What Exactly Is Rossi’s “Mme Curie” Reactor — A Direct Source of Electricity?

Ever since Andrea Rossi announced a breakthrough with a new version of the Hot Cat yesterday, there have been quite a number of questions put to him on the Journal of Nuclear Physics about just what it is, and what it does. So far we are getting a somewhat unclear picture, but there are some clues that can be gleaned from some of Rossi’s comments. Here are some examples form over the last 24 hours (August 9-10, 2015)

Q: Is it correct to now make a distinction between the ‘traditional’ Hot Cat and the “M.me Curie”?

The ‘traditional’ Hot Cat could be useful for industrial application, including driving steam turbines?

The “M.me Curie”, something new, different, not industrial?

A: Yes, it is correct.

Q: Are you saying that the new Hot-Cat is NOT suitable for generating electricity via steam turbines or that it is suitable for electricity generation via turbines?

A: While the Hot cat and the LT E-Cat will be destined to industrial applications, the “M.me Curie” will be destined to a completely different kind of utilization, very much popular.

Q: is your hope that the new Hot Cat will eventually be able to:

a) Provide electricity for domestic use
b) Provide heat for domestic use
c) Both

A: It is too soon to answer, let us make our R&D on it. While LT E-Cat and Hot Cat have been tested for years, the new born is just making the first steps. This time, when we will explain it, there will not pass much time before the distribution. No more mambojumbo-tango.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Q: I have the acute feeling that you are technically ready with the 1Mw plant, being your efforts dedicated to tune the direct electricity E-Cat generator.

A: You are not wrong, but I must repeat my mantric disclaimer: the final results could be positive, but also negative. About the direct production, I have news related to the new Hot Cat, named “M.me Curie”.
I am working with it, it is a real revolution. Is important. Works very strongly and I am very optimist. Now we must test its duration. The performance is very interesting. I want to be clear: it is too soon to give data, it could have problems, but what I am seeing now is very, very, very good. It could be the leader for the very massive production. We will go directly from our tests to the market. If what I am seeing now goes on, in October will be tried the safety certification. I am like a coach of tennis that looks at a kid 4 years old playing and says: ” this is the future Federer”. Big , big hope

Q: Did you change the reactant mix from the last run to optimize direct electric production?

A: Yes.

Rossi seems very excited about the Mme. Curie reactor, and he’s put out some decent hints here. When he says it will be “completely different” and “very much popular”, I think that points towards it NOT being just a heater (which is what all E-Cats have been so far), but something that produces electricity directly. That really would be the killer app for the E-Cat, especially if electricity could be generated in one’s home, off-grid.

As exciting as this all sounds, I think we will have to be patient with this. Rossi has talked about getting it into certification testing by October, but certification for domestic E-Cats has taken years so far, and we don’t see anything on the market yet for domestic use. I would anticipate that if this is a brand new technology quite a lot of safety testing would be needed to ensure that this product would be safe to be used in homes.

  • Obvious

    Turns all elements heavier than Ni62 into H2 and electrons?(and neutrinos) That would be spectacularly successful and useful.

  • Axil Axil

    Like so many tragedies that have befallen the filed of alternate energy, the story of Pal Brown is among the most unfortunate and the most stupid.

    http://autoweek.com/article/car-news/strange-life-and-stranger-death-paul-brown-case-another-smart-guy-doing-dumb-thing

    • GreenWin

      Pipe bomb his mother’s home? Only fear that there is “not enough” drives men to commit such crimes. Of course, in fact, the opposite it true – there is plenty for everyone.

  • greggoble

    With all those heavy electrons and dense electron clouds floating around in the nuclear active environment of LENR a harnessed flow of electrical current seems the logical next step. Seldon Technologies is pursuing this as well as is Liviu Popa Simil, each with carbon nano-tube LENR technology… glad to see Rossi is onto this too, using a different though similar approach…

    COLD FUSION NASA LENR PART THREE SPACEBOUND AND EARTHBOUND TRANSPORTATION
    http://coldfusionnow.org/nasa-cold-fusion-lenr-part-three-spacebound-and-earthbound-transportation/

    NASA states that the science and engineering encompassing cold fusion LENR is “not a narrow band set of physical phenomena”and that “devices are being engineered in real time”. (link)

    With 3-D printing and nano engineering being utilized to create the lattice; we will see many unique devices entering the marketplace, both thermal and electrical (hardy, robust, and scalable), for every imaginable application.

    One might posit that two categories of ‘cold fusion’ devices will gain hold in their respective markets:

    LENR/Thermal – heat without a carbon footprint

    LENR/Electric – electricity without a generator

    SELDON TECHNOLOGIES, NASA, AND LENR
    http://coldfusionnow.org/seldon-technologies-nasa-and-lenr/

    “The present disclosure combines the unique properties of nanotubes and in one embodiment carbon nanotubes, in a novel manifestation designed to meet current and future energy needs in an environmentally friendly way. Devices powered with nanotube based nuclear power systems may substantially change the current state of power distribution.” –Retired U.S. Rear Admiral Craig E. Steidle ofSeldon Technologies on cold fusion nanotube-based nuclear power systems.

    LIVIU POPA SIMIL – LENR – NUCLEAR BATTERY ROADMAP
    http://coldfusionnow.org/liviu-popa-simil-lenr-nuclear-battery-roadmap/

    “Method and Device for Direct Nuclear Energy Conversion in Electricity in Fusion and Transmutation Processes”

    ABSTRACT

    “A method and device to generate electric energy on demand by fusion or transmutation nuclear reactions produced inside a super-capacitor that uses inter-atomic field’s particularities obtained inside nano-structures, by using temperature, density and electric fields in order to modify nuclear entanglement and quantum non-localities particularities in order to control nuclear reaction rate of an inserted material, called nuclear fuel, facilitated by the nano-structure nuclear composition, called burner, that controls the non-local nuclear reaction.

    Fusion or transmutation generated nuclear particles’ energy is converted using a super-capacitor made of a micro-nano-hetero structure meta-material that loads from the nuclear energy and discharges by electric current.

    • greggoble

      This patent is for an “LENR Electric” device.

      “Modulated quantum neutron fusion”

      WO 2005017916 A2 – Assignees – Matthew William Gray, William Thomas Gray
      Publication date: Feb 24, 2005 – Priority date: Jul 26, 2003
      https://www.google.com/patents/WO2005017916A2

      Claim 1: What we claim as our invention is the aforementioned process of exciting hydrogen atom valence electrons to a quantum state by radio frequency, light energy, or other synthetic means, that results in artificial production of neutrons.

      Claim 2: What we claim as our invention is the aforementioned process of modulating the production of neutrons by the method in Claim 1 so as to synchronize their quantity and half-life decays to precipitate a nuclear fusion reaction of neutrons into Helium.

      Claim 3: What we claim as our invention is the aforementioned process of aligning the field oscillation phases of particles in order to precipitate nuclear binding in fusion reactions.

      Claim 4: What we claim as our invention is the aforementioned method of converting the magnetic energy from the Modulated Quantum Neutron Fusion process directly into electricity.

      Claim 5: What we claim as our invention is the aforementioned application of using the neutrons produced by the method in Claim 1 to synthesize elements.

      Claim 6: What we claim as our invention is the aforementioned application of using the neutrons produced by the method in Claim 1 to decontaminate hazardous radioactive materials and substances SO’ as to render them non-radioactive.

      BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

      0012 The Modulated Pulse Sine Flow Rate Modulator monitors the ratio of helium produced to reactant neutrons and generates control pulses to the Quantum Exciter to regulate frequency and quantity of neutrons produced so that the half-life decay reaction produces helium, and thus a changing magnetic field, according to the desired sine wave frequency. The Electromagnetic Compression Chamber uses Electric Field Separator principles to compress the neutrons to less than 1.4xl0~15m separation and align their phases to increase the decay rate and cause constructive interference of their fields resulting in particle fusion. The Transformer uses the collapsing magneton field energy to generate electricity.

      • GreenWin

        This last 0012 is fascinating, if hard to visualize without benefit of virtual particles to mitigate Claim 1 – “artificial production of neutrons.” The 1H electron must accept some virtual energy to merge with the proton creating an artificial neutron.

        Thank you you Greg for these enlightening links and view into the actual LENR program.

      • Mats002

        Thanks, very interesting – what state is this patent in? Is it approved or rejected? Can it be on hold since 2005 and still be in play?

    • Warthog

      “With 3-D printing and nano engineering being utilized to create the
      lattice; we will see many unique devices entering the marketplace, both
      thermal and electrical (hardy, robust, and scalable), for every
      imaginable application.”

      I made precisely this point in a different thread about the possible “ultra-scalability” of LENR, including “LENR on a chip” using such an approach, although I was thinking more along the lines of stereolithography rather than 3D printing.

      • greggoble

        You are ‘spot on the mark’, the “ultra-scalability” of LENR, including “LENR on a chip”… thanks for your insight.

        In the process of stereolithography, is jet printing one form or method utilized?

        Anyways, I’ve been reading all the abstracts and papers found at this site. Seems to me others in the field of LENR might enjoy them.

        Jet printing of graphene and of graphene with metallic doping is a hot subject, right up the LENR alley. These two industries will be strengthened through an early union. Many 3D printing processes are energy intensive… The 3D printers can create the LENR reactor… a blossoming symbiotic market.

        Industry Symposium

        “Digital Fabrication and Digital Printing NIP31, more than printing” September 27 – October 1, 2015 Portland, Oregon.

        Program http://www.imaging.org/ist/conferences/nip_df/NIP31_DF2015_PreliminaryProgram.pdf

        Sponsored by the Society for Imaging Science and Technology (IS&T) and the Imaging Society of Japan (ISJ)

        Early Registration Deadline: August 31, 2015
        Society for Imaging Sciences and Technology
        http://www.imaging.org/portland

        From page 13… “Inkjet Printing of Highly Conductive Graphene Based Composite Inks”, Mohammad Nazmul Karim, Shaila Afroj, and Stephen G. Yeates, University of Manchester (UK)

        From page 14… DIGITAL PRINTING TECHNOLOGIES TRACK INKJET-BASED PROCESSES CON’T. 10:10 – 11:10 AM, Tuesday September 29, 2015

        “Emerging Hybrid Ink Technology: Challenges of Implementation for Jetting and Print Process”, Mark Bale, SunChemical Ltd. (UK)

        “Droplet-on-Demand Printing of Polymer Solutions”, J. Frits Dijksman, University of Twente, and Paul C. Duinveld, Philips Consumer Lifestyle Technology Expert Group (the Netherlands)

        “Inkjet Printed P-type Semiconductors and Thin Film Transistors”, Chang-Ho Choi, Zhen Fang, Marshall Allen, and Chih-hung Chang, Oregon State University (USA), and Liang-Yu Lin and ChunCheng Cheng, AU Optronics Corporation (Taiwan)

        From page 15… DIGITAL FABRICATION AND 3D PRINTING TRACK 3D PRINTING AND ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING DAY 1 10:10 AM – 4:20 PM

        “Speed and Accuracy of High Speed Sintering”, Sami Giurani 1, Antonis Hadjiforados1, Adam Ellis1, Ingo Reinhold2, and Neil Hopkinson1; 1University of Sheffield (UK) and 2XaarJet AB (Sweden)

        • Warthog

          Stereolithography is a “subtractive” technique…3D printing is pretty much uniformly thought of as “additive”.

          In SL, the substrate (usually a silicon wafer) is selectively exposed to light through a photographic mask. Where the mask “shadow” falls, the silicon is not “sensitized”, where photons hit, it IS “sensitized”.

          The wafer is then immersed in a highly reactive chemical bath, the “sensitized” area is chemically attacked and removed. the unsensitized is not. After sufficient etching time to develop the necessary depth, the wafer is removed, and the etchant washed off.

          Due to long experience and much research, high accuracy and precision of both depth and shape can be attained.

          But many thanks for all the links. 3D printing is a subject of MUCH interest to me.

      • greggoble

        Industry Symposium

        “Digital Fabrication and Digital Printing NIP31, more than printing” September 27 – October 1, 2015 Portland, Oregon.

        Program http://www.imaging.org/ist/conferences/nip_df/NIP31_DF2015_PreliminaryProgram.pdf
        Sponsored by the Society for Imaging Science and Technology (IS&T) and the Imaging Society of Japan (ISJ)

        Early Registration Deadline: August 31, 2015
        Society for Imaging Sciences and Technology
        http://www.imaging.org/portland

        From page 13… “Inkjet Printing of Highly Conductive Graphene Based Composite Inks”, Mohammad Nazmul Karim, Shaila Afroj, and Stephen G. Yeates, University of Manchester (UK)

        From page 14… DIGITAL PRINTING TECHNOLOGIES TRACK INKJET-BASED PROCESSES CON’T. 10:10 – 11:10 AM, Tuesday September 29, 2015

        “Emerging Hybrid Ink Technology: Challenges of Implementation for Jetting and Print Process”, Mark Bale, SunChemical Ltd. (UK)

        “Droplet-on-Demand Printing of Polymer Solutions”, J. Frits Dijksman, University of Twente, and Paul C. Duinveld, Philips Consumer Lifestyle Technology Expert Group (the Netherlands)

        “Inkjet Printed P-type Semiconductors and Thin Film Transistors”, Chang-Ho Choi, Zhen Fang, Marshall Allen, and Chih-hung Chang, Oregon State University (USA), and Liang-Yu Lin and ChunCheng Cheng, AU Optronics Corporation (Taiwan)

        From page 15… DIGITAL FABRICATION AND 3D PRINTING TRACK 3D PRINTING AND ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING DAY 1 10:10 AM – 4:20 PM

        “Speed and Accuracy of High Speed Sintering”, Sami Giurani 1, Antonis Hadjiforados1, Adam Ellis1, Ingo Reinhold2, and Neil Hopkinson1; 1University of Sheffield (UK) and 2XaarJet AB (Sweden)

      • greggoble

        Liviu Popa Simil and ‘solid state LENR’ seems to be on a chip. The method for production and physics might be of interest to you.

        LIVIU POPA SIMIL – LENR – NUCLEAR BATTERY ROADMAP

        http://coldfusionnow.org/liviu-popa-simil-lenr-nuclear-battery-roadmap/

  • artefact

    Alexvs
    August 11th, 2015 at 4:02 PM
    Dear Mr. Rossi
    Regarding the name of the new reactor I insist: You are not holding the due respect to Mme. Curie (nee Maria Sklodowska).
    Sorry if I hurt your sentiments.
    Greetings

    Andrea Rossi
    August 11th, 2015 at 4:21 PM
    Alexvs:
    As I said, we did not have intention to give any name to it but “E-Cat”. We all know perfectly the immense importance of Madame Curie and we gave to this initial program her name for commemoration, not for disrespect. This said, from now on, let’s call our new prototype ” E-Cat x”, where X will be substituted by a number when and if it will go in commerce.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Paul Smith

    Axil has written: “…converting magnetic fields to current flow. Magnetic field = electricity…”

    This is true if the magnetic field isn’t static like in a permanent magnet.

    You can have a magnetic field that varies in intensity and direction inside a coil supplied with an AC current. In this case, if you put another coil inside this magnetic field you’ll get in it an induced voltage having the same frequency of the magnetic field. This is simply an electric transformer.

    If the E-Cat has a static magnetic field you cannot have that induced voltage. It should be necessary move an external coil to have that voltage (like in a dynamo).

    • Axil Axil

      A SPP comes and goes in time frames that vary between nanoseconds and picoseconds. A electric current will be induced when the magnetic field is building or decreasing as the SPPs comes and goes.

  • Omega Z

    M.me Curie
    M.me=Madame
    Madame Curie

    Rossi also mentioned her husband: Pierre Curie, a physicist who did pioneering magnetism of metals at various temps. Google his name & there is many details on Wiki.

  • James Andrew Rovnak

    I think just maybe the Ni isotope formation energy release is driving some hydrogen ions back into the electron stream (SPP) around the Ni surface hot spots & as an alternating EM field is necessary to get into the (ssm) LENR generation mode my wild guess is around 30 hz so it will work in the other direction to force H ions to generate electrical energy. So Rossi collects this in his external circuit & conditions it for electrical power generation. Must still be generating some thermal energy is my guess for radiant power also,.Note a high concentration of hydrogen ions is necessary to support the nuclear isotope generation process with subsequent release of thermal energy. The Li 7 neutron also supplies its lighter bound nuclear neutron to the process as it becomes Li 6.

  • Fyodor

    I think that this is the most likely explanation though I’m confused about how it would work. I don’t think that anyone has shown any sort of useful direct production of electricity, even experimentally, thus far.

    It could be something unrelated to power generation (removal of nuclear waste or something like that).

  • Axil Axil

    The Paul Brown Resonant Nuclear Battery is an ideal EMF design to harness the magnetic beams produced by the SPPs. The beta decays usually used to produce the EMF need not be present since SPPs are ideal generators of EMF motive force. Anyone who is interested in LENR should look into the theory and engineering related to the Paul Brown Resonant Nuclear Battery. This technology will still support the Cat and Mouse drive concept. Rossi is realty something, How he thinks of these things is amazing.

  • Ged

    Exactly. We have no way of detecting beta radiation as the reactor walls stop it if there, so we don’t know if it happens or not.

    • Axil Axil

      There is a way to deduce what drives the LENR generator. If Rossi tells us that the new reactor operates in SSM mode, then the reactor is driven by beta radiation. Beta decay does not use a heat delta to operate. But is SSM is not possible then the reactor uses heat difference to produce voltage. This is because the reactor’s exterior must be cooled to produce a difference in heat.

      • Ged

        The name has to be a big clue, at least into what Rossi thinks of it via his thought process and symbolism unfiltered from excitement. Sadly, I can only constrain ideas, but not decipher it yet. The naming convention is very peculiar though. An M then a full stop followed by “me”? The big M could be Marie, but nothing explains the “me”.

      • Omega Z

        I believe in 2011 or 12 Rossi mentioned Beta that is thermalized to heat. As to some of you questions & SSM-
        In response to Frank Acland’s questions

        1. Higher temperatures- Yes
        2. Longer periods of self-sustain- Yes
        3. Higher COP- Yes
        4. Better power density- Yes
        5. Something else- Yes

        http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=885&cpage=8#comment-1108576

        • Axil Axil

          No. 2 locks it down. The new reactor is an EMF harvester.

          • Mats002

            OK then where do the harvest go? Driving electrons outside the ‘chamber’ giving a current = electricity?

            • Axil Axil

              No, converting magnetic fields to current flow. Magnetic field = electricity.

              • Mats002

                I see (almost) your logic from A to B to C… What about energy amplification in this process (because it must be because SPP in the beginning of the process is low energy somewhere inbetween photons and electrons and then nuclei energies reached and then those are harvested in yet higher yield of energy, right?) – what parameters are involved other than speed (heat) and density of whatever-having-that-speed? Can ‘whatever’ change during the process and if so – how?

                • Axil Axil

                  SPPs setup a positive feedback loop between the nuclear reaction and the magnetic field. The magnetic beam produces a nuclear reaction which then is feed back into the SPP as gamma from the fusion which is then transferred back via a wormhole. The feedback loop keeps going until the SPP explodes in a Bosenova as observed by Dr. Kim at DGT.. But Rossi is now pulling magnetic energy away from the SPP. This causes the SPP is last longer before they explode.

  • Axil Axil

    Rossi gets his high COP by using the SSM mode. Does “Mme Curie” use SSM. Is “Mme Curie” self powered, that is, does the rap around power produced by the Cats power the Mouse directly? Once started up, is this reactor independent from external power? Self powering is always a good show for a demo.

  • Axil Axil

    The RTG fits the bill. A system with lots of beta decay and/or muons might be ideal for this type system. LENR having no hard radiation is also ideal for a RTG. The reference to radiation might be where Rossi got the “Mme Curie” name idea from.

    A radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG, RITEG) is an electrical generator that uses an array of thermocouples to convert the heat released by the decay of a suitable radioactive material into electricity by the Seebeck effect.

    Radiation must be of a type easily absorbed and transformed into thermal radiation, preferably alpha radiation. Beta radiationcan emit considerable gamma/X-ray radiation through bremsstrahlung secondary radiation production and therefore requires heavy shielding. Isotopes must not produce significant amounts of gamma, neutron radiation or penetrating radiation in general through other decay modes or decay chain products

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Cutdrawing_of_an_GPHS-RTG.jpg

    • Ged

      Beta would be safe if a non metallic absorber was used, like maybe a ceramic or high temp electrolytic compound perhaps. RTG would work in that case, but hard to say if he is using nuclear radiation as a source.

      M could be for muon or magnetic; I’m sure the name is some sort of clue. An oscillating magnetic field would also directly generate electricity.

      • Omega Z

        “but hard to say if he is using nuclear radiation as a source.”

        Rossi has restated since the Mme Curie disclosure that he does not begin with a radioactive fuel and does not produce a radiation outside the reactor.

        “outside the reactor” Has always stood out to me. This leaves the production of Beta, Gamma, X-rays & such during the reaction all possibilities. What ever it is, is no longer present within 15 minutes of shut down(Decayed away) & perfectly safe by the time it is cool enough to open up.

        I’ve thought for a long time that people should look at what decays away within 15 minutes or less for an idea of whats happening internally.

        • Ged

          I think the MFMP have, and there are some LENR predicted isotopes that would last less than 10 minutes; which is a challenge they are pondering on how to detect fast enough, such as by home made cloud chambers.

          • Omega Z

            I recall something that lasts less then 11 minutes. I didn’t post this because I don’t recall where I read it. The 15 minutes was by Rossi a long time back.

        • Axil Axil

          Remember that DGT said that huge magnetic fields were being produced by their reactThe M is for magnetic. Rossi might believe that there is nuclear activity going on inside his reactor but that may not be happening in the way he believes. The SPPs are converting the nuclear reactions to magnetic energy and Rossi is harvesting that energy using a Paul Brown nuclear battery type of circuit.

          By the way, thanks to everybody in helping solve this puzzle.

    • Fyodor

      RTGs have terrible efficiency (like five percent). They are only really used in situations where maintenance is impossible (probes and whatnot). It’s hard to imagine that the COP and power density are so high that you could lose that much power.

      • Axil Axil

        Reference: http://www.rexresearch.com/nucell/nucell.htm

        “The best RTGs in use manage to turn only about 5% of the available heat into electricity. Their output is usually less than 100 watts — just enough to energize a light bulb.

        The Nucell RNB, on the other hand, is much more efficient because it exploits the particles themselves, not the heat they shed. “Independent and peripheral-sponsored tests indicate we are getting more than 25% conversion efficiency”, says Brown.”

  • Bob

    Teasing is not very professional!

    I would rather him simply state new products are in development and then release solid data as appropriate. This new reactor cannot be “secret” due to the 1MW plant customer. Rossi states it is completely different and not for industrial use. So unless the secret customer is actually Darden,(whom I suspect) is controlling the information released, Rossi could tell us whatever he wants.
    He does not have to tell us anything, and in my opinion, opens him up to much criticism when dangles these little paradoxical tidbits in front of us. What does this accomplish? He could come out and state “I am working on a direct DC system. It is early in R&D and we are unsure as to the possible voltage or amps. We are conducting range tests at present”. But why such other statements that tease but do not really mean anything? Again, I understand he does not need to tell us anything and truthfully, most professional researchers do not, until they have solid data.
    Even entities such as Brillioun, Celani, Parkamov and others do not post such odd statements. I believe it does not reflect well on Rossi. I am grateful when he posts something solid and meaningful, but these “riddles” are not very “idoneous”! 🙂
    BLP makes boastful statements that do not come true and it really tarnishes their reputation. Rossi has one of the most important discoveries in history. How he presents himself will be the pallet from which many will paint his picture. Tesla was a genius. Yet most perceive him as a somewhat crazy, loose cannon because of his public discourse. Edison was intelligent, but for those who really know the history of him, he was a master publicist. Almost P.T. Barnum grade!
    Who was more respected then and now in history? Edison or Tesla?
    While I am not saying that one should completely conform to the media or public view, one does need to conduct oneself with a certain degree of formality to be taken seriously. I believe Rossi does a dis-service to himself with these odd and often paradoxical statements.

    Some state it is to mislead the competition. ??? The competition is getting their info from JNP? First, there is no competition and second, if he does not post information, there would be nothing to get! It is conspiracy theorist stuff about the competition. Rossi must post simply because he likes too! Which is not bad, but he really needs to polish the image a little in my opinion.
    Again, he could come out and state the general parameters of the new reactor or he could simply state a new device is being investigated. To post these riddles does not paint a particularly positive image.

    • ecatworld

      I don’t think Rossi is terribly concerned about his public image.

      • Bob

        Then why make these posts at all? If he does not care about public image, why even interact with the public?
        These posts will not sway investors. They will not influence banks, the patent office, nor governing bodies. They are his public venue! If he is not concerned about this, then why post at all?
        I am not trying to put him down. It is just that often, his statements do not quite make sense within the scope of a web posting. Why make a statement that something is totally revolutionary, (when the current 1mw test is just as revolutionary) and yet give no details what the revolution is, give it a cryptic name but not let anyone know what the name reflects, act as if he is being held back from disclosure when it is almost certainly only his decision to withhold.
        It was why Tesla was often looked at with a raised eyebrow. He would make claims he had an invention that could cause “earth quake” like effects and bring down an entire building. Yet, these claims were not documented nor verified in any matter. Tesla was a great mind in many ways…. but he also claimed he had alien contacts / communications. In later years, his “image” was totally destroyed.
        There is a difference between being “open minded” versus self delusional.
        Rossi is indeed quite the interesting case!

        • ecatworld

          Rossi says he learns a lot from the interaction on the JONP, and finds it useful to his work. I’m not sure what he finds so useful. He’s careful not to give away confidential information, but within certain limits I think he does like to talk about his work.

          • Omega Z

            Rossi also doesn’t give away what he learns on JONP.
            There’s also times where it may work like writers block. A distraction. A Dumb post that triggers a new Idea or train of thought. Think of Men in Black where “K” says lets go have Pie. Let the Pie do the work.

            Regardless, it is Lucky for us that Rossi does like to talk about his Cats.

    • BillH

      I can’t quite understand why IH/Darden have made little or no comment over what has been revealed over the last few week. I would have to believe that IH are supplying most if not all of the money for the ongoing projects. If they really wanted things to be kept secret they would surely be vetting AR’s postings and making their own press releases about progress and developments?

      • Omega Z

        Note it was rumored that Industrial Heat advised Rossi in the beginning to part ways with certain associates. This came from 1 of the disenfranchised. However, Rossi chose not to give up his JONP. Rossi finds the give & take to be of use. Note Rossi was interested in the price points of battery storage. He received a response in hours. That is time saved. I think he also obtains Ideas of different paths to try from his fans. And Note, It does appears on occasion that IH monitors JONP..

    • Omega Z

      Bob, If Rossi didn’t like talking about his Cats, We would really be in the dark. Likely most of us would be totally oblivious to all of this. SO, Being aware of this, I can deal with the teasing.

      Note that Rossi has also had a great impact in the proliferation of LENR awareness due to his need to talk. It has been priceless as has Frank’s Blog.

    • mike

      Well if Rossi has made a revolution within his revolution, he may find it hard to contain himself. Which it sounds like. I never really heard this kind of tone from him. I am excited.

    • GreeWin

      “Who was more respected then and now in history? Edison or Tesla?” Considering the stellar reviews of the Tesla EV and its buoyant effect on the inventor’s reputation – Mr. Tesla appears to gain in reputation daily.

      But we understand your frustration Bob. In a polished, well disciplined world Mr. Rossi would be muzzled. Happily for some, he does not live in such a world and his enthusiasm for the game is unbridled at times. Sit back, relax, or do as HAL 9000 suggests, take a stress pill. 🙂 The best minds at JPL-NASA seem to think this is all a just a fancy hologram!

  • Zack Iszard

    Something tells me that Rossi will be more secretive with this new design than anything yet. We may have to wait for the conclusion of the 1 MW test before he is ready to come forward with whatever this newer system will be capable of. With that in mind, I believe the intrinsic safety of the reaction itself is what has taken years of work to move toward approval. The M.me Curie system will not have as much of that to go through, since the current wave of E-Cats are paving the way, but unless it is nearly 100% thermodynamicly efficient it will need some very significant cooling. That part will need lots of safety testing.

  • Private Citizen

    Am wondering if there isn’t some coded pun about muons and electrons in the M.me.

  • Ged

    Given the name, it could be somehow related, if at least in concept, to the Curie point magnetic heat engine.

  • Ged

    Curie isn’t associated just with radioactivity though, but also magnetics.

    Take a look at this Curie point heat engine http://www.imagesco.com/articles/heatengine/HeatEngine.html

    • Dave Lawton

      Lighter flints make good curie point motors.

  • georgehants

    There must be more open-minded good scientists on ECW than the whole of academia put together, excluding the Quantum guys, I think.

    • Nigel Appleton

      Good grief, George – can’t you give the scientist-hatred a rest for a while? Pretty please?

      • georgehants

        Nigel why have you a problem with speaking the Truth regarding Cold Fusion and science.
        Please explain rather than just attack me, as I do with many links of good and bad science.
        You could of course have noted my praise for some of science rather than your getting annoyed because I do not believe in covering up the Truth.

        • Nigel Appleton

          No. You put up a link showing that alchemists called things by names other than those we would use. That does not make them geniuses.
          As to the rest of it, to say as you do that there must be more open-minded good scientists on ECW than (in) the rest of academia put together is just rather stupid hyperbole. What have biology, chemistry, geology, astrophysics, genetics done to show that they are packed to the gunwales with closed-minded, corrupt, or dishonest scientists or academics?

          As it happens, I think the LENR community – as represented here and elsewhere on line – is in danger of becoming closed-minded; although I’m reasonably certain there are a good few scientists working on LENR who have neither the time nor the inclination to argue the toss on the internet with scientist-haters and the scientifically illiterate

          • georgehants

            Again you Lie accusing me of being a science “hater” because I put up the Truth of science.
            Why do you Lie does that make you feel more justified in hiding the Truth.
            Very sad.

          • Warthog

            If you substitute the word “physicists” for “scientists” in GH’s comment, he is correct. Today’s physicists have evolved into cliques driven by politics, and have forgotten what real science is.

            I have had physicist after physicist on CF discussions here and elsewhere tell me repeatedly that CF is impossible because there is no theory describing it, and that there must be a theoretical explanation before it can be considered “scientific”. They have forgotten the idea that EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE (properly replicated) trumps theory every time.

            • Dave Lawton

              They have become High Priests who will defend their temple dogma to the death.

              • LilyLover

                At least the high-priests were not lazy. They were busy in rituals etc.
                These days everything is an “easy way out” – to stay out of “trouble” not “make noise” and stay “innocuous”. Grab the paycheck for not speaking-up. They don’t even have a dogma hence no dogmatic stance. They don’t even have a stance. They are a bunch of flow followers – as opposed to flow diverters.
                At least the old high priests achieved something – right or wrong 🙂

                These days it seems everybody is a winner as long as no one plays the game.

            • Nigel Appleton

              I would very much appreciate it if you could post links to the discussions with “physicist after physicist”

              What proportion of the world population of physicists do you suppose they represent?

              And of course you have identified the nub of the problem. Of the many attempts at replication of Rossi’s work, very few have succeeded – and one of those used fuel supplied and loaded by Rossi (No, I’m not suggesting any impropriety). Even fewer (?none) have achieved self-sustaining mode.
              Oh well, never mind – I’m going to call my lithium aluminium hydride “Fizzing Fairy Dust”, then I can claim to be a genius!

              • Paul

                If you don’t like Lenr, you can go in other blogs, this would be a better place… Thanks

                • Nigel Appleton

                  Where have I ever said I “don’t like” LENR? I think it has fantastic potential, and that AR is way, way ahead of everyone else.

                  Which leads me to think that his would-be replicators (including me) are missing something…

                • Mats002

                  Dear Nigel, your stay here is most welcome, same for your physicist collegues. Why ask for COP of over 3 and SSM when you would be more than occupied with explaining MFMP glowstick results by replications???

                • Nigel Appleton

                  I’m sorry, I don’t have the faintest idea what you’re getting at. Is there a problem with pointing out that Rossi is way out in front of the field, and that successful replications have been rare?
                  Would that not indicate that Rossi, as one might expect by now, knows something the rest of us do not?

                • Mats002

                  Agree, but that you miss something should not be an excuse to wait, there is enough information out to have some interesting results to work on.
                  Do you or any of your collegues run any experiments?

                • Nigel Appleton

                  Oh, I’m certainly not suggesting that anyone should stop trying to realise LENR!
                  I’m just trying to make a point.
                  Let me put it this way. Rossi has evidently got over the stage where he regularly burns out Kanthal coils; even though, in his latest design, he seems to be operating at temperatures at which the best of them would not be expected to last very long.How is he doing this? Does very hot Kanthal have a longer service life than its manufacturers would have us believe?

                  It’s also my opinion – I do not present this as a Fact, or the Truth – that something more/other than Ni and LiAlH4 is needed as a fuel

                  As for myself, I am but a humble biologist, fortunate indeed to have been able to have retired early with my ill-gotten gains from science (Don’t tell George! 🙂 ). I’m feeling my way a bit with this non-squishy hard stuff, – I’m much more at ease with a nice tubercle bacillus or a snippet of DNA – but intend to try induction heating with some different fuel formulations. Unfortunately my remaining biological expertise, such as it is, has been in demand from people who deserve a little help, so I’ve been unable to spend any time in the workshop.

                  I was however gaining considerable expertise in destroying electronic components! Never stop learning, that’s my motto!

                • Mats002

                  I promise not to tell George you are not a hot fusion scientist 😉

                • Nigel Appleton

                  This could indeed be a better place – with solid objectivity and reading for comprehension

              • Warthog

                You don’t actually think I keep track of conversations with obvious anti-LENR shills?? I’ve tried to have data-based discussions with those sorts, and out of many, many interchanges, NOT ONE would ever check out the published data. Their approach is virtually a rubber-stamp that goes something like “mumble, mumble, mumble…Coulomb Barrier…..mumble, mumble, mumble”, and then seques into “there is no theory, and thus no science”.

                And your response regurgitates one of their key points…somehow LENR is “all about Rossi”. Quoting publications that show peer-reviewed evidence from other researchers is simply ignored.

                • Nigel Appleton

                  I quite agree that the body of evidence in favour of LENR outside of Rossi’s containers is building up and cannot be ignored
                  The fact remains that AR is still way ahead of the rest at least in terms of a practical embodiment of LENR
                  But I can sympathise with a physicist who cannot see how the Coulomb barrier can be breached at low energies

                • Warthog

                  Yes, but the discussions I was having were about the overall scientific validity of LENR….NOT “Rossi’s LENR”. And apparently a physicist as knowledgeable about the mathematical formalism of physics as Nobel Laureate Julian Schwinger had no problem “seeing how the Coulomb barrier can be breached at low energies”.

                  The reality is that there is a certain subset of very powerful physicists to whom ANY positive reportage concerning LENR is anathema, who will use any means available to discredit same, and are working diligently to make that happen.

                • Nigel Appleton

                  Would you care to name names, shame the guilty? Give an example of the diligent suppression? Or just leave it as an unsubstantiated assertion?

                • Warthog

                  Read “Excess Heat” by George Beaudette,,,he covers the topic quite well, in addition to a balanced (if slightly dated) summary of the experimental data from many early researchers.

                  Or you could read Eugene Mallow’s testimony of the commission of documented science fraud by the physics department at MIT (it turns out that the “failed” replication attempt at MIT of P & F’s electrolysis/deuterium experiment actually succeeded…that is, showed measurable excess heat). The raw data shows this heat, but the published data was fraudulently CHANGED to show no excess. Who changed it has yet to be determined even as of today.

                  And then there was the attempt do destroy George O’Mara Bockris (then at Texas A & M, now deceased) over his experiments showing the generation of tritium in a P&F cell.

                  And many, many more…..

                  But the above constitutes a good start.

                • GreenWin

                  CORRECTION: “Excess Heat, 2nd Edition” by Charles G. Beaudette: http://amzn.to/1UCVzX9

                • Warthog

                  Indeed, and that is where I got my copy (now loaned out). But I would expect someone posting here to be sufficiently astute to use Google with the info I gave to get to the book at Amazon.

                  Requiring the person I am responding to to actually expend some minor effort to find the reference is an excellent litmus test in identifying skeptopaths.

                  Those truly interested in the answers will do the (small) amount of work required. Skeptopaths absolutely will not, but will ask for direct links, and, even if given direct links, will NOT actually read the information there. I’ve done this experiment dozens of times, always with the same results.

                • Nigel Appleton

                  I regard it as merely a common courtesy to share sources of information in situations like this..
                  But so be it.

                • Warthog

                  You’re following the skeptopath script to the letter. The information necessary to access the information is contained in my post.

                  Even your “childish” comment is dead on to the script.

                • GreenWin

                  I agree Warthog. The pathological skeptic refuses to even look at evidence. Happily we approach the auspicious time when the most pathological of skeptics are dying off. And only the deluded remain.

                  However, it is fair and proper to correctly spell an author’s name. Charles G. Beaudette (BSEE, MIT) deserves a lofty place in the history of LENR.

                • Warthog

                  Heh—I am horrible with remembering names. ‘Swhy I could never make it as a politician.

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

                  fantastic book, that Charles beaudete published freely on ICCF9 site

                  http://iccf9.global.tsinghua.edu.cn/lenr%20home%20page/acrobat/BeaudetteCexcessheat.pdf#page=35

                  but people who can afford should one day or another buy the paper book. maybe it will be collector one day!

                  the books of Edmund Storms may be too.

                • Nigel Appleton

                  Why, thank you, Warthog!
                  Links would have been nice, but I’ll chase these things down and read diligently. It’s always good to see someone prepared to back up their points
                  ETA I take it you mean Eugene MALLOVE?

                • Nigel Appleton

                  Right, I’ve been reading some of Mallove’s material. Very persuasive of dirty deeds at MIT

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

                  his book fire from ice is good too, but is more an historical descriptions of the few first years.

                  http://www.amazon.fr/Fire-Ice-Searching-Behind-Fusion/dp/1892925028

                  anyway it add many details, like the fraud of cherry picking by Gary taubes debunked by Texas AM statistic department.

                  about Mallove I’ve two interesting links

                  on is on MIT fraud,

                  http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1991/eirv18n37-19910927/eirv18n37-19910927_052-clearing_the_air_about_the_cold.pdf

                  the other on MIT opposition

                  http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1991/eirv18n37-19910927/eirv18n37-19910927_052-clearing_the_air_about_the_cold.pdf

                  about gary taubes fraud and bockris tritium

                  http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/taubesfabrication/TritiumDiscoveredByBockrisAtTexasA&M.pdf

                  anyway Edmund storms have even better argument in that proposed conspiracy is incompatible with observations.

                  about MIT fraud, most LENr scientists today like Ed Storms and McKubre blame it more on incompetence than in fraud.

                  http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondensedg.pdf#page=138

                  http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2012/ICCF17/papers/Miles-Examples-Isoperibolic-Calorimetry-ICCF17-ps.pdf

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

                  I’ll quote Mallove on Taubes/Bockris

                  “As an example of how flimsy was this circumstantial evidence for tritium doctoring, Taubes cited at least two occasions on which high levels of tritium were found—each of them near a time when funding officials came to the University. However, he failed to mention the other times of visits by sponsors when high tritium levels had not been announced — a statistical misrepresentation. (The figures were run by the statistics department at A&M and they found no strong correlation with the visits.)”

                  much more detail on tritium in the book…

                  note that taubes was published in Science and never retracted.

                • Warthog

                  Thanks for appending the links. I read this stuff more for my own education than to rebut critics, so I have never built up a file of links to what I read (which would be impossible anyway, given the broad swath of subjects I am interested in).

          • Omega Z

            Nigel
            George has some valid points. But He paints with a very, very wide brush.
            I am aware there is a fair number of the science community that follow ECW & it is silly to offend them. That they follow LENR, Skeptic or not indicates to me that they are at least open to possibilities. That is Science.

            The Science community has problems. Enough so that DARPA is getting involved with hopes of fixing the worst of it. The biggest problem is a lack of honest peer review or a lack of peer review all together & without peer review, there is no way to keep it honest.

            What really concerns me is I recently read an article where some “Physicists” are proposing a standard of Theory trumping all else. If A Theory is eloquently written, it can be excepted as fact. As far as I’m concerned, this would be the end of Science. With an eloquently written theory, all funding for a given experiment or field could be vanquished.

            I believe Experiment should always trump theory. It’s quite simple. If something works & doesn’t fit theory, The theory is wrong. In fact, A theory that appears to fit an experiment perfectly can still be wrong. Theory is just a tool. Even if it works doesn’t mean it’s not broken.

            There are some “Physicists” who look down upon all the other sciences. I’ve even read jokes about this. Not Funny. This is so wrong. However, it is just an extension of society. One group looking down upon another. We have an Educational system that promotes it. He who has the most education is the smarter. There is no correlation between education & intelligence.

    • LilyLover

      To make you happy:
      Yes dear, give them a rest.
      Purpose of science is to know. For them to know. “They” know!
      Fascists love fascism even though the society that faces fascism hates it.
      Similarly, today’s “scientists” love sciencism even though the society that they use it against should hate it.
      They know that as long as they keep everyone in the dark, the “knowers” can hinder the progress and trumpet the propaganda of their masters. To top it all, people are too busy to bother learning mathematics or grammar, too busy to not watch mindless shows etc. So why bother?
      Speaking truth means hard work.
      It’s easy to publish no-content 186-References Journal paper.
      🙂

  • Greg Leonard

    Rossi’s excitement suggests to me, that the Mme Curie has significant differences to the existing LT and HotCat – both of which have quite slow response times to control input.
    My guess is that she will produce DC electricity, and be much more controllable – maybe even opening up vehicle operations in conjunction with a good battery

  • Paul

    If M.me Curie is a gas-fired device, there are good chances that will be used to produce electricity for residential applications in a direct way.

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

    Please post a link to the type of device that would be used for direct electricity production. I assume it would be some type of coil. Is that correct?

    • ecatworld

      You may be right, Christopher. But I don’t really know, which makes it hard to link to something.

      • Nigel Appleton

        I’d be looking at free-piston stirling engines with linear alternators; or thermoacoustic devices, again with linear alternators; or (for the future) rectenna arrays tuned to the outputs of the Marvellous Machine
        The first two seem about ready for commerce. The last, not yet

  • Buck

    CURIEosity-CAT

    • Mats002

      Ha ha, that is better than CAT-a-strophe (the latter of F9 would be)

      If this new device lifts from the table it is a variant of EM Drive, then may be a CAT-a-pult?

      • Paul

        Which is the faith of Rossi’s supporters? E-Catholic!