Rossi on Extent of Testing and Review

I wrote on the Journal of Nuclear Physics today asking Andrea Rossi if he thought it made any difference where the upcoming report is published. I mentioned that in my opinion, if the report is well-written, thoroughly documented, and signed by the various authors, it should be acceptable, wherever it ended up being published. I expect the report will receive equal scrutiny whether it was published in Nature or on one of the authors’ web sites.

Rossi responded:

Frank Acland:
I do not know where the report will be published. I agree with you, though. The report will be written by 7 Professors and Physicists of three European Universities, who obviously review each other, and it will be further reviewed by other 7 Professors and Physicists of 7 Universities and Nuclear Physics Institutes of Europe, Asia, America before being proposed for publication. The report will be based upon millions of data collected by the measurement and registration instruments of the Professors and of their Institutes. The whole funded by an European scientific Institute.
Warm Regards,

The process described above sounds like it could take quite a while to complete. Even if the testing is complete at this point, it has to be written, and reviewed by people at various institutions. The process of providing feedback and rewriting could be quite time consuming with seven authors involved.

It’s not known who the authors or reviewers are, but I think the funding institute is Elforsk, who funded last years’ E-Cat test, and who have budgeted $200,000 for E-Cat testing for this year.

  • dennis

    Who cares about the report, this thing has been tested over and over, and works!, Why would anyone back the E-Cat and put in production if it were a hoax?–Go Rossi

  • Obvious

    Integerists. There is an infinity of numbers between 1 and 10. And an “infinity of infinities” if you start multiplying and dividing the infinity of numbers between 1 and 10.

  • Omega Z

    Question on many posters minds.
    How long till the Report is Published???

    Depends on where it is published.
    If published by way of ARXIV
    Possibly a couple months.

    If Published at Nature or another Scientific affiliate.
    Likely this time next year.

  • Omega Z

    GW gave 2 conclusions.
    I give another plausible point.
    Yes. Yes, “We are involved in so-called long-term test of E-CAT.”

    Yes. Yes, That was a dumb response. We are now bombarded daily by curiosity seekers about what the results are. Our Website is constantly going down.
    Note to Future Self. I Know Nothing…..

  • Omega Z

    If you really want to get your wife’s attention-
    Just tell her this technology will make housekeeping Bots a reality. All her chores will be done for her.
    She will either
    1. Love you more for trying to lighten her daily Burdens-
    2. Fear she could be replaced and Treat you like a King to keep you happy.

    Either way. You Win. 🙂

    • bachcole

      Won’t work. I do most of the housework. So she will love me less because she won’t need me. (:->)

  • Ophelia Rump

    Successful scientists are opportunistic scientists these days. They will not swim against the tide. But which way is that?

  • BroKeeper

    Peter Forsberg: “7 Professors, 7 Physicists, 7 Universities. A holy number?” Well, actually yes. The number “7” in biblical numerics represents Divine completeness and perfection. It is used
    in Genies 1 for the epoch of creation. I find these three 7’s apropos to the beginning of a new epoch directed by the Divine (numerically represented as “777”). This may be viewed as an encouraging omen for humanity’s future with another chance.

    • GreenWin

      Bro, I think you meant Genesis. Though Genies refers to the translation of the Arabic Jinn for “household guardian spirit.” Another holy number is 12 as well documented by scripture of many origins. And the number of E-Cats sold post 2011 demo. In any case it is all an encouraging omen. Thanks for that thought!

      • BroKeeper

        Yes, Genesis. Thanks GW! Interesting mistake. I use the hunt, peck and erase method of typing. I neglected the erase step. 🙂

        • Ophelia Rump

          What is the number of the holy hand-grenade?

          • BroKeeper

            For the unsuspecting:

            Monty Python’s Holy Grail Quote

            Cleric: And the Lord spake, saying, “First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.
            Brother Maynard: Amen.
            All: Amen.

            For those interested try this: 13, 23, 36, 200, 600 🙂

      • Pekka Janhunen

        OT: Speaking of magic numbers, in fennougrian culture nine was such number, before Christianity came in and introduced seven. It’s still in use in some Finnish sayings such as “a bear has the force of nine men”. I guess nine was like almost perfect, the best a mortal can do, only one short of the number of fingers.

    • PD

      Online survey of 30000+ people revealed 7 as the “world’s favourite number”.

      Numbers between 1 and 10 – 7 is the only number that cannot be multiplied or divided within the group.
      1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 can be doubled.
      6, 8 and 10 can be halved.
      9 divides by 3.
      7 is left on its own.

  • Iggy Dalrymple

    This is a liberal dog whose Envy-Button has metastasized to his left rear foot.–tbDDP0

    • Ophelia Rump

      Iggy, I have no idea of what you just said means, but the video was good!

      Sometimes a concept needs no words. We can all benefit from the insight which the dog lacks. If the dog were cuter, the video might have changed the world!

    • Omega Z

      And this Video is hilarious.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Iggy…..hee,hee or a conservative dog with a Tea Party back leg.

  • GreenWin

    Roger, remember, friends are those people unafraid to defend you to your wife (or spouse). Enjoy your read. 🙂

  • GreenWin

    Two conclusions come to mind: 1) This particular spokesman for Elforsk has no “need to know” about current LENR testing (standard compartmentalization) 2) a separate entity has been granted clearance to verify E-Cat’s functionality. In either case we can be sure that Elforsk is following developments closely. It is their job, according to Stefan Montin:

    “Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, LENR, is an area which has received increased attention over the past two to three years. When a dozen companies present that they are engaged in commercializing LENR technology, this may possibly indicate an unexpected discovery and this discovery in the future may affect the energy supply in the community.

    For Elforsk it is thus not about deciding whether LENR phenomena exists or not, but to be prepared if the unexpected should occur. The theory behind the phenomena is not yet clear and verification of its functionality in practical application has been going on and continues.” Stefan Montin, Elforsk, 11/2013

    • GreenWin

      NOTE: For linguists and behaviorists, it is fascinating to see the excess of “waffling” Mr. Montin uses. “…this may possibly indicate an unexpected discovery…” For our friends at ABC organizations (Language Inst. and elsewhere) it is this awkward use of language that is most revealing.

    • Fortyniner

      Possibly their attitude towards publicly acknowledging involvement and publishing their findings changed when the financial implications began to be realised at higher levels. It’s one thing to keep the world informed about a development that ‘might’ change the world in 20 years, but quite another when you discover that the development *will* change the world – drastically – in the very near future.

      Silence may be a hallmark of organisations that have become fully aware of the facts at executive level – something that could have implications for the nature of any published report if the research was sponsored by a commercial entity.

  • Bob

    This is really kind of incredible! Elforsk was admittedly centrally involved with the first “third party” test. This test was very positive in what we were allowed to see. They probably had even more information than we do……

    So, a company sponsors a test of a process that is truly World Changing. Not some nice little, “interesting” product, but one that could be the biggest thing since the industrial age started. This test was, without a doubt, convincing enough that one surely had to look further into this process and yet……

    “According to correspondence March 3, 2014 they are not involved in any so-called long-term test of ECAT.”

    HOW COULD THIS BE?!? Surely they are involved somehow. If they are not, then only one of two possibilities:

    1: They are completely blind, and I must say it, foolish or…
    2: They are involved and just do not want to admit it publicly at this time.

    • bachcole

      Bob, sorry, but as usual, there is more than the number of choices that seem obvious. A third choice is that Elforsk is involved with LENR+ in some other way but NOT with the long-term test.

      When a person (that would be me) lives OUTSIDE of the box, they are more likely to see OUTSIDE of the box.

  • ecatworld

    Thanks, Facepalm — that seems to eliminate them, then!

  • fritz194

    Apart of this story – a possible attention will hopefully shade a spotlight on few remaining white spots of science.
    There is obviously a huge gap between nuclear physics and electrochemistry.

  • Daniel Maris

    Great news! It sounds impressive, although we do have to await confirmation of who has been involved. As we know, Mr Rossi sometimes over-eggs the pudding.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Not really, The over egging of Blacklight is a stark contrast to Rossi.
      Rossi has always been neutral, and factual in my opinion.

      But at any rate the great Rossi hunt is over. He is not in charge anymore.
      He says vague things and people go into trances channeling dead alchemists for enlightenment.

      Rossi has not made any claims since Industrial Heat came into the picture.

  • Obvious

    Perhaps the Royal Society has decided to put a feather in their cap.

  • GreenWin

    All is proceeding nicely IMO. A second verification of E-Cat and Rossi Effect will nudge along the ordered transition from fossil/fission to distributed (PV, micro-CHP, microgrids) energy recources just as Edison Electric Inst. predicted last year. No gold rush. No Time Magazine cover. Just steady transition to renewables, followed by LENR “pilot” tests of district (<50MW) generators and local CHP systems.

  • Donk970

    more to the point, can we prevent industries like the oil and gas industries from influencing governments to maintain the status quo.

    • Omega Z

      Oil & Gas will continue to be needed. The Corporations that process it will continue to make profits. Not as much, but profits regardless.

      Of Concern is the Countries highly dependent on it for their livelihood. Those Governments that obtain 50% to 90% of all revenues from it. OPEC, Russia, Mexico, Many African Nations. Most if not all, already on shaky economic grounds.

      They get hit doubly hard. Lower number of barrels produced equals lower profits. Lower prices per barrel equal even less profit. Those Countries are in trouble.

      I’m of the opinion that this technology will take decades to roll out. It’s not about need. It’s just limits of Economic reality.
      Know different then all the other Alternate Energy(Wind/Solar/Etc) schemes. It’s been determined that if All Governments Doubled down on subsidizes & Incentives, They could replace “50%” of our energy needs by 2050.
      There is Zero reason to think LENR would fare any better.

      However, If it were to spread like wildfire, Everyone should be concerned. Governments would have 3 basic options.
      1. Raise Taxes on a large scale by those unaffected to provide economic support to those devastated.
      2. Raise Taxes on a large scale to take care of the Massive influx of Economic Refuges.
      3. Raise Taxes on a large scale for Military Defense for the coming Wars if they refuse options 1 or 2….

      But I do believe it will be a drawn out process.Thus plenty of time for everyone to Adapt.

  • winebuff

    I hope this report does take longer that will mean it is more thorough including theory and lets hope with tons of data from multiple reactors it will be a work with very few loopholes for anyone to deny. IH has lots riding on this.

    • Owen Geiger

      Good point. The previous test was Rossi’s. The long term test is for IH. Big difference. I think IH will be much more careful to get everything as clear and accurate as possible.

  • Bernie777

    We keep forgetting, this report, like all the past positive tests and reports, will not silence the skeptics. The only silencer will be a product that makes and/or saves money. When that is announced, that is when I start shorting.

    • Broncobet

      Good point Bernie,not about skeptics but about shorting.If this works at all ,anywhere,it will be more disruptive than the gold rush,word would get out and oil would be shorted. Oil has gone down but the two are probably not connected.The point being ,you would know before this report came out.

  • ecatworld

    I believe that Elforsk could well be described as a scientific institute — it carries out R&D on behalf of the energy industry in Sweden.

    • GreenWin

      I think this is a fair assessment of Elforsk which is the R&D arm of a consortium of European energy companies. Vattenfall in particular is interested in new ways to make energy.

  • Redford

    It it’s published this year it would be fast. On the good side, it seems that it’s a very serious process.

    • Bertuswonkel

      Don’t think it has to take that long since it is not a standard scientific paper. They only have to write up what they have observed during the tests, right? Don’t see why such a seemingly simple task would take a year. Better write it fast so it is fresh in memory.

      However, the last sentence of the first paper was “This test (the current one) will be crucial for further attempts to unveil the origin of the heat phenomenon observed so far”.

      If they attempt to explain LENR theoretically it will take a lot longer. Interpreting the results could be a lot more difficult than just reporting on what you have observed.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    The Levi et al. Report ( ) was published by 7 authors form 2 universities (Bologna and Uppsala) and a third academic institution (Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm). If you take the Swedish institute as the third “university”, Rossi’s description fits exactly. Some of the other “7 professors and physicists” could be identical with persons who are mentioned at the end of the report (cf. p. 28), except (sadly) Focardi and Kullander. The “Asian” part might be taken again by Ikegami (Osaka). America is not represented in the first report, but perhaps some of the listed scientists are meanwhile working at American universities. Another option would be the involvement of NASA, which would add a lot of credibility to Rossi’s project.

    • Omega Z


      The U.S. Research Funding reaches far & wide around the world thru different agencies. I would venture a guess of at least half or more of all the LENR programs we have discussed here at ECW has U.S. Finger Prints all over them. Both in funding & personnel.

  • Omega Z

    THINKING: Not Only did (Tom Darden’s)Cherokee/Industrial Heat Buy Rossi’s Technology & pixie dust, Curiously, They were also involved in some funding of Brillouin’s Technology which involved certain licensing rights if I recall. One wonders what co-operation is going on behind the scenes. Is Rossi’s pixie dust being shared?

    You also have McKubre working with Brillouin of whom said that this technology is so important, that the Government would not allow anyone Entity to have a monopoly on this technology. Is Tom Darden involved in some manner to make sure this technology is widely distributed by License to many different Corporations & Countries….

    You can’t help but Wonder what’s going on behind closed doors.

    • Warthog

      Have just finished reading Mats Lewan’s book on Rossi/E-Cat, and THE really new (and largely not previously known) part of the picture is “what is happening on the BUSINESS side”. It turns out to be very complex and involve MANY different parties.

      So, the answer to “what’s going on behind closed doors” is LOTS AND LOTS.

    • Bernie777

      Right, lack of transparency bothers me a lot.

      • NCkhawk

        Why should you or any of us expect transparency in the case of private investment in Rossi’s or anyone elses LENR invention?

        • Bernie777

          I do not mean lack of transparency of the tech, I mean lack of transparency of the corporate structure. Who owns what?

          • NCkhawk

            Why should any of us expect a private corporate investor and / or owner to disclose that to us? While everyone’s curiosity is high, it’s really none of our business. These guys will tell us what they want us to know when they want us to know it and I’m fine with that – they took the risk and disclosure is their privilege – not our right.

            • Bernie777

              By corporate transparency I mean corporate stockholders. Does Exxon directly or indirectly own 51% of the shares? If you want to stick your head in the sand, ok with me.

              • NCkhawk

                Wow! With all due respect, how do you conclude that anyone gets to know who the shareholders are in a private company? The word “private” is used for a reason and has meaning in this case. If a public company has purchased into a private company then there may be a route to eventual disclosure provided that the investment is material. Also, pls. get a grasp of the facts before you attempt insert an insult into the equation – it detracts from your credibility.

                • Bernie777

                  Please do not miss quote me, I never said the public has a right to know the shareholders of a private company. I have simply said I am troubled by IH not being transparent about who is controlling the company. If you don’t think it important who is controlling such an important technology that is your business, I simply do not agree with you.

                • NCkhawk

                  You have a stunning mindset – I don’t think that I’m capable of communicating with you. See you in the funny pages.

                • Bernie777

                  “See you in the funny pages.” I have been following Rossi for over three years, please review my posts with him. I believe in the integrity of Dr. Rossi. I have been a defender of his right to keep his tech secret and profit from his IP. Now his IP is owned by a corporation, we do not know who controls this corporation. I have never said I have a “right” to know who controls this private corporation. My original post above, “Right, lack of transparency bothers me a lot” Nothing you have said changes my mind, it still bothers me. I do not believe a corporation is a person with a personal integrity, a corporation can be legally bought. I am willing to continue my dialog with you.

                • Omega Z

                  Hey, NCkhawk & Bernie777

                  Didn’t mean to cause an Issue here.
                  I think there is just a misunderstanding here of where the other is coming from.

                  I agree with “NCkhawk” that we have no right to expect transparency from a private business.

                  I believe “Bernie777’s” Concerns are conspiracy oriented. Is someone interfering with this technology coming to market If so, I agree.

                  My curiosities are from a Fly on the Wall perspective. It could be fascinating. Or disappointingly boring. Probably Not…
                  And Like Bernie, I also have some concern of skullduggery.

                  I think most people on page would agree with all the above.

                • bachcole

                  Two more pluses. (:->)

            • bachcole

              I’d give you two or three pluses the the software won’t let me.

  • Paul

    Very good news. In my opinion, the real revolution will not start with visible plants (they are good for skeptics, nothing more than this), but when this new form of energy production will allow significant (at lest 50%) savings for the first energy consumers selected as customers and/or the secret wille sprad to other competitors with bigger shoulders. In all the other cases, this tech could make the end of many other revolutionary technologies we have seen in the energy field but that have never had great success. A huge saving for the customer is the real driver: always!

    • Bernie777

      “A huge saving for the customer is the real driver: always!” Not necessarily, many products and innovations have been “bought out” to reduce competition.

  • Jonnyb

    On the face of it, sounds very very promising.

  • stefan

    It is not certain that it is ELFORSK. I recently saw a comment on the energikatalysatorn site that someone claims to have talked to folks at ELFORSK indicating that they are not financing this.

  • Ophelia Rump

    When will there be a report by Industrial Heat about how many industrial sites are online?
    Or when they will go online? When will Industrial Heat be able to release the identities of a half dozen sites and provide performance statistics from them? Acknowledgement from just two Fortune 500 companies could cause a gold rush.

    • Omega Z

      I don’t think it will happen so fast.
      However, it would have a dampening effect on many other energy projects that would free up Funding for financing this technology, Plus a shift of personnel in skilled trades of which there is a big shortage.

  • hempenearth

    Well done again Frank!
    I’m not expecting IH products until the first half of 2015 and even that may be optimistic: three months for the report to come out and be analysed, six months product development and another three months installation and commissioning.