of DDμcatalysis, the physics of the processes is the same. We use this fact to determine the probability of DD fusion in the case of the “metal-crystalline” DD-catalysis. In the case of DDμ- catalysis the size of the muon deuterium molecules (ion+) is ~5×10ˆ13m. Deuterium nuclei approach such a distance at a kinetic energy ~3 keV. Using the expression (1), we found that the ratio of σ(3.0 keV)/σ(0.3 keV) = 1.05×10ˆ16. It should be noted that for the free deuterium molecule this ratio [ σ(3.0keV)/σ(0.03keV)] is about 10ˆ73. Experimental estimations of the fusion rate for the (DDμ)+ case presented in the paper by Hale [10]:
Thus, we obtain for the “metal-crystalline” catalysis DD fusion rate (for zirconium case):
Is this enough to explain the experiments on cold fusion? We suppose that a screening potential for palladium is about the same as for zirconium. 1 cmˆ3 (12.6 g) of palladium contains 6.0210ˆ23(12.6/106.4) = 0.710ˆ23 atoms. Fraction of crystalline cells with dual (or more) the number of deuterium atoms at a ratio of D: Pd ~1:1 is the case in the experiments [2] ~0.25 (e.g., for Poisson distribution). Crystal cell containing deuterium atoms 0 or 1, in the sense of a fusion reaction, we consider as “passive”. Thus, the number of “active” deuterium cells in 1 cmˆ3 of palladium is equal to 1.810ˆ22. In this case, in a 1 cmˆ3 of palladium the reaction rate will be
this corresponds to the energy release of about 3 kW. This is quite sufficient to explain the results of McKubre group [2]. Most promising version for practical applications would be Platinum (Pt) crystals, where the screening potential for d(d,p)t fusion at room temperature is about 675 eV [11]. In this case, DD fusion rate would be:
The problem of “nonradiative” release of nuclear fusion energy
As we have already noted, the virtual absence of conventional nuclear decay products of the compound nucleus was widely regarded as one of the paradoxes of DD fusion with the formation of 4He in the experiments [2]. We proposed the explanation of this paradox in [4]. We believe that after penetration through the Coulomb barrier at low energies and the materialization of the two deuterons in a potential well, these deuterons retain their identity for some time. This time defines the frequency of further nuclear reactions. Figure 2 schematically illustrates the mechanism of this process. After penetration into the compound nucleus at a very low energy, the deuterons happen to be in a quasi-stabile state seating in the opposite potential wells. In principle, this system is a dual “electromagnetic-nuclear” oscillator. In this oscillator the total kinetic energy of the deuteron turns into potential energy of the oscillator, and vice versa. In the case of very low-energy, the amplitude of oscillations is small, and the reactions with nucleon exchange are suppressed.
Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of the mechanism of the nuclear decay frequency dependence on the compound nucleus 4He* excitation energy for the merging deuterons is presented. The diagram illustrates the shape of the potential well of the compound nucleus. The edges of the potential well are defined by the strong interaction, the dependence at short distances Coulomb repulsion.
The lifetime of the excited 4He* nucleus can be considered in the formalism of the usual radioactive decay. In this case,
Here ν is the decay frequency, i.e., the reciprocal of the decay time τ. According to our hypothesis, the decay rate is a function of excitation energy of the compound nucleus E. Approximating with the first two terms of the polynomial expansion, we have:
Here ν° is the decay frequency at asymptotically low excitation energy. According to quantum-mechanical considerations, the wave functions of deuterons do not completely disappear with decreasing energy, as illustrated by the introduction of the term ν°. The second term of the expansion describes the linear dependence of the frequency decay on the excitation energy. The characteristic nuclear frequency is usually about 10ˆ22 sˆ-1. In fusion reaction D+D4He there is a broad resonance at an energy around 8 MeV. Simple estimates by the width of the resonance and the uncertainty relation gives a lifetime of the intermediate state of about 0.810ˆ22 s. The “nuclear” reaction rate falls approximately linearly with decreasing energy. Apparently, a group of McKubre [2] operates in an effective energy range below 2 keV in the c.m.s. Thus, in these experiments, the excitation energy is at least 4×10ˆ3 times less than in the resonance region. We assume that the rate of nuclear decay is that many times smaller. The corresponding lifetime is less than 0.3×10ˆ18 s. This fall in the nuclear reaction rate has little effect on the ratio of output decay channels of the compound nucleus, but down to a certain limit. This limit is about 6 keV. A compound nucleus at this energy is no longer an isolated system, since virtual photons from the 4He* can reach to the nearest electron and carry the excitation energy of the compound nucleus. The total angular momentum carried by the virtual photons can be zero, so this process is not prohibited. For the distance to the nearest electron, we chose the radius of the electrons in the helium atom (3.1×10ˆ11 m). From the uncertainty relations, duration of this process is about 10ˆ-19 seconds. In the case of “metal-crystalline” catalysis the distance to the nearest electrons can be significantly less and the process of dissipation of energy will go faster. It is assumed that after an exchange of multiple virtual photons with the electrons of the environment the relatively small excitation energy of compound nucleus 4He* vanishes, and the frequency of the compound nucleus decaying with the emission of nucleons will be determined only by the term ν°. For convenience, we assume that this value is no more than 10ˆ12-10ˆ14 per second. In this case, the serial exchange of virtual photons with the electrons of the environment in a time of about 10ˆ-16 will lead to the loss of ~4 MeV from the compound nucleus (after which decays with emission of nucleons are energetically forbidden), and then additional exchange will lead to the loss of all of the free energy of the compound nucleus (24 MeV) and finally the nucleus will be in the 4He ground state. The energy dissipation mechanism of the compound nucleus 4He* with virtual photons, discussed above, naturally raises the question of the electromagnetic-nuclear structure of the excited compound nucleus.
Fig. 3. Possible energy diagram of the excited 4He* nucleus is presented.
Figure 3 represents a possible energy structure of the excited 4He* nucleus and changes of its spatial configuration in the process of releasing of excitation energy. Investigation of this process might be useful to study the quark-gluon dynamics and the structure of the nucleus.
Discussion
Perhaps, in this long-standing history of cold fusion, finally the mystery of this curious and enigmatic phenomenon is gradually being opened. Besides possible benefits that the practical application of this discovery will bring, the scientific community should take into account the sociological lessons that we have gained during such a long ordeal of rejection of this brilliant, though largely accidental, scientific discovery. We would like to express the special appreciation to the scientists that actively resisted the negative verdict imposed about twenty years ago on this topic by the vast majority of nuclear physicists.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks Prof. S.B. Dabagov, Dr. M. McKubre, Dr. F. Tanzela, Dr. V.A. Kuzmin, Prof. L.N. Bogdanova and Prof. T.V. Tetereva for help and valuable discussions. The author is grateful to Prof. V.G. Kadyshevsky, Prof. V.A. Rubakov, Prof. S.S. Gershtein, Prof. V.V. Belyaev, Prof. N.E. Tyurin, Prof. V.L. Aksenov, Prof. V.M. Samsonov, Prof. I.M. Gramenitsky, Prof. A.G. Olshevsky, Prof. V.G. Baryshevsky for their help and useful advice. I am grateful to Dr. VM. Golovatyuk, Prof. M.D. Bavizhev, Dr. N.I. Zimin, Prof. A.M. Taratin for their continued support. I am also grateful to Prof. A. Tollestrup, Prof. U. Amaldi, Prof. W. Scandale, Prof. A. Seiden, Prof. R. Carrigan, Prof. A. Korol, Prof. J. Hauptmann, Prof. V. Guidi, Prof. F. Sauli, Prof. G. Mitselmakher, Prof. A. Takahashi, and Prof. X. Artru for stimulating feedback. Continued support in this process was provided with my colleagues and the leadership of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, and I am especially grateful to Prof. R. Parkey, Prof. N. Rofsky, Prof. J. Anderson and Prof. G. Arbique. I express special thanks to my wife, N.A. Tsyganova for her stimulating ideas and uncompromising support.
References
1. M. Fleischmann, S. Pons, M. W. Anderson, L. J. Li, M. Hawkins, J. Electro anal. Chem. 287, 293 (1990).
2. M. C. H. McKubre, F. Tanzella, P. Tripodi, and P. Haglestein, In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion. 2000, Lerici (La Spezia), Ed. F. Scaramuzzi, (Italian Physical Society, Bologna, Italy, 2001), p 3; M. C. H. McKubre, In Condensed Matter Nuclear Science: Proceedings Of The 10th International Conference On Cold Fusion; Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA 21-29 August, 2003, Ed by P. L. Hagelstein and S. R. Chubb, (World Sci., Singapore, 2006). M. C. H. McKubre, “Review of experimental measurements involving dd reactions”, Presented at the Short Course on LENR for ICCF-10, August 25, 2003.
3. Y. Arata, Y. Zhang, “The special report on research project for creation of new energy”, J. High Temp. Soc. (1) (2008).
4. E. Tsyganov, in Physics of Atomic Nuclei, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 1981–1989. Original Russian text published in Yadernaya Fizika, 2010, Vol. 73, No. 12, pp. 2036–2044.
5. E.N. Tsyganov, “The mechanism of DD fusion in crystals”, submitted to IL NUOVO CIMENTO 34 (4-5) (2011), in Proceedings of the International Conference Channeling 2010 in Ferrara, Italy, October 3-8 2010.
6. H.J. Assenbaum, K. Langanke and C. Rolfs, Z. Phys. A – Atomic Nuclei 327, p. 461-468 (1987).
7. C. Rolfs, “Enhanced Electron Screening in Metals: A Plasma of the Poor Man”, Nuclear Physics News, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2006.
8. A. Huke, K. Czerski, P. Heide, G. Ruprecht, N. Targosz, and W. Zebrowski, “Enhancement of deuteron-fusion reactions in metals and experimental implications”, PHYSICAL REVIEW C 78, 015803 (2008).
9. L.N. Bogdanova, Proceedings of International Conference on Muon Catalyzed Fusion and Related Topics, Dubna, June 18–21, 2007, published by JINR, E4, 15-2008-70, p. 285-293
10. G.M. Hale, “Nuclear physics of the muon catalyzed d+d reactions”, Muon Catalyzed Fusion 5/6 (1990/91) p. 227-232.
11. F. Raiola (for the LUNA Collaboration), B. Burchard, Z. Fulop, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.31, 1141 (2005); Eur. Phys. J. A 27, s01, 79 (2006).
by E.N. Tsyganov
(UA9 collaboration) University of Texas Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, Texas, USA
Andrea,
Best wishes on the upcoming test of the E-Cat in Bologna. We all hope it will be successful and exceed expectations. Also, relax and take a day off so you will be ready for the test in the USA.
Thanks to you and your team for their efforts on behalf of humanity,
Joseph
Quando leggo notizie di questo genere mi compiaccio di essere Italiano come lei ING.Andrea Rossi, mi fa dimenticare tutto il disagio che il nostro pianeta sta attraversando in questo momento. Le auguro un imbocca al lupo per la presentazione del suo progetto ( fusione a freddo) che si terrà il 6 ottobre a Bologna vicino a dove abito.Anche se mi occupo di installazione di pannelli fotovoltaici approvo a pieno il suo progetto.
Dear Italo:
Possibly, but surely within a couple of days.
Warm Regards,
A. R.
Dear Andrea Rossi;
I wanted to join the chorus of well wishers concerning your upcoming tests this month. I hope for the very best for all of your endeavors! Thank you for your efforts to bring this much needed energy source to the World and for sharing your journey with us.
With much support and appreciation;
R.M.
Sorry,
Nuclear insertion into heavy nuclei(fission). Typo.
To all the blog readers.
On the eve of Rossi,s momentous test,I would like to offer some of my thoughts to help pass the time before the event.First,I must agree with the main line
physicists that his device cannot involve particle penetration of the nickel nuclei.All the results that have been achieved from particle penetration produced much more energy and resultant particles than is seen emitting from his tests.Proton insertion into proton nuclei(fussion)or neutron insertion into heavy nuclei(fussion)results in much more emission and particle byproduct(neutrons,transmutated atoms and gamma rays)than his device,and much more dangerous to humans.His device utalizes in my thoughts what I call field induced nuclear decay(FIND).Basically,when enough hydrogen ions are created by the catalyst,energized by the heater and inserted into the nickel crystal,there is created a resonant EM field in the electron envelope of the atomic crystal structure strong enough to create a branching decay mechanism in the nickel nucleus.EM fields have no problem entering and reacting with the nuclear particle fields as we know through many test results.In effect he has created an unstable above ground level energized radioactive nickel atom.This atom then decays with the emission of a quasi beta particle into the nickel crystal lattice,creating thermal phonons that heat his core.Many branching mechanisms have been experimentally shown to exist in nuclei that involve the various particles present there.My favorite mechanism involves meson decays which can produce -muons(heavy electrons)gamma energy and +muons(heavy positrons)which result in the measured gamma emission and copper transmutation found in the test products of his device.Two mesons that are known to produce the -muons are the recently discovered B meson and the well known kaon meson which decays through the creation of -pions,0pions and +pions which further decay into -muons,gamma rays and +muons.The -muons then exit the nickel nuclei and interact with the lattice electrons to produce the thermal energy.The spent muons then become electrons that neutralize the additionally created proton in the copper atoms.
Dear Andrea Rossi, I’m quite positive that the demonstration in Bologna will be a great success.
A man like you wouldn’t summon such scientists until sure of the good result of the test.
You’ve already overtaken the goal.
With my high regard for you and your challenge.
C.R.
molti auguri per il successo.
sono a disposizione per commercializzare il prodotto.
cari saluti.
paolo
Il Suo esercito silenzioso è sempre qui con Lei,compatto,convinto e determinato,domani e sempre,non si senta mai solo,ha la compagnia che l’universo dona al giusto.
Auguroni!
Giovanni G
Le più grandi invenzioni e scoperte sono avvenute ad opera di uomini che hanno saputo rompere gli schemi e pensare diversamente e qualche volta anche per caso e con un buon pizzico di fortuna. Questo è quello che mi fa sognare ad occhi aperti e mi fa credere in quest’uomo, sperando che tutto funzioni e vada per il meglio al fine di avere al più presto, con le dovute sicurezze, questa promettente tecnologia che proiettera’ il mondo energetico avanti anni luce e ci renderà più indipendenti dalle grandi multinazionali.Molte volte gli scienziati si fossilizzano sui soliti schemi e non sanno andare oltre e guardare diversamente il mondo, credendo di dover spiegare sempre tutto con quanto gia si sapeva senza confutare le vecchie teorie. Questo mi fa sperare bene, il fatto stesso che il fenoeno non sia ancora chiaramente compreso mi fa sperare ancora di più. Pertanto ing.Rossi le auguro ogni bene e che la sua invenzione/scoperta possa al più presto arrivare nelle nostre case.
Kind Ing. Rossi Good morning.
I thank you for your prompt answer however inherent the automotive.
I live in sardegna and I have 61 years of age. I have been being retired for three years, after having worked on the planning of electronic systems and elettromechanical with intrinsic safety for a railway firm. I would want to tell you that my enthusiasm is very great for yours “Child” to the point that I would appreciate to collaborate with your staff, also free, apart possible necessary expenses to the production of yours possible applications of collaboration.
It is too much main point what you are doing.
In the horizon I see, in general, great benefits for the whole humanity.
During my job, besides problems of electric nature, I have also resolved problems of mechanical nature planning, drawing and also sending in production some seed-industrial manufactured articles.
If you were interested I beg you to write me to my address E-mail.
You hear Cordiality.
Francesco Toro.
Dear Ing Rossi,
we hope that tomorrow in the afternoon or in the late evening we will be able to read some news…
Would it be possible?
Kind regards,
Italo
Auguri per domani!!!!
Caro Luigi Versaggi,
Grazie!
A.R.
Dear Alvaro,
You will find on the nert the report from Nyteknik in few days.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Caro Mr Rossi,
I can’t believe we are just one day away from the big test in Bologna, you should know there are millions of people anxiously waiting for it to be a great success, I hope all this positive energy somehow reach you and give you strength.Tomorrow can be a great day!
Regarding the test when can we get more details about it? Like timing, final list of participants and where in the net can be followed?
All the best for tomorrow!
Alvaro
Caro Dottor Rossi,
Alla vigilia del test Le dico solo in bocca al lupo. Io e tutti quelli che hanno a cuore il bene comune incrociamo le dita.
Come sempre riporteremo su Facebook questo ulteriore successo.
Go Rossi Go!
Mr. Rossi,
Will the Bolognia test be broadcast on the internet?
Thanks and good luck
Ivan Idso
Caro Andrea,
so per certo quello che sta facendo e che sta dimostrando,
come ricercatore indipendente, comprendo tante cose.
Solo ai suoi clienti potenziali deve dimostrare qualcosa,
alla comunita’ verra’ poi spiegato,
e’ giusto cosi’.
Manca molto poco alla “accettazione” pubblica,
sia piu’ “rigido”, non ammetta piu’ domande fuorvianti provocatorie e nemmeno retoriche,
vada dritto per la meta, sono tempi dove dobbiamo essere molto concreti.
Ci aggiorniamo dopo il 6 ottobre,
saluti, Maurizio.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I think your invention is “The Golden Fleece of Energy”.
There is a huge opportunity for humanity
to preserve our earth from further destruction,
(I grew up in the “moon landscape” of a brown coal area)
To eliminate hunger and thirst and to avoid the wars for resources.
Such a profusion of cheaper recycling processes could
that allow for economic reasons
never before were possible.
There is much to do …
I wish every success for the upcoming tests
Best Regards
Hubert Roscher
Quote: “The energy corresponding is : E = Pxt = 1.10^6 W x 24*60*60*180 = 1.5*10^13 J
The combustion of 1 kg of coal liberate approximately 15 to 27 MJ. So it would be necesseray to burn at least 576 t of coal (in the best case). The current price for coal is 220 $ /t.
So in the best case (the cheapest one) you will have to pay 126720 $ to have 1 MW of heat during 6 months using coal.”
We should add to this $126720 market price of coal the very large externalized costs of coal burning. This includes heavy costs to the environment for coal mining, CO2 pollution , and coal ash disposal, and also the health costs for everyone living near a coal burning plant.
Of course the Mega-cat will use many kWh of electric power to operate, but this electricity will probably cost less than $25,000 for 6 months of power.
Including this electricity, the total cost of mega-cat fuel will be less than 1/5th the cost of using coal for heat. And of course the Mega-cat will have no externalized costs: no CO2 pollution, no toxic ash, and no health costs. Most of the Nickle can be recycled for other purposes.
Dear Italo:
Open.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Francesco Toro,
We are working on the turbine issue. Within a couple of years we will have resolved the many problems we have now.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear ing. Rossi good evening.
I wanted only to ask her if it will be possible to implement one of his And-cat in the traction civil and public getting some good energetic outputs, even inserting a small turbine to vapor to the place of the traditional endothermic motor. You hear Cordiality from Franco Torelli
Dear Dr. Rossi, may I ask if the secondary water circuit is closed or open?
Thank you
Kind regards,
Italo
Dear Fulvia,
Thank you for your suggestions. The test is restricted to few specialist scientists, and I cannot open it to the Public, even friendly, because you can imagine that in this case I would have to host thousands of persons, also valent scientists and technicians, who asked to participate. The Scientists invited that will not have the possibility to attend have been all substituted. To invite our friends who asked to participate is not possible, for security and safety reasons: we work in a factory that has not the structures to guarantee safety to thousands of People. Inviting some and not all the others should have been unjust. But a report will surely be made.
Thank you for your kind attention,
Warm Regards,
Andrea Rossi
[…] Rossi has remarked on how he sees E-Cat technology as being a low cost source of energy. A reader on his site asked: “For 1 MW delivered continuously for 6 months (the upcoming test), how much does the […]
Dear M. Dobrolecki,
The energy corresponding is : E = Pxt = 1.10^6 W x 24*60*60*180 = 1.5*10^13 J
The combustion of 1 kg of coal liberate approximately 15 to 27 MJ. So it would be necesseray to burn at least 576 t of coal (in the best case). The current price for coal is 220 $ /t.
So in the best case (the cheapest one) you will have to pay 126720 $ to have 1 MW of heat during 6 months using coal.
Warm regards
CARO Ing. Rossi, ci siamo!
Finalmente! Mi vien da dire, considerata l’enorme aspettativa che aleggia sulla prova del 6 ottobre 2011.
Immodestamente mi permetto anche di esortarLa affinché la prova risulti inconfutabile!
Lo potevano già essere di più le altre se : 1) si fosse pensato subito al circuito chiuso riscaldato dall’e-cat che, a sua volta,riscalda un circuito esterno aperto dove scorre l’acqua che in futuro riscalderà le nostre case o farà girare qualche sorta di turbina, 2) se le prove fossero continuate per periodi lunghi come è previsto per quella di giovedì prossimo.
Oltre a questo mi permetto di suggerire ulteriori 2 accorgimenti per il “pubblico” che numeroso guarderà i filmati nei giorni successivi: 1) appoggi l’e-cat su un tavolo in vetro libero da ogni orpello che non servisse al suo funzionamento, 2) esponga etichette descrittive ben evidenti su ogni strumento, tubo, valvola, ecc.. che entra e/o esce dall’e-cat, 3) posizioni computer e rilevatori vari in un tavolo separato ben distinto da quello dove sarà posto l’e-cat.
Sicuramente risulterò quantomeno presuntuosa nelle mie asserzioni e suggerimenti precedentemente esposti, ma credo che a volte gli accorgimenti della “massaia” possano essere ancora i migliori! 🙂
Grazie per l’attenzione e, naturalmente, come molti altri che abbiano un po’ di sale in zucca e speranza nel cuore, sono dalla sua parte !!!
Ci stupisca … ah come vorrei essere a Bologna giovedì!!
Grazie di cuore anche per la pazienza e la continua attenzione e dedizione che ha saputo e voluto porre a questo suo blog.
Fulvia
To anyone reading on this forum so I will not bother Rossi. He already is very busy.:)
A. Rossi says.
Few hundreds of euros activate for 6 months the 1 MW plant.
How much of coal will be needed to produce 1MW of heat by six months?.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
It is pretty easy to understand using ‘self-sustaining’ operation for scientific testing purposes. However, if some models of the energy catalyzer use electrical resistance for 10 minutes every 30 minutes in self-sustaining mode, then the circuitry might be nearly the same as operating with a control circuit that provides some continuous amount of excitation.
I think that I read somewhere here that having continuous control power would allow for a higher energy gain ratio while minimizing stability problems.
So my question is this: Since folks operating a gasoline powered automobile are comfortable with leaving the ‘ignition’ circuit active until shutting off the engine, why not use the control circuit electrical resistance in some of the ‘practical’ applications of the energy catalyzer, especially those that generate electricity?
If we mentally substitute the Ni-H for gasoline as fuel, I think the basic idea makes sense. There are experimental gasoline engines as well as millions of operational gasoline engines, and we can expect the wiring diagrams to be different between the two types.
If running in control circuit mode makes the devices more stable with a higher energy gain ratio, then perhaps in practical application, especially with units for retail customer use, using continuous control circuit excitation might make good sense. Also, the millions of customers currently familiar with the ignition switch on their car will be comfortable with a similar switch on their units.
I thought of the names ‘HouseCat’ for home use, and ‘BarnCat’ for agricultural buildings please use them if you like.
If you are a ‘Star Wars’ fan, as I am, I think ‘The Force’ is strong within you! I hope these ideas help.
Warm Regards,
JLMGeo
Dear Mikea:
Please contact us in November for commercial issues,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hello Mr. Andrea Rossi,
I have been waiting and hoping for your invention to be on market ever since it was published in PESN website and your January 2011 testing. More power to you. May I know of how can we able to sell your module or products in our country?.
Regards,
Mikea
Folks, I have this hypothesis:
New 9 (10) kW device for home use has 1st stage designed as producing steam and 2nd stage as warm water exchanger.
My hypothesis is: Folks buy 10 kW home device and next year they will buy slightly modified 2nd stage where will newly developed low-temperature 3kW turbine with generator. Folks will overnight have 3kW electricity sufficient for lightning and powering their PCs plus 7kW waste heat – sufficient for heating. All with minimum additional cost.
Thank you Andrea for the hope you bring to us you are a remarkable man god bless you.
Dear Martin Fallon:
I can guarantee you that the E-Cats will have a price that will allow to everybody to pay them. I am working for this, and this is what will give a sense to my work.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Rossi, First off all i would like to applaud you on your groung breaking work and i hope your name will be quoted in hundreds of years time in schools all accross the world about your invention, secondly i would like to ask you once you have proven to the world in october your invention works and in november people from accross the world want to buy your product will you oversee that it will reach every household at there request to purchase your product (depending on cost of course)and that some giant corporation doesnt get rights to your product and just make it unaffordable for the ordinary working class citizen. god speed and wish you well.
Dear Andrea Calaon:
Few hundreds of euros activate for 6 months the 1 MW plant.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
I personally have no doubts on the nuclear energy release from Ni 62 and 64 transmuting to Cu 63 and 65, with hot pressurized atomic hydrogen, as your numerous demonstration have already shown.
My doubt is only this:
Enriching natural Ni with isotopes 62 and 64 means using centrifuges, or improbable chemical means, anyway money. For 1 MW delivered continuously for 6 months (the upcoming test), how much does the “fuel” costs? More ore less than 250,000.00 USD?
Good luck
Best Regards
Andrea Calaon
Dear Petri:
My friend, that was just an ironical answer… Please do not take it seriously, I was joking.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
“2- The steam swoosh you saw is from a 10 kW module
Warm Regards, A.R.”
Why the steam swoosh can be found from youtube and that is 3 year old? Do I miss something?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeBOVQUrSgE&feature=player_detailpage
Thanks
-Pete
Gentilissimo Ing. Rossi, Le riporto un post che ho messo in facebook qualche giorno fa. Con grandissimi auguri (e non solo da me…)
PubblicaGiorgio Adorni Francia
PENSIAMO ALTO!
Mo, i neutrini più veloci della luce, Zichichi sul Giornale, vabbè parliamone…
Ma che giovedì 6 ottobre il nobel per la fisica Brian Josephson parteciperà alla verifica ufficiale della FUSIONE FREDDA inventata da Andrea Rossi e Sergio Focardi (prof. emerito a Bologna), perchè NONCELODICENESSUNO!!!
Occhio navigatori del pensiero, se va, è un nuovo Marconi, e tutti quelli che sputano sulla ricerca dell’energia pulita, faranno la fine del telegrafo al tempo della radio…
Dear Fabio Sanzani:
Thank you. Based on my experience, You are right.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Caro Ing. Rossi,
a proposito della crisi mondiale odierna e della sua scoperta mi sembra calzante ciò che Albert Einstein scrisse (purtroppo non ho trovato il testo in inglese):
“Non possiamo pretendere che le cose cambino, se continuiamo a fare le stesse cose.
La crisi è la più grande benedizione per le persone e le nazioni, perché la crisi porta progressi. La creatività nasce dall’angoscia come il giorno nasce dalla notte oscura. E’ nella crisi che sorge l’inventiva, le scoperte e le grandi strategie. Chi supera la crisi supera sé stesso senza essere ‘superato’.
Chi attribuisce alla crisi i suoi fallimenti e difficoltà, violenta il suo stesso talento e dà più valore ai problemi che alle soluzioni. La vera crisi, è la crisi dell’incompetenza. L’ inconveniente delle persone e delle nazioni è la pigrizia nel cercare soluzioni e vie di uscita. Senza crisi non ci sono sfide, senza sfide la vita è una routine, una lenta agonia. Senza crisi non c’è merito. E’ nella crisi che emerge il meglio di ognuno, perché senza crisi tutti i venti sono solo lievi brezze. Parlare di crisi significa incrementarla, e tacere nella crisi è esaltare il conformismo. Invece, lavoriamo duro. Finiamola una volta per tutte con l’unica crisi pericolosa, che è la tragedia di non voler lottare per superarla.(tratto da “Il mondo come io lo vedo”1931).”
Ad maiora
Cordialmente
F.S.
Dear Andrea Di Giovanni:
Should be 12-15 hours, or more.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Caro Mauro:
Grazie. Mi contatti in Novembre.
Cordiali saluti,
A.R.
Dear Eric Ashworth:
We are working hard on turbines for the E-Cat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
What’s puzzles me is the total media black-out. Normally you needs something like the Olympic Games to overshadow news like this 🙂 The core of the problem is that much of the world news is routed over some few news agencies. Local media basically just re-print news from these news agencies.
It is therefore of greatest importance that the 6/October tests is professionally covered. You probably have well over a million of visitors on this website. And if all these supporters write to their national media and ask for media coverage, you will probably break the barrier of silence..
For the news “business” its just a matter of supply and demand.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
I look forward to your technology to be used around the world. The benefits will be immense. I can see this improving the standard of living throughout the world, especially in the developing world.
Also I am impressed with your willingness to correspond with people on this website. There will always be people attacking you out envy and those with business interests threaten by this technology, my advice is to ignore these people and stay focused at the task at hand.
J. Allard
raul heining wrote in October 1st, 2011 at 12:54 PM:
“Wladimir,you can consider a model in which, according you, the neutrino is not matter but, even so,
going at a speed above light speed in vaccuum, it could take information and that is unacceptable to the
theory.”
Dear Raul,
in relativity any information carried by LIGHT or MATTER cannot move faster than light, because the space-time concept generated in relativity is consequence of the light (or matter) motion in the space-time.
Such consideration regarding “information” in relativity cannot be applied to a particle constituted by matter-antimatter.