# Strong nuclear gravity – A brief report

by
U.V.S. Seshavatharam
Honorary faculty, I-SERVE
e-mail: seshavatharam.uvs@gmail.com

Prof. S. Lakshminarayana
Dept. of Nuclear Physics, Andhra University
Visakhapatnam-03,India
e-mail:lnsrirama@yahoo.com

Introduction
Unification means: finding the similarities, finding the limiting physical constants, finding the key numbers, coupling the key physical constants, coupling the key physical concepts, coupling the key physical properties, minimizing the number of dimensions, minimizing the number of inputs and implementing the key physical constant or key number in different branches of physics.
This is a very lengthy process. In all these cases observations, interpretations, experiments and imagination play a key role. The main difficulty is with interpretations and observations.
As the interpretation changes physical concept changes, physical equation changes and finally the destiny changes.
Universe is a very big laboratory and its life span is very large. Modern physics is having only and hardly 200 years of strong scientific background. Strong motivation, good reasoning, nature friendly concepts, simplicity and applicability are the most favorable and widely accepted qualities of any new model.
Note that in the atomic or nuclear physics, till today no one measured the gravitational force of attraction between the proton and electron and experimentally noone measured the value of the gravitational constant.
Physicists say, if strength of strong interaction is unity, with reference to the strong interaction, strength of gravitation is 10^-39. The fundamental question to be answered is: is mass an inherent property of any elementary particle?
To unify 2 interactions if 5 dimensions are required, for unifying 4 interactions 10 dimensions are required. For 3+1 dimensions if there exists 4 (observed) interactions, for 10 dimensions there may exist 10 (observable) interactions. To unify 10 interactions 20 dimensions are required. From this idea it can be suggested that with ‘n’ new dimensions ‘unification’ problem can not be resolved.
As the culmination of his life work, Einstein wished to see a unification of gravity and electromagnetism as aspects of one single force. In modern language he wished to unite electric charge with the gravitational charge (mass) into one single entity. Further, having shown that mass the ‘gravitational charge’ was connected with space-time curvature, he hoped that the electric charge would likewise be so connected with some other geometrical property of space-time structure. For Einstein the existence, the mass, the charge of the electron and the proton the only elementary particles recognized back in 1920s were arbitrary features. One of the main goals of a unified theory should explain the existence and calculate the properties of matter.
Stephen Hawking – in his famous book – says: It would be very difficult to construct a complete unified theory of everything in the universe all at one go. So instead we have made progress by finding partial theories that describe a limited range of happenings and by neglecting other effects or approximating them by certain numbers. (Chemistry, for example, allows us to calculate the interactions of atoms, without knowing the internal structure of an atomic nucleus). Ultimately, however, one would hope to find a complete, consistent, unified theory that would include all these partial theories as approximation, and that did not need to be adjusted to fit the facts by picking the values of certain arbitrary numbers in the theory. The quest for such a theory is known as “the unification of physics”.
Einstein spent most of his later years unsuccessfully searching for a unified theory, but the time was not ripe: there were partial theories for gravity and the electromagnetic force, but very little was known about the nuclear forces. Moreover, Einstein refused to believe in the reality of quantum mechanics, despite the important role he had played in its development.
The first step in unification is to understand the origin of the rest mass of a charged elementary particle. Second step is to understand the combined effects of its electromagnetic (or charged) and gravitational interactions. Third step is to understand its behaviour with surroundings when it is created. Fourth step is to understand its behaviour with cosmic space-time or other particles. Right from its birth to death, in all these steps the underlying fact is that whether it is a strongly interacting particle or weakly interacting particle, it is having some rest mass. To understand the first 2 steps somehow one must implement the gravitational constant in sub atomic physics.

### 136 comments to Strong nuclear gravity – A brief report

• Andrea Rossi

Dear “Barney” (or, better, Giovanni Cesaretti):
Thank you for this comment of yours, which gives me the chance to answer to all the stupidities that some imbeciles, like your friend B., have put around, after tips got from some puppeteers.
1- I confirm that we are manufactiring a production line to make 1 million pcs per year
2- in this process we had all the permissions so far necessary from the competent Authorities, and to say that we have been stopped is totally false
3- it is totally false, as the puppet said, I am losing my collaborators: actually, I didn’t lose one, while they increase by the day
4- where the factory is in construction is confidential, and the reason for which is confidential is that we want to work in peace, without hurdles are put by puppeteers and puppets like the Snake or B., just to give a paradigmatic example, full time paid, to try to stop us, from their puppeteers
5- you say that to maintain confidential such a factory is impossible: obviously, you understand nothing of making a factory. Ask to somebody able to make a factory and get information to improve your knowledge of the matter.
6- conserve this comment of mine: if within 16 months we will not have in operation this factory, I will pay you pizza and bier.
Say hello to your friend B.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Francesco R:
Of course! I meant “as soon as the certifications are done”, as you correctly wrote. The certification processes are in course: I have corrected my text, thanks to your comment: my mistake, probably, came from a Freudian lapsus…
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Alessio Consorte:
http://ildemocratico.com/2012/03/22/la-fusione-fredda-ora-piace-anche-a-domenico-scilipoti
Warm Regards,
A.R,

• Mr. Rossi,
I’ve to honestly confess you -as a foreword- that I’m on the skeptical side of the road, wrt E-Cat story.

This said, I’m rather surprised when I read that, according to your words:
1- the robotized line to produce the E-Cats is already in production
2- the programs of the robots will be adjusted as soon as we will have the requirements from the certificators
3- we already got the green light from all the competent Authorities, so far the certifications are done

Are you saying you’ve setup a production factory, able to manufacture MILLIONS of devices per year, without any information spillage?
Have you excavated a deep bunker under a high mountain, and hidden your factory there, or drilled the Moon, or what?
It seems really difficult to me to cover such a -probably- huge and complex factory and keep confidential the whole process. Really unbeleivable, if I have to be honest.

So, may I kindly ask you at least where (meaning: in which Country) the factory is located? If not the Country, may I at least know the continent?

Barney

• Francesco R

In your reply to Philippe George (posted on March 23rd 8:13 pm) you wrote ” so far the certifications are done.”

I think you mean “as soon as certifications are done”. Don’t you ?

Francesco R

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Philippe George:
I want also to add that:
1- the robotized line to produce the E-Cats is already in production
2- the programs of the robots will be adjusted as soon as we will have the requirements from the certificators
3- we already got the green light from all the competent Authorities, so far the certifications are in course.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Philippe George:
We are under a process of certification made by authorized entities: I am pretty sure they are making the certification respecting all the specific laws existing in the matter.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Philippe GEORGE

Dear Mr. Rossi,

Is the hardware and software for controlling the reaction it implemented on a critical standard (CEI60780, EN50128) respecting the protection of persons? Otherwise, I doubt that your device can be sold in Europe…

Best regards
Philippe GEORGE

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Russ:
Very interesting suggestion.
Can you explain better? I am interested.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Dr. Rossi,

Thank you for your time and responses.

Have you considered performing highly accelerated lifetime testing (HALT) and highly accelerated stress screening (HASS) on your initial production units to maximize product quality and minimize factory production defects?

Have you considered building hardened ECATS for rough environment use?

Warm regards,

Russ

• Andrea Rossi

Maybe you are right.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Philippe GEORGE wrote in March 20th, 2012 at 9:32 AM :

Dear Mr. Rossi,

Did you try to measure a possible perturbation of gravity around the reactor of the e-cat?

Best regards
Philippe GEORGE

Andrea Rossi replied in March 20th, 2012 at 1:32 PM :

Dear Philippe George:
We did not this measurement because there are not bases to consider it useful.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

From the practical point of view, Andrea Rossi is right. But it would be interesting to investigate it. Probably in the future it will be investigated, because if a pertubation of gravity occurs around the e-Cat and it can be detected, such fact will be of the interest of the Theoretical Physics.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Pierino S.:
choose the solution you prefer, for us is the same.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Pierino S.

Caro Dott Rossi.
Tempo fà ho ordinato un Ecat 10 Kw per riscaldare la mia casetta.
Ora devo installare i corpi scaldanti;
Meglio i classici radiatori in ghisa oppure i ventilconvettori?
Grazie se potrà rispondermi.
Tanti auguri di buon lavoro.
Pierino S.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Dongian:
In past we esed to make electrolisys to separate hydrogen from water, but for many reasons we preferred other ways.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Philippe George:
We did not this measurement because there are not bases to consider it useful.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Philippe GEORGE

Dear Mr. Rossi,

Did you try to measure a possible perturbation of gravity around the reactor of the e-cat?

Best regards
Philippe GEORGE

• Dongian

caro Andrea.mi permetto di sottoporle alcune considerazioni forse futili.
non sarebbe più semplice e sicuro ottenere l’idrogeno per via elettrolitica invece che incamerarlo ?
delle polveri piezoelettriche mescolate al nickel e al catalizzatore potrebbero aumentare il COP?
forse anche una geometria interna a spirale potrebbe incrementare la reazione?
non c’è solo l’aspetto energetico c’è anche quello trasmutatorio.Produrre metalli come il rame dal nickel
o il ferro dal carbonio( carboniron di Osawa) sarebbe un traguardo economico-ambientale notevolissimo.

http://itis.volta.alessandria.it/episteme/ep4/ep4alchem.htm

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Guido Galeotti,
Yes, you can. COP still 6.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Guido Galeotti

Dear Mr. Rossi
I have a radiant heating system at home, which as you know, working at low temperatures (30-40 °C). Do you think that e-cat (which I have already ordered), can be a good solution for my system? Because it works continuously in winter, it may be that this can increase the COP value that you have guaranteed?
best regards
Guido Galeotti

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Mario M.:
Thank you, very interesting.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Mario M.

Dear Andrea, here below you wiil find the link to see the transmission broadcasted yesterday on Voyager, RAI 2:

Il Link ufficiale della RAI relativo a tutta la puntata di ieri (dovrebbe durare 1 settimana) – Official link of the entire “Voyager” – available for 1 week
http://www.rai.tv/dl/replaytv/replaytv.html#ch=2&day=2012-03-
19&v=115010&vd=2012-03-19&vc=2

Un Link su youtube del servizio sulla fusione fredda! – Link on the only part of “Voyager” regarding the ECat and the cold fusion

Best regards,
Mario M.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Paolo M:
Thank you.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Paolo

Stasera finalmente nella trasmissione di Rai 2 “Voyager” è stata approfondita un pò la sua scoperta e ne sono molto felice….Spero che diventi un tam tam che la sommerga di richieste …. la prego quindi il più possibile di utilizzare i media a fini divulgativi, tutti devono sapere..
Saluti e auguroni da Paolo M.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Paolo:
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Larry:
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Ivan Idso:
Yes, is a possible application,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Georgehants:
1- Suppliers
2- yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• georgehants

Dear Mr Rossi, a couple of questions if I may.
-Are Siemens, in any way financially involved in your venture or just subcontractors.
– Who is supplying the scientific know-how for your improvements to the E-CAT, do you have in-house researchers.
With thanks.

• Ivan Idso

Mr. Rossi,

I’ve been giving a lot of thought on incorporating an e-cat into my home and water heating. I plan on using thermal storage because as I understand the e-cat runs best if it runs constantly. With thermal storage I would need to run a small pump constantly between the e-cat and the thermal storage tank.

My question is, have you considered directly coupling the e-cat heat exchanger to a thermal storage tank (water heater)? This would eliminate the pump and would be the same as a conventional gas or electric water heater. This would seem to be the most overall efficient process.

A thought would be to side-mount the e-cat heat exchanger on a water heater so a gas or electric backup could also be incorporated. The controller could control both the e-cat and the gas or electric backup for maximum efficiency. Thanks and keep up the good work.

Ivan Idso
Rochester, MN

• Bhagirath Joshi

Dear U.V.S. Seshavatharam and Prof. S. Lakshminarayana : The role of gravity is discussed in my paper ‘Excess neutron shell model of Nuclei’ published here in december 2011 , which shows that the gravitational forces in the nuclei are putting the upper limit to element building and also isotope building for an element. Using your theory of Nuclear gravity could you explain the destructive radiuses of nuclei at which point the isotopes of an element do not exist. I have done analysis of isotopes for various elements and documents are located at http://www.rudramweb.com/documents/

I would appreciate if you could apply your Nuclear G to this model to show both upper limit mass of isotopes and also low limit of mass of isotope for an element. (basically number of neutrons low limit and high limit for an element in terms of nuclear radius)

Curious
sincerely
Bhagirath Joshi

• Larry

Dear Mr. Rossi

I’ve read that your proposed 45 MW reactor would mass about 200 tonnes. What would be the approximate cubic volume of a 45 MW reactor.

Thanks and best wishes
Larry

• Paolo

Caro Rossi , penso di essere stato uno dei primi a prenotare il suo E-Cat e vorrei alcuni chiarimenti.

1)Ha considerato che la resa di 6 volte in calore va raffrontata con il costo energetico in bolletta per una famiglia media rendendo pubblici tutti i relativi raffronti?
2) I black out vista la richiesta energetica media giornaliera, farà saltare spessissimo la corrente considerando, almeno in Italia 3 kw sugli impianti ?
Saluti e la prego di chiarirmi questi due aspetti

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Georgehants:
Yes, I have read reports that are very close to our theory, but for now I prefer to stay low profile.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• georgehants

Mr. Rossi, have you read any reports from others that agree with your theory of Cold Fusion.
I do not expect you to say which one but interesting if others may have agreed with you.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Jim Rice:
1- Good point, we could also leave to others the task to apply electric generators and other optionals, like air conditioners, but in this phase we have to do it, to help the basic technology. I think in future it will go the way you say, as it is already for the heaters: the E-Cat has not been designed to compete with the existing heaters, but to be applied to all the existing heaters.You are right, anyway.
2- We already are working on these issues with Manufacturers expert in the sector (like Siemens, for example) along the direction you suggested.
3- Patent: sorry, but I must contradict you, in fact many scientists have replicated my effect from the text of the application you referred to, even if I didn’t indicate the catalysts. Anyway our patent strategy is very complex, and, believe me, our intellectual property will be very well defended by a system of patents and a team of Attorneys: there is around some clown who is very happy to proclaim that has copied us: there are 99.9% probabilities that it is a mock up to steal money from some investor, and 0.1% probabilities that they have something working: in this last case, our Attorneys will stop them, and I can guarantee that this is more than sure.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Jim Rice

Dear Ing. Rossi,

Regarding all the different turbines, etc. proposed to utilize the heat from an e-cat; it seems to me that your task should simply be to provide the best heat module possible for sale, and allow others to add electricity, heat pumps, etc., rather than trying yourself to become experts in turbine, electricity generation, and other technologies.

You may want to allow others to add value by adding other capabilities to the e-cat, similar to Apple’s strategy of producing iPhones and allowing others to create the applications. The more people that can create add-ons to your heat module, the more valuable it will become.

I hope you are planning on offering the bare heat module to OEMs, etc., that want to create new uses for it.

The fact that energy is used in thousands of different ways means that it should be others job to come up with those applications.

Best of luck to you, Sir.

Jim Rice

PS- I read the preliminary opinion of your PCT patent application. One objection the examiner raised was that you didn’t include enough information in the patent to allow someone familiar with the art to construct the e-cat. Specifically, you didn’t identify the catalyst. I hope you are ready to file an application with this information as soon as secrecy is not needed any more, i.e., when the e-cats go on general sale, in order to protect your rights.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Marco S.:
We are giving essential preliminar information, now, because we will be able to give detailed description only in Autumn, when the production will start, after the factory will have been completed , the robotized line will be completed and the certifications will have been completed: we cannot finish the design of the E-Cats before the certificators give us all the necessary requirements.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Marco S.

Dear Ing. Rossi
Reading your answer and merging together all of the chunks of information we have got an idea on how the domestic ecat will work. Doubts still remain about how I will drive the ecat to produce the wanted thermal power, for example 5Kw or 1Kw. There probably will be a kind of knob to accomplish this. Is it true ? What does this knob will control: thermal power production ? Output temperature ? Or maybe the electrical consumption ? Or any other measure ?
What other controls will the ecat be equipped with ?
We understand your reasons of confidentiality but please understand our impatient to see the finished product.
😉

All the best
Marco S.

• Andrea Rossi

Karl-Heinz Brown:
Please let us put the E-Cat on the market before disclosing this information. Until then all the information regarding the product and even the plant by which it will be manufactured, which is in advanced preparation, will be confidential, for many reasons you can imagine just reading what is happening around…we need to work in peace, undisturbed. Same consideration is valid for the location(s) in which we will work.
Thank you anyway for your attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Henk:
Interesting,
Thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Henk

Beste Ing Rossi

I would this product to your attention.

SteamTrac System – Waste Heat Revovery System Using a Steam Cycle

http://voithturbo.de/paa_rail_dieseldrive_prod_steamtrac.htm

Warm Regards,
Henk

• Karl-Heinz Braun

Dear Mr. Rossi,
1. is the fuel refill placed inside the reactor chamber or next to it?
2a. If it is inside, there must be some mechanism to open it for fuel swap.
2b. If it is outside, how is the fuel (Ni and H) transported into the chamber for reaction and removed from the chamber for fuel swap?
Best regards and good luck!
KH Braun

• @Seshavatharam & Lakshminarayana; I read your paper and found it gave a good attempt to expand the field of possibilities of the cause of gravity.
I don’t believe gravity is directly created by causes in the atomic structure but is an effect that is the caused by the electrostatic fields created by the atomic structure. Think of warpage of the dielectric in capacitors and warpage caused by gravity. As well as consider the effects in an electrostatic linear accelerator. Gravity works in the same manner as any other EMF effect, it just appears to work in reverse. pg

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Koen Vandewalle:
Thanks,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Robert Curto:
Thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Andrea Rossi

Dear Franco:
Yes, it is worth to investigate.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

• Koen Vandewalle

Andrea,
Indeed, a very interesting publication !
Makes people smile. Thank you.
Kind Regards,
Koen

• Franco

Dear Ing. Rossi,

probably You already know but I would like to flag You this product:

http://www.greenturbine.eu/en/product.php

a Green Turbine product for low power application. Green Turbine seems a Netherlands small company.

Green Turbine site claims that this turbine requires steam at 200°C and a steam absolute pressure of 5.2 bar to produce electric energy.

Could the E-Cat (home version) meet these requirements?

My rough theoretical calculation using Carnot’s law [1-(290/470)] gives efficiency of 38% max.

In positive case, considering an efficiency 5% less (33%) and COP of 6, overall performance of E-Cat could give (as average) electrical power double respect to the input value.

Do You think that it might be worthwhile to investigate?

Kind Regards

• Robert Curto