E-Cat Test Coverage Roundup

There’s been quite a bit of attention paid to the recent Hot Cat test report, and I thought I would bring attention to a few sites where it has been mentioned so far (we have already pointed out the Forbes article). As you can see below there is a mixed response to it — but despite some misgivings about the report itself from some quarters there seems to be a new level of respect towards Rossi for carrying through with a commitment that was made, and which some people didn’t think would ever come to light.

I think that many people from here on out are going to take Rossi — and therefore LENR in general — more seriously.


Thanks for Alain Coetmeur for sharing this link to his collection of E-Cat related articles on Scoop.it — a good source for additional coverage.

The ECAT Revolution Slope of Hope

“. . . The issue was that Rossi’s claims were not supported by any evidence. Two years passed, and many started to accuse him to be building a giant hoax, when finally, a couple of days ago, on May 20th, a group of serious academics (all with reputations to lose), published a detailed and thorough paper titled “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device” where they did show that Rossi’s invention is not a hoax: his device produces clearly an incredibly large amount of heat from a still unknown/unexplained sort of non-radioactive nuclear reaction. . . “

Cold Fusion, independent tests: the Hot Cat works and produces more energy than traditional sources International Business Times (Original Italian)

Some quotes from an interview with Guiseppe Levi:

As stated in the article, we are faced with a non-conventional source of energy  . . .  We have been able to operate in complete autonomy and freedom. outset it was clear that we could publish the results whatever they were . . . Definitely not chemical in nature  . . . the absence of radiation makes us say that it is a nuclear power is still new in nature  . . . ”

E-Cat Validation Creates More Questions PESWiki — article by Hank Mills

“I wish that the report would have shown a system self sustaining for a long period of time, at least an hour, without dropping in temperature. My thinking is that this could easily be done by simply applying the radio frequencies for the entire hour without applying the resistance heating coils. But this might create a situation like in the first of the three tests in which the reactor over heats, goes out of control, and destroys itself. I think it is clear that the enemy of control in the E-Cat is temperature, but at the same time the COP increases with temperature. So this creates an enigma — how to increase temperature while maintaining control. “

Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas Extreme Tech — Sebastian Anthony

“Against all probability, a device that purports to use cold fusion to generate vast amounts of power has been verified by a panel of independent scientists. The research paper, which hasn’t yet undergone peer review, seems to confirm both the existence of cold fusion, and its potency: The cold fusion device being tested has roughly 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline. Even allowing for a massively conservative margin of error, the scientists say that the cold fusion device they tested is 10 times more powerful than gasoline — which is currently the best fuel readily available to mankind.”

Cold Fusion Machine Gets Third-Party Verification, Inventor Says Popular Science — Francie Diep

“A well-known promoter of cold fusion technology—who’s been demonstrating his latest invention here and there over the past two years—has announced that an independent third party has verified his machine works . . . There’s plenty of reason to be skeptical. Rossi has a history of blocking even simple tests of the E-Cat. Many established experts are skeptical of his invention and with the idea that cold fusion is even possible . . .”

Is Cold Fusion for Real?  Science 2.0 — Tommaso Dorigo

“A model is direly needed, I would say; the secrecy behind the project does not help figuring out whether this is a very elaborate scam or a Nobel prize worthy discovery . . . I continue to believe in the scam hypothesis, but I must admit that this study impressed me for its reported result.”

HotCat Independent Report eCat News  — Paul Story

“I have to admit to being surprised. Never have I longed to be proven wrong so much in my life. We are not there yet, but at face value, this appears to be a giant step in the right direction. Healthy scepticism of the scientific kind is still advised since there are, as yet, many unanswered questions.”


  • Alice Young

    Given that arXiv is more-or-less a bulletin board that (almost) anyone can post to, has anyone gone back to the four authors and confirmed that the document was actually authored by them? It appears that the only one confirming its authenticity right now is Mr. Rossi.

    • Roger Bird

      Alice, I personally do not recall them saying that they participated. Perhaps they are hiding in an Italian villa waiting for the 5hi7-storm to pass over. The Elforsk people are certainly responding appropriately as though they had actually funded the tests and their guys helped with the testing.

      Also, if someone invented their participation, they would be going ape-5hi7 denying it. I would be going ape-5hi7 if someone said that I did a test that I did not do. I don’t see anyone by their names going ape-5hi7.

  • Preston
  • Roger Bird

    I recall the movie “Babe”, about a pig and a guy, played by James Cromwell. The guy saw something that was supposedly impossible, an effective sheep-pig, and he pushed the envelope of what was possible to include the supposedly impossible. He had the courage and humility to endure the derision of a large crowd, because he was true to his observations and had confidence in himself and in his pig. At the end of the movie I was jumping up and down with my tears rolling down my face saying that it was the triumph of sweetness and humility.

    Is it greatness to be sweating away for years on a project that almost everyone in the world says is impossible, that distinguished scientists say is impossible, sweating away because you know that it is true, irrespective of what anyone else says? I know that Rossi is imperfect. He probably snaps at people occasionally when the camera is not around. But he is sweet. He is humble. And he is incredibly courageous and persistent. And I think that he might be a great man. I generally don’t think of anyone as great. We all have too many foibles. But in this case, especially considering the contribution that he is making to the human race, I think that he is a great man.

    • JamesThomas

      If he was a truly great man, he would have put humanity first and released his secrets to the world rather than hide everything for self-enrichment.

      His greed is the very same mind-set that has caused all man’s harm to life and the planet in the first place.

      • G_Zingh

        Not greed. If he gave his IP away his investors would desert him and he would lose the ability to refine his invention and the world would lose out. Who wants to invest in something that is free? No one. The government would have to take over funding and the project would have to compete with all the other special interest projects. Isn’t that one of the problems that gave CF a bad name in the first place?

        It’s not like the ecat doesn’t need further development. It needs a lot and hopefully a breakthrough in control; and a COP increase. Sorry, but I believe that Rossi is the man for the job. He got us this far when the government and scientific community closed their mind to the CF possibility. I say support the man.

      • Andrew Macleod

        I’m suprized that he is still trying to help the world after getting thrown under the bus with petroldragon…. Loosing his family’s fortune and bankruptcy….. If he is trying to earn a buck or two while helping the world so be it, bigOil is earning a fortune destroying it.

      • GreenWin

        Fascinating to watch others badly hurt egos, lash out at this small, individual man and team who, like Tesla, has flummoxed the old world.

    • Susan Corrigan

      That’ll do pig….that’ll do

    • Leo Kaas

      Wow, Roger, you nailed it. That is one of the reasons I have enjoyed watching this epic story play out these last few years. Can I have permision to repost your comment on my facebook page?

      • Roger Bird


        • Leo Kaas

          Thank You!

    • georgehants


  • lukedc


    May 22nd, 2013 at 11:51 AM

    Dear Andrea, I would inform you and your readers about the article on the Third Party report just published in Italy by “Repubblica”, which as you know is the most important national newspaper together with “Il corriere della Sera”, and had been traditionally skeptic on the cold fusion. The article is well written and balanced. Here is the link: http://www.repubblica.it/scienze/2013/05/22/news/forbes_la_fusione_fredda_italiana_funziona_da_test_indipendenti_ok_all_e-cat-59379551/

    Andrea Rossi

    May 22nd, 2013 at 4:30 PM

    Dear Paolo,
    I read the article on Repubblica, is sincere and honest, but contains some imprecision:
    1- the peer reviewing has been done. Read more carefully the report . Arxiv has anyway a peer reviewing ( a publication must be examined by at least one of the competent of the art that is well known by the Arxiv commettee: try to publish a bad article on Arxiv and you will understand that I am right); secondly, to be published in a cartaceous peer reviewed magazine takes many months, so the Examiners decided to anticipate the publication on Arxiv, pending a publication on another peer reviewed magazine. By the way, the report has been peer reviewed by the list of Professors you find in the acknowledgements, not to mention the fact that when a paper is signed by many Professors of international Universities, there is also an automatic peer reviewing made among the same Authors of the same report. It is more difficult that 7 Authors make mistakes than 1 Author , isn’t it? Also: the Report is 30 pages, and is impossible to publish 30 pages in a normal magazine, therefore by necessity the report will have to be reduced to be published in a normal magazine: for this reason Arxiv has been chosen by the examiners for the first publication.
    2- the description of the process has been described uncorrectly, but I understand that for a non expert is difficult to write in few lines an abstract of 30 pages of report.
    In conclusion, the journalist of Repubblica has made honestly and sincerely the job.
    Warm Regards,

    • Chris I

      arXiv is a pre-print service. It is not a peer reviewed journal. I have no knowledge of any requisite like the one Rossi claims; anybody with an account can post any bullcrap and they take their own academic responsibility for it.

  • Roger Bird

    The only real leg upon which the skeptics (not the patho-skeptics, those who refuse to look at the evidence. Their only leg that they stand on for their skepticism is of a psychological nature) have to stand is the Coulomb Barrier. The Coulomb Barrier is a very substantial leg, but I say unto them, any tool that is traveling close to the speed of light is going to behave differently than when it is going at room temperature speeds. And the tools that the Coulomb Barrier freaks use are elementary particles traveling at absurdly fast speeds. Einstein theorized and it was proven that things traveling close to the speed of light behave in very strange ways compared to every day speeds.

    A possible example is that as objects travel faster and faster, PERHAPS their repulsive force increases. We don’t quite know yet why the almighty Coulomb Barrier isn’t working. Perhaps it has something to do with what I said. Perhaps it doesn’t apply, like Widom-Larsen says. We will see.

    • Chris I

      The very difference between LENR and hot plasma fusion is that of low and high speeds. The very objection about the Coulomb barrier is exactly this. You are trying to make it the opposite way around.

      Az di bobe volt gehat beytsim, volt si geven mayn zeyde.