Now Thrust from the E-Cat? (Update: AR Trying to Make Propellantless Thrust Directly from The E-Cat)

I’m not sure what to make of this — and I am sure that some readers will put this into the “too good to be true” category, but here’s an new angle on the E-Cat from an exchange on the Journal of Nuclear Physics:

April 4, 2016 at 3:07 AM
Dear Andrea,
has your ecat-q ever produced (apart from heat, electricity and light) some kind of THRUST?
Best regards

Andrea Rossi
April 4, 2016 at 5:57 AM
Warm Regards,

Andrea Rossi is inviting a whole new batch of questions with this statement. When the questioner talks about thrust, I assume he means a reaction-less thrust or propulsion similar to what people are referring to with the Em-Drive, which has been tested by people at NASA and other places. Those who have claimed to measure the effect with the EmDrive have said it is very small, and the thrust mentioned here could be similarly small, and not practical.

Even so, this would of course be an astonishing additional feature of the E-Cat that Rossi has thrown out there now, but we have no data or details to go on right now; I hope we can learn more.


Andrea Rossi was asked about the the “thrust” issue, and this was his response:

Andrea Rossi
April 4, 2016 at 7:00 PM
Mark Saker:
we are trying ( TRYING ) to make a propellantless thrust. Maybe we will not succeed.
Warm Regards,

And another Q&A

Dear Andrea
sorry to bother you again, but could you clarify if the thrust you have mentioned can be obtained indirectly (for example using the electric power generated by the ecat-q to drive an engine) or DIRECTLY by the ecat-q?

Andrea Rossi
April 4, 2016 at 7:02 PM
You never bother: our Readers never bother me.
We are trying “directly from an E-Cat QuarkX”, but we are very green on this issue ( green, in this case, means “immature” ).
Warm Regards,

143 Replies to “Now Thrust from the E-Cat? (Update: AR Trying to Make Propellantless Thrust Directly from The E-Cat)”

  1. I’m curious if Rossi has a mechanism in mind for the thrust? Radiation pressure? Photon emission? And what scale? mN or greater?

  2. I’m really thinking thrust as in the EMDrive.

    If those resonant cavities had some sort of nanostructured active material on their internal walls and used hydrogen gas in a sealed construction they would in principle be similar to LENR reactors.

    Strong enough RF or microwaves might also be able to excite hydrogen in a more effective way than using just heat. Incidentally, Piantelli’s EP2754156A2patent application does suggest the usage of:

    a radiofrequency, in particular microwaves

    in order to ionize (and excite) hydrogen gas for promoting the production of what he calls “H-” (which in my opinion it’s possibly what Holmlid and others define as “Hydrogen Rydberg Matter”).

    Perhaps real-time precision weight measurements could be included as an additional check in replications efforts to detect any possible macroscopic EMDrive-like thrust effect.

  3. Some rather mundane explanations:

    1 – He misread „thrust“ as „trust“.
    2 – He meant thrust via heat (jet engine).
    3 – The produced magnetic fields attract external parts, causing motion if not everything is properly fixed.

    A considerable amount of thrust that does not correspond to #2-3 would be indeed a surprise, I think.

  4. How about a gamma ray laser, that should get things moving or Deformed Space Time, if you could get that to resonate!!!

  5. Does anyone think Mr Rossi might just enjoy sending people down the wrong path now and again, just to give people something to think/talk about, red herrings so to speak.

    1. You might not believe this but lately I’ve been secretly speculating on possible EMDrive-like thrust effects in LENR devices, regardless of what Rossi wrote today. I would have liked to comment about that somewhere in the LENR blogosphere before Rossi did; too bad…

        1. I might be wrong in my thinking but I see EMDrives replications as “generalized” LENR devices comprising a gas, a means for exciting such gas (RF generator or magnetron in typical replications), an enclosed [and possibly structured] transition metal surface and optionally a dielectric surface in its proximity. I speculate that the excess heat effect in “actual” LENR devices is a side effect arising when the gas used is hydrogen/deuterium. It’s worth noting that Rydberg Matter (which I often mentioned being involved in LENR) can also be formed from gases other than hydrogen, but only with hydrogen nuclear anomalies and excess heat was observed in the case of Holmlid et al.

          My hunch is that what makes LENR devices work could also be what makes EMDrives work (just barely – they might be quite unoptimized devices as they currently are being fabricated).

          As far as I am aware of, very few people so far have checked for (or expected) changes in reactor weight not explainable by a loss of reactants in evidently working LENR experiments. It should not be too expensive to try checking out for this too; who knows if observing it is actually easier than excess heat.

          As a funny aside, I thought that the inexplicable weight loss Rossi claimed some time ago might turn out to be the result of some sort of EMDrive-like spacetime bending effect generated by the E-Cats in his container. Assuming this was actually the case, of course – perhaps Rossi actually meant something completely different with thrust generation.

    1. Actually it is, once you consider the AxilAxil’s monopole stuff (and the presence of magnetic field around LENR reactors reported by Defkalion and others, and the observation of X-ray beams by Hagelstein and Tanzella, etc..)…

      1. maybe but I wouldn’t speculate much about it before Rossi answers further questions. The thrust could be a conventional one due to heat, etc…

    2. My intuition assumes it. This is Twilight Zone stuff without the menace; it is something beyond our current knowing. I would assume that they are related, assuming that Rossi is saying EMDrive like stuff that we think that he is saying.

  6. On a few occasions, during development, some E-Cats went through Sudden Unplanned Dis-assembly. At that point some of the parts were THRUST into the nearest stationary surface.

      1. I should have added 😉 Rossi has mentioned E-Cats that have failed suddenly during extreme testing resulting in fragments being tossed about. Nothing that was usable, but forces none the less. MFMP had their “Bang” event during testing also. I tried looking here but couldn’t find a specific example.

  7. The question rather is, why someone suddenly asks just for thrust? And how Rossi could observe it? Too many questions are swirling and floating there…

      1. Yes, the context of question would be important here. But I consider the scalar wave involvement in cold fusion quite seriously. For example the fact, that the cold fusion cannot be initiated by alternated current from grid, but it requires chopped current from some PWM regulator would also indicate the involvement of scalar wave physics. The scalar waves and monopoles would result from fast interrupting of EM field – not just alternating it.

        1. Here’s how Nicola Tesla originally observed them:

          In his lab, Tesla utilize a dynamo connected to magnetic interrupter to produce very quick pulses of high voltage direct current. He noticed these pulses could completely vaporize thin wires. In addition, these pulses could produce what seemed like pressure waves that would induce stinging sensations. At first he thought these blasts waves were composed of tiny particles of the vaporized metal. This possibility was ruled out when he noticed nothing could shield them, including glass or even copper sheets. If these were high speed particles of some sort the glass should have shielded him from them, and if they were purely electrical the metal should have blocked them. However, they penetrated any barrier!

          1. Please note that the experiments with exploding wires were also the way, in which whole the LENR research started by Wendt/Irion before ninety years:


            So that it may be quite possible, that even Nicola Tesla achieved some cold fusion/transmutation unwillingly during his experiments. The exploding wire would act in similar way, like the magnet pinch experiments with hot fusion (Focus fusion etc.).


  8. He was working with an engineer on the potential of an e-cat powered turbine engine. Maybe that’s what he means.

  9. Gerard McEk
    April 3, 2016 at 12:37 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    In the past you mentioned that you hope to realize a QuarkX Jet combination in 2016.

    1. Are you progressing on that?

    2. Can you tell us when you think to start testing?

    3. At what energy level do you intend to test it?

    4. Is the QuarkX developed far enough for this application?

    Thanks and kind regards, Gerard

    Andrea Rossi
    April 3, 2016 at 7:06 PM
    Gerard McEk:

    1- yes

    2- we already did with the E-Cat QuarkX

    3- we test modules of 500 W, later we’ll pile them up

    4- no, this is why we are at the preliminar R&D phase

    Warm Regards,


  10. The last experiments with EMDrive arranged by Tajmar/ NASA were highly suboptimal and not reflecting the Shawyer’s original design. Event the Chinese managed to measure it better. I would merely consider them as an intentional attempt to cover and obfuscate the situation.

  11. Hi all

    All heat engines can create thrust. Whether an electric source driving a turbofan or a nuclear source heating water in to steam and shooting it down the nozzle of a jet or rocket engine.

    Kind Regards walker

  12. April 4, 2016 at 3:07 AM
    Dear Andrea,

    Does your ECat-X give back rubs ?

    Best regards
    Private Citizen

    Andrea Rossi
    April 4, 2016 at 5:57 AM


    But while ECat-X undergoes a secret 3 yr. test, I’m most excited about new ECat-Y, which does time travel and tastes like bacon (F7)

    Warm Regards,

    1. How lovely to see his sense of HUMOR, even while engaged in such IMPORTANT work. I SALUTE you Andria, RESPECT, RESPECT, RESPECT.

  13. I wonder if LENR Ni transmutations are due to weak force interactions such as stimulated EC or Beta decay and the energy released is ultimately responsible for some of the heat. What would the energy released in the neutrinos be? Could this be directional in some circumstances and lead to thrust due to neutrino emission? A kind of Neutrino Drive?

    Putting my over imaginative SciFi head on

    Could stimulation (say around 100keV or maybe 66.9 keV maybe from K alpha characteristic X-Ray emission from tungsten say) of normally stable Cu63 lead to stimulated EC to Ni63 (Qec = -66.9 keV), could the Ni63 (normal half-life 101 years, Q value +66.9 keV) be stimulated to faster beta decay back to Cu63 generating beta electricity and neutrino thrust?

    Could in the right kind of electric field or alignment the emission to beta or neutrinos be optimised in some way?

    Just some fun I like the idea of a neutrino thruster. Still would be energetically balanced though unless LENR can provide the stimulation.

    1. On a related LENR point.

      Perhaps stimulation on some nuclei leads to energy balanced stimulated weak reactions.

      But Perhaps Stimulation with H- ions as per Piantelli and MFMP leads to LENR. Assuming only group 10 elements are initially involved:

      Could Ni isotopes < Ni62 + H- ions go to Ni62 via immediate stimulated EC following absorption of the proton emitting Internal bremsstrahlung from EC with the absorbed high energy proton along with neutrinos instead of gamma?

      Then maybe with no more stimulation the Ni62 does not absorb further protons but just ejects them without neutrino emission either as proposed by Bob of MFMP and Piantelli,

      Could Ni62 with external Stimulation H- ions go to Cu63, which goes to Ni63 then to Cu64 on H- absorption which goes to Ni64 and Zn64?

      Would this explain the Copper and Zinc seen in some experiments but only Ni62 seen in others and high counts of at 64 seen in some perhaps preprocessed fuels?

      Could Ni64 with even more additional external Stimulation go to Cu65?

      Would this explain increase in relative abundance of Cu65 compared to Cu63 seen in paper: Search For Nuclear Ashes In Electrochemical Experiments by Violante et al. and noted by Bob in the recent MFMP presentation?

      Of course this is only a precursor to LENR+. With Li7 going to Be8 and 2 alpha no beta or neutrino emission would occur. (and no neutrino thrust in this case)

    2. I suppose if an electron was captured from the S1 or S2 orbital which are spherical, it would be difficult to define a direction component or dependence or generate a directional emission?

      I wonder if it was captured from one of the P2 orbitals though if a directional effect could be exploited under a electric or magnetic field or something?

      On the other hand perhaps the structure and orientation in nucleus itself is more important than the electron orbitals?

  14. I’m pretty sure that this one is lost in translation. I honestly don’t think that Rossi means it creates thrust directly.

    1. Yup I guess you are right… probably its thermal thrust or something… It will be amazing if its something else.

  15. On JONP:

    “Silvio Caggia April 4, 2016 at 8:09 AM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    Some years ago I asked you if you noticed some gravitational anomaly near e-cat, and you answered no.
    Now has someone asked if ecat-q ever produced (apart from heath,
    electricity and light) some kind of THRUST, and you answered yes.
    Did something change or you didn’t notice the phenomenon before?
    Ingenuos Regards

    AR: No”

    So this thrust should be related to the jet engine.

    1. Caggia made the classic mistake when questioning Rossi of combining two questions; ‘did something change?’ and ‘(perhaps) you didn’t notice the phenomenon before?’. Rossi answered only one question, leaving the reader to either guess which, or to assume (probably incorrectly) that it was no to both.

  16. On JONP:

    “Giovanni April 4, 2016 at 9:49 AM
    Dear Andrea
    Just to be accurate: I mean THRUST as the translation of the italian word “spinta”.
    Is this Thrust directly obtained by the e-cat q or indirectly via other means (heat, magnetic fields, etc.)?
    Many many regards, Giovanni

    Andrea Rossi April 4, 2016 at 11:22 AM
    I know what is the thrust of a jet.
    We are still in a preliminar R&D phase and the description will be given after we will have made a working product.
    Warm Regards, A.R.

    1. Giovanni stressed that he meant thrust as in jet engines and Rossi acknowledged that he knows the meaning of thrust as in jet engines. (……)

      1. So then, indeed, he was talking about Jet propulsion with the e-cat’s heat (and/or electrical) output. The news then is that he’s likely already pulled it off in R&D, based on the “yes” and his answer here.

        1. The word “thrust” is also routinely used – albeit incorrectly – to define the propulsive force generated by RF resonant cavity “thrusters” (e.g. the EMDrive), which is likely what Giovanni wanted to know.

  17. Main stream science has always insisted on explaining all current experimental data within the Standard Model, or labeling it voodoo science. The problem with this stance is that it fails to take into account that which is yet to be discovered, which unseats all previous prejudice. However NATURE will continue in the ways which suit HER best, and we poor humans will have to learn to delight in her MYSTERY.

    I remember many years ago reading about a Scientist who DARED to suggest that he had seen evidence for fractional charge, and who was roundly dismissed. I wonder how his funding applications went after that??????? I probably read the article in U.k. New Scientist.
    The Most Important thing about Cold Fusion, LENR is that it works and represents a New HOPE and New Beginning for us all, if we spend xxx time finding a strong theory, so be it. In the mean time LET THE E_CATS ROLL OFF THE PRODUCTION LINE.

  18. Well clearly if the e-cat underlying mechanism is a Rydberg matter phenomonon then as per Holmlid muons are being emitted and are passing out of the reactor, many such muons (or mystery muon-like particles) would offer ‘thrust.’ Now whether the Rydberg chamber can be configured like an EM drive is a question pertainingto optimizing that thrust. But the reality inside the e-cat is that ‘di-lithium hydride’ aka ‘dilithium crystals’ are surely present! 🙂

    1. /* Well clearly if the e-cat underlying mechanism is a Rydberg matter
      phenomonon then as per Holmlid muons are being emitted and are passing
      out of the reactor, many such muons (or mystery muon-like mischugenon
      particles) would offer ‘thrust.’ */

      In reality it is clear nonsense instead: the E-Cat doesn’t produce a muons – and even if it would, then the measurable thrust would require pretty high flux of muons, making everything in the lab extremely radioactive.

    2. If Lithium metal is being added there likely are are some Trilithium Nitride crystals in the chamber as well. : )

    1. I fear that has been happening a lot lately.

      But I suppose part of that is because people are antsy and on the edge of their seats from the anticipation of the ERV report being “soon”, but not being explicitly defined when. So, it’s easy to latch on to every small happening or scrap of info with all that excess enthusiasm built up for the ERV. It’s similar to how it would be utter torture to foreknow the week of ones death, without knowing the hour.

  19. When Rossi speaks of thrust, we not talking directly from the device, but using the heat from the device. Just in case people don’t know, a JET engine works on heat (who would have thunk???).

    Rossi quite some time ago reversed his position on the eat being able to produce usable thrust for aircraft engines – this “change” of heart occurred around the time of the hot-cat.

    And Rossi flat out admitted he’s working with an engineer on the feasibility of using the ecat to power a JET engine.

    So the fact of Rossi working on using ecats for JET engines was revealed QUITE some time ago.

    However, this admission means that some type of prototype was built and the ecat thus has produced thrust.

    On the other hand, it could be steam exiting a nozzle during VERY early tests, and by a physical definition, steam existing a nozzle as a result of heat from the ecat is thrust.

    So the question to Rossi now should be:

    This mention of thrust, is this the result of the testing collaboration with an engineer in the aircraft industry for a JET engine, or is this thrust you mention simply steam exiting a nozzle as occurred
    in early e-cat demos?

    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    1. I think the big question is whether the thrust is EmDrive type (resonant cavity thrust or something else enigmatic) or heat generated thrust (jet engine or steam nozzle or anything like that). My guess is it’s heat generated (the E-Cat X based jet engine under test).

      1. Well, tests for the EM drive are quite difficult, and they prove nothing until such tests occur outside or away from the earth’s magnetic field.

        An electronic compass needle moves rather easily and produces a force – even in a vacuum. However that same compass needle in space does not produce a force because there is no earths magnetic field to work against.

        Way, but WAY WAY too early to make any conclusion about the EM drive until such time it is tested away from the earths magnetic field. Until such time the EM drive is tested in conditions that are “more exciting” then watching a compass needle move, then we have
        nothing more than watching a compass needle move!

        >My guess is it’s heat generated (the
        E-Cat X based jet engine under test).

        Yes, I quite sure most here beyond the age of 5 years would agree with your statement!

        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        1. Fully agree with that. Now that everyone is convinced it is jet engine thrust, there is no point asking whether it is a steam nozzle trust.

          1. Actually, there is!!
            Not so easy! The problem is if Rossi answers no to some prototype engine, then we STILL be guessing what he means by thrust.

            So “very likely” he talking about the collaboration with the aerospace engineer, but he might not be.

            It is a truth that steam escaping a nozzle is thrust and the ecat has produced steam escaping from a nozzle.

            With Rossi being so intelligent, it dead obviously that 2 + 2 = 4, and that steam escaping a nozzle is thrust.

            So in effect, it actually takes someone with my brilliance and logical thinking to ask the right question – else you not get an answer that pins Rossi down.

            The simple matter is it not obvious to anyone here that simple steam escaping from a nozzle is thrust until I pointed this out!

            In fact it was not obvious to the person asking the question either! The simple matter is the day we heard that steam came out of a nozzle from the ecat is the day we ALL SHOULD HAVE known the ecat has produced thrust.

            Bottom line:

            Ask a question that an unemployed drunken rodeo clown SHOULD already know the answer to – you get an answer that is no better than the question.

            We all knew the ecat produced thrust, so the question had to be phrased different to eliminate the obvious answer that steam coming out of a nozzle is thrust.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          2. Technically you might be right but the original question implicitly referred to the reaction byproducts (heat, light, electricity), rather than what could be done with them.

          3. I did not see much in Rossi’s answer that restricted the context that would eliminate using a working fluid. (the question might have intended to, but Rossi never did).

            Rossi did clear this up by stating he was talking about using a working fluid (air, or water), which is exactly what I deduced and stated before Rossi made that clear.

            Like I said, what Rossi meant was 100% clear by using logical reasoning, and what I stated thus turned out to be correct. He was talking about a fluid (air, water)

            If you drop a hammer, I don’t need you tell me it going to hit the ground – logic and reason can foretell that’s going to happen. Rossi near always assumes people can think this way.

            Of course some believe in fantasies like our CO2 is causing dangerous warming, and some even believe the science fiction of black holes.

            When a person’s basic knowledge ismessed up, and then combined with lack of logical reasoning (a mind trained in philosophy), then you get the wild speculative answers we witnessed here in place of rational thinking. It is not my intention to be critical of anyone here, and I am no more the messenger then telling you that 2 = 2. (so I enjoy the comments, ideas and suggestions by all here!).

            I also stated that the ecat could be used for light since that “logically” is the only way the ecat could function, and low and behold after that I stated as such, Rossi confirmed.

            As long as one keeps their mind to rational thought, then it rather easy to make predictions and statements that are going by logical reasoning be true!

            It really becomes like thinking ahead moves in a chess game.

            It is science that must submit to reason and logic, not the other way around!

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  20. I cover this issue in this post as follows:

    “I am interested in how rapid if not almost instantaneous radioactive stabilization of radioactive isotopes occurs and only stable isotopes result from nuclear reactions caused by this nanoplasmonic based effect. I am impressed by the possible role of negative vacuum energy in this regard as described in the paper

    “Effects of Vacuum Fluctuation Suppression on Atomic Decay Rates”.


    In explanation from these experiments, nano geometry of particles converts light energy from the laser into vortex motion of electrons/light hydrids(polaritons) in a nanoplasmonic “Dark Mode” soliton produced on the surface of the gold nanoparticles. Without the gold nanoparticles, laser light alone is ineffectual in producing these effects in this type of experiment.

    The powerful emission of a nano-scale magnetic anapole beam by the soliton produces the separation of the vacuum into positive and negative energy zones. Through quantum fluctuation damping, the magnetic beam also forces the entanglement of the soliton with the U232 nucleus by pumping high levels of magnetic energy into the vacuum. This vacuum energy pumping using EMF energy from microwaves also happens in the EmDrive system under development by NASA where some laser beam probes exceed the speed of light as these beams pass through negative energy zones.

    In another thought, action of nano sized particles and structures could be based on time acceleration by those nano structures as a result of negative vacuum energy production.”

  21. Here is another post here at ECW

    Forget solid, liquid, and gas: there are in fact more than 500 phases of matter. In a major paper in a recent issue of Science, Perimeter Faculty member Xiao-Gang Wen reveals a modern reclassification of all of them.

    Condensed matter physics — the branch of physics responsible for discovering and describing most of these phases — has traditionally classified phases by the way their fundamental building blocks — usually atoms — are arranged. The key is something called symmetry.

    To understand symmetry, imagine flying through liquid water in an impossibly tiny ship: the atoms would swirl randomly around you and every direction — whether up, down, or sideways — would be the same. The technical term for this is “symmetry” — and liquids are highly symmetric. Crystal ice, another phase of water, is less symmetric. If you flew through ice in the same way, you would see the straight rows of crystalline structures passing as regularly as the girders of an unfinished skyscraper. Certain angles would give you different views. Certain paths would be blocked, others wide open. Ice has much symmetry — every “floor” and every “room” would look the same, for instance — but physicists would say that the high symmetry of liquid water is broken.

    Topological order is a more general understanding of quantum phases and the transitions between them. The dances that the various types of particles go through defined the new world that is created. In the new framework, the phases of matter were described not by the patterns of symmetry in the ground state, but by the patterns of a decidedly quantum property — entanglement. When two particles are entangled, certain measurements performed on one of them immediately affect the other, no matter how far apart the particles are. The patterns of such quantum effects, unlike the patterns of the atomic positions, could not be described by their symmetries. If you were to describe a city as a topologically ordered state from the cockpit of your impossibly tiny ship, you’d no longer be describing the girders and buildings of the crystals you passed, but rather invisible connections between them — rather like describing a city based on the information flow in its telephone system.

    There are experiments in condensed matter physics that produce results that are inconsistent with the proton collider mindset. Condensed matter produces experimental results that contravene the world of the standard model because of the ways that matter moves and interacts.

    Chemists have at there disposal all 500 states of matter to work with. The experimental results that they produce are ignore by main stream physics because they do not fit into the standard model paradigm. But there is a class of issues in physics that need these new multiworld insights to solve. When physics takes all 500 states of matter into account, then the currently intractable issues that now face science might have a change for resolution.

    In the EmDrive, as a result of the particular shape of the cone and the RF antenna, the flow of photons in a particular pattern causes a buildup of EMF in a fixed region of space in a standing wave. This forces the vacuum to compensate with a volume of associated negative energy to develop. Negative vacuum energy produces a repulsive force called dark gravity. IMHO, this is where the push of the EmDrive comes from.

    See for background


    If we force a tennis ball to the bottom of the ocean, the ball would collapse. Does that mean that the pressure inside the ball is causing the ball to collapse?

    No, it is the pressure outside the ball that is crushing the ball.

    There is a case where negative vacuum energy produces a repulsive force. That case is produced when the medium in which negative vacuum energy occurs is a special type of liquid.

    The vacuum is viewed by some people and me as a spin net liquid. There is a lot of spin in the vacuum but that spin always cancels itself out to remain on the average zero.

    In this liquid environment, negative vacuum energy is repulsive.

    Repulsive Casimir and Casimir-Polder Forces

  22. Here is anther post here at ECW

    Regarding Geneste’s paper, the ‘strange radiation’ tracks described were replicated by Keith Fredericks and reported at ICCF18:

    Your analysis suggested they might be superluminal tachyons.

    I would like to suggest something else.

    These tracks are produced by analog black holes called “dark mode surface plasmon polaritons” (dark mode SPP). From nanoplasmonics, it is well known that these polariton solitons produce monopole magnetic fields. Being a black hole, the inside of the soliton contains negative energy due to the fact that loads of magnetic power is being projected as an anapole magnetism beam. This power projection segregates the vacuum into positive and negative energy.

    Things that travel in negative vacuum go faster than light in a neutral vacuum as found in the laser probes used in the EMdrive experiments.

    Hawking radiation will easily entangle these solitons and also help to produce negative vacuum energy.

    The huge power content of these solitons come from a positive feedback mode between the soliton and the this SPP.

    Nanoplasmonics explains these solitons and how they project a monopole magnetic beam. In fact I have a micrograph of this beam.

    Your estimation of the power content of the soliton of 64 GeV puts the anapole magnetic field in range for it to produce muons and mesons born from the vacuum pair production as seen by Holmlid and the quark soup produced in the LeClair cavitation experiments.

    For and overview on this supject see as follows:

    This soliton mechanism is already well defined in physics and I have the papers to show you.

    also see

    Prof. Daniele Faccio: “Black Holes, With A Twist” – Inaugural Lecture


  23. That could have been spectacular, but nevertheless easily explainable phenomena. I do not think that he has seen flying E-Cats.

  24. “ever produced” thrust seems for airplanes or spacecraft.
    In what e-cat could be better ? no more need oil ? Use very light fuel ? Yes, Yes.
    Heat at a better temperature ? No.
    Optimize the rate thrust / weight of fuel ? The classic way is to ionize light atoms and accelerate them. For this goal, e-cat can ionize from heat, then hightly accelerate ions from electricity. Yes. Yes.

  25. Andrea Rossi

    April 4, 2016 at 7:00 PM
    Mark Saker:
    we are trying ( TRYING ) to make a propellantless thrust. Maybe we will not succeed.
    Warm Regards,


    1. There must be a significant repulsive force stronger than current EM Drive forces or they would not even consider pursuing for jet engine designs. Unless, perhaps it is designed for long distant space travel. This is a lot to take in.

    2. Welp, I was wrong then, and it isn’t about only jet engine propulsion. This one is a bit hard to wrap the head around. I really can’t see how the e-cat reactor can participate in EM drive like effects, unless it’s all magnetic field related, which would then not work outside the Earth’s field.

  26. Is it possible they are trying to power an EmdriveCannae thruster? I know that Shawyer mentioned laser year that he was turning his attention toward terrestrial transportation and his thruster would proportedly require a lot of power to do so.

  27. Mark Saker

    April 4, 2016 at 12:08 PM

    Dear Andrea

    In reference to Giovanni’s question and your response. I think there may still be some confusion with translation.

    Giovanni is trying to determine whether the ‘Thrust’ you are getting could create a new type of propellantless thruster. There is quite a bit of research on thrusters which do not require propellant at the moment, such as the em-drive and other ‘resonant cavity propulsion’. I think Giovanni is trying to determine whether the ‘Thrust’ you are talking about is like this, or whether you just mean you have experienced ‘Thrust’ by adding the ecat into a jet engine.

    Could you please confirm whether you were discussing the ecat jet engine or whether you have experience a new type of propellantless thrust.

    I hope you can answer

    many thanks


    Andrea Rossi

    April 4, 2016 at 7:00 PM

    Mark Saker:

    we are trying ( TRYING ) to make a propellantless thrust. Maybe we will not succeed.

    Warm Regards,


  28. Fulvio Fabiani, Rossi’s engineer:

    “The field that this reaction opens up is so vast that it’s almost impossible to imagine all the capabilities and possibilities. I have always been a lover of science fiction, and yet I was never able to believe that the famous star ships you see in the movies would become possible, because it seemed too far away. But I have to say that when I saw what Rossi was able to open, I’m seeing that world getting closer. Maybe before I die I will see those starships. Yes, it’s a child’s dream.”

    Fabiani must have been talking seriously without exaggeration.

      1. If IH/Darden refuse to publish any part of ERV report for the original low temp Cat, this story will turn into a CATastrophe!

        I will take it as a negative outcome and that makes all claims from ‘Rossi says’ to look very foolish.

        The serious LENR community with COP a little over 1 without levitating features, having open data and published 3rd party reports with name and phone number will be the winners.

        1. Anyway the question for me is: Can I go in a year or two into any electronics shop (or even buy it on the internet) and ask them to sell me an Ecat-QuarkX in the form of a light bulb. And hope it doesn’t drag out the cables when it wizzes off into hyperspace…

  29. If you think what might happen within LENR NAEs – this is quite similar to what might be needed for gravity shielding / gravity “interaction”. Thrust as byproduct of non-radioactive nuclear gravity shielding. Perfect. There is research in this field – military and confidential. A Mrs. “Ning Li” dissappeared years ago after anouncing progress, USAF paid studies on AIT Austria to verify findings – and Martin Tajmar had to take some downtime…. John Schnurer died in a car accident.
    Eugene Podkletnov who started this circle in 1992 works now on gravity beams in moscow.
    Rossi is a blatherskithe. Even if there is some chance that this might work – I would keep that confidential until further notice.

    1. Ning Li, Podkletnov and Tajmar all worked with low temperature superconductors. So if this reaction occurs above the temperature of liquid nitrogen that would be something new. In addition, Tajmar has been replicating the experiments of Podkletnov, Modanese and Wallace all last year as head of a physics department at the University of Dresden. During his “downtime” he was a professor at KAIST, the Korean analog of MIT. If Rossi wants anyone to test if there is thrust with the E-Cat, they should write a proposal to him.

      1. The common thing with superconductivity and LENR is (probably) the formation of a Bose Einstein Condensate (BEC).
        If the presence of a BEC causes macroscopic force anomalies in respect to gravity or ether 2.0 – we have found something very nice.
        A profound argument auf skeptics regarding lenr and antigravity is typicalwise that there is pretty less “Space” for new physics.
        I agree with that – but the other way around – I assume that once LENR is understood – lots of other marginal borderline effects might be explained and understood.

        1. Having that missing link – and assuming the referenced people are no fraudsters -, we will understand Hutchinson Levitation, Effects, Grebenikov CSE, Levitation, Keely…. So if we apply Ockhams Razor – its favourable that the number of needed changes to physics is minimal.

  30. A spacecraft could collect “ambiant” gaz and powder in a large “funnel” (a parabolic concentrator to a speed vortex in a toroidal cavity), then ionize that and separately accelerate positives and negatives ions.

  31. Isn’t a jet engine that works by very hot e-cat x in the “burner chamber” also a propellantless engine?
    A question for Rossi would be if the thrust will/should work in space.

      1. Yes. The question is if Rossi just talks about something like that (“ordinary” stuff) or if it is something like the EMDrive.

  32. I am curios as to how somebody would know that an ECAT x can produce thrust
    Surely you must have some inside info to ask such a question?
    Seems too good to believe ………………………………………

    1. To speculate on the possibility, inside information is not needed in my opinion.
      In my case I only thought there might be some similarities between typical EM thrusters, generic LENR devices and some of the proposed theories/observations.

  33. On JONP:

    “Andrea Rossi April 5, 2016 at 7:15 AM
    Marco Serra:
    The thrust in a jet is given by a fluid, in our case air or water.
    About our robotized line, the manufacturing system will remaion absolutely confidential.
    Warm Regards,


    Andrea Rossi April 5, 2016 at 7:16 AM
    Sverre Haslund:
    I can confirm that the so called Rossi effect does NOT produce muons.
    Warm Regards,

    1. “A magnetohydrodynamic drive or MHD propulsor is a method for propelling vessels using only electric and magnetic fields with no moving parts, using magnetohydrodynamics.

      The working principle involves electrification of the propellant (gas or water) which can then be directed by a magnetic field, pushing the vehicle in the opposite direction. Although some working prototypes exist, MHD drives remain impractical.”

      However with LENR energy density/power is it now practical with the E-Cat QX?

    2. I was really glad to read this. With the propellantless thrust we were getting into wacky zero point energy land.

      Rossi interpreted propellantless as simply using ambient matter (air or water) as the “fuel” that gets heated and ejected. It is propellantless in the sense that it requires no fuel. It is not propellantless in the sense that it can magically create motion without pushing something out.

        1. Since we already know it can produce electricity, I bet someone will be able to engineer an ion drive out of it. Ion drives are excellent deep space engines.

          1. If it can significantly boost the thrust from a conventional thruster or ion drive it could already be useful though.

        2. Perhaps one day with an ion spike and a ECAT Quark thruster we can surf the outer atmospheres of the planets (and stars) and cruise the space in-between.

      1. I also breathe a sigh of relief! I am glad I wasn’t wrong to doubt he meant EMdrive like. Rather, it’s more a ramscoop design, which could be ridiculously powerful. But, even a propeller is “propellentless” in its thrust by that thinking ;).

      2. Yup I think thats the most likely and logical explanation. Anything else would be too amazing I suppose. I did wonder at some point if he was distinguishing the jet from some other observed thrust. But as someone interested in the potential underlying mechanisms and science even just a thermal COP of 1.1 is amazing enough. What ever new things E-Cat Quark gives us, Everything else in addition to the COP is an incredible, beautiful and additional gift especially now when it seems the world is in need of these things.

      3. “With the propellantless thrust we were getting into wacky zero point energy land.” LOL. Yes, weren’t we. I was too polite to say it, but I was thinking it. We have stepped back from the abyss.

  34. You can power your EmDrive with the electricity from E-CatX’s that will be an astounding enough combination.

  35. Having acceleration without a propellant is as easy as falling off a log. (Hint: Gravity)

    I can also time travel, but only in one direction.

    1. Would that be one second per second, or one minute per minute? I guess it depends upon your attention span. Newton would be one month per month. (:->)

      1. I can only travel in the direction of increasing entropy. The slower the states change, the longer the perceived time interval.

        1. “I can only travel in the direction of increasing entropy.” Only if you take your marching orders from physics.

          1. According to physics the surface area of the USA is constantly getting smaller because entropy requires an ever increasing density of states.

  36. Ask vague questions get vague answers. I would think by now we would understand that English being Rossi’s 2nd language and his caginess sometimes produces quotes that can have a large degree of interpretation. Artefact’s post below, hopefully puts to rest this trip into the dreamworld of everyone’s imagination over the interpretation of Rossi’s comment on the QuarkX producing thrust.

    1. Indeed. One possibility is that Rossi might be talking about MHD propulsion, for which one needs magnetic field, DC power and ionisation of air. Magnet can be ordinary magnet, DC power comes from E-cat and maybe if the cat has a window it can also ionise air also. Such device could make air move without having any moving parts.

      1. I would think MHD would work better with seawater since it has dissolved ions to move around. For air I would think you would need stronger ionizing radiation than what is so far being claimed for LENR or need to heat the air to plasma. But, I am no expert on the subject.

          1. Thanks, but I just like to learn new things and science has been a passion of mine since youth, so I know a few things. : )

        1. Maybe at hypersonic speeds in air the ionized layer in the boundary layer of the bow shock can be utilized. Perhaps after detachment and shaping of the shock with an ion spike to avoid heating the vehicle etc.

          Perhaps micro LENR devices in the wing surface can locally ionize and shape the surface the air in its vicinity at sub hypersonic speeds too.

  37. Can anyone venture an opinion as to what this means?

    Gerard McEk

    April 5, 2016 at 6:14 AM

    Dear Andrea,

    Fully surprised I read you that are trying to develop some thrust with your QuarkX. The wonders of the apparatus seem to increase by the week.

    Can you tell what made you think that it can develop thrust? Was it because:

    1. You widnessed some movement or force.

    2. The developing theory suggests this will happen

    3. Is there any chance it will produce golden eggs as well? 😉

    Thanks for keeping us up too dat with all these exciting developments!

    Kind regards, Gerard

    Andrea Rossi

    April 5, 2016 at 7:09 AM

    Gerard McEk:

    We are making R&D principally to cook eggs. The thrust ( or crust, or rust, or Proust ) if for to make the eggs jump to avoid sticking.

    Warm Regards,


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *