Andrea Rossi on the Parkhomov Report

On the Journal of Nuclear Physics, AlainCo posted a link to the recent report by Alexander G Parkhomov who has described achieving excess heat from a reactor based on Rossi’s Hot Cat used in the Lugano test.

This is Rossi’s comment

AlainCo:
Thank you for the important information.
I do not know the particulars, therefore cannot comment, but it is possible that the so called “Rossi Effect” is replicable after the data published in the Report of Lugano.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

I think it’s significant that Rossi labels the information ‘important’, and does not dismiss the report, nor make a typical comment on not discussing the work of his competitors. I think it could actually be a matter of satisfaction to Rossi to see his work being the center of attention from other researchers.

Rossi has said that the Lugano report in the form that was finally published, actually contained more information than Industrial Heat wanted to see released. My understanding is that the report sent to Arxiv.org for release for publication (which they never have published) was apparently a shorter document, and I believe did not contain a lot of information about the composition of the fuel used in the Hot Cat.

So it turns Arxiv could have done a huge favor to the replication community by not publishing the report sent to them. Their refusal motivated the Levi team to publish the full document which contains a number of new clues about the Hot Cat, and which has motivated Parkhorov and others to try and replicate it.

  • Bob Greenyer
  • georgehants

    mike, please explain further, thank you.

  • Chris I

    Seems as if the Cat’s out o’the bag….

    • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

      Hopefully MFMP will follow soon. This would be great! With live data on the net. Then the complete cat kindle is out of the bag!

      • Chris I

        And of course also the col.’s 11 secret herbs’n’spices.

  • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

    The method used by the experts for testing
    Rossi’sreactor based on thermal vison is a bit complicated. In our experiment we
    use a method for heat determination based on the quantity of th evaporated
    water.This method was worked out and many times
    verified in the experiments led by Yu. N. Bazhutov.

    Who is Yu. N. Bazhutov.??

    • psi2u2
      • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

        So does this mean this person is a physicist? And does this add more credibility to that “couch-test” ?

        • psi2u2

          Check out his publications on Andreas’ link.

          • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

            Okay, havard, CERN… looks good 🙂

            • Alan DeAngelis

              CERN disparaged F&P for decades.
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htgV7fNO-2k (25:50 min.)

              • Alan DeAngelis

                PS
                Robert Duncan was dismissed as a charlatan when he came to the conclusion that cold fusion was real. (at 1:15). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLhqYFyrtWQ
                The marbled institutions were able to get away with slandering LENR for decades (F&P weren’t physicists therefore by definition they were “incompetent boobs”). The prima donnas never anticipated a Rossi. Now
                they’re terrified that the world will see that they set the whole field back a
                quarter of a century (maybe even a century if Langmuir’s torch turns out to be LENR).

                • Alan DeAngelis

                  I’m off on a tangent again. After the mainstream’s irrational response to F&P’s discovery, I’ve been having my doubts about their infallibility. I’m starting to watch videos like this.
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4GFAjX62Yg

        • Alan DeAngelis

          Would he be more credible than Brian Josephson?

      • Andreas Moraitis
        • psi2u2

          Yes, thanks — that is a better link. Mine has some articles by Yu.N. but also a lot of miscellany from other Bazhutovs.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Yuri Bazhutov is a guy we at the MFMP really love – he was turned away from the US border and so failed to attend ICCF18.

      We have him in our Celani videos from ICCF-17, talking to Celani – he is the guy on the right

      http://youtu.be/HN4VK82Mngc?t=1m15s

  • http://renewable.50webs.com/ Christopher Calder

    To those who wish to try, experiment with nickel powder (55% by weight), iron powder (39%), and lithium aluminum hydride (6%). Use only very high purity nickel.

  • Gerard McEk

    It does not seem to surprise Rossi that the hot cat is being replicated. Maybe, as Bachcole says elsewhere, the hot cat cannot work with a high COP and that they therefore allowed the test team to analyse the ‘fuel’. It can be that the Ecat has the ability to have an infinite COP and that they still have a reasonable advance in research. On the other hand, if now the whole world starts to replicate the Hot cat, IH will never be able to maintain the advance in research. They need a patent and this replication may be advantageous to get it finally.

    • Bob Greenyer

      I have a 500W electric heater in my house on right now – but with temperatures dropping to -8 outside it could really do with a bigger output. Right now it would suit me fine if it was kicking out 1.25kw for the same 500W input!

      • Gerard McEk

        What is holding you up Bob, go for it, now you can use it! 🙂
        Clearly the other purpose is more important: prove that it works, show the world! Let’s go LENR

        • georgehants

          Gerard, a man can do no more than his best, if he proves Cold Fusion or not he has made the effort, that puts him in a class infinitely above the average Western scientist.
          Good luck Bob.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      If Rossi has unlimited COP E-cat, then his development of a gas-cat is disinformation meant to confuse competitors. And the reverse, if his gas-cat project is for real, then he doesn’t have large or unlimited COP.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        Much agree.
        There is not a lot of reason for gas-cats if you have high COP’s.

        However, I been thinking about this issue for some time, and am starting to “warm” up to the idea that a gas system still might be desirable, even with a COP of 10x.

        If we have a 3x system, and say we need 50,000 watts (that’s about the furnace rating to heat say a 3000 sq foot home + garage).

        50,000 watts is quite a bit of power. Recall that your typical automobile is about 80,000 watts. 50,000 watts will give you the heat of a furnace rated at about 170,000 BTU/hr.

        With a COP of 3x, then we need an input of 16,000 watts to heat that above house and garage in the winter. Now where does one EASY and at low cost get 16,000 input watts? That is some SERIOUS input electricity. By adopting gas, then this large “heavy” electrical load can be eliminated.

        As noted, perhaps after MANY years, only a COP of 3 could be had, and further research was a DEAD END.

        Thus, with COP STUCK, then the ONLY course of action is to commercialize what you have. As noted, a COP of 3 scarcely can be sold. It is “slim” as a sales pitch to customers.

        I still have to think the final plant of Rossi will obtain 6-10, since anything less is a hard sell to customers. Who’s going to by a 3x machine?

        Recall that heat pump heating systems OFTEN and EASY obtation a COP of 3. So for every 1000 watts of power into the heat pump furnance, you get 3000 watts of heating out. And such systems often run in the 6x range depending on outside temperatures.

        Regards,
        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada
        [email protected]

      • Warthog

        Not at all. The “Gas-Cat” concept is VERY useful in remote places. A propane cylinder is a lot less complicated more long-term reliable than a storage battery and associated circuitry. My take is that the “gas” portion would likely only be used at startup.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          Agreed from technical point. From business point – I don’t know.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            By “business point” I mean roughly that the intensity at which AR is developing the gas-cat is likely inversely proportional to his COP; and also that he probably avoids niche applications for the time being and goes for the big game. In any case, your point is good.

        • Mike Ivanov

          1) Batteries and circuits are robust enough these days. 2) Battery could be re-charged, using new Panasonic therm-electic converters for example and it is not good to be out of gas in remote area.

      • Mike Ivanov

        “unlimited COP E-cat” is not equal “stable working self-sustainable E-Cat”. But, reading Parkhomov experiment data it looks like what fine tuning of components and temperature management may lead to the device where you have to heat it-up only periodically, to keep the reaction in “self-sustainable” window. Which will give a COP like 100 or more.