Wladimir Guglinski
Mechanical Engineer graduated in the Escola de Engenharia da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais- UFMG, (Brazil), 1973, author of the book Quantum Ring Theory-Foundations for Cold Fusion, published in 2006
Abstract
Quantum Ring Theory (QRT) proposes a new model of neutron, a new hydrogen model, a photon model, a model structure for the aether, a model of electron, a model of proton, and a new nuclear model named Hexagonal Floors Model.
Here we analyze the Rossi-Focardi cold fusion experiment by considering the nuclear properties of the Hexagonal Floors Model.
Dear Ville Kanninen:
Very good question. We have found physical reasons to this limitation, and we are going to publish this fact along with the theory.
Thank you.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
You said that COP 6 is the highest possible.
Have you found some very fundamental physical reasons to this limitation (which you will publish some day) or is this just because of the current engineering choices ?
kind regards
Ville Kanninen
Dear Stephen Taylor:
Maybe an idea,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Steven Karels:
COP 6 is the highest possible.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Abdrea Rossi,
How do you set COP? It does not appear to be the temperature as you have the same COP for the 600C units as with the 110C units.
Is it a function of the hydrogen gas pressure? I would be surprised if this was a major factor as much of the hydrogen is adsorbed into the nickel so pressure, I would think, would be a secondary effect.
Besides, real-time control of pressure would be difficult over the pressure range needed to affect COP. I would assume the eCat reactor geometry would be the major factor in COP determination but I could be wrong.
As I mentioned before (previous posting), COP range and instability go hand-in-hand. I would also assume it is factory set and not adjustable in the field.
Dear All,
Finally I found the time to make some measurements. You can go on the below link to see what setup I used as also to download the Excel file with 36000 seconds (10 Hours recording) of measurements:
http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/AetherDetection/
Some technical details:
1.ADC-24 with effective 20-Bit Noise Free A/D Conversion (PicoTech Technologies)
2.Cubic Neodymium Magnet
3.GM08 Gaussmeter (Hirst Magnetic Instruments)
4.Sampling Rate: 1 Sample/Second. Conversion Time:660msec. Voltage Range:+/-625mV
5.Distance between Sensor and Magnet:2 cm
6.Main Signal Amplitude: 502 Gauss
7.Probable Aether’s Amplitude: 501.4 to 501.8 Gauss
8.Probable Aether’s Frequencies: 7mHz to 10mHz (130 secs to 100 secs) Main Frequency/ 16mHz to 20mHz (60 secs to 50 secs) Due to Coriolis effect (2 times the Main frequency)
The Excel file has 36000 samples. It will be greatly appreciated if someone is more capable than me (Last time I was involved with FFT was back in 2005) to create an FFT for all these data as also separately for the window of 23000 to 23600 samples. Then please send to me also a copy.
Of course, this experiment does not prove the existence of Aether 100%, but let us say that is indicative. I put this information on the Web Site, just to ignite interest to professional and amateur researchers and with their results, we could check altogether if the idea is correct (Using Magnetic Field Lines instead of Michelson Laser Interferometer for the probable detection of Aether).
The next attempt is the Hall Sensor I suggested on a previous e-mail. I have to buy it first and when I find time I will repeat the measurements. Lately I search for a new job because from 1st of July, I will be jobless (the company I work for, closes permanently). I hope to have some luck on coming week.
A person or expert in Measurements could be the ideal case to evaluate these recordings.
Anyway, I ask myself: When I analyzed (just a moving Average) the data (HONOLULU Station) downloaded from the reliable source of USGS National Geomagnetism Program (US), I observed the oscillations of 7mHz to 10mHz (130 secs to 100 secs) Main Frequency/ 16mHz to 20mHz (60 secs to 50 secs) Due to Coriolis effect (2 times the Main frequency). Now with my own measurements, I observed the same oscillations too! Is this accidental? Does this signal is a usual noise where I am not aware? But what kind of noise is this from the moment it appears periodicity and dominates the entire length of measurements? (The detection can be made on windows of 300 samples and above).
For any further technical information on the experimental setup or if there are some unclear issues about it, do not hesitate to call me.
Your feedback will be very helpful!
Best Wishes
Ioannis Xydous
Electronic Engineer
Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
E-mail: SEPP@ioannisxydous.gr
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I have remained silent since last July as many of us searched for efficient means of converting low grade heat to electricity. I always hesitate to distract you from your work. Now I wish you once again Godspeed as you work to perfect stability at 600C. This is so important.
Your recent comment “Within a week we will have important news regarding the high temperature reactors.” has caused me to hold my breath. As I try to breathe I find much needed relief from the “grey Cat”.
You are correct to question Dr. Joseph Fine. His grey Cat is not stable. It is not capable of sustained power and is quite fickle actually. When can this grey Cat brew a cup of tea? That is a video I would like to see.
So, when you can run the E-Cat through a conventional turbine to produce electricity beyond the needed input please use the remaining heat to brew tea for all those in attendance. A swimming pool size heat sink with a huge tea bag dropped in would certainly do nicely.
Wishing you well,
Stephen Taylor
Dear Franco:
The 1 MW plant can give either hot water or steam at a max temp. of 120Celsius, so far ( but this is in evolution).
The mass of fluid depends on the temperature you want them. The Customer ask us precise parameters, we supply precise parameters. As I explained, we have integrals, not numbers, to deal with.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ing. Rossi,
with reference to 1MW plant, I would like to flag You a technical parameter lists at link:
http://ecat.com/ecat-products/ecat-1-mw/ecat-1mw-technical-data
that in my opinion should better explained.
It has been written “Water Output Temperature 85-120 C”, but as some know at ambient pressure, above 100°C, water becomes steam therefore if You agree I think that it should be better highlighted.
I suggest also to add the pressure range of the steam at output steam and its flow rate, even if as the average value.
Kind Regards
Franco
Dear Hank Goranson:
We will publish the tests and the COP calculation. The COP, anyway, is not different.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Regarding the high temperature steam you say “I prefer to give these data when we actually will produce steam at high pressure.” Does this mean that the 600C steam is produced at atmospehric pressure?
Now that you can produce this very hot steam you have a very good opportunity to silence the pseudo skeptics. Nobody would believe that liquid water could travel side by side with 600C steam. All you would have to do is to feed this hot steam into an insulated vessel with cold water and measure the temperature increase for a suitable time interval. From this you could easily verify your COP.
//Kind regards Hank
Ioannis wrote in May 26th, 2012 at 10:56 AM
“Dear Wladimir,
… as also I believe that your work with the necessary mathematical formulations will create much attention!”
Dear Ionnis,
any mathematical formulation means nothing if it cannot make predictions.
The mathematical formulations concerning the flux of gravitons (within my nuclear model) induced by the flux of massless electric particles of the aether (and vice-versa) will be similar to that mathematical formulations made by Maxwell, concerning the Faraday experiments.
The equations will be similar to that of Maxwell.
However many empirical constants will be missing in the equations, and so they will not be able to predict anything.
The equations must be established and be confronted with the results of experiments.
Many experiments will be required for the estabilishment of the empirical constants.
Quantum Mechanics was developed by several geniuses along 100 years in the 20th Century.
The new task (the mathematical formulation for Quantum Ring Theory) is not a task for only one man. It will require the work of several theorists working along decades.
You did not offend me, dear Ioannis.
I appreciate to have the chance to explain what the models of QRT may represent for the future advance of Theoretical Physics.
regards
WLAD
Dear Franco:
– 110 °C.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Italo R.:
I prefer to give these data when we actually will produce steam at high pressure. So far we are working on the reactor. When we will have finished our tests on it, we will pass to hte Carnot cycle. The kg/h are still an integral, anyway, because you have mass versus temperature if the power is constant: it is an integral, not a number, whose area in the Cartesian axxes system is circumscribed within the x axis,
the perpendiculars of the minimum and maximum limits of the x ( mass) and the curve formed by the Sigma of the f(x).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr. Rossi, you have written:
“…The flow rate is an integral of flow rate as a function of temperature…”
Can you please explain?
If temperature of output steam is about 600°C and its pressure in that point is 4400 psi (about 310 bar if it is a real value), there is a flow of steam going out to, in example, a turbine for making electricity.
The question has been about the value of that flow (expressed in example in kg/h).
Probably you will let us know those values at the end on current tests, I think.
Thank you for all the time you spend for us, replying to our messages.
Kind regards,
Italo R.
Dear Wladimir,
I did not want to offend you. I read your work where there appears great insight, but it would be more interesting to see some equations which put all of these ideas together. I know that they will come in time as also I believe that your work with the necessary mathematical formulations will create much attention!
Michael Faraday was on of the greatest minds in history since he was involved with so many things from physics to chemistry, he was maybe the greatest experimenter of all times! I have great respect to such kind of people as also to anyone (like you) who has a creative expression (theoretical, experimental or whatever) and publish his own ideas even against the establishment!
—————————————————–
Dear Daniel De Caluwé,
Thank you for your interest as also that you forwarded my message to free experimenters in your country. The valid information is the first message of me below yours. The previous will not help. They need a Data Logger system with at least 18-Bit Amplitude resolution, otherwise they will detect nothing. I already tried something as I mentioned which seems encouraging (I saw again the Aether Signal), but I have to make more experiments with other sensors too. Probably the next couple of day, I will publish some pictures of the equipment and the recordings.
I will look forward with great interest and patience, the results from other experiments! Thank you very much for your support!
Best Wishes
Ioannis Xydous
Electronic Engineer
Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
E-mail: SEPP@ioannisxydous.gr
Dear Ing. Rossi,
I’m not sure to have understood properly if the 1MW plant that You will delivery in July to an European Customer will be:
a) the first version that produces steam at temperature of 120 °C
b) the intermediate version that produces steam at temperature of 200 °C
c) last version that produces steam at temperature of 600 °C to allow electrical energy production.
Could You specify?
Thanks
Kind Regards
Franco
Dear Steven N. Karels:
The flow rate is an integral of flow rate as a function of temperature.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Bennet Britton,
You asked about steam pressure at 600C. After some research on the internet, it appears that the pressure is about 4400 psi. The water/ateam at this temnperature is above the critical point so no boiling occurs. You would need an answer from Andrea Rossi on flow rates.
TO ALL OUR READERS OF THE USA: HAVE A GREAT MEMORIAL DAY !
WITH ALL MY HEART,
ANDREA ROSSI
Dear Piero:
We do not need any funding from political institutions, and we want not to have any public funding. My opinion is that a technology that works can find funding from the market, while a technology that does not work is a waste of public money if it is funded. All I need from the political environment is to be allowed to work in peace. We are able to make by ourselves the money necessary to our development: the People votes with the money for the products that are useful.
In any case I want to thank publicly the Sen. Scilipoti, whom I do not know personally, because he repeatedly tried to help us, and this is important for me to understand that part of the Sovereign People wants to help us working. This is important in order to decide where to work now and in future. I want not money to make work: I want to work to make the money necessary to develope this technology making real, useful and safe products, not theoretical chatters. This is all I ask.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Ioannis,
Based on your first message, I contacted a Dutch group of free-energy (Zero Point Energy) experimenters, that maybe have (at least some) of the equipment you mentioned in your first message.
But I don’t know if they can do the experiment, and I leave it up to them to react here, or to contact you via your e-mail address or at your website.
Kind Regards,
Ir. Daniel De Caluwé,
Mechelen, Belgium.
Dear Andrea, I would bring to your attention the new question made yesterday, in the Italian Parliament, from a political person, Sen. Scilipoti, regarding the opportunity of funding research on cold fusion, due also to the very interesting result recently obtained from the Italian Eng. Andrea Rossi. The Italian Minister Giarda answer is in a video at the link http://www.rai.tv/dl/RaiTV/programmi/media/ContentItem-d172c9b7-4125-4ecb-9130-fd77037a9372-popup.html#p=
(the relevant part is from minute 28:08 to 34:14): he says that the funding of an ad hoc research through the national research institutions will start when it will be further clear that the Rossi’s apparatus has a practical application in low cost energy production. So, we hope it could be soon, because it would be a very giant step in the long way towards the Italian energetic independence, and possibly towards a National Energetic Plan, which since many years, incredibly, in a so big country still lacks… Kind regards
Ioannis wrote in May 23rd, 2012 at 2:29 AM:
“Dear Joe,
About the Quantum Ring Theory although it has some very interesting ideas, lacks of some further mathematical formulations. ”
Dear Ioannis,
Faraday discovered the laws of interactions regarding the electromagnetism. He discovered how the laws work.
But he did not proposed the mathematical formulation, which was developed later by Maxwell.
I made a similar work concerning the laws of interactions of the massless particles of the aether: how the flux of gravitons interact with the flux of electric massless particles of the aether.
Faraday made real experiments by using tools as wires, magnets, coils, etc.
I made imaginary experiments by using my brain and my theoretical new nuclear model.
The task for obtaining the equations for the laws governing these electromagnetic-gravitational interactions within the nucleus is much more arduous than that which was to establish the equations for electromagnetism by Maxwell, because several experimental parameters are missing.
In the case of the electromagnetism, the only experimental parameters to be achieved were the permitivity and permeability of the vacuum.
I’m sure the equations will be obtained in the future, when the physicists will realize that my nuclear model is correct.
This is explained in my book to be published in the upcoming months, in London.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Congradulations on achieving 600C. An electrical power plant (such as ones in China) employ 1000 MW turbines and have efficiencies in the mid-40%. Assuming 40% efficiency and 1000MW output, a thermal output of 2500 MW is required.
Question: Is there any technical reason why the new eCat technology could not be scaled up to this level?
Question: How soon could eCats be made available and delivered to electrical power plants?
Yesterday,
I thought it through again and I noticed that with the information I gave you, it would not be possible to detect the Aether. With 1 to 4 KHz probable Aether frequency, it would need at least a 40KHz sampling rate to have a detail form of the Aether Wave.
This will create a lot of data as also the Aether will not appear on Oscilloscopes and on PC Based Oscilloscopes since they have from 8-Bit to 12-Bit resolution.
We must distinguish a change of 1/100000 which means that is needed an 18-Bit A/D (Analog to Digital Converter) at least (I think it would be OK).
Some years ago I bought the ADC-24 USB Data Logger(effective 20-Bit A/D per Channel) from picotech which has a maximum Sampling rate around 20 Hz (which is very low).
http://press.picotech.com/pr/en/highresolution-data-acquisition.html
I thought to make the following assumption (I will need your opinion about it): If we suppose at the surface of Earth exist a Magnetic Field “Anomaly” of the DC Magnetic Field which gives a value 1000 times stronger than normal, then we could place a Permanent Magnet not rotating on the surface of Earth to create this “Anomaly”.
The simplest version of this setup is to place a stationary not rotating Magnet on a table and to place the Magnetic Field Sensor in a distance of 1 to 2 cm. By this, we avoid the High Frequency of the Aether since it would be now down to 1 to 10 mHz (1E-3Hz=1mHz) similar to Exp.#1.
The new setup could be:
1.ADC-24 USB Data Logger (20-Bit effective Amplitude Resolution)
2.SS495A Hall Sensor which has also integrated temperature compensation (See Link on previous post), placed from 0.5 to 2 cm in distance from the Magnet.
3.Recording time more than half of a day with 1 Sample per second, sampling rate. Tips: If you go on line: http://geomag.usgs.gov/data/ to download data, you could see there which are the best times to record in your location with the goal to have relative flat regions of Magnetic Field (less domination of the long period signal).
4.The cables attached to the Sensor must not be more than 30 cm for noise considerations.
The conclusion of the above comes from the consideration to distinguish the singal of Aether you need to have an amplitude resolution of at least 1/100000 as you could see also from Exp.#1. It will be like a noise on the main signal of 24h period since the magnet although stationary will co-rotate with Earth surface. As Wladimir Guglinski mentioned and as it seems, Aether Detection is not SO EASY as I thought.
Most probably this weekend I am going to try something by not using the above sensor but the sensor of a Magnetometer. The rest of the materials I already have them.
I suppose such kind of experiment with the purpose to detect the Aether was never proposed so far. It would be greatly appreciated your feeback, your opinion as also in any case those who are interested, will enjoy it!
Best Wishes
Ioannis Xydous
Electronic Engineer
Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
E-mail: SEPP@ioannisxydous.gr
Dear All!
I am planning to attempt to create a simple setup for the Exp. #3. I have to apologize to everyone since as it is described on my paper, you will never measure anything. You see when you are focusing in theories you forgot the technical part (I forgot that I have a profession!) which means a very slow rotation of the spherical magnet with angular velocity down to 1 rad/sec will not create any measurable voltage (except the known physics) for a coil of 10uH (Since the 1 rad/sec will correspond to the main frequency where there will be coupled the Aether’s high frequency). It will be needed for sure a Hall Sensor like the following which has a Bandwidth around 20KHz:
http://uk.farnell.com/jsp/search/productdetail.jsp?SKU=1225627&MER=baynote-1225627-pr
Those who are Electronic hobbyists more or less, it will not be difficult to create a setup (easier said than done, I know). The experiment has similarities with the Faraday Homopolar Generator (think about it).
What is needed:
1.Oscilloscope or a PC based Oscilloscope or a Data Logger with analog channel input and Bandwidth around 5KHz.
2.A spherical (or whatever) Neodymium/or other Magnet with 1 to 2 cm radius. The sensor must be positioned above the equator of the spherical magnet (As I wrote on my paper) and about 1 cm distance from the surface.
3.Most probably will be needed a Magnetometer (Just to put the Sensor on such a distance for not to saturate it (600 Gauss)) and if not, then if it could be seen something on screen from the co-rotation of the magnet with the sensor, that will be at least the magnet’s self-rotation detection.
4.Power supply of 5VDC for the sensor.
5.The magnet with the sensor must rotate together with an angular velocity around 1E-3 rad/sec or less, where this velocity will “force” the Aether’s angular velocity down to some 1E3 Rad/sec which will be equal to 1 to 4 KHz signal coupled on the unipolar rotation frequency (1E-3Hz=1 mHz) of the Magnet. See Exp.#1 with Earth’s Magnetic Field.
6.There is a probability to be needed a signal amplifier. If you use a PC based oscilloscope/Data Logger, it can be filtered with the Excel.
Those who are going to measure something clearly or who could distinguish clearly the signal (visually) between the main magnet rotation and that of the Aether’s, I will put their video or Excel Analysis on my Web Site. I hope and I wish it will work! As it seems from the reliable source of Data I used for Earth’s Magnetic Field, it is proved that a Hall Sensor on the Surface of Earth (co-rotation) can detect Earth’s rotation. Then at least, I believe we will see the Magnet Rotation. The rest will be a surprise for all of us, if it appears something else modulated on the long period signal of the magnet.
Whatever questions you have about the setup, you could reach me via the e-mail address below. As I see by writing the above, it will not be so easy as I thought. Needs mostly patience!
What do you say?
Best Wishes and Best of Luck
Ioannis Xydous
Electronic Engineer
Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
E-mail: SEPP@ioannisxydous.gr
Hi everyone!
I would like to ask the physicists or free researchers of this blog, if they know some kind of web link (Web Site/Paper) that could provide an exact information (detailed diagram with values) about the Nuclear Force/Energy between two protons. As you may already have seen in my web page (http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/), it is given an alternative proposal for the Nuclear Force and Energy equations as also exact diagram where could someone see the Coulomb Barrier (2.27fm, -259MeV):
http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/image/obj257geo143pg1p2.png
I created the above diagram with constant speed of light (due to second postulation of Einstein) since none of the Nuclear Phycisists would ever spend time to read a proposal with variable speed of light (with distance) using it for the Nuclear Force.
As you will note on my web site or on my paper (SEPPv3.pdf) the value of Energy for the Coulomb Barrier (-259MeV) as also the maximum Energy (621MeV) is exactly the same in both cases with constant light speed and with variable light speed. Their difference is on the distance value and on the Force value.
Another information that I am searching is the Force ratio between the Nuclear and Coulomb Force as it was measured on the Laboratory. They say everywhere on the Internet that their ratio is around 100 and in theory through the fine structure constant (1/137) that Nuclear Force is 137 times the Electromagnetic Force.
From my calculations it was revealed for two protons:
Fnuclear=-4.51E5 Newtons (Maximum Value on 0.662fm=0.662E-15m)
Fcoulomb=5.14E3 Newtons (Coulomb Barrier on 2.27fm=2.270E-15m)
The absolute ratio is: 87.8. It means that the Nuclear Force between two Protons is 87.8 times stronger than the Coulomb Force.
Any help would be great appreciated!
Best Wishes
Ioannis Xydous
Electronic Engineer
Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
E-mail: SEPP@ioannisxydous.gr
tj…..thanks for your excellent comments.
When the time comes,
when an investor has to decide between a solar plant, and an E-Cat plant, it will be very easy to make a decision !
Robert
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Dear Ognjan Milin:
The theory will be published as soon as possible.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Robert — The 20 MW solar park will also cover and ruin many acres of desert wilderness and require expensive power lines to deliver the power to where it is needed. By contrast a 20 MW power E-Cat could be located anywhere the power is needed and would only occupy the space of the E-Cat building.
All things considered a 20 MW E-Cat electric power system would likely require much less raw materials to build and cause much less total pollution than a similar output solar system with large batteries for night time power.
Dear Mr. Rossi,
it ist really very kind from Your side to answere so many questions people asks You in this blog. Especially because you seem to be very busy with the set up of the commercial production of the Ecat.
In one of the last discussions (comments to JANUARY 15th FOCARDI AND ROSSI PRESS CONFERENCE) i asked the question, how the BSM theory of Prof. Stoyan Sargoytchev could be an explanation for the LENR phenomena. And than i saw that also Ionnis mentioned the theory of Mr. Sargoytchev.
In an Interview with Sterling Allan on 14.01.2012, You mentioned, that the effect could be explained with forces similar to these, which are used in some “martial arts”. This sounds really mysterious!
Will the LENR finally be explained by extending the existing physical main stream theories? Or will there be an 180° degree change in science? A paradigm shift, which involves the existance of a cosmic lattice into our physical reality?
With kind regards,
Ognjan Milin
Ioannis,
I thank you for indulging my curiosity concerning your model. Your responses are much appreciated.
All the best,
Joe
Dear Joe,
Well I mentioned one Anti-Vortex and six Vortices for an initial Aether topology in free space (The total topology needs to be re-considered). As I write on my paper and as it is also proved mathematically, from the moment the Aether is Vortex/Anti-Vortex then due to Nuclear Force properties as also due to the reduced fine structure constant (Collapse condition) and the conclusion from the Electron-Positron creation process, that the Aether is not allowed to collapse and this means only when you have pairs of Vortex/Anti-Vortex in space.
The above is proved simply since the Electron has condensed Anti-Vortex Aether in its mass and the Positron has condensed Vortex in its mass (You wll find the Graph on the General Theory of Aether). From the critical distance until the Coulomb Barrier, the Force is repulsive. When we have a pair of Vortices (Two Protons for example) then the Force is attractive from the critical distance until the Coulomb Barrier. If the Aether was only Vortices or only Anti-Vortices would collapse and probably could become a Black or a White Hole (from the attraction/condensation), without to give the chance to the Universe to be expanded and to create all the known forms of matter as we know.
About the Quantum Ring Theory although it has some very interesting ideas, lacks of some further mathematical formulations. I agree with some aspects in regards to Nuclear force explanation, but I am not good with models on Atomic level.
It would be interesting if Wladimir Guglinski can explain more on this and if he sees a connection with my theory.
Best Wishes
Ioannis Xydous
Electronic Engineer
Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
E-mail: SEPP@ioannisxydous.gr
Dear Robert Curto:
Thanks, interesting,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Propagare:
I am motivated by the fact that I think our work is useful.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Hello Dr. Rossi,
it is a long time ago since I wrote to you.
I was pretty diligent spreading the news about you and your ECat to my friends around the world, slow but successfully it seems.
Now I am sure:
You are John Galt. Right?
It is a pleasure for all of us to live in your life time.
The age of Andrea Rossi is in front of us.
I hope we will meet in the new America based on the old values.
All my warmest regards, a German friend
propagare
—-8<—- Not to release
PS If you want to invest your spare time to motivate yourself on a high level, please consider to have a look into this:
1. The Fountainhead (1949) by Ayn Rand – Your assistants can find this out of copyright movie on TPB.org
2. The Philosophy of Liberty http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I (free in 42 languages)
Dr. Rossi, they are going to build a 20MW Solar Park in Picture Rocks, Arizona, for $65 million.
That is $3.25 million per 1MW of Solar Power, only when the Sun Shines !
I think the E-Cat is going to be much less expensive, 24-7-365
Robert
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
Yes, we have a plan finalized to make us leave to specialists all the applications not core of our business.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Prof. Brian Josephson, Nobel Prize:
Thank you for your attention.
The earthquake has hit my house, which is in Ferrara, where the sismic event has been strong, but not our factory, which is in Bologna, where it has hit less, so our work has not been affected. No injuries to my family, thanks to God. Anyway, the people of this geographic area is used to react strongly to adverse events.
Again thank you,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Pekka Janhunen:
The total amount of Hydrogen we put in a charge is < 10 g
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Hank Mills:
Yes, there are transmutation products and I will give complete explications of what we have understood after this year of very intense experiments as soon as we will be allowed to do it. We have understood many things we didn’t know two years ago.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Thank you for trying to answer my questions with the info you can provide at this time. Perhaps you can answer one question that is now obsessing me. Are there any transmutation products at all produced by the new ECAT?
This saga becomes more interesting and exciting by the day!
Hank Mills
Dear Andrea,
Can you tell, how is hydrogen supplied to the new reactor, as hydride or as gas?
best regards, /pekka
Ioannis,
1. You mention that 6 smaller vortices are positioned around a larger one. Why is that so? Can you speculate on a possible relationship between your setup and that of Wladimir Guglinski whose Quantum Ring Theory uses hexagonal geometry to explain the nucleus of the atom?
2. A site that I think you might enjoy is the following one:
http://www.16pi2.com/
All the best,
Joe
Andrea,
Since you seem to be busy responding to comments with business as usual I take it that the earthquake in the Bologna region did not impact on your operations, for which we can all be grateful!
PS: note my recent email
Mr. Rossi: Koen Vandewalle asked you “Do you already have a plan on the further steps to let others multiply your achievements?” I think it is a critically important question for all of us. I hope your answer,”Yes, we will” means you do have a plan?
At any rate, congratulations. For me,I find myself returning to this site several times a day, it is like having Tesla coming out of his lab every hour or so and answering reporters questions. Thanks.
Dear hank Mills:
1- this is a pretty good question, to which I will answer with the publication, in due time, of the theory.
2- Same as above
3- Many modifications have beenmade
4- Yes, we are making “scientific boxe” with the reactor. Thank you for the suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I can’t stop thinking about the new E-Cat! Here are a few more questions that come to mind…
1) Is copper still the main transmutation product? If not, what has changed?
2) Are multiple different reactions (fusion, fission, electron-positron annihilation, and the yet unnamed phenomenon that you stated produces most of the energy) still taking place in the new E-Cat, or have you been able to maximize the production of one specific type of reaction?
3) Is the improvement in stability mostly due to an improvement in the geometry of the reactor core and/or heat exchangers, or have more fundamental changes been made? For example, distribution or composition of the powder “charge.”
4) Any interesting stories you can share from “torture testing” of the new E-Cat model? I can’t help but think such tests must be fun — pushing it as far as it can go. I can’t help but wonder if you have had a spike of 1000C steam in such torture testing that melted the paint off the walls! By the way, if you have any old, useless melted nickel slugs from such tests don’t throw them away. They are important pieces of history that one day will be displayed in science museums across the USA!
Sincerely,
Hank Mills
Hi Joe!
About your questions:
1.
a)Although I studied in the past (during 1994-1998) differential equations, fourier analysis, Vector Analysis, I cannot say that I am very comfortable or capable to solve related problems using High Level Mathematics, today.
b)I am an Electronic Engineer (not a physicist) and the last years I was involved with more practical things than Mathematics. I have heard about the Tensors, but I do not know anything about their theory and formulations.
c)As I mentioned on a previous e-mail, I do not have an inclination in Mathematics, but believe it or not I have very great Scientific Intuition (Science and Technology) where many times had happened in the past to solve unresolved issues (without a second person to confirm them) only by reading a paragraph, hearing something that somebody else said, accidental observations and personal experience. This is called combinational ability on unrelated fields of Science. It is not arrogant, it is just me! (In someone’s CV is written about his studies and technical Knowledge for a job position, but the CV does not cover the rest of him which also cannot be discussed since needs people with sensitivity and advanced psychological understanding. Not what they see just in front of them with their own eyes.).
d)You mention the Tensors. I am sure that it will be something complex in formulation. Have you ever read a paper that provides simple final equations about the Aether, Unified Field Force, Complete Coulomb and Casimir Force, Quantum Magnetic Force, Universe Force and many others where in almost all of them the Aether Tangential Velocity is present? You will find nowhere as also I did not find so far even before I write my work. But that does not mean that I could be 100% right. Since 1st of October 2011 from the first version release of my work, I never received a detail comment on it although it was sent to more than 500 Scientists (I used direct contact e-mails from Departments of Nuclear Physics, Astronomy, CERN, ESA, Neutrino Detectors and others in many countries). I ask myself why? Maybe it needs time or those who were involved they think is not a serious work since it speaks about Aether and against the second postulation of Einstein. Why they do not say directly using some arguments or better to compare specific subjects like Nuclear or Casimir Force with what I propose? (I do not like also to lose my time for the wrong reasons and for lies. If I am wrong then I am wrong! Then, I will decide to focus myself on other things that could probably be more entertaining and profitable.)
2.
a)About Neutrinos: I was speaking in case a Neutrino enters the field of a moving electron or stationary (relatively) nucleus or the field (imaginary) of another Neutrino. If you see the diagram of the Nuclear Force (Unified Field Force) and espeacially of Energy between two protons, you will note a curve with a minimum (Coulomb Barrier) and a maximum (at critical distance). It will be complex to speak about it as also I do not develop it on SEPPv3.pdf because I did not have time. Just see the Energy Curve of the Nuclear Force between Protons. Now in case we have a proton (1.6E-19Cb) and an Anti-Neutrino (8.23E-23Cb Imaginary) above the Coulomb Barrier between them, Anti-Neutrino will be decelerated (I expect) and below the Coulomb Barrier between them, it will be accelerated (I expect). Again it is very important at what distance the Anti-Neutrino will pass from a hypothetical proton that finds in its way. I propose on the Chapter of the Unified Field, the form of the Weak Force which is the Unified Field using imaginary parts to include Neutrino interactions with normal matter. If you distinguish the real with the imaginary part of the Weak Force as proposed, then you will see what are the influences on our real world and what on the imaginary world. I did not do it, because I was mentally very tired!
b)I believe if they could ever measure the velocity of Neutrinos inside a specific arranged Electric Field (to receive only acceleration), they will measure a velocity above the light speed. Such kind of experiment sounds for the moment practically impossible, but this does not mean that we cannot make macroscopic Neutrinos that would surpass the light speed. The only condition that must be met (except the Know How, which I will not speak about) is that the macroscopic Neutrino must have the Power on Board, otherwise forget it!
I hope some of the above words will not be misunderstood!
Best Wishes
Ioannis Xydous
Electronic Engineer
Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
E-mail: SEPP@ioannisxydous.gr