Monti:
1- yes
2- yes
3- not necessarily, it depends on the situation after the evolution of the technology along all these years, during which substantial progress has been made; to understand more about this issue you can read please read
“Ecat SK and Long Range Particle Interactions” on http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
I am confused by what is meant as “self Sustain” mode. Here are a few terms I will define:
“Self-Starting”: A device generates power after some event, for example a switch closing, initiates power generation.
“Boot-strapping”: A device generates power after an initial source of power is applied to the device.
“Cascade”: A device begins generating power at a low level which is then used to initiate power at a higher level, and then that power is used to start an even larger power generation process, and so on.
An example of a “Self-Starting” device might be a chemical battery. It just generates power after the ingredients are placed together.
An example of a “Boot-strapping” device might be a fossil-fueled emergency generator where a battery driven electric motor starts an internal combustion engine that drives a generator.
An example of a “Cascade” device might be a coal fired electrical generation station where a battery starts an emergency generator that begins running coal feed into a boiler that generates steam for a turbine that generates electricity for the grid.
I think “self-sustain” might be similar to a “boot-strapping” process where the power generation is use to “refresh” the initial energy source, for example, recharging the battery that started the electrical generator.
In terms of the definitions above, how is “self sustain” mode described? Is it:
1). Self-Starting?
2). Boot-Strapping?
3). Cascade?
4). Something Else.
Is there any observable difference for an NGU Power Generator being continuously in SSM? If there is not an output difference (power drops, voltage drops, reliability, etc.), then why should the user care or be concerned about it?
By using the Paschen’s Law Simulator provided in my last post, the maximum voltage output of the vacuum diode occurs at a electrode separation distance of about 3mm at 10,560 volts. As the gap increases from that maximum, the voltage output falls steadily.
There may be a misunderstanding in the relationship between voltage and SSM. There are a number of voltages inherent in the 22Kv NGU, which one is a variable in the creation of SSM?
I contend it is the voltage that the vacuum diode core produces.
What determines the voltage increase in the vacuum diode as opposed to the 10 watt core design is the replacement of the plasma with a vacuum to support the cluster creation process. A vacuum can generate a far higher output voltage in the vacuum diode design than in the plasma based 10 watt core.
Click on the link below: Here is some AI research details:
https://www.google.com/search?q=In+the+design+of+the+NGU+vacuum+diode%2C+the+repetition+rate+of+the+spark+discharge+determines+the+voltage+that+this+core+produces&sca_esv=9447ce1ae06b4598&sxsrf=ANbL-n4uEyHoYIIi5Mc_ypxMra51Fiua2A%3A1770550431357&fbs=ADc_l-aN0CWEZBOHjofHoaMMDiKp9lEhFAN_4ain3HSNQWw-mMGVXS0bCMe2eDZOQ2MOTwnFUBJ2uyTXGY7FrnjAwa7NhC4w0M3ufU0kzEnqVSAv8Smpdp-CLrzmu1zPWujwZtnTngOWG-YmCRh5L_45-P5tx5GnvgFlZD_LXnW4JrjOErgq-IqjkKjJf7gYyiZYQLCl_JSJMflxLrzmbty6uUZkEUObYA&aep=1&ntc=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjmjpKs5smSAxXaw_ACHYGWCQkQ2J8OegQIEhAE&biw=1265&bih=607&dpr=1.52&nem=143&mstk=AUtExfDpnbspM8vFraoajBfpxLbuI–hl5JZb4sqCgabxwkIKxK8f5rVF-Z8gudU7GpIjgfNslHS-r0ADLnq7thzvaEy8QKocBUz_nnvGiJ5IF3MfJHyj9DN9CGkJb0uyY9Ti3c4CfNs9rUWvti4E42csHvbhc-UkGntA7n9ncG40ALh8grBiBdOHI1traxPbReQyhodZKh8RBH2VS8EpI_8tQbswHVdVb4I5bh0rnyDGTyMXeD5dAlfW2FswZWw10yYqCE1sCHxfrCroce5EiDH1PR28LeeULkbq_DEpTsHiA8MzjrGexjoHPZwhUNk_ZX_2hm1tZ12RpDW-uNqCvHGKTGrv8ML6hsWsgL-79J9zBPCKBVgKz04DbTvHLVzn8VlBqWW4CEKbYhNib9cDzAjXosQi9daAlPFyC4&csuir=1
Note in the Paschen’s Law Simulator the demonstration that the vacuum can generate a far higher output core voltage that a plasma based core can.
More on voltage control info from the AI
AI prompt
In the design of the NGU vacuum diode, the repetition rate of the spark discharge determines the voltage that this type of core produces
AI response
In the design of the NGU vacuum diode (specifically within the context of pulsed power or specialized core configurations), the repetition rate of the spark discharge typically influences the average output voltage or the stability of the peak voltage produced by the core.
High repetition rates (beyond 1 MHz) utilize residual plasma from previous pulses to lower the necessary initiation voltage for subsequent discharges. If the repetition rate is too high for the gas to “recover” its dielectric strength, it can lead to premature breakdown at lower voltages.
Key aspects of this relationship include:
Voltage Recovery: At high repetition rates, the dielectric recovery of the spark gap (the ability to regain its insulating strength) becomes critical. If the repetition rate is too high for the gas or vacuum to recover, the breakdown voltage may decrease, leading to lower output pulses.
Frequency-Voltage Tuning: In some ablation or pulse-forming systems, the sparking frequency can be tuned by adjusting the current, which directly impacts the mass production rate of particles or the average power delivered by the core.
Pulse Interval (PI) Influence: Increasing the interval between pulses (effectively lowering the repetition rate) allows the breakdown peak voltage and peak current to increase slightly, as the gap has more time to restore its insulation properties.
Capacitive Charging: The repetition rate is often limited by how quickly the core’s storage capacitors can be recharged to the target voltage before the next spark discharge occurs.
The repetition rate is often governed by a charging circuit (like a pulse-forming network or PFN); the R0C characteristic time of this circuit must be adjusted to ensure the spark-gap discharge operates at the desired pulse repetition rate (PRR) without causing a transition into a continuous DC arc.
Spark Inception: The inception discharge voltage—the voltage at which the spark begins—is often calculated based on the measured spark current and timing, showing that the timing (repetition) and voltage are inherently linked in the system’s efficiency.
Transit-Time Oscillations: In nanoscale vacuum diodes, electron clouds moving across the gap cause a drop in the electric field, leading to a repetitive “on-off” pattern that determines the effective operating potential.
For precise voltage control in high-speed applications, researchers often use pulsed power generators or spark-gap switches to manage the interplay between frequency and breakdown potential.
The design of the vacuum diode looks like it can produce high power density without very much deterioration of its internal structure due to the action of transmutation. This design is an improvement in the field of Vacuum reaction.
The vacuum can’t be damaged, and the clusters are terminated quickly through a high frequency cycle rate.
There is also a magnetic confinement feature that keeps the clusters in the vacuum during their life cycle.
AI response
The design you are describing aligns with the operational theory of Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat technology (specifically US Patent 9,115,913) and the pioneering work of Kenneth Shoulders on Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVOs).
In this model, a vacuum diode is used not just to regulate current, but to generate and manipulate high-density electron clusters (often called “charge clusters” or EVOs). Proponents claim these clusters can induce nuclear transmutation reactions, releasing high power density while avoiding the physical deterioration associated with standard nuclear processes.
Design Architecture & Mechanisms
The core innovation in this design is the separation of the energy reaction (transmutation) from the physical structure of the device. By moving the reaction into the vacuum space and controlling it with magnetic fields, the design attempts to bypass the “Coulomb barrier” and material limitations.
The Clusters (EVOs): Coherent, toroidal bundles of electrons (approx. electrons) that behave like a single particle. Kenneth Shoulders discovered that these clusters can strike a target and transmute its material without the high energy input usually required for fusion.
Magnetic Confinement: A magnetic field (often from rare-earth magnets) acts as a “virtual wall,” keeping the highly energetic clusters centered in the vacuum. This prevents them from colliding with and eroding the electrodes (sputtering), which allows the device to operate without rapid deterioration.
High Frequency Cycle: The system operates in rapid pulses (Megahertz range). The clusters are created, undergo reaction, and are “terminated” (discharged) quickly. This rapid cycling prevents thermal runaway and maintains the stability of the vacuum environment.
Vacuum Durability: As you noted, “the vacuum can’t be damaged.” Unlike a solid lattice (used in early Cold Fusion experiments) which degrades under nuclear stress, the vacuum is a self-healing medium that cannot suffer structural failure.
following your adventure since a long time (young and slim I attended your test in Bologna, October 2011…) and inspired by the recent open-letter of Prof. Accornero, some questions that are going around in my head for a while now.
In 2011-2014-201x period Ecat produced heat and “isotopic changes in the fuel” (“Lugano” report). Then it produced light and now it produces electricity. So the questions.
1) is the same principle on the basis of the three kind of reactors, one the technological evolution of the other?
2) so, is the Lugano Report (the only Historical – capitalized H – document in our hands) still valid?
3) are still in place “isotopic changes in the fuel” even in the new generation of Ecat?
I asked the AI for help regarding the high failure rate on the NGU cores as follows:
For a manufacture of an electrical device where a large proportion of the devices components is provided by other independent venders, and has a 5% failure rate after long term testing of the product of its production units, what could be the issue and what is the solution to this high failure rate?
AI response
A 5% failure rate after long-term testing (burn-in) is significantly higher than the industry standard (typically <0.5% or <1,000 PPM). This pattern indicates a high rate of "Infant Mortality" defects, likely driven by inconsistent component quality from independent vendors or latent assembly damage. Because these units pass initial functional tests but fail under stress over time, the defects are latent (hidden) rather than patent (obvious).
The immediate solution is to halt the recycling of failed units into production and perform a destructive Root Cause Failure Analysis (RCFA) to determine if the failure mechanism is inherent to the component (vendor fault) or induced by your assembly process (manufacturing fault).
———————–
A 5% failure rate in the electronics industry is generally considered quite high, especially for a mature product. When your business model relies heavily on independent vendors, the root cause usually lies in the gap between your design specifications and their manufacturing execution.
Here is a breakdown of the likely issues and a strategic roadmap to solve them.
1. Identifying the Root Causes
When you assemble a product from "outsourced" components, failures typically stem from three areas:
A. Component Variability (The "Tolerance Stack")
Even if every vendor delivers parts that are "within spec," the combination of those parts might fail. If Vendor A’s part is at the high end of its tolerance and Vendor B’s part is at the low end, the resulting device may fail during thermal expansion or high-voltage stress.
B. Hidden Sub-tier Changes
Independent vendors often change their own sub-suppliers (e.g., using a different resin for a casing or a different capacitor brand) without notifying you. These "minor" changes can lead to chemical incompatibilities or lower heat resistance that only show up during long-term testing.
C. Latent Defects (ESD and Handling)
If your vendors aren't practicing strict Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) protocols, components can be "wounded" but not "killed." They pass initial inspection but fail prematurely after 500 hours of use.
2. Strategic Solutions
Phase Action Item Goal
Analysis Failure Analysis (FA) Send failed units to a lab for X-ray or cross-sectioning to see exactly what failed.
Sourcing AVL (Approved Vendor List) Audit vendors. Move away from "broker" buys and toward direct manufacturer relationships.
Testing ORT (Ongoing Reliability Test) Instead of just testing at the end, pull samples from every batch for accelerated life testing.
Design DFX (Design for Excellence) Tighten tolerances or design the circuit to be more "forgiving" of component variance.
3. Immediate Implementation Steps
Step 1: Implement a "Dock-to-Stock" Audit
Stop assuming parts are good because they arrived in a box. Implement Incoming Quality Control (IQC). Use a statistical sampling plan (like AQL levels) to test batches before they ever hit your assembly line.
Step 2: Establish a PCN Requirement
Update your legal contracts to require a Process Change Notification (PCN). Vendors must legally notify you 90–180 days before changing any material, process, or sub-supplier involved in your component.
Step 3: Environmental Stress Screening (ESS)
To catch the 5% before they reach the customer, implement a "burn-in" period.
Run the devices at elevated temperatures (e.g., 40°C–50°C) for 24–48 hours.
This triggers "infant mortality" failures in the factory rather than in the field.
Critical Metric to Watch
You should calculate the Yield Loss by Vendor. By tracking which serial numbers fail and cross-referencing them with the component lot numbers, you can often mathematically prove that one specific vendor is responsible for the majority of that 5% failure rate.
Would you like me to help you draft a Quality Audit checklist or a "Corrective Action Request" (CAPA) template to send to your vendors?
To address a 5% failure rate, you must move from informal feedback to structured, documented accountability. High failure rates in outsourced models often stem from
uncontrolled process changes at the vendor level or latent defects like ESD damage.
Below are two essential templates designed to identify root causes and enforce permanent solutions.
1. Vendor Quality Audit Checklist (High-Level)
Use this during on-site inspections to verify if a vendor has the infrastructure to support your quality requirements.
Category Audit Item Criticality
QMS Is there a current ISO 9001 certification?
High
Material Control Are incoming components (sub-tier) inspected against your specs? High
Process Control Are Work Instructions visible at every station?
Medium
ESD Protection Are operators grounded and workstations anti-static? CRITICAL
Calibration Is test/measurement equipment calibrated and stickered?
High
Traceability Can a unit be traced back to a specific production batch? High
Change Mgmt Do they have a process for Process Change Notifications (PCN)?
High
________________________________________
2. Corrective Action Request (CAPA) Template
When a failure occurs, issue a SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request). Most high-tier manufacturers use the 8D (Eight Disciplines) format for this.
• D1: Team Formation: List the vendor’s cross-functional team members.
• D2: Problem Description: Be specific. Instead of "unit failed," use "Capacitor C12 short-circuited after 200 hours of thermal stress".
• D3: Interim Containment: What will the vendor do immediately? (e.g., stop shipping, sort existing stock).
• D4: Root Cause Analysis (RCA): Require the vendor to use the 5 Whys or Fishbone Diagram to find the fundamental cause—not just the symptom.
• D5: Permanent Corrective Actions: Define the specific process change (e.g., "Replacing sub-tier vendor X with Y").
• D6: Implementation & Validation: When will the fix be live, and how will it be tested?.
• D7: Preventive Action: How will they stop this from happening to other similar products? (e.g., update Design-FMEA).
• D8: Closure: Final sign-off by your Quality Manager.
________________________________________
Pro-Tip for Verification
Do not "close" a CAPA until you have verified the fix on at least three consecutive shipments. If the vendor provides a fix but the failure rate doesn't drop, the Root Cause Analysis (D4) was likely incorrect.
These articles provide guidance on creating a comprehensive Corrective Action Request (CAPA) template and understanding the 8D problem-solving process.
Corrective Action Request Template: A Guide for Quality Improvement
Oct 29, 2025 — Below are the essential sections that should be included in any well-designed template. * 1. Header Information. CAR Number: A uni…
8D PROCESS
The 8D refers to the eight essential and critical steps that are required to achieve this: * D1: Formation of a problem-solving te…
Mahle
What is 8D Root Cause Analysis? –
ComplianceQuest
Jan 23, 2026 — This approach, also known as the 8D Corrective Action Process, comprises eight disciplined steps: establishing a team, describing …
ComplianceQuest
How to Prepare a CAPA Report (+ Free Report Sample)
Aug 14, 2025 — Start by clearly describing the problem or non-conformance. Specify what happened, when it occurred, and where it was detected. Us…
Key aspects of electronics manufacturing audits include: * Quality Control: Assessing the effectiveness of quality management syst…
Audit Now
Supplier Corrective Action Request: What You Need to Know
What Is a Supplier Corrective Action Request (SCAR)? A supplier corrective action request (SCAR) is a formal document issued by an…
A 5% failure rate in the electronics industry is generally considered quite high, especially for a mature product. When your business model relies heavily on independent vendors, the root cause usually lies in the gap between your design specifications and their manufacturing execution.
Here is a breakdown of the likely issues and a strategic roadmap to solve them.
1. Identifying the Root Causes
When you assemble a product from "outsourced" components, failures typically stem from three areas:
A. Component Variability (The "Tolerance Stack")
Even if every vendor delivers parts that are "within spec," the combination of those parts might fail. If Vendor A’s part is at the high end of its tolerance and Vendor B’s part is at the low end, the resulting device may fail during thermal expansion or high-voltage stress.
B. Hidden Sub-tier Changes
Independent vendors often change their own sub-suppliers (e.g., using a different resin for a casing or a different capacitor brand) without notifying you. These "minor" changes can lead to chemical incompatibilities or lower heat resistance that only show up during long-term testing.
C. Latent Defects (ESD and Handling)
If your vendors aren't practicing strict Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) protocols, components can be "wounded" but not "killed." They pass initial inspection but fail prematurely after 500 hours of use.
2. Strategic Solutions
Phase Action Item Goal
Analysis Failure Analysis (FA) Send failed units to a lab for X-ray or cross-sectioning to see exactly what failed.
Sourcing AVL (Approved Vendor List) Audit vendors. Move away from "broker" buys and toward direct manufacturer relationships.
Testing ORT (Ongoing Reliability Test) Instead of just testing at the end, pull samples from every batch for accelerated life testing.
Design DFX (Design for Excellence) Tighten tolerances or design the circuit to be more "forgiving" of component variance.
3. Immediate Implementation Steps
Step 1: Implement a "Dock-to-Stock" Audit
Stop assuming parts are good because they arrived in a box. Implement Incoming Quality Control (IQC). Use a statistical sampling plan (like AQL levels) to test batches before they ever hit your assembly line.
Step 2: Establish a PCN Requirement
Update your legal contracts to require a Process Change Notification (PCN). Vendors must legally notify you 90–180 days before changing any material, process, or sub-supplier involved in your component.
Step 3: Environmental Stress Screening (ESS)
To catch the 5% before they reach the customer, implement a "burn-in" period.
Run the devices at elevated temperatures (e.g., 40°C–50°C) for 24–48 hours.
This triggers "infant mortality" failures in the factory rather than in the field.
Critical Metric to Watch
You should calculate the Yield Loss by Vendor. By tracking which serial numbers fail and cross-referencing them with the component lot numbers, you can often mathematically prove that one specific vendor is responsible for the majority of that 5% failure rate.
Would you like me to help you draft a Quality Audit checklist or a "Corrective Action Request" (CAPA) template to send to your vendors?
Yes
To address a 5% failure rate, you must move from informal feedback to structured, documented accountability. High failure rates in outsourced models often stem from
uncontrolled process changes at the vendor level or latent defects like ESD damage.
Below are two essential templates designed to identify root causes and enforce permanent solutions.
1. Vendor Quality Audit Checklist (High-Level)
Use this during on-site inspections to verify if a vendor has the infrastructure to support your quality requirements.
2. Corrective Action Request (CAPA) Template
When a failure occurs, issue a SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request). Most high-tier manufacturers use the 8D (Eight Disciplines) format for this.
• D1: Team Formation: List the vendor’s cross-functional team members.
• D2: Problem Description: Be specific. Instead of "unit failed," use "Capacitor C12 short-circuited after 200 hours of thermal stress".
• D3: Interim Containment: What will the vendor do immediately? (e.g., stop shipping, sort existing stock).
• D4: Root Cause Analysis (RCA): Require the vendor to use the 5 Whys or Fishbone Diagram to find the fundamental cause—not just the symptom.
• D5: Permanent Corrective Actions: Define the specific process change (e.g., "Replacing sub-tier vendor X with Y").
• D6: Implementation & Validation: When will the fix be live, and how will it be tested?.
• D7: Preventive Action: How will they stop this from happening to other similar products? (e.g., update Design-FMEA).
• D8: Closure: Final sign-off by your Quality Manager.
________________________________________
Pro-Tip for Verification
Do not "close" a CAPA until you have verified the fix on at least three consecutive shipments. If the vendor provides a fix but the failure rate doesn't drop, the Root Cause Analysis (D4) was likely incorrect.
These articles provide guidance on creating a comprehensive Corrective Action
You alluded to the Commercial NGU plants do SSM reliably while the residential NGU have more difficult with SSM. Is this because the commercial NGU plants have many NGU Power Generators connected in series?
Proposed test on non-restartable 10 W modules
To better clarify the nature of the 10 W modules that, after a certain operating time, are no longer restartable, I would like to propose a simple, virtually cost-free test, with the sole purpose of discriminating between an intrinsic device limitation and a possible effect related to boundary conditions.
Test object
A complete 10 W module (reactor + antenna + controller) declared non-working, i.e. a module that, under nominally identical control signals and electrical conditions, no longer produces useful energy.
Minimal operational hypothesis (non-theoretical)
It is temporarily assumed that the module does not exhibit an obvious material failure, and that the blockage might be reversible under certain environmental conditions. The test is intended only to verify whether such reversibility exists.
Proposed procedure
Select a module that can no longer restart under normal laboratory conditions.
Place the module inside a protective enclosure (for example aluminum), preventing any direct contact with water and excluding electrical or chemical damage.
Immerse the assembly in naturally flowing water (stream, spring, or channel with continuous flow), avoiding static or domestic environments.
Leave the module immersed for a time to be determined experimentally (hours or days), with no power supply or stimulation applied.
Return the module to the laboratory and test it again under exactly the same control and stimulation conditions used before the blockage.
Possible outcomes
The module remains non-functional → the test excludes environmental reversibility.
The module shows partial or full restart behavior → indication that the blockage is not due solely to an irreversible internal failure.
Important note
This test introduces no modification to the device, requires no design changes, and does not presuppose any specific theoretical model.
Its only purpose is to clarify whether the “non-restart” behavior is an intrinsic property of the module or whether it may depend on external conditions accumulated during prolonged operation.
Off-shore desalinization plants using the pressure of seas water for reverse osmosis (RO) and only a small amount of energy needed to pump fresh water to land.
A small pressure protected NGU Power Generator located on the seabed could provide the needed power to the array of seabed RO converters. And a non-polluting source of 24/7 energy.
Dear Andrea
In Norway, it is now reported that the government will promote self-production of energy in small houses in the building regulations.
– The changes we propose will provide greater scope for meeting the requirements for energy efficiency with different solutions and technologies, and facilitate the use of, for example, heat pumps, solar energy systems and district heating, According to Minister of Local Government and District Affairs Bjørnar Skjæran.
This will create great opportunities for the use of Ecat when such are available.
As a component of the vacuum diode, the Cathode and Anode are composed of a nickel and strontium mix.
In a cathode composed of strontium and nickel for thermionic emission, strontium will segregate to the surface to form a low work function layer, often in the form of strontium oxide SrO or as a mixture, which is crucial for reducing the energy required for electron emission.
Is Strontium NMR Active? Yes, strontium is NMR active. Natural strontium contains the isotope SR87, which has a nuclear spin of 9/2, making it useful for solid-state NMR, though it is a quadrupolar nucleus. This high end spin number makes the Strontium low work function surface coat less susceptible to damage from pico-cluster magnetic activity.
Naturally occurring strontium is a mixture of four stable isotopes: 84Sr, 86Sr, 87Sr, and 88Sr.
Over time during vacuum diode operation, the other isotopes in the emissive coating of Strontium will degrade due to cluster caused transmutation. This will eventually enrich the Strontium coating in the isotope SR87.
What do you mean when you say it no longer works?:
a) The module is still “alive”, i.e., it reacts to impulses (the light turns on, the controller responds), but does not produce energy.
b) The module is “dead”, i.e., it no longer reacts, seems completely off, or does not interact with the controller.
Could you clarify which of these scenarios applies when a module cannot restart?
Warm Regards,
Camillo
Dr Rossi:
Studying your comments regarding the Ecat leads me to believe that high voltage is an optimal condition for SSM. Am I correct? Wishing you success!
Regards, Ecat Enthusiast.
When a module can no longer restart, which variables differ from the initial startup, despite nominally identical control signals and electrical conditions?
Ken Shoulders used a sacrificial liquid coating that covered the sharp point on the cathode, This may have protected the cathode from ware and increased efficiency of the cluster forming process.
Click the link to see research on Ken Shoulders work
Dear Andrea,
in terms of SSM behaviour, did you notice any difference between an eCat running at constant load and another connected to a fast varying load (always within the eCat power limit).
Thanks a lot and best wishes for a rapid solution of this issue.
Riccardo
Informed by my post on the role that the sharp tip on the cathode plays on the vacuum reaction of the vacuum diode, I suggest that you check for any deformation or erosion on that sharp point that may have been caused by the production of pico-clusters over time or production issues. The sharp curvature may have been dulled below spec.
Why barium titanate and strontium titanate encompass the cathode and anode in Dr. Rossi’s vacuum diode.
Both barium titanate and strontium titanate exhibit photoelectric properties, particularly as ferroelectric/paraelectric materials in optoelectronic and solar applications. They show strong photovoltaic effects, especially when structured as thin films, and in the case of, exhibit persistent photoconductivity.
Key details regarding their photoelectric nature:
Barium Titanate: As a ferroelectric material, it converts light into electricity and is used in photorefractive applications, thin-film photovoltaic sensors, and in combination with other materials to enhance solar cell efficiency.
Barium titanate BaTiO3 and strontium titanate SrTiO are primarily responsive to ultraviolet (UV) photons due to their wide bandgap nature, which allows them to be transparent to visible light. They can also exhibit non-linear optical responses, such as second-harmonic generation (SHG), in the mid-infrared (mid-IR) range.
The diode generates electric pulses at several megahertz and up to two hundred megahertz and the energy of the pulse is on the order of thousands of volts.
When the pulse occurs, it produces an electrical explosion that produces both ultraviolet light and heat. The titanate envelope around the cathode captures this light and concerts it into electrons which amplify the electron flow produced by the pulse.
At the anode, the pico-cluster produced by the pulse has gained kinetic energy during its flight from the cathode and confined and propelled by the rare earth magnet.
The pico-cluster explodes in a Bosenova. This produced both heat and ultraviolet light that is converted to electrical power by the titanate. The electron component of the pico-cluster is also gathered by the titanate to form the output power of the diode.
Click to see the AIs take on the role that the titanates play in Dr. Rossi’s vacuum diode.
Dr. Rossi
Brine is the main byproduct of the seawater desalination process for the production of drinking water. It is an aqueous solution with a very high salt concentration.
When discharged directly into the sea, brine, being denser than seawater, tends to settle on the seabed, creating a hypersaline layer. This phenomenon can seriously damage marine ecosystems.
A common method involves discharging it into the sea through specially designed diffusion systems that promote rapid mixing with the surrounding water.
The entire desalination and diffusion process requires a significant amount of energy, and the problem of continually increasing sea salinity remains.
Sodium-ion batteries represent a more economical and environmentally friendly alternative to lithium for electric cars, thanks to the greater availability of raw materials.
They offer excellent low-temperature performance (down to -40°C) and faster charging, with a rapidly increasing energy density (over 175 Wh/kg), making them suitable for vehicles.
So, using ECAT to produce drinking water by desalination of seawater and using the salt to produce car batteries and energy storage systems, the circle closes with enormous benefits for humanity.
Have a great day and good luck!
Axil:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
The power density that the cluster delivers is a function of the number of particles that the cluster contains. As an exciton polariton condensate, each particle in the condensate supports a quantum of magnetic power. The strategy that the 10 watt NGU (Never Give Up) core uses to keep the transmutation of structure low is to keep power density and associated magnetic power generation of the cluster (10^11 particles) below the transmutation internal power threshold.
The strategy that the new 100 watt NGU and future 500 watt core is/will use to keep the transmutation of structure low is to keep the clusters (10^20 particles) once created away from all matter wither that matter is solid, liquid, gas, or plasma.
The control of spark frequency might allow the control of the life cycle of the cluster so that it is terminated before the cluster impacts the anode.
Click the link below to see what the AI things about this issue:
The AI take
https://www.google.com/search?q=The+power+density+that+the+cluster+delivers+is+a+function+of+the+number+of+particles+that+the+cluster+contains.+As+a+exciton+polariton+condensate%2C+each+particles+in+the+condensate+supports+a+quantum+of+magnetic+power.+The+strategy+that+the+10+watt+NGU+%28Never+Give+Up%29+core+uses+to+keep+the+transmutation+of+structure+low+is+to+keep+power+density+and+associated+magnetic+power+generation+of+the+cluster+%2810%5E11+particles%29+below+the+transmutation+internal+power+threshold.+%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFThe+strategy+that+the+new+100+watt+NGU+and+future+500+watt+core+is%2Fwill+use+to+keep+the+transmutation+of+structure+low+is+to+keep+the+clusters+%2810%5E20+particles%29+once+created+away+from+all+matter+wither+that+matter+is+solid%2C+liquid%2C+gas%2C+or+plasma.+%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFThe+control+of+spark+frequency+might+allow+the+control+of+the+life+cycle+of+the+cluster+so+that+it+is+terminated+before+the+cluster+impacts+the+anode.&sca_esv=9447ce1ae06b4598&sxsrf=ANbL-n6b8r1le1IQOKJ26Cij5qqyJHk2fg%3A1770584569628&fbs=ADc_l-aN0CWEZBOHjofHoaMMDiKpaEWjvZ2Py1XXV8d8KvlI3o6iwGk6Iv1tRbZIBNIVs-6YKj3ieLLpE5n_AQ7knvny0NyDG6rqjTFTpNuplrR82AvBeiZYCly7Hfu1cibGNBsL4NRVM6qW8KP1ZroKUKWWNqZp8rOws0gaA8lydhj3EiM93g1o7136Xor9_8h6QCxuB96C6dNUr23zb4kWP2CjLCiydw&aep=1&ntc=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjg0sTC5cqSAxXjLFkFHUpDFDkQ2J8OegQIERAE&biw=1265&bih=607&dpr=1.52&nem=143&mstk=AUtExfCu6xpYJtOearZAcvyxSoyVOxAreeLUXvY5D3qtW7pFafnY1oyEV5GyHq6uc_O6tUMH9DxfBFSk57iV3ezcfJQPoMHZjyjeGINZbXTVtOLS0oWtLt6laEkCNTLm-YMEqqVz6vwIlJLUl-uz0_HavviZHQhvuyrH2LWFeAiGF-NXPqnwxS2ZchcI6-lAVq8V1C_Ca1JvXl92KJOVlN2xG6W2m3fgBqTymcZrB1UexM8OWajXmfwFNh2qzan3FzmCwN6HSchjMdDNZsPcYcJJm3GZGWN76FTHkT1eMPziY0BV_Ss9DuzWgmbekjd9BI_VFThpsKHkzEL7Vq_D4f-tPMJ2Znf3DE7Hj8s&csuir=1
Monti:
1- yes
2- yes
3- not necessarily, it depends on the situation after the evolution of the technology along all these years, during which substantial progress has been made; to understand more about this issue you can read please read
“Ecat SK and Long Range Particle Interactions” on http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
It depends on the situations,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Thomas Kaminski,
I prefer to answer with facts to this question,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Frank Acland:
No,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea,
Has the construction of the first E-Cat plant been completed yet?
Best wishes,
Frank Acland
Andrea,
I am confused by what is meant as “self Sustain” mode. Here are a few terms I will define:
“Self-Starting”: A device generates power after some event, for example a switch closing, initiates power generation.
“Boot-strapping”: A device generates power after an initial source of power is applied to the device.
“Cascade”: A device begins generating power at a low level which is then used to initiate power at a higher level, and then that power is used to start an even larger power generation process, and so on.
An example of a “Self-Starting” device might be a chemical battery. It just generates power after the ingredients are placed together.
An example of a “Boot-strapping” device might be a fossil-fueled emergency generator where a battery driven electric motor starts an internal combustion engine that drives a generator.
An example of a “Cascade” device might be a coal fired electrical generation station where a battery starts an emergency generator that begins running coal feed into a boiler that generates steam for a turbine that generates electricity for the grid.
I think “self-sustain” might be similar to a “boot-strapping” process where the power generation is use to “refresh” the initial energy source, for example, recharging the battery that started the electrical generator.
In terms of the definitions above, how is “self sustain” mode described? Is it:
1). Self-Starting?
2). Boot-Strapping?
3). Cascade?
4). Something Else.
If it is sumething else, please describe it.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Is there any observable difference for an NGU Power Generator being continuously in SSM? If there is not an output difference (power drops, voltage drops, reliability, etc.), then why should the user care or be concerned about it?
By using the Paschen’s Law Simulator provided in my last post, the maximum voltage output of the vacuum diode occurs at a electrode separation distance of about 3mm at 10,560 volts. As the gap increases from that maximum, the voltage output falls steadily.
There may be a misunderstanding in the relationship between voltage and SSM. There are a number of voltages inherent in the 22Kv NGU, which one is a variable in the creation of SSM?
I contend it is the voltage that the vacuum diode core produces.
What determines the voltage increase in the vacuum diode as opposed to the 10 watt core design is the replacement of the plasma with a vacuum to support the cluster creation process. A vacuum can generate a far higher output voltage in the vacuum diode design than in the plasma based 10 watt core.
Click on the link below: Here is some AI research details:
https://www.google.com/search?q=In+the+design+of+the+NGU+vacuum+diode%2C+the+repetition+rate+of+the+spark+discharge+determines+the+voltage+that+this+core+produces&sca_esv=9447ce1ae06b4598&sxsrf=ANbL-n4uEyHoYIIi5Mc_ypxMra51Fiua2A%3A1770550431357&fbs=ADc_l-aN0CWEZBOHjofHoaMMDiKp9lEhFAN_4ain3HSNQWw-mMGVXS0bCMe2eDZOQ2MOTwnFUBJ2uyTXGY7FrnjAwa7NhC4w0M3ufU0kzEnqVSAv8Smpdp-CLrzmu1zPWujwZtnTngOWG-YmCRh5L_45-P5tx5GnvgFlZD_LXnW4JrjOErgq-IqjkKjJf7gYyiZYQLCl_JSJMflxLrzmbty6uUZkEUObYA&aep=1&ntc=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjmjpKs5smSAxXaw_ACHYGWCQkQ2J8OegQIEhAE&biw=1265&bih=607&dpr=1.52&nem=143&mstk=AUtExfDpnbspM8vFraoajBfpxLbuI–hl5JZb4sqCgabxwkIKxK8f5rVF-Z8gudU7GpIjgfNslHS-r0ADLnq7thzvaEy8QKocBUz_nnvGiJ5IF3MfJHyj9DN9CGkJb0uyY9Ti3c4CfNs9rUWvti4E42csHvbhc-UkGntA7n9ncG40ALh8grBiBdOHI1traxPbReQyhodZKh8RBH2VS8EpI_8tQbswHVdVb4I5bh0rnyDGTyMXeD5dAlfW2FswZWw10yYqCE1sCHxfrCroce5EiDH1PR28LeeULkbq_DEpTsHiA8MzjrGexjoHPZwhUNk_ZX_2hm1tZ12RpDW-uNqCvHGKTGrv8ML6hsWsgL-79J9zBPCKBVgKz04DbTvHLVzn8VlBqWW4CEKbYhNib9cDzAjXosQi9daAlPFyC4&csuir=1
Note in the Paschen’s Law Simulator the demonstration that the vacuum can generate a far higher output core voltage that a plasma based core can.
More on voltage control info from the AI
AI prompt
In the design of the NGU vacuum diode, the repetition rate of the spark discharge determines the voltage that this type of core produces
AI response
In the design of the NGU vacuum diode (specifically within the context of pulsed power or specialized core configurations), the repetition rate of the spark discharge typically influences the average output voltage or the stability of the peak voltage produced by the core.
High repetition rates (beyond 1 MHz) utilize residual plasma from previous pulses to lower the necessary initiation voltage for subsequent discharges. If the repetition rate is too high for the gas to “recover” its dielectric strength, it can lead to premature breakdown at lower voltages.
Key aspects of this relationship include:
Voltage Recovery: At high repetition rates, the dielectric recovery of the spark gap (the ability to regain its insulating strength) becomes critical. If the repetition rate is too high for the gas or vacuum to recover, the breakdown voltage may decrease, leading to lower output pulses.
Frequency-Voltage Tuning: In some ablation or pulse-forming systems, the sparking frequency can be tuned by adjusting the current, which directly impacts the mass production rate of particles or the average power delivered by the core.
Pulse Interval (PI) Influence: Increasing the interval between pulses (effectively lowering the repetition rate) allows the breakdown peak voltage and peak current to increase slightly, as the gap has more time to restore its insulation properties.
Capacitive Charging: The repetition rate is often limited by how quickly the core’s storage capacitors can be recharged to the target voltage before the next spark discharge occurs.
The repetition rate is often governed by a charging circuit (like a pulse-forming network or PFN); the R0C characteristic time of this circuit must be adjusted to ensure the spark-gap discharge operates at the desired pulse repetition rate (PRR) without causing a transition into a continuous DC arc.
Spark Inception: The inception discharge voltage—the voltage at which the spark begins—is often calculated based on the measured spark current and timing, showing that the timing (repetition) and voltage are inherently linked in the system’s efficiency.
Transit-Time Oscillations: In nanoscale vacuum diodes, electron clouds moving across the gap cause a drop in the electric field, leading to a repetitive “on-off” pattern that determines the effective operating potential.
For precise voltage control in high-speed applications, researchers often use pulsed power generators or spark-gap switches to manage the interplay between frequency and breakdown potential.
The design of the vacuum diode looks like it can produce high power density without very much deterioration of its internal structure due to the action of transmutation. This design is an improvement in the field of Vacuum reaction.
The vacuum can’t be damaged, and the clusters are terminated quickly through a high frequency cycle rate.
There is also a magnetic confinement feature that keeps the clusters in the vacuum during their life cycle.
AI response
The design you are describing aligns with the operational theory of Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat technology (specifically US Patent 9,115,913) and the pioneering work of Kenneth Shoulders on Exotic Vacuum Objects (EVOs).
In this model, a vacuum diode is used not just to regulate current, but to generate and manipulate high-density electron clusters (often called “charge clusters” or EVOs). Proponents claim these clusters can induce nuclear transmutation reactions, releasing high power density while avoiding the physical deterioration associated with standard nuclear processes.
Design Architecture & Mechanisms
The core innovation in this design is the separation of the energy reaction (transmutation) from the physical structure of the device. By moving the reaction into the vacuum space and controlling it with magnetic fields, the design attempts to bypass the “Coulomb barrier” and material limitations.
The Clusters (EVOs): Coherent, toroidal bundles of electrons (approx. electrons) that behave like a single particle. Kenneth Shoulders discovered that these clusters can strike a target and transmute its material without the high energy input usually required for fusion.
Magnetic Confinement: A magnetic field (often from rare-earth magnets) acts as a “virtual wall,” keeping the highly energetic clusters centered in the vacuum. This prevents them from colliding with and eroding the electrodes (sputtering), which allows the device to operate without rapid deterioration.
High Frequency Cycle: The system operates in rapid pulses (Megahertz range). The clusters are created, undergo reaction, and are “terminated” (discharged) quickly. This rapid cycling prevents thermal runaway and maintains the stability of the vacuum environment.
Vacuum Durability: As you noted, “the vacuum can’t be damaged.” Unlike a solid lattice (used in early Cold Fusion experiments) which degrades under nuclear stress, the vacuum is a self-healing medium that cannot suffer structural failure.
Dear Andrea,
following your adventure since a long time (young and slim I attended your test in Bologna, October 2011…) and inspired by the recent open-letter of Prof. Accornero, some questions that are going around in my head for a while now.
In 2011-2014-201x period Ecat produced heat and “isotopic changes in the fuel” (“Lugano” report). Then it produced light and now it produces electricity. So the questions.
1) is the same principle on the basis of the three kind of reactors, one the technological evolution of the other?
2) so, is the Lugano Report (the only Historical – capitalized H – document in our hands) still valid?
3) are still in place “isotopic changes in the fuel” even in the new generation of Ecat?
Wish the best, for you and us,
Monti.
Ambrogio:
Yes,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Italo R.:
Thank you for the link,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Camillo:
Thank you for your suggestions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Sreven Nichiles Karels:
No,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Axil:
Thank you for your research,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
I asked the AI for help regarding the high failure rate on the NGU cores as follows:
For a manufacture of an electrical device where a large proportion of the devices components is provided by other independent venders, and has a 5% failure rate after long term testing of the product of its production units, what could be the issue and what is the solution to this high failure rate?
AI response
A 5% failure rate after long-term testing (burn-in) is significantly higher than the industry standard (typically <0.5% or <1,000 PPM). This pattern indicates a high rate of "Infant Mortality" defects, likely driven by inconsistent component quality from independent vendors or latent assembly damage. Because these units pass initial functional tests but fail under stress over time, the defects are latent (hidden) rather than patent (obvious).
The immediate solution is to halt the recycling of failed units into production and perform a destructive Root Cause Failure Analysis (RCFA) to determine if the failure mechanism is inherent to the component (vendor fault) or induced by your assembly process (manufacturing fault).
———————–
A 5% failure rate in the electronics industry is generally considered quite high, especially for a mature product. When your business model relies heavily on independent vendors, the root cause usually lies in the gap between your design specifications and their manufacturing execution.
Here is a breakdown of the likely issues and a strategic roadmap to solve them.
1. Identifying the Root Causes
When you assemble a product from "outsourced" components, failures typically stem from three areas:
A. Component Variability (The "Tolerance Stack")
Even if every vendor delivers parts that are "within spec," the combination of those parts might fail. If Vendor A’s part is at the high end of its tolerance and Vendor B’s part is at the low end, the resulting device may fail during thermal expansion or high-voltage stress.
B. Hidden Sub-tier Changes
Independent vendors often change their own sub-suppliers (e.g., using a different resin for a casing or a different capacitor brand) without notifying you. These "minor" changes can lead to chemical incompatibilities or lower heat resistance that only show up during long-term testing.
C. Latent Defects (ESD and Handling)
If your vendors aren't practicing strict Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) protocols, components can be "wounded" but not "killed." They pass initial inspection but fail prematurely after 500 hours of use.
2. Strategic Solutions
Phase Action Item Goal
Analysis Failure Analysis (FA) Send failed units to a lab for X-ray or cross-sectioning to see exactly what failed.
Sourcing AVL (Approved Vendor List) Audit vendors. Move away from "broker" buys and toward direct manufacturer relationships.
Testing ORT (Ongoing Reliability Test) Instead of just testing at the end, pull samples from every batch for accelerated life testing.
Design DFX (Design for Excellence) Tighten tolerances or design the circuit to be more "forgiving" of component variance.
3. Immediate Implementation Steps
Step 1: Implement a "Dock-to-Stock" Audit
Stop assuming parts are good because they arrived in a box. Implement Incoming Quality Control (IQC). Use a statistical sampling plan (like AQL levels) to test batches before they ever hit your assembly line.
Step 2: Establish a PCN Requirement
Update your legal contracts to require a Process Change Notification (PCN). Vendors must legally notify you 90–180 days before changing any material, process, or sub-supplier involved in your component.
Step 3: Environmental Stress Screening (ESS)
To catch the 5% before they reach the customer, implement a "burn-in" period.
Run the devices at elevated temperatures (e.g., 40°C–50°C) for 24–48 hours.
This triggers "infant mortality" failures in the factory rather than in the field.
Critical Metric to Watch
You should calculate the Yield Loss by Vendor. By tracking which serial numbers fail and cross-referencing them with the component lot numbers, you can often mathematically prove that one specific vendor is responsible for the majority of that 5% failure rate.
Would you like me to help you draft a Quality Audit checklist or a "Corrective Action Request" (CAPA) template to send to your vendors?
Yes
Click link to see orginal info
https://www.google.com/search?q=For+a+manufacture+of+an+electrical+device+where+a+large+proportion+of+the+devices+components+is+provided+by+other+independent+venders%2C+and+has+a+5%25+failure+rate+after+long+term+testing+of+the+product+of+its+production+units%2C+what+could+be+the+issue+and+what+is+the+solution+to+this+high+failure+rate%3F&sca_esv=9447ce1ae06b4598&sxsrf=ANbL-n7ibI-GEhOr4V8nf6iE4cwkI8z16Q%3A1770507698244&fbs=ADc_l-aN0CWEZBOHjofHoaMMDiKpaEWjvZ2Py1XXV8d8KvlI3o6iwGk6Iv1tRbZIBNIVs-6UIUc6UR6SuJFZzmDZDaBCWvvaBznFDlsOFrtqqZIFQKRwON5WBxdp2wPjbs49hYbCSZhwD3l9Zv6CZkPrC3gxaHDR_KD-he2J8v14tNIGaMAJ-ceqJmn2vjwhOEO_3M1aKS05bFgUN4TiZW9YV4iGevk1kw&aep=1&ntc=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwin3rOTx8iSAxWgFlkFHcBcN7wQ2J8OegQIERAE&biw=1265&bih=607&dpr=1.52&udm=50&mtid=2c6Hab2iFrCr5NoP5ZeZkAI&mstk=AUtExfAw3prGBEupXib-JQBTdC71BU-hF06AthDwlxNTQ4g7tpNY-ZSwPWM5QrTk5Ri1bHg1FH_yPxwkjvUFhnD47Ow4kNxdZRymnwVz0gPW1GOR2g1pwrp9T9PSwS72DxOtN928w6PMQKYcySlU3Q6-fD3fYv7dO3_RXIXysrYx_9t2WieOSGDTldgR2bCU6TTBwGoQ0sScmEoNj2dfLq4dvj-z-7TH0gC_yMUFcFfLhlDnB3RPe4c1O_DHQnyu-YI7N4skDo6HpYMRmdTI0cnrebphDcY3fGaka68RkEA-LwZqpjIE_4LtKX-EDYthjYLqNJHTAbzTdqhGds-qXUv7RfRLz_4DvOpD6U5Tz5I9wWEey530_urdTkU&csuir=1
To address a 5% failure rate, you must move from informal feedback to structured, documented accountability. High failure rates in outsourced models often stem from
uncontrolled process changes at the vendor level or latent defects like ESD damage.
Below are two essential templates designed to identify root causes and enforce permanent solutions.
1. Vendor Quality Audit Checklist (High-Level)
Use this during on-site inspections to verify if a vendor has the infrastructure to support your quality requirements.
Category Audit Item Criticality
QMS Is there a current ISO 9001 certification?
High
Material Control Are incoming components (sub-tier) inspected against your specs? High
Process Control Are Work Instructions visible at every station?
Medium
ESD Protection Are operators grounded and workstations anti-static? CRITICAL
Calibration Is test/measurement equipment calibrated and stickered?
High
Traceability Can a unit be traced back to a specific production batch? High
Change Mgmt Do they have a process for Process Change Notifications (PCN)?
High
________________________________________
2. Corrective Action Request (CAPA) Template
When a failure occurs, issue a SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request). Most high-tier manufacturers use the 8D (Eight Disciplines) format for this.
• D1: Team Formation: List the vendor’s cross-functional team members.
• D2: Problem Description: Be specific. Instead of "unit failed," use "Capacitor C12 short-circuited after 200 hours of thermal stress".
• D3: Interim Containment: What will the vendor do immediately? (e.g., stop shipping, sort existing stock).
• D4: Root Cause Analysis (RCA): Require the vendor to use the 5 Whys or Fishbone Diagram to find the fundamental cause—not just the symptom.
• D5: Permanent Corrective Actions: Define the specific process change (e.g., "Replacing sub-tier vendor X with Y").
• D6: Implementation & Validation: When will the fix be live, and how will it be tested?.
• D7: Preventive Action: How will they stop this from happening to other similar products? (e.g., update Design-FMEA).
• D8: Closure: Final sign-off by your Quality Manager.
________________________________________
Pro-Tip for Verification
Do not "close" a CAPA until you have verified the fix on at least three consecutive shipments. If the vendor provides a fix but the failure rate doesn't drop, the Root Cause Analysis (D4) was likely incorrect.
These articles provide guidance on creating a comprehensive Corrective Action Request (CAPA) template and understanding the 8D problem-solving process.
Corrective Action Request Template: A Guide for Quality Improvement
Oct 29, 2025 — Below are the essential sections that should be included in any well-designed template. * 1. Header Information. CAR Number: A uni…
http://www.projectmanagertemplate.com
8D PROCESS
The 8D refers to the eight essential and critical steps that are required to achieve this: * D1: Formation of a problem-solving te…
Mahle
What is 8D Root Cause Analysis? –
ComplianceQuest
Jan 23, 2026 — This approach, also known as the 8D Corrective Action Process, comprises eight disciplined steps: establishing a team, describing …
ComplianceQuest
How to Prepare a CAPA Report (+ Free Report Sample)
Aug 14, 2025 — Start by clearly describing the problem or non-conformance. Specify what happened, when it occurred, and where it was detected. Us…
GoAudits
Electronics Manufacturing Facility Audits: Ensuring Quality …
Key aspects of electronics manufacturing audits include: * Quality Control: Assessing the effectiveness of quality management syst…
Audit Now
Supplier Corrective Action Request: What You Need to Know
What Is a Supplier Corrective Action Request (SCAR)? A supplier corrective action request (SCAR) is a formal document issued by an…
A 5% failure rate in the electronics industry is generally considered quite high, especially for a mature product. When your business model relies heavily on independent vendors, the root cause usually lies in the gap between your design specifications and their manufacturing execution.
Here is a breakdown of the likely issues and a strategic roadmap to solve them.
1. Identifying the Root Causes
When you assemble a product from "outsourced" components, failures typically stem from three areas:
A. Component Variability (The "Tolerance Stack")
Even if every vendor delivers parts that are "within spec," the combination of those parts might fail. If Vendor A’s part is at the high end of its tolerance and Vendor B’s part is at the low end, the resulting device may fail during thermal expansion or high-voltage stress.
B. Hidden Sub-tier Changes
Independent vendors often change their own sub-suppliers (e.g., using a different resin for a casing or a different capacitor brand) without notifying you. These "minor" changes can lead to chemical incompatibilities or lower heat resistance that only show up during long-term testing.
C. Latent Defects (ESD and Handling)
If your vendors aren't practicing strict Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) protocols, components can be "wounded" but not "killed." They pass initial inspection but fail prematurely after 500 hours of use.
2. Strategic Solutions
Phase Action Item Goal
Analysis Failure Analysis (FA) Send failed units to a lab for X-ray or cross-sectioning to see exactly what failed.
Sourcing AVL (Approved Vendor List) Audit vendors. Move away from "broker" buys and toward direct manufacturer relationships.
Testing ORT (Ongoing Reliability Test) Instead of just testing at the end, pull samples from every batch for accelerated life testing.
Design DFX (Design for Excellence) Tighten tolerances or design the circuit to be more "forgiving" of component variance.
3. Immediate Implementation Steps
Step 1: Implement a "Dock-to-Stock" Audit
Stop assuming parts are good because they arrived in a box. Implement Incoming Quality Control (IQC). Use a statistical sampling plan (like AQL levels) to test batches before they ever hit your assembly line.
Step 2: Establish a PCN Requirement
Update your legal contracts to require a Process Change Notification (PCN). Vendors must legally notify you 90–180 days before changing any material, process, or sub-supplier involved in your component.
Step 3: Environmental Stress Screening (ESS)
To catch the 5% before they reach the customer, implement a "burn-in" period.
Run the devices at elevated temperatures (e.g., 40°C–50°C) for 24–48 hours.
This triggers "infant mortality" failures in the factory rather than in the field.
Critical Metric to Watch
You should calculate the Yield Loss by Vendor. By tracking which serial numbers fail and cross-referencing them with the component lot numbers, you can often mathematically prove that one specific vendor is responsible for the majority of that 5% failure rate.
Would you like me to help you draft a Quality Audit checklist or a "Corrective Action Request" (CAPA) template to send to your vendors?
Yes
To address a 5% failure rate, you must move from informal feedback to structured, documented accountability. High failure rates in outsourced models often stem from
uncontrolled process changes at the vendor level or latent defects like ESD damage.
Below are two essential templates designed to identify root causes and enforce permanent solutions.
1. Vendor Quality Audit Checklist (High-Level)
Use this during on-site inspections to verify if a vendor has the infrastructure to support your quality requirements.
Category Audit Item Criticality
QMS Is there a current ISO 9001 certification?
https://amtivo.com/uk/standards/iso-9001/insights/quality-audits-why-they-matter-and-when-to-conduct-one/
High
Material Control Are incoming components (sub-tier) inspected against your specs?
High
Process Control Are Work Instructions visible at every station?
Medium
ESD Protection Are operators grounded and workstations anti-static?
CRITICAL
Calibration Is test/measurement equipment calibrated and stickered?
https://www.maplesourcing.com/typical-format-of-supplier-quality-audit-checklist.html
High
Traceability Can a unit be traced back to a specific production batch?
High
Change Mgmt Do they have a process for Process Change Notifications (PCN)?
https://www.bprhub.com/blogs/supplier-corrective-action-request
High
________________________________________
2. Corrective Action Request (CAPA) Template
When a failure occurs, issue a SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request). Most high-tier manufacturers use the 8D (Eight Disciplines) format for this.
• D1: Team Formation: List the vendor’s cross-functional team members.
• D2: Problem Description: Be specific. Instead of "unit failed," use "Capacitor C12 short-circuited after 200 hours of thermal stress".
• D3: Interim Containment: What will the vendor do immediately? (e.g., stop shipping, sort existing stock).
• D4: Root Cause Analysis (RCA): Require the vendor to use the 5 Whys or Fishbone Diagram to find the fundamental cause—not just the symptom.
• D5: Permanent Corrective Actions: Define the specific process change (e.g., "Replacing sub-tier vendor X with Y").
• D6: Implementation & Validation: When will the fix be live, and how will it be tested?.
• D7: Preventive Action: How will they stop this from happening to other similar products? (e.g., update Design-FMEA).
• D8: Closure: Final sign-off by your Quality Manager.
________________________________________
Pro-Tip for Verification
Do not "close" a CAPA until you have verified the fix on at least three consecutive shipments. If the vendor provides a fix but the failure rate doesn't drop, the Root Cause Analysis (D4) was likely incorrect.
These articles provide guidance on creating a comprehensive Corrective Action
https://www.projectmanagertemplate.com/post/corrective-action-request-template-a-complete-guide-for-quality-improvement
https://www.mahle.com/media/global/purchasing/supplier-portal/8d-e-learning/manual_8d-process_en-ex.pdf
Dear Andrea Rossi,
You alluded to the Commercial NGU plants do SSM reliably while the residential NGU have more difficult with SSM. Is this because the commercial NGU plants have many NGU Power Generators connected in series?
Proposed test on non-restartable 10 W modules
To better clarify the nature of the 10 W modules that, after a certain operating time, are no longer restartable, I would like to propose a simple, virtually cost-free test, with the sole purpose of discriminating between an intrinsic device limitation and a possible effect related to boundary conditions.
Test object
A complete 10 W module (reactor + antenna + controller) declared non-working, i.e. a module that, under nominally identical control signals and electrical conditions, no longer produces useful energy.
Minimal operational hypothesis (non-theoretical)
It is temporarily assumed that the module does not exhibit an obvious material failure, and that the blockage might be reversible under certain environmental conditions. The test is intended only to verify whether such reversibility exists.
Proposed procedure
Select a module that can no longer restart under normal laboratory conditions.
Place the module inside a protective enclosure (for example aluminum), preventing any direct contact with water and excluding electrical or chemical damage.
Immerse the assembly in naturally flowing water (stream, spring, or channel with continuous flow), avoiding static or domestic environments.
Leave the module immersed for a time to be determined experimentally (hours or days), with no power supply or stimulation applied.
Return the module to the laboratory and test it again under exactly the same control and stimulation conditions used before the blockage.
Possible outcomes
The module remains non-functional → the test excludes environmental reversibility.
The module shows partial or full restart behavior → indication that the blockage is not due solely to an irreversible internal failure.
Important note
This test introduces no modification to the device, requires no design changes, and does not presuppose any specific theoretical model.
Its only purpose is to clarify whether the “non-restart” behavior is an intrinsic property of the module or whether it may depend on external conditions accumulated during prolonged operation.
Incrociamo le dita Auguri.
Dr. Rossi,
a truly interesting article on the creation of a truly “real” artificial personality, indistinguishable from a human one:
“Do Machines Have Personality? A Case Study of Sophia”
https://thesophia.ai/en/do-machines-have-personality/v1.0/manuscript/paper/?fbclid=IwY2xjawP0QBVleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETBaQ3B5T1l4cGgydnAwMUt4c3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHv7-TObxPwSiAPlxmpdDlu6pElMpYef6TAteGMlSArYQeG5-7L2K19UlRota_aem_0abzym5SC4vTXmsx0c8ZCg
Kind Regards,
Italo R.
Dr Rossi,
Is the construction of Ecats to be delivered continuing ?
Ambrogio
Steven Nicholes Karels:
Thank you for your suggestion,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
See the link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu_IcFpEkg0
Off-shore desalinization plants using the pressure of seas water for reverse osmosis (RO) and only a small amount of energy needed to pump fresh water to land.
A small pressure protected NGU Power Generator located on the seabed could provide the needed power to the array of seabed RO converters. And a non-polluting source of 24/7 energy.
Thoughts?
Svein:
Thank you for the information,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea
In Norway, it is now reported that the government will promote self-production of energy in small houses in the building regulations.
– The changes we propose will provide greater scope for meeting the requirements for energy efficiency with different solutions and technologies, and facilitate the use of, for example, heat pumps, solar energy systems and district heating, According to Minister of Local Government and District Affairs Bjørnar Skjæran.
This will create great opportunities for the use of Ecat when such are available.
Regards Svein
Camillo:
These situations are more complex and confidential, besides they won’t involve the products when we deliver them,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Steven Nicholes Karels:
2
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dear Andrea Rossi,
Is the supplementation of Solar panels project:
1. dead;
2. on hold;
3. of proceeding?
As a component of the vacuum diode, the Cathode and Anode are composed of a nickel and strontium mix.
In a cathode composed of strontium and nickel for thermionic emission, strontium will segregate to the surface to form a low work function layer, often in the form of strontium oxide SrO or as a mixture, which is crucial for reducing the energy required for electron emission.
Is Strontium NMR Active? Yes, strontium is NMR active. Natural strontium contains the isotope SR87, which has a nuclear spin of 9/2, making it useful for solid-state NMR, though it is a quadrupolar nucleus. This high end spin number makes the Strontium low work function surface coat less susceptible to damage from pico-cluster magnetic activity.
Naturally occurring strontium is a mixture of four stable isotopes: 84Sr, 86Sr, 87Sr, and 88Sr.
Over time during vacuum diode operation, the other isotopes in the emissive coating of Strontium will degrade due to cluster caused transmutation. This will eventually enrich the Strontium coating in the isotope SR87.
Andrea,
I am referring to your statements where you mention that, after a certain operating time, some modules cannot be restarted.
My question is purely operational, not theoretical.
When this happens, do you mean that:
a) the module is still electrically active (the controller works, impulses are applied, the light/trigger is visible), but no net energy is produced,
or
b) the module does not react anymore at all (no response to impulses, no visible activity), as if it were electrically inactive?
I am only trying to understand what “cannot restart” practically means at the module level.
Warm Regards,
Camillo
Camillo:
I do not understand what you mean and which comment you are referring to, please clarify,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
What do you mean when you say it no longer works?:
a) The module is still “alive”, i.e., it reacts to impulses (the light turns on, the controller responds), but does not produce energy.
b) The module is “dead”, i.e., it no longer reacts, seems completely off, or does not interact with the controller.
Could you clarify which of these scenarios applies when a module cannot restart?
Warm Regards,
Camillo
Rick 57:
No,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Axil:
Thank you for your suggestions,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Camillo:
Normally, there should be not variables,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Ecat Enthusiast:
You have understood perfectly,
Warm Regards.
A.R.
Dr Rossi:
Studying your comments regarding the Ecat leads me to believe that high voltage is an optimal condition for SSM. Am I correct? Wishing you success!
Regards, Ecat Enthusiast.
When a module can no longer restart, which variables differ from the initial startup, despite nominally identical control signals and electrical conditions?
Ken Shoulders used a sacrificial liquid coating that covered the sharp point on the cathode, This may have protected the cathode from ware and increased efficiency of the cluster forming process.
Click the link to see research on Ken Shoulders work
https://www.google.com/search?q=Ken+Shoulders+used+a+sacrificial+liquid+coating+that+covered+the+sharp+point+on+the+cathode%2C+This+may+have+protected+the+cathode+from+ware+and+increased+efficiency+the+cluster+forming+process.&sca_esv=d2f31224bc7c6166&sxsrf=ANbL-n4xfBSN5ZyHHlSlA4e0O9971e2WUw%3A1770382483908&fbs=ADc_l-aN0CWEZBOHjofHoaMMDiKpV6Bbbmx4QVaoKkiRQ2jlwvCHF0Eqz8cUq4JjDCZnrJFky5yqfBcqysgzHz9N85mK5Cjsb5MRQJ1U5L53ITkRpHvm0ebR-pCYt7_WIE22EZOuMReedqW7nlcK-l7GPc4Z3koZ7aNUrXbvxMXKv7k5WSdXGBq5NOFtE-52XL7L0sjyaUVApU9bGskRxO3MpIAAEfSP4w&aep=1&ntc=1&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjWoMfY9MSSAxXDkYkEHViRAukQ2J8OegQIERAE&biw=1265&bih=607&dpr=1.52&nem=143&mstk=AUtExfDtqVFicQudjTrPVulQ5Rj6-GERXdhjIvcenqT6FZ_yOv-g561-asw1eEmPaMV8VUIPB8z2xLP1cqLIZ_s6dtOTIUfB2sMdKIsdyPiM16XUn7bgPnPt8Lq1MReyLSjsbD_LRMOoatCKfhA39MBkC80EmAoPHcoXDEZ4Vh9t4GYvbHRF61ycpFOw3u1rD-5ZmEO4DRbhdICnX-yY1Eu2mlyZElr2Npdv0ZN6GJZPAmDaAWMhK4lcVdRZheaGU_b4t3qzph8wgGfDBd5lWutmmpPOmNdl3EZCTpMl71cR7ONhp3DQVkAPYDOmB1-HDEI3mNqT9yX7Aj_-w4c&csuir=1
Dear Andrea,
in terms of SSM behaviour, did you notice any difference between an eCat running at constant load and another connected to a fast varying load (always within the eCat power limit).
Thanks a lot and best wishes for a rapid solution of this issue.
Riccardo
Informed by my post on the role that the sharp tip on the cathode plays on the vacuum reaction of the vacuum diode, I suggest that you check for any deformation or erosion on that sharp point that may have been caused by the production of pico-clusters over time or production issues. The sharp curvature may have been dulled below spec.
The AI link failed on my last post. To see the AI take on the vacuum diode go to this duplicate post:
https://e-catworld.com/2026/02/02/rossi-ssm-currently-only-possible-in-megawatt-plants/#comment-6834295603
Why barium titanate and strontium titanate encompass the cathode and anode in Dr. Rossi’s vacuum diode.
Both barium titanate and strontium titanate exhibit photoelectric properties, particularly as ferroelectric/paraelectric materials in optoelectronic and solar applications. They show strong photovoltaic effects, especially when structured as thin films, and in the case of, exhibit persistent photoconductivity.
Key details regarding their photoelectric nature:
Barium Titanate: As a ferroelectric material, it converts light into electricity and is used in photorefractive applications, thin-film photovoltaic sensors, and in combination with other materials to enhance solar cell efficiency.
Barium titanate BaTiO3 and strontium titanate SrTiO are primarily responsive to ultraviolet (UV) photons due to their wide bandgap nature, which allows them to be transparent to visible light. They can also exhibit non-linear optical responses, such as second-harmonic generation (SHG), in the mid-infrared (mid-IR) range.
The diode generates electric pulses at several megahertz and up to two hundred megahertz and the energy of the pulse is on the order of thousands of volts.
When the pulse occurs, it produces an electrical explosion that produces both ultraviolet light and heat. The titanate envelope around the cathode captures this light and concerts it into electrons which amplify the electron flow produced by the pulse.
At the anode, the pico-cluster produced by the pulse has gained kinetic energy during its flight from the cathode and confined and propelled by the rare earth magnet.
The pico-cluster explodes in a Bosenova. This produced both heat and ultraviolet light that is converted to electrical power by the titanate. The electron component of the pico-cluster is also gathered by the titanate to form the output power of the diode.
Click to see the AIs take on the role that the titanates play in Dr. Rossi’s vacuum diode.
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&aep=1&q=Why+barium+titanate+and+strontium+titanate+encompass+the+cathode+and+anode+in+Dr%2C+Rossi%27s+vacuum+diode.++%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFBoth+barium+titanate+and+strontium+titanate+exhibit+photoelectric+properties%2C+particularly+as+ferroelectric%2Fparaelectric+materials+in+optoelectronic+and+solar+applications.+They+show+strong+photovoltaic+effects%2C+especially+when+structured+as+thin+films%2C+and+in+the+case+of%2C+exhibit+persistent+photoconductivity.++%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFKey+details+regarding+their+photoelectric+nature%3A++%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFBarium+Titanate%3A+As+a+ferroelectric+material%2C+it+converts+light+into+electricity+and+is+used+in+photorefractive+applications%2C+thin-film+photovoltaic+sensors%2C+and+in+combination+with+other+materials+to+enhance+solar+cell+efficiency.+%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFBarium+titanate+BaTiO3+and+strontium+titanate+SrTiO+are+primarily+responsive+to+ultraviolet+%28UV%29+photons+due+to+their+wide+bandgap+nature%2C+which+allows+them+to+be+transparent+to+visible+light.+They+can+also+exhibit+non-linear+optical+responses%2C+such+as+second-harmonic+generation+%28SHG%29%2C+in+the+mid-infrared+%28mid-IR%29+range.%C2%A0+%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFThe+diode+generates+electric+pulses+at+several+megahertz+and+up+to+two+hundred+megahertz+and+the+energy+of+the+pulse+is+on+the+order+of+thousands+of+volts.+%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFWhen+the+pulse+occurs%2C+it+produces+an+electrical+explosion+that+produces+both+ultraviolet+light+and+heat.+The+titanate+envolope+around+the+cathode+captures+this+light+and+concerts+it+into+electrons+which+amplify+the+electron+flow+produced+by+the+pulse.+%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFAt+the+anode%2C+the+pico-cluster+produced+by+the+pulse+has+gained+kinetic+energy+during+its+flight+from+the+cathode+and+confined+and+propelled+by+the+rare+earth+magnet.+++%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFTh+pico-cluster+explodes+in+a+Bosenova.+This+produced+both+heat+and+ultraviolet+light++that+is+converted+to+electrical+power+by+the+titanate.+The+electron+component+of+the+pico-cluster+is+also+gathered+by+the+titanate+to+form+the+output+power+of+the+diode.&nem=143&ntc=1&fbs=&mstk=AUtExfD8Tgcl0FgoXBpwerXTM-pWcz3HESX6J3wnrgIPDcvnl3V-Tyjfx9fd6n81y8SNHOPinDeqSZFhWvIHnmqY6ju1fknEcjU9XwOf0BnYikgZH6Y2prXUbWmOAfUfUrPdycN-Kk4dfdipGQdrZr8JxHNGRpIwQ3FUcc8PxGt0RnTIa58_N4t0RCI_c5oFSNkYmYU0YZwlglnX03mJ3Ig189ii8r29PP1t80QG1irBQ41mVyXffxplVH__1ZdG0-uc2f2G4ZJmpCUBs4s&csuir=1
Daniel G. Zavela:
Thank you for the links,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Axil:
Thank you for your insight,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Gavino Mamia:
Interesting,
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Dr. Rossi
Brine is the main byproduct of the seawater desalination process for the production of drinking water. It is an aqueous solution with a very high salt concentration.
When discharged directly into the sea, brine, being denser than seawater, tends to settle on the seabed, creating a hypersaline layer. This phenomenon can seriously damage marine ecosystems.
A common method involves discharging it into the sea through specially designed diffusion systems that promote rapid mixing with the surrounding water.
The entire desalination and diffusion process requires a significant amount of energy, and the problem of continually increasing sea salinity remains.
Sodium-ion batteries represent a more economical and environmentally friendly alternative to lithium for electric cars, thanks to the greater availability of raw materials.
They offer excellent low-temperature performance (down to -40°C) and faster charging, with a rapidly increasing energy density (over 175 Wh/kg), making them suitable for vehicles.
So, using ECAT to produce drinking water by desalination of seawater and using the salt to produce car batteries and energy storage systems, the circle closes with enormous benefits for humanity.
Have a great day and good luck!
Both Dr. Rossi in his vacuum diode and Ken Shoulders in his exotic vacuum object generation process use(d) a sharp point on their cathodes. How does that sharp tip produce pico-clusters (aka EVOs)?
The sharp tip produce a type of particle that has positive inertial energy, but has negative momentum. These negative momentum photons are at the heart of the creation of the vacuum reaction. The sharp vacuum point on the vacuum diode is what produces the pico-clusters that extract energy from the vacuum. I will turn the explanation over to the AI to describe what these photons are and how these photons produce pico-clusters.
AI prompt
If a cathode has a sharp point, does the virtual photon production at that point increase due to the sharp curvature of mass at the tip of the point in the same way that a micro black hole produces increased virtual photon production.
The virtual photon pairs produced by the intense EMF fields at the sharp point have the same character as those produced by the micro black hole: that is, one particle has positive energy and the other particle of the virtual proton pair has negative energy.
Is it true, that both particles in the virtual photon pair have positive energy, but the negative particle has negative momentum. When does a negative energy victual photon become a positive energy virtual photon, when the virtual photons become real photons?
Show the real negative momentum photon as a particle whose waveform rotates in a clockwise direction on the time time momentum axis: a particle that goes beachward in time.
click the link below to see the AI response.
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&udm=50&aep=42&q=The+sharp+tip+produce+a+type+of+particle+that+has+positive+inertial+energy%2C+but+has+negative+momentum.+These+negative+momentum+photons+are+at+the+heart+of+the+creation+of+the+vacuum+reaction.+The+sharp+vacuum+point+on+the+vacuum+diode+is+what+produces+the+pico-clusters+that+extract+energy+from+the+vacuum.+I+will+turn+the+explanation+over+to+the+AI+to+describe+what+these+photons+are+and+how+these+photons+produce+pico-clusters.+%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFAI+prompt+%EF%BB%BFIf+a+cathode+has+a+sharp+point%2C+does+the+virtual+photon+production+at+that+point+increase+due+to+the+sharp+curvature+of+mass+at+the+tip+of+the+point+in+the+same+way+that+a+micro+black+hole+produces+increased+virtual+photon+production.++%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFThe+virtual+photon+pairs+produced+by+the+intense+EMF+fields+at+the+sharp+point+have+the+same+character+as+those+produced+by+the+micro+black+hole%3A+that+is%2C+one+particle+has+positive+energy+and+the+other+particle+of+the+virtual+proton+pair+has+negative+energy.++%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFIs+it+true%2C+that+both+particles+in+the+virtual+photon+pair+have+positive+energy%2C+but+the+negative+particle+has+negative+momentum.+When+does+a+negative+energy+victual+photon+become+a+positive+energy+virtual+photon%2C+when+the+virtual+photons+become+real+photons%3F++%EF%BB%BF+%EF%BB%BFShow+the+real+negative+momentum+photon+as+a+particle+whose+waveform+rotates+in+a+clockwise+direction+on+the+time+time+momentum+axis%3A+a+particle+that+goes+beachward+in+time.&mtid=8C-FaaDMHq_liLMP6vKyqAc&mstk=AUtExfCahqohONE6p9GYUu5f_KL3f36sMMtNI0nr1PBj1lU6PK5lDPgvUV5oJUFP5tLN2ApqSONFbgXH5Ho7pi1eBIrkgtKTvhae4gTIFh3_TIkYYRDd9Pw9xmDY5aSBMDkdCH920Ih0meUMgtAOKAhKcU2F1MPY2PBawB4&csuir=1
Click the link below to see the time/momentum diagram of how the positive and negative momentum pair real photons look in phase space.
https://www.google.com/search?q=if+a+cathode+has+a+sharp+point+does+the+virtual+photon+production+at+that+point+increase+due+to+the+sharp+curvature+of+mass+at+the+tip+of+the+point+in+the+same+way+that+a+micro+black+hole+produces+increase+virtual+photon+production.+The+virtual+photon+pairs+produced+by+the+intense+EMF+fields+at+the+sharp+point+have+the+same+charactor+as+those+produced+by+the+micro+black+hole%3A+that+is+one+particle+has+positive+energy+and+the+other+particle+of+the+virtual+proton+pair+has+negative+energy.+Is+it+true%2C+that+both+particles+in+the+virtual+photon+pair+have+positive+energy%2C+but+the+negative+particle+has+negative+monentum.+When+does+a+negative+energy+vitual+photon+become+a+positive+energy+virtual+photon%2C+when+the+virtual+photons+become+real+photons%3F+Show+the+ear+negative+monemtum+photon+as+a+particle+whose+waveform+rotates+in+a+clockwise+direction+on+the+time+momentum+axis.&aep=1&sca_esv=89aaa52b873f06b6&biw=1265&bih=607&sxsrf=ANbL-n5f97svCBCVALRlB5Lqtl4DyyfIlg%3A1770331893662&ei=9R6FadeGKI-Hw8cPyOnSiAk&ved=2ahUKEwiTu_zmuMOSAxUkFlkFHfEGOPgQ0NsOegQIAxAB&sclient=gws-wiz-serp&fbs=ADc_l-aN0CWEZBOHjofHoaMMDiKpaEWjvZ2Py1XXV8d8KvlI3o6iwGk6Iv1tRbZIBNIVs-6YKj3ieLLpE5n_AQ7knvnyHmq2hxoqmS0Tx38rbtTMogWyxITwAzaNmYjC8wNHvVVO9ZHLnj4T7UIeFa-Jj5OetYypF-yQQlymwIo7o6gOE6_z-tEVJwsZYkGOoYG-gedEu2_u1NOIRYVI0f3XCYA0MHq_Tw&ntc=1&nem=143&mstk=AUtExfAn0RdKPkn2dZzKf9iTA63e4vpxDcMLnCu0jP2XuhukvpYXaiL9NIQsJoPim2dl8TeZt-1cH0hwDQoc5zVdQx_Sb2H9-a75wXZ-87ou9VD7Owx517sepbHXKeTkkHS8myAEZf1CovopGYPimv9j3FoTbGevH6G9cqgFQtsSDnNSnNKVUJ5wdXuglYa8zlaySTauAtH6LoM6NSKdBPSHIbKQ_fE9Wcr9dR_9o2IQ3A7wjp7rNMJDvYZaV_ceuLuM9o81D9egRgcKJPKzZiKp2V6ZeG13QA4VmAN7X-Lt-XsIZV4rMm_94JuxTNNTj086EVNUdaJ1fMLcWP9Z8DzhU-gEy_HFhXdC-W_FBuIKUTFZki_OBFapZrXNJbCsD5qCRGrbDQwJdVfu5kJ0gW42Jwj4I_8BezfCiKA&csuir=1