.
by
.
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
.
.
.
Introduction
In this paper by highlighting the following 28 major short comings of modern big bang cosmology the authors made an attempt to develop a possible model of Black hole cosmology in a constructive way [1-3].
From now onwards instead of focusing on ‘big bang cosmology’ it is better to concentrate on ‘black hole cosmology’.
Its validity can be well confirmed from a combined study of cosmological and microscopic physical phenomena.
It can be suggested that, there exists one variable physical quantity in the presently believed atomic and nuclear physical constants and “rate of change” in its magnitude can be considered as a “standard measure” of the present “cosmic rate of expansion”.
Michael E. McCulloch says [4]: For an observer in an expanding universe there is a maximum volume that can be observed, since beyond the Hubble distance the velocity of recession is greater than the speed of light and the redshift is infinite: this is the Hubble volume.
Its boundary is similar to the event horizon of a black hole because it marks a boundary to what can be observed.
This means that it is reasonable to assume that Hawking radiation is emitted at this boundary both outwards and inwards to conserve energy, and any wavelength that does not fit exactly within this size cannot be allowed for the inwards radiation, and therefore also for the outwards radiation.
According to Hawking, the mass of a black hole is linearly related to its temperature or inversely-linearly related to the wavelength of the Hawking radiation it emits.
Therefore, for a given size of the universe there is a maximum Hawking wavelength it can have and a minimum allowed gravitational mass it can have.
If its mass was less than this then the Hawking radiation would have a wavelength that is bigger than the size of the observed universe and would be disallowed.
The minimum mass it predicts is encouragingly close to the observed mass of the Hubble volume.
Thus it is possible to model the Hubble volume as a black hole that emits Hawking radiation inwards, disallowing wavelengths that do not fit exactly into the Hubble diameter, since partial waves would allow an inference of what lies outside the horizon.
According to Tinaxi Zhang [5-7], the universe originated from a hot star-like black hole with several solar masses and gradually grew up through a super massive black hole with billion solar masses to the present state with hundred billion-trillion solar masses by accreting ambient materials and merging with other black holes.
According to N. J. Poplawski [8-11], the Universe is the interior of an Einstein-Rosen black hole and began with the formation of the black hole from a supernova explosion in the center of a galaxy.
He theorizes that torsion manifests itself as a repulsive force which causes fermions to be spatially extended and prevents the formation of a gravitational singularity within the black hole’s event horizon.
Because of torsion, the collapsing matter on the other side of the horizon reaches an enormous but finite density, explodes and rebounds, forming an Einstein-Rosen bridge (wormhole) to a new, closed, expanding universe.
Analogously, the Big Bang is replaced by the Big Bounce before which the Universe was the interior of a black hole.
The rotation of a black hole would influence the space-time on the other side of its event horizon and results in a preferred direction in the new universe.
Most recently cosmologists Razieh Pourhasan, Niayesh Afshordi and Robert B. Manna have proposed [12] that the Universe formed from the debris ejected when a four-dimensional star collapsed into a black hole – a scenario that would help to explain why the cosmos seems to be so uniform in all directions.
Dear Andrea,
I assuming, perhaps incorrectly, if iron was in the fuel mix of the Lugano device (unless it was a contaminant) that it must have been selected to serve some purpose. The Lugano report on page 28 states, “From all combined analysis methods of the fuel we find that there are significant quantities of Li, Al, Fe and H in addition to Ni.” Also, on page 44 fuel particle number three showed a peak in iron via EDS analysis. Iron is also referenced in a couple other places in the report.
Various individuals on the internet have posted interpretations of the charts and analysis provided in the Lugano report and concluded iron was present in the fuel. I’m not a scientist, so I can’t say for certain they are correct. But iron also appears in the document, “Determination of Ni isotopes in nickel material from Rossi reactor.” In this paper, lithium, iron, and copper were found in the ash but not the unused fuel of an early model e-cat. From what I have read, certain LENR researchers claim that the unused fuel had any catalyzers removed, and the copper in the used fuel was simply a contaminant from a copper reactor core. This leaves both a small amount of lithium .4% and a larger amount of iron 11% in the spent fuel.
So maybe iron had no role in the Lugano device. Or, perhaps, it did. Then there is the possibility it was added as filler or a way to more evenly distribute the fuel in a reactor. Some folks think it was an anti-sintering agent, others think it breaks down molecular hydrogen into atomic hydrogen, a few people think it might interact with protons, a couple internet posters claim it might prevent hot spots, etc. Only you really know.
I don’t know what the truth is about iron. For years now, I’ve let my curiosity compel me to spend hundreds or thousands of hours reading, chatting, talking, and writing about issues like this in the hope of learning more and eventually obtaining an understanding of how this marvel of science works.
So I ask you in return: did iron have a role?
If so, I hope it is as interesting as the role of lithium turned out to be and you are allowed to eventually discuss the topic.
If not, then I’ve probably made myself look silly and like a total amateur goofball to everyone at Industrial Heat. But that’s okay. At least I’m interested in something that is of vital importance to the world.
Hey, I could be camped outside of an electronics store waiting for the launch of the latest most advanced cell phone while love blogging about the mobile graphics chip it contains and the resolution of the screen…
I think I’ll keep following the E-Cat as my obsessive hobby.
Hank Mills:
Really Fe had a role?
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Orsobubu:
He,he,he…
Please try to buy back at least your mother and your little brother!
As a matter of fact, I agree that LENR did have no effect at all on the price of oil: the price of oil depends on the ratio between demand and offer and such ratio has been strongly modified after the discovery of enormous reserves of hydrocarbons by means of the fracking techology. About the other issue you raised, I insist on the fact that all the energy sources will be integrated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Uh-oh! It seems fossil energy sector is not scared at all of ICCF people… quotes for crude oil have never been so high since december, soaring 9% higher than last week prices… or, at least, oil men are sure all energy sources will be integrated, as always Rossi said. Let’s wait for the last days of the meeting.
I don’t buy the story of peaceful integration, I’m a smart guy that look ahead and just previously of ICCF I sold my house, my MTBike, my mother and my little brother and bet heavily all what I’ve got on the fall of oil. It is only a temporary loss, I’m pretty sure some clamorous bombs will be dropped during next sessions in Padua. I’ll keep you updated 🙂
Dear Andrea,
Can we eventually expect a paper that discusses the role of iron in the Lugano device?
Bernie Koppenhofer:
I suppose in several months. We are studying.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi:
When do yu think the new paper with more mathematical calculations related to the reverse Mossbauer effect, about which you wrote here yesterday, will be published ?
Frank Acland:
He made a paramount presentation of the programs of Industrial Heat and explained nicely and clearly his ideas about LENR.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
What do you think of the speech of Tom Darden?
Many thanks,
Frank
Pekka Janhunen:
Thank you for the insight.
More calculations regarding the reverse Mossbauer are in line to be published.
The mathematical calculations so far confirm the Cook-Rossi theoretical paper.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
If one sets mass to zero in the Mössbauer effect formula, the formula blows up. That regime is interesting because it corresponds to effectively massless electron fluid whose plasma frequency is so high that not even gammas can propagate (my earlier comment http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=861&cpage=10#comment-1018797). Gammas are then attenuated (or reflected, if coming from the outside) in the same way as low-frequency radio waves cannot pass through the ionosphere. Another side of the coin is that cross sections of those nuclear reactions that normally produce gammas are enhanced, because creation of gamma is no longer suppressed by the relatively small electromagnetic coupling constant. Hence reactions such as D+D->He4+Gamma or p+Li7->Be8+Gamma become possible, where “Gamma” does not represent a real gamma, but symbolically represents coupling to plasmons at typical gamma frequencies.
A friend of mine pointed out the following cold fusion theory paper by Lutz Jaitner from 2012: http://www.cfcr.de/chain_reaction_dec_2012.pdf . The paper proposes an “L-shell trapping” model which is interesting, although I do not quite believe in it. But the paper also suggests that LENR has characteristics of a chain reaction mediated by moderately energetic hydrogen nuclei. In particular, he shows how the chain reaction assumption may explain why the phenomenon occurs at metal-hydrogen interfaces and why the geometric shape of the interface can play a role.
In my opinion, a synthesis might be the following. For some chemical reason, a sub-population of the Ni-H valence electrons becomes effectively massless (while exotic, such phenomenon is not unheard of because it happens in graphene, although in a 2-D way). This enhances the fusion cross section of p+Li7->Be8+Gamma a lot (a bit later the Be8 decays to two 46 keV alphas as an unrelated process). The 17.26 MeV Gamma (plasmon wave packet) heats the matter locally, which emits, among other things, a cloud of energetic protons. At some probability, an energetic proton can cause more than one new fusion reactions so that a chain reaction may be possible. The chain reaction does not work in bulk metal, because there too much of the energy goes into ionising the heavy nickel atoms. The chain reaction also cannot work in hydrogen gas for obvious reasons. But the chain reaction can work at a metal-hydrogen interface, especially if the interface has a complicated shape (see Fig 5 on page 9 of Jaitner’s paper) so that energetic protons created in the gas have a high probability of hitting the metal surface again. Optimally the spatial scale of the surface features should be similar to the mean free path of said energetic protons (perhaps ~1 keV protons plus minus one order of magnitude) in the used hydrogen gas. Concerning the HotCat specifically, perhaps(?) one should consider the Al-Li-H liquid density rather than hydrogen gas density.
regards, /pekka
Hank Mills:
Thank you for your kind words and for your insight.
I cannot answer to your questions, but I really appreciate your enthusiasm.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
Thank you!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Paul:
The basic design will not be touched, because we did not have major troubles, so far, provided the situation will go on as it is gone fo far.
Minor changes will be made, many of them.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea,
Assuming the one year test is positive, do you see the current design becoming the production model, or do you think a redesign based on lessons learned (to make the system more robust, cheaper to manufacture, etc.) will be the best path?
V/R,
Paul
p.s. It is not easy coming up with questions you can answer.
Dear Andrea,
In case you have not seen it, here’s the transcript of Tom Darden’s speech at ICCF19 in Padova today: http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/04/13/tom-dardens-speech-on-lenr-at-iccf19/
He seems positive about LENR, saying: “We’ve reached a tipping point. The potential of your work is so great. The signs of progress are now so significant.”
I am assuming he is basing his optimism on what he is learning from the 1MW plant.
Kind regards,
Frank
Dear Andrea,
I can’t help but wish you could discuss a few of the properties of the Ni-LiAlH4 (also known as the E-Cat) technology. You probably can’t say anything, but the more is revealed in documents such as your theory paper the faster my limited, amaterish armchair researcher-wannabe mind races with thoughts and questions. Here are a few of the issues I’ve been wondering about. You or anyone else is welcome to comment on any of them. If you cannot, thanks for tolerating more of my ponderings!
1 – What seems to make the reaction rate jump so fast around the boiling point of lithium compared to lower temps in which lithium is probably only a liquid – perhaps in an alloy with aluminum? Ikegami suggests and demontrated that particles such as protons have a greater chance of inducing nuclear reactions with lithium when the metal is in the liquid state. The greatest rate enhancement is when the lithium is very close to the melting point. Could there be another rate enhancement near the boiling temperature?
2 – At the ignition temperature (the term Cures used on the Cobraf forum to describe the temperatures at which hot cats started producing excess heat which he though might be related to phase change temperatures of various additives) of lithium the excess heat production seems to soar. By carefully controlling the input power with automatic regulation schemes, some replicators have been able to post pone the destruction of their thermocouples and reactors. I am curious about the dynamics of this spike if it was allowed to proceed through out the reactor (not only in one small hot spot). Is there a temperature at which the reactions become self limiting? With a robust enough container, maybe Tungsten, would the reactions reach a limit?
3 – A large percentage of the fuel in the Lugano reactor was iron; there was far more iron in the powder mix than LiAlH4. I wish the theory paper would have addressed this component of the fuel. It seems to be slightly less than complete to specifically define the E-Cat as a Ni-LiAlH4 system when a huge amount of iron was in the mix. Atomic hydrogen generator, sintering prevention agent, catalyst to lower hydrogen release temperature in LiAlH4, oxygen absorber, stabilization agent, possible minor nuclear reactant: the function of is mysterious and speculation abounds. Probably, most of the guesses are totally wrong. A couple of sentences in the theory paper would have helped resolve a bit of this mystery.
Enough for now.
Thank you for all your hard work. Even though you have had assistance at times, you have made all this happen via sheer will power. Researchers in many fields could learn from your dedication and work ethic.
Hank
Koen Vandewalle:
The R&D and the test on course of the 1 MW E-Cat will finish between December 2015 and February 2016 and the results, as I always said, could be either positive or negative.
After this period, if the results will be positive, the expansion of the technology in all the world will be strong. If negative, the work of R&D will have to continue.
About the integration of all the available energy sources, this is an obvious and necessary issue.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
In earlier interviews with teachers who had experienced Nickel-hydrogen experiments, it was said that “after a period of time, the half of the periodic table was to be found in the reactors.”
You write occasionally that there are answers to come after closing the R & D.
That closing may be way ahead.
The longer the e-cats work, the more complex the reactions can be. That way, there can be done after each test a new test again with new potential. With potential, I mean the ability to achieve greater efficiency, or at worst, a self-destructive reaction that ends the functioning of the e-cat, where a solution must be found.
This may take years or even decades to explore all that.
This may cost millions or even billions.
These vulnerabilities demand all who is involved to be strong, rich, fast and wise.
My hope is that A.R. and I.H. are all four.
That’s why I asked if everyone knew before.
A.R. often responds: “all energy sources should be integrated”. That makes me very afraid. We should be past the point right now to decide wether we can or we cannot ever replace conventional energy sources with LENR. And we should start the transition.
Kind Regards,
Koen
Bob K:
Thank you for your kind attention.
As we always said, the data regarding the 1MW plant will be published after the end of the test of 1 year and the R&D on course in the factory of the IH’s Customer will have been completed. I must add that the results could be either positive or negative.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Andrea, We all know that you have an awesomely powerful invention in your custody. Why do you think that Tom Darden spoke with such guarded vagueness at ICCF 19? No mention of the 1MW plant now performing beneficial work for many months. I would think that this would be excellent news.
I am grateful for your endless work and communicating with us. Thanks, Bob
Dr Joseph Fine:
1- It is more complex, but you got the essence of the reverse Mossbauer, which is the core of the Cook-Rossi Theory-in-the-making. What we use is not the Mossbauer, but the Mossbauer equation to explain the reverse of the Mossbauer effect as the source of heat and the bar of the high energy photons emission. A paper is close to be published with all the maths of this.
2- No, the issue is more complex
3- Same as in 2: we have much study to make on this issue, to give a mathematic substrate to fix it: this is what the nights in the plant are useful for ( when She does not bring troubles).
4- I jog outdoor or bike 1 hour per day, to store D vitamin…
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
The Mossbauer Effect requires nuclei to be embedded in the lattice so they cannot recoil when they absorb or emit gammas.
1: For the Reverse Mossbauer Effect to occur, is it correct to say that nuclei have to be less firmly embedded in the lattice so they can vibrate? Then nuclei/(the lattice) can absorb gammas and emit “phonons” also known as heat.
2: Is it correct to say that nuclei are less firmly embedded in the lattice when they are on or near a defect in the lattice or near its surface? Or perhaps, nano-clusters of one element are embedded in another substrate?
3: Are the regions where nuclei can vibrate and the Reverse Mossbauer Effect (can) occur be considered as the Nuclear Active Environment (NAE)?
Go outside the plant for a few hours and enjoy the Spring and the Sunshine!
Springtime (Vernal) regards,
Joseph Fine
Orsobubu:
Welcome back!
Thank you for your insight.
The COP this morning is constant . Not bad.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi Andrea!! I’m following all your achievements and in general all new progresses in the experimental and theoretic aspects of the field and I’m very pleased especially for you and your team!! WOW all that’s happening is great and all the people scattered through the world involved in the research are heroes!!
Now I propose a new and very good method to anticipate and evaluate the results of the ICCF19 meeting!
Mmm it is not really new and I don’t believe really in it but it is interesting anyway: knowing that oil investors are well ahead of all the geopolitic scenarios, I will follow the price of the crude oil future: if it tanks, the meeting is going well under a business perspective, if it soars, the meeting is a delusion for potential LENR investors. On the basis of this method (which thinking better to it now I personally absolutely don’t endorse) at 9.15 – Padua time – the hopes were very high among the oil community because the index rallyied vigorously, but after 10.30 something is going to obfuscate their enthusiasm
How well is going your COP calculation inside your plant beetween 9.15 and 10.30 Padua time?? 🙂
JC Renoir:
Yes, it is. We are not going to give up. You bet.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Italo R.:
As I said many times, we will give data regarding the 1 MW plant after the test and R&D on course will have been completed. The results,as you know, could be either positive, or negative.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
JC Renoir:
1- We thought it was opportune to take a look at what is happening around.
2- I will not attend because I have to stay 16 hours per day inside the 1 MW plant in operation in the factory of the Customer of Industrial Heat in the USA.
3- Obviously I agree: we are a Team.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear dr. Rossi, this is certainly an indiscreet question, and I understand if you cannot reply.
Waiting for the intervention of Tom Darden, can you already tell us if the COP of the 1 MW plant is:
1 – less than 6
2 – Between 6 and 10
3 – more than 10
Thank you
waiting regards…
Italo R.
Herb Gillis:
Sorry, I cannot give this kind of information.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Andrea Rossi:
In the Lugano test it appeared that the composition of the nickel ash was predominantly Ni62, the most stable isotope. Do you think Ni62 (if appropriately reprocessed into fuel) would catalyze the Li7 + H reaction? This might provide some more clues as to what the role of nickel is in the overall process.
Kind regards; HRG.
Frank Acland:
of course he is briefed.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Robert Curto:
I am not able yet to know when the domestic E-Cats will be for sale.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
I was pleased to learn that Tom Darden will be speaking at the ICCF conference in Padova next week. Is he well briefed on the performance level of the E-Cat plant? — I am sure he will be getting plenty of questions.
Kind regards,
Frank Acland
Dr. Rossi, I know I am getting ahead of myself.
But when you get an E-Cat to produce electricity for the home.
I live in a Condo, 5 Buildings, about 100 Apartments in each Building.
Can you install one Unit for each Building ?
Each owner can pay for the electricity they use.
You are aware, if a home owner produces more electricity then they need,
in many States, I think 43, they can sell it back to the Grid.
So if one Unit produces more electricity then then 100 Apartments need,
There is a possibility that the electricity will not only be less expensive,
but after after the cost of the Unit is recovered, and the small fuel cost,
it will be free, for the life of the Unit.
Is this possible ?
The Grid could pay the home owner 50% of what they charge customers.
They could make 50% profit on what they sell to their customers.
Every year the Grid would get smaller, after a few decades, they would go out of business.
Just like the Horse and Carriage did when the Auto took over.
Robert Curto
DTravchenko, Thank you for your response.
I also am not an expert in cancer, but I am in contact with Doctors who are.
Robert Curto
Domenico Canino:
No, I cannot leave the 1 MW E-Cat untiol the test and R&D period is completed. It is necessary for me to stay insite the plant 16 hours per day, let alone going to Italy!
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Rossi:
the tests that you are making on the Hot Cat installed in the compuer-container of the 1 MW plant will bear a domestic apparatus ?
Warm Regards,
DT
Robert Curto:
I am not an expert of cancer, so I can’t be useful to you in it, but I agree with you about what you say of the work of our Andrea Rossi.
Warm Regards,
DT
Why the President of Industrial Heat decided to participate to the ICCF 19 ? Will you be with him? Do you agree with his choice?
Dr Rossi:
Is the certification process for the domestic E-Cat still in progress?
JCR
Tom Darden monday 13 April will be in Italy in Padua for a LENR conference; will you be there too?
Herb Gills:
Under a probabilistic point of view, it is likely that other elements will be discovered to be useful in some form.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi:
Do you think that practical LENR (Rossi effect) devices could be developed using other nuclear systems which are similar to Li7 + H combination? For example, the B11 + H combination?
Kind regards;
HRG.
Steven N. Karels:
Thank you for your insight.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
D. Travchenko:
The reference to the work of Dr Alexander Parkhomov was due. He made a very important work, talking the necessary and working very hard, as usually do Russians when they are engaged in something they have trust in.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
A. Bhatt:
Thank you, I am delighted to share your thanks with my great Team of Industrial Heat, without which I could not be where I am now: inside a 1 MW plant that , thanks to God, is working not bad.
So far.
Thank you for your precious words.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Cook-Rossi Paper, page 9: “Again, neglecting details of the energetic mechanisms, the main possibility for augmenting 62Ni34 abundance is reaction (13). Reaction (13) entails the direct uptake of a proton by 61Ni33(mechanism unknown), leading to 62Cu33 (9.7 min), the decay of which would result in the desired isotope, 62Ni34. Problematical here is the small abundance of the precursor 61Ni33, which accounts for only 1.14% of the Nickel isotopes.”
Lugano Report, page 29: “From the ICP-AES analysis we find that there is about 0.011 gram of 7Li in the 1 gram fuel. If each 7Li nucleus releases about 17 MeV we find then that the total energy available becomes 0.72 MWh. This is less than the 1.5 MWh actually produced in our 32 days run, so more energy has to come from other reactions, judging from this very rough and speculative estimate.”
The total fuel mass in the Lugano report was 1.0 grams. The LiAlH4 is around 0.038 grams. If the remainder of the fuel mass was nickel, the nickel content would be 0.962 grams. (This leaves no mass left for the Rossi Catalyst)
With an average nickel amu of 60, the total number of nickel atoms would be 0.962/60 moles = 0.0160 moles. Multiplying by 6.022E+23 atoms per mole gives the total number of nickel atoms as 0.966E+22 atoms. The total number of 61Ni33 atoms available for the reaction is 1.14% of the total nickel or 1.10E+20.
One amu of mass converted to energy is equal to 931Mev which is equal to 4.1434E-20 MWh. The mass defect for the 61Ni + a proton going to 62Ni is 0.0027109 amu, so the energy per 61Ni atom is equal to 1.123E-22 MWh
The amount of MWh released by one 61Ni + one proton going to 62Ni is 1.123E-22 MWh. If all the 61Ni were converted to 62Ni, the additional energy release over that of lithium would be 0.01236MWh.
The computed energy difference from the Lugano report of total energy (1.5MWh) from that assigned to the lithium reaction (0.72MWh) is 0.78MWh. Therefore, there must be some other reaction besides the 61Ni + a proton becoming 62Ni.
Curiosone:
OK, in a nutshell ( even if the mathematics are very much more complicated and will be object of a specific publication, in due time): what we use is the Mossbauer effect at its reverse, to reconcile the Lugano results. The Mossbauer effect is based on the equation
Er = Ey^2/2Mc^2,
wherein:
Er = recoil energy
Ey = energy of the photons
M= mass of emitting or absorbing body
The principle is that during a reaction the elementary particles involved recoil and this recoil energy absorbs the energy of the photons, so that the energy is not yelded as gamma rays, but as heat.
In reality Mossbauer has discovered the effect by which the energy can be yelded as photons, but what interests us ( and this is the pillar of our theory) is the reverse, which is the fact that photons lose their energy which is turned into heat.
Now, look well the equation above: as you can see, if the mass M of the particles involved is very low, the recoil energy is very high. In the E-Cat the particles involved in Li + p reactions ( the ones that made the depletion of 7Li) have a very low mass, because alpha rays are gaseous, Li is in form of vapour, so that the value of the denominator is very low, which makes very high the recoil energy. This is why, we think, we do not have high energy gamma producion, while we have high ratio of heat.
Remember: all this has the potential to be wrong.
I am spending part of the nights here insite the 1MW E-Cat to calculate this. It is not as easy as it seems. The mathematics must take in account the lattice stucture which brings with it all the complexities of the collective models ( Greiner Maruhn) integrated with the behaviour of the single particles ( Cook). But I got time… and I am learning from all the Prof I have the luck to interact with, personally or through their books.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Just wanted to say thank you for your hard work Dr. Rossi. Been following your works closely for over 4 years and think this technology could help save the world from the massive debt and currency crisis that I see looming in the near future. (Not to mention change the world for the better.)
~A Bhatt