Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity

Rosemary Ainslie, Donovan Martin,
Evan Robinson, Mario Human,
Alan Macey, Riaan Theron

This First part of a two-part paper deals with results from a circuit that was designed to determine whether the amount of energy dissipated in a circuit could exceed the amount of energy delivered from a battery supply. If so, then this result would prove the basis of a magnetic field model that predicts an exploitable non-conservative field condition. This model is the subject of the second paper.
The distinction is drawn that the energy that is dissipated in a circuit is sourced from the induced potential difference in the circuit material itself.
Correspondingly then, the proposal is that the circuit material itself may be used as a supplementary and secondary energy supply source that has not, typically, been factored into the analysis of power conversion.
This raises the question as to whether Kirchhoff’s Laws exceed Faraday’s Laws of Induction. And if not, then there is also a potential for the conservation of potential difference at a supply that may be exploited to enhance energy efficiencies.
Test results show that this is, indeed, possible and that the inductive and conductive components of circuit material may be factored in as a potential energy supply source depending on the circuit design and intention.

190 comments to Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity

  • Andrea Rossi

    We are working on it,
    Warm Regards,

  • R.G.

    Dear Andrea:
    The global warming is worsening dramatically. Please make to deliver massively the Ecats as soon as you can,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Michael M.:
    So far yes. I think that important news will come soon.
    Warm Regards,

  • michael m.

    I think that the most important replication so far is the one made by Alexander Parkhomov, do you agree?

  • Stella Nokia

    This paper, titled Experimental Evidence of a Breach of Unity, by Rosemary Ainslie and Donovan Martin, is full of fabricated data. On June 29, 2013, the claimants themselves proved that they could not reproduce their own data, specifically Figure 3, in this paper, when they are being watched so they cannot cheat. The recording of this demonstration is available on YouTube.

    Further, on August 10, in a comprehensive series of tests moderated by a professional EE power systems designer, Ainslie and Martin proved, and admitted, that ALL the data concerning power, current and voltage in these two papers are incorrect.

    Ainslie has admitted these errors (see her blog) and has indicated that she will be retracting this paper and the other one by her and Martin that appears here. She says that she will be issuing error statements, along with the retractions.

    Kiss Kiss —
    –Stella Nokia

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    The most understood fusion reactions occur between Deuterium. I assume you use natural Hydrogen which contains about 1/6000 Deuterium. If you look for Tritium generation in your byproducts, you might find some but with the low percentage of Deuterium, it may not be observable. If the Nickel matrix plays a role in freeing the H2 to nacine Hydrogen, the same should apply to Deuterium. Something to keep in mind.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Enrico Billi:
    Splemele, splemele! (Don’t wolly).

  • Enrico Billi

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    indeed compare with the “mountains” of coal have been burning in USA and China, the quantity of Nickel used by e-cat could be considered irrilevant.
    I know nickel is abundant on Earth, but i am thinking if you have a precise ratio energy/(mass fuel) of your device, you can also define the efficiency of your device and plan further improvements (to reach the theoretical limit of 230MWh/g in my previous post). In order to do not waste natural resources, i hope you can squeeze all its gamma ray energy from that Nickel.
    Warm regards, lavolaLe lavolaLe
    Enrico Billi

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    1- I do not think so
    2- Confidential
    Warm Regards,

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I have been thinking on eCat and the Ni-H reaction. Is it possible for some of the energy generation to be due to H+H -> He? Has Helium generation been noted in any of yor tests?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear H.Hansson:
    1- yes, for the domestic E-Cats, while for the industrial we are very close to be all set
    2- If one certification goes through it eases the certification elsewhere, based on the existing conventions.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Enrico Billi:
    Whatever the efficiency, the amount of Ni referred to the production is irrilevant.
    Misulale, misulale!
    Warm Regards,

  • Enrico Billi

    Dear A.R.,
    i am thinking how to define the efficiency of the e-cat. If the reaction is Ni+H->Cu then the energy released for 1 gram of H will not be about 23 GWh, because we have not an annihilation reaction but a “may be” a capture reaction. For Ni60 the bound energy of protons is about 9MeV, 1% of proton mass (about 938 MeV).
    So for the e-cat we should have a maximum energy density of 230MWh/1g.
    My counting is right? How much is the efficiency of heat/energy released for the e-cat we tested last year? (low temperature)

  • H. Hansson

    Dear Mr Rossi,

    You have said that your invention is undergoing a certification process in both USA and EU. If either one of this processes is delayed will that affect the product launch worldwide?

    Like if the certification process is delayed in USA but successful in Europe will your European business go ahead (and not wait for the processes in USA to be completed)??

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
    Warm Regards,

  • Joseph Fine


    So the “Total Mass” of all of the ingredients; Copper, Nickel, catalysts etc. at the “end” of the test will be less than the “Total Mass” of all of the ingredients at the “start” of the test.

    I think I have it right this time. Sorry about the last post.


  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
    Warm Regards,

  • Joseph Fine

    A.R., K.D.

    If 1 gram of matter (Nickel, Copper or anything else) were completely converted to energy, the result would be 23*10^6 KWh.

    So the “Total Mass” of all of the ingredients; Copper, Nickel, catalysts etc. at the start of the test will be less than the “Total Mass” of all of the ingredients at the end of the test. The mass “defect” will corresponf to the energy produced and will be on the order of picograms.

    Probably most of the Nickel will still be there, requiring reprocessing. So making an equivalence of grams of Nickel to barrels of oil is misleading. Because grams of matter are NOT consumed, only milligrams or less. K.D. is much closer to the truth. Maybe 1 milligram of some elements/particles that change to energy are equivalent to 13.5 barrels of oil.

    Is that more correct?

    Joseph Fine

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear K.D.:
    1 gram of matter ( indipendently from the atom it belongs to) is equal to 23 x 10^6 kWh, from the equation E = mc^2 ( Einstein).
    Warm Regards,

  • K. D.

    Dear Mr Rossi.
    You answered to Joseph Fine

    2- No: 1 g of matters should be 23 x 10^6 kWh.

    It is little confusing.
    So, with his calculation of 1700kW/barrel of oil, 1 gram of nickel will replace 13,529.41 barrels of oil?

    23 x 10^6 kWh = 23,000,000 kWh = 23,000 MWh

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
    1- yes
    2- No: 1 g of matters should be 23 x 10^6 kWh.
    Warm Regards,

  • Joseph Fine

    Dear Andrea,

    According to tables, the energy content of a barrel of Oil is (approx.) 5.78 million BTU/barrel = 1700 kW-Hrs / barrel.

    The E-CAT2 is under test for 90 days at a power level of 10 kW-Thermal (10 kW-Hr/hr). for 90 days. And so the test is running for a total of (at least) 90*24 = 2160 hrs. Therefore, the total energy produced is 2160 hr * 10 kW-Hr/hr. = 21,600 kW-Hrs.

    And that means the energy produced is 21,600/1700 = 12.7 barrels of oil (Equivalent).

    As the amount of Nickel used in the E-Cat2 is 1.5 grams, the equivalence is now: 1.5 grams of Nickel = 12.7 barrels of oil. Question 1) Is that correct?

    Question 2) Do you expect that all of the initial 1.5 grams of Nickel will be completely consumed, or transmuted to Copper?

    As the test has not been completed, the amount of Nickel converted during the test won’t be known until the measurements are made.

    I don’t know the current price of Nickel, but 1 gram of Nickel is about equal to 3 cents (US $0.03). So 1.5 grams of Nickel costs about 5 cents or a “Nickel”.

    That’s my 5 cents worth.

    Best regards,

    Joseph Fine

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Dr Enrico Billi:
    1- yes, it is so
    2- no, we have never detected neutrons outside the reactor
    Lavolale, Lavolale!

  • Enrico Billi

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    last year you show to us the module and the 1MW thermal plant. In that case you say the system is inherently safe because if the powder melts the reactions stops.
    With the new high temperature devices, the e-cat can reach and exceed 600 Celsius degrees. I was thinking about a couple of things:
    1) I hope the theory or model you develop based on your experimental results allow you to develop some kind of inherently safe conditions of these new high temperature devices.
    2) A lot of news paper talk about piezonuclear system developed in Italy, but this device mainly release neutrons, i want to know if also at high temperature you has not detected neutrons coming out from the e-cat.
    Best regards, and of course my best wishes for your lavolaLe lavolaLe
    Enrico Billi

  • […] language that an outside entity is carrying out the tests. On the Journal of Nuclear Physics today, Bernie Koppenhofer asked: There has been a lot of speculation on this site and other LENR sites about whether the statistics […]

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
    Yes, the validation of the high temperature reactors is made by third parties.
    Warm Regards,

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Mr. Rossi: There has been a lot of speculation on this site and other LENR sites about whether the statistics about your new 600c reactor will be validated/Confirmed by your customer or third party. Will it be?

    PS Of course the stats could be validated by the Almighty himself and there will be skeptics who will question the Almighty’s qualifications. (:

  • Christos Stremmenos

    Dear Peter Gluck:
    Thank you for your answer, but I insist: … errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum….…
    that was the main cause of the current situation in Greece.
    Ch Stremmenos

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Ivan,
    our certifications willcover Europe and North America, but they will be also a solid starting point for further validations.

  • H. Hansson

    Dear Christos Stremmenos,

    I fully understand your frustration.

    “They”/that company have sent out “almost pregnant” style messages for over a year now and always backed down in the last minute.

    From your story it seems that no technology transfer was made. Do they have any knowledge or skills in LENR??

  • Ivan

    Dear Mr Rossi, In which countries the certification would be valid?. and how long the certification usually takes? I Know you are not the certificator, but you probably have asked this question.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Adrian:
    There is not little people, there is People. The certification process is in course and I do not think anybody is pulling the bkakes . I trust the Certificators.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Steven N. Karels:
    Thanks to you and Happy Fourth Of July to all our American Readers: it is the case to remember that the Fourth Of July celebrates the People that has given Freedom and Democracy to the world.
    Warmest Regards,
    Andrea Rossi

  • […] new post appeared today on Andrea Rossi’s Journal of Nuclear Physicis written by Christos Stremmenos, former […]

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Happy Fourth of July to you and all the others enjoying the freedom of America. I wish you the best and am glad to call you my friend.

  • Adrian

    Dear A. Rossi,

    There is a lot of anticipation regarding your product and everybody seems to want the same thing, a date of when this product will be presented to the public (also to mainstream media). Currently I understand you are trying to certify it and that you are under NDA regarding this issue.

    Can you tell us (the little people) when do you expect this certification to be achieved? Is it this year (2012)?
    And if it takes too long to certificate, does that not concern you that this delay is happening for political reasons (aka, you are being blocked at this level by the powers that be and this long term NDA is your new leash)?

    With respect,
    Adrian M.

  • Andrea Rossi


  • Hank Mills

    Dear Christos Stremmenos,

    Thank you for providing additional clarity into the origins of the now terminated relationship between Leonardo Corporation (Andrea Rossi), and Defkalion. As usual, your comments are refreshing in that they provide important FACTS that certain other parties refuse to disclose. I admire your courage to state the TRUTH. Your integrity is unmatched by anyone else in the cold fusion or LENR field.

    You and Andrea Rossi will be remembered by history as two heroes in the saga of how cold fusion (LENR) made it into the market place.

    Here is a good quote that fits this situation: “In a world of lies, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

    Hank Mills

  • Christos Stremmenos

    Dear Andrea
    “ΠΟΛΛΑΚΙΣ ΕΞΑΜΑΡΤΕΙΝ ΟΥΚ ΑΝΔΡΟΣ ΣΟΦΟΥ ….!!”, ….. “cadere ripetutamente in peccato, non è da uomo saggio” ….. !!


    I’m doing it for two reasons. The first is in defense of the dignity of LENR or COLD FUSION, AN ISSUE TO WHICH I HAVE DEDICATED 20 YEARS AND MORE OF MY PROFESSIONAL LIFE, AND WHICH IS, ONCE AGAIN, AT RISK OF BEING DISPARAGED. THIS TIME, THE ATTACK IS NOT CONDUCTED ON THE (PSEUDO-?) SCIENTIFIC LEVEL, LIKE AT MIT IN 1989, BUT IN A GENERAL PERSPECTIVE OF SPECULATION, on the part of characters, who, though incompetent, are usually opportunists in the economic and entrepreneurial field.

    The groundlessness of their statements — due to the fact that up to now nothing substantial has been publicly demonstrated by them — constitutes a serious threat in terms of further defamation for LENR-related work.

    Sweeping generalizations — drawing into the maelstrom of media misinformation even those who, with their hard work and competence, are seriously intent on promoting the new energy era (a fact to which I have been eyewitness on numerous public occasions) — are in my opinion unfair, and come at the expense of the enormous value that this issue has for the future of humanity and of the planet.

    The second reason, which places me under the moral obligation to bear witness (…even in a courtroom…), is the first question put forth by PETER GLUCK TO THE (ANONYMOUS?) MANAGEMENT OF DGTG:


    Allow me, in order to fit my reply within a proper sequence of events, to refer to a Party conference on energy held in Athens in 2004, in the course of which I presented my old friend G[eorge]. A[ndreas]. Papandreou (future Prime Minister of Greece) with a report on my research work in Bologna on Cold Fusion (Pd/D and Ni/H), emphasizing that such research was not only scientifically extremely promising, but, in my opinion, interesting on the political and environmental level as well, with possible important economic implications especially in the development of a Green Economy.

    We parted with the promise of bringing each other up to date periodically, as he also felt that that the issue was of utmost importance.

    Going a step further back in time to the early nineteen-nineties in Bologna, and in the wake of Fleischmann [1] and Pons’s [2] experience, we were striving, together with other colleagues of the University including Prof. Focardi, to conduct parallel research on Cold Fusion. We would exchange opinions, materials, instruments … optimism and trust… a veritable and atypical independent collaboration which continued for quite some time, convinced as we were, on the basis of the experimental results obtained, that the phenomenon of Cold Fusion was real.

    It was Focardi who, four years ago, informed me of the formidable QUANTITY leap which had been achieved through the initiative, suggestions and participation of Dr. A. Rossi, in a series of experiments in which the amount of excess heat leapt from watts to Kilowatts.

    I rejoiced at the news, because it was clear that the usual experimental phase of 4-5 watts in excess that we had obtained, working doggedly and for a long time without resources or moral incentives, was over. It was a victory for all of us …! But, as I believed then and still believe now, it was a victory for mankind.

    After meeting Andrea Rossi on his return from the USA, we agreed with and shared the idea of launching the European level of the new energy technology in Greece — for cultural as well as economic reasons (especially in view of the current critical contingency) — and, specifically, “with exclusive rights for Greece and the Balkans”.

    With this informal agreement, I went to Athens to inform G. Papandreou, who had by then become Prime Minister of the Greek Government. Papandreou called for an ad hoc meeting to plan the development of this energy innovation.

    Present at the meeting, presided over by the Prime Minister, were the Secretary General for Research and Technology, Prof. Mitsòs, the Deputy CEO of the State Energy Agency (DEH), Dr. Baratsis, and other collaborators to the Prime Minister, as well as myself. After ample information and discussion, the Greek Government expressed its intention to proceed with a feasibility plan, extending to the industrial level, of Rossi’s technology. Allow me to omit the subsequent behind-the-scenes scenarios, in terms of denigration of this issue, which were brought about by the usual “skeptical experts” who, though never having had any contact with the experimental reality of Cold Fusion, were nonetheless successful in exerting a negative influence on its image, thereby hindering the evolution of the project on the public investment level.

    About two months later, Alex Xanthoulis, an economist I was only slightly acquainted with, comes to the fore, with a view of developing Rossi’s technology entrepreneurially.

    In concert with Andrea Rossi, we invited him to Bologna for a demonstration of a small E-Cat reactor (about 2 Kw), in the presence of Prof. Focardi. Test and relevant calorimetric measurements were entirely performed, under Rossi’s vigilant eye, by J. Hatzihristos and G. Sorticos, who had accompanied Xanthoulis. Subsequently, in the midst of the usual enthusiasm for the test, a date was set for the following month, November 2010, for signing the contract in Athens between the brand-new ad hoc corporation “Defkalion GT”, and EFA, the firm holding the territorial rights for Europe over Rossi’s invention.
    The contract provided for, among other things, financial obligations to EFA on the part of DGT, to be met in two phases of the project: the deadline for the first phase was set for Feb. 24th, 2011, when a certain sum would have been guaranteed for collection on the part of EFA, subsequent to the success of a test performed by a certifying body (the University of Patras), in return for a license on Rossi’s pending patent, with exclusive development rights for Greece and the Balkans, and rights of pre-emption for the rest of the world with the exclusion of the USA.

    The second phase provided for the implementation, within an 8-10 month period of industrial R&D in Greece, of a domestic module (“Hyperìon”). At this point, Rossi’s technology (Leonardo Corp.) would have been transferred [to DGT], with obligations for technical assistance and guidance, placing DGT under the obligation to pay a second installment to EFA.

    NOT ONE THESE FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS WAS EVER MET BY “DEFKALION GREEN TECHNOLOGY”. As a logical consequence, after seven months of fruitless and psychologically exhausting expectations, in AUGUST 2011 Rossi challenged THE CONTRACT WITH “DEFKALION GT”.

    On a personal level, I am indirectly burdened by the weight of DEFKALION GT’s disparaging unreliability and inconsistency, despite the fact of my having interrupted all contact with that party as of said August date.

    In a manner of conclusion, I find to this day that the irrational brashness of periodically relating, as a result of these facts, … things such as the contents of that interview, and communicating over the Internet inconsistent scientific and technological achievements, is inconceivable.

    (Moreover…!!!) Respect is due to what, through hard work, competence, and less communication Rossi is striving to accomplish…!

    Ch. Stremmenos

    (Retired Prof., University of Bologna,
    Former Ambassador of Greece in Rome).

    [1] http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Fleischmann
    [2] http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Pons

    «Non è mia abitudine di intervenire a delle affermazioni di discutibile attendibilità come queste che appaiono al “EGO OUT”in un intervista di Peter Gluck allo DGTG (anonimo?) management (2012-06-25 Via Skype ).
    Lo faccio per due ragioni : La prima, a difesa della dignità della tematica LENR (o C.F. che ho dedicato 20 anni e più della mia vita professionale …) che rischia ancora una volta di essere denigrata sta volta non a livello (pseudo?) scientifico come nel 1989 al MIT, ma a livello speculativo in generale da dei personaggi incompetenti ma di solito opportunisti nel campo economico imprenditoriale.
    L’infondatezza delle loro affermazioni non avendo dimostrato pubblicamente fin ora niente di tangibile, costituisce un serio pericolo di ulteriore diffamazione del filone LENR.
    Trascinare in questo vortice di disinformazione mediatica facendo tutte “ l’erbe un fascio”, chi seriamente promuove con duro lavoro e competenza la nuova era energetica (di cui sono stato testimone oculare in numerose dimostrazioni pubbliche), mi sembra ingiusto e va a scapito del enorme valore che ha per il futuro dell’umanità e del pianeta questa tematica.
    La seconda ragione che moralmente mi obbliga a testimoniare (… anche in sede legale …), è il primo quesito posto da Peter Gluck all’ (anonimo?) management della DGTG:
    “When was your company established and with what purpose?”
    Mi sia consentito per inquadrare la risposta in un vero decorso dei fati , riferirmi al 2004.
    In un convegno partitico ad Atene sull’ energia, ho consegnato al amico di vecchia data G. A. Papandreou (futuro Primo Ministro greco), un rapporto del mio lavoro di ricerca svolto a Bologna sulla fusione fredda (Pd/D e Ni/H), sottolineando che queste ricerche risultavano scientificamente assai promettenti e a mio parere interessanti anche a livello politico ambientale con possibili risvolti economici importanti specie nello sviluppo dell’economia verde.
    Ci siamo lasciati con la promessa di aggiornarci periodicamente , perché anche a suo giudizio il tema era di enorme importanza.
    Facendo ancora un passo indietro: al inizio degli anni ’90 a Bologna sulla scia dell’esperienza di Fleischmann e Pons, ci siamo cimentati con altri colleghi dell’ Università compreso il Prof. Focardi, di occuparci di ricerche in parallelo sulla fusione fredda. Ci scambiavamo pareri, materiali, strumenti …. ottimismo e fiducia … insomma una vera collaborazione atipica indipendente durata a lungo, convinti fermamente in base ai nostri risultati sperimentali ottenuti, del esistenza del fenomeno della F.F.,
    E stato Focardi 4 anni fa, a mettermi accorrente del incredibile salto di QUANTITA che hanno ottenuto per iniziativa, suggerimenti e partecipazione del’ingegner A. Rossi,ad una serie di esperimenti che si passava dai watt ai Kw, di calore in eccesso.
    La notizia mi ha riempito di gioia, perché risultava chiaro che si usciva dalla consueta fase sperimentale dei 4-5 watt in eccesso che con insistenza senza risorse e incentivi morali abbiamo ottenuto lavorando per lunghi periodi. … era una vittoria per noi tutti …!.. ma come pensavo e penso tutt’ora, una vittoria per il genere umano.
    Conosciuto poi Andrea Rossi di ritorno dagli USA, abbiamo concordato e condiviso l’idea di lanciare in Grecia per motivi culturali ed economici(specie in questa difficile circostanza) la nuova tecnologia energetica a livello Europeo e nello specifico “con esclusiva per Grecia e Balcani”.
    Con questo accordo informale, mi sono recato ad Atene per informare G. Papandreou ora Primo Ministro del Governo Greco, il quale ha convocato una riunione ad hoc per pianificare lo sviluppo di questa innovazione energetica.
    Eravamo presenti in questa riunione presieduta dal P.M., il Segretario Generale della Ricerca e Tecnologia Prof. Mitsòs, il vice Amministratore Delegato del Ente Pubblico di Energia(DEH) Dr. Baratsis e altri collaboratori del P.M.. Dopo un’ ampia informazione e discussione, è stata espressa la volontà del Governo Greco di procedere con un piano di fattibilità anche a livello industriale allo sviluppo della tecnologia Rossi. Tralascio gli senari dietro alle quinte che hanno avuto seguito, in senso denigrante di questa tematica dai soliti pontificanti “esperti scettici” che non hanno mai avuto nessun contato con la realtà sperimentale della F.F. che comunque capaci di influenzare negativamente la sua immagine e di conseguenza ostacolare a livello di investimenti pubblici, l’evoluzione del progetto .
    A questo punto, dopo circa due mesi emerge la figura di Alex Xanthoulis, economista che io conoscevo solo marginalmente , propenso di sviluppare ipreditorialmente la tecnologia Rossi .
    In accordo con Andrea Rossi lo abbiamo invitato a Bologna per una dimostrazione di un piccolo E-cat
    (2 circa kw) con la partecipazione del Prof. Focardi. La prova e le misure calorimetriche sono state eseguite integralmente dai J.Hatzihristos e G.Sorticos che accompagnavano Xanthoulis, in presenza e l’occhio vigile di Rossi. In seguito, in mezzo ai consueti entusiasmi di successo della prova, è stata fissata per il mese successivo cioè a Novembre del 2010 la firma del contrato ad Atene con la nascente ad hoc “Defkalion GT” e la Società EFA (,che aveva la delega territoriale europea sull’ invenzione di A. Rossi).
    Il contrato prevedeva anche degli obblighi finanziari della DGT verso EFA, sviluppabili in due fasi di realizzazione del progetto: la prima fase che scadeva il 24-2-2011 prevedeva una certa somma garantita incassabile da EFA a prova avvenuta con successo, da un ente certificatore ( Università di Patrasso ..), per la licenza sul brevetto pendente di Rossi, con esclusiva di sviluppo per la Grecia e Balcani e diritto di prelazione per il resto del modo eccetto gli USA.
    La seconda fase prevedeva l’implementazione entro circa 8-12 mesi, dello sviluppo (R&D) industriale in Grecia, di un modulo domestico ( “Hyperìon”). Quindi trasferimento della tecnologia Rossi (Leonardo Corp.) con doveri di assistenza e guida tecnologica, che implicava l’obbligo da parte della DGT di versare una seconda trance all’EFA .
    NESSUNO DI QUESTI OBBLIGHI FINANZIARI E STATO RISPETTATO DA PARTE DELLA “DEFKALION GREEN TECNOLOGY”. Come conseguenza logica, dopo 7 mesi di infruttuose e psicologicamente esaustive aspettative, Rossi al AGOSTO 2011 ha impugnato IL CONTRATO CON “DEFKALION G T”
    Per quello che mi riguarda, mi sento di riflesso il peso della denigrante inaffidabilità e incoerenza della “DEFKALION G T”, pur avendo interrotto ogni tipo di rapporto con loro dalla sopracitata data di Agosto.
    Per concludere mi riesce tutt’ ora inconcepibile l’irrazionale audacia di raccontare periodicamente in seguito a questi fati , …..delle cose, come il contenuto di questa intervista, comunicando via internet inconsistenti successi scientifici e tecnologici (plus …!!) rispetto a quelli che con duro lavoro, competenza e meno comunicazione Rossi porta avanti …!
    Ch. Stremmenos
    (Prof UniBo in pensione, già Ambasciatore di Grecia a Roma)»

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dear Kim:
    He,he,he…we do not make fire works, we just make products.
    Warm Regards,

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>