Rossi: Nothing Wrong With Current Physics [Updated]

Here’s a comment by Andrea Rossi today which reiterates his stance regarding his discovery (again he refers to the “Rossi Effect” — maybe now an official marketing term) in terms of current physics:

Andrea Rossi
August 20th, 2013 at 11:38 PM
Eric Ashworth:
There are no cospiracies: all we have to do is make good products, and the market will use them. In our work and in the Rossi Effect there is nothing strange or exoteric or anything that can put in crisis the rules of Physics. I work using the well known rules, that we studied very well. No new physics have to be expected from my work, just a better use of the Physics we already have.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

This should be a comfort to scientists the world over — but it’s not possible to fully evaluate his statement without the publication of his theory, and it could be a while before we learn about it.

UPDATE: More related Q & A’s

Dear Andrea,
You wrote:
«No new physics have to be expected from my work, just a better use of the Physics we already have.»
It is extremely interesting puzzle. While anticipating the time you will be granted of an international patent, and you can publish a theory/design of E-Cat, fearing not the loss of IP, I’d like to get a hint.
What period the physics/chemistry’s discoveries as basic for your vision of main processes inside the E-Cat belong of:
1. After 1989
2. Between 1957 and 1989
3. 1939-1957
4. Before 1939

Best Regards,
Anatoliy V. Sermyagin

Andrea Rossi
August 21st, 2013 at 7:21 AM
Anatoly V. Sermyagin:
I would say 1939 (Enrico Fermi) and 1989.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Giuliano Bettini
August 21st, 2013 at 3:18 AM
Andrea
you spoke twice of Rossi Effect.
That’s extremely important IMO, I do not ask what it is (maybe you can not answer), but I ask what it refers to.
The Rossi Effect what it refers to?
Catalyst?
Properties of Nickel lattice?
A kind of collective phenomenon?
Thanks
Giuliano Bettini.

Andrea Rossi
August 21st, 2013 at 7:24 AM
Giuliano Bettini:
Here have named my process the “Rossi Effect” referring to the collective phenomenon ( whose mechanism has now been completely understood).
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • Donald

    The only reason that Rossi is making noises to the effect that no new physics is involved is for safety PR. Note also his patent update has also deleted mention of the supposedly indispensable catalyst.

    If Rossi’s effect is real, it can be taken for granted that new physics are involved. This creates an enormous and overwhelming problem with safety certification. Who knows what other effects are involved. Rossi’s effect could be, and probably is, just the tip of the iceberg of a whole range of unknown effects. Rossi and his sponsors want to make reassuring noises and not wave the red flag in front of the certifiers.

    • Roger Bird

      Donald, you could be right. But another commenter here pointed out that there is new confirmed physics too new for the old guard to acknowledge but which is really “old” in the sense that Widom-Larsen etc. is not necessary. I did not fully understand it so I can’t repeat it for you.

  • BroKeeper

    This is a response to earlier comments starting with: Italo R. on August 21, 2013 at 8:53 (sorry if this breaks protocol):

    I strongly believe Rossi is looking at this blog on his short breaks despite the opinions of some in this valuable but inexpensive brain-trust emporium of experienced thought. Think about it a moment; what human wouldn’t take interest (ego or not) in what others say about ones ideas, that soon will have an irreversible impact on humanity; especially from an arena of diverse skilled scientific, engineer and philosopher (his degrees) followers who believe in his works.

    Rossi is not only knowledgeable but also wise enough to realize it takes an army to overcome a huge force of negative paradigm thinking from not only of his own making but the locked-in repulsive physicists and skeptics.

    Many times I have seen those (including Admin) contributing to this blog having a connection with Rossi’s initiated JoNP offer suggestions with positive feedbacks: “This is a very interesting point”, “Thank you for your continued interest and support”, “Interesting”, “Maybe in future will be useful”, “I will” (Bernie Koppenhofer August 1st, 2013 at 2:49 PM), “good point” etc. etc. He knows where these contributors blog.

    As Steven Karels commented, “As long as AR is willing to share information, there are those of us who will glean those statements to look for hidden gems of knowledge and understanding” also holds true to AR himself. There are gems of knowledge and understanding in these valuable blog comments Rossi can certainly glean from in propelling his progress and himself (as it has for me and my own false paradigms).

    I personal want to thank everyone’s contribution – from another blog freak “Bleak?”. 🙂

  • georgehants

    22 August 2013
    Fukushima leak is ‘much worse than we were led to believe’
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23779561

    • Dr Bob

      When I hear the IAEA say “its only hydrogen explosions” I understood quite right away that the situation was reaaally bad.

      I wonder what the long terms affect will be, ex Hawai in 20 years or Tokyo in 10 years etc

      Anyone who have an idea?

      I read the Fukushima Diary to stay on top of the latest info. Its a very good blog.

      • Roger Bird

        The Cube Rule causes me to have NO concern whatsoever other than for the locals.

        • Dr Bob

          The Cube Rule?

        • Felix Fervens

          What “Cube Rule” is that, please?

          • Roger Bird

            I was sort of fishing with that one. Assume 3 dimensional dispersion, a substance dispersed 2 miles away from it’s origin would be 8 times less dense compared to it being dispersed only 1 mile away. Of course, the Pacific and the atmosphere are not thousands of miles deep or wide. But you get the idea. In 2 dimensions, the “rule” would be squared. If a criminal trying to run from the law runs 10 miles, the poor law enforcement officers have to cover an area of 100 miles. Fukushima is only a problem for the locals.

            • ndelta

              The cube rule is well and good for straightforward static phenomena. The local food chain concentrating the radiation is a real threat not only to the local population eating the seafood, but other more distant populations through the global reach of pacific seafood industries.

              • Roger Bird

                All of that uranium came from some place, and it wasn’t hurting anyone then. People hiking in the outback of Utah [sort of a redundant phrase. Utah is the outback] didn’t come home puking and losing their hair wondering what happened. The more dispersed, the better.

                But I can see that animals would concentrate it again.

      • Thinks4Self

        Tokyo might receive some contamination eventually from contamination carried via wind and vehicles but Hawaii and other islands won’t likely receive anything measurable beyond background levels. It is like the difference betwen dumping a bottle of fountain pen ink in a bath tub, swimming pool or lake. The larger the volume and area the smaller the contamination per square or cubic unit and as distance from the source grows the concentration will drop exponentially.

  • georgehants

    Below is logical scientific proof that John Lennon was more scientifically qualified than most scientists.
    ——
    I believe in everything until it’s disproved. So I believe in fairies, the myths, dragons. It all exists, even if it’s in your mind. Who’s to say that dreams and nightmares aren’t as real as the here and now?”
    John Lennon
    ——
    “The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it”
    ~George Orwell

  • georgehants

    Edmund Storms: At peak efficiency “no other source of power will be necessary.
    http://coldfusionnow.org/edmund-storms-at-peak-efficiency-no-other-source-of-power-will-be-necessary/

    • Roger Bird

      From the objective viewpoint, the Earth goes around the Sun. From the subjective viewpoint, the Sun goes around the Earth.

  • Venno

    Just a simple question
    If Rossi is not using anything new in Physics
    Why is it so difficult to get a patent?

    • Joe Shea

      The US Patent Office does not ask whether the physics is new, but whether the phenomenon of cold fusion is involved. In that case, they have a policy of not considering it. That’s wrong, but there seems to be little we can do about it.

      • Roger Bird

        Yes, because our government is too big and is no longer accountable to anyone, except perhaps the media and big business.

        • Ric Werme

          And climate scientists. 🙂

    • Owen

      The powers that be — banks, energy companies, etc. — control governments and therefore the patent system.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Once more……Rossi must reveal his Intellectual Property before they will grant a patent. As Mr. Musk of Tesla and Space X fame has stated, Why should I give my IP to China? Rossi and his partner are proceeding using their intellectual property as a “trade secret” until they can gain a competitive advantage. It is simply being an intelligent entrepreneur.

      • Murilo ferreira de Melo

        Sou Engenheiro, aperfeiçoei hum Processo Construtivo Parágrafo Construção de casas pré-moldadas http://www.capremol.com.br.
        No Departamento de Patentes hum Funcionário me Veio com UMA Questão : QUEM TEM UMA ideia Acaba tendo outras, o Sr. tem uma Bem Simples na área de culinária?
        Ingenuamente respondi: hum assador com o Formato fazer Pãozinho Francês.<pouco tempo Supermercados estavam cheios Deles.

        PERDE-SE TEMPO PRECIOSO ENQUANTO ROSSI NAO TORNA INTEIRAMENTE TRANSPARENTE O SEU PROCESSO.

        Voce ENTREGARIA O IP do SEU PARÁ APROVEITADORES? AINDA MAIS O CAAT QUE PODE REVOLUCIONAR A MATRIZ ENERGÉTICA DO MUNDO, Transformando O NOSSO PLANETA NUM PLANETA VERDE?
        NO MEU ENTEDIMENTO E DE MUITOS A CULPA DA DEMORA RECAIRÁ SOBRE QUEM NAO QUER LHE CONCEDER A PATENTE, INFLUENCIADOS PELA COMUNIDADE CIENTIFICA QUE SE ACHA REPRESERNTANTE DIRETA DE DEUS.
        Historicamente, Serao DRÁSTICAMENTE CRITICADOS PELA ÚNICA PREJUDICADA, A HUMANIDADE.
        DE UMA FORMA OU DE OUTRA ESSE SEGREDO SERÁ REVELADO FINALMENTE Sera.
        POIS NÃO SE CONSEGUE TAPAR O SOL COM UMA PENEIRA!

  • Robyn Wyrick

    I’m thrilled.

    It’s late August, and summer is nearly over. ICCF went off without a hitch. NI Week came and went. And no blockbuster from Rossi.

    I don’t know physics, but I know a little about marketing and business. Rossi’s position has been heavily compromised by the flooding LENR field, and still he remains tight lipped.

    I know what you’re thinking: what about the 3rd Party Report? That was a blockbuster. But here’s the thing: that wasn’t *from* Rossi, that was from Elforsk.

    We haven’t heard significant claims from Rossi since 2012! Not since the fall releases of the gas enabled Hot Cat photos almost a year ago.

    And this is why I’m thrilled.

    In the beginning of this year he said he was going to tone down the public disclosures, and that is exactly what has happened. After the publication of the 3rd Party Report he said they were going to do more extensive testing – a six month run. And what have been his public statements all summer: testing is ongoing, looking good.

    But no bold new announcements.

    We all knew that there would be a phase where Rossi would have to move from experimentation to industrialization. Where he would have to go from weirdo maverick inventor to corporate insider. And not only does this pattern certainly look like that is occurring, but it is (again) exactly what Rossi says is occurring.

    It would be different if Rossi were making these claims in the absence of outside rivals – if Rossi were claiming to have a human teleporter or something. But instead, his claims are fairly solidly in the spectrum of the LENR field.

    Cold Fusion is cropping up all over the place.

    So, I’m with Rossi: “Testing is ongoing.” “The market will decide.”

    • fortyniner

      Robyn, while I agree with your basic tenet, the apparent shift towards secrecy would unfortunately also be consistant with Rossi becoming marginalised, while the new owners of the IP follow their own plans for the tech.

    • Roger Bird

      Robin gives another RIGHT-ON clarification of what is happening.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    I sometimes think that the theorists are over thinking things. Could it just be that the covalent bond between the metal and proton (or deuteron) when it absorbs inferred radiation (when heated or irradiated with an IR laser) oscillates and enables the proton to tunnel into the nucleus of the metal (or enables a deuteron to undergo a stripping reaction with the nucleus of the metal)? No new physics needed.

    • fortyniner

      Way outside my field, but (speaking of uncomplicated models within current physics) I would be interested to know how much force is exerted by magnetostrictive movements within a nickel lattice, induced by oscillating emf, current flow or RF/microwave stimulation. Could such forces be sufficient to ‘crush’ an appropriately situated proton/deuteron (possibly partially ‘cloaked’ by the lattice’s shared electron field) between metal nuclei close enough to another similar to allow fusion?

      Or do I need to go and sit down somewhere quiet for a bit?

      • georgehants

        Morning Peter, my feeling is just that as with many things this mystery should be enjoyed as the food and wine of science.
        Surely science exists to solve such problems, instead they seem to treat them as some kind of disease.
        Science can only improve I suppose as it would seem impossible for them to sink any lower in many areas.

      • Alan DeAngelis

        Yeah, fortyniner, it will probably turn out to be something simple instead of something reminiscent of a Rube Goldberg cartoon. We’ll just have to wait an see.

  • GreenWin

    It is fascinating that as the catastrophe in Fukushima Japan threatens to pollute huge segments of the Pacific ocean, the New York Dimes prints a front page story on IPCC’s latest “global war ming” scare.

    Fukushima threatens millions of peoples’ health in the immediate present: “Japan is poised to declare a toxic water leak at the Fukushima nuclear plant a level 3 “serious incident,” its gravest warning since the massive 2011 earthquake and tsunami that sent three reactors into meltdown;” the other, from IPCC is decades old speculation supported by dubious science.

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/21/world/asia/japan-nuclear-leak-warning

    As Ruby says: Cold Fusion Now!

    • Roger Bird

      Here we go again with the Fukushima melodrama. Oh, the humanity!!!

      • fortyniner

        Fukushima is not a melodrama, it is a real-life nightmare. If meant sarcastically as it appears, your comment is inappropriate in the extreme and indicates either an utter lack of understanding of the inevitable consequences, or callous indifference towards those affected.

      • georgehants

        Roger, maybe not such a “melodrama” if you lived locally to Fukushima and were trying to bring up your children.

      • Roger Bird

        Fukushima is clearly a serious problem for the locals. Radioactivity becomes less and less of a problem the more dispersed it is. It decreases relative to the cube of the distance. By the time that it gets to Colorado, it is at the very bottom of my personal concerns.

        • GreenWin

          Radiation in the seafood chain is a real issue. Enjoy your next Pacific-caught tuna salad sandwich!

          My point is to follow the NYT replacement of Fukushima news with “climate” news. Nuclear fission disasters cost certain PTB billions. Carbon credit schemes MAKE those people billion$.

  • Italo R.

    I think I have been one of the first person that many months ago has written in one of these blogs that “the Rossi Effect is real” …
    Mr. Rossi has surely copied it from me…:-)

    • Andy Kumar

      Italo,

      Rossi gets most of his brilliant ideas from the blogs.

      Man is a genius. Where everyone sees sh*t, he sees fertilizer 🙂

      -Andy

      • Roger Bird

        I had the thought upon awakening that Rossi may use us as a sort of focus group. After-all, they are going to have to seel the e-cat to the public.

  • Tyler van Houwelingen

    Some great comments today, especially by Preston and AlainCo.

    I think there is also some potential merit to prof. Kim`s theory about the Coulomb barrier which fits within the standard model. I give a brief synopsis at the end of my presentation if anyone is interested @ http://www.lenrproof.com

    I have not commented in a while, but always come by to read up. warm regards,

    Tyler

    • llsurfer

      Thanks Tylor! Your slideshow is my preferred reference when spreading the word about LENR.
      Looking forward to more updates in the future!

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    I cannot recall Rossi being so confident about the physics involved “my process the “Rossi Effect” referring to the collective phenomenon WHOSE MECHANISM HAS NOW BEEN COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD” (my emphasis)………..Could this mean we are close to an announcement?

    • Jonathan

      Don’t get your hopes up. This guy has been blowing hot air for years and will most likely continue to do so for many years to come.

      • kasom

        Well, may be.

        But if not, WTH have all the scepts invested so much time and effort in millions of letters of typed BS in some ten forums every day over that time.

        Who will laugh at the end?

        • GreenWin

          I have a good chortle nowadays. 🙂

        • roseland67

          kasom,

          kasom,

          Give a date definition of what “The End” means???

          10-2013
          6-2014
          3-2015
          8-2016

      • winebuff

        +1

      • Andrew Macleod

        I have been following Rossi since his first announcement and IMO the skeptics are the ones blowing hot air. As far as I’m concerned if it takes 20 years to come out so be it, well worth the wait.

      • Andy Kumar

        “Don’t get your hopes up. This guy has been blowing hot air for years and will most likely continue to do so for many years to come”

        Amazingly, he needs only a milligram of Ni to do that.

        -Andy

        • georgehants

          Morning Andy, good to see a flat-earth’er on page, miss you guys sometimes.
          I pop over to ECN occasionally to absorb the deep wisdom from the failed scientists that comment there but it is fun to have a couple here to entertain us.
          Tell me do you think the bicycle will ever catch on.

          • GreenWin

            George, don’t spread nonsense. “Two wheeled pedal vehicles are pure fantasy!” S.K. Eptic

          • Andy Kumar

            George,

            You saw thru the deliberately ambiguous words. We would like to visit more often but are no longer welcome in your neighborhood.

            Hope the placebos are keeping you in good spirits 🙂

            -Andy

    • clovis

      Hi, Bernie.
      I would say, the time is getting short as well, all is well with e-cat tech,only time is needed to make a final test, and i feel that time is ticking right now,it would be a great christmas present for the world,
      ‘IT COULD HAPPEN’ SMILE.

  • Dr Bob

    Hi

    I just wanted to post this in plains site if anyone can benefit from it:
    http://newspacebpc.com/competition-rules/

    Its a possibility to work with space applications / companies and get some greenies / contact with the space industry.

    Im not a Jedi space playboy but I reckon that if palladium is commonly occuring in asteroids, the palladium addicts acutally have a real chance on this as well.

  • clovis

    Hi, guys.
    The Rossi effect, I love it, very fitting,history will record this name, an a turning point for humanity,– The Rossi effect– a rose by anyother name would not smell as sweet, e-cat and the Rossi effect, are the orignal ROSE,– happy happy happy.

  • Stephen

    “This should be a comfort to scientists the world over”
    🙂 why, exactly? Funny view of science…

  • Zero

    Why does the whole thing sound a lot less trustworthy now that he says it operates under the currently known laws of physics?

    • Roger Bird

      What you should not trust is anyone, including Rossi, saying that they have a lock on how it works. The process works; we have a lock on that, thanks to Levi, Essen, et. al.

    • fortyniner

      Possibly a spin intended to reduce Pavlovian opposition from establishment physicists. If those with careers and reputations invested in a ‘standard model’ world view can be convinced that their dogma is not threatened, then they will have less reason to try to dismiss CF (er, sorry, The Rossi Effect). They might even come on side and open research projects if it doesn’t look too unsettling to the status quo.

      • Roger Bird

        I agree to the possibility. Just like when he said that it was integrative not disruptive. But, of course, us saying these things is not helping any. Perhaps we should just shut up. (:->)

  • Tony McDougall

    AR’s reference to Enrico Fermi makes me think there is some quantum physics at work in the “Rossi Effect”!

    • GreenWin

      Fermi’s 1938 Nobel was largely for his “demonstrations of the existence of new radioactive elements produced by neutron irradiation, and for his related discovery of nuclear reactions brought about by slow neutrons.” There is little evidence of energetic neutrons outside Rossi’s reactor. But slow neutrons and pseudo-neutrons are mentioned in various theories.

    • Chris I

      There couldn’t not be “some quantum physics at work” in it.

      • Tony McDougall

        So which interpretation of quantum physics will Rossi use to explain whats going on. Is the “Cat” in the E-Cat Schrodinger’s Cat?

        • MStone

          Rossi favors Quantum Ring Theory over Quantum Field Theory.

        • Chris I

          Perhaps the Many Worlds, because he is striving to manage the whole thing in the New World and the Old World, and also in Oz and Kiwilandia, and he seems to think it will be a great thing in Our Ancestor’s World too. But then,oh heck, he is flatly refusing to deal with the Mandarin World, even though he aims for other Eastern Worlds.

          No, so then maybe it’s gotta be the Conscious Observer, because that’s what so many folks think is his only support for his extraordinary claims… and oh, yes, it could even be the reason why he calls it a kind of a Cat. He dassn’t have Wigner’s friend inside it lest his secret IP be let out of the bag instead of the Cat.

          Really Tony I didn’t suppose you were talking about interpretations because you said quantum physics, which doesn’t care about interpretations. Only Pious Folks care about those. Anything that could be empirically distinguished automatically hops across the boundary, from hermeneutics to physics.

          For the record, anything up to the atomic and molecular scale is quantum physics and in some cases even larger scales, such as is likely with these phenomena, where I infer that a good bit of metal lattice must be coherently involved, but if it’s at all a nuclear process then it can’t not be of an inherently quantum nature.

          • Chris I

            e-gosh I forgot it could even be the Transactional, cuz he’s sure a-hopin’ to conduct a great many of’em. Further, he’d better conduct them in a short span of time, making the whole pack of them like one big Übertransaktion.

            • Roger Bird

              I have no idea what you are talking about, and that makes me not care what you are talking about.

              • Chris I

                Well you’re not Tony! It only matters if Tony knows, and cares.
                😛

                • Tony McDougall

                  I know what you mean, Chris.

                • Chris I

                  Thank goodness!!!
                  😉

  • JJE

    I don’t understand anything anymore!
    Is the Rossi Effect a nuclear fusion? If so, it overcomes the Coulomb barrier with normal pressure and temperature and, in this case, there is a violation of the known rules of nuclear physics.
    If not, what is the Rossi Effect ?

    • Giuliano Bettini

      Andrea Rossi
      August 21st, 2013 at 7:24 AM
      Giuliano Bettini:
      Here have named my process the “Rossi Effect” referring to the collective phenomenon ( whose mechanism has now been completely understood).
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

      Giuliano Bettini
      August 21st, 2013 at 3:18 AM
      Andrea
      you spoke twice of Rossi Effect.
      That’s extremely important IMO, I do not ask what it is (maybe you can not answer), but I ask what it refers to.
      The Rossi Effect what it refers to?
      Catalyst?
      Properties of Nickel lattice?
      A kind of collective phenomenon?
      Thanks
      Giuliano Bettini.

    • Bruce Fast

      One possibility that I have considered is that while the average energy level of the system is low, there may be loci with extremely high energies. He could be crossing the coulomb barrier with very localized high energy points.

      • BroKeeper

        Bruce, I appreciate this question because I brought this up over a week ago appealing to the nuclear expertise in the house without response:

        “I have a question to the local nuclear scientists. If such large amounts of energy are released from the fusion of a hydrogen atom with another NI or H atom in a very finite volume of space to that of a few molecular sizes, wouldn’t there exist torus reactor plasma equivalent energy temperatures (before dissemination) to nearby H or NI atoms to the point some of the hydrogen would overcome the coulomb barrier? This is not to exclude the forced plasma from electrical impulse.
        Just like the beginning of the big bang temperatures forcing sub-particles together in a very small space with extremely high temperatures……….

        ……does initial dense localized hot plasma from fusion sparks exist to overcome the limits of fusion (coulomb) barriers to cascade further nearby H to Ni or H to H fusion?”

        I may bring it up again and again until I get an answer (like an impatient child repeating “are we there yet”). 🙂 Thanks.

    • Roger Bird

      JJE, I feel your frustration. The LENR effect is a way of going around the Coulomb Barrier. Remember that the Coulomb Barrier was determined under very specific circumstances, that of particles moving at 1/20th of the speed of light or more and having two protons smash into each other. Most of the theories that I have seen about LENR are some variation on an electron marrying a proton and becoming a neutron, and the neutron waltzing into the next nucleus. Then in the nucleus the neutron getting divorced and becoming an electron and a proton again. Sort of like the electron escorts the proton past the Coulomb Barrier.

      • Robyn Wyrick

        That’s a great metaphor.

    • Preston

      No, Rossi is right, it’s not new physics.

      The Coulomb barrier is not an issue, the process doesn’t require two protons to fuse. What happens is either by electron capture, or just real close elongated orbits the proton either turns into a neutron, or it just acts like one. Since it’s a neutral particle, there is no coulomb barrier to overcome.

      Current physics already recognizes Muon catalyzed cold fusion. Muons are like electrons, but heavier so they naturally orbit closer to the nucleolus. Make hydorgen out of muons and they will fuse. Current physics also already recognizes electron capture, where a proton captures an electron and turns into a neutron. One thing that happens even in hot fusion is quantum mechanical tunneling. The two protons just need to get close enough to tunnel, they don’t have to actually hit each other.

      What Rossi is saying is good, it’s not like blacklight power, or telsa coils, or the Keshe foundation, etc that all postulated new physics. And it’s not even like dark matter or dark energy, no really new physics is needed.

      • Roger Bird

        Thank you, Preston. That helps.

      • Jim

        Nice explanation

      • GreenWin

        The elongated electron orbit and fractional Rydberg state of Mills, share some of the same potential IMO.

      • hempenearth

        On the terminology, it could be said logically if not traditionally that an electron being “captured” by a proton, is the “fusion” of an electron with a proton.

      • Morgan

        is there some equation or some way to prove LENR using math that there can be net energy etc with electron capture or whatever you think this is?

    • Chris I

      According to some, there are alternatives to it “being fusion” or at any rate a positively charged object getting into the nickel nucleus.

      Aside from this, which of the known “rules of nuclear physics” do you assume is being violated if the Coulomb barrier is being overcome at normal pressure and temperature? The Gamow factor is not a fundamental rule, it is a computation and exceptions to it would only mean that it does not apply to the specific case, for reasons such as some of the simplifying assumptions not holding well enough.

  • Roger Bird

    This reminds me somehow of Rossi saying that his invention is integrative, not disruptive. Perhaps he is trying to not scare the pants off of people until it is too late.

    The things that Rossi is doing to make the process better: higher COP, better control, etc are probably just plain old ordinary physics. But to say that the fundamental process is not new is disingenuous.

  • Roger Bird

    Robin gave me a hard time when I got venomous concerning scientists. So I will say it again, only this time without the venom. Scientists tend to not understand human beings and human emotions so well, as a general rule.

    • AlainCo

      One explanation given by Thomas Kuhn is that Scientist are educated strongly to integrate the current paradigm of their domain.
      This paradigm is not really a theory, but a bundle of methods, of things which are important, of rules, of things not to look at. The education is violent because they have to work at the edge of knowledge and should not disperse or be troubled.

      I imagine that human factor is clearly ruled as to ignore. Moreover science attract people who often are not attracted by human factor.

      On the opposite, with similar tastes about science and technology, engineers are trained to integrate human factor, because it is part of their job, thus their paradigm. However they are less trained on enforcing theory and enforcing peer-review , and they prefer the paradigm of their work : that it match reality, and that uncertain sources are more-or-less reliable (which is similar but different from peer-reviewed). The face uncertainty all the time, since theory for them are variables coming from external science. Engineer face less extreme theoretical challenge than scientists, but more extreme problems with low-tech problems, with uncertainties, with required decision despite lack of data, and with human factors.

      I have been shocked when reading scientific paper to see the mass of theoretical questions, compared to the simple plain description of facts, and studied of parameter spaces. The slides of ENEA at ICCF18 are what I expect from good research, like what Longchampt wrote about his F&P replications.

      Like for Wright brothers, putting aside the theoretical question does not prevent to build a phenomenological model of what is happening, and to optimize and predict with that rough model.

      One problem also I observe about hard-skeptics, is that they clearly don’t understand humans. they don’t understand the kind of risk fraudsters decide to take, and the risk which are not realistics. They also have a very naive model of genuine business, ignoring the reality of innovators…
      They also don’t understand what is uncertainty, what is lack of data, and how you can infer semi-rational decisions despite that lack of data and certainty. they also don’t understand risk, opportunities, options, … Like scientists are educated.

      I’m reading more and more documents on innovation (From Norber Alter, a thesis, Taleb, Kuhn, military strategy innovation…) and it is clear that innovators are alien, working in garage, with trial and error, ambitious and calling for revenge more than greedy, taking semi-rational decisions guided by a blank-filled model of reality (because no complete model exists).

      part of hard-skeptics incredulity is lack of honesty and self-delusions, but I feel also that a big part is paradigm-enforced blindness, and incompetence in human factor, uncertainty, fuzzy logic.

      The history of cold fusion is quite simple if you see it without theory, replacing scientific method by engineering risk analysis, and integrating human factor dynamic.
      Add to that that real history shows how it happens often…

      so simple! it could be so simple!

      • Jim

        Mistaking the map for the territory is a fundamental problem of human psychology.

        This occurs at levels ranging from “what the preacher told me is true” to the most refined and tested scientific models.

        And conceptual representations that have any degree of everyday meaning don’t come anywhere near accurately modeling the quantum fluff that reality seems to be made of.

        At the same time we are massively dependent on conceptual models for the simplest everyday perceptions and behaviors. The consequences of inaccuracy in these models can be seen when we consider beliefs about things like the value of seat belts or stock tips, or when it is recognized that people often think that reality behaves the way concepts do, leading for example to legislation setting the value of pi to 3.

        A major difficulty is that until we understand that we are effectively bound by the limits our conceptual modeling content and methods, we have no chance of breaking free of of those limits.

        We literally cannot think outside the box until we understand that we’re in a box. And in most cases people are strongly incented to value and respect the walls of their particular box.

        As to the aggravating behavior of scientists, they very likely won’t have the slightest idea of what we’re complaining about, and they will interpret those complaints according to models that they are familiar with, which is that we are overly emotional, under educated, insufficiently intelligent and/or excessively attached to wishful thinking and magical views of reality.

        It usually takes a major crisis for people to even be aware of the conceptual box they are in, let alone question it.

        Otherwise it’s like waking sleepwalkers; not particularly pleasant or safe for anyone involved.

        • GreenWin

          Well put Jim. The major crisis you speak of may be at hand. At the moment we have an escalating Fukushima nuclear catastrophe threatening the Pacific ocean and millions of peoples’ health and welfare. But this does not fit the mainstream paradigm, so the New York Times front page prints a story about the latest IPCC global war ming report.

          One of these crises is far more threatening than another. But replacing the nuclear fission industry will crimp the lifestyle of certain elites. They would rather collect fees off carbon credit sales, than have to retool their energy investments.

          • Roger Bird

            I don’t believe you. I think that you are making a Mount Everest out of a Mount Washington.

          • psi

            Sadly, it looks like those of us who said “no nukes” in the 1970s were right all along.

          • GreenWin

            “…they clearly don’t understand humans.” THIS is the most insightful statement I have EVER seen on this site. What some people do not understand about human nature, psychology, inner spirit makes the angels weep. It is the fundamental reason for failure of this program in ever respect.

          • AlainCo

            we should compare the leaks to the planet production of banana…
            some said it was 25% of planet banana radioactivity per year, and 25% of a single coal power plant among the 2500 on the planet.

            the leak is serious for the people working in the zone… serious for the psychology and thus the economy of the region, but no panic…
            I imagine that Rhone river transport much more natural radioactivity into Mediterranea than Fukushima in the pacific…

            anyway a challenge, a risk, for local workers and local economy… have to be solved… without panic.

            • Roger Bird

              And without melodrama.

            • psi

              Well, admittedly we do not yet know how bad this is going to become. And if Japan and the world is lucky, then it remains an event that can be compared with other risk assessments. But in a worser case analysis — which could still unfold — it may dwarf anything we’ve seen and become a truly planetary disaster. It has that potential. So we just wait and see while the local officials and workers do the best they can to contain an already terrible and still potentially catastrophic situation.

            • GreenWin

              Also germane is the fact that the 600+ page Parliamentary report on causes points to collusion between Tepco, regulators, government to minimize the dangers.

              Bloomberg News claimed the corruption in nuclear power makes Bernie Madoff look good.

          • Thinks4Self

            Remember Bikini Atoll? Far more radiation was released into the Pacific Ocean during those tests than Fukushima ever will. When tested recently the scientists conducting the tests were hard pressed to find radiation above background at ground zero of the tests. Radioactive elements are nothing new to the planet the environment can deal with them and yes part of that dealing is adsorption by flora and fauna. Ever wonder why we still use iodized salt in the US?

            • Roger Bird

              “Ever wonder why we still use iodized salt in the US?” Because the FDA is seriously messed up and usually 40 years behind medical research (and I am not even talking about wholesome intuition).

              • AlainCo

                euh not for that reason.
                We know that in france because in mountains they were not using sea salt with iodium, but mine salt.
                The result was a throat strange disease linked with a medical stupidity (cretinism: “crétin des alpes”).

                however you are right that it is important, since one big cause of thyroid cancer around chernobyl, beside the stupidity to let kids drink local milk, was that ukrainian population was so poor that it could not afford sea salt.

                note that around powerplant they keep the iodium in pharmacy, because there was many real accident with iodium over consumption, and because it is only useful only few hours before contamination…

                we should rather be concerned about banana, and women… they are both radioactive and much appreciated despite their Po40 content. 😉

                less funny for the workers on the zone.

      • psi

        Alainco, as usual, excellent summary of some of the leading problems invoked by the so-called “skeptical” position. I say “so-called,” because I have noticed that very routinely those who like to drape themselves in the mantle of being “skeptics” are more skeptical of ideas on the margins than they are of those which have obtained some kind of status quo privilege. I’m not saying this is always an entirely unreasonable stance; I do maintain, and I think you would agree, that the history of ideas, not to mention politics, shows that such faith is often a dubious one.

        • AlainCo

          I understand some caracteristics of so-called skeptics, because I’m very mainstream…
          Their heuristic is not totally stupid on most subject, Yet recently I have observed that media mainstream is crowded with mass-delusion, by “priest of doom” and matching “merchants of the Temple”…

          Maybe their are fooled by the corruption of the media system, the maintream media, and also the science media, who are controlled by an oligarchy, by ideologies, and by those who control funding …

          I hesitate between a “Kuhn” vision of paradigm change blindness, and a “collective delusion” as Roland Benabou based on terror and financial interest to enjoy the benefits of sharing the same illusion with those who fund, price and publish.

          basically I notice also that the “evil force” in media have lost power and that the real evil today is “the Good Side”…
          Not a surprise, because those who have the power decide of who is The Good.

          Many skeptics simply protect “The Good Side”, desperately, like Templar monk-soldiers.*
          Some also face conflict between what Judith Curry call the “micro-ethic” (respecting the rule of honesty, fair arguments, admitting facts, recognizing weakness) and the “macro-ethic” (protecting The Good Side from doubts and attacks), and as usual make the bad choice of “circling the wagons”… at short term they protect their camp from critics. on the long term they ruin their credibility.

          You will notice all that around many scientific controversies.

  • Patrik

    Well, this is not correct. What Rossi has showed in the demos is not possible with “old physics”, simple as that. Except for one thing, and that is físsion. That is normal nuclear fissioning like in our nuclear plants. Rossi has however made it clear that this is not the case either.

    So new physics it is, or bust.

    • Job001

      It’s as likely not new physics. It’s correcting the assumptions associated with the NAE Nuclear Active Environment and the mathematical definitions being used.
      A. In the case of muons, a huge increase in mass decreases the radius of the calculation for “coulomb barrier”.
      B.slow neutrons pathways have no “coulomb barrier”.
      C.In the case of BEC states or localized superconducting equivalent formations, charges can be “shielded” and the coulomb barrier reduced effectively to near zero.
      D.In the case of conductive metals, some shielding from free electrons and positrons is likely.
      E.In the case of probability of ion collision this is dramatically higher in lattice than for random motion in a vacuum due to joint VECTORED motion of many protons once group freed by saturation of the local NAE.

      Starting assumptions are critical. Without correct assumptions its GIGO Garbage In, Garbage Out.
      LENR starting assumptions have extremely little to do with standard hot fusion vacuum non-shielded assumptions. It is not surprising the wrong assumptions were previously used nor that the coulomb barrier may have little or nothing to do with LENR.

      • Roger Bird

        The science that you mentioned I accept as being real, but I would hardly call them old physics. They are new proven science. But perhaps even worse, they cross disciplines in ways that the old codgers can’t deal with.

        • Chris I

          It all depends on how Patrik meant his words “old physics” and given his opinion of it being impossible according to OP, I take him to have meant fundamental stuff rather than corollaries of theorems that follow from other theorems and their corollaries and yadda yadda.

          Granting this to be so, I disagree with him because the objections are based mostly on reckoning with OP in old ways. The most perplexing objection is the Coulomb barrier but I’ve pointed out my own considerations concerning this; even if we assume the most apparent scenario (Ni + p –> Cu) we musn’t forget that the Gamow computation is based on a host of things which simplify the actual framework that nuclear processes ought to be described by.

          In short, I suspect it to be a matter of reckoning with OP in new ways. Then again, perhaps it does involve NP too.

  • Barry

    I miss his accent.

    • Roger Bird

      LOL, so also do I miss his accent. I think that he is cute and adorable, aside from probably being the most important person in the world right now.

  • daniel maris

    I’m more interested in seeing proof of the “good products” rather than discussing the physics, important though the physics undoubtedly is.