by
U.V.S. Seshavatharam
Honorary faculty, I-SERVE
Alakapuri, Hyderabad-35, AP, India
E-mail: seshavatharam.uvs@gmail.com
.
Prof. S. Lakshminarayana
Dept. of Nuclear Physics, Andhra University
Visakhapatnam-03, AP, India
E-mail: lnsrirama@yahoo.com
.
.
Introduction
On 21 December 2011 a new meson of rest energy 10.530±0.005 GeV was detected in CERN – LHC and the ATLAS detector.
This new meson, known as χb (3p), consists of two parts – an elementary particle known as a `beauty’ quark and its opposite antiquark, which are bound together by a `strongforce'[1].
Its existence was predicted in our published paper [2]: page-278, table-16, last row, last column.
Before going further, authors request the interested readers to please go through the two published papers [2] and [3].
This paper is a combined and unified version of the published papers [2,3] and proceedings of the DAE symposium on nuclear physics 2011, India [4,5].
Please note that in our previous paper [2] it was suggested that: W boson is the super symmetric boson of the top quark fermion and the charged Higgs boson pair generates the neutralized Z boson.
It was also suggested that [3,5] Higgs charged boson and W boson couples together to form a neutral boson of rest energy 126 GeV.
Its existence was detected and is under open discussion [6,7].
Another interesting idea is: W boson pair generates a neutral boson of rest energy 161 GeV. This is our prediction and needs to be verified.
.
Dear Ing. Rossi
sorry ! b.o.m. stands for bill of materials(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_materials …..in italy : distinta base)
Cordialità
Dear gio:
Sorry for my lack of phantasy, but…what the heck do you mean by “b.o.m.”?
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear ing. rossi
in your reply to frank acland, when you talk about “5 man hour” , do you mean time production that you have in your b.o.m.?
cordialità
Dear Frank Acland:
1- the Hot Cats can be driven either by electric power or gas, but also a hybrid system is doable
2- with the outsourcing network already organized, if necessary we can manufacture thousands per day, if necessary
3- one module of 10 kW take 5 man hours, right now, but with a robotized line this number can be riduced to less than 1 hour
4- it is very difficult to answer, because manufacturing is made by many persons, considering our employees and our suppliers. Answer 3 gives you the work force necessary to manufacture.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
If you don’t mind, I have a few questions regarding the hot cat manufacturing.
1. Are the hot cat plants under manufacture gas driven, electricity driven, or both?
2. Approximately how many reactors can be manufactured in a day at the moment?
3. Approximately how long does it currently take to build a a hot cat plant?
4. How many people are involved in the manufacturing of reactors and plants at the moment?
Many thanks, and best wishes,
Frank Acland
Dear Tomconover:
By “stream” I just wanted to mean the gas- fueled- plants- line of production.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Rossi,,
Can you explain a little more about the “gas stream” for us please? Is this meaning “gas fueled” or “vaporized steam pressure” or “direct energy to electricity conversion”? If not, to what do you refer? All of your comments are received with joy and respect.
Thank you!
Dear Greg Leonard:
1- no, it is more fit than the Hot cat for low temperature applications
2- yes, up to 600 Celsius
3- yes: the gas stream is growing up seriously
4- yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear AR
I am very pleased to see your pragmatic and long term view in integrating LENR with existing energy structures.
In contrast, you are busy working at ‘the cutting edge’ of the research and making such progress that it becomes difficult to have a stable product to begin large scale production and the beginning of that integration.
A few questions come to mind:
1. Has the warm-cat been superseded by the higher powered (and possibly more efficient) hot-cat?
2. Is the hot-cat now at a stable design level?
3. Are you expecting significant new changes coming from your continued research?
4. Is the theory leading you to new areas/materials to research into?
With much gratitude for your inspiration and perspiration
Greg Leonard
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
In any case, I want to repeat that all the energy sources have to be integrated. There must be competition in an integrated system, with a gradual selection of the best available technologies in the specific situations.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi,
As a national policy, Germany seeks to phase out its use of nuclear power and has initiated a policy of ‘Energiewende’ or Energy Transformation. This desision resulted, in part, from the tragic Tsunami in Japan and the consequences of the subsequent Reactor accidents at the Fukusihima-Daiichi complex.
In the meantime, France has continued to rely on nuclear power and seems not to be following in the same path. However, all is not what it seems. In the next decade or so, many of France’s reactore will be over 40 years old, and the cost of replacing them will be high. The cost of operating these older French reactors safely will also be high.
I read this essay (see below link) on how the French are starting to think about their own Energy Transformation.
Perhaps the French might replace their Nuclear Reactors with ‘Nick’le-ar Reactors.
http://bos.sagepub.com/content/69/1/18.full
Best regards,
Joseph Fine
Dear Orazio Sardella:
We will send the final offers to all the persons who made the pre-orders as soon as the domestic E-Cat will have been certified.
Thank you for your attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Steven N. Karels:
I lived in the wonderful New Hampshire for 5 years, from 1996 through 2000. I know the feeling. We will be able to sell the domestic apparatuses as soon as they will be certified.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I live in New Hampshire and a large snow storm is approaching us with estimates of 30cm to 60cm (1 – 2 feet) of snow and blizzard conditions. I really wish I had a residential Hot eCat with electicity generation to ride out the storm. Please don’t forget the consumer products. (Wish I was in Miami)
Caro Andrea Rossi quando sara’ evaso mio preordine eCat casa cordiali saluti orazio sardella
Dear Brian:
We are working very hard on the Hot Cats deliveries and on their safety certifications. As you know, upon them is in course an Indipendent Third Party Validation that recently has been prolonged with further tests. I suppose that the publication of the results will be made by March, after the end of the tests. Again, I want to remember that the timing of the Third Party work and of their publication does not depend on my will. By March also the safety certification ( which also is in course) will be advanced. The delivery of the first plant should be made in March/April. We are doing our best, but consider that we are making our path through an inexplored jungle: nevertheless, we are respecting the scheduling we assigned to ourselves in November.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mr. Rossi
I hope that you are doing well and that it is warmer in Miami than it is where I am.
I was wondering how the progress on your commercial Hot-Cat was coming along. Are you still on track to deliver it by the end of February?
Thank you
Brian
Dear Andrea Calaon:
1- no
2- no
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
on November 21st you sent this post:
“Dear Clovis Alan Ray:
You merit this info: yesterday the third party validation of the Hot Cat has been completed.
Has been good.
The results have been better that in the July 16th preliminary test.
We are presently manufacturing 3 1 MW E-Cats:
1- Low Temperature 1 MW E-Cat
1- 1 MW Hot Cat
1- 1 MW Hot Cat gas fueled
A Report will be published after peer reviewing.
We are working very hard.
Warm Regards,
A.R.”
I have a question regarding the 3 1 MW plants:
– Will the three “plants” be used as additional heat sources in a single and already existing “turbo-gas” power plant? (I imagine the low temperature Cat as an additional “phase change” heat source and the two high temperature Cats as additional overheaters).
Regarding the long time the independent tests are taking:
– Are the test repetitions linked to the measurement of quantities of tritium (and may be Helium4) that are less than expected?
Best Regards and Good Luck
Andrea Calaon
Dear Koen Vandewalle:
Your ideas are not wrong.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I remember that the E-cat modules for the steam production are quite heavy. Since the Hot-Cat is lighter, and also for other reasons, it might be usefull to build E-cat modules for steam production that make a transfer of heat by radiation to an outer tube that is immersed (or sprayed on) with fluidum that has to be vaporized. The variations are infinte. The materials of the outer tube can be chosen to match the chemical properties of the fluidum, and can eventually last longer than one e-cat charge.
This could be seen as an optional upgrade of the first MW installations, within the same size of container and units. Or is the Hot Cat too expensive for these applications ?
Kind Regards,
Koen
Deaer Robert Curto:
Interesting,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi, the link in the post below will not work.
I did not add, resources.
Please try:
http://www.cleanedge.com/resources/news/AWEA-record-U.S.-wind-capacity-added-2012
Robert
Dr. Rossi, last year in the USA it cost $25 billion to build 13,124 MW of Wind Power.
($1,904,763 per MW)
I believe the E-Cat:
Has less Capitol cost.
Has less cost per kWh.
Needs less Land.
I hope the following link works.
http://www.cleanedge.com/news/AWEA-record-U.S.-wind-capacity-added-2012
Robert
Et. Lauderdale, Florida USA
Dear Steven N. Karels:
We have organized a quality control system not dissimilar to what happens for other industrial plants that cannot be tested like light bulbs… we have nothing to invent about this issue. About the protection of the IP, this is a confidential item.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Joseph Fine:
My Colleague Prof. Sergio Focardi is feeling well, and he too is present to the tests, now and again.
Smarter than ever.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
So if eCat technology is successful and you begin to mass produce eCat reactors (100s per day, 1000s?), how do you test them? If they were light bulbs, you might apply a current and see if they light. Do you fire them up and see if they have linear response? How much of their life (e.g., 6 months) do you burn away to validate their acceptability before shipment?
Will each one be “smart” in the sense that it electronically reports its status during the time it is working or is it too hot during operations for electronics? Is each unit serial numbered and a database exists for each unit? What can you tell us about how a delivered and functional eCat reactor module works, without revealing trade secrets.
Andrea Rossi,
While we wait for the report, can you tell us how Prof. Sergio Focardi is feeling? I hope he is well.
All the best,
Joseph Fine
Dear Koen Vandewalle:
The scientists are still working and I have no idea of what they are thinking. I do not think we will know what they know and what they think before the publication of the report.
About what we are doing: I do not know if it is big or not. All I know is that we are working very hard to deliver the industrial plant we have to put in operation as scheduled. In Great Britain they say: my garden is smaller that England, but bigger than a stamp.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
In this case, the scientists probably know everything by now. The world must have enough smart and honest people to figure it out. It is better to work together. Only the refined engineering of the HotCat itself remains under the industrial secret… for a while.
There is no way back. It is time now. You must strike first.
Very, very, very exciting !
I Hope you enjoy it.
The world needs it.
Thank you very much Mr. Rossi ! Honestly, I was afraid that the happenings with the patents had closed too many doors.
This is opinion of course, but I also have a question:
Are you already on the pathway to a next big thing ? Or is it a small thing ?
Koen
Dear Broenink:
The third party indipendent validation tests have been funded directly by the scientists and some of the Universities ( not Italian) which are making the tests. All the expenses for instrumentation, men hours, hotel, restaurants, taxi etc have been paid indipendently by the Entities who are making the indipendent validation. This is the reason why
1- the report will be published indipendently from the results
2- we cannot know anything of the date of the publication
3- we do not know where the publication will be made
4- we do not know exactly when the tests, that are still in the making, will be finished. Lately I have been informed that more tests will be made to be sure of the results, repeating again the tests.
5- we can assist to the tests, but we cannot make any operation during the tests.
6- the reason for which all these scientists are making these tests and for which their Universities are paying the expenses is merely scientific
Thank you for your questions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Daar Mr. Rossi,
With the verification of your technology being imminent can you please tell us who financed the independent research and the report which will be published shorty?
Dear Steven N. Karels:
a- yes, this year the Hot Cat certification should be completed
b- no, absolutely. The report of the Third Party is totally indipendent from us and out of our control, as well as are their measurements. Also we cannot know where the report will be published and when
c- yes, heating systems for industrial purposes and eventually power production
d- yes, absolutely.
Thank you for your questions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Regarding your response to Giuseppe. First of all, congradulations to you and your technical team. Transitioning from conceptual prototype to industrial module undergoing safety certification in less than one year (May 2012 to present) is exceptional. I also congradulate you and your team on advancing your theoretical model to the point such that improvements are made in the actual device. I feel much more confident in the third party testing that is being conducted on your later Hot eCat module with the improved performance and better theoretical understanding will be good. If the third party does their job correctly, I expect a favorable report.
Questions:
a. When do you expect a Safety Certification to be completed on the Hot eCat — this year?
b. Will you privately see and review the third party report before its publication (although I know you could not publically comment on it before its release)?
c. Do you anticipate the immediate market niche to be thermal (warm) eCats or Hot eCats?
d. Do you anticipate your business strategy to be building 1 MW eCat modules and another party integrates them into larger systems (e.g., electrical power plants, larger industrial heating units)?
Dear Antonio D.:
AC or DC are both usable, with specific adaptations.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Rossi,
I have a specific question that may have interesting implications: does the E-Cat and the HotCat need AC electric power to work, or also DC power can be used? You said that also the gas powered models need an electrical drive: is it also AC in this case?
Thank you,
Antonio
Dear Giuseppe:
Thank you for this question.
We are working with the Hot Cat ( the E-Cat at high temperature) since May 2012. The improvements have been remarkable, because we passed from a conceptual prototype to industrial plants that are in construction. The third party tests in course are made on a module of the Hot Cat for industrial applications. We are at the level of safety certification too. As for the theoretical issues, strong improvement has been done too. Personally, I think we have understood very well the phenomenon’s sources and this has improved the technology.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Mr. Rossi, could you quantify in percentage per year, since you began working with the hot cat its improvement in terms of yield, COP or everything else.
Or its improvement are only in terms of reproducibility and learning of the phenomena that are generated?
Good Evening U.V.S. Seshavatharam and Bhagirath Joshi,
The proton radius is something very confusing and misunderstood today. Well, I would like to give you my insight on this subject through my research: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
I believe today’s Science makes a very big mistake about the proton radius (one of the main reasons they cannot discover the pure Nuclear Force description, where Quantum Physics took the hard and futile road with destination the NOWHERE). The creation of a proton in vacuum (through the pair production process) must obey to the Planck constant (this is very critical and often forgotten). In my work, I found a way to clear-up this misunderstanding: The proton radius as it is today attempted to be measured is wrong since it corresponds to a reduced Proton’s Compton Wavelength (1.32fm) around the value 0.87fm. The reduced Proton Compton Wavelength occurs due to the way of measurement as also combined with a special reason: The speed of light is not c when the distance from the center of the Proton or Electron is below the Compton Wavelength of the particle.
The proof that Scientists are wrong about Proton’s radius is the following:
Planck Constant: h=re*me*c2/VA=6.626E-34 Joule/Hz or h=rp*mp*c2/VA=6.626E-34 Joule/Hz. For any charged particle created in vacuum it must obey the Planck constant.
re=Electron Classical Radius=2.817E-15m
rp=Proton Classical Radius=1.533E-18m
VA=348.43 Km/sec (Charged Particle’s Tangential velocity due to its self-rotation)
λce=c*re/VA=2.42E-12m (Electron’s Compton Wavelength)
λcp=c*rp/VA=1.32E-15m (Proton’s Compton Wavelength)
When r<2.42E-12m, then v2.42E-12m then v=c (for a distance from the center of the Electron). Exactly at r=re (classical radius) the speed of light is null.
When r<1.32E-15m, then v1.32E-15 then v=c (for a distance from the center of the Proton). Exactly at r=rp (classical radius) the speed of light is null.
The concept of the variable speed of light with distance as also how the Tangential Velocity is related with the Charge, Mass and Planck Constant you may find them in the Theory Presentation (.ppt format) on my web site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/
I will look forward for your comments!
Ioannis Xydous
Electronic Engineer
Switzerland
U.V.S. Seshavatharam
The size of proton.. is this a free proton or part of nuclei. the size of proton for a system of 92 protons will yoiel 92 times the size of proton+ the required neutrons and this will exceed the size of nuclei of Uranium.. and as it happens I am giving you the example of uranium. Do you mean to say that the size of proton remains the same in the integrated nuclei or it is compressed.. if so than do you think from your calculation that the plank constant is not a constant and a varient? As you know the speed of light is not a constant in all medium and can not be considered constant, even though the well respected scientist said it is a constant and used it in all his equations.
There is a gap in science.. of a free thinker.. Could you pls tell me with your mathematical knowledge, that Higgs boson is really found. and the announcement of finding higgs boson is not really a conspiracy?
Bhagirath Joshi
Mr. U.V.S. Seshavatharam
According to Einsteins’ theory The kinetic energy is converted in to mass at rest. When the highly energised mass is suddenly stoped for a mooment of time, it exhibits material characteristics and than in the next moment disintef=grates… these are the manifastations of energy.. How can you say that it is a new particle.. also think this way.. aneutron mass is much smaller compared to this instanteneous mass… how in your pure wisdom any one can say that small masses are made up of these massive masses and it proves the theory?
It is like being in fools paradise……
can you explain?
Bhagirath Joshi
Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
The tests in course are made on the Hot Cat.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi: Do you consider the current production of one or both of your E-Cats to be in the Beta testing stage of development?
Dear Steven N. Karels:
1- yes
2- yes
Yes, we have consolidated a theory.
Warm regards,
A.R.
Dear Frank Acland:
1- also
2- yes
3- yes
4- not yet
5- external Customer
Thank you for your attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I hope you don’t mind more questions regarding your current manufacturing situation — we are all very curious!
1. Are you currently manufacturing the hot-cat reactors in the USA factories?
2. Are you currently building hot cat plants in the USA factories?
3. Do the USA manufacturing facilities belong to your USA partner?
4. Have any of the prototype plants built at your Italian R&D facility been delivered to non-military customers yet?
5. Will the first hot cat plant be installed at a facility belonging to your USA partner — or an external customer?
Many thanks,
Sincerely,
Frank Acland
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I probably did not communicate clearly enough. I used the term “ash” to mean the resulting output material of the reaction. For instance, Helium is the product of a Deuterium + Deuterium fusion. Nickel + Hydrogen becomes Copper.
After a long period of continuous operation, 6 months or greater, do you observe in the eCat operation any elements that were not there before the start of operation?
If so, are the amount(s) consistent with your theory of how the energy is generated?
If not, can you explain then why no output was detected and still be consistent with your theory of operation?
I think it is important to be able to point to an accepted nuclear reaction equation and state we are observing output(s) and energies consistent with established science or to express that the reaction is outside of known science.
If the reaction is outside of known science, then you will have a much harder job of marketing eCat technology since no one wants to buy and operate something unknown.
Again, I am not looking for you to reveal your secrets. What I am looking for is that you have a theory of how eCat operates and you have verified the output product(s) are consistent with that theory.
Dear Steven N. Karels:
1- the charge, after working for 6 mo, is completely recycled. The recycling cost is irrilevant respect the energy produced
2- we do not have ashes, just totally recyclable metals, in amounts in the order of magnitude of grams. The isotopic variations do not affect the recyclability of the metals. No ashes are left, since we have not chemical reactions like the ones from the combustion of gasoline.
3- see above
4- see above.
Consideration: ” free energy” (I suppose you are thinking to the so called Gibbs free energy) of our system is irrilevant respect the energy produced by our reactors.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I suggest for the eCat technology to be widely accepted and received into the worldwide applications it seems destined for, I would contend that a reasonable knowledge must be asserted and verified as to the energy production methodology. I know input and output ratios (COP) can strongely support an economic decision but unless the “ash” product is known and measured, the device will always be considered one of the “free energy” devices and not generally accepted. I am not asking you to reveal trade secrets.
Question 1: When you run an eCat for a long period of time, can you observe a measureable change in the composition of the “fuel”, a so called “ash”?
Question 2: If there is an “ash”, is it consistent with a change in the “fuel” composition? (e.g., gasoline plus air -> water + CO + CO2)
Question 3: Do you have a reasonable theory as to how the “fuel” is converted to “ash”?
Question 4: Is the amount of energy released by the eCat consistent with the theoretical energy release as demonstrated by the build-up in “ash” and the reduction or change in the “fuel”