.
by
.
U.V.S.Seshavatharam
Honorary faculty, I-SERVE, Alakapuri
Hyderabad-35, AP, India
Email: seshavatharam.uvs@gmail.com
.
S.Lakshminarayana
Dept.of Nuclear Physics, Andhra University
Visakhapatnam-03, AP, India
Email: lnsrirama@yahoo.com
.
.
Abstract
Point of ‘big bang’ can be considered as the center or characteristic reference point of cosmic expansion in all directions.
If so, the existence of ‘preferred direction’ in the universe may not be wrong.
Based on the Mach’s principle, it can be suggested that, within the ‘Hubble volume’ overall distribution of ‘Hubble mass’ will explain the
observed physical phenomena.
With the discovered applications it is very clear to say that, without a joint and unified study of cosmology and atomic & particle physics, one should not deny the concepts of black hole cosmology.
The most interesting thing is that, at any given cosmic time, if the universe is a primordial growing black hole, then certainly its ‘Schwarzschild radius’ can be considered as its characteristic minimum size at that time.
Clearly speaking, “forever rotating at light speed, high temperature and high angular velocity small sized primordial cosmic black hole gradually transforms into a low temperature and low angular velocity large sized massive primordial cosmic black hole”.
Independent of the redshift observations and considering the proposed relations, with a great confidence now one can start seeing/observing the universe as a primordial expanding and light speed rotating black hole. Based on the proposed relations and concepts of black hole cosmology, definitions of cosmic homogeneity and cosmic isotropy must be re-addressed.
It is also clear that, now the black hole universe is expanding in a decelerating mode at a very small rate in such a way that with current technology one cannot measure its deceleration rate.
Finally it can be suggested that cosmic acceleration and dark energy can be considered as pure mathematical concepts and there exists no physical base behind their affirmation.
For the most serious cosmologists this may be a bitter news, but it is a fact.
Authors hope that, by 2015 definitely this subject will come into main stream physics.
With reference to Black hole cosmology, it can be suggested that, characteristic nuclear charge radius and the characteristic angular momentum of the revolving electron increase with cosmic time.
In addition, characteristic nuclear charge radius is more fundamental than the reduced Planck’s constant.
The key point to be noted is that the Planck’s constant can be considered as a cosmological constant.
.
.
Sorry my english is a machine translation. Dear Dr. Rossi! You have a lot of months of hard work up to 16 hours a day. But the timing of the sale of E-cat and remain unclear. It is normal for the industry difficult birth of new products. Thus, the typical cars and planes are still developing teams of dozens of people, and build their thousands. And work of one person does not replace the work of the collective. May be worth more to delegate to the other persons, increase your work team? It is doubtful that your investors need result of your works your labor exhaustion :))). I am personally as your little client need a real product – E-cat :)))
After the imminent release of the report you will be throwing questions – where e-cat? when the e-cat? What that it is necessary to accelerate the production of e-cat? :)))
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I think Argon’s suggestion was towards the thought of developing different applications, given you understand the input and output characteristics of the eCat reactor. A suitable simulator could be developed to exercise the heat transfer and/or application.
Personally, I would think it would divert you from your primary goal of producing a production version of eCats. The industrial companies that want your eCat know best how to convert the output power into their particular application. Having an “army” of support means Management and that takes time and energy (from you). You are doing it right… keep on doing it.
Wlad,
Why do you keep insisting that the only photons in the Dirac theory are the annihilation photons of an epo(511 KeV for the electron, 511KeV for the positron)? In his theory he accounts for the production of all frequencies of the spectrum and only in special cases, for the annihilation of the epos. Why do you think that only those photons are allowed?
Argon:
Sorry, but I do not see the point.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear dr.Rossi!
You will need to work not thirty people, but many dozens of groups and thousands of experienced people. You can have labor subcontractors without loss of your know-how. For this you may give yous future subcontractors a full-featured simulator E-Cat.
To save your know-how you need to give subcontractors not real E-cat, but its full-featured simulator. Having the same external characteristics. Identical dimensions, capacity, load schedule and everything else like a real E-cat. But without the contents of the active Ni-H nucleus. To put it simply, an electric boiler in the corpus of E-Cat with the electronic control circuit. With big label ‘model emulator E-cat’
In doing so you will be able to hired your contractors other entire teams and firms. Specialists in steam turbines, energy, power electrics. Specialists in Stirling engines and heating systems of buildings, etc. etc.
eernie1 wrote in September 30th, 2014 at 11:13 AM
Wlad,
You must be kidding that the absorption of Dirac photons by a black surface is indicative of violating the conservation of energy. The total absorption is only for the visible portion of the energy spectrum which is a very small part of the energy realm. Even so you agree that, that part of the absorption is completely accounted for and no violation of energy conservation occurs.
——————————————-
No, I am not kidding.
The energy of a photon in the visible spectrum is between 1,24eV to 12,4eV.
The energy of a photon composed by electron-positron moving with the speed c of light is:
E = 2.m.c² = 2x(0,5×10^6 eV/c²).c² = 10^6 eV
Therefore the energy of the Dirac’s photon is at least 10^5 times larger than the photon of the visible spectrum.
There is only one way to save the Dirac theory: we have to consider that the visible spectrum does not exist.
But in this case I dont understand how can I read the comments posted here in the JoNP.
regards
wlad
Wlad,
You must be kidding that the absorption of Dirac photons by a black surface is indicative of violating the conservation of energy. The total absorption is only for the visible portion of the energy spectrum which is a very small part of the energy realm. Even so you agree that, that part of the absorption is completely accounted for and no violation of energy conservation occurs.
As for Pamela- Boss, there are so many ways 10 MeV neutrons can be generated in nuclear transmutations and nucleus rearrangements your guess is as good as mine. Feynman diagrams will tell you the same thing. Pamela hit her solutions with a sledge hammer and like lightening produced some neutrons of varying energy.
Wladimir Guglinski:
There is nothing that can’t be discussed with respect. This is why we will continue to spam any comment that is disrespectful toward anybody, independently from the issue.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi wrote in September 30th, 2014 at 8:34 AM
Wladimir Guglinski:
As you know, I publish all your comments, even when I do not agree with your opinions. The sole comments of you that we spam are the ones in which appear phrases that we deem offensive against scientists that adhere to the Standard Model. Any comment is welcome, independently from the text, so far it does not show lack of respect for anybody who works seriously in the field. We spam as well comments that insult you.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
————————————-
Dear Andrea
when a scientist betrays the scientific method, neglecting or rejecting some experiments which deny the Standard Model in which he believes, the lack of respect is of the own scientist against himself and against to the scientific method.
I dont think to reject scientific experiments can be considered a serious attitude
The serious and acceptable attitude is to be loyal to the scientific method, being honest, in order to recognize when the Standard Model is denied by some experiment, and to confess it.
So, when a scientist refuses to accept any experiment which denies the Standard Model, the lack of respect is not mine when I call him a betrayer.
regards
wlad
Wladimir Guglinski:
As you know, I publish all your comments, even when I do not agree with your opinions. The sole comments of you that we spam are the ones in which appear phrases that we deem offensive against scientists that adhere to the Standard Model. Any comment is welcome, independently from the text, so far it does not show lack of respect for anybody who works seriously in the field. We spam as well comments that insult you.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Eric Ashworth wrote in September 28th, 2014 at 2:02 PM
Wladimir,
Do you ever wonder why your theories are rejected when they do make sense and why paid physicists will not answer your questions.
———————————-
Dear Eric,
the eCat is being tested by academicians, and if I comment here my opinion on the reason why the physicists do not answer my questions, my comment will not be aproved for publication here.
Some years in the future the scientific community will realize that I am right, and the physicists in the name of the Science will ask me forgiveness, as the Pope in the name of the Church asked pardon to Galileo, 400 years after his death.
regards
wlad
Wlad,
I agree completely with you when you state there are numerous methods to obtain cold fusion. However I would change it a little to say there are numerous methods to obtain energy from the nucleus and I have so stated in a number of previous blogs. We have already succeeded through hot fusion of Hydrogen and cold fission of Uranium, Plutonium and Thorium. Nature does it many ways through radioactivity. I think it is easy to predict that through insight provided by people like you and other researchers, other investigators will succeed in the future to uncover other methods. Success always unlocks the door to further success by providing incentives.
eernie1 wrote in September 29th, 2014 at 3:31 PM
Dear Wlad,
I do not understand your argument about the violation of the energy-mass relationship. Dirac accounts for all the energy waves resulting from mass conversion produced by epo interactions. By the way, many experiments show that photons can be divided, enhanced(doubled in frequency)changed in polarization character, reflected and otherwise manipulated without annihilation. What do you mean when you say it strikes a surface? This will be my last comment on this subject.
—————————————————
Eernie,
when the light bits a black surface, the photon is 100% annihilated, all its energy is absorbed by the surface and converted to heat.
And from Dirac’s theory the energy of the positron-electron photon is several times biggest than the energy of the light converted to heat.
regards
wlad
Italo R.:
I lost your comment for a mistake, it is gone lost in the spam when I forwarded it for publication. Sorry for that. Anyway: you asked which kind of support the Professors of the ITP asked to Prof of other institutions.
Answer: I do not know, but we will read on the report, I think. It is totally futile to make suppositions, let’s wait for the report and eventually read it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Eric,
a new paper suggests that the Universe can be like a Swiss Cheese, as I said some days ago.
The name the physicists are calling such Swiss Cheese is “multiple universes”.
See figure in the link:
http://www.inovacaotecnologica.com.br/noticias/noticia.php?artigo=inflacao-cosmica-balanca-multiverso-ganha-firmeza&id=010130140929#.VCnGcRYUpbE
The original paper is published here:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.6530
The new astronomical observation is eliminating the hypothesis of inflationary universe, and therefore it disproves the Big-Bang theory.
.
Now,
if the physisists will finally realize that light can move with speed very lower than c=300.000km/s in the dark matter existing in the space between the multiple universes, they will conclude that the system for measuring the distance between the galaxies is wrong, and this is the reason why from the current theories the galaxies would have to be expelled under the action of the centripetal force.
regards
wlad
http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.6530
eernie1 wrote in September 29th, 2014 at 11:03 AM
Wlad,
My theory of LENR depends greatly on some of the principals of the Dirac theory. One aspect considers that the electrons that make up the electron sphere of an atom originate from the epos contained within one of the neutrons in the nucleus. This creates a proton within the nucleus and the remaining positron of the epo gives the nucleus its + charge. The electron, depending upon the number of nucleons and their make up(ratio of neutrons to protons) remains external to the nucleus sphere within a specific distance and with an equilibrium energy. If the external electron is then forced back into the nucleus(electron capture)the result is generation of a Beta+- emission with the subsequent ejection of the captured electron and either the formation of an isotope or transmutation to another atom dependent on the ratio of neutrons to protons in a specific atomic nucleus along with a neutrino+- and a photon of various energies dependent upon the angle with which the electron approaches the nucleon inside the nucleus. Forcing the electron(most likely a 1s electron) back into the nucleus can be accomplished by applying a negative field to the exterior of the atom’s electron sphere which transmits its effect to the inner electrons through field effects. I call this the Fermi-Alvarez effect since they both were involved with formulating the theory and performing tests to verify the phenomena.
——————————————–
Eernie,
1- I think there are several different mechanisms for cold fusion, instead of only one. Each mechanism depends on the conditions used in the experiment
2- How do you explain the emission of neutrons with energy 10MeV in Pamela Mosier-Boss experiment?
In his paper Neutron Emission in the Cold Fusion Phenomenon, Hideo Kozima eliminates one of the d-d fusion as possible explanation for cold fusion:
“The neutron energy spectra extending up to about 10 MeV and the existence of the CFP in protium systems exclude the CFP in protium systems exclude the d-d fusion from fundamental nuclear reactions responsible for events in this phenomenon.”
http://www.google.com.br/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEMQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.jp%2Fhjrfq930%2FPapers%2Fpaperr%2Fpaperr28.pdf&ei=g7spVNaiAYqF8gG90IHQCA&usg=AFQjCNGHDYJjh5hIgwj-t2VRXD6euoKMew&sig2=lfbBJ8S2pNeT2Hx61pJyng&bvm=bv.76247554,d.b2U
In the Discussion and Conclusion Kozima says:
“The occurrence of the nuclear reactions resulting in neutron emission in protium and deuterium systems is a decisive evidence of new mechanisms other than d-d reactions supposed to be a cause of the CPF by the pioneers of this wonderful field
However,
such conclusion can be wrong, because perhaps the excess energy of the neutrons emitted can be due to the energy of the helical trajectory of the electron, not considered in the standard theories, as I show in the article available in Peswiki:
How zitterbewegung contributes for cold fusion in Pamela Mosier-Boss experiment
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Article:_How_zitterbewegung_contributes_for_cold_fusion_in_Pamela_Mosier-Boss_experiment
See the Fig. 9, where the electron loses its helical trajectory when occurs the fusion p+e=n:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:AAAfig9-coldFUSION-pamelaMOSIERboss.gif
As you may realize,
to solve such question of the emission of neutrons with 10MeV is fundamental for the understanding of several experiments in the field of cold fusion.
regards
wlad
Dear Wlad,
You continue to misrepresent or read something into my remarks that are not there. You are the one insisting upon the annihilation of the epos as a function of the process and the annihilation of any subsequence photons. You criticize Dirac’s theory based on his relativistic treatment of the Schrodinger equation. Since you insist on not reading into his theories, how can you criticize them? He hardly compares them or can they be compared to any religious form since they are deterministic rather than philosophic.
I do not understand your argument about the violation of the energy-mass relationship. Dirac accounts for all the energy waves resulting from mass conversion produced by epo interactions. By the way, many experiments show that photons can be divided, enhanced(doubled in frequency)changed in polarization character, reflected and otherwise manipulated without annihilation. What do you mean when you say it strikes a surface? This will be my last comment on this subject.
Magnus:
Thank you for the repetition. Our specialists have discovered that the Pulso Dream website, apparently from Russia, is in reality directed from Greece. We are continuing to investigate the real source to file a suit.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea and Readers,
Warning for fraudulent websites claiming ECAT partnership
29 Sep 2014/in ECAT News/by ECAT
It has come to our knowledge that a fraudulent website “Pulsodream” has surfaced on the Internet. They are illegally seeking investments related to ECAT products by Leonardo Corporation. “Pulsodream” do NOT have any licenses or rights to sell or market the ECAT under Leonardo Corporation, NOR representing any other Licensee of Leonardo Corporation.
“Pulsodream” is a total fraud and has been reported to the appropriate authorities.
Please be aware.
/The ECAT Team
– See more at: http://ecat.com/news/warning-for-fraudulent-websites-claiming-ecat-partnership
Yours Sincerely,
Magnus Holm,
Hydro Fusion Ltd
Wlad,
My theory of LENR depends greatly on some of the principals of the Dirac theory. One aspect considers that the electrons that make up the electron sphere of an atom originate from the epos contained within one of the neutrons in the nucleus. This creates a proton within the nucleus and the remaining positron of the epo gives the nucleus its + charge. The electron, depending upon the number of nucleons and their make up(ratio of neutrons to protons) remains external to the nucleus sphere within a specific distance and with an equilibrium energy. If the external electron is then forced back into the nucleus(electron capture)the result is generation of a Beta+- emission with the subsequent ejection of the captured electron and either the formation of an isotope or transmutation to another atom dependent on the ratio of neutrons to protons in a specific atomic nucleus along with a neutrino+- and a photon of various energies dependent upon the angle with which the electron approaches the nucleon inside the nucleus. Forcing the electron(most likely a 1s electron) back into the nucleus can be accomplished by applying a negative field to the exterior of the atom’s electron sphere which transmits its effect to the inner electrons through field effects. I call this the Fermi-Alvarez effect since they both were involved with formulating the theory and performing tests to verify the phenomena.
Regards.
eernie1 wrote in September 28th, 2014 at 10:51 PM
1)———————
Wlad,
We are not talking about electron positron annihilation where the combination mass is converted to energy. It is well known that it results in photons of 1MeV. You didn’t have to calculate it. Are you trying to dazzle me with your knowledge of math?
—————————————–
No, dear Eernie.
I am speaking about the energy-mass conservation law
When a photon formed by electron-positron hits a surface and is annihilated due to to the collision, all the energy of the photon is transfered to the surface.
Therefore,
the Dirac’s photon composed by electron-positron violates the energy-mass conservation law.
.
2)——————————–
I was talking about the results of epo interactions within a physical system where the relationship of electron wave to positron wave produced a wave of a frequency which depended upon all the characteristics of the system.
———————————-
And I am not interested in a theory which works only in those conditions interested to the author (Dirac) and his followers, but it fails in others fundamental aspect, as for instance the conservation of the energy-mass.
.
3)——————————
If you insist that only complete annihilation is the only outcome of epo reactions, we cannot continue discussion.
——————————–
And I cannot bamboozle myself by supposing that the photon does not suffer complete annihllation when it hits a surface, since it is stopped due to the collision and its velocity becomes zero.
Dirac theory would be very good if the photons were not annihilated with he hits a surface (when they do not have reflection, refraction, etc).
Unfortunatelly,
dear Eernie,
the photon has total annihilation. And I can not pretend it does not happen, just to please the followers of the Dirac theory.]
I can believe in phantasies, but not when they belong to the field of the science.
.
4)—————————–
If you want to get into a math contest, don’t start with basic relationships. You can get them in any first year physics manual. I don’t appreciate spending time reading perhaps your misinterpretation of my statements. Where do you think those frequencies you mentioned came from. When I was doing electron spin absorption studies in free radicals with magnetic alignments one of the prominent absorption bands was in the 300 GHz region of the spectrum. Please read Dirac’s theory.
——————————–
I cannot waste my time reading a theory proposed by an author who pretends that some phenomena of the Nature do not exist.
What Dirac proposed is not a scientific theory. Instead of, he actually proposed something like a religious dogma.
He believed that Nature works only with four particles, because, as you said, “he also believed that the smallest number of proposed particles was the best approach to describing a physical system( Four fundamental particles in his analogy)”.
Unfortunatelly,
the Nature does not shares the Dirac belief, and she uses more than four particles (probably because she came to the conclusion that it is impossible to produce all the phenomena by the use of only four particles).
If the Dirac’s dream would be possible, be yourself sure that the Nature would use it, since she always uses the most simple solutions.
Regarding to your other words: “He would not be to happy with your use of all the different forms you use to describe your analogy”, I am not interested if Dirac would be happy, or not.
I have concluded that it is the unique way so that to explain all the phenomena.
The best would be if Dirac would complain to the Nature, saying: “I am not happy with your use of all those different forms you use to produce the phenomena”
And she would simply reply to him:
“Sorry, dear Dirac, I cannot produce all the phenomena I need with only four particles, as you did”
regards
wlad
Wlad,
We are not talking about electron positron annihilation where the combination mass is converted to energy. It is well known that it results in photons of 1MeV. You didn’t have to calculate it. Are you trying to dazzle me with your knowledge of math? I was talking about the results of epo interactions within a physical system where the relationship of electron wave to positron wave produced a wave of a frequency which depended upon all the characteristics of the system. If you insist that only complete annihilation is the only outcome of epo reactions, we cannot continue discussion. If you want to get into a math contest, don’t start with basic relationships. You can get them in any first year physics manual. I don’t appreciate spending time reading perhaps your misinterpretation of my statements. Where do you think those frequencies you mentioned came from. When I was doing electron spin absorption studies in free radicals with magnetic alignments one of the prominent absorption bands was in the 300 GHz region of the spectrum. Please read Dirac’s theory.
eernie1 wrote in Sep eernie1
September 28th, 2014 at 11:24 AM
Wlad,
For your other inquiry, Is this a trick question? Of course the spectrum between 3KHZ and 300GHZ can be generated by the epos.
————————————————–
The mass of the electron and positron is m= 0,5×10^6 eV/c²
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_rest_mass
The energy of a photon composed by electron-positron moving with the speed c of light is:
E = 2.m.c² = 2x(0,5×10^6 eV/c²).c² = 10^6 eV
The energy of the electromagnetic wave with frequence 3Kz is 12,4peV = 12,4×10^-12 e/V = 10^-11eV
So, the energy of a photon composed by positron-electron is 10^6/10^-11 = 10^17 times larger then the photon with frequence 3Kz.
.
The situation is worst with photons with extremelly low frequence, with 3Hz, which energy is 12,4feV.
Their energy is E = 12,4×10^-15eV = 10^-14eV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_spectrum
So, the relation between the energy of the positron-electron photon and the photon with extremely low energy is:
10^6 / 10^-14 = 10^20
regards
wlad
DEAR READERS:
WE HAVE DISCOVERED WHO ARE THE FRAUDSTERS OF “PULSODREAMS”: IS A GANG WHO MADE A CORPORATION IN THE SEYCHELLE ISLANDS; THEIR REPRESENTATIVE IS A PAVEL ASIMOV. THE SOURCE OF THEIR WEBSITE IS IN RUSSIA, BUT WE ARE DISCOVERING THE REAL LOCATION OF THIS GANG. OUR ATTORNEYS ARE PREPARING ACTION. PLEASE DISREGARD WHATEVER THEY OFFER, BECAUSE IS A TOTAL, UNDISPUTABLE, FRAUD AND WHATEVER MONEY YOU WILL GIVE THEM, IT WILL BE LOST, BECAUSE WE NEVER GAVE AND NEVER WILL GIVE TO THESE CRIMINALS ANY RIGHT REGARDING OUR PRODUCTS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY UNDER EITHER AN INDUSTRIAL OR FINANCIAL POINT OF VIEW.
NOW YOU HAVE BEEN DULY INFORMED, BEYOND ANY POSSIBLE DOUBT.
WARM REGARDS,
DR. ANDREA ROSSI, CEO OF LEONARDO CORP.
Alessandro Coppi:
He,he,he..
A.R.
Hi Andrea, I was waiting for a message with capital letters, but not this one!
…ch’anco tardi a venir non ti sia grave.
Alessandro Coppi
Wladimir, Thanks for your reply regarding my thoughts and your comment about having no time to dwell upon that which you are unable to prove as I know you are busy. I find your comments interesting and food for thought. As for Dirac I was unaware that he distilled physics down to four particles. My simple understanding is that there are only four major densities within nature. Solid-Liquid-Gas-Aether. Three of them being comprised of Aether substance which has the least density when as an unstructured mass. To me the figuer four runs throughout nature. As an after thought and I am curious. Do you ever wonder why your theories are rejected when they do make sense and why paid physicists will not answer your questions. I was once asked in a discussion what’s the difference between a secret and a mystery I said “very little” with no further comment. Best Regards Eric Ashworth.
Wlad,
Dirac believed he could explain the laws of Nature with his four particles. IMO he did a good job. HE thought that adding more would only over complicate the issues.
For your other inquiry, Is this a trick question? Of course the spectrum between 3KHZ and 300GHZ can be generated by the epos. Superconductivity and semiconductors are explained by electron-positive holes and pairing of entangled electrons which are a manifestation of epo interactions as a pipeline for electron-positive hole movement without environmental interaction(resistance).Do you have a reason to believe this cannot be accomplished? By the way, have we beaten this subject to death yet?
ITALO R.:
I THANK YOU FOR THIS INFORMATION AND I REPEAT AGAIN THAT PULSODREAM IS A FRAUD. THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY LICENSE, WE DO NOT EVEN KNOW WHO THEY ARE AND THEIR IS AN ATTEMPT TO STEAL MONEY FROM YOU. IT IS A FRAUD AGAINST WHICH OUR ATTORNEYS ARE ALREADY WORKING. WE DO NOT EVEN YET KNOW WHO THESE CLOWNS ARE !!!
WARM REGARDS,
DR ANDREA ROSSI, CEO OF LEONARDO CORPORATION
PIETRO F.:
THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION: AS I ALREADY ANSWERED TO PIERO MONGIOJ, THIS IS A FRAUD. EVERYBODY BE AWARE NOT TO PAY TO THESE CLOWNS ANY SUM OF MONEY, BECAUSE WE DO NOT EVEN KNOW THEM AND THEY ARE TRYING TO STEAL MONEY FROM YOU. IT IS A TOTAL FRAUD, THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORIZATION AND ALL THEY PUBLISHED IS ABUSIVE.
PLEASE NEVER PAY MONEY TO ANYBODY THAT OFFERS YOU OUR PRODUCTS WITHOUT FIRST ASKING US IF THEY ARE AUTHORIZED LICENCED SELLERS.
YOU MAY ASK US WRITING TO INFO@LEONARDOCORP1996.COM
WARM REGARDS,
DR ANDREA ROSSI, CEO OF LEONARDO CORPORATION
Piero Mongioj:
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INFORMATION: DEAR READERS: IT IS A TOTAL FRAUD.
PULSODREAM IS TOTALLY UNKNOWN TO US, THEY HAVE USED OUR NAME, MY PHOTOGRAPHY, THE PHOTOS AND EMBODIMENTS OF OUR E-CATS WITHOUT ANY AUTHORIZATION. THEY ARE TRYING TO SELL INVESTMENTS RELATED TO OUR PRODUCTS WITHOUT HAVING EVER CONTACTED US OR OBTAINED ANY AUTHORIZATION.
THEIR OFFER OF INVESTMENT IS A TOTAL CLOWNERY.
PLEASE BE EXTREMELY AWARE TO PAY THEM ANY SUM, BECAUSE IT IS A FRAUD AND YOUR MONEY WILL BE TOTALLY LOST.
OUR LEGAL STAFF IS ALREADY WORKING ON THIS ISSUE.
AGAIN: DO NOT GIVE ANY SUM OF MONEY TO “PULSODREAM” BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE OUR PRODUCTS, THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY LICENSE, THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY AUTHORIZATION OF SORT TO DEAL WITH ANY OF OUR PRODUCTS.
I REPEAT: IT IS A TOTAL FRAUD.
WARM REGARDS
DR. ANDREA ROSSI, CEO OF LEONARDO CORPORATION
Dear Andrea,
Are they concerned with you?
https://pulsodream.com/en/index.html
Un caro saluto,
Piergiorgio
.. se nessuno l’ha ancora informata:
https://pulsodream.com/en/index.html
Buon lavoro
Pietro F.
Dear Dr. Rossi, have you already seen this site?
https://pulsodream.com/en/index.html
If you have already been informed, discard please this mine.
Ragards,
Italo R.
UVS.Seshavatharam wrote in September 24th, 2014 at 8:16 AM
Wladimir Guglinski Sir
Please let me have a couple of days. I will forward the mail to my professor: lnsrirama@gmail.com
yours sincerely,
UVS.Seshavatharam
——————————————
COMMENT:
Two couple of days have gone, and nobody did come here to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero, according to the Standard Nuclear Physics
The nuclear physicist Dr S.Lakshminarayana did not come.
And also did not come the professor invited by Dr Seshavatharam.
Dear Mr Jr:
you use to claim that current Theoretical Modern Physics is able to explain all the physical phenomena
So,
may you tell to us why the nuclear physicist Dr S.Lakshminarayana and the professor invited by Dr Seshavatharam did not come here to explain why even-even nuclei with Z=N have magnetic moment zero ?
Perhaps they did not come because they do not know that your stupid definition of nuclear magnetic moment which violates a fundamental law of Physics, according to which the magnetic moment of the even-even nuclei with Z=N is, BY DEFINITION, equal to zero
Mr JR
please invite them to come here to share the solution proposed by you
regards
wlad
eernie1 wrote in September 27th, 2014 at 11:03 AM
he also believed that the smallest number of proposed particles was the best approach to describing a physical system( Four fundamental particles in his analogy). He would not be to happy with your use of all the different forms you use to describe your analogy.
—————————-
Eernie,
science is not a question of taste
A theoretical model must be able to describe the physical phenomena
If the smallest number of proposed particles is not able to describe what we observe in the Nature, then we cannot keep our believe that “the smallest number of proposed particles was the best approach to describing a physical system”
You did not respond to my question:
The electromagnetic radio waves (frequence between 12,4 feV to 1,24meV) are also formed by positron-electron?
regards
wlad
Hrabal:
So far we are making industrial plants to make heat. One of the main goals of our R&D process is the production of electric energy. About domestic application, you already gave the answer. We are working also in that direction.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
first of all, thank you for what you did so far, it’s simply wonderful.
Then a question:
Could the 1M plant be used to give electricity power to houses or residential buildings?
I wonder if it may be or will be suitable for giving power to small villages or other different kinds of communities.
I believe the e-cat’s actual revolutionary strength lies in the use of single domestic units, but, as you said, it needs time for certifications, so I’m eager to see it working even in not a perfect situation to let it speak by itself and give impulse to others in spreading it’s use.
high regards
riccardo
Wlad,
One other thought. You seem to be working in a 4 dimensional relativistic Riemann system space with only time as a non Abelian dimension. Since in such a space the geometry is spherically oriented, and is highly dependent on the velocity factors in the particle(massive or massless) motion, I think many of the values such as magnetic moments can vary continuously with time and what we measure is average or statistical values. This is the basis of many of the theories proposed in SQM, QED, QCD and Relativity. The interpretation of these effects IMO is what leads to the disagreements between scientists.
Wlad,
Dirac did use the phase differential among other considerations to explain why the electron did not fall into the nucleus. I don’t want to get into a discussion of fundamental criteria, but of course frequency is the number of times the fields of the particles(massive or massless)go from maximum to minimum per second. The variance can be achieved in a number of ways such as the amount of phase difference between interacting entities, angle of approach, dipole length, and many more physical relationships between various particles or waves. Dirac treated all systems as waves stating they all wave. All the above situations of course have been observed and investigated through multiple scientific programs and can explain all the observed frequencies. he also believed that the smallest number of proposed particles was the best approach to describing a physical system( Four fundamental particles in his analogy). He would not be to happy with your use of all the different forms you use to describe your analogy. Dirac was attacked by mainstream scientists(Heisenburg, Plank) using the same arguments you have presented to me. As you know mass and energy are interchangeable and can assume either form at different phases of existence. Please do not become as narrow minded as them?
JC Renoir:
I cannot answer to questions related to what happens inside the E-Cats, in positive or in negative. Nevertheless, I can answer to your question independently from the E-Cat operation.
Electrical current is a flow of electrons through a medium plus a transmission of vibration induced by electrons bouncing against each other. This fact produces also a resistance, as if you kick many balls inside a pipe and they proceed in disorder making reciprocal obstacle : this of course makes their path less easy, which means that this produces a resistance, due to the mass od electrons, which are fermions, therefore carry matter ( while bosons carry only force). But: at very low temperatures electrons can team up in pairs so that their spin sums up to an integer number ( electrons have spin never integer, but always plus or minus 1/2, and electrons have spin 1/2): once they combine an integer spin they are turned into bosons ( bosons have spin integer) and bosons do not carry matter, so that their new status allows them to proceed in the condensed matter of the conductor without encountering resistance.
If you want to understand better, can Google ” BCS Theory”.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear George:
Excuse me for my late answer, but I read only now your comment of 22 september that answered to my comment regarding the “5 Stelle” position on the LENR.
I am sorry to have misunderstood your position and I understand your reaction. I want also to say that I have given to your movement my vote, because I think that you are the sole political force not rooted by corruption. So I never intended to damage you, I just wanted to ask to Andrea Rossi his opinion about the financing of LENR by the government. What I wrote ( erroneously, as you explained) has been caused by the fact that in the internet ( please sdo not ask me where, because I do not remember) has been written in a journal that in the list of the waste of money spent by the government there were also 4 million euros given to somebody ( not specified) for R&D on the LENR that produced nothing. So I was curious to ask Andrea Rossi’s opinion, that’s all; I never wanted to damage you. Please go ahead with your good work,
W.G.
JC Renoir:
We are patiently fixing the problems step by step, improving the situation day by day. “Non mollare mai” ( Never give up).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Another question: how is going on the work on the 1 MW plant?
ICRenoir
How can you explain that electrons do not find resistance in a superconductor ? Is this related to the Rossi Effect?
JCRenoir
eernie1 wrote in September 25th, 2014 at 9:36 PM
Wlad,
Dirac explained that the spins(1/2) of the two particles were out of phase in the string and thereby could not combine.
—————————
Eernie,
there is not in Theoretical Physics an explanation for the reason why the electron does not fall down within the proton
If the solution proposed by Dirac based on the spins out of phase was acceptable, the theorists would also apply it as explanation why the electron does not falls down within the proton
,
eernie1 wrote in September 26th, 2014 at 10:51 AM
1) ——————-
Of course the energy of the generated photon is dependent on its frequency(hv) The frequency of the emitted photon is dependent upon the method of interaction with the external force causing the phase transformation.
—————————
Eernie,
this is the sort of phantasmagoric solution based on the Heisenberg phantasmagoric scientific criterium
What would be the PHYSICAL MECHANISM capable to produce different frequencies in a photon composed by two corpuscles with the same mass???
What is the physical mechanism reponsible for the frequency of such a photon??
What is frequency ??
Two particles with the same mass, moving always with the same speed c, cannot have different frequencies
Dirac model of the photon is absurd, it makes no sence from the PHYSICAL VIEWPOINT
But obviously, from the MATHEMATICAL viewpoint, one can propose any sort of nonsenses (from the PHYSICAL viewpoint), as Heisenberg did
2) —————————–
This allows photons to be created throughout the spectrum.
———————————
No, it does not allow it
The spectrum is possible only if the particle-antiparticle of a photon A have DIFFERENT masses of a particle-antiparticle of a photon B
The frequency of a photon depends on the mass of the particle-antiparicle
3) ———————
All this can be derived by using the Dirac wave equation. Dirac was a quantum rebel since his theory disrupted many of the cornerstone ideas of the leading scientists and he was attacked often. But many of the observed atomic values were able to be derived using his formulas.
————————-
Dirac supposed the aether formed by positron-electron because experiments showed that positrons are created in some reactions
His theory can work better by considering that aether is formed by elementary particles of the aether (electricitons, magnetons, gravitions, etc)
,
Eernie,
1- as Dirac suppoosed the photon as a particle, how did he explain the wave feature of the photon?
2- How did he explain the polarization of light following statistical laws?
3- What about the electromagnetic waves with very low energy, in the infrared, microwave, and radio?
The electromagnetic radio waves (frequence between 12,4 feV to 1,24meV) are also formed by positron-electron?
regards
wlad
Steven N. Karels:
As you correctly say, it is impossible that an important plant does not have an initial period of assessment. Our plant is a very complex thing and we are making all the necessary work to deliver it respecting all the guarantees we gave to our Customer. Obviously this work is not public and in due time we will give the due information regarding the operation of the plant.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
In my 40+ years of working in engineering, I have rarely seen a new installation go without problems. Would you characterize the more significant problems as:
1. Failure by the developer to consider how the eCat was to preform in the customer’s environment?
2. The Customer not clearly expressing his requirements and needs?
3. Operator error?
4. Installation errors?
5. Performance problems?
6. A rush to deliver the unit before it was completely tested?
7. Combinations of the above?
Koen Vandewalle:
The report, I suppose, will define exactly the protocol of the test. I am not allowed to give any related information before the publication.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Eernie1:
The industry of the Customer is not a theater, nor a show room…it is an industry, with specific issues regarding safety, production and confidentiality. When visits will be allowed and at which conditions will be decided exclusively by the Customer, for obvious reasons and only when all will have been stabilized and consolidated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.