Theoretical feasibility of cold fusion according to the BSM

.
by
Stoyan Sarg Sargoytchev
York University, Toronto, Canada

.
Read the whole article
Download the ZIP file
.
Abstract
Advances in the field of cold fusion and the recent success of the nickel and hydrogen exothermal reaction, in which the energy release cannot be explained by a chemical process, need a deeper understanding of the nuclear reactions and, more particularly, the possibility for modification of the Coulomb barrier.

The current theoretical understanding does not offer an explanation for cold fusion or LENR. The treatise “Basic Structures of Matter – Supergravitation Unified Theory”, based on an alternative concept of the physical vacuum, provides an explanation from a new point of view by using derived three-dimensional structures of the atomic nuclei.

For explanation of the nuclear energy, a hypothesis of a field micro-curvature around the superdense nucleus is suggested.
Analysis of some successful cold fusion experiments resulted in practical considerations for modification of the Coulomb barrier.
The analysis also predicts the possibility of another cold fusion reaction based on similarities between the nuclear structures of Ni and Cr.

617 comments to Theoretical feasibility of cold fusion according to the BSM

  • Wladimir Guglinski

    How cold fusion may contribute for the solar nucleosynthesis

    • Rafael wrote in November 12th, 2014 at 8:23 AM :

    Maybe the sun is the product of a LENR, why not you try to mix the same chemical elements that has in the sun to see if you not create an artificial sun or get electricity or make a nuclear fusion propellant with less chemical elements, we already know what the sun is made of, just see on the wikipedia. Do not forget that the sun also has chromium nickel and calcium.
    —————————————————–

    Dear Rafael
    All the current theories of Modern Physics had been developed from the concept of empty space. So, the concept of field considered in the QFT–Quantum Field Theory does not take in consideration any structure for the space.

    That’s why in the Standard Nuclear Physics the electric field of the particles as the proton, the electron, and also the electric fied of the nuclei, is considered as a spherical field involving the particles, or the nucleus.

    This electric field of the nuclei considered in the Standard Nuclear Physics is a homogeneous sphere (it means that in any point of the field the value of the electric vector is always the same). Therefore, when a particle as the proton is forced to enter within a nucleus because it is submitted to very high pressure and temperature, the energy necessary to win the Coulomb repulsion is always the same (because no matter where is the point of the electric field of the nucleus where the proton enters, since the energy necessary is the same in any point of the electric field of the nucleus).

    Such concept of field adopted in the QFT introduced several puzzles in the Standard Nuclear Physics.
    For instance, when an alpha particle (2He4) exits the nucleus 92U238, it leaves out with an energy lower than the energy necessary to put an alpha particle within the nucleus 92U. Such paradox was solved by Gamow. However his solution is not acceptable, because he introduced another paradox in his solution. Besides, if the 2He4 should exit the 92U as proposed by Gamow, because the electric field of the 92U is spherical the 2He4 would have to exit the 92U with a tangential line (because of the rotation of the 92U). But the experiments show that the 2He4 exits the 92U with a radial line.

    Other puzzle is the emission of solar neutrinos by the Sun, as we see from the paper published by the journal Nature in 1984:
    Solar neutrinos and other problems and their relation to energy production in the Sun:
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v312/n5991/abs/312254a0.html
    Models of the solar interior, based on the usual physical assumptions, predict a neutrino flux several times greater than that observed in the Davis 37Cl experiment. If, as is widely accepted, this discrepancy represents a ‘flaw’ in the standard solar model one would expect this flaw to manifest itself in other ways also. Here we point out some less well known discrepancies between theoretical predictions of the standard solar model and relevant observations. ”.

    The problem is not solved yet, as we realize from the last updated on 23 September 2013 version of the paper The 3He(α,γ)7Be reaction for big bang and stellar nucleosynthesis:
    http://www.york.ac.uk/physics/research/nuclear/nuclear-astrophysics/big-bang/

    ”…; looking for physics beyond standard model of particle physics. Naturally, the reaction attracted early attention of experimentalists and theoreticians alike in the 1950’s. Surprisingly, even today much work needs to be done via nuclear physics experiments to understand this reaction and provide information to the colleagues working on big bang nucleosynthesis, standard solar model and standard model of particle physics.

    Perhaps the puzzle of the rate of solar neutrinos cannot be solved via the Standard Model because they are not considering the cold fusion in the Sun. The emission of neutrinos from cold fusion reactions occurs in a rate very lower than that occurring in hot fusion.

    Probably some steps in the nucleosynthesis of some elements in the Sun occurs via cold fusion. And therefore it is impossible to conciliate any theory developed from the Standard Model with the experimental astronomical observations.

    .

    An experiment published in 2011 proved that space is no empty
    The experiment was published in the journal Nature. Light was produced by the space. And therefore the space cannot be empty. It must have a structure, so that to be able to emit light.
    A vacuum can yield flashes of light
    http://www.nature.com/news/a-vacuum-can-yield-flashes-of-light-1.12430

    Therefore the concept of electric field adopted in the Quantum Field Theory must be wrong.

    A new concept of electric field, based on the concept of a space having a structure is proposed in the Quantum Ring Theory.
    And here a crucial point emerges: there is no way to propose a spherical shape of electric field by considering the space with structure.

    Therefore the concept of field adopted in Quantum Field Theory cannot be correct.

    Other fundamental puzzle impossible to be solved by considering the concept of field adopted in QFT is concerning the null magnetic moment of even-even nuclei with equal quantity of protons and neutrons, as 2He4, 4Be8, 6C12, 8O16, 10Ne20, etc. Due to the monopolar nature of the electric charge. For instance, the 2He4 has two protons. As the nucleus has rotation, the rotation of the two protons has to induce a magnetic moment. So, by considering the model of field adopted in QFT, it is impossible to explain the null magnetic moment of the 2He4, and all the other even-even nuclei with equal quantity of protons and neutrons.
    I had challenged several nuclear theorists for coming to Rossi-Focardi blog Journal of Nuclear Physics-(JoNP) so that to explain how such puzzle could be solved according to the Standard Model. No one nuclear theorist did come.

    The reason why the model of field adopted in Quantum Field Theory cannot explain the null magnetic moment of the even-even nuclei with equal quantity of protons and neutrons is because in QFT it is adopted the mono-field model. In my paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism, submitted for publication in the JoNP, it is shown that the null magnetic moment of those nuclei can also be explained via a double-field model (an outer electric field concentric with an inner central field composed by gravitons), adopted in Quantum Ring Theory.

    The Fig. 1 ahead shows the two concentric fields of a proton, as proposed in the paper Aether Structure for unification between gravity and electromagnetism.
    FIG. 1
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_1-_3_fields_of_the_proton.png

    As the radius of the electric field has the magnitude of the Bohr’s radius 10^-11m, and the radius of the nucleus is 10^-15m, of course the Fig. 1 does not show the real proportion between the fields. The Fig. 2 show a better proportionality (but of course not real yet):
    FIG. 2
    http://peswiki.com/index.php/Image:FIGURE_2-_3_fields_in_real_proportionality.png

    As seen in the Figure 2, there are two “holes” in the electric fields of the particles, and also in the electric fields of the nuclei.
    Under suitable condictions of low pressure and temperature, a nucleon as a proton or a deuteron can enter within a nucleus through that hole by having lower energy than that necessary if the nucleon is forced to enter via any other point of the electric field of the nucleus.

    By considering that nucleons also may exit a nucleus via the hole in the electric field of the nuclei, we eliminate two paradoxes of the Standard Nuclear Physics:

    1) The unacceptable paradox introduced by Gamow, proposed for explaining how a 2He4 can exit the 92U with energy lower than the necessary to cross the Coulomb barrier of the electric field of the 92U

    2) Why the 2He4 exits the 92U by a radial trajectory as detected by experiments (impossible to explain from the Gamow theory based on the Standard Model).

    .

    How a nucleon may enter within a nucleus
    Cold fusion may occur by two ways:

    1) Via resonance within vessels with conditions of low pressure and temperature, as occurs in the Rossi’s E-Cat.

    2) Via kinetic energy in vessels with conditions of very high pressure and temperature, as the Sun. Let us see how it may occur:

    a) In the Sun, more than 99,999% of the fusions occur via high nuclear reactions.

    b) Cold fusion occurs in less than 0,001% of the nuclear fusions

    c) It is very hard to occur cold fusion in the Sun, because the nucleons (for instance a proton) have very high kinetic energy in the star. So, when a proton enters within a nucleus via the “hole” in the electric field of the nucleus, the fusion does not occur (the nucleus cannot capture the proton) because due to the very high kinetic energy the proton simply trespass the nucleus, exiting the nucleus in the other “hole” opposite to the “hole” where the proton had entered.

    d) But a cold fusion reaction may occur as follows:

    d.1) Within the Sun all the nuclei are moving very fast, and every time changing the direction of their motion due to the collision with other nuclei.

    d.2) But suppose that a nucleus (for instance 3Li7) in an exact instant is moving along the x-axis with speed “v”, with the “hole” of its field aligned toward the x-axis. And consider that a deuteron with speed “V” (moving in the same direction along the x-axis) in that exact instant collides against the 3Li7, because the speed V is faster than v. In that condition the relative kinetic energy of the deuteron regarding the 3Li7 is E= 0,5.m.(V² – v²), where “m” is the mass of the deuteron. Therefore the kinetic energy of the deuteron in some very rare conditions is suitable low so that, when the deuteron enters within the 3Li7, the deuteron is captured, and 3Li7 transmutes to 4Be9.

    .

    The difference between cold fusion and hot fusion
    There are three basic differences between hot fusion and cold fusion:

    1) Hot fusion occurs when a nucleon enters within a nucleus (only under extreme conditions of high pressure and temperature) when the nucleon succeeds to perforate the electric field of the nucleus.

    2) Cold fusion occurs when the particle enters within a nucleus via the “hole” existing in the electric fields of the nuclei. It can occur either in low or in high conditions of temperature and pressure.

    3) In order to enter within a nucleus via hot fusion, a particle needs to have a very big kinetic energy. So, when the particle enters within the nucleus, due to the very high kinetic energy of the nucleon the nucleus is excited, and this is the reason why gamma photons are emitted. Unlike, in the case of cold fusion, as the particle enters with low energy the nucleus is not excited, and gamma rays are not emitted. So, also the tax of neutrinos emission in cold fusion is lower than in the case of hot fusion.

    Therefore, such property of cold fusion of emitting lower quantity of neutrinos can be response for the question why from the Standard Nuclear Physics there is no way to conciliate the hot fusion reactions in the Sun with the flux of neutrinos emitted by that star.

    Conclusion
    As we may realize, beyond the challenge of finding a theory capable to explain cold fusion by keeping the principles of the Standard Nuclear Physics there are many other challenges in Nuclear Physics impossible to be solved via the Standard Nuclear Physics.

    Up to now the nuclear theorists refused to think about a New Theory based on new fundamental concepts missing in the Standard Nuclear Physics, because of two reasons:
    1) Cold fusion is impossible to occur by considering the Standard Model
    2) Therefore they were sure it would be possible to solve the unsolved questions by keeping the Standard Model.

    But now cold fusion is a reality: Rossi’s Effect was confirmed by three universities of the Europe. And the nuclear theorists worlswide are beginning to accept this new reality, as by one of the top level nuclear phusicist of Russia, Dr Uzikov:
    http://www.proatom.ru/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5595

    Therefore a reasonable person must realize that it makes no sense to continue trying to explain cold fusion via the old Standard Model. Because the problem is beyond the challenge of finding a theory for explaining cold fusion, actually now the cold fusion became the way for solving the unsolved questions.

    Some nuclear theorists have the hope to explain cold fusion via the Standard Model. When we reply to them that cold fusion is impossible to occur from the principles of the Standard Model, they say that we don’t know in deep the Standard Model. However, we may reply to those nuclear theorists: actually you don’t know in deep the structures existing in the Nature. They are very different of that considered in the Standard Nuclear Physics, by beginning from the structure of the space, and as consequence the structure of the electric field of the nuclei, responsible for the difference between hot fusion and cold fusion.

    Regards
    wlad

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Correct.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Eernie1:
    I cannot give this information now.
    In due time we will give information about the theory we see behind the so called Rossi Effect.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • eernie1

    Dear Andrea,
    Since you are understandably in your quiet period with respect to the mechanics of your device, perhaps we can speculate together about the physics involved and how the analysis of the ashes by the professors can lead us. From your previous remarks, I get the feeling that you are not completely satisfied with your present theory and that the ash analysis surprised you to a certain extent.
    One thing that stands out for me is the apparent neutron involvement indicated by the reported isotope content. At the energies involved for instance any free produced neutrons must be slow(thermal)neutrons, which exhibit therefore a much larger cross section for interaction with other isotopes within the structure. You of course have a much better knowledge of starting materials both quantity and quality so you can more readily pass judgment on any proposed theories. If it is possible, you can save us time and effort if you can rule out various proposals. For example, one theory requires 4He to be generated. Have you ever measured an increase of this isotope when your device is operating? Are the reported ash ratios of isotopes consistent with the starting amounts? I understand that some of the questions may involve confidential information, but if you can provide some answers perhaps we can provide possible reaction directions.
    Mutual regards.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I can understand your reluctance for further public testing. Too much exposure now can mean too much immediate demand which is bad for a developing business as well as feeding your competition at the expense of your R&D.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gillana:
    Visibility in this phase of our development is not very important. What is important is that we stabilize the commercial breakthrough pulled by means of the 1 MW plant making profit in the factory of our Customer. All the rest is secondary. We will not make any other public test, because from now on we will be focused exclusively on the market and the public tests will be made totally useless by the regular operation of our commercial plants. Our R&D will be maintained confidential until the commercialization of new products related to it. We cannot give further advantages to the competition, that is eating voraciously every information we feed it with.
    R&D, obviously, will continue in our factory, but it will not be finalized to public tests, it will be finalized to the manufacturing of products.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You have probably already considered this. On the gas-fired eCat reactors, I assume the gas flame will be applied to the exterior surface of each eCat reactor. Therefore, the heat fluid (e.g., water) being heated should be running coaxially inside the eCat reactor. Depending on the requirements you may want to run all of these in parallel or use a series plumbing scheme so that some of the eCat reactors run at a lower temperature and some at a higher temperature range (single stage, two stage or multi-stage designs).

    On the maintenance side, I would strongly suggest that the location of each eCat be readily recognizable (e.g., numbered or lettered) and that the individual eCat reactors be monitored so that fuel lifetime, temperature history and maintenance actions are noted and retrievable. A user-friendly graphics display system should show the overall system status and then be able to “drill-down” to a specific eCat reactor module. A database of the overall system and each eCat reactor should be automatically maintained both at the customer location and at your corporate location, although the information stored may be different. Some type of internet interrogation and control should be considered, with proper security implementations. Some type of built-in-test (BIT) is needed.

    Some type of load-averaging control should be implemented so when the system is running at partial output power, the fuel consumption of the eCat reactors is managed to maximize operational time between maintenance actions (i.e., don’t run one specific eCat reactor all the time forcing it to consume all of its fuel when most of the surrounding eCat reactors have plenty of fuel left).

    Some thoughts,

  • gillana

    Dear A.Rossi
    First of all congratulations for visibility gained in the media following your last ITP, in Italy Panorama (n.47) made a good piece.
    Here I would suggest that this visibility is now of paramount importance for the success of the E-Cat and I would continue to do public short demonstrations for promotional purposes.
    Please could you briefly summarize the progress of the new 1MW plant compared to the equipotent plant originally projected.
    Best regards

  • Andrea Rossi

    Gio51:
    Be kind, read all my comments on this issue from some time ago through now.
    Thank you for your attention,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu: again thank you, very appreciated also from all the Team.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    Thank you very much,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Orsobubu:
    Thank you. Inspiring for persons who perspire: look, how idealism gears up with materialism!
    Warmest Regards,
    A.R.

  • orsobubu

    … dedicated also to the whole wizardry Team, of course!

  • BroKeeper

    Dear Readers and Andrea,

    Thank you Andrea, and thanks to Dan C’s help, for making this video available.
    I felt, from reading company PR material and articles on Tom Darden’s ideology in recovering brownfields into sustainable, environmental compatible and profitable properties, there was much more to the story in selecting Cherokee Investments.

    This remarkable 2011 YouTube of UNC Kenan-Flagler business school presentation made it quite clear the reasons why Andrea has entrusted the E-Cat into Tom Darden’s/IH capable hands. Obviously the integrity and purposeful sincere intent projected in this video by Tom and William McDonough is to construct a better world under ‘right’ business models framed with ethical practices. Practices, WM says, founded on Thomas Jefferson’s three directives in the Declaration of Independence “with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. With our liberty, McDonough stresses, we should provide for everyone opportunity to the Pursuit of Happiness including the poor with clean water and accessible housing.

    This, in my opinion, is a must view video to those who wish to understand what is behind Andrea and Tom Darden’s philosophical core values and their vision to incorporate the “New Fire” for all generations.
    Thank you, Andrea.
    BroKeeper

  • orsobubu

    >It appears we moved the mountains!

    No, dear Andrea, this time you didn’t move any mountain, THEY were obliged to go to *your* mountain, instead. And I want to dedicate this energetic and inspired song to your personal story, because you are the man on the silver mountain, “show them the way, the light and the fire, they will scream your name, and make you holy again”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czybZ-J_X9g

    RAINBOW – Man On The Silver Mountain

    I’m a wheel, I’m a wheel
    I can roll, I can feel
    And you can’t stop me turning
    Cause I’m the sun, I’m the sun
    I can move, I can run
    But you’ll never stop me burning
    Come down with fire
    Lift my spirit higher
    Someone’s screaming my name
    Come and make me holy again

    I’m the man on the silver mountain
    I’m the man on the silver mountain
    I’m the day, I’m the day
    I can show you the way
    And look I’m right beside you
    I’m the night, I’m the night
    I’m the dark and the light
    With eyes that see inside you
    Come down with fire
    Lift my spirit higher
    Someone’s screaming my name
    Come and make me holy again

  • Gio51

    Dear Dott. Rossi
    If I am not wrong, you stated some time ago that in a reasonable timelapse you would have been be able to open a customer installation to visitors, therefore disclosing the customer’s name. Am I wrong? Which is the situation right now?
    My best regards
    Giovanni

  • Andrea Rossi

    Giovanni Guerrini:
    Thank you: yes, it is true: before our fight the LENR were mostly forgotten. The fight ( F-I-G-H-T ) we made in these last 4 years has definitely changed the game.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Italo R.:
    Thank you, very useful !!!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    You are right, I already sent to the IT Guy the issue.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dan C.

    Dear Mr. Rossi

    The link you provided to Brokeeper is unavailable. Has a typo
    I believe this is the video,
    The link you provide “v=OfO” should be “v=OfQ”

    William McDonough and Thomas Darden – UNC Kenan-Flagler
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfQHvmYEOVI

  • Italo R.

    About William McDonough and Thomas Darden – UNC Kenan-Flagler:

    The correct link is this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfQHvmYEOVI

  • Giovanni Guerrini

    Yes,dear Dott Rossi,you with Prof Focardi,have moved mountains.
    Before your appearance on the scene,few people knew that “cold fusion” is real,now the world knows it.
    I’d call it “Rossi Focardi effect” !

    Thank you all,again.

    Regards G G

  • Andrea Rossi

    Neri B.:
    I cannot answer. When and if the gas- fueled E-Cat will be available, due information will be given.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    I inform immediately the IT guy about this.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I already answered you: the intrinsic safety system of the E-Cat stops the reactor whatever the source of heat, which means also in case of whatever external source of heat, even a fire.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Neri B.

    Dear Andrea,
    referring to the gas E-CAT i have a question.
    Is the gas needed only for reaching an activation point of the reaction and then you switch off the gas and mantain an eletric driver or the gas is burned continously?
    And if so which is the power (in electric Watts) needed to drive the reaction?
    Why the electric driver was so high in the test of TPR2?
    Thank you

  • BroKeeper

    Dear Andrea,

    Thank you very much for your added response. However, clicking on the YouTube link gives:
    “This Video is Unavailable. Sorry about that” 🙂
    BroKeeper

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    My previous question was in the event of a building fire, not caused by your equipment, would the eCat reactor

    a. pose the same danger level as a tank of compressed hydrogen (because the Rossi Effect might be triggered even if the eCat was powered down) or
    b. would the internal temperature slowly rise (due the building fire and/or the Rossi Effect) until the nickel withing the eCat reactor melted and the Rossi Effect was no longer possible?

  • Andrea Rossi

    Frank Acland, Pietro F., George:
    Very interesting!
    It appears we moved the mountains!
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Bob:
    Both.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    Our industrial plants have obtained the safety certification because they are intrinsecally safe: if the temperature reaches the safety limit the reactors turn off by a law of nature, whatever the source of the heat that causes a rise of the temperature. Besides, we have put all the safety systems imposed by the certification companies. By the way, the case of a building fire is quite unlikely, because the E-Cat plants are put in proper environment, made with not flammable materials. We have to respect all the requirements already existing for thermal energy industrial plants.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Bob

    Dear Andrea Rossi

    You recently reported the maximum operating temperature of the e-cat to be 1400C

    Can you say whether this maximum temperature is due to:

    1. the nature so-called Rossi effect, or

    2. the current state of the art of the e-cat technology.

    Thank you.

    Bob

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    When you field your 1MW eCat system, what are the dangers of a building fire? While electricity would be off, the internal temperature of the building could rise to high levels in an uncontrolled structure fire. What implications does this have for the eCat reactors? Could they start to produce power and eventually explode? Obviously the eCat system is not expected to work after such a fire scenario, but are there dangers to firefighters, etc.?

  • George

    Some top nuclear scientists are urging India’s new government to revive research on “cold fusion”, saying it has the potential to provide answers to the country’s energy problem.

    http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/modi-government-urged-to-revive-cold-fusion-114111700763_1.html

  • Pietro F.

    ….forse sarebbe il caso di sbrigarsi un po!! 🙂
    ….perhaps it would be appropriate to hurry up a bit!!! 🙂

    http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/modi-government-urged-to-revive-cold-fusion-114111700763_1.html

    Buon lavoro

  • Frank Acland

    Dear Andrea,

    I think you will find this article interesting. Nuclear physicists are urging the new Indian government to revive a new LENR program, apparently inspired by your work.

    http://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/modi-government-urged-to-revive-cold-fusion-114111700763_1.html

    Kind regards,

    Frank Acland

  • Andrea Rossi

    BroKeeper:
    To better understand the core values of Industrial Heat, you can go to
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfOHvmYEOVI
    and you also can search
    William Mc Donough and Thomas Darden-UNC- Kenan-Flagler
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Heath:
    More problems resolution is on course. But I am an optimist.
    Obviously the time scheduling in such cases is not chronometry: one year is an approximative term.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Heath

    Dear Mr. Rossi,
    From your response to Dr Joseph Fine, a quick question. Has that one year with the Customer already begun or is there more problem resolution before to be resolved before that period starts? I am excited about what you and Industrial Heat are working toward, thus my curiosity.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    yes
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • Steven N. Karels

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    I think I can understand the decision to proceed toward a natural gas fired eCat.

    The ultimate goal is the production of useful forms of energy (heated water, steam or electricity). I had assumed that the ideal solution would be an electrically heated eCat fed by a portion of its own generated electricity, essentially running for free, using only the cost of the hydrogen, nickel and other fuel components.

    But if we separate the input energy from the output and realize that electricity is currently and probably will always be more expensive than natural gas, we realize that diverting a portion of the generated electricity back to heating the eCat reactors is using precious (more costly) electricity that could be sent on the grid to sell to others.

    So even if the COP goes very high, it makes more economic sense to sell the electricity than to use it to heat eCats. Is this essentially correct?

  • eernie1

    Andrea C.
    There is no way to predict accurately the composition of the fuel content as stated previously because of the variety of possible starting ingredients. Andrea R. has made that abundantly clear warning that any attempt may be misleading. Because the tube is not sealed and allows 4He to escape is the reason that the 4He could be detected by sniffing the surrounding atmosphere. A sealed tube, unless the probe is inserted inside the tube, would not allow measurement. 7Li may only be the starter catalyst, allowing other ingredients to provide the necessary neutrons. The variety and form of the inserted energies may trigger other sources.
    Regards and please continue your investigations.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Robet Curto:
    Thanks for the information,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Pekka Janhunen:
    The reasons why we are trying gas is very simple:
    1- to make 1 kWhe you need 3 kWht
    2- gas price is very cheap and will become cheaper
    Thank you for your idea, we have worked on it , but I cannot give information related to it.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Silvio Caggia:
    In the Report you can find clear explication regarding the amperage measurements. I can only take notice of what is written in the Report, as you can too.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Dr Joseph Fine:
    We will publish a report of the 1 MW plant used by the Customer of IH for his industrial purposes after 1 year of regular operation, when we will be able to give evidence ( if so) of the real profitability of the technology, beyond the laboratory tests: this is the obvious next step of our evolution.
    I do not know what the Professors of the ITP will make, because they are totally independent from us.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Rossi

    Andrea Calaon:
    Your comment has been retrieved casually from the spam: next time change the address and send again your comment.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Andrea Calaon

    Dear Steven N. Karels,
    Thank you for your suggestion! So far I had not considered the stoichiometric aspects in details. But you are right: it is necessary.
    Eernie1 explained exactly my thoughts regarding the neutron transfer. I had proposed two reactions that consume Li7 and Li6 at different rates. But here there must be something more to have that kind of shift.
    If I made the numbers right the 0.011 grams of Li7 donating one neutron can be responsible for only 22.4% of a one neutron shift of the sole Ni58 (Ni with natural isotopic ratios). And it would be only the 4.7% of the total Nickel forward shift (58,60,61 ->62). Eernie1: may be the 0.011 [g] is not that accurate, but we are speaking about different orders of magnitude. So Ni must be invested by a series of reactions that have little to share with Li.

    Dear Eernie1,
    About He4 I guess it would have been impossible to detect any, since the reactor was not Helium tight (like the system of Tadahiko Mizuno), and the isotopic analyses were done only on the powders.

    Dear All,
    About the hydrides in the charge: If I had to provide a source of hydrogen as constant as possible with temperature I would have used a mixture of reversible metal hydrides:
    Mg(AlH4)2, KAlH4, Na2LiAlH6, K3AlH6, K2LiAlH6, K2NaAlH6, LiGaH4, Ca(AlH4)2, …
    I am not an expert in mass spectra, but the lines on pages 50 and 52 (and others) I think do not contradict this.
    For a Hot Cat powder however there is not much difference since the temperature are so high that any hydride would have released its hydrogen much before.
    Still the Carbon and Oxygen present in the charge are obscure to me.

    The fact that the Nickel powder does not sinter at 1,400 [C] for 32 days is for me quite remarkable.

    Only the surface of the active grains can produce the LENR. In the test almost all Nickel reacted, instead of only the active volume on the surface of the particles. I think the reason is the fact that at 1,400 [C] the metal grains of which the active particles are made of undergo not only grain growth, but also recrystallization, activated by the gamma and the “not too fast” daughters of the LENR. So that sooner or later all Ni nuclei are invested by the LENR.

    Best Regards

    Andrea Calaon

  • Eric Ashworth

    Dear Andrea, The following immediate information, I am guessing, probably will be of no value to yourself but maybe some of the readers of the journal will find it interesting. I have added some further information that you may find interesting regarding a static barrier that I believe is part of the energy equation and could be a consideration.

    Anyway, when I refer to geometry I am referring to three basic shapes or you could say symbols that make up a stable structure. These being cube, pyramid and sphere or in diagram format square, triangle and circle. Six pyramids form a cube, four on the horizontal and two on the vertical. The two on the vertical are associated with polar activity whereas the four on the horizontal are associated with structural activity that produce the poles, rotation of the structure sets the precedent. The sphere represents the neutral of the structure. Being neutral it does not extend outside of the cube. The space that extends outside of the cube within the base of the pyramid is considered a part of the Absolute volume. The neutral is always between two Absolutes. It’s the apexes of the four pyramids that combine to form a super gravitational focus of force (the apex of a pyramid should have some distinguishing feature when associated in connection with its cube). The volumes at the base of the pyramids form octahedral cavities with values of gravity when six or more neutrals are packed together. On the face of each of the four flats, central position, base of each pyramid is one vortex that responds to the polar activity, central position of the two vertical pyramids. Thereby, four loops of quarks enter and exit the two vertical pyramids at their bases around and on the pole. These loops, as previously described, open and close the vortexes that contain the economy flows in accordance to the exterior environment

    I therefore theorize that when the exterior environment is made-up of many neutrals that structure a lattice, containing many octahedral cavities, the inner neutrals will respond differently from those at the outer edge. To explain why, I will have to refer to the static barrier that all structures possess (the mechanism produces one). The static barrier is directly related to the internal kinetic energy. As previously dealt with. When a structure increases in its kinetic energy the vortexes close because the loops increase in flow and force. This is a self preservation response action. All created structures travel from the base of a pyramid from where it is formed to its apex where the super gravity exists and where higher energy is able to penetrate structure and eventually cause it to fall to pieces so as to be recycled (there are structures that create and those created within). The vortex has an oscillating motion to it responding to two values of gravity maintained by an integral motion of a flow with a force. This oscillating motion creates around the structure a variable static barrier of none flow that is dependent upon its kinetic content. A week static barrier will allow penetration of quarks at the vortex. A slow oscillation is a long stroke. A fast oscillation is a short stroke with regards the vortex and its internal dimension which when closed down produces a short stroke and a strong static barrier.

    An octahedral cavity contains a four static barrier value of a static force. Its the static barrier that provides a resistance to flow. The exterior of a lattice is thereby surrounded by a static barrier of less resistance than that within the interior composed of octahedral cavities (the atom could be considered to have a primitive conscious response mechanism). If what I theorize is correct then LENR should peak and then fall in thermal output. Could I be correct?. I do not want to probe into what could be confidential. Regards, Eric Ashworth

  • Andrea Rossi

    Steven N. Karels:
    I cannot comment anything regarding this issue. Everything you or other Readers write about this issue is totally out of the reach of my possibility to answer positively or negatively. Any comment is welcome, but I have precise limitations regarding the IP divulgation.
    The contradictions or errors possibly emerging from such kind of comments or articles cannot be commented by me.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

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>