Rossi: Public Demonstration of E-Cat QuarkX Planned for Europe (Live on Internet, Self-Sustain)

Thanks again to Gerard McEk for posting some question for Andrea Rossi on the Journal of Nuclear Physics have gotten some interesting responses from Andrea Rossi. Here are the questions and his answers:

Dear Andrea,
Recently you said the QuarkX will be demonstrated when it is ‘ready’, which you hope is within months.
It will underpin the details of the ‘Tremendous Surprise’ that will be revealed then.

Some questions if I may:

1. To whom will it be demonstrated? (I hope it will be open to public or us, you followers). 1- to our partners in a first stage, to the public in a second
2. Where will it be demonstrated? (I assume Europe, Sweden?) 2- Europe
3. Is it right to assume that ‘ready’ means ready for sales, so the QuarkX factory is ready and fully equipped, and test runs were successfull? 3- not yet, but close

In a response to an earlier question about when we might see photos of the QuarkX, Rossi responded: “As soon as we will present the products. I hope it’s matter of months.”

So we don’t have a definite time commitment here, but he has gone on record committing to a public demonstration of the latest E-Cat, which of course will be very interesting to anyone who has been following the story, and could be a surprise to people who haven’t. As far as the location goes, my guess would be Sweden, since Rossi had previously said he would do a press conference in Stockholm, Sweden at the same time as Mats Lewan’s now cancelled symposium which was tentatively scheduled for June 21.

UPDATE: (May 6: 2016)

I asked Andrea Rossi a few more question about what a possible E-Cat QuarkX Demo might be like. See below:

Frank Acland
May 6, 2016 at 12:37 PM
Dear Andrea,

You can imagine that many followers of the E-Cat are interested in the idea of a public demonstration of the E-Cat QuarkX. A few questions on the matter, if I may:

1. Will the public demonstration be held only if the R&D on course is successful, and the factory is ready to produce E-Cat QuarkX reactors? 1- yes
2. Will it be a scientific presentation, or a commercial presentation? 2- a commercial presentation
3. Will it be broadcast live over the Internet? 3- yes
4. Will it be minutes, hours or days long? 4- will be long enough to interest the audience, not enough to make them fall asleep
5. Will it show the E-Cat QuarkX operating in self sustained mode? 5- yes, F8.

It’s not finalized — it all depends on whether the R&D is successful and production gets organized, but I would say if he can pull this demonstration off it would be a major milestone in the history of the E-Cat.

339 Replies to “Rossi: Public Demonstration of E-Cat QuarkX Planned for Europe (Live on Internet, Self-Sustain)”

    1. Or he could with very little or no other external power source. plug a motor into it. We are dealing with claims of direct electrical output. Off the grid power would be a surprise. Your comment has nothing to offer. The world could change and you scoff as if you know it won’t. What good is that to humanity?

    1. It would not be strictly scientific, but if you could unplug the QuarkX from the mains and have it run in self-sustain for a decent length of time, you might be able to get the idea.

  1. Amazing times ahead of us. Anyone realize that the legal dispute is monetary proof of the existence of the E-Cat? I don’t think it get’s more real than having lawyers fighting in court over something that doesn’t exist…

    1. The initial response to the lawsuit was that it evidently did not work or at least could be replicated. Thus they are not paying the 89 million.
      .
      People should wrap their heads around this… 89 million is nothing compared to the potential. Darden himself could probably swing it easily.
      .

      Elon Musk / Tesla LOST 232 million dollars just last year! They have lost money every year so far, yet they still get investors because they have an actual product. Not profitable yet, but a product none the less.
      http://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-q1-2016-earnings-193243906.html#
      No, I do not think the lawsuit proves anything other than IH / Darden do not believe Rossi lived up to the contract and that Rossi is trying to get his 89 million dollars. This amount is peanuts if the device was working without any doubts by IH. We will have to wait for the IH response to find out, but the case will probably be settled out of court with NDA’s securely in place as with everything Rossi.

      1. being within the crowd while Darden was giving his speech back in Padova, I’m under the impression that he is not paying any lawyer just for pleasure

      2. “People should wrap their heads around this… 89 million is nothing compared to the potential.” Yep, very troubling indeed, a smart businessman like Darden/IH would not give up Trillions if it worked as stated. IH’s legal response will determine if my head get’s totally wrapped around this thing or not!

        1. Outside looking in, What you say makes sense.

          In Reality,
          I’ve seen people make $2,000 in a day in commissions then turn around and risk their job trying to cheat someone out of a nickel… I saw this take place on a regular bases. I saw people go to jail. I saw those people get out and repeat.

          People do not make sense. That Darden could make billion$ has nothing to do with this human characteristic. From VC stories I’ve read about, this is not uncommon. Kill the inventor is quite common.

    2. If Andrea Rossi actually sets foot inside a courtroom, then he is either an extremely brave con man, or he truly believes he has a real product.

      Until then, Rossi has a chance to disappear, possibly leaving behind his dear wife to explain how a cruel world hounded our savior, our next Tesla, into ignominious hiding.

      Meanwhile, I have seen convincing public demonstrations of many things, from light bulbs to nuclear weapons to Ron Popiel’s cap snaffler. Only Andrea Rossi seems immune from the call to demonstrate his magical new technology. Always his demonstrations are “soon,” but not today. Always the confirmation is dubious, as in an ERV that by sheer coincidence turns out to be a good buddy from way back.

      Do we really need to calculate COP’s when we have nuclear levels of power gain? No. Simply bring out a children’s wading pool, fill it with water from a garden hose, then make that water boil away with no outside connections. No chemical process or battery technology can produce that kind of energy in a toaster-sized package. Just do what you claim you’ve been doing all along, Andrea. Boil some water, in public.

      1. “along with sincere attempts to replicate Rossi’s magical process.”

        Isn’t there mounting evidence that LENR is real and de facto a new science. I remember the NAVY confirming this a couple years back…

        I think Rossi is just a pragmatist and doing what’s best for himself (can’t fault him for that) and for the world.

        He’s an honorable person in my book. The ice on the cake will be with the release of his version of LENR. It’s just a matter of time before someone else does it if he doesn’t.

        1. Good to hear. By the way, what’s your deadline? Sometime this month? Two months? Six? A year? I’m sincerely interested in what it would take to finally turn you off Andrea Rossi.

          1. Jimbo,
            I asked the same question 5 years ago and did not once receive a single date from anyone, you won’t either.

          2. Speaking for myself, I have no date by which I will give up on this. I take the long view. So long as there’s an indication of progress, it’s got my interest. These these things take time. Speaking of things taking time, I started following the Steorn story 10 years ago, and just this year got an Orbo cell to test on, and I’m having a very interesting time.

          3. As long as there is new happenings I’m am content to continue following the story, as I assume you are as well.

      2. I’m not a believer in “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof”. Whatever the claim maybe it only requires ordinary proof. As for a disappearing trick by Rossi. I have heard the same thing at least once year since 2011. Remember Rossi has taken IH to court for his $90M, I have yet to see IH as for their $11.5M back…….

        1. The demonstrations I have described are very prosaic and boring. Rossi has failed to perform even a simple public demonstration.

          1. Here are two interesting links of public demonstrations:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-0WvK2b7dU

            I note that in the demo above, Celani reported detecting a burst of radiation just before Rossi announced that the reaction had started. Celani of course (and others) continue with research along similar lines and appear to be having some success

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhvD4KuAEmo

            Also, there have been several tests (Mats Lewan, Levi, Lugano report etc.,) not to mention the currently contested ERV report corresponding to a 1-year 1 MW reactor test.

          2. I forgot to mention that Prof. Sergio Focardi is the one giving the introduction at the beginning of the first demo (the one in which Celani detected a brief burst of radiation at the beginning and Rossi asked him to turn off his spectrum analyzer). His statements are then followed by those of Levi.

      3. ->”Rossi wasn’t after your money, he was after Tom Darden’s money.”

        Considering how Darden made most of his money,
        That ain’t all bad…

  2. Starting the unit, and unplugging it from any power source would be operating it in Self-Sustain Mode. Rossi has never said they can’t do SSM due to safety reasons. He says the 1MW plant ran in SSM most of the time.

    What he has said regarding safety is that they haven’t used the power produced by an E-Cat to drive itself — I would call that self-looping, which is different from SSM

  3. strictly speaking, Rossi is not a scientist. He is certainly an inventor and an entreprenuer but no scientist. He is not particularly interested in discovering and sharing knowledge but in obtaining and retaining IP for his own purposes. This may not end up being a bad thing but do not confuse him with a scientist.

    1. According to some scientists like Michio Kaku, we are all scientists.
      Some just get paid for the task making them a Professional Scientists.

      The difference between a scientist & a Professional Scientist.

      When a Professional Scientist screws up, climb into your bunker…
      It’s going to be bad…

  4. If Rossi has done everything he said he has done, and still won’t be accepted. He is left with the only option, have the ecat produce electricity without out him keeping it going. You don’t know all his obstacles. He produced heat and got screwed out of his money. He can now produce electric instead of heat. The lawsuit may actually help him achieve that. In the end it may be the lawsuit that moves this forward, which is good for humanity.

    This is so important, speculating against it without knowing is foolish. Normally proof is needed to call someone a fraud. But in this case, even doubting that which is possible is only spreading a needless cancer. It is almost like the Pascalian wager applies. But hey, people do what they want. You should go to a skeptic site. You will hear what you want to here. I don’t go to Skeptics sites. I am here because I want to hear what I want to hear. But skeptics seem to want people to be converted. I don’t want to convert, I want a new energy source. I only like to hear from thoughts of believers. Doubting Thomas comments anger me and I feel we are being harassed.

    1. You wrote: “I only like to hear from thoughts of believers. Doubting Thomas comments anger me and I feel we are being harassed.”

      I don’t believe that’s the mandate that Frank has set for this site.

      1. Actually, in a sense it will open a portal into another universe, a place where people will be able to have more energy available at very low cost. Some jokes contain a grain of truth.

  5. I disagree. A demo is a gesture of good faith. The goal is not to prove without a shadow of a doubt. Consider it an open house for your fans.

    Rossi’s is not the only invention or field of high tech science that produces a product that is absolutely fantabulous. Demos are a standard accepted way of showing off the product to customers and investors and if it does not hurt to include the general public. If letting everyone in is not feasible restrict the crowd to selected VIP’s.

    1. It is also a useful form of marketing. I think it’s a very good move for Rossi, if the QuarkX is able to work as he says. It would be a way to let the world know that the E-Cat has arrived in marketable form. It could even help his case in court if his technology is in question.

        1. If it produces electricity you’ll need to show it powering something. If it produces heat I guess you’d have some way to measure temperature, or show it boiling water or making steam. If it makes light then that would be fairly obvious. The key will be to show it operating with no input — in Self Sustain Mode, so you’d have to have some obvious way to show that there is no power going into it. Running it for even half an hour might be effective if it is in SSM. Of course there will be some who will claim trickery, whatever you do. You won’t be able to convince everyone.

          1. I guess a battery might run it for 1/2 hour so I think the demo would have to be long enough and put out more power and energy than an equivalent sized battery.

          2. Running with no power input. Yes. I agree. And that would have to be with the power connection removed, not just a switch turned off on a control unit with a claim that only power was being fed to the instrumentation.
            That was always a defect in the early demonstrations where Mats Lewan said he could feel the ecat boiling long after the power was turned off. I can well believe he could but what I found hard to believe was that all power was actually removed from the input to the heater circuits. That would have been so very easy to include in the demonstration and it would have made it all so much more convincing.

  6. BLP demo was not public. I tried to go to BLP demos multiple times and was rejected by BLP every time. I think BLP designs their audiences so as not to have any technical expertise in the crowd.

    A public demo is open to all. Otherwise it is a private demo.

    1. Did you mention that you had $15 million available to invest?

      Perhaps you have a long list of pertinent degrees behind your name, relevant industrial experience and a Rolodex to die for; all of which you’re ready to bring to the table?

      Astonishingly, BLP have concrete goals in mind when they run these demos and they make no bones about their expected outcomes; if you have no contribution to make towards those goals why would they offer you one of a very limited number of seats?

      There is actually a great deal of information posted on the BLP website including hard data by independent third party testers that assembled the designs undergoing testing themselves and who brought their own instrumentation; until there’s a compelling reason for Mills to specifically offer you insider information you could fill your boots with what’s already in the public domain including doorstopper sized tomes on a ‘complete’ description of the universe, with validated cosmological predictions, a new, validated, methodology for doing predictive chemistry and some rather remarkable software. Being able to discourse, as an equal, on his complete body of work might just get you an invite to the next demo in the absence of other qualifications…

      Rossi has concrete goals in mind for his next demo as well; shockingly neither you nor I, or even Frank, are invited for reasons that should be quite obvious by now.

      1. Roland,

        I am not going into my qualifications here in Disqus in response to your ad hominem response to my posting.

        (And I’ve read all their papers posted on their website.)

        My conclusion from my interaction with BLP is that they refused to allow technically qualified potential investors into the so called “public” demo. Therefore, it was not a public demo at all. Draw your own conclusions as to why they decided to do so. I drew my own.

        1. I would agree with Anon and I would have to hazard a guess based upon past history that any demo by Rossi would not be public either.
          He might post an edited video, but it would not be public.
          .
          Which is partially understandable. If word really got out, there could possibly be hundreds show up. Probably not, but possible.

  7. Please, please not another test. (By my count this is number EIGHT) This will just give propagandists like Maryyugo more chances to discredit LENR because of some esoteric, arcane testing procedure not followed. I can only hope Rossi has sold or dispersed ten or more of his E-Cat reactors to intelligent entrepreneurs who will be laughing all the way to the bank while the Maryyugo’s of this world are still disputing LENR by finding something wrong with the latest test procedure.

    1. No more tests. Rossi just sell your product… please! Stop the stage show and give the world your technology…

      1. The surprise will be, I think, a demo as a sales pitch. Then a sales desk to take orders. (Maryugo looking on and rolling eyes)

  8. There are two possible outcomes from this public demonstration 😉

    1. Any advanced enough technology will always be considered magic. If Rossi has the real thing, his technology is far ahead of everyone. And any public demonstration of QuarkX will therefore be percieved as a magic trick.

    2. Rossi is pulling a practical joke on all of us. And his public demonstration will therefore be concluded a Nice magic trick.

    😉

      1. I believe The only proper “public test” would be diffusing the products into the marketplave and let the consumers and users tell us If they’re happy or not with the products….

    1. Wel, for those who aren’t convinced LENR is real, we could always ask them to “observe” me356’s system as it is running :

      http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/05/05/update-from-me356-on-lenr-testing/

      After all, nuclear reactions in a lab at “room temperature” in a rig running at between 100 and 1300 degrees Celsius are impossible, so there can be no danger to the observers. Oh, wait, me356 observed plenty of Neutron activity (likely down to the Tungsten, apparently – that pesky W) and impurities, although there was likely a very high COP of around 50. Still, that must have been a trick somehow.

      Is it not about time the mainstream physics community (or, at least, the experimental physicists therein) started taking LENR seriously – after all, with ocean acidification and climate change (man made or not), we are all on a clock… and I also can’t see anyone seriously running a diesel engine on the Moon… (whatever happened to those visions of moonbases by the year 2000 ?) so sticking with the current status quo really isn’t doing much for our options.

      LENR research would likely also shine a light onto that thorny issue of how to reconcile the gap betwen the Quantum world and the world of General Relativity so much sought after by theoretical physicists around the world.

      Or, do physicists think themselves too clever to deal with such mundane issues as sustainability and survivability? In which case, I would like to remind them “who will read their papers and marvel on their genius?” with the whole world in a grave.

    2. Oystein Lande
      May 6, 2016 at 3:03 AM
      Dear mr Rossi,

      Will a public demonstration serve any good? I’m thinking it’s better to focus on getting it ready for the market:

      I think there may be two outcomes of a public test:
      1. Any advanced enough (like

      2. Sceptics: Rossi is pulling a practical joke on39 AM
      Oystein Lande:
      I totally agree with you, in fact the demo will be made only when we will be close and ready for the market.
      I agree upon every single word you wrote.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

  9. Serious here for the first time… does anyone who is a part of the EWC team think Dr Engineer Rossi comes over and reads our comments?

    Does he care?

    I think Frank might have asked him (Rossi) before and he said NO or no?

      1. no he isn’t. the world needs help. he says he has an answer and he is choosing not to share.. he is not enabling us at all.

        1. Ask the guys at MFMP where they’d likely be at this point in time had Rossi NOT started 5 years ago (at the hardware level).
          YOU have access to Rossi’s patent. HE’S already shared the information. YOU can build a reactor, like Me356- CoP 10-50. Any of us can, and some of us might even follow proper safety procedures. What’s stopping you?

          1. Money. I remember Jed putting together a list of things a lab would need to produce LENR and he said it came out to about $5M.

  10. It is over five years since Mr. Rossi announced that he had made a discovery that clearly would change the World, if genuine.
    Since then he has almost daily/ weekly held out the carrot for the donkeys to follow.
    I am as open-minded as always, but find it impossible to believe that a human being could keep secret such a discovery, that could save millions of lives and change billions of lives for the better.
    It does not take an Einstein to work out that the more competent, honest people that are working on a subject the faster it would progress.
    Mr. Rossi, whom we all know is religious, must have some strong, hidden justification to set his mind at rest for the path he has chosen.

    1. george, we must begin to entertain and examine the thought that Rossi is NOT religious but is, instead, greedy enough for it to be considered evil. Indeed, how could a religious human hold back suck a misery-relieving invention?

      A law suit is an extraordinarily good device for deception: “I cannot comment on a matter under lititgation”. Have another carrot, george.
      ..

    2. Who is going to pay for the massive automated factory required to churn out E-Cats if anyone can make and sell them? Not to mention the ongoing cost of R&D.

        1. George, I know how hot fusion works, if i tell you will you make me a mass production?
          BTW, be very careful, or we might have a lot more people dying from radiation and we don’t want to lose you.

          1. DrD, once again I can make no sense of your question in regards to my comment above, that contains the obvious logical answers you need

        2. georgehants,
          I have headed engineering for several major corporations. You do not understand how these decisions are made.
          One thing is certain, if the product were open source, they would not be made in America.

          1. Adrian, I have not the slightest interest in ——–
            “You do not understand how these decisions are made”
            I only have interest in how they should be made for the best for everybody.
            Excusing or being part of a faulty system is no answer

          2. Adrian that is your opinion and I respect it, I believe it is obvious and moral that all discoveries are given freely to all of society and the discoverers sensibly and well rewarded by society.
            To think that Mr. Rossi alone can do faster work than thousands of people working and sharing all their findings is logically in error.
            While all the others are working that does not affect Mr. Rossi continuing and if he alone discovers more before the others then Wonderful.

    3. Why? People who heard about electricity in some LAB doubted electricity and more so doubted it would EVER have any use and impact their lives.

      In fact electricity was of little use to anyone. In fact until the accidental discovery that electricity moving through a wire could make a compass needle move then electricity had no use for anyone. (and most interesting this observing of the compass needle moving was an accident
      – so was what occurred with P&F).

      And in fact when the discovery was made that electricity could move a compass needle, at that time again electricity meant nothing to anyone except for paying in labs. Electricity STILL had no use to anyone.

      It was ONLY until commercial products appeared was any use for electricity accepted by the public. BTW way, what was the first use of electric that brought electric out of the labs and into the public eye? Why of course the telegraph! And since commercial electricity did not exist, then the telegraph ran on batteries. The result was a whole bunch of battery makers spring up to supply the train companies. So like computer industry, a whole bunch of “other” new industries sprang up.

      And MOST interesting is this commercial use of electric was for transferring of information – very much what computers do today!

      So looking at past history, yes, commercial products most certainly were the ONLY means to validate and have people pay for that product.

      No one suggesting that we MUST wait around for a perfect light bulb. However, if you can’t book an air flight, or purchase a light bulb, then what does the average person care?

      (hint: they don’t care!)

      (hint: they WILL ONLY care WHEN they can purchase a product).

      Thomas Edition did NOT invent the light bulb, but spend huge sums of money to find a filament that would last more than a few days. But no one cared about light bulbs until a commercial viable one could be purchased!

      So yes, “reasonable” people are ONLY going to care about a light bulb when they can purchase one and realize that such bulbs will last, and are worth their purchase money.

      Same goes for lining up around the block for the iPhone – consumers had no clue that they would be willing to pay for such a product until they saw people using such devices.

      Rossi did not discover LENR. Pons & Fleeshman brought LENR to the world.

      And there are several companies racing to perfect LENR. Brillion, Nic-energy and several others. And Brillion has VERY high quality independent reports from SRI (Stanford Research Institute) showing their reactors work.

      Since Brillion has VERY high quality independent reports, then why is the public not caring? Well kind of like electricity – until such time products appear that can change their lives, then people care little about some light bulb or ecat in some lab.

      Given that companies like Brillion have independent test results (available on their web site) from HIGH QUALITY independent lab like SRI, then how come everyone does not believe in LENR?

      Cleary the experience with Brillion shows that having high quality independent test does very little. And people hearing about Thomas Edison trying to improve the light bulb and testing 1000’s
      of different materials for filaments amounted to NEAR NOTHING to the people.

      The ONLY REAL test and acceptance occurred when consumers could purchase such light bulbs – I fail to see how LENR is any different.

      I mean, we had LENR for nearly 30 years. So now that you know Brillion has great 3rd party tests that are independent what’s that done for LENR? And a few months ago Brillion did a presentation in Washington for some members of congress.

      So what are you asking Rossi to do different than the other LENR companies in the marketplace?

      nd who do you know that has done MORE than Rossi to promote and bring the LENR story to the world? (seems to me Rossi done MORE THEN EVERYONE ELSE COMBINED to raise LENR awareness). Funny how you pick on Rossi the one who’s done the most.

      If you think you can do a better job to promote LENR, then quit complaining, and quit your job and starting promoting LENR to your local members of government and tell those socialist lumps to get off their butts and start some serious funding of LENR.

      And now that you know other companies have indeed high quality independent tests of their devices, why focus just on Rossi? As noted, Rossi done far more than anyone I know to promote LENR as he works hard to build a commercial product.

      Of course as a socialist, you blame everyone else and everyone but your socialist government supposed to fix this problem, but then it is the socialist government taking all this money but not actually doing something about LENR, right? And if they not going to address this issue, then
      why are we giving billions to the DOE, and institutions like NASA (that can’t even build their own rockets anymore!).

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      1. Albert, again a long rambling reply, you are giving just one false view of the way things are, with open science and good open demonstrations of Mr. Rossi’s Cold Fusion, are you seriously trying to say that the rest of science and the World would not move it forward faster to commercial reality if the rich and powerful where not allowed to delay and disrupt the progress to protect their selfish little positions.
        It is very difficult for me to follow points based on Dogma and illogical thinking.
        Even in a sad capitalist World are you saying the Chinese would not start moving a thousand times faster than Mr. Rossi virtually on his own in his container?

        1. I simply stating that Rossi done more than everyone else combined. If you have some other LENR company that doing a better job, then by all means share that company or person here with everyone.

          And where are you government socialist foe in this story? That is the REAL question!

          Rossi done more public demos of his products then everyone else, so what are you exactly complaining about? Why are you complaining about the person WHO HAS DONE THE MOST to promote LENR and speed this process along?

          And as noted it not the private sector that destroyed Pons and Fleeshman careers. A truly sad epic of government funded institutions that chased P&F out of town.

          are you saying the Chinese would
          not start moving a thousand times faster than Mr. Rossi virtually on his own in
          his container?

          We don’t know that. There nothing stopping China now from looking at the patents and testing and building their own devices now. It not like China going to respect any IP laws – they don’t respect most IP rights now!

          So what’s stopping China from moving a 1000’s times faster than Rossi now? What’s stopping them from investing and partnering with LENR companies now?

          Heck, as far as we know, IH has all the IP info about the ecat, and they already made some partnership deals with China now.

          So nothing I can see exists now that stopping China from moving forward anymore then say NASA or other government institutions that have conspired to thwart LENR for nearly 30 years.

          So what is stopping NASA right now? In fact, what is stopping China right now?

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          1. Albert, not a single thing you say in your long reply in anyway negates the very simple points I am making.
            You are either saying that Rossi is a fraud or it is time he released his secrets for the good of mankind

          2. How do you know Rossi is ready? He clearly not ready for maufctiong, but at least is working towards that goal.

            And why should Rossi release his secrets anymore then DARPA or NASA as to what they know about LENR? I mean at least blame your government institutions that know about LENR first, right? (this is what you call the kettle being black! – blame everyone else except your own socialist foe!)

            So yes, what I saying contradicts nearly everything you state because it places the blame for slow adoption of LENR squarely on those government institutions that you socialists so love and tell everyone to rely on and justify such taxes.

            If you believe in your system, then why not blame NASA, or DARPA, or even MIT that receives most its money from governments?

            The delay in LENR is due to your government institutions sitting on this technology. (after all, most research occurs at those government funded institutions). Why blow billons on the ITER or CERN projects when millions of children are going hungry and LENR funding would solve this issue?

            So why is any blame going on Rossi who done more than everyone else to promote LENR and bring LENR to the world? And why no blame on your socialist foe spending billions on global warming, yet none on LENR? What government has approached Rossi and offered him funding to speed things along?

            It is not Rossi who has or is holding things back. He done more in the last 5 years then all your governments have done in the past 30 years. And why should Rossi give anything about LENR when NASA which has taken billions of dollars of money not have a GREATER responsbilty here? After all, Rossi has to eat, and NASA is the one with billions of funding here.

            So the KEY concept here is to blame the correct people for the delays and thus learn from history to not repeat and adopt your way of thinking that let everyone down.

            So NASA and your government institutions been sitting on LENR for 30 years and therefore your socialist mentality and ideal are VERY much the reasons for the 30 year delay in LENR.

            So yes, I am most certainly placing the blame on people and governments that have your ideals.

            I mean, if you going to stand here and “blame” some system or ideology for delaying LENR, then let’s do that (and it Cleary a battle you will lose with me). Thus your insistence on talking about some ideological system being responsible for delaying LENR thus places the blame squarely in your socialist camp.

            When you can show that your governments and your socialist system has done MORE for LENR then Rossi has, then you might have a point here!

            If you going to make a point about how Rossi could move things along faster, then DO NOT include your ideological system, or attempt to disparage another ideology for the delays in LENR. Since CLEARY is it easy to see that your socialist institutions CLEARLY are the ones that dropped the ball on LENR.

            So yes, as long as you bring up ideology in your posts, then we must therefore toss the tennis ball back and place the blame on people that have adopted your ideals and this MOST certainly does contradict what you mention and your claims of who and what is to blame for delays in adopting LENR.

            It is simple:
            LENR has been delay far too long, and this is due to your government institutions inaction on this technology.

            If you want to leave out your ideological post and make constructive criticism as to how you think Rossi or anyone else can and should move LENR along, then fine.

            However, as long as your promoting your brand of socialism and ALSO attaching blame to another ideology, then then I have TONS of history to show exactly who is to blame for delays I LENR – and it clearly your socialist government camp that done so for 30 years now. And these facts Cleary do contract you attempt to blame these delays on capitalism which right now is the only system investing in and attempting to bring LENR to the people.

            Until such time you can show your socialist ideals are doing more than capitalism for LENR, then you are fighting a losing battle.

            Regards,
            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          3. cash, who ever or what ever it was, can we agree it was wrong and needs changing so that such a thing can never happen again and of course it is all around us.

          4. Albert, enough now, you say ——–
            “How do you know Rossi is ready? He clearly not ready for maufctiong, but at least is working towards that goal.”
            I have not implied or said anywhere that he is or is not ready to manufacture, I do not know where your reply’s are coming from.
            I am open-minded in that either Mr. Rossi is genuine or false in his Cold Fusion discoveries and if genuine should pass everything he knows on for others, to help speed the utilisation of the Technology as fast as is possible by the whole World.
            It is a very simple point that you either agree with or do not.

          5. Albert
            The question is Alberta being
            punished by God for electing
            a socialist government
            oil prices,fires etc.
            A sick joke I know.
            Sam

          6. An extreme take on this might be: We don’t really know much about how the universe actually works, therefore there might be such a thing as an almighty being with a sick sense of humour (who are we to decide what an almighty being wants to do?). Or any other explanation you can think of to fit ones (supernatural?) agenda.

          7. I would have thought to remain true to his original statement of intention to give away half of all the ecat profits to help sick children, an ideal he says was shared by IH, the best interests of sick children and the whole world would be best served by releasing his technology to the world and just receive a percentage of the profits by way of a license fee or royalty. Many technologies work like that, particularly in the medical field. Rossi could make billions just in royalties with no effort from himself, leaving him free to invent whatever new versions he wanted to, all financed by income from ecat royalties.
            You would have to wonder why he doesn’t do this when it would be so consistent with his previously stated intentions. Specially after five years now with nothing being sold on the open market.
            Since he seems to have put the original ecat on the back burner for an indefinitely long period, how about releasing that for others to develop? I bet the right people could get it certified for home use within a year.

    4. Gee George. It sounds like a shadow of a doubt has crept across your previously unswerving support. What was it that could possibly justify such a turnaround?

      1. Morning Pweet, no, no, not doubt, have never believed or disbelieved as with everything, just a very open-mind.
        My, I think justified complaint, like from many others is that Cold Fusion has never been a discovery that should not be shared, just like a drug for malaria etc.
        It is obscene to keep secret life saving technology for any reason, profit being the worst justification.
        All discoveries and work for society should be sensibly rewarded by that same society and for example Mr Rossi left in peace to do his work, not playing silly games trying be a business man as well.

  11. I assume the reason (last question) is because with no source of electric for controllers the reaction may either stop or, worse, run away.
    Remember, it was only at Christmas that he claimed he now sees a way to produce electric (directly).
    Batteries were out, also for safety reasons but now he says it might be a possibility.

  12. Two people who have to be invited to the demonstration are the responsible journalists for the Swedish Science Radio, Ulrika Bjorksten and Marcus Hansson.

  13. You may wish to define a “scientist” in the very general sense of anyone who has curiosity. Perhaps a cat is a scientist?
    Or you can define a scientist as someone who has formal credentials and is paid to do science.
    If you needed surgery would you prefer someone who has an interest and watched a TV program or would you prefer someone who is recognized as a professional scientist?
    In any case not all such amateur “scientists” use scientific methodologies and therefore their findings are less credible.

  14. A good link.
    While I understand the frustration on this forum what I think people do not appreciate is how many letters and emails famous scientists get from cranks and delusional people. Not saying LENR is delusional by the way.
    Such scientists are very busy and time is an important resource for them. So they get lots of people throwing ideas at them.
    Look at this, look at that, look at UFOs, look at cold fusion, look at my perpetual motion machine, just read my theses on why quantum mechanics is wrong.
    If you are going to invest your time then you want to invest it in something that looks most likely to reward you. There are many hot topics in physics for Kaku to spend his time on. He can only pick a few.

    If I offered to sell you some magic beans, would you be skeptical or just hand over the money. Presumably you would want me to give you proof before you invested.
    If I then offered to prove it but failed. And then said oh wait let me have another chance. How long would you stick around waiting for me to prove my magic beans. Some might say no times, it is nonsense. Some might stick around for a couple of attempts and some believers might be convinced even in the absence of proof. Fine that is human nature.

    Unfortunately it is for LENR to prove itself. Seemingly LENR is very difficult to replicate and because it has had multiple chances and failed to reach the bar of scientific acceptability is it any wonder that many scientists do not wish to spend any further time on it. So they miss out on any interesting developments, their attention is elsewhere. It is also true what Huw Price says about the risks of reputation traps in science, as in other professional areas. You worry what your peers think of you.

    So LENR is seen as fringe science, often conducted in secret or by amateurs, perhaps with not always with the best scientific practices. This makes it even harder to get scientists to take note.
    However if it turns out LENR is real and useful and amazing then
    Kaku will embrace it as will other scientists.

    1. I’ve spoken to Kaku. At the time, he didn’t see the evidence to get involved in LENR/Cold Fusion.

      1. He is a scientist. Once the evidence is there he will be convinced.
        Of course some need a little evidence and some need a mountain, depending on their prejudices. We all have prejudices, but in the end a true scientist will go with the evidence.

  15. I man glad that I read AR’s response to others right in some way and that he has now confirmed a demo. So what will this ‘Tremendous surprise’ show us, above what we know already? We know about heat, electricity and light that the QuarkX can produce and that will be surely demonstrated, but what is the surprise?
    I would guess the first ‘atomjet’ will be demonstrated. Generating electricity and trust. What would you think?

    1. And how would that be demonstrated?
      Maybe we will see AR hovering on a 5 jet platform with a big flat screen on the bottom faced to the public below showing AR’s face with a big smile and a thundering voice: ‘See I told you all the time, it really works’.

    2. As I expressed in another post, I think it will open a portal to another universe. Or, it will make cappuccino. Because you are right, there is no where else to go; classically. Unless, maybe generate massive magnetic fields…but, I bet with some tweaking, it can do that anyways.

      If I was really getting serious, and knowing Rossi’s idiosyncrasies. I would say, maybe a demonstration where the heat could be dialed down to a negligible level and the electricity dialed up to max. Where it would be a warm to the touch electricity generator? Maybe doing away with the need for battery storage?

    3. For me, a ‘tremendous surprise’ wouldn’t be the QuarkX opening up a portal to another universe, but rather Rossi finally agreeing to a 100% convincing, flawlessly conducted and truly independent test of his reactor. Alas, both possibilities seem about equally likely rigtht now.

      1. Flawnessless in this area is in th eye of the beholder.

        He could do a perfectly executed demo, witnessed by half the Royal Society, a panel of bishops and scrutinisers from the Magic Circle, and the demonstration would still be described as badly flawed and probably a scam by some.

        Have to say I’m feeling pretty cynical about some of my fellow man at the moment, and tend to have a lot of sympathy and admiration for Andrea.

    4. Actually, I think this is a good step for Rossi.

      Just seeing some pictures and a video of the device in operation and producing heat + electricity
      would be a marvellous step and demo.

      Like many of the past Rossi demos, they are not a slam dunk to convince people, but they are
      history, and they in the past have helped Rossi much. And people without working products tend NOT to demo such devices, so again this show Rossi at least is working on proto-types.

      Rossi has stated that such demos tend to chew up valuable time that could be put towards
      perfecting the technology and moving it closer to commercialization. I much agree – time for Rossi is limited, and he is aging. Thus, with recent events, such an investment by Rossi to demo “something” is a welcome step at this point in time.

      Every day on this planet is one less day for you and me and Rossi. One has to make the best of every day.
      I much grasp this issue and thus explains why Rossi not so much interested in public demos – but cleary with recent events, I sure Rossi feels the reading public here is asking for some kind of bone to chew on. I find it interesting that Rossi senses this need also.

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    5. It will probably be something we have discussed here on ECW and won’t be all that surprising for us.

  16. Are you contesting the existence of hot fusion?

    I’m actually not denying the LENR is real, although I haven’t concluded that it is, either. My main concern is that Andrea Rossi may be stringing everybody along with more and more fabulous claims, while all he’s really got is an elaborate techno-scam. In this scenario, the mark isn’t you or me. We are useful idiots lending Rossi an air of credibility so that he can con his real mark – Tom Darden.

    Even if LENR is real, Andrea Rossi could still be a con man.

  17. Zed actually wrote a variation on that piece titled ‘Waiting for the E-Cat’. At least I vaguely remember having read it with great amusement. Must have been about 20 years ago…

  18. Its all about hubris, ego. too much about property ownership. Iike having a house on a piece of land, even though deep down I “know” that piece of land is just there, and I won’t be taking it with me. But my son will have it, for a while. As long as I or my son pay the city taxes. This last bit makes it ‘seem’ like a real ball of wax.

  19. Just waiting to hear how you say the same of Hot Fusion. And HF in fact costs us a lot of money wich LERN doesnt

  20. I had a look at your links thanks.
    It looks like scientists at work to me.
    Whether it is good science or bad science I could not say.

    I agree with you, in my opinion also LENR is real, but that is my opinion, I could be wrong.
    How much commercial potential it has I have no idea.

    I am well aware of the fallibilities of scientists. They are the same as any human being. As an indicator I did mention Huw Price and his article on “reputation traps”. But yes also there are fears of defunding and peer pressure etc.

    Fortunately the scientific method is the best way to counter these things. For instance in the US at one point it was professional suicide to say you agreed with continental drift. But in the end the evidence overcame the stupidity and prejudice.

  21. Few health treatments are evidence based.
    Atul Gawande and others have been banging on about this for a long time.
    Reputation seems to be the big thing in medicine and doctors are very resistant to admit mistakes and change their ways.
    You could say that pharmaceutical trials are evidence based but it is a severely flawed system, driven by private enterprise and profit.
    Basically the last thing they want to do is cure you. They want you to have to keep taking the tablets.
    Nonetheless there are world changing improvements such as anasthetics, antibiotics, and more recently the ability to intervene in genetic conditions. All provided by scientists.

    1. And what have they done for us lately, besides ignore and suppress discoveries like vitamin C, free radical theory, dietary causes of disease theory, etc. etc. etc., many of which I have proven to my own satisfaction by my own experimentation.

  22. I agree that LENR has had harsh treatment from some in the scientific community.
    And yet the scientific method remains our best tool set for obtaining an accurate picture of reality.

    As I said above, scientists are human beings. So they can be liars, cheats and fools, They can be subject to pride and prejudice.

    For over 18 centures students were told what to believe. Aristotle says this, Plato says thus.

    But around 500 years ago students started to say;
    “Are you able to prove that?”
    “I think I would like to test that.”

    When I hear “Rossi says”, I listen but I am skeptical.

    But when Rossi produces something then I will be interested.
    I do not care if he presents his invention for formal scientific testing, or just puts it on sale in WalMart. Either way the invention will stand or fall and we will find out.

    What we wish and what is real are not the same.
    I would like a pet unicorn.
    I suspect if and when I get a pet unicorn it will be courtesy of scientists, either by virtual reality or genetic science.

    1. No one is attacking the scientific method. We are attacking stupid, cruel, and greedy scientists who have suppressed or ignored advances.

    2. Oh, I forgot to mention that I am attacking reductionistic science as the sole means of discovering anything of value in the health sciences. The very term “evidence based” makes me want to puke because it always means a very high bar of reductionistic science whose sole purpose is to garner profits for pharmaceutical companies.

  23. I hope that Øystein Lande will not be invited when AR is demontstrating the QuarkX to his followers:

    Oystein Lande
    May 6, 2016 at 3:03 AM
    Dear mr Rossi,
    Will a public demonstration serve any good? I’m thinking it’s better to focus on getting it ready for the market:
    I think there may be two outcomes of a public test:
    1. Any advanced enough (like Alien 😉 ) technology will always be considered magic. If QuarkX is the real thing, the technology is far ahead of everyone. And any public demonstration of QuarkX will therefore be percieved as a magic trick.
    2. Sceptics: Rossi is pulling a practical joke on all of us. And his public demonstration will therefore be concluded a Nice magic trick.

    Andrea Rossi
    May 6, 2016 at 6:39 AM
    Oystein Lande:
    I totally agree with you, in fact the demo will be made only when we will be close and ready for the market.
    I agree upon every single word you wrote.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  24. Yes their stuff. If Rossi doesn’t patent and claim his IP others will do it for him. I believe Rossis intentions are good. He wants to make this tech available to the world. I’m sure there are other people that would love to claim it and keep in all locked up, never to be seen again.

    1. Don’t take me the wrong way. I’d love to live in George’s world where everything is free and everyone does things to help each other but society isn’t ready for that because there are too many people that would take advantage of it. It may happen someday but I’m not ready to drink that cool aid today.

    1. You’re right about a demonstration not proving anything, but it will certainly be well worth seeing what this latest ecat X looks like and what it does.
      It’s actually got some pretty high hurdles to jump after all the announcements over the last six months and I’m really curious to see how this is presented.
      I’m expecting lots of heat, lots of light and enough electricity to run another ecat X, thus making a pair of ecat x’s in effect, totally self sustaining with no external power applied after initial activation.
      I’m pretty sure he can pull this off in a closed demonstration to commercial people so the fun part will be working out how he does it.

  25. On JONP:

    “Frank Acland May 6, 2016 at 12:37 PM
    Dear Andrea,
    You can imagine that many followers of the E-Cat are interested in
    the idea of a public demonstration of the E-Cat QuarkX. A few questions
    on the matter, if I may:
    1. Will the public demonstration be held only if the R&D on course is successful, and the factory is ready to produce E-Cat QuarkX reactors?
    2. Will it be a scientific presentation, or a commercial presentation?
    3. Will it be broadcast live over the Internet?
    4. Will it be minutes, hours or days long?
    5. Will it show the E-Cat QuarkX operating in self sustained mode?
    Many thanks, Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi May 6, 2016 at 4:58 PM
    Frank Acland:
    1- yes
    2- a commercial presentation
    3- yes
    4- will be long enough to make the audience get interested, not enough to make them fall asleep
    5- yes, F8.
    Warm Regards, A.R.”

      1. I hear ya.
        Just like Apple and the 1st I-Phone. Nearly 7 years to get it developed and to market.
        Of course, they had to develop entirely new technology for that.
        Oh, wait. They merely had to figure out how to integrate existing technology that had been in use for years….

  26. It has been announced that “ITER” will be delayed an additional 10 years on top of the previous announced 10 year delay and an additional $5+ billion funding in already what is way over the budget. That takes us from 2025 to 2035 before 1st start up. Many more years before actual testing to possibly achieve COP=1.

    The head of the ITER committee seemed a little gloomy in tone. Likely because the U.S. congress is about to say enough and cut the purse strings on ITER.

    Big physics is coming under new scrutiny. Science needs to provide a ROI even for Government to justify the cost. CERN is next. Knowledge for the sake of knowledge is no longer acceptable. It needs to have real world practical applicable use.

  27. I’m looking for proof. I wish Rossi success. I’d like him to leave instructions for replications at the same time he does the demo. I wait to see if this is proof or just more of the same — demos with flaws that prevent proof.

  28. This website has people replicating things Rossi was doing years ago. See Me356 and MFMP. In a few years or less others will be replicating for you. You perhaps?

    1. Doubt Rossi will go QuarkX commercial until he has all the necessary patent protection, because you can be sure just about every man & dog quasi / wannabee competitor will be buying a QuarkX unit and reverse engineering it.

      Happens all the time. Just like GM bought a Tesla X and tore it apart to learn all the industrial secrets therein.

        1. QuarkX will not help that situation very much.

          In fact local electrification could result in an unstable grid, destroying manufacturing and chemical processing that needs 100% reliable power supply.

          So the rich, in their McMansions, that can afford solar today, put the longer term grid maintenance costs on those who can’t afford solar.

          You think LENR local electrification will be any different, when those that can’t afford LENR electrification get slugged with the maint costs of the grid as the LENR McMansions go off grid?

          1. Politics & corruption killed those children, as solutions are available.

            Sorry mate but you draw a very long bow putting this on Rossi.

          2. Engineer48, of course I must agree, but the possible benefits of free commercial Cold Fusion would clearly, with the right motivation allow a great improvement, just as no patents and greed on drugs would save millions of lives.

          3. LENR will never save anyone, until the politics and corruption that are the real cause are eliminated. LENR will only increase corruption as it represents political and business power, which are bed fellows with corruption.

          4. MFMP is in no position to commercialize anything. Your devotion to the “open source” approach is simply wrongheaded.

            The classic case is Linux. Linux was essentially a failure, remaining a market curiosity UNTIL Google used it to develop Android, at which point, it became a winner. A success driven by a CAPITALIST usage.

            The data in the real world simply doesn’t support your position the “freeing the IP” results in widespread adoption and use.

          5. Linux was very successful before Android as a program that ran servers and networks. Us mortals just didn’t see it. My OS is Linux derived and it may be older than Android.

          6. Technically successful, yes. As percentage of market share, no. For many years, the order was “Wintel”, MacOS, and far, far back, various flavors of Linux.

            But the perspective was that even with that abysmal market share, Linux was THE absolute most successful “open source” product EVER. I’m not aware of anything else that was open sourced and suddenly “took the world by storm”, as “Rantin’ George” seems to think will happen.

        2. I’m just waiting for the day the aliens claim the rich as their property because they engineered humanity as their intellectual property. The worksmanship is so-so.

  29. There is a reason California is the mecca of high tech. In California the boss tells the world that the company will have a demo in 1 month. Then he informs the staff that they have one month or else they will all look like fools. No asking anybody if it will be ready or not. One month. Get going!!!!

    I’m going to place my bet on Brillo being first with a demo. They’ve already done one in Congress. Now it’s time for George and Godes to tell their people to giddy up. This is how great science is created. Under intense pressure.

    1. They did not do a demo.
      They gave a presentation to a few Congress persons.
      Brillo has spent much of the last 2 years trying to gather VC investments.
      Quite hard to do when 95% of the IP has already been sold off.

    1. Not quite. Pardon me being pedantic, but only sales resulting in happy customers matter.
      For example, IH bought one for quite a lot of money but apparently they are not happy, so they don’t count as a happy customer.

  30. Rossi wrote:
    “2. Will it be a scientific presentation, or a commercial presentation? 2- a commercial presentation”

    The demo will be a COMMERCIAL PRESENTATION”. In other words, Leonado will be showing their ready for market product and taking orders for delivery. Sort of like Apple or Samsung doing a Show & Tell for their latest phone offering.

  31. Thanks for the QuarksX heads up. Advanced labs pursuing replication of QuarkX might benefit from studying these solid state LENR direct electrical production patents. Liviu Popa Simil is what I call a lone radical free nuclear spirit, while on the other hand Craig Steidle comes from military and NASA vibrational frequencies. Each have brilliant LENR technologies which are, for the most part, under the radar. Solid state LENR Electric requires experts from many branches of science… as I see it (from my limited point of perspective) a teeny tiny bit of an actinide may help.

    Dr. Simil seems approachable while Seldon seems unapproachable.

    Investigative research is encouraged…

    LIVIU POPA SIMIL – LENR – NUCLEAR BATTERY ROADMAP – JANUARY 27, 2014
    http://coldfusionnow.org/liviu-popa-simil-lenr-nuclear-battery-roadmap/
    SELDON TECHNOLOGIES, NASA, AND LENR – MARCH 13, 2014
    http://coldfusionnow.org/seldon-technologies-nasa-and-lenr/

    Op. Ed.

    With the E-Cat QuarkX (direct electrical production from LENR) on everyones mind, a review of Seldon Technologies LENR patents (solid state direct electricity production) is in order.

    Circumstantial evidence leads me to believe this was developed out of DoD/NASA defense research programs.

    Rear Admiral Craig E. Steidle – USN, NASA, DoD

    Admiral Craig E. Steidle served as the first Associate Administrator of the Office of Exploration Systems at NASA (now known as the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate), an organization formed to implement NASA’s human exploration of the solar system as announced in the Vision for Space Exploration.

    Adm. Steidle served as the Director of the Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Advanced Strike Technology Office and was the Director of the Joint Strike Fighter Program, DoD’s largest program.

    Admiral Steidle officially resigned from the position of associate administrator for exploration systems in June 2005. He served as a Visiting Professor in Aerospace Engineering at the U.S. Naval Academy for five years and then briefly as the President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation before fully retiring in 2011.

    Seldon Technologies

    Now, Craig Steidle is on the board of directors of Seldon Technologies, Inc. The two following Seldon patents are noteworthy.

    This one has a Jan 6, 2016 first examination report to review.

    Methods of Generating Energy and/or he-4 Using Graphene Based Materials – Publication date: Oct 30, 2013

    http://www.google.com/patents/US20130266106

    Inventors Christopher H. Cooper, William K. Cooper, James F. Loan

    From the Patent:

    Deuteron-Based Reactions

    [0050] Fusion of two deuterons that are confined in a solid can theoretically result in three different outcomes as shown in the following equations (V. E. Kim, Purdue Univ., The 15th International Conf. on Condensed Matter Nuclear Sci. (ICCF-15) Oct 5 -9, 2009)

    [0052] For each 4He produced by two deuterons 23.8 MeV energy is released because of the well-known relationship between change in mass during a fusion process and energy release (E=mc2). It is speculated that the energy released is in the form or electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths ranging from Gigahertz to extreme UV, sometimes referred to as “soft x-rays”

    [0053] It has been discovered that graphene materials have an unusual electronic structure making it an ideal candidate for a variety of applications, primarily in the field of electronics. In particular, it has been discovered that the single atomic layer of carbon, characteristic of graphene materials, effectively screens Coulomb interactions, causing graphene to act like an independent electron semimetal. Furthermore, one particular graphene material, carbon nanotubes, can be grown with remarkable uniform diameters, number of walls, and atomic structure. See, “The Effective Fine-Structure Constant of Freestanding Graphene Measured in Graphite,” Science, Vol. 330 no. 6005 pp. 805-808 5 November 2010, which is herein incorporated by reference

    [0058] The results presented herein are, in general, consistent with other reported low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) experimental results, most notably the work of McKubre at Stanford Research Inst, who reported a peak 4He concentration of 1 ppm after 20 days of aging palladium powder in D2 gas (APS meeting, Denver CO, March 5, 2007)

    Methods of Generating Energetic Particles Using Nanotubes and Articles Thereof

    US 20130266106 A1 – Publication date Oct 10, 2013

    http://www.google.com/patents/US20110255644A1

    Inventors: Christopher H. Cooper, James F. Loan, William K. Cooper, Alan G. Cummings Original Assignee: Seldon Technologies, Llc

    From the patent:

    ABSTRACT

    There is disclosed a method of generating energetic particles, which comprises contacting nanotubes with a source of hydrogen isotopes, such as D2O, and applying activation energy to the nanotubes. In one embodiment, the hydrogen isotopes comprise protium, deuterium, tritium, and combinations thereof.

    There is also disclosed a method of transmuting matter that is based on the increased likelihood of nuclei interaction for atoms confined in the limited dimensions of a nanotube structure, which generates energetic particles sufficient to transmute matter and exposing matter to be transmuted to these particles.

    DESCRIPTION

    This application claims the benefit of domestic priority under 35 USC §119(e) to U.S. application Ser. No. 60/741,874, filed Dec. 5, 2005, and Ser. No. 60/777,577, filed Mar. 1, 2006, both of which are incorporated by reference herein.

    Disclosed herein are methods of generating energetic particles, by contacting nanotubes with hydrogen isotopes in the presence of activation energy, such as thermal, electromagnetic, or the kinetic energy of particles. Also disclosed are methods of transmuting matter by exposing such matter to the energetic particles produced according to the disclosed method.

    A need exists for alternative energy sources to alleviate our society’s current dependence on hydrocarbon fuels without further impact to the environment.

    The inventors have developed multiple uses for nanotubes and devices that use such nanotubes. 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. For example, nanotube based nuclear power systems may reduce, if not eliminate, the need for power distribution networks; chemical batteries; energy scavenger devices such as solar cells, windmills, hydroelectric power stations; internal combustion, chemical rocket, or turbine engines; as well as all other forms of chemical combustion for the production of power.

  32. It would be helpful if later on Andrea Rossi explained the demonstration protocol and discuss it with people over the internet, before actually doing the demonstration. That way he can receive feedback on parameters that needs to be made in order for the demonstration to be convincing and acceptable.

    1. Hi you LENR crazy and wildly happy dog. Your tale poses excellent statements (and mysterious questions) from time to time, which must be included in the LENR autobiography! A friendly QuarksX replicators heads up, (love) like you Dr. Bob the scientific dog… I was serendipitously posting (3 min. before you Bob) whose patents you should all be studying. Seldon technologies has it dialed in. Liviu has grasped the deeper heart of it. LENR Electric rocks….

      Have fun Dr. Bob et.al. and all you other cold fusioneers.

    2. Good idea. I think someone with ‘Doctor’ in front of their name should very politely suggest it to him and mention how much it would improve the chances of acceptance by all if this was done.

      1. I posted the idea as a comment on his blog.

        What would be the most simple and intuitive way that Rossi can demo his quark-X?
        A glass table with three small batteries, and three quarks, the electricity or heat then does some kind of job such as melting cheese or power some electronics?

    3. Now that’s a good suggestion! Nevertheless I doubt that Andrea will give the demo-organization to the crowd. But I know he can be influenced by well known scientists and doctors as Pweet below says. So I urge them to unite and suggest AR how to do a believable and convincing demo. I am sure he would benefit if it is done well.

    4. I agree with you. We all know that skeptopathics wont believe in it anyway but would serve for the common people like us to confirm that the E-Cat is legit.
      Also with the SSM enabled that would more than enough to confirm a high COP (maybe not 50 as Rossi said that generating electricity reduces de COP)

  33. Our responsibility is much greater than we might have supposed, because it involves all mankind.
    Jean-Paul Sartre

    1. Well then why now shout we should stop burning coal as that involves all mankind. Oh wait. Then a lot of people will die from lack of heat, manufacturing would stop & things would rapidly spiral down.

      Rossi did not create the world we have, nor is it on his shoulders to save it.

      So maybe back off and give him the time to properly do his job, which as I said before is not to save the world but to make his LENR reactors safe and commercially available.

      Remember we are talking about a low energy NUCLEAR REACTOR what has access to energy densities 1,000,000 time more powerful than any chemical reaction. Please also remember back in 1989 P&F talked about one of their cells going runaway and melting a hole in their concrete lab floor. Those very early P&F reactors were but a small fraction of the power that Rossi is manufacturing.

      Do you really wish to hear again:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb13ynu3Iac
      Look at Oppenheimer face.
      Does he look like a happy man?
      If anyone here thinks LENR will never be weaponised, well I have a Bridge in Brooklyn you may be interested in buying.

      1. Engineer48, Oppenheimer probably looks worried because ha gave evidence against Bohm as a communist that forced his leaving for the UK to do his best work.
        I believe that all Cold Fusion work should be shared in the World without any regard for profit.
        You only need to say, I agree lives are more important than profit or no I disagree profits are more important than lives.
        Best

        1. You ignore political power and the corruption that is needed to make it work. Nothing will change with LENR other than increased political power and the necessary corruption to control the new power.

          1. georgehants wrote:
            “I believe that all Cold Fusion work should be shared in the World without any regard for profit.”

            That will never happen, so no point in thinking it will. Much better to work via and through the realities of the world.

            My focus is simply to get my clients 750MWe steam turbines powered with QuarkX 600C steam. Ok will not save the world but still is a job that needs engineers to get dirty hands to do. One thermal power plant at a time. One small bite at a time. Slowly the world will change but with 100,000 thermal power plants to mod, this is a HUGH job to both do and to finance.

            This is reality 101. This is how the world changes. One install after another, retaining turbine and generator investment, spreading out over the planet, slowly eliminating thermal power plant related CO2 and other nasty emissions and reducing upward electricity price increases while increasing grid reliability and penetration.

          2. Engineer48, I think we disagree on very little but you are always describing the faults in the system we have now.
            We have that system because ordinary people have been brainwashed by those corrupt people you mention into accepting the situation as if we could not do better.
            We can go on forever describing those faults, the logical and sensible position would seem to be change things, do not accept this corruption etc. Find a better system.
            We are not programed robots but thinking sentient individuals all capable of deciding right from wrong without following any status quo.
            Many thanks for chat, it is a never ending subject.

        2. The comment and tears were in regard to his work on the 1st Atomic Bomb. He did his duty but later had a think about what doing his duty resulted in.

          Anyone who thinks LENR will never be weaponised, is well believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden. LENR will be weaponised, count on it.

          1. So agree, but that applies to everything from a tree branch to anti-gravity.
            Einstein had the same concerns and the debate still rages regarding the use of those weapons.
            Nobody can argue that they have kept a relative peace in the advanced World for 70 years while the West releases all it’s aggression against backward nations with millions dying.
            For now I will just try and work to change the system that creates these things, I can do no more and if we are all blown to kingdom come by maniacs with Cold Fusion super bombs etc. well that’s life.

          2. LENR, with 1,000,000 times more access to energy than any chemical reaction, will be weaponised. No way it will not happen.

            Pocket sized, 1MT (4x Hiroshima power), nuclear, non radioactive, non traceable, NICE bombs. Shall a terrorists set one off in your favourite coffee shop?

            Watch the face and learn. Watch the tears of regret at what he helped to create.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb13ynu3Iac

            Those here who think LENR will never be weaponised are wrong. Scientists will, as Oppenheimer did, do their duty and will create LENR Nuclear Weapons that are not radioactive and can be carried by anyone, undetectable, to the point of detonation.

            Who will become the next:
            “I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”

          3. Engineer48, I have already answered this comment above and you have moved it down the page, strange.

          4. In my view, nothing that we at the moment know about LENR is pointing to the direction that one could make a bomb out of it. A bomb needs a very fast reaction, of order one microsecond or less. Otherwise the device disintegrates before it has a chance to react.

          5. LENR will never be weaponised. The rate of energy release will never be as extreme as in nuclear weapons, as the LENR principle is in using metallic crystals. The power of the LENR can never go beyond a “fizzle”, as in the famous accident of Pons/Fleishman, when a Palladium plate burned its way to the concrete floor.
            We have too many nuclear weapons, so I do not see any potential driving force for the weaponisation.

  34. If I we I.H. I would be considering paying up and making an apology, unless they know something we don’t.

  35. The Military Industrial Complex is simply letting all this play out? Really? A power source so magical that all logistical management of warfare is beyond obsolete and they are going to allow its distribution to the whole world, all at once? A “weapon” doesn’t need to go boom. The fact the Mr. Rossi has not vanished from the face of the earth is evidence that he has nothing. Considering the nature of the CIA you can bet he’d end up under some mountain in Nevada along with all his devices; well fed and cared for but developing power packs for tanks (and a lot more.)

    1. Hi all

      In reply to Thomas Baccei

      I agree with you except you make a major assumption with regard to military having had access to this for some years already.

      I wrote a paper on the subject several years back you can also read publicly available papers written by others on the subject if you care to search.

      Kind Regards walker

      1. It was rumoured that Rossi’s first demo 1 MW reactor was sold to the US military. A few months later I recall Rossi announced his high temperature breakthrough and acknowledged the military support he had received. I assumed at the time that he was assisting the military with their new toy because technically the demo reactor was a failure as it produced less than half the rated 1MW of power. Still enough to generate possible military interest though.

    2. I believe that energy dependence, international oil wars, global climate change, potable water and global stability are all National Security Issues, which need resolution. There is a single answer, and you believe that the appropriate response is to fall back on the old chestnut of locking the solution in the vault. If we allow any group to do that, we deserve extinction.

      1. Ophelia, what makes you think I approve? It is so obvious that the first military to deploy QuarkX as a power source for their equipment would have an insurmountable advantage over any rival. If you were president (or a surrogate) wouldn’t you investigate such extravagant claims? Would you just let it play out with a commercial product, and public exhibitions before you had fully incorporated it in your forces? It is not a question of thinking that response is appropriate, but rather , inevitable.

        1. Energy is certainly important to armies, but so are many other technologies that are freely developed, such as microchips in general. One can avoid risking own soldiers if AI can do the job. It’s also an insurmountable advantage, kind of. Until the rival gets it too.

        2. DOE held two different in-depth colloquia on LENR over the years. The final recommendation from each was that the FedGov provide sufficient funding to LENR research efforts TO PROVIDE A DEFINITIVE ANSWER the the reality or lack of reality of the Pons and Fleischmann effect. The high-energy physics community successfully lobbied in the background and prevented the issuance of such funding.

    3. The MI Complex and US Government is probably upset that Rossi released this information about LENR existence to the world before they could quiet it for complete capitalization on the discovery. Rossi may have knowingly did humanity a huge favor by doing so. The E-Cat is out of the box, so to speak (pls, pardon the pun.)

    4. LENR devices have already been patented by the US military, as well as covered by the US Defense Intelligence Agency, as seen in this unclassified report.

      fas.org/irp/dia/lenr.pdf

      Not only is it optmistic but it essentially is stating that the cat’s already out of the bag (and this was written way back in 2009)

  36. “5. Will it show the E-Cat QuarkX operating in self sustained mode? 5- yes, F8.”

    To me, showing self sustain mode is the next best thing to self looped operation; easy to show and much easier to do than self looping.

    If the thing is giving off energy with little to no energy input for a reasonable period of time, surely that in itself is remarkable.

    I had assumed – according to reports – that during the year long test Rossi had the eCat in self sustain mode more often than not. I thought the whole conditional F8/F9 thing during the test was more of a formality while the test was underway. But now that the test is over it is perplexing to me that Rossi still puts in the F8/F9 qualifier. Self sustain should be easy to know and as familiar as an old sweater to him after a year in the container.

    So I don’t get Rossi’s F8 tentativeness at this point. Is he really uncertain?

    1. That’s because it’s the high temperature Quark and not the low temperature version which seems to be reasonably controlled. As he says, there is still development work going on with this. Let’s hope it pans out and the result silences (or at least shuts up for a short while) the critics.

      1. lol fat chance of shutting up the critics. as AR has said this is a commercial demo, not a scientific one. The skeptopaths will no doubt complain about experimental protocols, etc. They will probably continue to deny it until ecat power is supplied directly to their house.

        1. They will deny it until someone shows a working theory.

          For them, Theory seems to trump facts and experiment.

  37. Michael, i do not understand your comment as what you say seems to be exactly what I an saying.
    What shall we try and change for the better today?

  38. Steve, one does not change the World in a day, if you and your family lived in an area that had no access to clean drinking water and you had watched one of your children die from it’s effects, would you be happy if your village received filtered water.

    1. Their government and related corruption are what causes those end results to happen. No way will LENR reactors change anything. In fact the governments and corruption will use LENR reactors to increase their control and in no way will LENR reactors give the power to the people at the expense of less power for governments and corruption.

    2. georgehants, No one is denying those horrors, I have traveled quite a lot in my life too places where clean drinking is a dream of the many, the funny thing is, all the corruption in todays world allows that to happen everyday, trillions are made from the poorest people by the richest, and funnily enough its those Richest and most powerful people that you should be shouting at to deal with the situation.

      The ecat and quarkx are not the end of poverty, not the end of dirty water, not the cure for the starving, Rossi is not to blamed for all that is wrong with society.

      He is in fact working hard to remedy what he sees as problems and he is doing so to the detriment of his health, in a world that would rather see him fail. It is though, HIS prerogative to do with his inventions as he pleases, we, you, cannot constantly demand he give away his life’s work.

      The market of oil, gas and coal and renewables are all stacked against a man who may or may not, have a starting invention that may possibly change the future, his reluctance to go public has obvious benefits, if you can but see them.

      Working with private companies to perfect and produce a working product is the only way to bring them to market as proven reliable products.

      IF he gave all the information to the world, the largest companies would start a patent war, the biggest companies would own the market, the people would pay though the nose, if indeed the product was not shelved, or people did not die from explosions, runaways, neutron blasts…

      You understand that once the secret is out, people will die doing tests in their garage, what better way to stop production, to stop patents?

      Rossi seems to understand this corrupt system and capitalism very well, he understands the dangers of experimentation, of high cops and neutron blasts, he understands how easy it will be to stop both the e-cat and quarkx in this world of capitalist corruption.

      He understands that giving away his secrets will be the death of Lenr, the e-cat and the quarkx. At least It looks that way to me anyway.

    3. First of all, an international control of the development of this technology and uranium 8 and thorium.

  39. Michael, logic alone shows you wrong, would suggest some Research on economics and the Fact that only production and organisation of manpower is of any concern.
    One could remove the whole finial system except basic tokens putting millions out of work without the slightest effect on what is democratically chosen to be needed or fair luxuries for all.

    1. George you need to take a hit of reality 101.

      No way will anything LENR can do lessen government control nor the corruption necessary to keep government in control.

      In reality, LENR will increase government control and corruption.

        1. George,

          The enemy is political power and the related corruption that keeps it in power. How will LENR defeat those forces? When it fact it will strengthen them?

          This is the real world.

          1. Simple. It will decentralize energy production and raise standards of living by reducing the cost ordinary people pay for basic survival needs. Don’t you think that will have a significant beneficial impact on society?

  40. 2 Dec, 1942, Chicago, Michigan.
    1st controlled Nuclear Reaction.

    6 Aug, 1945, Alamogordo, New Mexico,
    1st intentional uncontrolled Nuclear Reaction, (Atomic Bomb) Explosion.

    How long from the 1st controlled LENR reactor until the 1st intentional uncontrolled LENR Atomic Bomb Explosion?

    It will happen.

    1. “In 1917, Ernest Rutherford
      was able to accomplish transmutation of nitrogen into oxygen at the
      University of Manchester, using alpha particles directed at nitrogen 14N + α → 17O
      + p. This was the first observation of an induced nuclear reaction,
      that is, a reaction in which particles from one decay are used to
      transform another atomic nucleus. Eventually, in 1932 at Cambridge
      University, a fully artificial nuclear reaction and nuclear
      transmutation was achieved by Rutherford’s colleagues John Cockcroft and Ernest Walton,
      who used artificially accelerated protons against lithium-7, to split
      the nucleus into two alpha particles. The feat was popularly known as
      “splitting the atom””
      …..
      Rutherford conducted research that led to the first “splitting” of the atom in 1917 in a nuclear reaction between nitrogen and alpha particles, in which he also discovered (and named) the proton.[9]

      Rutherford became Director of the Cavendish Laboratory at the University of Cambridge in 1919. Under his leadership the neutron was discovered by James Chadwick in 1932 and in the same year the first experiment to split the nucleus in a fully controlled manner was performed by students working under his direction, John Cockcroft and Ernest Walton.

      1. The modern nuclear fission reaction later discovered in heavy elements, in 1938 by the German scientists Otto Hahn and Fritz Straßmann.[3]

        1. Rudolf Ladenburg, émigré physicist at Princeton University (Palmer Laboratory) wrote to Hahn on February 22, 1939:[24]

          “Your discovery has caused a huge sensation in the whole scientific world, and every laboratory which has the necessary means is now working on the consequences of your discovery.”

    2. The more dangerous versions of cold fusion or LENR seem to happen when using the higher numbered metals as recently indicated by me356 in his experiments. By avoiding that path as stated by me356 and others then explosions and radiation in general is avoided. As in all new toys many experiments and responsible knowledgeable approach is the key to avoiding problems.

      1. Be very careful what you want to predict. There have been many, over decades that I have come across, prognostications based on the bible that have not come about. You tube is full of them.

        1. I don’t do the predicting, God does. When I first became aware of bible prophecies, a one world order with everyone being forced to have the mark of the beast in order to buy, sell, or hold a job was an absurdity. But now it’s viewed as inevitable.

          1. It will likely become a global currency, but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Also, good luck controlling BTC. That would be like controlling BitTorrent, which after all of these years, isn’t controlled by governments because it is decentralized. Same with Bitcoin. To impose true control over Bitcoin, the Internet would have to be shut down.

          2. It’s a fear! not a desire. If this one world government ever happens, and I hope it doesn’t, they will control the internet and attempt to control everything and every one.
            There’s plenty of rogues capable of manipulating online currency like Mark K/magicaltux. Anyway, one world government (or it’s currency) isn’t something I like to think about so, no more from me on that subject.

          3. I’m definitely not for a “one world government,” but I am for financial autonomy and personal freedom. Those who conflate government control with Bitcoin understand neither.

          4. The best prophecies are usually sufficiently vague as to be subject to pertinent reinterpretation should the occasion arise.

          5. I think the best ones are the most specific. For instance, Jesus said that the temple would be torn down. It happened within about 40 years of His prophecy.
            He said He would be put to death. His death is one of the most strongly attested fact in history. Even His enemies acknowledged it and why they put him to death.

          6. Your interpretation that it is someone or other that decides it all is your own view of what is in a particular book. I can make statements like that based on my own proclivities and convince people left and right. And those people will kill to prove that I am right because they believe I am their prophet. Whose prophet did you want to be? That kind of attitude is what the ISIL and Al Quada types use to make trouble in this world of ours. Do you want to be a part of that?

          7. I worship a God of Love, a God Who IS Love, and He says such a thing is evil. Part of what Sharia law is about is that such countries will not pass anti child molestation laws because that would be saying that Mohammed did was wrong. Do you want to a part of the cure rather than the disease?

    3. An early Ragone Plot of the potentialities of energy release from LENR places it a single order of magnitude above the most energetic known chemical reactions; please do share the source of the additional 5 orders of magnitude you so persistently refer to.

      I’ve made several, brief, posts suggesting that the knowledge required to produce LENR devices that have significant non ionizing radiation potential be closely held as I do generally agree with the sentiment that children shouldn’t be allowed to play with matches.

      On the other hand anyone can demonstrate (by siphoning the gas out the tank, pouring it over a car and lighting a match) that petroleum products are dangerous when used inappropriately. This has not dissuaded humanity from using petroleum products quite ubiquitously.

      While in agreement that at some point in time a serious risk assessment of the various LENR designs is in order I would strongly suggest the inflating these risks for polemic purposes does us a significant disservice.

      A UL, or equivalent, sticker with the standard appropriate usage cautions should suffice for the commercial designs intended by Leonardo & Rossi.

      We digress; so the next question might be ‘To what purpose?’

    1. Yes, he apparently does talk informally. No need for formalities if being informal will do. Or do you mean the often wrong meaning of the word that has has been to mean to lie?

  41. That would be “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. Proof has nothing to do with an individuals view or perspective. Deeply false.

  42. If there was free energy chances are there wouldn’t be water wars because people could build huge desalinization plants and just take water from the ocean.

  43. That’s how LENR should have been painted all along, some kind of hyperchemical reaction. The physicists would never have gotten involved, and we’d have cheap energy by now.

    1. Problem is, we humans categorize science into distinct (often non-permeable) ‘departments’, whereas the way nature behaves, and likely is: hybrid.

  44. Another option is that the military has already other options, which could make the LENR powered devices not worth too much in a strategic conflict. Essentially, LENR is like a limitless fuel. What the military has could be perhaps some means of shutting down LENR remotely, in a certain area. Maybe they just want to push other countries to use LENR, only to make the LENR-powered vehicles/airplanes suddenly without power. This is only a speculation. What they really have we will not know for sure even in the next 50 years.

  45. Base on the sun being a gas. Recent research indicates sun is reidberg matter and or metallic hydrogen as a dense liquid. If so then hot fusion is based on outdated model of the sun. No wonder hot fusion can’t do what it is trying to do.

  46. As stated previously the Pentagon is already well aware of LENR, and already have their own implementations. Rossi’s version is really not that unique.

    It is also worth noting that the pentagon report I posted is hosted by the FAS, whose role is nuclear nonproliferation.

    And we do not live in a military dictatorship so maybe cool it with the hyperbole.

  47. I want to believe. I really do. I want it to be true,and for Rossi to have made a working version of a LENR machine that will revolutionise the planet.
    BUT – What has happened to the legal fight between him and Industrial Heat?
    Has ANYONE actually seen this machine working?
    Has ANYONE actually verified that it reliably runs on it’s own and produces a COP of +3 or higher?
    Talk is cheap and there has been enough talk now.
    Does it work? And where is it?
    Prove it beyond all reasonable doubt for heavens sake.

    1. 1 – no movement is expected in the legal case until June when Industrial Heat faces a deadline to submit their case.
      2 – Yes.
      3 – Yes.
      4a – Unknown with certainty beyond its creator, his inner circle and the people that have directly tested it.
      4b – Was in Miami. Probably still is but unknown.

      Regarding 2 and 3 you may choose to disbelieve these people for various reasons but the answers are clearly yes.

      Warm Regards ; )

      1. 2 and 3 do no make any sense, nor questions or answers. Anyone seen working device? AR claims he made it and definitely saw it, so what? Anyone verified? Means somebody “independent” and “reputable”? After Lugano report we may see what skeptics can easily say “no” to anything they do not like – independency of people who made Lugano report, any replications like one done by Parkhomov, etc. I think even then the product will actually hit the market – it would be denied in many places as a scam, perhaps on government level. Sad story.

        1. It really could be true but we have no right to demand anything. We can try to do it yourself if we are so smart. Something we really did not understand.

          1. Well, to replicate hot cat using Lugano and Parkhomov data – you can you it in your garage. To make working stable design of commercial reactor with stable COP – it will take years for anybody, perhaps except famous “snakes” AR mentioned many times.

    2. Yes, VW, we are all worried about why the massive company cannot pay its bills. It seems to have cycles of boom, pocketing money, and declaring bankruptcy. Whatever will happen to them now, poor Corporate Cheating Beaches.

    3. Please do some research before flooding E-catworld with this stuff… the answers to all of your questions are here on the website. Many, many people have now directly witnessed various versions of the E-Cat in operation, and many tests have been done on them by serious scientists and engineers.

      1. Unfortunately responding with facts to the the wave of new ‘skeptics’ that have appeared here and elsewhere is unlikely to have any effect. Their agenda means that they are immune to such responses, and will only respond with further disinformation, half truths, disingenuous implications and the rest of the shill arsenal.

        1. Some of the more informed (as well as other purely trollish) ‘skeptics’ have been banned from this site. Therefore, assertions that unimpeachable past testing of E-Cat is beyond reproach go unanswered and taken as fact in the resulting echo chamber.

      2. The problem is that “reasonable” doubts exist for those tests.

        The isotopic shifts are very interesting and likely one of the STRONG points of the LENR test.

        However, details of the BEFORE fuel test and the AFTER fuel test of the fuel raises some questions. Was the BEFORE test of the same fuel? I did not realize they were allowed open the ecat and take a sample of the fuel before the start of the test. Can such fuel samples even be exposed to air before loading into the reactor? So again, details here are missing.

        And some reasonable objections to the way heat output was measured in the 3rd party test also exist. So such information is “less” than stellar.

        All of the above does not prove or disprove Rossi’s ecat, but “many” doubts can be raised and as such these doubts hurt Rossi’s case.

        I consider myself a STRONG believer in LENR. And I find it VERY difficult to believe that Rossi does not have something that works – I sure it does! The questions remain are the performance, and how close Rossi is to a commercially viable device.

        Regards,
        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  48. We should evolve towards a better social system with abundance.
    Then all that is left to fight over is football and which made up religion is the true one.

  49. As predicted, the “concern safety trolls” begin to emerge from their dens with the next meme in line to delay research into and implementation of LENR energy.

    1. Mind you, there have been various and notorious meltdowns (Ukraine, Japan) – the dynamics and/or consequences of which are currently, today, scientifically unexplained…

      They don’t know what’s going on, nor what is to be expected, of Fukushima, for instance.

      All we know is that radioactive material is being flushed by the tonnes into the sea, and that there are many bags of contaminated soil.

      What are they going to do about that? And that is only Fukushima.
      Do we want to talk about Mayak?
      The “safety trolls” seem unconcerned about these issues….

    2. People who are concerned about safety are „trolls“ who want to „delay research into and implementation of LENR”? Are you joking?

      1. Not at all. This bunch could care less about safety…they simply are using the “idea” of safety to restrict who is allowed to play with LENR. HERE is the real core of what they want:

        “LENR really should not be allowed outside of controlled environments
        that have laboratory level safety measures and monitoring in place. I
        would definitely say basements and electric vehicles should probably be a
        huge NO for LENR ever.”

        This is just the next tactic in the war to kill or at least further delay LENR.

        1. I agree that the safety argument will likely be abused by certain persons. And we have already seen such an attempt (which was possibly rather a personal attack against Rossi) some time ago. However, one should not put all people who are raising safety questions into the same basket. Safety is important, and a lack of safety would probably hinder the dissemination of LENR technology more than anything else.

          1. “However, one should not put all people who are raising safety questions into the same basket. “

            Of course not. But it is fairly easy to distinguish the two classes. One class is saying “go forth and do…but keep safety aspects in mind”. The other is saying “DON’T go forth and do…leave this complicated stuff to the high priests of physics.”.

            “Safety is important, and a lack of safety would
            probably hinder the dissemination of LENR technology more than anything
            else.”

            Only if “class two” gets their way and succeeds in selling their meme. As one with formal training in “things nuclear”, who had considered a career as a “health physicist” before the defenestration of the nuclear industry in the USA, and who worked for forty years in the chemical industry (chemicals will kill you just as dead as nuclear), OF COURSE safety is important.

  50. As society we should move towards a future where food, clean air, health care, education, information etc is totally free.

    We might not get there in 100 or 200 years, but we can sure do better than we are doing today.

  51. DFarwell –
    You do know that its possible to use poop to make a bomb? And you do realise that gasoline that we use in cars are highly flammable? And you do realise what happens to life on earth if 2% of our current Nuclear Fission Bombs was detonated, or what the consequences will be over a span of 1000 – 10 000 years if we continue as is with Fossil Fuel and Extremely Deadly Uranium / Plutonium based energy tech?

    So please, explain to us why we should be afraid of what we dont know, and never seen, when we are already terrified of what we do know.

  52. Didn’t the last person who made the light bulb claim want to see a 100W bulb? Oh well.
    But yes, a decent demo should be done. Not certain the ‘Live at Q headquarters’ demo is going to be that one unless independent verifiers are present through the build, execute and post mortem process.

  53. It is pretty hard to stop a technology and even trying to do so would take the US out of a very big game in which they are currently the front runner. There have been many groups worldwide studying LENR and once the word gets out there will be no stopping it. I think the US government may have seen the

  54. Cold Fusion by that name has been under research for decades now and even NASA was investigating it, so I don’t think Rossi’s breakthrough would have come as a complete surprise to the military. They would have known that it was just a matter of time and if Rossi found it so would others so why not take the lead instead of trying to stifle it.

    I think the military helped him and he acknowledged that help on his blog. That would have been the pragmatic decision for the military to make. If you can’t stop it then try and take the lead. It was way too late to try and stop research in cold fusion and taking Rossi out of the picture would only have piqued the interest of an already growing group of new fire advocates. The US has little sway over researchers in Japan, China, Russia and Italy.

    I would also not be surprised if the US military scientists who (allegedly) purchased the demo reactor are now adapting it to power ships. I think it was the Navy that attended the demo. They would have a big lead in terms of practical deployment. Rossi has great respect for US institutions and has contracted with the military prior to his CF discoveries. He has contacts there and I think that he would keep the military fully appraised of his latest advances. He would have no problem sharing IP with the military because they never talk about anything.

    If the military cracked down on Rossi then that goose just might stop laying golden eggs. That would not help the US government.

  55. IN BREAKING NEWS: APCO WARS GO NUCLEAR

    Early on May 6 the APCO wars took a much darker turn when panicked hordes of E-catworlders scrambled for their back yard fallout shelters, many of them vowing remain underground with their families and pets till food and water gave out, when the long feared nuclear option was finally put into play.

    Stay tuned for up to the minute coverage of breaking news and our updated reports on radiation levels in your area.

    YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST ON RADCAT RADIO – SAVE A LIFE – TELL A FRIEND – NOW

        1. You mean the horde that suddenly appeared doesn’t have our or the world’s best interests at heart. Who’d have ever thought that! /sarcasm

          1. “First say it doesn’t work, then say it’s dangerous.” This was predicted a long time ago by Peter and others. There is just a novel twist that by adding a conspiracy theory narrative they think they can say both things at the same time.

          2. I do not expect that a commercial LENR reactor which has been built and tested by professionals would be dangerous. For experimental reactors which are built and controlled by knowledgeable people the risk should be manageable. A reactor that is put together in the basement by an inexperienced person could be very dangerous. I think we should make a distinction between these cases.

          3. True, but if perception management is now in play, then rationality goes out of the window, to be replaced by misinformation and fake concern intended to generate classic ‘FUD’.

            Introducing a specious fear factor would serve a number of agendas. The primarily one being to introduce public fear alongside increasing awareness, as a first step towards legislating cold fusion into the nuclear (fission) camp, necessary to take control and force a monopoly.

            Secondary gains would include damping down any expectations of imminent revolutionary change by creating a perceived ‘downside’, and putting off would-be experimenters in order to reduce the chances of ‘Edisonian’ breakthroughs that might not be containable.

            Given this, the apparently sudden (and often subtle) emphasis on potential dangers of LENR seen on several blogs simultaneously are entirely unsurprising, especially given Apco’s involvement.

      1. Yep, and in a recent Q&A he said it is possible that it might be run from a cell phone battery. Previously he had said it can’t be run from a rechargeable battery for safety reasons. PROGRESS (at least in theory).
        If it’s charging it’s own battery it is self sustain which is tantamount to an infinite COP.
        I think it calls for a new definition of COP
        1) individual thermal COP
        plus
        2) Overal system COP.

    1. I actually believe that with airbus having taking out some LENR patients, they will be the first to fly a plane on LENR. Airbus is planning two models – one 100% electric, and one with a extender model, much like some electric cars with a gas extender engine.

      Here is a video of the working electric plane from airbus. I think this is the start of a new aviation revolution. Even the potential of placing one turbine to power all electric motors is a viable concept.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJKYekL7JsY

      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  56. Brillouin was fully aware of Rossi and Rossi’s approach LONG (years) before IH or Darden ever heard of Rossi, and they began experimenting with solid-phase systems also well before….so to insinuate that Godes “stole” Rossi’s IP is simply a gross misreading of the situation.

    1. For all we know Brillouin tossed their method and stole Rossi’s. No, I am not say that is what happened. I am merely saying that we know very, very little of what is going on. We have five or ten datapoints and then our imaginations fill in the spaces and we think that we are looking at the Mona Lisa. I prefer the honesty of only 5 or 10 datapoints and let history fill in the spaces to the certainty of imagining a completed picture.

      1. Yeah, but I don’t see even one datapoint that says “Brillouin stole Rossi’s IP”. The only datapoint of ANY sort that I know of AT ALL says that IH licensed technology from Brillouin as well as from Rossi. That’s it.

        LEGALLLY IH is perfectly free to combine their two different licensed technologies into one device, and even to patent the combination under their own name. Ethically questionable, yes….legally barred from doing so….no.

        In such a situation, IH would still owe Rossi royalties if, as, and when the patented combination were put up for sale as a commercial device.

  57. We shall see. As I said…it is fairly easy to distinguish between true safety concerns, and using safety concerns as a meme to delay LENR.

    1. Now that we can agree on Warthog! I think the distinction should be observed between those that raise legitimate serious health and safety concerns versus those just spouting rhetoric. I believe I am presenting very valid and honest concerns and perspectives. I think LENR could be used safely for sure, just not by the average Joe in his basement or his car. This perspective could absolutely change if we were to get some dramatically different information or progress than what we have today, but then and only then. This would require many many years of monitoring and study before certification either way.

      1. Warthog clearly does not agree with you Dfarwell so there is therefore no common ground between him and you upon which you can develop a false sense of trust.

  58. No in my opinion which is just as valid as yours the ERV is an associate of IH. He appeared when IH appeared on the scene so they must have brought him them right? Please show evidence that Penon did anything with Rossi before IH began dealing with Rossi.

    1. The problem is the ERV is not going to be considered independent. Penon has ties to Rossi. This does not necessary invalidate the ERV, but with 80 million on the line, then IH position is they want a more independent report.

      Penon has worked with Rossi in the past. Someone here can dig up those past collaborations, but to my knowledge these past associations do exist.

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      1. Penon simply did one of the very first 1MW tests, which turned out to be for IH. What ties did he have with Rossi or IH prior to that? The only connection I recall was as being the 1 day tester of the 1MW plant years ago.

      2. I think this is incorrect. As far as I know there is no link between Penon and Rossi, except for the fact that IH hired him to do a test of a hot-cat reactor in 2012 and then again he was hired and approved by both IH and Rossi to do the one year test of the 1 MW plant.
        Many people have been confusing Fabio Penon with Fulvio Fabiani, and I suspect that is the reason some are saying Penon has ties to Rossi. Fulvio Fabiani has been working very closely with Rossi for several years. But perhaps I am wrong?

      3. If you are going to make the claim that Penon is an associate of Rossi then show the proof to back it up. Otherwise your claim is nothing but a guess. You do have proof don’t you? Or do you just go through life making wild guesses and unproven claims?

        1. Yes, I most graciously accept that I am wrong on this issue. And I am most happy to be corrected.

          I had heard and read that Penon had previous ties to Rossi, and clearly this is not the case.

          However, the arm’s length issue is in fact an issue. IH simply does not trust the test Rossi setup. This in no way suggests that Penon did not do his job, and what he measured is VERY LIKELY correct. In fact Rossi stated that when he placed his instruments beside Penon’s, Rossi got the same results. This in no way suggests that other power or sources of energy were not being input to the plant.

          On the other hand, with 80 million on the line, and spending daily time with Rossi, you can VERY MUCH state that after several months of working together, they CLEARLY had huge ties DURING the 1 year long test. So facts are facts and HUGE ties DO exist during this test.
          So I fully accept that Penon did not have “previous” ties, but they did work together for a year.
          So while no previous ties exist, Cleary a collaboration existed for the year long test. And with 80 million on the line, then conflicts of interest do arise since Rossi controlled the plant and was on site for that time period.
          So because the “factory” and setup was done by Rossi then the issue of arm’s length remains a sticking point. You can bring in any number of people to measure the input + output of the plant, but since that plant was far too close to Rossi’s pocket, then nothing really changes in the reduction and value of the ERV report.
          The “customer factory was not independent from Rossi. From what we heard, IH did NOT want to do this test, and wanted ANY kind of working reactor from Rossi to test, and IH thought the test was too soon and simply wanted a working device of any kind.
          Rossi clearly went ahead with this test and unfortunately the plant was far too close to Rossi’s pocket to be considered independent.

          So yes I certainly accept and my apologies for being wrong on Penon’s ties to Rossi, but this changes little or nothing in regards to the 1MW plant being a independent test run at some 3rd party customer.

          Cleary Penon had ties to Rossi for the year long test.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  59. You know that arXiv is a preprint server where scientists can post there papers BEFORE they submit it to a peer reviewed journal.

    1. As you well know, or should know if you are talking on this board, the very concept of LENR is so far outside the usual physics paradigms about what can or cannot happen in nature, that it is highly unlikely that LENR research can be published in most peer reviewed physics journals. So “debunking” arXiv as valueless in this discussion seems rather unfortunately prejudicial. Despite three decades of heavy gatekeeping from established journals, LENR researchers have made continuous and impressive progress publishing in less well established venues and sharing experimental results at their own conferences.

  60. DFarwell –

    Yesterday you wrote a message saying you were sooo concerned about Cold Fusion not being controlled or -decentralized. The dangers of radiation if not controlled by government or huge corporate entities. You are all reading from the same script, huh?

  61. If you do not take it seriously, why are you talking about it? The logic conclusion must be that you are a person who waste time on unimportant matters.

    Do you get paid for this?

  62. Regardless as to how one slices and dices this, clearly Rossi feels pressure to play ball. This is good. I will admit that the first public 1MW plant was anti-climatic, but at least the demo
    did occur. And it gave ECW readers here much to write and talk about.

    Also, seeing the size and format of the ecat-X will also be most interesting. Rossi continues to push forward and this is a good sign. How much of a “black box” type of demo this will be of course gives rise to much speculation, but never the less, the fact that Rossi is open to and desires some kind of demo is a step in the right direction.

    The only issue here is lack of 3rd party verification, but that issue will sort itself out when working products are being sold.

    Rossi is holding his cards close to himself – we just don’t know what kind of poker hand he has as of yet!

    Regards,
    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    1. “working products are being sold.”, I doubt very strong, that it will be easy to get permission to sell his cats, especially when I read the post of me356:

      “Reactor is emitting neutrons a few days after the test!”.

      LENR is offering a lot, but without public awareness of the technology with all chances and risks, the existing energy industry, will bring up a lot of arguments against it.

      So Rossi should start to give away testing units so that real research by th e so called mainstream science can start to investigate the phenomenons. Cheap mass production alone will not be sufficient, et least not in Europe.
      I have followed the development of Wind and PV for the last 20 years,
      without a political “Yes we want it” behind it, the increase of annually installed capacity to the range of 50.000 MW+ per year never happened.
      To start making a difference in the energy landscape the same amount of ecats, has to be produced annually, not 3 MW units in 6 month. There is still a very long way to go…

      1. I don’t think the gamma or x-ray emission is a problem ASSUMING that minor shielding can (does) fix this issue.

        Remember, a typical vacuum tube TV (before flat screens) had about 5 pounds of lead to contain the x-ray emissions. In fact on GE televisions they had a bad circuit board that caused an over-voltage in the TV, and those TV’s were recalled due to them emitting too much x-rays. So the “old” story about not sitting too close to the TV might
        have some valid reasons!

        Note that new regulations came into place that required safety (fail safe) circuits had to be added to all new TV’s manufacture and sold in the USA.

        If we assume that minor shielding does contain these ionizing emissions of energy, then I don’t think that issue will prevent the ecat being sold anymore then say TV’s.

        However, I will agree that much resistance and attempts to thwart or stop LENR will occur, and the issue of ionizing radiation is certainly an issue to watch.

        So far, from what I seen, such emissions are minor and are solved by minor shielding.

        As for making a impact on general energy use? if mass produced LENR devices can appear in the marketplace – the LENR revolution can occur at break-neck speed – likely faster then the adoption of personal computers.
        Regards,
        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      2. He maintains he already has the necessary certification to sell and operate them and he does seem to be doing that but hardly a mass distribution (yet).
        After all he was investigated for operating one and cleared so he must be correct on that point.

        1. To me it looks like only AR has the knowledge of the inner workings of e-cat. He has been following personally the running of each e-cat unit in the 1MW cofiguration. No amount of certification or patents can show how to regulate and adjust the units for maximum effect.

      1. Its apparently enough important for him to recently make a Disqus account so he can write here.

        Lets compare DFarwell with Dewey Weaver

        DFarwell
        I have a tangible breadbox I painted a cat chasing a ball on the side of, but it does not mean it produces excess energy.

        Dewey Weaver
        You need to careful though, the Lord of Planet Rossi might wish Jabawhoever his name is to come bump you on your head in your nest or quiet your city.

        Based on the logical rambling, could very well be the same person.

        Because they believe the exact same things, and have the exact same opinions, maybe they should start their own forum somewhere.

        1. I try not to think about them too much and the implications it has on the nature of humanity any more than I have to, but it wouldn’t be surprising.

  63. He said 5 years ago that he had a customer. I stopped listening to him when so much of what he said he’d do did not come to pass. He said In mercato veritas, so I’ll just let the market weigh in on his truthfulness.

  64. Anyone who uses the word “debunked” is not to be trusted. I.E. the word “debunked” has been debunked.

    I have been aware of the Lugano report since it came out, and I see no reason whatsoever to disbelieve it. But, I do disbelieve you; with me, your credibility is exactly zero.

  65. What I meant to say is that there might be exaggerated hysteria about the ‘safety’ of LENR – in the sense that the new technology might be incorrectly, but intentionally, portrayed as potentially unsafe.

    But that same world which might be screaming about the safety of LENR has been rather silent throughout the commercial development of fission, which – when accidents like Fukushima or Chernobyl happen – can not be completely explained (what happens during/after a meltdown?), nor prevented from becoming destructive and out of control.

    Fission risks have been taken, nevertheless, and their toll is still not calculated.

    Yes, the scale of basement LENR experiments is different from full scale nuclear facilities. Yes, of course there should be constructive and prudent safety concerns about a new technology.

    But if the stance is that everything should be either safe – or should not be out there, then we humans have rather been walking on the wild side with 160 decrepit fission facilities operating around the globe, generating amazing amounts of radioactive waste which nobody knows how to dispose, and allowing so many nations (democracies, oligarchies and dictatorships) the capacity each to destroy the planet tenfold with their nuclear weapons.

    LENR seems to be the technology that might give us the one chance to change all this, to grow out of our fission misery.

    Humans decide through behaviour. Human behaviour is not necessarily a safe bet.

  66. So you want me to believe that you are concerned about my understanding of chemistry and physics from a safety point of view?

    What makes you think that I honestly care about your opinion in the first place after calling you out for being a troll?

    Also, you have no respect for me or anyone in this forum so no need to pretend.

  67. I agree, Fukushima and the Fleischmann MELTDOWNS are really very similar.

    Martin had to clean the floor and buy a new lab bench, the Japanese are spewing deadly radioactive material into the nature that will affect the world and cause mutations in all living life.

    Clearly Nuclear Fission is not safe, regardless of handled in a basement, or by a government owned energy company, so it probably should not be used in the first place. We have not even started to see the problems that will arise due to Fission accidents.

    However, since it seems you just discovered internet one week ago, and became a activist, you have probably missed those discussions that have been held many times.

    The problem DFarwell is NOT your opinon on this certain topic, the problem is that you are a troll.

  68. DFarwell – if you understand LENR in the context of radiation, please do tell us about the mechanism that would make a run away potentially dangerous. If it is soo serious business, would it not make sense to explain exactly why?

    1. “please do tell us about the mechanism that would make a run away potentially dangerous.”

      Yes, do tell.

  69. All that matters is the isotopic shifts. The “debunkers” have only been able to explain them away by magical slight of hand.

  70. Demos don’t matter at this point. That is not what most people are clamoring for. Only working products in the marketplace will resolve the remaining ambiguities. After multiple demos before renowned scientists, with positive reports, albeit attacked from every angle possible by the PTB, Mr. Rossi understands this very well.

    1. Agreed, except product demos shortly before market availability are highly welcome. Standard marketing in other words.

      1. Yes, indeed. And Mr. Rossi has indicated that such a demo would be for commercial not scientific purposes, which is entirely appropriate. Once the devices are in the marketplace, the scientists who want to test the units will likely be able to, and prove for themselves whether or not it works. This must be the order in which LENR is rolled about out because of the current scientific blockade.

  71. The navy actually had a known group researching lenr and shortly after Rossi’s demo the navy announced that the research had been ended I think with the excuse that it was unfruitful. I often wondered if they went out of sight because they had something serious to explore now they had a working reactor. The reactor must have gone somewhere. In any event the military would never openly discuss a radical new technology that gives them a military edge. To say there is zero proof when the group holding the demo reactor is the military is meaningless, otherwise you are assuming that if the military did have the reactor we would all know about it, thus proof. If the military have it you will never hear it from them.

    The bit about Rossi working with the military is in his blog back in the period between when the demo took place and he made the high temperature breakthrough. As I recall, that breakthrough took place at a military lab.

    I don’t think Rossi wants to work in a government lab. It is contrary to his philosophy. He wasn’t at the military lab to research cold fusion. He was there I believe to train the military and transfer IP on the demo reactor he sold them, but while working there with them he came up with the high temperature breakthrough. The military would really want that if they wanted to power ships and they may have influenced his research in that area. He was very pleased when he announced the high temp breakthrough.

    Rossi is on a mission from his god and nobody is going to be able to buy
    his IP or take it away. He has had hard life experiences and as a result has grown very
    cautious about making sure his tech does not get buried. He trusts no one.

    Maybe the government lets him keep working because they don’t believe it works. The military, who are not the government, would not mind if he keeps working as long as he keeps them apprised.

  72. You seem to indirectly suggest that either there will be no parties that might wish to delay, oppose or control a new energy technology, or that if there are they won’t use any subversive tactics to obtain their goals.

    I respectfully suggest that neither is very likely, in which case denial, ridicule, fear-mongering and the rest of the propaganda arsenal will be deployed by those who stand to lose power and/or money when LENR is introduced.

    http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-propaganda.html

  73. DFarwell’s comments go some way beyond rational skepticism by introducing disinformation and an unfounded implication of collusion. Attacking the messenger doesn’t refute the message.

  74. You still haven’t provided proof that Penon is an associate of Rossi. I think you’re an associate of IH sent here to spread rumors and FUD, I am confident that someone will find the evidence to prove so.

    1. See my above post. The simple fact is Rossi and Penon worked close together during the year long test. This is a conflict and if Rossi had not be present everyday during the test then I would gladly accept that no conflict of interest exists, but that’s not the case.

      So “previous” ties did not exist, but they did DURING the year long test.
      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      1. Under the same logic, “previous” ties existed with IH during the same one year test, with IH present every day. I don’t think conflict is the right term here, because Penon would be conflicted with respect to both parties. That is less of a conflict, and more of a referee.

        1. Well, no, because Penon was working with Rossi for that year test. If you remove Rossi from that year long test, then I agree inpendence exists.

          1. Your logic is one-sided. What if I were to suggest that if the IH personnel present every day of the test were removed, then independence would exist, would you think that to be a fair statement?

      2. The diplomats involved in establishing the truce in Korea worked closely with each other for over a year did that make the North Korean diplomats associates of the American and South Korean diplomats? If so how could either side trust the truce since the diplomats worked together for so long? Your logic is flawed.

    2. Don’t worry, when that name draws concern, it will be abandoned for a new one.
      we have talked about this kind of attack many times over the years. now we have some defence for it, did you ever think we would need it, there are some dirty rascals out there, we all need to hang together here, in order to fend off the onslaught. that has been put into operation, maybe we need our own, undercover operation unit, i bet we have the right stuff, and bright minds, to Defend the E-CAT,technology, from the ones that want to hide it away. maybe we could get anonymous to help, they love projects like this, does anyone no how to contact them,

  75. Why not demo self-looped, “No wires in”?

    The excuse is that somehow the e-Cat can tell the difference between power from the mains and power from a storage device or generator, thereby somehow spiraling out of control.

    What ever happened to the Lugano scientists ?

    Silent on the scientific challenge that the emissivity factors they used for alumina (and calculating COP) don’t match reality.

    There was news that the Lugano team were working on a new independent experiment, but so far no results reported.

    Leif Holmlid is doing some interesting work on laser induced plasma, with claims of excess energy and high energy emissions.

  76. Right. He has not gone looking, obviously, or he would see abundant evidence for effects that cannot be predicated on traditional physics at least as is usually understood.

  77. ” it plays absolutely no role in the thinking of health scientists.”

    I think this is an overgeneralization. Infectious disease specialists, for one, pay a lot of attention to evolution, as it is what allows infectious agents to develop resistance to antibiotic treatment.

  78. ‘why are so many on this blog, who pointed to how great IH/Darden was 6 months ago, now are ready to crucify them?”

    Again my overgeneralization meter is going crazy with this statement.

    I don’t sense any impetus to “crucify” Darden; I do see skepticism and some retreat from the emphasis on Darden’s accomplishments and suggestions that he might have a conflict of interest if COP 50 account has any merit. Surely, if Rossi is telling the truth, enormous forces would be mobilizing to slow down the LENR revolution.

    To what extent this is actually happening I think we do not yet know. That depends not only on what IH can say in its defense against Rossi’s lawsuit, but what Rossi can accomplish with his newer venture.

  79. No question with a high COP, then generation of electric is most easy. They not done this yet, since they only have the one proto-type plant. I am sure they get around to such setups.

    I mean, assuming that the wright brothers just flew their first plane, then how come next week you could not book a trans-Atlantic flight? Answer, they not that far yet. Same goes for ecat, they only had one plant running in a test environment so far. So no question down the road I sure electric generation will be tested. And now that the ecat-X produces electricity
    directly, then perhaps the steam, or sterling engine approach is not required.

    However, if the COP is so high, then larger scale electric generation is MOST certainly possible here.

    The company that used the reactor over 12 months knows whether it works or not

    Well, that is the problem. The company is not known, and as far as we can tell the company and location was setup by Rossi (or his lawyer).

    And we heard that IH objected to the yearlong test since their reactors they had did not work and stated before a yearlong test is started, they would rather receive from Rossi ANY KIND of working device – even one with a small output.

    From what we know, Rossi went ahead with setting up a company and a yearlong test anyway. We don’t have details about this customer and how independent they are from Rossi.

    So many questions exist about the plant and customer – and who control the customer, and who setup the company etc. All of these issues thus bring much doubt about the customer being an independent customer at arm’s length from Rossi.

    If the customer could be found, or did come forward, then many of these issues would evaporate and such information would show if the company was under the wings of Rossi or not.

    So questions remain about this “customer” until we have more information.

    Regards,
    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  80. Not clear what we main by “no production”

    Does this mean no industrial production, or does this mean no heat from the
    ecat?

    Regardless, such information of production or not is MOOT since this clearly shows Darden has serious doubts about the ecat.
    So regardless of the term production meaning industrial production, or heat production.
    One would not care about some industrial production if the ecat was performing well heat wise, and no industrial process existed.

    – either way, this bodes very bad for Rossi.

    Regards,
    Albert D. Kallal
    Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    1. Snobben says that Swedes say that Lewan says that Darden says.
      But Darden’s earlier advice, which I want to follow because he hasn’t reversed it, was to ignore information that doesn’t come directly from IH.

      1. Yes…Darden wants to be in control and avoid rumours. But he can’t stop people talking about what they have heard and seen… As long as we trust Mats Lewan who is a true LENR-friend, then you can trust this information. I my self give it 90% for being the truth. Becaus i don’t think the swedish scientists did lie and not eather Mats Lewan hwo can deny this when ever he likes…

      2. I can confirm what ‘Snobben’ writes and I also have written evidence (although I would have liked Snobben to check with me first, before spreading this info!).

          1. No, I have written evidence of the meeting in Stockholm and of the claims by Darden – essentially what we have already heard before.

          2. Thanks, Mats, and also Snobben. I’m still wondering, though, if “production” referred to production of energy by E-cats, production of E-cats themselves, or production of chemicals or other commercial products using E-cat energy during the 1-year test.
            It also leaves me wondering what was his motivation for making such trip to Sweden, but this we probably cannot get to know now.

        1. As noted, this simply means that Darden/IH have serious doubts.

          It would be “hard” to believe that Darden would state no industrial production took place if he was referring to some industrial production process and LEAVE OUT the issue of the ecat performing well and making heat?

          As noted, this information hurts Rossi.

          Such information does not necessary put a fork in Ross’s claims, or invalidate them.

          However, these doubts represent serious challenges to Rossi and as a result Rossi will need to step his game up.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

  81. Thanks,

    Cosmic rays and other radiation in space is a problem, Liviu proposes metallic thin layer ‘active’ radiation shielding. Interesting that he states LENR phenomenon in this proposal, similar to one by Widom Larson.

    His is LENR hybrid fission/fusion similar to Navy / JWK GEC GeNie reactor. Transmutes nuclear waste to benign elements.

    Most likely working with a group… he solicited such.

    Cheers

    “Liviu Popa Simil LENR Nuclear Battery Roadmap” 27 Jan. 2014
    http://coldfusionnow.org/liviu-popa-simil-lenr-nuclear-battery-roadmap/

  82. More Smoke Ware, if there is some will to do a real demo, use some batteries (kw/h know), measure the output, it should be a multiple (cop), and put it in closed circuit producing electricity and recharge the batteries, you do not need megawatts, just a proper imposible to denny test. But knowing Rossi, and its fanatic followers this will never happen.

  83. The thing is that the patent law isn’t going to change overnight. If you research online you will find that there are many instances of patents being used to suppress technology. If you haven’t noticed endless shenanigans in all things related to money, you will eventually.

    Given the current legal model with patents, it is important for somebody who is passionate about making, developing and releasing this technology for the public to have the patent on the technology. If the details are made public before that happens, you can bet the farm that somebody in big money circles will get the patent first, and sue the bajeezas out of any body else, and go on to squander the technology and exploit it for their own personal benefit however they can, the rest of us be damned. That is why it is important for Rossi to have the patent or somebody like him, before any public disclosure of the necessary details for the best working model.

    Look no further than Disney suing the pants off of anybody who tries to put a Mickey Mouse logo or something like that on a cake or whatever, and there are many other examples.

  84. Debt is totally unnecessary in order to have a viable currency that stimulates trade and can fund infrastructure. The Chinese have proved this over the past thirty years, since their internal currency, the yuan is created debt free by its government owned central bank. Of course, Wall St accuses them of currency manipulation, even though they us the privatized US dollar for international trade.

Leave a Reply

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