An Onion-Cat?

I’m wondering if Andrea Rossi may have been dropping some hints about a new E-Cat configuration in some recent posts on the Journal of Nuclear Physics.

Recently Steven Karels, a frequent poster on the JONP, wrote:

You referred to the “Mouse and Cat” design for eCat control. The Mouse provides stability, runs part of the time with a relatively low effective COP. The Cat provides the large amount of output power and spends portions of its time in a self-sustaining mode. Surely you must have considered a “Mouse, Cat and Tiger” configuration. Where the Cat controls the Tiger.

1. Can you address this possible configuration?
2. Would stability be an issue?
3. Could not the “Mouse and Cat” subsystem be considered a “Big Mouse” to the Big Cat (Tiger)?

Andrea Rossi replied:

Steven N. Karels:
1- I cannot give this information until the product is on the market
2- see point 1
3- would a man with 5 balls be considered a pin-ball?
Warm Regards,

Rossi didn’t deny that this idea was a possible configuration — just that he couldn’t provide information. His response to question 3 is very obscure and I couldn’t figure out what he was referring to until I got a clue in another recent exchange today when another reader, Sylvio Caggia wrote:

Dear Steven N. Karels,
Hands off “my” onion-cat!

To which Rossi replied:

Silvio Caggia:
That’ s pre- divulgation!
Warm regards

This reference to an ‘onion-cat’ goes back to and idea discussed on the JONP a long while back, where you have a succession of E-Cats set inside one another in a succession of ‘cat and mouse’ configurations. Rossi’s response about ‘pre-divulgation’ seems to me it might be a hint that the onion cat might indeed be a design — and I’m now wondering if the 5-balls comment of Rossi above might refer to a 5-skinned onion-cat, or some cascading kinds of E-Cats building on the concept of a cat and mouse configuration where a smaller reactor feeds a larger one.

Very cryptic stuff here from Rossi, and I admit this is total speculation on my part — but thought I’d bring it up here since we are in a rather quiet news period.

  • Barry8

    I think rather than Pin-ball, “Stan” is a better name because he won’t be able to sit down very easily.

  • barty
    • We appear to be at the stage where “respectable” people find tortured ways to say “it’s real… but we’re not sure if it’s real.”

  • Andreas Moraitis

    There appears to be an essential difference between the 1MW Hot-Cat and the 1MW E-Cat plants regarding thermal flow. In the old, low-temp plants all the E-cats had a separate thermal insulation. Provided that the Hot-Cat plants include 72 reactor modules in a space of 1 m^3, it seems unlikely that the modules can be perfectly insulated from each other. Therefore, we had already some kind of coupling, although not in form of a cascade, but rather in a ‘parallel’ configuration. The modules will be able to heat or cool each other, depending on requirements. With an appropriate design, such a plant could be safer and easier to control than a plant with independently operating modules. Engineering might be more difficult, but one could perhaps use computer models for optimization.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      One could even realize an onion-like concept for the ‘boot’ process. For example, the reactor in the middle could be started first, pre-heating the surrounding reactors, and so on. This could reduce the maximum power input significantly. The system would then take advantage of both serial and parallel connections.

    • Paul

      Independently operating modules, thermally not electrically (!), are typically required by safety certificators to give safefy certification, so I think that your idea will not be followed.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Interesting. If I recall it correctly, the concept with a large number of Hot-Cats in a relatively small container was mentioned by Rossi himself. It will be difficult to reach a sufficient thermal insulation with such a design.

    • Omega Z

      Insulation would be unwanted.
      The H-cats would be immersed in a Vat(of Oil/Salts) equally spaced & should maintain an equilibrium. This should help provide a stable operation.
      This Vat would then be immersed in the boiler itself or connected by tubes to heat the boiler.

      Note the #72. A couple of these would be backup to kick in should another kick out.
      Regardless of the number of extras in this statement, It indicates a higher output then 10Kw. Closer to 14/15Kw output each. Rossi sometimes flip/flops between 106/72. One is, the other hoped for.

  • jousterusa

    “…we are in a rather quiet news period.” And it’s killing me!

    • Pekka Janhunen

      AR feels your pain (

      March 31st, 2014 at 2:00 PM
      Michele Bruno:
      Thank you for your kind words. We will have news worth to be communicated, positive or negative as they might be, when the report of the third indipendent party’s long run test will be completed. About the patents, our patent attorneys are working very well, I think. All we can do to merit your trust is to work, and that’s what we are doing. I understand that the situation, from the public point of view, is a little bit boring, but this is not the right moment to talk.
      Warm Regards,

      (By the way, notice that there is a long thread on the second page of JONP, now with 3445 comments, which is not included in

    • Barry8

      Hold out for three more weeks Joe.

  • Anon2012_2014

    Rossi made a joke: 5 balls = Pin-Ball. It’s funny.

    Give the man a break until the report comes out. Then decide.

    • Fortyniner

      Sorry, you’ll have to explain the joke I think. Does a pinball machine let you have 5 balls? (I mis-spent my youth in may ways, but playing pinball machines wasn’t one of them).

      • Pekka Janhunen

        I’m not quite sure but I understand it similarly to: “if I had two (five) wheels, I would have a bicycle (car)”, or “if cows would fly, it would rain milk and cats would be happy”.

      • Omega Z

        Yes, But I have seen exceptions. Rossi has also made remarks as to Flippers.

        Note 49’er, you may be aware- Rossi’s Programming tech. “Fulvio Fabiani” is/was involved in Casino’s & electronic games before E-cat. Has or Had a big Interest in Pinball & tournament gaming… Likely an Influence in these statements.

        • Fortyniner

          Perhaps that’s how Rossi mis-spent his youth – I can see him hanging out with his compagni at a local bar in black coat. ‘drainpipe’ trousers, white socks and a ‘Brylcreem’ hair job.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Having wasted some lifetime can be a valuable experience. It makes it easier to recognize its real value.

      • Anon2012_2014

        The joke is in English, on the slang homonym for the male anatomy components, of which there are usually only 2.

      • Barry8

        At leased the old ones did, then they cheaped it down to three.

  • Christopher Calder

    I think there are two obvious reasons Defkalion dropped their chemical catalyst reactor design and went for the spark instigation method. One obvious reason is that they can easily use the power generated from the reactor to create the spark, thus creating a loop and an infinite COP. If the electricity is cut off the worst thing that can happen is that the LENR reaction will automatically shut down because there will be no more H1 gas created, only H2 gas, which does not react. The other obvious reason is that they did not want legal conflicts for producing a reactor too similar to the Rossi design. Defkalion claimed to have achieved a COP of over 20:1 with their old chemical reactor design. No one outside the company knows the COP of their spark design. Rossi needs to get above 10:1 COP to create electricity, which so far he has not done.

    No one has answered my question. Is the latest Rossi test Hot-Cat reactor attached to a mouse or not? If it is, we should expect a higher COP than the first short test.

    • Omega Z

      The previous 3rd party test was done on different Hot-Cats.
      It’s my Opinion that the last test was the Mouse/Cat version. The Original H-cat melted down in the December run.

      On M/C version, The COP is related directly to the temperature. The higher the temp, the higher the COP.
      By extrapolating the Data, A COP>20 should be possible, But I’m just Speculating.

      As to the latest 3rd party test, I believe Rossi has stated that it is the Latest Version. What ever that consists of…

      • KD

        It was last version over six months ago when the tests started.
        The R&D is going on, so there might be new versions now.
        Do you remember the evolution of the first low temperatures versions of e-cats?.

        • Omega Z

          I agree, Rossi has since been working on increasing the energy density among other things.
          The Gas Cat is also a major subject of research. Do you realize as to Why?

          It is Not only due to it’s cheap price in the U.S at this time…

    • Bernie777

      When I read Defkalion in your first sentence, I stopped reading.

    • ecatworld

      Rossi has said yes, they are using the cat and mouse setup.

  • Ophelia Rump

    The idea of scaling a series up to a large reactor really depends on the range that they are able to scale the core to without it melting down. Perhaps they have found a way too cool the core at large scales. Five levels of scaling would imply an exquisitely high level of Over Unity out of the primary core, and a very large scale reaction core. Perhaps something like a honeycomb with coolant flowing through it. Similar to the catalytic converter in its architecture.

    Somehow I think it is early in the knowledge stage to be venturing into exotic core architectures when the need is to bring something to market which is viable.

  • orsobubu

    It is an idiomatic italian expression used in answer to somebody who assumes a very unlikely condition as a basis for a discussion. Like, if pigs had wings they could fly, or If granny had balls she’d be grampy. I don’t see any linkage between the five balls and the skins of a cascading e-cat. IMHO, it is only a joke to express the scarce probability rossi himself be engaged in such not serious (or confidential) discussion in details. The previuos post linked by Pekka is another example of this joke:
    Joseph Fine:
    Some one commented on E-Cat World that Apple might buy Leonardo Corporation and rename the E-Cat the “I-Cat”.

    Dear Dr Joseph Fine:
    The Hot Cat will have 72 modules and the whole generator will stay in 1 cubic meter of volume. I suppose. Very important progree is in course. About what “might” be: if I might have 6 balls, I could be a flipper.
    Anyway, Manuel Cruz before me has another possible interpretation.

    The “pre-divulgation” hint could be instead a real reference to an onion setup of the machine, but it could be also another trick to sidetrack readers.

    About “hands-off” joke by Caggia, he is referring to the suggestion first made by him in this post:

  • Paul

    If you want cascade E-Cat, I think that you should connect the electrical output (including a turbine) to the input of the following, But you need at least four Hot-Cats, because for reasons of security an HotCat chain in series should be powered by another independent HotCat chain in series, in a cross scheme (it would be cleare with a picture). Every HotCat added to the two “parallel” chains make the overall COP greater and greater.

  • Christopher Calder

    Was the Hot-Cat that was recently long term tested (but not yet published) the same as the simple Hot-Cat unit used in the first short test, or was it a newer, improved Hot-Cat with mouse unit attached?

  • Gerard McEk

    Clearly is a cascaded ecat a possibility, however the heat controlled ecat might be not so responsive. If you increase the heat production (= energy production) by cascading ecats, then the responsiveness becomes more important. What I understood is that the ecat is now controlled (using an on/off control of the heater) and that during the off period the temperature could increase during a short time. This reflects a very slow response on the primary heat control, therefore I do not believe that a multi cascaded ecat will actually work. If they can increase the responsiveness of the ecat by e.g. also controlling the cooling of the ecat, then cascading will be possible and a COP of 25 or higher is feasible. However, in that case the output energy will constantly fluctuate. In other words, you cannot control the output energy properly, which makes the ecat less usable.
    It would be nicer to have another control parameter (then juste the heater temperature), for instance the hydrogen pressure or a kind of plasma control like with the Brillouin process. That could make everything much easier to control and to cascade.

  • Manuel Cruz

    It’s not cryptic. A pinball is a game with 5 steel balls, but that doesn’t mean that everything with 5 steel balls can be a pinball. What works for one thing might not work on other things, and so the mouse solution for the e-cat is not a solution for the big-cat.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Agreed. Rossi has referred to such saying earlier (, “About what “might” be: if I might have 6 balls, I could be a flipper.” (Oct 25, 2012). (Flipper=pinball.) Maybe it’s some Italian saying(?) referring to far-fetched speculation where the number of options increases rapidly. I think we would again need some help from Italian speakers.

      • Ophelia Rump

        It could just be that Rossi is an interesting character and a little quirky. But yes I agree with you, its just an expression.

    • Ophelia Rump

      The problem of a large scale Hot-Cat is heat dissipation, the powdered core must not melt. Control is really secondary to that obstacle, like the sound barrier. First you must not tear apart, then you will need stability control, in that order.