.
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.
Dr Rossi:
Do you sometimes have visitors at the plant? In other words is the plant off limits to all outsiders until the ‘test’ is over. There have been rumors that some have seen it and are extremely impressed …
Warm Regards,
AlbertN
Italo R.:
I cannot add anything to what already has been written. As I already said , data regarding the plant characteristics and the performance will be given after the end of the test on course.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Bernie Koppenhofer:
Permissions, authorizations are the hardest part of this issue. For this reason I do not think that it will be the first one to be on. Most likely the first wave will be for utilizations like the one on course, which is production of heat for industrial purposes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Bernie Morrissey:
Thank you for your kind comment.
We will talk of all the negative and all the positive things after the end of the tests.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
This will depend on the Customer, after the end of the tests.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea,
I know that you do not share any data until all testing is done. After hearing Dr Tom Darden speak at ICCF19 I can understand why you shared everything with him. That was a great choice on your part. I hope your testing continues to go well at the 1MW plant. You always say that the results could be positive or negative. Can you comment on things that could make results negative. I think we all know the positive things.
Bernie
Dear Dr. Rossi,
we have read on e-catworld the description on the instrumentation installed on the 1 MW plant, taken from one post of yours.
It seems that there are 56 sections, and each of them has two thermocouples (for temperature in and out) and pressure of steam.
But it is necessary having a flow instrument on each of these section. Using flow value and differential temperature in each section, it is possible the compute of the transferred heat
Am I right? Have you installed those flow meters? In this case, what type of instrument have you used?
Thank you for your time replying.
Kind Regards,
Italo R.
Dr. Rossi: I was excited to hear one of your pet projects is retrofitting coal power plants. Do you think decommissioned coal plants will be the first targets for your reactors? Have you identified coal plants to retrofit? Why not buy a small decommissioned plant and avoid much of the regulatory hassles?
Dr Joseph Fine:
Thank you for your information and your insight.
Also in this case, we are not dealing with a product, but with a lab test. When and if it will become a product, we’ll test it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi:
Happy Earth Day and Happier Earth days to come!
Similar to earlier discussions about using heat produced by electrically driven E-Cats to produce more electricity, it may be possible to use heat produced from gas driven E-Cats to produce more gas or liquid fuels.
The immediate product of such a process would be Synthetic Gas or SYNGAS (a mixture of CO & H2), and then, from the SYNGAS, fuels such as Methanol, Dimethyl Ether (DME), Ethanol, Butanol, etc. could be produced.
Idaho Labs claims efficiencies as high as 70% when using electrolysis with biomass (Carbon-rich).
http://www5vip.inl.gov/technicalpublications/Documents/4138359.pdf
If you believe Idaho Labs, a synthesis efficiency of 70% suggests that, even with an E-CAT COP of 5.0-10, it should be possible to produce fuel with an energy content of 3-5+ times the amount of gas consumed. (Plus some Nickel and Lithium et cetera.)
New Co2 Fuels uses concentrated Solar Energy as its Heat Source and electrolysis to dissociate both H2O and CO2.
http://www.newco2fuels.co.il/product/8/overview
They claim an efficiency of 40%.
As a plus, their SYNGAS was produced from dissociation of CO2 to CO, so any subsequent fuel combustion is approximately CO2 neutral. That is you are only recycling the CO2 you used to produce the fuel.
The Overall COP or “O-COP” of a SYN-GAS producing E-Cat is the product of the E-CAT COP and the Synthesis process efficiency (for example, about ~ 25 %).
For the sake of argument, assume there are three ranges for the expected E-CAT performance (COP): COP = 10, 20 or (as high as) 50.
The 3 estimates of Overall COP are:
O-COP = 10*(0.25) = 2.5 x;
= 20*(0.25) = 4.0 x; or,
= 50*(0.25) = 12.5 x.
In other words, a SYN-GAS E-Cat could produce more fuel than it consumes, while producing heat energy for other uses. If Synthesis efficiency is higher than 25%, so much the better.
This should be an interesting development.
Thermal Regards,
Joseph Fine
Dear Andrea,
I have just read this comment of yours from April 3 regarding the measurements you are taking, and the participation of a referee (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=96&cpage=2#comment-1068747)
The report of the referee will be published?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
Silvio Caggia:
We are not authorized to give any information about the Customer.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Silvio Caggia:
As I said many times these data will be given after the end of the test.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
you can’t give the numbers of SSM, ok… Just answer with dots separated by spaces to give us a feel…
like:
1) . . .
2) . . .
3) . . .
🙂
Dear Andrea Rossi,
while we are waiting the end of the 400 days test, the customer is daily using the 1MW plant to process something with the steam heat, right?
Is it possible that going to the supermarket we are ALREADY buying and eating a food processed by the customer using the e-cat heat?
Can you give some info about the kind of product processed by the customer?
I think your fans would be happy to taste NOW some “e-cat cooked food”, and also the customer should be happy to receive free-advertisement…
Paul:
I will pass it on.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Robert Curto:
Thank you for the information.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea,
In the spirit of cleaning up brown-field industrial sites, perhaps Cherokee should be purchasing coal power plants in the process of being decommissioned, before before people realize they still have value as power plants (and before they loose their permits). They could also make a return on investment by recycling all the railroad tracks used to transport coal to the plants.
Paul
Dr. Rossi, your Readers may want to Google:
DEAN KAMEN’S INVENTION FOR CLEAN WATER
Robert Curto
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
USA
Ivan Idso:
Thank you for your kind words.
I totally agree about what you say of Dr Tom Darden.
Yes, today is Earth Day! Your kind of celebration is smart.
About the partial retrofit of coal plants with the E-Cats, as I said it is my pet- program, but there are enormous difficulties regarding the permissions.
Our technology could be integrated, to help comply the new EPA requirements.
Before this, though, we have to complete our test and R&D on the 1 MW in operation.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Thank you for your hard work and you seem to have found a good partner in Tom Darden based on his speech last week!
I have a question, in my hometown in Minnesota they are decommissioning a coal plant. Part of it is burning gas for steam for heating and cooling downtown buildings but they are scrapping much of it. They, of course, are clueless to your work and I am concerned they will scrap something, such as a cooling tower, that may be useful with your power plant when it is available. What parts of an old coal plant can be reused in an lenr power plant?
P.S. we have a celebration of Earthday this Sunday in Rochester with several classes for the public. There will be a class on lenr that is being given by Tom Wind from Energy 2.0 Society (Frank Ackland’s group). Perhaps someone from our utility company will attend and be enlightened!
Thank you for your time.
Steven N. Karels:
Congratulations for your magnificent endeavour.
I too hope to be able to help you asap.
Can you send a detailed description of the water purification system you are dealing with? I could, perhaps, start to take a look to see how the E-Cat could be integrated there.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I have returned from Guatemala. We installed 3 Village Water Purification Systems which can provide potable water to up to 600 local villagers. We also had a medical team with us who saw more than 300 patients where medical support is nearly non-existent. Three of the team got sick themselves but were treated and recovered before the end of the trip. All of us returned safely with great memories.
Perhaps, in the future, I will be able to install an eCat system of some type there.
Quinton Heri:
Now, while I am answering to you, here is 08.03 p.m. of Tuesday Aprol 21st.
I am inside the container of the computer and, since the E-Cat is stable, I am studying.
Her voice is a strong, regular bubbling that I can hear from where I am, and this is good. She is in ssm. I cannot give you the numbers, but the ssm cycles are long. Enough. So far.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
JC Renoir:
I am delighted to read this. To be useful to the work of teachers is very important to me. My experts also told me that most of the attention to our work comes from young people. This is very important. To all of them I reccommend to study Physics before studying LENR, otherwise they build a house without the due basement.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Paul:
We are making a strong work on this issue, and we have strong evidence of the safety of our E-Cat.
By the way, we obtained already the safety certification.
I do not think this will be the target. Anyway, wherever our foes will shoot, we will answer to their fire in the right measure. We have also Nero with us ( …beware…)
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hank Mills:
Before solar panels, that are very easy and simple technology, based on elementary principles of Physics, got industrially developed, as they are now, half century is passed, and they are sold only because the Taxpayer is paying for them ( read well your electric power bill).
The first industrial plant working with LENR is ours and it is gone in operation since several months. Still we must remind that the results that we will have after one year of test could be either positive or negative.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea,
Is one of the reasons you are spending so much time with the reactor is to prove that is safe and does not produce any (as yet undetected) harmful radiation?
Once the e-cat is proven and on the market, you can bet that the first salvo to preserve the status quo will be that the e-cat’s safety is untested.
(They will probably demand a 10 year study.)
Paul
Nero:
I know, but I edited your comment because it was going to set fire ( which for a Nero is normal) on the base of BS information.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
The solar panel is real. For decades, the scientific community has accepted it as a legitimate technology that works. Right now, 99% of the scientific community is unaware that the E-Cat exists. Of those that do know about it, only a small fraction have read enough to learn the truth: the Ni-LiAlH4 technology does indeed produce massive excess heat from safe, clean nuclear reactions.
My question: what do you think needs to be done in order to make the E-Cat be accepted by the mainstream as every bit as “real” as the solar panel?
I would think there are three things that would help most.
1 – A positive and successful 400 day test of the low temperature 1 megawatt plant with an order for many more units by the customer.
2 – The mass production of E-Cat products like the 1 megawatt plant and their sale in the marketplace.
3 – A huge widespread tsunami of replications of basic test reactors by qualified experts like Alexander Parkhomov. These replications could take place at any time and accelerate the acceptance of the technology, unlike the results of the 400 day test that will not happen until several months from now.
Thank you.
Dr Rossi:
Where are you now? How is going the 1 MW E-Cat now? How “Her” voice? How long are the self sustained mode cycles?
Paul:
Yes.
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea, i don’t ask the COP 😉
Di nuovo, caldi caldi saluti… 😉
Andrea,
I trust that when you are ready to go to market all of the “legal administrative” concerns will have been addressed.
Paul
Nero:
Same answer I gave to Italo R.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Paul:
We are ready for the production and the outsourcing system has been organized for any evenience. Obviously we must wait for the results of the test on course that, I repeat, could be either positive or negative.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Christofer Calder:
I cannot give this information.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Neri B.:
Same answer I gave to Italo R.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Italo R.:
Sorry, I have edited your text not to spam it.
Tha data will be given after the end of the test on course.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Carlo Marcena:
I understand, sorry, I have been slow…
Thank you for your kind attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
it was not a real question. I had concluded my second last post on the Thermal Acoustic Engine (TAE) with “???”, to mean my doubts about TAE readiness for the market. In your reply you just made these doubts clear. So, in my last post, I said that I was sharing your answer. That’s it. And congrats for the news you have disclosed (and you are going to disclose, I suppose, in a matter of months …).
CM
Dr Rossi:
Can we know what is the COP of the 1 MW plant?
Kind Regards
Italo R.
Dear Andrea,
We are curious to know the COP of the 1 MW plant
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Can you please tell us how many grams of fuel in total is currently being used in your one megawatt reactor that is being Beta tested? That would be an interesting statistic.
All the Best,
Christopher Calder
Andrea,
Assuming the results of the one year 1MW tests are positive, how long will it take IH to start manufacturing 1MW plants for the market place?
How many do you think they could produce in 2016 (again assuming current tests are successful)?
I understand your answer is purely a projection and we will not hold you to its accuracy.
Paul
Dr Rossi:
Please let us know what is the COP of the 1 MW plant
Carlo Marcena: I do not understand your question. Please rephrase it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
About thermo-acoustic engine: I do share your way to answer my three ???.
Warm regards,
CM
Andrea Rossi:
We saw that there are tornados in Florida: does this affect your work with the E-Cat?
W.G.
Andrea:
Did you read that Dr Parkhomov has found in his experiments of replication of the Rossi Effect has found isotopical shifts similar to the ones of the Lugano report?
Warm Regards,
DT