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
Hello Everyone,
for better understanding see graphical explanation of measured data from test on:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/68116335/Temp-Data-Ecat-6-10-11-Edited-by-MAP-v2
Best Regards, M.
I believe this is the most significant discovery/invention/event since the hybridization of wild wheat circa 8000 B.C. which transformed nomadic hunter gatherers into settled agriculturists. A new life is now coming to this world’s human beings. It is epochal.
Carissimo dott. Rossi
sono un suo devoto fan,
avrei bisogno di parlare con lei anche tramite mail o skype
dell’e-cat.
anche se immagino non abbia tantissimo tempo in questo momento,
mi auguro e spero di poterla sentire al più presto grazie.
Hi AR,
Looks like another good test. It appeared from the test that the thermal output of the ecat in self-sustain mode varies by a bit. By more than +/- 10%.
Questions:
1. What are some of the causes for this variance (that you can tell us about)?
2. What options are available in an ecat design to reduce this thermal output variance to say, +/- 1 %
3. Do all ecats in the 1MW have equal performance?
(ex:Does ecat #8 average the same heat as ecat #43)
3. The 1MW plant would have a lower thermal output variance than an individual ecat, correct? The value of choosing multiple smaller units is that it can smooth out the variance.
~Luke
Gent. Mauro Valerio,
A novembre inizieremo l’azione commerciale. Mi contatti.
Cordiali saluti,
A.R.
Dear Florian M.:
Thank you, thank you very much.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hello Mr.Rossi ,
I have been following your progress since the start, And have a suggestion for you regarding the ECat for home use.
You may have to make it a kit so that the home owner has to assemble it themselves to circumvent American and Canadian laws.
The power source would be a plug in device, it would be shielded in a way that the owner cannot open it. And the rest of the componets mearily snap or bolt together . You would make the instructions in simple picture form and at a grade 8 reading level. I have an idea but unfortunately I am unable to draw it as the pictures that I have seen are only of one side . If you could email more pictures from all angles would be greatly appreciated . I could have a drawing done it about 10 min or less . And send it back to you for review.
Thank you,
Troy
Dear Italo,
We measure the temperature inside the reactor, but not with thermocouples: we invented a very good method (confidential)
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Hank Mills,
I agree with what you said. And I want to thank you for your empathy.
Warm Regards,
Andrea
Dear Ing. Rossi
I think that your system will be much more attractive and of a more valuable value if you will be able to couple it as soon as possible with a device capable of generating electric power. So not only hot water but also electric power. This is the most valued (and perceived) requirement and result. Good luck and looking forward to hear from your 1 MW plant…!!!
Ciao
Giovanni
Hello Rossi,
You stated,
—
Dear Martin, they applauded the test, and for me has been one of the best moments of my life. Mats Lewan has written the report in agreement with the attendants.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
—
I am glad that the test was one of the best moments of your life. However, I hope you also have additional great moments when the mainstream media finally catches on to the reality of the E-Cat, and the world wakes up to it’s reality. Then you will get the credit you deserve, as the person that took cold fusion from a fascinating experimental lab curiosity, to a practical and robust technology — that can solve the energy crisis!
Your test was a clear success in my opinion, because it…
1) Demonstrated excess energy.
2) Demonstrated massive excess energy after the period of stabilization was complete, even when the drive was completely turned off. This is an example of MASSIVE heat after death.
3) It demonstrated massive excess energy, even while having to deal with huge losses (both due to the heat exchanger and the surface area of the module allowing so much heat to leak). If these losses had been eliminated (perhaps by the use of a very good insulator like aerogel) the measured output would have went through the roof.
1 + 2 + 3 = a BIG success, and proof of cold fusion!
There is no doubt the test was a success. The snakes will deny this, because they either have personal agendas, are paid disinformation agents, or their irrational skepticism blinds them.
Of course there are some individuals, like myself, that while viewing the test as an OBVIOUS SUCCESS — would have liked to have seen the test performed differently. For example, a longer period of self sustain, all reactors inside the module being turned on, each reactor being adjusted to produce the maximum amount of power it can do so safely, the use of a “control” E-Cat, etc. I would have liked to see this, because I would hope the more “spectacular” the test, the more likely the mainstream would be to take notice.
This is because I’m an outsider, and don’t see everything the way you do. I think from your point of view, a big “success” is more than good enough. This is because performing the test in a way that would produce even MORE amazing results is simply not needed (customers can test units themselves when they go on the market), is a waste of time (you are a very busy person), and you have already done/seen/performed such experiments hundreds of times (why perform them again when you need to be working on the one megawatt plant)!
You have deadlines, a budget, a personal life, and other tasks to perform. Trying to satisfy everyone would not allow you to get anything done!
I find your technology absolutely fascinating, and I cannot get enough of hearing about test performed. You have performed so many tests, you probably consider them a little bit like a chore. You know how your reactor works, how it performs, the performance of your modules, etc. Performing tests for the public in a manner that is beyond what is needed to produce a big success, is simply probably not appropriate at this time, in your opinion.
Some people — even those who think your test is a big success — have criticized the way the test was performed, because certain changes could have made it an even BIGGER, MASSIVE, and SPECTACULAR success (that might have FORCED the mainstream media to take notice). I do not disagree with much of what these people have to say, but I also think they need to try to imagine what it is like to be in YOUR POSITION. If they did, they may make the same suggestions, but they would not be so nasty about it.
As an outsider without the responsibilities you have — and 18 hour work day — I need to try to imagine what it is like to be in your shoes.
I just thought I would try to express what I am feeling. I try to be an open person, and I wanted to be open with you.
I sincerely hope I did not offend you.
Hank Mills
Dear Ing. Rossi, I wonder why there hasn’t been put a thermocouple inside the core of reactor.
I think that the measure of that temperature would be the most important of the entire test.
Infact it permits to valuate the strenght of reaction and watch exactly the self sustaining state.
If that temperature infact remains high without electric energy in input, there is surely self sustaining.
All other measures at this point are surely secondary, not really so important.
Kind Regards,
Italo
dear mr rossi,
I am stunned about your amazing results
I cry tears of joy ,and to me it`s extremely hard to understand what just happens.
which chance is give to our mankind.
finally, we can have a rest,we can find back to each other.
no more fear loosing our selves in the dark.
no need for beeing faster,better,harder…
but I start to notice as a matter of course,
that once more we will grow beyond ourselves,
that we transform ourselves to a new level of energy.
With great power, great responsibility arises.
But you’re not alone my brother, we stand by you!!!
(my english is not the best,maybe you can read it in german too)
sehr geehrter seniore rossi,
ich bin überwältigt angesichts ihrer faszinierenden forschungs ergebnisse.
ich weine tränen der freude und es fällt mir äußerst schwer zu begreifen was gerade geschieht.
welche chance der gesammten menschheit dadurch gegeben ist.
wir können endlich wieder zur ruhe kommen,zueinander finden.
wir brauchen nie wieder angst haben das uns die energie ausgehen könnte,
dass wir an kraft verlieren.wir mssen nicht immer weiter immer mehr leisten.
doch verspühre ich wie ganz selbstverständlich,dass wir noch einmal mehr über uns hinaus wachsen werden,dass auch wir uns auf ein neues energie level transformieren.
man sagt das aus großer macht noch größere verantwortung erwächst,
und ich spüre und fühle wie sie auf ihnen lastet.
doch wirst du nicht alleine stehen bruder,
wir alle gehen an deiner seite!
Buongiorno Sig. Rossi
Avete contatti con produttori di caldaie per abitazioni civili?
A quanto vedo inseriee l’E Cat in linea con una cadaia domestica é tecnicamente molto semplice.
Facendo circolare nel circuito primario Glicole o olio dietermico probabilente non si deve neppore modificare lo scambiatore di calore gia presente nelle caldaie domestiche.
Le auguro di riuscire a portare presto sul mercato il suo prodotto.
Distinti saluti
Mauro Valerio
Dear Eric Ashworth:
I will take in due account your suggestion, very interesting.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Hank Mills:
I love animals ( with exception of snakes).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Martin, they applauded the test, and for me has been one of the best moments of my life. Mats Lewan has written the report in agreement with the attendants.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Hank Mills:
Honestly, the amount of power absorbed from the displays, instruments etc is not relevant. The energy calculated by Nyteknik is realistic, even if it has to be condidered that, as Mats Lewan wrote, all the surface og the E-Cat was 60-80 Celsius hot: all the energy necessary to maintain for 8 hours at 70 Celsius 5000 square cm of surface has not been accounted for. Such energy is easy to recover, just improving the insulation.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Neri Accornero,
Thank you for your kind attention. About the thermoelectric converters: the Seebeck effect has a very low efficiency. We are resolving better.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Caro Ing Rossi , seguo il suo lavoro da circa un anno e continuo ad essere sbalordito dalla semplicità ed efficienza del suo sistema. La dimostrazione del 6/10 è inequivocabile , non perda tempo a discutere con scettici di qualunque sorta .Se posso permettermi un suggerimento si concentri sulla produzione di un sistema sicuro di bassa potenza (5-10 KW) che tutti compreranno immediatamente, solo il mercato potrà premiarla. E’ chiaro che non sono ancora ben conosciuti gli intimi meccanismi della fusione a bassa energia ma non importa la tecnologia ha sempre preceduto la scienza . Ancora un suggerimento se mi consente , se fosse possibile sarebbe meglio convertire il calore prodotto in energia elettrica utilizzando o convertitori termoelettrici a stato solido o motori stirling insomma meno vapore e turbine , a parte uno scambiatore termico per l’acqua calda di casa !
Steve Jobs avrà cambiato il mondo ma Lei lo ha stravolto !!!! e qualcuno non lo ha ancora capito.
Neri Accornero
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I just thought of something that may reduce the amount of input that went into the E-Cat, during the test on October 6th.
From what I remember of a previous test, some of the settings on your control box do not send a constant input to the resistors, but turn them on and off. I think settings 5, 6, 7, and 8 only send power to the reactor intermittently (for example, off one second and on one second). If the input was not constant during the time period these settings were used, the total value of the input energy that went into your device should be less. However, the report on NyTeknik does not account for this.
If we could figure out for what periods the resistors were off vs. on, it would help reduce the input energy for the first thirty minutes, and make your overall energy output look even MORE impressive than it already is.
Could you please specify how long the power stays on and is turned off for these settings?
Also, did you record the input power readings yourself during the test, in addition to allowing outsiders to do so? That information could be useful in showing that the input power was actually LESS than what NyTeknik has reported (their data is somewhat crude).
Thank you.
dear mr Rossi,
As you told us several scientist attending the test of 6 oktober.
Until now i haven’t heard anything of them (or did i missed something)
Do you know when they will give a reaction?
Best Regards,
Martin
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I have a little bit of a funny story.
I was talking to a family member about the recent tests of the E-Cats (Energy Catalyzer) and mentioned the terms “Fat Cat E-Cat”, E-Tiger, E-Kitten, etc. This family member stated, “he must really love cats!” I stated, “all the best inventors like cats!”
Hank Mills
Dear Andrea, Regards your reply to Michael K Oct 9th 1042 am. To make it cheap it has to be basic and safe. Forget the bells and whistles. You have sufficient efficiency so like Ford the E-Cat will be the equivalent of his model T to start with. You say you have to make big numbers, not necessarily initially. Demonstration units performing well in working situations should be the fuse to ignite your technology onto the world stage. It is how to get these units out, as you are aware, because of the present resistance. However, this could be one method of many. I live in Canada, we have many indigenous natives living on reserves in remote areas. These people have a well structured and preserved society and they are seeking methods to make their lifestyle more pleasant. One or two of your E-Cats providing cheap comfort whereby perhaps they pay on a monthly basis to start with could be the fuse needed to get your E-Cats recognised and wanted I am thinking of hot community showers. also they could be as it were field trials. If you think this could be a possible idea worth investigating let me know I shall put some feelers out and perhaps a plan could be put together. I don’t expect payment because I like challenges. Regards E.A.
Dear Casey,
Nothing amusing, it has been very dangerous. But one amusing anectode I can tell. When we bought the factory to make the first prototypes and the tests, in Bologna, I have been given a wrong address to go to visit the factory, so that I have gone in front of the wrong building. It was 12 a.m., the time during which in Italy they have the lunch break, so that all the workers and the employees of that factory were outside, just in front of their factory, strolling , chatting, you know…
When I arrived with an assistant of mine I started to say, close to them, so that they could hear: ” oh. this factory is perfect for me…you see, there, where are the offices, we take away all that stuff and put there the reactor…there, where is the accounting office, we will put the system to work with the powders… and so on, until around us gathered all the employees of that factory, tremendously worried and one asked: ” Who the hell are you? Are you saying that we are going to lose our jobs?” I didn’t know what to say, I thought they already knew, until arrived a guy saying to me: “Rossi, this is not the factory you are buying, you got a wrong address!”
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Carlo Ombello
You bet,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Sergio:
Lavolale, lavolale, as is used to say my friend Enrico Billi, an Italian Physic who works in China.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ken Hancock:
As you know, we guarantee 6:1.
Warm Regards,
A. R.
Dear Michael K.
Your comment is smart, I think. In few months we will be ready to give the E-Cats to the World. I am working on this veru hardly, believe me, I have just to find the way to make it cheap. I have a problem: to make it cheap I have to make big numbers, but to make big numbers I have to sell it. I have to find the formula to escape this closed circuit.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr.Rossi,
Congratulations for the positive test, now we could begin a new era;
the importance of the E-Cat is mutch more big like the inadequate critics;
Our future – society, Earth – is more important like the human superficiality.
When could try the E-Cat in home heating?
With deepest regards,
Michael K.
Dear Mr Rossi
Many congratulations again on Thursday’s successful test.
I’m aware that your demonstration unit required a power input of 1.3 kW for 3 hours before running in self sustaining mode, and produced 4.3kW output. However I understand that the unit used at the tests in Jenuary produced some 12 kW output for a power input of 400W.
I understand that only one of three cores was used in the recent test, but is this the reason for the difference in gain, or something else? And what input/output do you plan to market in the commercial unit?
Thank you again and may God bless your work.
Ken
i telegiornali vomitano notizie di cronaca di ogni sorta e stronzate sportive che saziano le menti più sprovvedute……..nessun accenno al primo uomo che accende per primo il fuoco atomico amico, e con esso un nuovo sogno per l’umanità intera.
che il popolo sia con lei….non ci deluda.
Andrea,
Just sent you some thoughts on e-cat’s design via email. Give it a read.
Cheers
Dear Mr. Rossi,
On a lighter note, could you share any especially amusing stories when you had ecats go “pop” during some of your earlier attempts? It must have been annoying for the work to be delayed by accidents, but too much power was surely a sign you were on the right tract for energy production.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
You have nailed it.. your e-cat has developed (a generation or two) since the February test.. As you will start production within some few months, the value of your brand (E-cat) will support your business better than the total secrecy “black box” concept. I think you should consider to adopt you business strategy to the success you made. You should publish enough with information to allow interested parties to replicate the basics of the February test.
The work of the Univ. in Bologna and Uppsala will benefit greatly from the interaction in the research community, allowing you to stay ahead of the pack and launch new solutions.
As the contract requirement for total secrecy is no longer there, and the US patent laws have been changed, this direct approach should be seriously considered.
Dear A.R. Zdural:
Thank you for your suggestions. Anyway, we do not reach energies able to make those effects: if the temperature inside the reactor overcomes the melting point of the nickel, the Ni melts, no more powder remains, the Effect dies. It is intrinsecally safe. About my personal safety, let the will of God be done.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear A.Goumy:
1- partly automated
2- both
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear John Littlemist:
Yes, our attorneys and our specialists are working on this necessary issue. We do not use radioactive materials, do not produce radioactive wastes and do not emit radiations (as clearly evidenced also from the Oct. 6th test), so we are obtaining the necessary authorizations.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Burt,
It was already ready from a former test of a week we made with it. We use single reactors for our test to understand exactly where is the problem if we have some.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr Rossi,
Why was only one out of three units used in the 6 oct test?
Keep up the good work!
Mr Rossi, congratulations for your achievements that hopefully will benefit the whole mankind soon.
I would like to know whether you have a plan on how to fight all the necessary bureaucracy in order to get the household E-Cat to stores.
E-Cat is a device with a radiation source, and I doubt whether the national regulators, agencies and authorities will allow people to have a nuclear reactor in their homes?
What do you think?
Dear Mr Rossi,
I would like to know, if it is not confidential, a little more about the way you control the E-Cat: I read in a recent post of yours (October 8th, 2011 at 11:56 AM) that the self-sustaining mode will be regulated by computer in the commercial units, so here are my two questions:
1) In your recent tests with the so-called “Fat-Cat”, did you manage the various cycles (switch on/off, current intensity, “frequencies”) manually, or was it yet, at least partly, automated?
2) When computer-regulated, will the cycles be pre-programmed, or will it be retroaction from the E-Cat internal state?
Best regards,
A.G.
Dear 2012 Nobel laurate,
Mr. Rossi, surely it is hugely important to receive the Nobel prize. Nevertheless there is no prize available that can match with your serving to humankind. Allah (some calls it God, others Master of the Universe, some others with many different names) with its lovingly way knows what is the matching prize.
Of course you are well aware of the gigantic opposition arising from present day masters. Just to name few, one can mention seven sisters and their ultra rich partners.
Please observe safety measurements for yourself, this includes your own survival. One other point that it is obvious that you are taking extreme care to avoid nuclear explosion (for example keeping the test time not long enough) and your main concern at present is not generating excess energy but controlling the e-cat so that it does not function as a H bomb. We are aware of it and so do the snakes.
With deepest regards,
A.R. Zdural
David Roberson,
Good question, and opportune indeed.
NOT ONLY I CONFIRM THAT I VERIFIED THAT THE WATER TEMPERATURE IN THE EXHAUST STREAM UNDER OPERATING CONDITIONS HAS BEEN MEASURED AND MATCHES THE READING SEEN ON THE TEST THERMOCOUPLES, BUT EVERYBODY CAN EASILY CHECK IT EVERYWHERE WITH FEW DOLLARS , WITHOUT ANY RISK: IN THE REPORT MADE BY NYTEKNIK THERE ARE THE PHOTOS OF THE CONNECTORS WHERE WE PUT THE THERMOCOUPLE; JUST GO IN ANY SHOP FOR PLUMBERS AND BUY THE SAME ARTICLE ( IT COSTS LESS THAN 10 $). ONCE YOU GOT IT, GO IN YOUR BATHROOM , CONNECT THE TOY WITH RUBBER HOSES ( ANY RUBBER HOSE) AND MAKE HOT WATER FLOW IN ONE ROW, AND COLD WATER FLOW IN THE OTHER, PUT AT THE OPPOSITE SIDE. ONCE YOU DID THIS, TAKE A THERMOMETER AND MEASURE THE TEMPERATURE IN THE EXACT PLACE WHERE WE PUT THE THERMOCOUPLE, THEN MEASURE THE TEMPERATURE AT A DISTANCE OF A COUPLE OF INCHES AFTER SUCH POSITION, ALONG THE WATER FLOW. IF YOU FIND ANY DIFFERENCE, LET ME KNOW: I NEVER DID . OF COURSE, THE MORE DISTANT YOU GO, THE MORE THE TEMPERATURE DECREASES, SO IT IS LOGIC THAT TO MEASURE THE POWER WE HAVE TO STAY IN PROXIMITY OF THE WATER FLOW EXIT.
I WANT TO ADD THAT, TO ANSWER TO THE FRAUDOLENT STATEMENTS MADE FROM THE SNAKES PAID BY THE USUAL WELL KNOWN TO DISCREDIT AND BLACKMAIL US (YES, I REPEAT: BLACKMAIL US):
1- THE CALCULATION OF ENERGY MADE BY THE SNAKES ARE EMBARASSINGLY WRONG, JUST ANALYZE THE RATIO BETWEEN THE ENERGY INPUT AND THE ENERGY OUTPUT IN THE PUBLISHED REPORTS. BY HTE WAY: TO BE HONEST, THE REAL EFFICIENCY SHOULD BE CALCULATED AFTER 3 P.M., WHEN THE E-CAT WAS STABILIZED, BUT, NEVERTHELESS, ALSO BEFORE IT THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY PRODUCED HAS BEEN MORE THAN THE CONSUMED…READ CAREFULLY THE PERIODS OF RESISTANCE SWITCH ON/SWITCH OFF DURING THE FIRST HOURS, BEFORE 3 P.M.: THE RESISTANCE HAS A POWER OF 2.5 Kw AT FULL LOAD, SO IF YOU MAKE IT GO 10 MINUTES YES AND 10 MINUTES NO YOU CONSUME 1.25 kWh/h, WHILE THE PRODUCTION WAS WELL ABOVE…AND WE WERE IN THE START UP UNSTABILIZED PHASE !!! AFTER THAT, WE WORKED WITH THE RESISTANCE FOR FEW MINUTES AND 3 AND A HALF HOURS WITHOUT RESISISTANCE TURNED ON. EVERYBODY CAN READ IT VERY CLEARLY IN THE NYTEKNIK REPORT.
2- IT HAS BEEN FRAUDOLENTLY WRITTEN IN THE BLOGS OF THE SNAKES THAT THE DEVICE HAS BEEN NOT WEIGHTED: FALSE, THE E-CAT AND ALSO THE CALORIMETRIC ASSEMBLY HAVE BEEN WEIGHTED BEFORE AND AFTER THE TEST, AND THIS IS CLEARLY WRITTEN IN THE SAME REPORT OF NYTEKNIK: CLEARLY, THE SNAKES THINK THAT THEIR READERS ARE SO STUPID NOT TO BE ABLE TO READ THE REPORT, BUT, UNFORTUNATELY FOR THEM, IT IS NOT SO. I WANT TO UNDERLINE THAT NOT ONLY ALL HAS BEEN WEIGHTED, BUT ALSO THAT AT THE END OF THE TEST I HAVE DISASSEMBLED IN FRONT OF ALL THE ATTENDANTS ALL THE PIECES, AND TAKEN OFF THE INSUILATION TO MAKE WELL CLEAR THAT EVERY COMPONENT WAS CLEAN, THAT THERE WERE NOT BATTERIES, OR ANY KIND OF POTENTIAL ENERGY SUPPLY INSIDE THE E-CAT AND INSIDE ALL THE OTHER COMPONENTS; FOR THIS REASON WE HAD TO STOP THE E-CAT, (WE FINISHED AROUND MIDNIGHT) OTHERWISE IT WOULD HAVE CONTINUED TO WORK ALONG THE SAME EFFICIENCY REACHED AFTER THE STABILIZATION. ALL THESE OPERATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN FRONT OF HIGH LEVEL SCIENTISTS ARRIVED FROM: UNIVERSITY OF UPPSALA, UNIVERSITY OF PARIS, UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA, US NAVY, RESEARCH CENTER OG CHINA, HIGH LEVEL INDUSTRIAL CONCERNS, UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS, AND I AM SURE I AM FORGETTING SOME: I ALLOWED ALL THIS PEOPLE TO BE PRESENT AN LOOK AT ALL THE OPERATIONS MADE DURING THE TEST: WEIGHTING, DISASSEMBLING, OPERATION, EVERYTHING! BESIDES: WEIGHTING ETC HAS NOT BEEN MADE BY US, TEMPERATURES HAVE NOT BEEN CONTROLLED BY US, BUT BY THE ATTENDANTS.
A SNAKE HAS WRITTEN THAT INSEDE THE E-CAT THERE WAS DIESEL OIL TO BE BURNT………JUST LOOK AT THE WEIGHTS: AT THE END OF THE OPERATION THE E-CAT WEIGHTED SOME GRAM MORE THAT BEFORE THE OPERATION….
Thank you for your question, very useful.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Carlo Ombello:
Excellent,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Francesco Toro:
Exactly! What I need is not a technological design, I need a nice dress for the E-Cat, something nice to look at, not the usual hugly piece of utilitaristic tool.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
[…] I posted a question to Rossi on his web site, seeking clarification from him as to whether despite this abrupt change […]
Caro ing. Rossi buongiorno
Le scrivo ancora per un piccolo chiarimento inerente il contenitore dell’E-Cat modulo “familiare”.
Come forse avrà già capito sono anche un disegnatore CAD. ma dal tenore delle Sue risposte afferenti detto contenitore mi sembra di arguire che più che altro Ella avrebbe bisogno non di un progetto meccanico completo di layout dei componenti interni (che so in acciaio inox or Al), bensì di un progetto di rivestimento esteriore (verniciatura o altro procedimento litografico)che dia una presentazione “estetica” gradevole al prodotto, magari con un bel logo in tutte le facce del cubo.
Forse nella traduzione dall’inglese non ho percepito qualche sfumatura delle Sue risposte e per questo questa domanda gliela ho formulata in italiano
Mi corregga se sto sbagliando… ma preferisco chiedere piuttosto che elaborare per niente.
p.s. non mi piacciono le chewing a gum…
Cordiali saluti
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Your LENR test on October 6, 2011 should be listed as a historical event.
I wonder if I might ask you to clarify one issue that the skeptics continue to bring up which you can settle quickly. My personal opinion is that the location you selected for the thermocouple that measures the output water temperature of the heat exchanger is entirely reasonable, but they are not convinced. Could you make a statement that you have verified that the water temperature in the exhaust stream under operating conditions has been measured and matches the reading seen on the test thermocouple? I would assume that you performed such a test during your ECAT verifications. If this has not been done, is it possible for you to perform this test? Please let me know if you have already responded to an earlier post regarding this issue as I reviewed a large multitude of them and did not see a direct statement to this effect.
Thank you and keep up the grand effort.
D.R.
I meant… the link! 😀
http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/what-is-krivit-up-to-chapter-2.html?m=0
Carlo Ombello