A Few Miscellaneous E-Cat Items

With not too much news coming out about the E-Cat these days, pending the publication of the next third party report,  I thought I’d mention just a few things I’ve noticed that might be of interest here.

Andrea Rossi made a comment that indicates that he is still quite involved with Hydro Fusion, the Swedish Licencee that runs the ecat.com web site. The most recent publication on the Journal of Nuclear Physics is a paper by Dr. Magnus Holm titled “The  Geometry of String Theory Solitons”. I have no idea what the article is about, but in publishing it, Andrea Rossi made the comment “Dr Magnus Holm is presently working also with me for the E-Cat.”

Another item regarding Hydro Fusion comes via the unlikely source (because I don’t normally cite it on this site) of freeenergyscams.com. A fundraising document from Hydro Fusion is reproduced on the site which appears to be authentic. I am not going to comment on any other information on the site. According to the document, Hydro Fusion is trying to raise funds for operations by selling shares. They indicate that in the document that they have a goal of not only being a distributor (they have a distributor’s license at the moment it seems), but also get a manufacturing license, and be a manufacturer of E-Cat products for Europe. They would have to work out a deal with Industrial Heat to do this, I am sure.

On another front, Andrea Rossi has mentioned that Industrial Heat is going to be involved (or maybe already is) in some kind of humanitarian work. When a reader commented about medical work he was doing in Guatemala, Rossi replied:

“Congratulation for your effort in Guatemala, you have all my admiration. The Industrial Heat Group is making a strong work of this kind in Africa, where will be destined a substantial part of the proceeds of our activity.”

My overall impression from all I have been able to glean from various sources (some not citable here) is that while we are not getting many official announcements at present, that there is a lot of work going on behind the scenes with regard to the E-Cat, and much preparation involved in getting it ready for commercialization and public awareness. How long we will have to wait for all this to be revealed I don’t know — but I am hoping that the report will be published in June.

  • Mr. Moho

    According to rumors elsewhere, it will be in the 18-20x ballpark.

    • ecatworld

      Hi, Mr Moho — do you have a source you can share for that?

      Thanks!

      • Mr. Moho

        As usual, I’ve gathered that from a couple comments on 22passi and Cobraf, the two main Italian discussion venues I closely monitor where relatively accurate information sometimes posted from insiders.

        This being said, the comment on 22passi I’m referring about – which apparently caused a short-lived stir on a different skeptical blog – got deleted soon after getting posted (and wasn’t from Passerini, although he’s endorsed him; basically saying he has close-to-first hand information), and same for the one on Cobraf, coming from a user with seemingly good connections who IMO often posts very interesting information nobody else seems to be able to dig off the Web (but might or might not actually be an insider). I swear yesterday I read him mentioning that “rumors are” that the COP would be around 20 and a different user replied that it could have been ’22′ as to reward blogger Daniele Passerini for the patience he’s had so far (I guess in dealing with pseudoskeptics). That one comment got deleted too, apparently. Go figure.

        So, it looks like I can’t source that anymore, unfortunately. I wouldn’t rely on that information for a new blog post.

        • ecatworld

          Thanks very much — helpful information. Bottom line someone posted this on 22passi and it got removed, another person posted it on cobraf and it was removed also. Bothe comments putting COP into the 20 ballpark. Strange goings on!

    • Billy Jackson

      okay so lets go with the lower number.. if its a COP of 18. and just so i have it clear in my head.. if i put 1000w in.. how much should i expect out at that COP? its not a strait x18 is it??? never mind.. i found it on Wikipedia..

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance

      • ecatworld

        Yes, it would be 18,000 W

        • Billy Jackson

          thats… astonishing…i can only imagine the prosperity that much energy would enable..18000… for the cost of 1000 ….

  • Paul

    I found very well done this assessing ( http://lenrftw.net/assessing_ecat_report.html ) of the new E-cat independent third party report because it is a reliable tool for evaluating “in advance” the impact of the document to be soon disclosed according to Rossi’s words. It will be interesting check it on this blog after the public release of the report.

    • LENR G

      Thanks, Paul! I’ll be looking for the community’s help with the assessment so that it’s more than just my opinion. I’ll also add new line items as necessary to address any issues in the report.

      • Paul

        Now you should accept bet… In such case, I bet on COP 15 :)

  • GreenWin

    Another item largely overlooked is the quiet, unobtrusive, yet disruptive creation of a Cold Fusion X-Prize (aka “Forbidden Energy.”) This is a significant preview of how CF will re-enter the public mindset. A Visioneering X-Prize is a big deal.

    Not sure how much the Prize will be worth ($10M?) but it provides an excellent incentive to startups like DGT, IH, Brillouin, Mills, Miley etc. It makes great PR and more importantly is a step toward righting the injustice done to P&F. Not to mention the humanitarian impact downstream.

    Mainstream icon TIME Magazine reports: http://time.com/103895/xprize-visioneering-contest-announces-winner/

    • Freethinker

      Yes,

      “Forbidden Energy” has a different ring to it compared to the now dead-beat “cold fusion”, even though I personally find the latter more appealing. But it may very well sell to the unknowing mass.

      I (too) think that this is a preamble of things to come in terms of positive press in MSM. I just the other day found a very positive article on Tom Dardens son’s MakeItRight company in HuffingtonPost ( http://huff.to/1jEfllO ), where also Tom Darden himself was eluded to. Putting the Dardens in a positive light, may make it easier when the day of reckoning comes. Dardens may be easier to accept and believe initially, compared to a European with a rap-sheet (as the critics no doubt would paint it). Dardens would be untouchable and beyond reproach in comparison.

      Hopefully we will see more positive press in the coming weeks – and hopefully *a lot* (well now, one can always hope) after the report is published.

      I hope the X-Prize pan out and there is a worthy winner.
      Like you say, it makes for great PR.

  • Billy Jackson

    Well said. bad choice of words on my part. corrected and amended good sir.

  • barty
    • Oceans2014

      Clearly these are patent Trolls, they are filing what they can before the Rossi report is published, that’s all it can be they have shown nothing and are NOT interested in showing anything because the real business here is to file law suits against Real LENR developers.

  • Billy Jackson

    I think our hopes for the e-cat report may lead to both excitement and disappointment. If it follows form the report will garner plenty of attention both here and on other boards with both sides arguing the validity from their own preconceived perception.

    It will not be the June report that we should be eager for. but the repeated replication or attestments from verifiable sources outside of any vested interest and/or monetary gain. A working public device or just repeated statements of success from future purchases by various vendors.

    I am excited for the e-cat and applaud Rossi for daring to challenge our beliefs. but as with all things, “trust, but verify” should be the watch word we live by. Getting upset at someone challenging your beliefs or statements shows a lack of conviction in them as if you yourself fear they will be proven false..

  • hempenearth

    My question on JONP about whether licensees had been transferred to Industrial Heat never got published or answered.
    I have asked the Australian licensee whether I should be dealing with him or with Industrial Heat for our requirements. He told me I should deal directly with Industrial Heat.
    Based on what I’ve been told by the Australian licensee, the timeline for commercial Hot Cats in the southern hemisphere is late 2015

  • jousterusa

    Is anyone aware of any connection between Tom Darden and the Darden chain of restaurants (Olive Garden, Bonefish Grill, Red Lobster)? That Darden seems to be a Florida guy.

  • Homo-Sapien

    Coincidentally on JONP rossi posted about

    Physics of rotating and expanding black hole universe. a realm where time is variant :-)

  • Homo-Sapien

    A viable solution to Multi-bodied problems and also problems regarding Lenr are solvable when time is not classed as an invariant. This has great implication regarding the state of science in this area
    and also will enhance probability theory ..wink ..

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I had a similar idea a long time ago. If there were a certain kind of feedback between time as a variable and the value of a particle’s wave function, this could result in a quasi-statistical phenomenology, which would nevertheless be deterministic. The ‘age’ of the particle would then be one of the determinants of its behavior.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        I should better say “history” instead of “age”, provided that the amount of the hypothetical feedback depends on the context. Please note that this is not more than a speculation.

      • Fortyniner

        Way out of my field and probably unrelated to your idea, but there appears to be some support in certain astronomical observations for the idea that time may be variant, at least as far as massive objects are concerned. It seems likely from the observations that in many cases that are currently interpreted as relativistic recession, red-shifts may instead arise from differences in local time ‘fields’:

        Inherent Redshift

        Arp believes that the observed redshift value of any object is made up of two components: the inherent component and the velocity component. The velocity component is the only one recognized by mainstream astronomers. The inherent redshift is a property of the matter in the object.

        It apparently changes over time in discrete steps. He suggests that quasars are typically emitted from their parent galaxies with inherent redshift values of up to z = 2. They continue to move away, with stepwise decreasing inherent redshift. Often, when the inherent redshift value gets down to around z = 0.3, the quasar starts to look like a small galaxy or BL Lac object and begins to fall back, with still decreasing redshift values, toward its parent.

        He has photos and diagrams of many such family groupings. Any additional redshift (over and above its inherent value) is indeed indicative of the object’s velocity. But the inherent part is an indication of the object’s youth and usually makes up the larger fraction of a quasar’s total redshift.”

        http://electric-cosmos.org/arp.htm

        It might be postulated that newly-ejected quasars may be compact to the point that a gravity field approaching that of a black hole so distorts local time that wavelengths are shifted downwards, and that this effect will then progressively be reduced as the mass of the quasar (a ‘proto-mini-galaxy’) becomes more dispersed. However this would not explain the ‘quantisation’ of the decay, so Arp’s

        • Billy Jackson

          while not directly related to redshift. I have an inherent problem when talking about theories based on universal physics at such distances. its nothing more than “best guess” one that while based on observation may not equal the sum of its parts.

          The universe is mind boggling big.. its so big in fact that just the observable part is larger than most people understand. the sense of scale so vast that most of us no matter how much we profess differently can not grasp it’s splendor in all its glory.

          to think that we can judge something so far away is plain hubris of the worst sort. we can barely get off our planet and have only once with a very small machine accomplished getting out of our solar system .. the assumption that time, space, gravity, and physics are a constant universal and thus the same everywhere is being made by people who have never left home!.

          These are educated, and very smart people i give them that.. but one thing i stress is theories are just that. best guess until proven differently regardless of how widely its been accepted and in the end, theories are not facts.

          • GreenWin

            Human beings believe they can see, sense or measure about 4% of the universe. Which makes ‘em ign’nant of the remaining 96%. Guess we’re not too shmaaat, eh??

            • Fortyniner

              We’re probably guessing about the real nature of 90% of the 4%! Maybe if this civilisation cycle lasts for another millennium we can make that 80%.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            We can only observe what is possible to observe, and only know what is possible to know. But things that were impossible hundred or thousand years ago are possible today, because people have tried continuously to get over the barriers which had seemingly been defined by nature – with the help of theories, by the way. You need always some kind of theoretical framework in order to interpret facts. And in hundred or thousand years we will know much more than today. Certainly there are limits that we will never be able to surmount. But should we for that reason stop thinking about nature and ourselves?

            • Billy Jackson

              absolutely not. frameworks and theories are fine. its when people start waving theories around as facts that my BS alarm goes off. i have no problem with the current framework. its just when its applied to something thats xx billions of light years away that i draw the line on what you can understand from something so far away.. one of the Hubble telescopes pictures has a galaxy in it that physics says shouldn’t exist because its to large.

  • blanco69

    Magnus Holm studied String Theory (amongst other things) throughout his extensive university career. It makes sense for him to have a paper or two lying around on that subject. There is no doubt that Magnus is a very qualified physicist, however, what does a crack physicist do for cash while he waits, like the rest of us, for an indeterminate period of time until the ecat comes to pass. I guess fund raising is as good a pastime as any.

    • Freethinker

      Well,

      maybe you are right, that he have a couple of papers not quite finished that should be completed and published – I guess many who has done any post-graduate studies has.

      The “paper” in the JONP, as far as I can understand, is not a new “paper”, it is his complete dissertation, already made public (and hence “published”) in 1999.

      As much as it proves Magnus Holms capabilities to grasp extremely complex concepts in theoretical physics – all available kudos to him for that – it also confuses me as to what the intent with this “re-publishing” is.

      It may cause some waves as attached to the paper are articles already published in other journals (eg. JHEP, IJMPA), with co-authors who may not fully appreciate the benefits of being re-published in JONP.

      If the intent is to show the public that the CEO of HydroFusion is not to be trifled with regarding physics, then a link at the website for HydroFusion would be a better choice, I think.

      Just saying.

      • blanco69

        Absolutely Peter, Magnus’ theoretical physics credentials are impeccable. The surprise here is that Rossi digs up an old paper of his, ‘pubishes’ it and then says, ‘I know him!” The only thing I can think of is that maybe it’s some kind of figurative endorsement from Rossi. Maybe as a thank you for his patience.

  • http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/ AlainCo

    About underground work, the US side of LENr-Invest (it is two companies, one swiss, the other US) is also modest but interesting

    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/338-LENR-Invest-Fund-I-LLC-raises-205-000-in-May/

    Unlike what I imagined it is not related to a European operation in process of that same scale. It is probably US centered.

    people don’t imagine what is the victory to obtain those intermediate investments.
    It is quite easy to get 13million$ with a good industrial-grade prototype.
    But to get simply 200k$ with just a lab result, just to fund inception research, is much harder.

    Note that this amount is about what got Doug Wells at nasa…
    what is needed for one year of a lab and a LENR researcher.

    Of course the entrepreneur are not paid at this price… except in hope, later if it works.

    • Broncobet

      AlainCo I have pointed out many times that Arpa-e has put out a solicitation of bids for grants of $500,000 each for LENR research.All one would have to do is write a proposal to get the money.This is one reason I have a little hope for LENR to prove of some use, that the scientific community of the US believes it is worth investment.Did anyone even write a proposal? Perhaps they were awarded and they are doing good work now,but I have heard nothing.

  • David Dow

    Calm before the storm?

    • Billy Jackson

      Enjoy it while we can.. soon as it comes out the naysayers will be out in droves.. while they will petulantly demand we provide every single detail to unanswered questions they themselves will hide behind emotional dogma and blind adherence to their beliefs despite evidence to the contrary.

      • Fortyniner

        Fortunately, thanks to admin’s policies, few of them manage to make it into these pages. Hopefully we’ll be able to consider the results without having to deal with the usual pointless assertions of cronyism, cheating and incompetence from the shills.

        When the results are published though, it might be fun to briefly pop over to ECN and sample the spittle-laden rantings of Hody et al. that the paper will inevitably trigger.

        • bachcole

          I suggest to Frank that he have an open forum that allows the very worst of the skeptopaths even to vomit their bile all over the place. This would increase his traffic and yet the rest of us could just ignore that particular segment of e-catworld.com, if that is possible.

          • ecatworld

            Thanks for your thoughts, Roger — I have seen websites where what you suggest is the policy, and I have not liked the end results.

            I feel comfortable with the current policy. I like to have a web site where I can enjoy and learn from the contributions of readers — and I try to keep it abuse-free.

            • Billy Jackson

              I do believe that all comments and discourse have their place within the debate about the e-cat. while some are particularly insistent that they ignore the evidence around them.. aka they keep pointing at the missing license plate on the car as if that invalidates the fact that its a car…

              I have no issue with someone such as goat asking hard questions or at least backing up his beliefs with solid math and logic based on his education and experience.

              What i have an issue with is the so called emotional pounding that some use demanding that we bend our views to their scientific view, yet at the same time use their own emotional anger over being challenged in their beliefs is most unscientific.

              • Fortyniner

                The clues are strewn around like pebbles waiting to be picked up by those who are not fearful of change. What slightly puzzles and disturbs me is that with a few exceptions such as the MFMP team, it is mostly older individuals (retired or unassailable) who are slowly picking them up, rather than the younger generation of scientists who could spend their long research lives unraveling the mysteries of the many observational anomalies and generally ‘re-booting’ scientific research.

                Perhaps a growing fleet of working cold fusion reactors unexplainable by current theories will be the factor that will finally break the rigid mould that closed-minded academics, political interference and the corporate profit motive have imposed on the whole field of scientific research.

                • Omega Z

                  49′er

                  It’s quite possible that there are many youngster’s paying attention to LENR, But are just keeping their mouths shut.
                  At least until the solid proof becomes well known. Or they would destroy their careers.
                  That would be my bet/hope anyway…

                • Billy Jackson

                  its quite possible that the younger generation fears the taint of the cold fusion label. We know that established interest are going to fight this simply because it puts their own lively hood at stake.

                  Unfortunately the very simplicity of the device will defeat them. there is nothing special about the e-cats construction that requires a deep knowledge of engineering. as has been stated before once the properties of it is known anyone with any shop knowledge can make this thing in their garage.

                  it will be regulations and restrictions, the fear of the “nuclear” label, that become the downfall of this device once it goes political.

            • jousterusa

              You’re right, Frank, and perhaps for a reason you’ve not contemplated: When the good news hits, journalists will be all over this site – as I have been for years now – and they will look for criticism and skeptopathy to
              butress their “balanced” articles. I’m relieved they won’t find it here!

        • jousterusa

          You’re right. One of the great virtues of this site, which are many, is that we don’t have to listen to what Spiro Agnew memorably called the “nattering nabobs of negativism.” Agnew aside, I sure don’t miss the naysaying of Mary Yugo and her ilk.

          • Billy Jackson

            The other danger jousterusa is surrounding yourself with those who only have opinions such as yours. I agree that negativity for the sake of itself is an annoying beast to deal with. but sometimes out of the demands and harsh critics we get a view from a different perspective that opens new avenues of approach that we did not think of.

            Take Krevit for instance. its well established that he detests Rossi and would more than likely deny the e-cat works even if it was powering the building he was in..easily Rossi’s harshest critic. He helped the e-cat get this far through the hard unanswered or difficult to answer questions. He was able to show us through his negativity what others will be looking for thus enabling Rossi and the testing team to put into place the information they would need to either answer or prepare for those criticisms

            • ecatworld

              Rossi said quite recently in response to someone making this point: “You are right, critics have been very useful. We learnt from them.”

              I don’t think there’s been a substantial critique of the E-Cat or cold fusion that hasn’t been dealt with here. I think it’s best to handle criticisms with maturity and perspective — and not give free rein to those who seem to have a strong emotional investment in seeing Rossi or anyone else crushed and humiliated.

              • Billy Jackson

                100% agree with you. guidance and moderation are much in need when discussing highly volatile subjects such as cold fusion or lenr. passions run high as people “know what they know”. It is one of the main reasons i come here. you allow and encourage discussion of the topics, regardless of sides. unless it gets out of hand and someone is being intentionally obtuse.

                there is not a lot that can be done to trolling individuals who intentionally antagonize the community or intentionally derail a thread but remove them unfortunately that’s a difficult line to walk for anyone as you must separate intent vs honest disagreement.