Physics of rotating and expanding black hole universe

Honorary Faculty, Institute of Scientific Research on Vedas(I-SERVE)
Hyderabad-35, India
Now as recently reported at the American Astronomical Society a study using the Very Large Array radio telescope in New Mexico and the French Plateau de Bure Interferometer has enabled astronomers to peer within a billion years of the Big Bang and found evidence that black holes were the first that leads galaxy growth. The implication is that the black holes started growing first. Initially astrophysicists attempted to explain the presence of these black holes by describing the evolution of galaxies as gathering mass until black holes format their center but further observation demanded that the galactic central black hole co-evolved with the galactic bulge plasma dynamics and the galactic arms. This is a fundamental confirmation of N. Haramein’s theory described in his papers as a universe composed of “different scale black holes from universal size to atomic size”.
This clearly suggests that: galaxy constitutes a central black hole; the central black hole grows first; Star and galaxy growth goes parallel or later to the central black holes growth. The fundamental questions are: If “black hole” is the result of a collapsing star, how and why a stable galaxy contains a black hole at its center? Where does the central black hole comes from? How the galaxy center will grow like a black hole? How its event horizon exists with growing? If these are the observed and believed facts — not only for the author — this is a big problem for the whole science community to be understood.
Any how, the important point to be noted here is that “due to some unknown reason galactic central black holes are growing”! This is the key point for the beginning of the proposed expanding or growing cosmic black hole! See this latest published reference for the “black hole universe”. In our daily life generally it is observed that any animal or fruit or human beings (from birth to death) grows with closed boundaries (irregular shapes also can have a closed boundary). An apple grows like an apple. An elephant grows like an elephant. A plant grows like a plant. A human grows like a human. Through out their lifetime they won’t change their respective identities. These are observed facts. From these observed facts it can be suggested that “growth” or “expansion” can be possible with a closed boundary. By any reason if the closed boundary is opened it leads to “destruction” rather than “growth or expansion”. Thinking that nature loves symmetry, in a heuristic approach in this paper author assumes that“ through out its lifetime universe is a black hole”. Even though it is growing, at any time it is having an event horizon with a closed boundary and thus it retains her identity as a black hole forever. Note that universe is an independent body. It may have its own set of laws. At any time if universe maintains a closed boundary to have its size minimum at that time it must follow “strong gravity” at that time.
If universe is having no black hole structure any massive body(which is bound to the universe) may not show a black hole structure. That is black hole structure may be a subset of cosmic structure. This idea may be given a chance.
Rotation is a universal phenomenon. We know that black holes are having rotation and are not stationary. Recent observations indicates that black holes are spinning close to speed of light.
In this paper author made an attempt to give an outline of “expanding and light speed rotating black hole universe” that follows strong gravity from its birth to end of expansion.
Stephen Hawking in his famous book A Brief History of Time, in Chapter 3 which is entitled The Expanding Universe, says: “Friedmann made two very simple assumptions about the universe: that the universe looks identical in which ever direction we look, and that this would also be true if we were observing the universe from anywhere else. From these two ideas alone, Friedmann showed that we should not expect the universe to be static. In fact, in 1922, several years before Edwin Hubble’s discovery, Friedmann predicted exactly what Hubble found… We have no scientific evidence for, or against, the Friedmann’s second assumption. We believe it only on grounds of modesty: it would be most remarkable if the universe looked the same in every direction around us, but not around other points in the universe”.
From this statement it is very clear and can be suggested that, the possibility for a “closed universe” and a “flat universe” is 50–50 per cent and one cannot completely avoid the concept of a “closed universe”.
Clearly speaking, from Hubble’s observations and interpretations in 1929, the possibility of “galaxy receding” and “galaxy revolution” is 50–50 per cent and one cannot completely avoid the concept of “rotating universe”.

439 comments to Physics of rotating and expanding black hole universe

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    a. No
    b. No
    c. No
    Warm Regards,

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    Is the eCat performance affected by external environmental energies, such as

    a. Radio waves/EMP
    b. Indirect Lightning
    c. Earthquakes/seismic shocks or vibrations
    at levels below that where physical damage occurs?

  • Italo R.

    The following is a real and actual interesting device that is similar to the domestic E-Cat when will be ready.
    Obviously, it isn’t a LENR reactor, but uses solar and/or gas as energy fonts, connected and integrated with the grids:

    Italo R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Warm regards,

  • Thorbjörn

    Will the independent third party include a runaway reaction that will result in a meltdown/explosion?

    If yes, will they unplug the electrical input when the runaway reaction begins?

    Best regards, Thorbjörn

  • Andrea Rossi

    Luiz Carlos De Almeida, Eernie1:
    The mechanism of the so called Rossi Effect is not that. Besides, I cannot give any information about the composition of the fuel .
    Warm Regards,

  • eernie1

    Dear Luiz Carlos,
    I have not seen any reports of ash contents or Nickel isotope mixtures by Andrea or other investigators to the extent you have indicated. Can you cite references for my use?

  • luiz carlos de almeida

    Dear eernie1 .
    I’m taking into account the product reported by Dr. Andrea Rossi , in relation to the transmutation of nickel products , as they are reported transmutation of nickel in 70 % Cu – 63 and 30 % Cu -65 (note that 70 % the fuel nickel is formed by Ni -58 , which leads to having to admit the addition of fusion of at least 05 neutrons are added in NI-58,ocurring the decay of one neutron (01) in one proton, occuring transmutation in Cu-63.

  • eernie1

    Dear Luiz Carlos,
    Why not go directly to a K Shell electron capture by the nucleus of a Nickel atom to create the transmuted isotopes? This is much easier to attain and they occur many times spontaneously,rather than electron capture by a proton. The results are transmutation of Nickel to Copper by decay of a neutron inside the Nickel nucleus when there is an abundance of neutrons(higher atomic weight Nickel isotopes)with the emission of a -Beta particle and an antineutrino. The lower atomic weight isotopes(proton rich) would change a proton into a neutron with the formation of an Iron isotope a positron(+Beta) and a neutrino. These reactions are well documented(see L. Alvarez) and have been experimentally obtained. The mechanisms you propose have been in contention by many investigators, including those in favor of LENR.

  • luiz carlos de almeida

    Atomic Model and considerations about the process
    established of the Cold Nuclear Fusion by Dr. Andrea Rossi (Transmutation nickel into copper):

    By Luiz Carlos de Almeida
    Transmutation of one chemical element into another heavier:

    The change of nickel in copper by cold fusion with hydrogen is an example of
    transmutation. This process occurs in a nuclear environment active, which uses
    hydrogen (pressure) and the fuel powder composed of nickel and of catalysts added (still a trade secret), initially heated, producing energy and copper (product of transmutation of the nickel fuel).

    Analysis physicochemical of this Transmutation:

    The transmutation described above relates to Catalyst of Energy developed by
    Italian Dr. Andrea Rossi. The first conclusion was that known chemical reactions could not explain the amount of energy measured. This would only be explained if a nuclear reaction would be occurring. The knowledge we have today says that nuclear reaction could not occur, thus showing that this process of cold fusion is a crucial event for changes in atomic theory currently dominating.

    The results of cold fusion and Barriers of Theoretical Physics dominant:

    1. The first barrier to accept cold fusion concerns the Coulomb barrier, which would be an impediment to the merger that is occurring in the catalyst of energy by cold fusion;
    2. By the current theory, how much bigger the atomic number, higher the Coulomb barrier, but the results weren’t consistent in this process of cold fusion. The nickel has 28 protons, and this would determine an enormous force of impediment to the process have occurred, since the fuel analyzed (powder plus catalysts), 06 months after use, presented 30% copper – 63 (29 protons + 34 neutrons) and copper – 65 (29 protons + 36 neutrons), in the same proportion of radioisotopes found in nature;
    3. Another barrier identified by researchers was the fact of having been used nickel powder common, as in nature, with the following radioisotopes: Ni-58 (68.1%), Ni-60 (26.2 %), Ni-61 (1.1%), Ni-62 (3.6%) and Ni-64 (0.9%) (These radioisotopes don’t present decay);
    4. The isotopic distribution of the nickel and of the Copper, left the scientific
    community perplexed and without explanations;
    5.The reason for this perplexity is the transmutation have occurred and, besides having occurred, how to explain the proportions of radioisotopes (Copper-63 and Copper-65), because, as the proportion was 70% Copper-63 and 30% Copper-65, events occurred in the same nucleus of nickel, com the merger of 01 proton and also have, some neutrons;
    6. The explanation of the proportions of radioisotopes, has led some physicists try to introduce contamination by copper in the fuel;
    7. If the reactions occurred, would have products highly radioactive, that which is not observed in this fusion process. What would explain, the reactor does not to emit gamma radiation? These rays would be this fusion products, because the radioactive isotope which would can form, The Copper-59, decays by beta emission (+) and this decay is of 511 Kev (energy easily detected);
    8. The physical process that is occurring has not yet been theorized, highlighting the need for changes in current atomic theory;
    9. Any chemical process should be discarded, because the production of energy is very substantial (producing 25 kWh), the only alternative explanation, that there is some kind of nuclear process that gives rise to this energy production.

    Analysis of the barriers Theoretical:

    The electron from hydrogen is captured by its proton, equaling the number of
    electrons with the number of positrons of this proton, turning into a neutron. Thus, the Coulomb barrier is overcome.
    The contamination of the sample with copper is an alternative simplistic, since
    are occurring mergers and release substantial energy. The most correct is to consider the transmutation and understand how it is happening.
    The conclusion about the distribution of measured isotope and the fact that the
    sample displays 30% of radioisotopes of copper, 06 months after fuel use nickel, with the same proportions of radioisotopes that occur in nature, cannot be explained by current theory. This is a process unknown fusion.
    The action of the Coulomb force in the cold fusion:
    Hydrogen atoms and nickel atoms are involved by catalysts, which make it
    possible the hydrogen atom becomes a neutron, by capture of electron by the proton of the hydrogen atom after this process; these neutrons are fused with the nuclei of nickel. After that, one neutron of the core decays into a proton, turning nickel into
    copper and releasing energy (low-energy radiation).
    The Coulomb barrier between excess electrons and the electrons of hydrogen is the force responsible for the formation of the necessary environment for the
    occurrence of the cold fusion.
    The number of positrons is greater than the number of electrons in the proton,
    what determines the strength of the electron containment is the balance between the magnetic force of attraction between the electron and the positron and the resistance
    force produced by energy dark around the atomic nucleus, keeping the electron in its place.
    Occurring magnetic repulsion caused by electrons of the catalysts, there will be
    imbalance, and the electron will orbit toward the proton and will be captured by him.
    This electron will enter into the proton with low input kinetic energy, because will go overcoming the resistance barrier without accelerate. This electron won’t annihilate the positron. This causes the hydrogen proton becomes a neutron.

    As this process is also occurring in other hydrogens, such situations may occur:

    1. The protons of hydrogen atoms capture electrons, turning into neutrons and how they are very close, become fuse with concomitant transformation of a proton, in a neutron, besides low-energy radiation emission (formation of deuterium and tritium from hydrogen);;
    2. In the case of the transmutation of nickel in copper, the process is similar, but after the formation of neutrons, these neutrons are fused with the proton of nickel, at the same time occur the transformation of a neutron into a proton (neutron of the nickel), occurring transmutation of nickel in copper, with emission of radiation at low energy.

    The catalysts that were used, in this transmutation, were not also revealed, for it is a trade secret.

    Electron Capture Process:

    In these processes of cold fusion, annihilations don’t occur between positrons
    of the nuclei and electrons captured, because the elements involved are stable
    elements and present a very high bond force. This high clamping force is a barrier to occur disintegration. If there is not a very high kinetic energy of the electron will against the proton, she won’t be able of produce electromagnetic radiation, as occurs in the formation of X-rays (electron accelerators).
    The electron overcomes resistance of dark energy with sufficient kinetic energy
    to overcome the barrier of bond strength and ends up being captured by of the proton absorption. In this process, the proton absorbs the electron without emissions.

    Emission of radiation with low energy, in the transformation of a neutron into a proton concomitant with cold fusion:

    In the process of cold fusion, emissions occur with little energy, but the
    dominant scientific understanding believes that if such disintegrations are occurring, emissions must occur with emissions of high-energy.
    When emissions occur in natural processes of disintegration, the nuclei
    involved are unstable due unbalance between force of resistance and the core volume (mass) . To adapt this relationship between nuclear volume (mass) and strength of union, these nuclei emit radiation in processes of disintegration of high energy. This adaptation is a physical means to go missing this volume (mass) and consequently increase the clamping force until that force can keep this core cohesive without possibilities of new natural disintegrations, becoming stable nuclei.
    Emissions occur in processes of disintegration caused by electron bombardment, bombardment with gamma rays, X-rays and ultraviolet rays, laser bombardment (visible or not), application of sound waves (son luminescence), heating to millions of degrees centigrade, collisions proton, neutron collisions and many other methods. All these methods produce disintegrations by introducing energy sufficient to disintegrations in high energy. For the same method, the disintegration processes
    occur with very varied results to different cores, as it will vary greatly depending on the nuclear volume (nuclear mass), because each core has a particular bond strength and inversely proportional to the nuclear volume (mass).
    The radiation emitted with little energy doesn’t have enough kinetic energy to
    escape the enclosure of the reactor. In the propagation and reflection inside the
    reactor such emissions are losing kinetic energy that is transformed into thermal
    energy heating reactor.
    The energy input at this stage of emissions can be reduced or even switched
    off, since the heating is sustainable process, and the pressurization of hydrogen, is maintenance factor of the events, so that to disable the device, simply turn off the resistance and reduce pressure hydrogen. The ventilation system of the reactor can be increased. This can cool the temperature below to the required for the reactions occur.
    The process of transmutation of nickel in copper
    The nuclear active environment is formed by:
    1. Finely ground nickel (nano-particles);
    2. Catalysts (not yet published);
    3. Ordinary hydrogen, which is pressurized on the nanoparticles of the nickel and
    catalysts. Captures occur of the electrons by protons of the hydrogen atoms, turning into neutrons without producing emissions. As previously described;
    4. Added to the above elements the process begins with an initial input of
    approximately 1000 W of power producing a temperature of + – 500 degrees Celsius.
    1. Coulomb repulsion forcing the electrons orbiting toward the hydrogen protons.
    2. Capture of electrons by the hydrogen protons, and these protons turning into
    This nuclear active environment produces the transformation of the hydrogen
    protons into neutrons by electron capture and fusion of these neutrons with nuclei of nickel, since neutrons do not have the impediment of the Coulomb barrier.
    After the merger, a neutron nuclear of the nickel turns into proton. In this
    process are emitted radiation with little energy, a neutrino and a antineutrino.
    After the release of energy, for the maintenance of the processes, remaining an
    entry in the reactor, with power of 80 W. The transformation a neutron nuclear of the nickel (into a proton) will produce the −63 Cu and the −65 Cu .
    The number of neutrons depends on which isotope fused and which isotope
    was produced. ( −63 Cu , or −65 Cu ).
    The isotopes copper 63 and, copper 65 may have been formed during the
    process. Its presence is therefore a proof that nuclear reactions occurred in the
    process and do not present the same products issued in hot fusion. It’s a physical process that hasn’t yet an explanation (Theory).
    The proton captures the electron, without decay and radiation, and after
    becoming a neutron is captured by the nucleus of nickel (in amounts of 01 to 07
    neutrons) after captured a neutron of the nickel turns into a proton in a process known decay, with emission of electromagnetic radiation at low energy plus a neutrino and an antineutrino and (−) Beta radiation:
    Transmutation of nickel in copper. Fusion of Neutron with the core of nickel
    with subsequent decay of a neutron into a proton and emission at low energy.
    It is a different physical process than those established today. There is no way
    to explain it by analogies of the isotopes in the products, as in processes known

    TRANSMUTATION NICKEL INTO COPPER ratio 70/ 30of isotopes of copper (
    −63 Cu ) e ( −65 Cu ), can be explained considering that you can have any of the
    following events:
    Ni-58, with fusion of 05 neutrons;
    Ni-60, with fusion of 03 neutrons;
    Ni-61, with fusion of 02 neutrons;
    Ni-62, with fusion of 01 neutron;.
    1. Radioisotopes of copper 65 may be formed by mergers of neutrons (with
    immediate conversion of a neutron into a proton):
    Ni-58, with fusion of 07 neutrons;
    Ni-60, with fusion of 05 neutrons;
    Ni-61, with fusion of 04 neutrons;
    Ni-62, with fusion of 03 neutrons;
    Ni-63, with fusion of 02 neutrons;
    Ni-64, with fusion of 01 neutron.
    1. The results of mergers involving isotopes of nickel, probably happen with fewer neutrons involved in transmutation of isotopes of nickel into copper (C-63 and C- 65). The formation of copper ( −63 Cu e −65 Cu ) is from the captures of the electrons by hydrogens and then by emissions of radiations (at low energy).

    (QUANTUM THEORY AND THE HIDDEN VARIABLES – 2012 – Luiz Carlos de Almeida)
    (TEORIA QUÂNTICA E AS VARIÁVEIS OCULTAS -2012 – Luiz Carlos de Almeida).

  • Andrea Rossi

    Pietro F.:
    Let us see the results of the R&D and validation work in course. The results could be positive, but also negative.
    Beside this, I think all the energy sources must be integrated. I do not see miracles in the horizon, but I see a hard work all together.
    Warm Regards,

  • Pietro F.

    Buongiorno Andrea,
    sono un vecchio fan della prima ora, ogni tanto le scrivo per incoraggiarla e per salutarla.
    La Russia, nel braccio di ferro che sta avvenendo attualmente con gli occidentali, conta moltissimo sul fatto che il suo gas sia un inevitabile freno alle minacciate ripercussioni economiche politiche sventolate dagli occidentali (e non ha tutti i torti). Immagino che la sua discesa in campo (commerciale) cambierebbe gli equilibri in campo. Pensa sia immaginabile che cio’ avvenga, diciamo, nei prossimi tre mesi?
    La ringrazio e buon lavoro.

    Hello Andrea,
    I’m an old fan of the first hour, every so often I am writing to encourage you and to greet her.
    Russia, in the tug of war that is happening currently with the West, relies heavily on the fact that its gas is an inevitable brake on economic policy threatened repercussions waved by Westerners (and not entirely wrong). I guess its descent into the field (commercial) would change the balance in the field. She thinks it is conceivable that this’, let, happen in the next three months?
    Thank you and good luck.

    Pietro F.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Eernie 1:
    1- the experiment is not finished yet
    2- I do not think it will take more than a month to the end, but this is a supposition of mine, maybe wrong
    3- The publication of the report will be made, indipendently from the results, positive or negative as they might be. I cannot know when. I will have the report before the publication, but I do not know if I will be authorized to make it public: I signed an NDA, valid for all the participants, in which is written the engagement not to make public any information before the publication of the Report.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Andy Kumar:
    Dark Matter could be a Physics entity that can explain phenomenons in the field of Astronomy, like the pull that causes the expansion of the Universe, surely not effects in microcosmos.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andy Kumar

    Dear Mr. Rossi,

    Recently, evidence for dark matter particles was found.

    Perhaps some dark matter or dark energy interactions are happening in ecat. That is why we don’t see the normal nuclear reaction signatures for ecat. Could you tell us something about it? Sometime ago you had hinted at some cosmic phenomenon at work in ecat.

    Andy Kumar

  • eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    I do not know if you have previously answered the following questions. Can you tell us if the investigators have finished their tests? If they have, do they have a timetable for completing their report? Finally will they give you a preview of the report since it should not matter if they have a finished product and submitted it for publication?
    All the best.

  • Andrea Rossi

    You are right. As I already answered to Mark ( see the comment of Andrea Rossi to Mark on 2014-03- 14- time 02.15 a.m. on this blog), the Professors have put instrumentation standing by the PCE 830 to measure any direct current that cannot be measured by the PCE 830. Obviously, the measurement confirms that there is not any direct current flowing. It had not been put in the test of March 2013 because nobody thought about this issue, since I never used direct current, but this time the Professors wanted to take account also of this issue.
    Warm Regards,

  • Thorbjörn

    Are the independent third party aware of the limitation of the PCE-830 that has been pointed out by Mats Lewan?
    Mats Lewan wrote:

    UPDATE: I have been in contact with a representative of PCE Instruments UK Ltd who has confirmed that the PCE-830 cannot detect DC tension. When connected to an AC source with an offset DC tension it will display the graph of the AC tension correctly but it will not detect the offset DC tension.

    Best regards, Torbjörn

  • Andrea Rossi

    Now I understand ( the hypothesys of beaming radiations from far to heat the E-Cat is ridiculous).
    The background noise is measured.
    Warm Regards,

  • Mark

    Hi Andrea,

    My concern is not the possibility of beaming radiation energy to heat the HotCat (although the pseudo sceptics may think so)from a far. It is the fluctuation of electromagnetic interference (from the surrounding or emitted from the Hotcat) that may increase the uncertainty value in the final accepted result for exact COP that the professors are trying to determine. If they try to derive a 6-sigma or K=6 or 99.9999% certainty, background noise should be considered – for example in industrial Partial discharge measurements of HV applications. This background noise was not included in the first report.


  • Andrea Rossi

    Ecco Liberation:
    It is premature to answer to this question.
    Warm Regards,

  • Ecco Liberation

    Dr Rossi,
    Do you expect changes in how you and/or your associates will be able to publicly disclose information about your work, after the next experimental report will get published?

    Regards, EL

  • Andrea Rossi

    Andrea Calaon:
    Basically, you have understood. I will be able to answer to your questions after we will have made preliminar experiments. We are working on this in the USA.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Calaon

    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    I am thinking about a combined cycle power plant. From what you told me last time on this web site, I guessed that the Hot Cat can already efficiently over-heat the steam entering the steam turbine. Am I correct when I guess that you are now trying to add the LENR heat source to the gas turbine to minimize the methane needs in steady operation of a hypothetical LENR combined cycle power plant?
    How much heat do you expect you can pass to the air-kerosene gas? Will you work with ceramic foams?
    Andrea Calaon

  • Andrea Rossi

    I suppose yes. The control of the energy consumed has been made very sophisticated, after the experience made in the 6 days test of March 2013 published on Arxiv. But let me add this: should be there a microwave electromagnetic interference of that power all the persons around the reactor would boil …
    Speaking seriously: between the control panel of the reactor and the plug of the electric power beside their PCE 830 Wattmeter the Professors have also put instruments able to measure any immission of direct current, if any ( there is not direct current, anyway) and the frame in which the E-Cat has been put has been totally electrically insulated by the same Professors.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    The third party indipendent experiment has nothing to do with commercial issues.
    Obviously, the results will affect all our activity, either the results will be positive or negative, due to the importance of the experiment in itself and the information it will provide.
    Warm Regards,

  • Anonymous

    Mr. Rossi,

    A few times you have suggested that particular commercialization steps would wait or depend on the third party test (or at least that has been my understanding). Have your customers or investors tied specific contracts or investments to the results of the third party tests? Or is it just the case that you believe that a positive result will have an important impact on the success and recognition of the E-Cat.

    If this veers into confidential territory then obviously please disregard this question.

    Thank you for taking the time to answer isofar as you are able.


  • Mark

    Hi Andrea
    Do they have instruments to detect possible
    Microwave or electromagnetic interference?


  • Andrea Rossi

    Curiosone ( Walter Gentili):
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Michael D.:
    1- yes
    2- yes
    3- yes
    Warm regards,

  • MichaelD

    Dear Andrea Rossi:
    1- did the professors of the third indipendent party that are making the validation test make the set up of the E-.Cat themselves ?
    2- did they bring all the instrumentation to make the measurements?
    3- did thay put also instrumentation that can measure also direct current , if any, consumed by the E-Cat ?
    Warm Regards,

  • Curiosone

    Dr Rossi:
    the test made in March 2013, reported on Arxive, has given specific experience to the professors, that now surely have corrected and improved their knowledge of the E-Cat: did this create discussions between you and the T.I.P.?
    Walter Gentili

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    Thank you for the information.
    Warm Regards,

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    orsobubu wrote in March 12th, 2014 at 1:33 PM

    In that forum, someone is arguing that mr. Guglinsky’ Quantum Ring Theory is centered on Einstein work, so he’s rejecting it.


    here is what that guy wrote:

    “Re: Unsolved Modern Physics puzzles solved in Quantum Ring Theory (Score: 1)
    by Kadamose on Wednesday, March 12, 2014 @ 10:42:55 PDT
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    What a load of crap. The fact that Quantum Ring theory is centered around Einstein worship is a big red flag to stay the hell away. Einstein was a fraud — and I will continue to say this ad infinitum until it sinks into everyone’s heads.
    Eliminate Relativity from QRT and it might be something of interest.”


    Dear Orsobubu

    Mr. Kadamose has no idea on what he says.

    While Einstein’s Relativity Theory is based on the empty space, Quantum Ring Theory is based on the aether.

    To claim that “Quantum Ring theory is centered around Einstein worship” is like to say that Darwin evolution theory is centered in the Inteligent Design theory.

    Probably Mr. Kadamose refuses the Einstein’s proposal that matter’s inertia grows with the velocity, and tends to infinitum when it approaches the speed of light, mentioned by me.

    In spite of there are errors in Einstein’s theory, however the growth of the inertia with the velocity of particles was confirmed experimentally.

    Also, it is correct the equation E=mc² mentioned by me.

    We cannot develop the science by rejecting everything of the old theories.
    We have to keep what is correct in the old theories.

    To discover what is wrong in the old theories, and what is correct, is just the most harder work of any theorist who proposes to himself to develop a new theory.

    However, Mr. Kadamose has a paranoiac aversion against Einstein, and he rejects anything comming from the genius of the relativity.


  • Joseph Fine

    Andrea Rossi,

    I received an interesting E-mail today from Dr. Frederick Mayer.

    I thought you should see a copy. (You may find their work of interest.)

    Dear Colleagues,
    We are pleased to forward a copy of our paper “Thermal energy generation in the earth”, published in the European Geosciences Union’s journal, Nonlinear Processes in Geophysics. It can be downloaded at
    We welcome your comments and look forward to hearing from you. Finally, you may consider the possibility that building reactors based upon the Earth’s energy source could turn out to be considerably easier than building reactors based upon the Sun’s energy source.
    Best regards,
    Fred and John

    (Click on PDF icon for paper.)

    I don’t know if Tresino physics, which are described in the above paper, are possible.

    And I don’t know the best way to test their theory.

    If a theory is correct (or, for that matter, if it is incorrect), it can be tested. If it cannot be tested, it is not a theory.

    Niels Bohr once said:

    “Your theory is crazy, but it’s not crazy enough to be true.”

    ( Tresinos Physics might be crazy enough.)

    Best regards,

    Joseph Fine

  • orsobubu

    In that forum, someone is arguing that mr. Guglinsky’ Quantum Ring Theory is centered on Einstein work, so he’s rejecting it. If I understood something, my impression is that QRT presents many fundamental differences, i.e. about the photon and space concepts in general, if I remember correctly. The author often refers to Einstein thought because of his method and philosophical approach instead, and this is absolutely interesting and correct, in my opinion. Einstein was on of the few scientific geniuses to have not a strictly narrowed mind about the facts of science and human thinking in its wider meaning. For example, Enrico Fermi, the nuclear energy pioneer, was known to be totally unable to relate to anything different of his specific field of research.

  • blaze

    gas would be awesome. No need for a grid.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N Karels:
    Not possible. Besides, it is totally useless for the utilizations we are loking for.
    Warm regards,

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    Dears Mr. Joe, Mr. Orsobubu, and other readers of JoNP:

    The talk between me , Mr. Joe , and Mr. Orsobubu is published in the , under the title Unsolved Modern Physics puzzles solved in Quantum Ring Theory:


  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    If you could somehow use tungsten instead of nickel for the Rossi effect, you might be able to get to 3,000C

  • Andrea Rossi

    We will make experiments on a jet engine, and we will try all the possible configurations. If we will get positive results, I will be able to answer to your question.
    Warm Regards,

  • Gherardo

    if I understand correctly you’ll replace the combustion section of the turbine (the one that is after the compressors and before the turbines) with multiple hot cats (there are many examples of multiple combustion chambers in production engines) that will rise the temperature of the air as a combustor would do using kerosene (mainly JP4).
    Did I understand correctly?
    For sure machining a new hot section suitable for the hot cat will not be trivial without a major jet engine manufacturer doing the work.

    Best regards, Gherardo

  • Andrea Rossi

    No way that we will reach 3,000 °C.
    Warm Regards,

  • Phil

    Hi Don and Andrea,

    Thanks for the link Don. Was unaware of that research. Was more interested in this use of nuclear heat:
    especially as SpaceX will be building massive Martian Colonial Transporters (>10,000,000 lbs takeoff thrust and 100 tons of cargo / 100 passengers to the Martian surface and back) that could sure use the long duration burn that a upper stage Nuclear Thermal motor could provide to significantly reduce transit time to just a few months or less.

    Sure looks like a good fit for a 3,000C (>3,200k) Hot Cat upper stage with Methane as prime fuel and maybe Oxygen as extra thrust (injected in the exhaust nozzle). Really nice biggie here is NO RADIATION or Shielding needed, so the MCT could carry much more cargo to and from Mars.

    Any change for a 3,000 C Hot Cat in say 5 years?

    Does Elon Musk know about the Hot Cat?

  • John L


    Perhaps this CSIRO Brayton Cycle turbine but instead of the mirrors you have the Hotcat or many Hotcats

  • Andrea Rossi

    Don Witcher:
    Thank you, very interesting. I did not know of this and it’s a source of useful information.
    Warm Regards,

  • Don Witcher

    Dear Andrea Rossi
    As you undoubtedly know, during the 1950’s GE modified two J47 axial flow engines and successfully ran them on three different Nuclear Reactors in ground based bench tests. This certainly provides a proof of principle for your current R&D project. My question is have you been able to use some of the knowledge gained by this extensive program either by access to project reports or by involvement with some of the engineers who worked on the program and are still around.
    Warm Regards
    Don Witcher

  • Andrea Rossi

    Andrea Moraitis:
    I will try a direct combination. Hoping it works.
    Warm Regards,

  • Andrea Rossi

    Warm Regards,

  • Claud

    Dear Andrea, when you mention “jet engine” you mean gas turbine?
    Thank you

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>