Rossi: E-Cat Theory to be Published (Minus Certain Information) ‘Within Several Months’


Many people have been asking Andrea Rossi questions about the workings of the E-Cat reactor lately (I guess thinking since he has been more talkative, he might give some revelations), but as is his common response he won’t give any information away. In the past, however, he has said that at some point he would publish his theory — and lately said he hopes to do it in 2014. Yesterday he made the following statement on the Journal of Nuclear Physics:

“Within several months I will make a publication, wherein all the issues that will not affect the IP will be touched. This will be after the completion of the third indipendent party validation”

One of the main criticisms of Rossi’s work from scientists is that he has provided no theoretical information explaining how the E-Cat works, and Rossi may be attempting here to address that objection. However the fact that certain proprietary information will not be included in this report will, I am sure, be a problem for many — competitors included.

All businesses want to keep a competitive advantage, so giving away the key secrets of the E-Cat does not seem to be on the cards here. Perhaps Rossi will explain how to generate low-powered low energy nuclear reactions, and leave out the secrets of the catalyst which provide for the levels of power he is generating.

I suppose the goal for now for Rossi and Co. is to make a credible splash on the world scene once the current round of testing is completed and the results are published. At some point they are going to make a commercial pitch, and credible technical data and scientific information will be key ingredients if they are going to be taken seriously.

Whatever is included in Rossi’s publication, I’m sure there will be intense interest in it, and maybe, even without some secrets it will include some key information to help us understand this fascinating phenomenon.


  • bachcole

    95 people have signed up for the Thunderclap. We need 500 by January 15th. Let’s move it, people.

  • BroKeeper

    From what I understand, the input is more than just heat but it includes a specific frequency causing some sort of magnetic resonance that maintains stability. Some say it has to do with hydrogen compression within a confined matrix of nickel compound crystal.

    Rossi mentioned the input is turned on to keep the catalyst from running away not just to bring the temperatures up. So there is more to it than just heat.

    This is really out of scope stuff here and no one really understands it, not even Rossi to the full extent (as he has admitted). It will be some time before the hard core scientists realize its truth and apply their unproven theories to extreme conditions. Then another wave of LENR power will mature with greater control and power (look out). Right now most of us are only in the “INSANTITEE” phase of the theories. Stay tuned.

    • georgehants

      BroKeeper, By “hard core scientists” do you mean the dumbbells who 24 years ago where handed Cold Fusion on a plate and like every other scientific subject that is not kinder-garden they closed their incompetent minds.
      Talk to the average scientist about the mind, Placebo Effect etc. and you will wish you had talked to your cat.
      24 years later and the scientific community still cannot get beyond believing a steam engine runs everything.
      Today I read a scientific report recommending the outlawing of human sex activities on the basis that the avoidance of the frictional heat produced will save the planet from Global Warming.

      • BroKeeper

        The condition is “realize its truth”. Some may not ever realize the truth.
        As far as your other issue, I recommend lubricants to cut down on the excessive heat. :)

        • georgehants

          BroKeeper, do you agree that if one cannot determine “the Truth”, then one does not know.
          Therefore there can be no alternative to keeping an open-mind and to do more Research.
          To dismiss or debunk because one is ignorant is clearly the action of a very low intelligence on any subject.

          • BroKeeper

            It’s harder to unlearn than to learn. Many are stuck in a paradigm they cannot reject because so much is at stake: pride, money, leadership, fear, general belief systems, etc. of which have been mentioned here before. Many would rather continue on their illusions (“closed mind”) because they don’t want to count or pay the cost of change. IMO this is a lack of wisdom not knowledge whether it be error or not. Yes, I agree in most part.

            • bachcole

              Well put, BroKeeper! This is why once we get these physics-geese pointed in the right direction of LENR they will do marvelously and improvements to LENR will accelerate. Unfortunately, turning them is not easy, as you say. Intelligence is not wisdom and is not paradigm nimbleness.

      • Chris I

        George I used to think you were misguided but now I simply don’t know what to think.

        Do you have a ref to that about frictional heat? Are you sure it wasn’t satire? Are you unaware that the placebo effect has been scientific fact for decades, which medical research cannot omit allowing for when testing new stuff?

        • bachcole

          George is conflicted on homeopathy. He believes that it is placebo because there are NO more physical constituents left, but he admits that it works. So he gives placebo a positive spin. I believe that homeopathy works because of transcendental “constituents”, like prana, chi, life force, and I consider saying that homeopath is placebo to be an insult to my intelligence and observational skills. At least that his my take on his position when he uses the word “placebo”.

          • Chris I

            Aren’t you leaving out Cosmic Vibrations and other stuff? LOL though I was thinking along the same lines myself….

  • Marc Ellenbroek

    So how would the theory look like? Presumably like the W-L theory, but in the area where W-L struggles to convince Andrea found his miraculous catalyzer. This is to start LENR where you will need an energy of 1.6 Mev to allow a proton to fuse with an electron and form a very slow neutron. Possibly after LENR is started, sufficient energetic Muons are around to keep the process going. If you have a catalyzer which produces energetic particles, that may do the job. e.g. Carbon (14), Calcium (48) or Uranium (235). The E-cat is being controlled by switching an external heat source on and off. I wonder how you can get that stable as the process itself produces heat also, posing a considerable potential for a run-away. Maybe temperature dependable control of the catalyzer position?
    Others (Brillouin, Defkalion) seem to have found a simpler way to start the LENR process. They use plasmas and/or high EM fields to start and control LENR. Would they also use a catalyzer or will natural and cosmic radiation be sufficient in that set-up?
    Let us wait and see what Andrea Rossi and others will reveal.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      The energy needed to make a neutron from an electron and a proton is actually:
      Rest mass of electron = 0.000549 u
      Rest mass of proton = 1.007276 u
      Rest mass of neutron = 1.008665 u

      0.000549 + 1.007276 = 1.007825
      1.007825 -1.008665 = – 0.000084 u
      i.e. 931 x 0.000084 =
      0.78 MeV
      This is still very high so I wonder if the following reactions are taking place:

      Ni(N)H2 > Cu*H > Zn* > Ni(N-2) + He(4)

      After inferred radiation (heat) oscillates the covalent nickel hydride bond, nickel hydride sucks up one of its hydrides to become cuprous hydride (Cu* is copper in an excited state). The cuprous hydride sucks up its hydride to become zinc in its excited state (Zn*). The zinc loses its energy by fissioning into nickel (with two fewer neutrons than the starting nickel) and helium.

      For example:
      2 H(1) + Ni(64) > Ni(62) + He(4) 11.8 MeV

      2 H(1) + Ni(62) > Ni(60) + He(4) 8.85 MeV

      2 H(1) + Ni(60) > Ni(58) + He(4) 6.88 MeV

      2 H(1) + Ni(58) > Ni(56) + He(4) 4.80 MeV

  • Bertuswonkel

    The press conference can be seen here:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CfHaeQo6oU

    Pons at around 6.45 calls it ‘a sustained nuclear Fusion reaction’. This turned out not to be correct and caused physicists to denounce the claims based on their theoretical understanding on nuclear physics. They were in principle right ‘Cold Fusion’, a fusion process like in the sun, is not possible under such mild conditions.

    • Fortyniner

      It hasn’t ‘turned out’ to be anything yet, as no coherent theory has been tested as far as we know. It is still possible that some form of fusion takes place very locally and at the atomic level under the conditions P&F established.

      • Bertuswonkel

        Thanks for the reference, have not seen that one before and will take a look at it.
        You are right, should not jump to conclusions, i am in no position to make that call anyway.
        However, the fact remains that some physicists at the time were saying this could not be possible because if it was fusion they should be dead from the radiation. I am just following E. Storms on this one who in many of his papers stresses the need to make a distinction between what is known about Hot Fusion and Cold Fusion. According to him they are two distinct processes.

        • Fortyniner

          My own suspicion for what it’s worth is that two processes (at least) take place in Rossi’s reactors – a relatively benign nucleonic effect of the type that Hagestein and others propose, and actual nuclear fusion on a very local scale. It’s possible that the latter can be stimulated by the first process if it is pushed too far, and will destroy the reactor if it is not immediately terminated.

          Such a delicate ‘balancing act’ could account for some of the difficulties that Rossi in particular seems to have encountered. Continuously driven systems such as those developed by Brillouin and DGT seem to be inherently safer, but they may have other disadvantages (my understanding is that the life of the modified spark plugs that drive the reaction conditions was, and still may be, quite short).

    • bachcole

      Hot fusion, as it is fantasized by most people as an energy source here on Earth, is not even practiced in the Sun. Someone here and someone elsewhere (two separate calculations) calculated that the Sun generates only 17 watts per cubic meter. The only reason that we see so much razzle-dazzle on the Sun is that there are so many cubic meters in the Sun. But I generate far more than 17 watts per cubic meter, and my dogs do slightly better. So trying to get that kind of action here on Earth and expecting it to solve our energy problems is absurd. Now, if they want to compare their fantasy hot fusion with a supernova, then that might make more sense, but it won’t be quite so appreciated by people since supernovas are much more scary. In fact, the containment walls and magnets or lasers of a hot fusion device would rapidly become highly radioactive, so their other fantasy that hot fusion is clean is a big, fat lie.

    • bachcole

      “Pons at around 6.45 calls it ‘a sustained nuclear Fusion reaction’. This
      turned out not to be correct and caused physicists to denounce the
      claims based on their theoretical understanding on nuclear physics.” That was not their real reason. Even now in the LENR community where there are a bunch of different theories, there is only one person who acts like those physicists, and that would be Krivit. That thought by Fleishmann may have been used to beat F & P over the head with, but the real reasons would be numerous, but would include greed, pride, fear of ridicule, etc. etc. etc.

  • jousterusa

    My regret is that so many people are freezing this winter – at least 22 Americans have died – that the home E-Cat could have saved. I am surprised Rossi and the other progenitors of this technology don’t care more. Theories and patents are secondary to human life.

    • Buck

      That assertion about Rossi is completely uncalled for.

    • Doktor Bob

      I understand your way of reason and sometime I thing very similar but also I remind myself that Andrea Rossi has made more than most of us for Cold Fusion. If China is being played out towards US – like it seems that we are starting to see – then we will have some real – unstoppable – chain effect.

    • bachcole

      That is like saying that we should not have built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam because 11 or 14 workers got killed. 22 Americans dying out of roughly 200,000,000 exposed to the two really bad storms is like one in 9,090,909. If you find it necessary to blame anyone, you should be blaming the physicists and others who have impeded “cold fusion” research and development for the past 25 years. Rossi is putting in 16 hour days 365 days per year, working as fast as he can. And if he had no concern for patents, then he would have gotten NO capital from anyone and would still be working in his garage.

  • bachcole

    Apologies to Martha and the Vandellas.

    Callin’ out around the world, are you ready for a brand new heat?
    Winter’s here and the time is right for heating the home.

    Dancin’ in Chicago (dancin’ in the home)

    Down in New Orleans (dancin’ in the home)

    In New York City

    All we need is E-Cats, sweet E-Cats,

    There’ll be music everywhere

    There’ll be swingin’ swayin’, and I-Pods playin,

    Dancin’ in the street

    Oh it doesn’t matter what you believe, just as long as you are there.

    So come on every guy, grab a girl,

    Everywhere, around the world

    There’ll be dancin’, they’re dancin’ in the street.

    This is an invitation, across the nation,

    A chance for folks to meet.

    There’ll be laughin’ singin’, and music swingin’

    Dancin’ in the street

    Philadelphia P.A., Baltimore and D.C now,

    Can’t forget the E-Cat motor city,

    All we need is E-Cats, sweet E-Cats

    There’ll be music everywhere

    There’ll be swingin’ swayin’, and I-Pods playin,

    Dancin’ in the street

    Oh it doesn’t matter what you believe, just as long as you are there.

    So come on every guy, grab a girl,

    Everywhere, around the world

    They’re dancin’, dancin’ in the street

    Way down in L.A., every day they’re dancin’ in the street

    Lets form a big strong line, and get in time,

    We’re dancin’ in the street.

    Across the ocean blue, me and you

    We’re dancin n the street

    • Daniel Maris

      No mention
      Of scansion.
      I’ll spare your blushes, today…
      I’ll only say
      Your versifying
      Was death defying.

  • bachcole

    Apologies to the Monkees.

    “I thought environmental purity and prosperity was only true in fairy tales
    Meant for daydreams but not for us.
    Oh, E-Cat conviction was out to get me (duh-duh, duh-duh)
    That’s the way it seems (duh-duh, duh-duh)
    Disappointment haunted all my dreams.”

    Then I saw Darden in China
    Now I’m a believer.
    Not a trace
    Of doubt in my mind.
    I’m in love with Rossi and Darden
    I’m a believer,
    I couldn’t leave them if I tried

    I thought environmental purity and prosperity was all work and no result
    Seems the more we gave the less we got.
    Oh, what’s the use in trying (duh-duh, duh-duh)
    All you get is pain (duh-duh, duh-duh)
    When I needed sunshine I got acid-rain

    Yes I saw the May 2013 Levi, et. al,
    Now I’m a believer.
    No not a trace
    Of doubt in my mind.
    Said I’m a believer, yeah yeah….”

    • MLTC

      Don’t you mean you’re a belieber? :P

      • bachcole

        I am definitely not a belieber.

        • MLTC

          :-) Nor am I.

          • bachcole

            I am more of a bachiever or even a b.b.kingiever. (:->)

            • MLTC

              :-) Same here.

  • bachcole

    I thought that GreenWin was unnecessarily harsh in his response, plus you made a very good point. A patent would be very valuable to at the very least avoid unjust lawsuits.

  • kdk

    I’ve started wondering since I started to understand W-L better if it would be possible for collective weak-interactions to just barely keep another electron from combining with a proton and to the point where they’re so close that they don’t need to form a real neutron to get past the electron cloud.

  • bonk

    Rossi needs a patent more than a Nobel prize. All these tests and theory are to convince the PATENT GODS to issue him a patent. No patent, no business going forward.

    • GreenWin

      Ridiculous bonk. Trade Secret is far more valuable than any patent. And it applies globally. Why should he care what USPTO thinks? He doesn’t need them. Nor the academic boffins at Science and Nature. Great thing about market economics is if it works – even when the underlying mechanism is not understood (just check out vast quantities of pharma products) – it enters the market and generates hundreds, thousand of billions. No GODS necessary. Just a device that works.

  • Fortyniner

    Rossi has been guilty of a number of exaggerations and worse in earlier times, but the last time he promised that independent verification work would be published – it was. Why do you think it will be any different this time?

    I wonder why you feel the need to say, “I am believer in LENR/E-Cat etc.” – when your comments clearly indicate that this is not the case. Camouflage?

  • GreenWin

    Lew Larsen has discussed how his theory is the reason NASA’s Joe Zawodny became convinced LENR works. He also claims to have taught NASA how the theory allows for transmutations. And that Joe called him up to ask how to make excess heat. At which point Lew suggested that Joe and NASA would need to pony up some money for that proprietary info. So, Lew and Widom, like many other inventors and scientists, would like to be compensated for their work. Surprise.

    We still have to pay doctors, firemen, machinists, plumbers, lawyers, waiters for their work. Why would an inventor, even of a breakthrough energy source, be held to a different standard?

  • Fortyniner

    “..the goal for now for Rossi and Co. is to make a credible splash.”

    I don’t think that a research paper – no matter how convincing – will do that, even if accompanied by a well designed ‘press kit’. The media have already proved to be a dead weight as far as informing the general public about CF, and I can’t see that changing other than at the margins.

    Only a working generator whose inputs and outputs can be measured over time by qualified people including science correspondents is going to make the splash. The question is when, and whether it will happen in the US, Sweden… or China.

    • ecatworld

      I agree — credibility needs to come on a number of fronts.

      • Chris the 2nd

        I also agree. was it Blacklight or Brouillion? that had their technology signed off by tenured scientists engineers and professionals from all over and it didn’t even make the technology news editorials & blogs.

        • artefact

          That was Blacklight power. They had 5 or 6 people doing tests but at a rather low energy level afair (as far as I remember).

    • bachcole

      The “only” part is my only point of disagreement. When business people start saying “hey, we have several E-cats and they are really helping our bottom line”, that will give Rossi credibility also. But another paper won’t help much. It will be exciting and perhaps informative for us believers, but it won’t help with his credibility much.

      • Bertuswonkel

        I don’t agree with this at all. A paper published in the right place i.e. were lots of scientist read it is very important. P and F claims were dismissed because they could not explain how the process works. They made the mistake of calling it Fusion but it actually has nothing to with Fusion, its a new class of reactions. People have a hard time believing you if you cannot explain were the energy is coming from. If Rossi is planning to make a big splash, he would be wise to have a damn good explanation for this magical device.

        • GreenWin

          Presumably this “magical” process is the same that SPAWAR scientists published on. And that NASA pursues. And that Mitsubishi, Toyota, STMicro, SKINR, NRL, SRI, ENEA, DARPA, ARPA-E, University Osaka, Purdue, Missouri, MIT Hagelstein, etc. are all working with.

          • Bertuswonkel

            I know but none of them has published a well tested theory on LENR were everyone in the community can seem to agree on. Rossi must know what has happened to P an F. He has a damn good experiment to find out more about this mysterious force. My guess is that he is testing his device to try, with a team, to solve the puzzle of LENR. This is the first step before you can start mass production this technology, you have to know what you are doing right. To bad he is not willing to share his findings of his studies, might help the community a lot with working out the fundamental mechanics.

            • GreenWin

              Why should Rossi “share” any of his findings when he is invested in commercial enterprise? NRL, DARPA, SRI, ENEA etc. are all funded by taxpayers. Have they shared all they know about LENR? Or have some of them “classified” the data for… proprietary reasons?

              No, an “accepted theory” is the old gatekeeper ruse. The academics & theoreticians have had the past 25 years to figure it out. Their time is over. Commerce is steering this ship now.

              • Pekka Janhunen

                I’m waiting from Rossi’s publication not so much a theory, but the experimental facts: which isotopes turn to which, in what quantities, and whether or not the excess energy is consistent with the calculated binding energy change of the isotopes.

                • Fortyniner

                  I have a feeling that any theory of operation will be very general in nature, and probably lacking the kind of detailed information you refer to, in order to protect IP. It will probably have to be published on Arxiv only, due to a lack of ‘meat’.

                • Karl

                  It might still be too many holes in the so called physical laws, that we can expect the complete theoretical answer from Rossi in a short perspective. It does not matter in such case as long the reactor is doping the workwork, to my mind. The complete future explanation maj perhaps require entierly new theoretical models.

                • roseland67

                  Pekka,
                  And HOW is the reaction controlled?
                  Does the nickel lattice somehow expel the Hydrogen proton
                  if the reactor is suddenly shut off?
                  Do all of them act the same?
                  What if they get “caught” in the middle of transmutation and the reactor is shut off?

                • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

                  I would be very surprised if Pekka knew the answers. Why don’t you wait with the rest of us until the third party report and the theory are published?

                • Pekka Janhunen

                  I think that roseland67 wasn’t asking me, but was incrementing a common nice-to-know list.

                • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

                  Oh, ok. See now how that was meant. That would be useful questions then. Some answers will probably be given by Rossi’s theory, though I suspect more questions will be raised then answered.

                • Bruce Williams

                  SO AM I desperately……………….we can live without the theory, but we really need the facts about the experiments.

                • GreenWin

                  Pekka, agreed. The experimental results of Rossi’s device will contribute to an eventual theory. However, I think you’d acknowledge that even in your field of expertise (astrophysics) we have managed to get along with conflicting and non-unified theories of gravity – all the while being able to calculate orbital trajectories and gravitational effects on distant planets.

                  Heck, millions of doses of pharma products are consciously, legally prescribed every year, with little comprehensive understanding of how they actually effect the human organism.

                • bachcole

                  I suppose pharmas not knowing how they work may be why pharmaceutical drugs kill so many people each year.

              • Bertuswonkel

                I agree with all of this but would argue that the two go hand in hand.
                Rossi surely has a theory, i would love to know what it is, should be very interesting.
                Science is all about the pleasure of finding things out. Al lot of people would be very happy if someone solved this puzzle just for the pure joy understanding how things work.

          • BroKeeper

            Its Notably Something About Nuclear In Tiny Energy Engines Theory or INSANITEE Theory.

      • Paul

        The theory has nothing to do with the credibility, but with the Nobel Prize… No theory, no prize!

        • Warthog

          Not so. The radioastrophysicists who detected the original microwave signature of the “Big Bang” had no theory. They still got the Nobel.

          True science depends ONLY on replicated experiment. Theories are good, and can accelerate further experimentation, but only ONE THING validates a discovery…….replication

      • Daniel Maris

        I agree. Real practical demonstrations are what we want to see. The science can wait.

        To be fair we have seen some demos, but nothing that approaches full credibility.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      I understood that Rossi (and I think Admin) meant that he plans to publish his theory paper in addition to the third party long-term testing report which is probably published first.

      • ecatworld

        Yes, that’s how I understood it, Pekka