Quite a lot of attention has been given to this exchange on the Journal of Nuclear Physics:
At the end of your tests it will turn out that your plants do not work and are not reliableI bet 1000 Euros to win 3000Eyros if you fail. I bet you will fail.
…and I remain anonymous, so you can say you spammed “nobody”.
As strange as it might seem, I think
maybe you will win your bet.
So here we have Andrea Ross seemingly siding on the side of a negative outcome to the E-Cat test that has been going on for almost 10 months now. What are we to make of this apparent pessimistic attitude regarding the test?
Personally, I’m not sure.
To me it seems obvious that the “Rossi Effect” is real. There are plenty of reasons for me to come to this conclusion, many of which I have listed in this post. The recent interview that Fulvio Fabiani gave with Mats Lewan (http://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/) is in my opinion the latest piece of evidence in favor of the reality of the Rossi effect.
What’s not obvious is if the E-Cat plant that Rossi has been running for the last 10 months or so is up to the task of being a commercial product. From what AR has reported, the plant has needed hundreds of repairs over the course of the test, and now we know that Rossi is moving onto a new E-Cat design with the E-Cat X, which he seems to think is superior to previous versions of his reactor. The E-Cat X, however, has only been running for a month, and Rossi reckons that it will need a 6 month test to see if it will be useful in commercial products.
I have wondered whether Rossi has considered ditching the current design being used in the 1MW plant in favor of using the E-Cat X in future low temperature plants. I asked him whether future low temperature plants would use the same design as the one he is currently testing, and he replied:
The external design will be similar to the one published in the artistic 3D embodiment published on http://www.leonardocorp1996.com
The technological design will inherit the enormous experience we made during the tests and will take advice of all the shortcomings we experienced in this important test.
I later asked if he thought that future low temperature plants would incorporate E-Cat X units. His response:
It’s a possible option.
So I think Rossi might well be agreeing with “Anonymous” that his current plant is not reliable and would not be suitable to be put in the marketplace as it is right now — and that an improved design is needed. Does that mean the test results will be positive or negative? I guess that depends on the definition being used. They might be able to get the plant to limp across the finish wire having met the contractual requirements of the test, but that would not mean this design is suitable for the marketplace. In that respect the test could be considered positive in one sense, and negative in another.
I hope it will all be clearer early next year.