Thank you for your reply and your reference to the Aharonov- Bohm effect. Now I understand. My own understanding is that magnetic fields at the level of field density can be considered physical to that which operates at that same particular level of density i.e. relativity.
The Aharonov-Bohm effect demonstrates the ability of a magnetic field to act as a barrier/deflector towards incoming particles. It could be referred to as a ’buckler’ as it can buckle particles out of the way (the term buckler is a very ancient reference to a magnetic shield and its use is described in a very ancient book to help describe the make-up of a mechanism).
There are two types of drive systems that stem from the understanding of nuclear physics, one is mechanical and the other electro magnetic allowing one vehicle to have a binary system of propulsion, necessity for any vehicle that enters and exits the Earths atmosphere. To understand how to manufacture such a vehicle it is necessary to understand atomic physics at the nuclear level i.e. the make-up of the atom which is, as known, comprised of electrical potential. The E.M. drive i.e. electro magnetic, the U.F.O. i.e. unifying field oscillator and LENRs i.e. low energy nuclear reactions are all of the same subject i.e. physical/atomic and the wave i.e. none physical in comparison to the atom as understood. However, the atom is an admixture and thereby represents a neutral. Everything in our existence i.e. tangible to us has to be neutral because we are a product of neutrality and therefore being intelligent we can investigate this neutral world but only in the physical which is neutral i.e. the now. Basically it’s the purpose of life i.e. to investigate. The subject is too deep to discuss here but anything that is neutral has to exist in two dimensions at once and believe it or not does exist in two different dimensions regarding densities which relate to time zones within alternating occasions. Anyway your line of investigation is relevant to this subject being nuclear physics. The Coulomb Barrier is a magnetic shield that oscillates to insulate the proton/protons and provide the atom i.e. proton/s and electron/s being the Coulomb Barrier with a system of identity i.e. a stand alone unit in a sea of similar units.
The atom is a manufactured unit from the other dimension/time zone i.e. the outer wave dimension of its progenitors field and thereby this subject is directly related to the GOD concept and represents as stated the final frontier in physics which is why it cannot be revealed to the general public who have no use for the understanding and resultant technology. the understanding has to be used for a specific purpose/purposes and Andrea as far as I am aware is the only independent researcher who has such a purpose besides myself.
Obviously there’ll be those who disagree and those that say it’s not possible to put the E Cat into a self sustain mode just as those before said you could not overcome the Coulomb Barrier. Such people should not be involved in science, physics or technology. All it takes is a mutual understanding between like minds who see to advance science and technology.
Regards Eric Ashworth
I would agree that abbreviations should be avoided. Normally I am careful with my wording, obviously this time I failed. AB effect = Aharonov-Bohm effect, my post was a clarification of my previous post from the day before. I was referring to the possible nuclear influence of the magnetic vector potential, that if a sufficiently strong potential was present local to a Hydrogen atom, there may be interactions that lead to nuclear effect.
A few weeks ago I posted speculation that on a far larger scale the magnetic vector potential may in some way interact with electromagnetics that could provide the propelling force of the EmDrive, my last post regarding the smallest of scales is unconnected with this.
One other related question: if the plasma to electricity parts prove to be unreliable, but do sometimes work for long periods of time, would it be feasible to perform a public demonstration simultaneously of say 50 of your latest ecats that utilize plasma to electricity production, which most of those 50 ecats will likely malfunction during the public demonstration but it would also be likely at least some would complete the public demo (which would prove your technology beyond any doubt due to the closed loop nature of the demo), would that be beneficial for attracting investment funding for further refining the ecat from either public or private sources?
If the longevity of the parts used for converting plasma to electricity cannot be attained, will you consider refocusing the ecat back to retro-fitting gas turbines for centralized grid electricity production?
Prof:
This one is very interesting:
“An exact formula for electromagnetic momentum in terms of the charge density and the Coulomb gauge vector potential”
Hanno Essen 2018 Eur.J.Phys.39025202
Warm Regards
A.R.
To all,
I assume that Andrea has contracted a company very capable of doing these kind of tests and that there is no need to suggest the how to do it.
In ALL cases they need to ensure there is no hidden battery of any kind, or if the can’t look inside, to ensure that the energy supplied exceeds any chemical reaction energy in the given volume.
Kind regards, Gerard
I agree with the suggestion of an open loop vs a closed loop demonstration. A closed loop will require a long enough operation time to eliminate stored chemical energy, such as a battery. But an open loop, sufficiently monitored and engineered, will provide a fast, easy to understand demonstration. The effective COP and the output power must be such to preclude a battery or other “cheat” methods.
I would suggest two levels of output, a low and high level. Differencing the outputs and inputs would suggest the amount of power consumed by the controller and other constant consumption devices.
1) There’s a stage of self organization of a complex space charge configuration in a DC electrical discharge in which new double layers are continuously ejected and re-formed. I’m thinking that this mode might amplify the power of the ion acoustic waves which could make it more suitable for harvesting. Have you ever observed this mode of a pulsating fireball?
2) Have you considered attempting to harvest the longitudinal waves produced from the fireball by utilizing a similar sized spherical resonator cavity in close proximity to the device? This should work like a Tesla coil in that the pulsating fireball would act like the top globe of a Tesla transmitter. If an identically sized metal sphere with a tunable circuit was placed in proximity, you should be able to draw off power. You could even have multiple such receivers around the E-Cat SKL.
I agree with Long Time Follower. If you can have a third party verify a significant amount of thermal output with very little input in a non-closed loop mode, go ahead and have the presentation. Then after establishing that as an undeniable fact show some data from the run that collected electrical output. You don’t have to prove all the future (even near term) potential of the technology. Instead, just try to establish in the minds of the audience that the technology produces a massive excess of total energy beyond any doubt whatsoever.
One request I would make of the third party is to show that each reaction (even if it is not nuclear) is producing more energy in eV than would be possible if the hydrogen was under going chemical reactions (a few eV) or even some sort of supra-chemical reaction (200+ eV). This would prove that your technology is clearly superior – even beyond LENR – because you are not consuming any significant amount of fuel over time. Even over a week of operation, I suspect that if you performed a calculation including the total number of hydrogen atoms and the energy produced by the reactor, the total energy per reaction would be in the millions of eV.
Finally, I just wanted to ask if it is practical to extract energy from the plasma ball via the ion acoustic oscillations it produces that send current through the external circuit? If this is possible, I suspect it would be more practical for long term use than using sacrificial probes inserted into the plasma ball that would eventually be degraded by the unique conditions in the ballerina. I think what’s important is not to let any part of the reactor actually touch the plasma ball.
Keith T, Your explanation to Andrea February 7th. I presume this is what you are inferring. A magnetic vector potential is a propelling force of a physical existence i.e. a hydrogen atom producing a force. Is the interior of the atom shielded from influence? i.e. a type of barrier. You say the AB effect demonstrates that an electron can be influenced. This is where you lose me, why abbreviate and use the term AB effect. If you explain this effect i.e. none abbreviation I could understand what you mean. This subject is technical and I cannot emphasize the importance of not abbreviating phenomenas. Every phenomena has a none abbreviation. Why use it when the subject is technical. I mention this because you are not the only person to abbreviate. With regards your question, I believe you are referring to the electro magnetic propulsion unit i.e. E.M. drive which I agree has little published information and which I consider off subject with regards the self sustaining mode of the E Cat and the requirement of a propulsion unit but I agree the subject is interesting.
Regards Eric Ashworth
Anyone who wants to suspect that there are hidden batteries will do so irrespective of whether or not it is plugged in to the grid. Don’t fall for that. Your main feature is that SKL does not need the grid. Showcase it.
Regards,
Patrick
Dear Dr Rossi,
Maybe it is better if in your presentation of the Ecat SKL you do not make the closed loop, because almost surely voices will be raised that there are hidden batteries or the like. I suggest to plug a power source and measure both the electricity the Ecat draws from the grid and the electricity that it produces: then it will be obvious that the COP is infinite, if the electricity produced is more than the electricity consumed.
Cheers
Long Time Follwer
I am trying to piece together and understand, for a magnetic vector potential that has physical existence, if a hydrogen atom as a whole can be influenced by a sufficiently strong magnetic vector potential, if within a hydrogen atom the relationship between electron and proton can be influenced or is the interior of an atom somehow shielded from influence, the AB effect demonstrates that an electron can be influenced, can it still be influenced within the confines of a hydrogen atom, can the proton and its contents be influenced.
There is very little on this subject to be found within published papers, if there is possibility of influence from the magnetic vector potential (or electric scalar potential) how can this be detected.
All of this may or may not be part of ongoing investigations, hopefully it is, and hopefully any results can be shared in future papers.
A. Is it possible a magnetic vector potential can surround and permeate an atom.
B. If a magnetic vector potential Aharonov-Bohm effect experiment was repeated using single hydrogen atoms passing a long solenoid instead of electrons, would the same effect of increase and decrease of speed be seen for the atoms as was for electrons, the phase shift then producing an interference pattern.
Dear Andrea,
Just one question:
Does this reliability problem also prevent the E-Cat SK Leonardo being tested and certified?
I wish you all the wisdom to solve this problem. Good Luck!
Kind regards, Gerard
Bob Luk, O.K. I do need information and I think everyone contributing to the JONP is on the same page and therefore we are in agreement but depending upon ones life experiences we have different view points. My question now is how many times does one need to demonstrate a mechanism or an experiment to convince someone of its worth regarding a new discovery?.
I was of the opinion that once would be sufficient but maybe it requires a specific number of times. I am unaware of any academic rules but I am interested to learn. With regards my own experience in R&D a first time failure was sufficient for me to think again and redesign until I got the result I required. What is the golden rule?. For me this is the strength of the JONP. Where else could I get a response and where else could I ask such a question as I do appreciate interaction on this important subject which I have been involved in for over twenty years.
Regards Eric Ashworth
For development or future use, is it possible to observe the plasma zone using ultra high speed, high resolution video and photography, filtered for the emission wavelengths of interest, focusing at different scales and even down to microscopic contents if possible. Observing start-up, running, shutdown, and if particular faults are known to occur from particular triggers observe these events also.
The observed results may of use in development, but would be good for future publicity, the recent images of the surface of the sun showing the top of the convection cells were for scientific use but the public has certainly shown interest.
Caro Andrea
Is the component you have to invent ex-novo a hardware or a software one ?
God bless you
Marco Serra
Keith T,
Thank you for your reply and your reference to the Aharonov- Bohm effect. Now I understand. My own understanding is that magnetic fields at the level of field density can be considered physical to that which operates at that same particular level of density i.e. relativity.
The Aharonov-Bohm effect demonstrates the ability of a magnetic field to act as a barrier/deflector towards incoming particles. It could be referred to as a ’buckler’ as it can buckle particles out of the way (the term buckler is a very ancient reference to a magnetic shield and its use is described in a very ancient book to help describe the make-up of a mechanism).
There are two types of drive systems that stem from the understanding of nuclear physics, one is mechanical and the other electro magnetic allowing one vehicle to have a binary system of propulsion, necessity for any vehicle that enters and exits the Earths atmosphere. To understand how to manufacture such a vehicle it is necessary to understand atomic physics at the nuclear level i.e. the make-up of the atom which is, as known, comprised of electrical potential. The E.M. drive i.e. electro magnetic, the U.F.O. i.e. unifying field oscillator and LENRs i.e. low energy nuclear reactions are all of the same subject i.e. physical/atomic and the wave i.e. none physical in comparison to the atom as understood. However, the atom is an admixture and thereby represents a neutral. Everything in our existence i.e. tangible to us has to be neutral because we are a product of neutrality and therefore being intelligent we can investigate this neutral world but only in the physical which is neutral i.e. the now. Basically it’s the purpose of life i.e. to investigate. The subject is too deep to discuss here but anything that is neutral has to exist in two dimensions at once and believe it or not does exist in two different dimensions regarding densities which relate to time zones within alternating occasions. Anyway your line of investigation is relevant to this subject being nuclear physics. The Coulomb Barrier is a magnetic shield that oscillates to insulate the proton/protons and provide the atom i.e. proton/s and electron/s being the Coulomb Barrier with a system of identity i.e. a stand alone unit in a sea of similar units.
The atom is a manufactured unit from the other dimension/time zone i.e. the outer wave dimension of its progenitors field and thereby this subject is directly related to the GOD concept and represents as stated the final frontier in physics which is why it cannot be revealed to the general public who have no use for the understanding and resultant technology. the understanding has to be used for a specific purpose/purposes and Andrea as far as I am aware is the only independent researcher who has such a purpose besides myself.
Obviously there’ll be those who disagree and those that say it’s not possible to put the E Cat into a self sustain mode just as those before said you could not overcome the Coulomb Barrier. Such people should not be involved in science, physics or technology. All it takes is a mutual understanding between like minds who see to advance science and technology.
Regards Eric Ashworth
George N.:
We’ll see.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
@Eric Ashworth,
I would agree that abbreviations should be avoided. Normally I am careful with my wording, obviously this time I failed. AB effect = Aharonov-Bohm effect, my post was a clarification of my previous post from the day before. I was referring to the possible nuclear influence of the magnetic vector potential, that if a sufficiently strong potential was present local to a Hydrogen atom, there may be interactions that lead to nuclear effect.
A few weeks ago I posted speculation that on a far larger scale the magnetic vector potential may in some way interact with electromagnetics that could provide the propelling force of the EmDrive, my last post regarding the smallest of scales is unconnected with this.
Regards,
Keith Thomson.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
One other related question: if the plasma to electricity parts prove to be unreliable, but do sometimes work for long periods of time, would it be feasible to perform a public demonstration simultaneously of say 50 of your latest ecats that utilize plasma to electricity production, which most of those 50 ecats will likely malfunction during the public demonstration but it would also be likely at least some would complete the public demo (which would prove your technology beyond any doubt due to the closed loop nature of the demo), would that be beneficial for attracting investment funding for further refining the ecat from either public or private sources?
George N:
We’ll see.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
If the longevity of the parts used for converting plasma to electricity cannot be attained, will you consider refocusing the ecat back to retro-fitting gas turbines for centralized grid electricity production?
Prof:
This one is very interesting:
“An exact formula for electromagnetic momentum in terms of the charge density and the Coulomb gauge vector potential”
Hanno Essen 2018 Eur.J.Phys.39025202
Warm Regards
A.R.
Sven B:
The independent party tests will end sometime in March. Eventually will be made the presentation
Warm Regards
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
What is now the most probable month for the E-Cat SKL presentation?
1: March
2: April
3: May
Kind regards
Sven B
Dear Dr Rossi:
Any further publication you can suggest that could be useful to understand your effect directly or indirectly?
Many thanks,
Prof
To all,
I assume that Andrea has contracted a company very capable of doing these kind of tests and that there is no need to suggest the how to do it.
In ALL cases they need to ensure there is no hidden battery of any kind, or if the can’t look inside, to ensure that the energy supplied exceeds any chemical reaction energy in the given volume.
Kind regards, Gerard
PlasmaFan:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
PlasmaFan:
Thank you for the suggestions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven N. Karels:
Thank you for the suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
I agree with the suggestion of an open loop vs a closed loop demonstration. A closed loop will require a long enough operation time to eliminate stored chemical energy, such as a battery. But an open loop, sufficiently monitored and engineered, will provide a fast, easy to understand demonstration. The effective COP and the output power must be such to preclude a battery or other “cheat” methods.
I would suggest two levels of output, a low and high level. Differencing the outputs and inputs would suggest the amount of power consumed by the controller and other constant consumption devices.
Dear Andrea,
1) There’s a stage of self organization of a complex space charge configuration in a DC electrical discharge in which new double layers are continuously ejected and re-formed. I’m thinking that this mode might amplify the power of the ion acoustic waves which could make it more suitable for harvesting. Have you ever observed this mode of a pulsating fireball?
2) Have you considered attempting to harvest the longitudinal waves produced from the fireball by utilizing a similar sized spherical resonator cavity in close proximity to the device? This should work like a Tesla coil in that the pulsating fireball would act like the top globe of a Tesla transmitter. If an identically sized metal sphere with a tunable circuit was placed in proximity, you should be able to draw off power. You could even have multiple such receivers around the E-Cat SKL.
Thanks.
Dear Andrea,
I agree with Long Time Follower. If you can have a third party verify a significant amount of thermal output with very little input in a non-closed loop mode, go ahead and have the presentation. Then after establishing that as an undeniable fact show some data from the run that collected electrical output. You don’t have to prove all the future (even near term) potential of the technology. Instead, just try to establish in the minds of the audience that the technology produces a massive excess of total energy beyond any doubt whatsoever.
One request I would make of the third party is to show that each reaction (even if it is not nuclear) is producing more energy in eV than would be possible if the hydrogen was under going chemical reactions (a few eV) or even some sort of supra-chemical reaction (200+ eV). This would prove that your technology is clearly superior – even beyond LENR – because you are not consuming any significant amount of fuel over time. Even over a week of operation, I suspect that if you performed a calculation including the total number of hydrogen atoms and the energy produced by the reactor, the total energy per reaction would be in the millions of eV.
Finally, I just wanted to ask if it is practical to extract energy from the plasma ball via the ion acoustic oscillations it produces that send current through the external circuit? If this is possible, I suspect it would be more practical for long term use than using sacrificial probes inserted into the plasma ball that would eventually be degraded by the unique conditions in the ballerina. I think what’s important is not to let any part of the reactor actually touch the plasma ball.
Keith T, Your explanation to Andrea February 7th. I presume this is what you are inferring. A magnetic vector potential is a propelling force of a physical existence i.e. a hydrogen atom producing a force. Is the interior of the atom shielded from influence? i.e. a type of barrier. You say the AB effect demonstrates that an electron can be influenced. This is where you lose me, why abbreviate and use the term AB effect. If you explain this effect i.e. none abbreviation I could understand what you mean. This subject is technical and I cannot emphasize the importance of not abbreviating phenomenas. Every phenomena has a none abbreviation. Why use it when the subject is technical. I mention this because you are not the only person to abbreviate. With regards your question, I believe you are referring to the electro magnetic propulsion unit i.e. E.M. drive which I agree has little published information and which I consider off subject with regards the self sustaining mode of the E Cat and the requirement of a propulsion unit but I agree the subject is interesting.
Regards Eric Ashworth
Dear Andrea,
Anyone who wants to suspect that there are hidden batteries will do so irrespective of whether or not it is plugged in to the grid. Don’t fall for that. Your main feature is that SKL does not need the grid. Showcase it.
Regards,
Patrick
Long Time Follower:
Not a bad idea.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Dr Rossi,
Maybe it is better if in your presentation of the Ecat SKL you do not make the closed loop, because almost surely voices will be raised that there are hidden batteries or the like. I suggest to plug a power source and measure both the electricity the Ecat draws from the grid and the electricity that it produces: then it will be obvious that the COP is infinite, if the electricity produced is more than the electricity consumed.
Cheers
Long Time Follwer
KeithT:
Sorry, I am not able to answer.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
We are making it.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Are you personally building the new SKL component, or is it being outsourced somewhere?
Best wishes,
Frank Acland
Dear Andrea,
I am trying to piece together and understand, for a magnetic vector potential that has physical existence, if a hydrogen atom as a whole can be influenced by a sufficiently strong magnetic vector potential, if within a hydrogen atom the relationship between electron and proton can be influenced or is the interior of an atom somehow shielded from influence, the AB effect demonstrates that an electron can be influenced, can it still be influenced within the confines of a hydrogen atom, can the proton and its contents be influenced.
There is very little on this subject to be found within published papers, if there is possibility of influence from the magnetic vector potential (or electric scalar potential) how can this be detected.
All of this may or may not be part of ongoing investigations, hopefully it is, and hopefully any results can be shared in future papers.
Regards,
Keith Thomson.
KeithT:
Can you explain more clearly what do you mean, exactly ?
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Colin Watters:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Lotr Mileikowsky:
It has to be experienced.
We aim to 200-4000 duty hours.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Chuck Davis:
Thank you for yor attention to the work of our Team,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
It is very comforting to realize that the reliability issue is on track to be resolved,
Warm Regards,
Chuck Davis
Dear Dr. Rossi,
today I have only one question:
What number of hours (or days) is existing E-Cat SKL capable of uninterruped run, until some part is broken?
Note: This part which need be replaced by not just invented new part.
Dear Andrea,
A. Is it possible a magnetic vector potential can surround and permeate an atom.
B. If a magnetic vector potential Aharonov-Bohm effect experiment was repeated using single hydrogen atoms passing a long solenoid instead of electrons, would the same effect of increase and decrease of speed be seen for the atoms as was for electrons, the phase shift then producing an interference pattern.
Regards,
Keith Thomson.
Dear Andrea,
Glad to hear the current problems only affect the electricity generating parts. Good to hear the heat only version of the reactor isn’t affected.
Regards
Colin
Randy Miller:
Sorry, these issues are confidential.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mr. Rossi, thx a lot for the reply.
Can You, maybe, describe ( briefly )
1) Which kind of problem the new component shall solve ???
2) …just describe it briefly… general…
3) So that we at least can make a picture of which problems You are trying to solve…
Randy Miller:
1 exactly
2 confidential and we think we are resolving the problem
Thank you for your kind offer of support,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Hi. Mr. Ross.
Thx for the quick reply.
1) What means “does not exist yet” ? Is there not a single tool/component
in the world, which can Do the job ?
2) If You cannot say, which function it shall provide or support, can You,
maybe, tell us a similee, what it should do ?
So we can, at least imagine, why there is the need to invent a complete new component…
Gerard McEk:
No
It just takes some time.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Randy Miller:
1 that does not exist yet
2 confidential
3 because the problem emerged recently
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Mr. Rossi.
You said, You need to invent a new component.
1) What means “new” in this context ?
2) Which function will it have ( or which function will it support ) ?
3) Why do You have detected this so late ?
Best regards
Randy.
Dear Andrea,
Just one question:
Does this reliability problem also prevent the E-Cat SK Leonardo being tested and certified?
I wish you all the wisdom to solve this problem. Good Luck!
Kind regards, Gerard
Bob Luk, O.K. I do need information and I think everyone contributing to the JONP is on the same page and therefore we are in agreement but depending upon ones life experiences we have different view points. My question now is how many times does one need to demonstrate a mechanism or an experiment to convince someone of its worth regarding a new discovery?.
I was of the opinion that once would be sufficient but maybe it requires a specific number of times. I am unaware of any academic rules but I am interested to learn. With regards my own experience in R&D a first time failure was sufficient for me to think again and redesign until I got the result I required. What is the golden rule?. For me this is the strength of the JONP. Where else could I get a response and where else could I ask such a question as I do appreciate interaction on this important subject which I have been involved in for over twenty years.
Regards Eric Ashworth
KeithT:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea
For development or future use, is it possible to observe the plasma zone using ultra high speed, high resolution video and photography, filtered for the emission wavelengths of interest, focusing at different scales and even down to microscopic contents if possible. Observing start-up, running, shutdown, and if particular faults are known to occur from particular triggers observe these events also.
The observed results may of use in development, but would be good for future publicity, the recent images of the surface of the sun showing the top of the convection cells were for scientific use but the public has certainly shown interest.
Regards,
Keith Thomson.
Dear Andrea,
Is waiting for this new component to be created the reason why the presentation may not occur in February?
Many thanks,
Frank Acland
@Eric Ashworth,
even in a personal demonstration, one needs to know how many times demonstrations must be repeated before claiming success
Bob Luk
Colin Watters:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Thank you for your attention to the work of our great Team,
Warm Regards,
A.R.