New Paper By Rossi and Gullström Reports QuarkX Experiment — Calculated COP >22,000

A new paper has been published on titled “Nucleon polarizability and long range strong force from σI=2 meson exchange potential”. The authors listed are Carl-Oscar Gullström and Andrea Rossi; report available here:

The physics involved are very complicated, and I will not attempt to critique it. However there is a very interesting experimental report of a device tested in Doral, Florida, which from reading it would have to be the QuarkX that Rossi has been talking about for so long (although the name QuarkX is not used). Below is the section of the paper describing the experiment:


Address of the site: 7861 NW 46th St., Doral, Florida, 33139 USA Participants to the experiment: Carl-Oscar Gullström, Dr Andrea Rossi

Description of the apparatus The circuit of the apparatus is made by a power source to supply direct current, a load made a 1 Ohm resistance, a reactor containing two nickel rods with LiAlH4 separated by 1.5 cm of space.

Measurements: During the test a direct current was switched on and off. When the current was switched on a plasma was seen flowing between the two nickel rods. The current was running through the plasma but the plasma was found to be charge neutral from a Van Deer Graaf test. This implies that the plasma has an equal amount of positive ions flying in the direction of the current and negative ions(electrons) in the opposite direction.

Input: 0.105 V of direct current over a 1 Ohm resistance.

Energy output: The wavelength of the radiations out of the reactor has been measured by a spectrometer ( Stellar Net spectrometer 350-1150 nm ) and was integrated with the value of 1100 nm ( 1.1 microns ).

The temperature of the surface of the reactor ( a perfect black body ) has been calculated with Wien’s equation: 2900/λ (micron) = 2900/1.1 = 2636 K

By Boltzman Equation the effect is: W = σ × ǫ × T4 × A
A = 1.0 cm2
ǫ = 0.9
By substitution: W = 5,67 × 1012 × 0.9 × 4.8 × 1013 = 244.9

A simple calculation using Ohm’s Law (.105 V / 1 Ohm = .105 A) gives the input power of 0.01102 Watts (.105 x .105)
To calculate COP: 244.9 (W out) / 0.01102 (W in)
COP = 22,223.23049

If confirmed, this is much more impressive than any previously reported E-Cat test.

  • Axil Axil

    LENR breaks doen protons and nuetrons into mesons and pions.

    These particles are the mechanism whereby atoms can interact via the storge force. The signa meson is the mechanism where atoms interact with each other.

    “If I am not mistaken σσ refers to scalar mesons (total spin 0 and even parity JP=0+JP=0+) in general. As @annav pointed out one candidate is f0(500)f0(500). Especially in effective theories of the nuclear force mesons are quiet important since there are many models describing the nuclear force with the exchange of those mesons: exchange models (see Pion-exchange model, Yukawa potential,…). How ever I think in a more modern view one uses chiral EFT with multiple pion exchanges to model the nuclear interaction. – M. J. Steil Sep 16 ’16 at 14:04”

  • Axil Axil

    Rossi et al are confusing cause and effect. The strong and the weak force produce nuclear change and the subatomic particles are the effects of how those forces function. The strong and the weak force produce the pion, muons, and mesons that Rossi is now factoring into his theory. But these particles are just the effects of what the strong force is doing in LENR. LENR is a condition where the strong force changes the way it behaves. The particles are the results of this change in behavior.

    Professional science states the the fundamental forces of nature cannot change unless they are affected by the application of extremes in energy. If enough energy is present, then the fundamental forces will gradually become unified. This is the main tenet in supersymmetry. This misconception is where science is going wrong in their understanding of reality. The action of the fundamental forces can be changed by special very low energy electromagnetic formating.

    As witnessed by LENR, the fundamental forces do not behave in this high energy driven way. As Rossi states, these forces change when a special type of magnetism is applied to the fundamental forces of nature. Rossi has picked the quadrupole magnetic force as the factor that changes the action of the fundamental forces. This pick is wrong. Informed by other LENR experimentation, we know that the proper LENR active magnetic force format is the monopole magnetic force.

    But even with this small bit of theoretical misdirection, we must give him his due. Rossi is very close to having LENR theory correct in its most basic aspects.

  • sam

    March 29, 2017 at 8:29 PM
    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    From what we can see in the Gullstrom-Rossi paper, the energy density of the QuarkX is stunning.

    Andrea Rossi
    March 30, 2017 at 10:09 AM
    The Gullstrom-Rossi paper is the beginning of a long work still to do and many verifications, included third parties verifications, have still to be made.
    Warm Regards,

    March 29, 2017 at 8:34 PM
    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Congratulations for the model you offered for the neutron decay: you would make a fantastic teacher.

    Andrea Rossi
    March 30, 2017 at 10:07 AM
    Thank you!
    Warm Regards,

  • sam

    Frank Acland
    March 27, 2017 at 8:41 AM
    Dear Andrea,

    You mention making a simulation of large scale production of QuarkXes.

    Is this a software simulation, or actually combining QuarkXes in an industrial-size unit?

    Thank you,

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi
    March 27, 2017 at 9:49 AM
    Frank Acland:
    We are working in this very moment on both issues.
    Warm Regards

    Andrea Rossi
    March 27, 2017 at 8:06 AM
    Dear Readers:
    Yesterday this blog has been unaccessible for several hours during the afternoon for a hacking attack. Our IP guy has repristinated all well in short time.
    Sorry for the gap of accessibility.
    Warm Regards,

  • sam
  • hunfgerh

    Assuming an e-capture mechanism based on nanoscallated superconductors;
    The values:

    R = 1 Ohm , U = 0,105 Volt

    are absolutely realistic for the circuit.

    • Axil Axil

      Does this mean that this level of current flow is caused by Crossed Andreev reflection between two normal electrodes separated by a superconductive plasma?

    • Axil Axil

      The current flow of R = 1 Ohm , U = 0.105 Volt may be caused by nanoscale superconductivity were the plasma is an imperfect superconductor where the current flow is caused by a pseudogap.​

      High-temperature superconductivity doesn’t happen all at once. As doping increases, superconductivity starts in isolated nanoscale patches that gradually expand until they take over. In this case, superconductive quasiparticles develop in the plasma so that electrons tunnel between the patches of superconductivity resulting in a pseudogap​.

      Does this mean that this level of current flow is caused by Crossed Andreev reflection between two normal electrodes separated by an imperfectly developing superconductive plasma?​

      • hunfgerh

        Sorry, I can not answer your question. Maybe someone else is trying.

  • giovanniontheweb

    nice mix of inconsistent discussions here, applying static temperature and Ohm’s Law concepts to plasma it comes to the same as to apply a river flow to sea waves. Step back to better jump might apply.

    • Rene

      It is the input impedance of the reactor.
      Warm Regards,

  • Jouni Tuomela

    Please consider reading this:
    They see several forces. Do those have anything to do with the phenomena what we have seen been happening?

    • Axil Axil

      This mechanism is how the Papp engine works as follows:

      Ionization and Coulomb explosion of Xenon clusters by intense, few-cycle laser pulses

      The power of the Papp engine came from the Coulomb explosion of noble gas clusters. The energy released by the explosion is proportional to the number of noble gas atoms in the cluster and the duration o the light pulse that triggered the coulomb explosion. The noble gas clusters were generated in the vacuum cycle of the non active piston.

      A large exploding noble gas cluster can produce as much as 2 MeV in energy.

      The laser…

      The XUV excitation pulses came from the chlorine in the noble gas mix as activated by the ignition spark.


      An excimer laser typically uses a combination of a noble gas (argon, krypton, or xenon) and a reactive gas (fluorine or chlorine). Under the appropriate conditions of electrical stimulation and high pressure, a pseudo-molecule called an excimer (or in the case of noble gas halides, exciplex) is created, which can only exist in an energized state and can give rise to laser light in the ultraviolet range.

      Papp polished the interior of the engine to reflect the excitation light created by the Excimer_laser discharge.

      The ions attain their kinetic energy from the conversion of the electrostatic repulsive energy in the cluster; the ions are too heavy to be accelerated directly by the rapidly oscillating laser electric field. Depending on the ion charges, the initial cluster/nanodroplet radius, the level and speed of the outer ionization process, the ion energies are in the keV to MeV range which is sufficient to induce nuclear fusion, if hydrogen isotopes are involved. Accordingly, possible applications of Coulomb explosions are table-top laser-induced nuclear fusion and neutron sources for material research [7-9] the study of stellar nucleosynthesis in the laboratory [10,11] (“stars in the lab” [12]), as well as particle accelerators.

  • Zephir

    /* A simple calculation using Ohm’s Law (.105 V / 1 Ohm = .105 A) gives the input power of 0.01102 Watts (.105 x .105) To calculate COP: 244.9 (W out) / 0.01102 (W in) COP = 22,223.23049 */

    The input power was undoubtedly higher, as the study in question explicitly says, that the voltage given (0.105 V) is the voltage on the 1 Ohm shunt resistor – not the reactor itself. Given the distance of nickel electrodes 2.5 cm, the actual voltage could be four orders higher (you’ll need roughly 1 kV/mm in air at room pressure for to achieve a discharge) – and after then the COP ~ 22.000 would shrink to some COP ~ 2.2 i.e. 220 %.

    BTW The radiation area 1 cm2 is also pretty small and it would correspond roughly the 1 mm diameter of reactor, so that the diameter of nickel electrodes must be definitely smaller. Which surface temperature the wire of diameter 1 mm and length 25 mm could get, if we introduce a power W = 25 kV x 0.1 A = 2.5 kWatt? Well, pretty high and the temperature achieved would correspond the 2.5 kWatt incandescent lightbulb.

    Does the result presented corresponds some actual overunity, after then? I wouldn’t say yes at the very first look.

    • Thomas Kaminski

      Actually, the 1kV/mm is the dielectric breakdown potential. Once ionized, the voltage could drop substantially.

      • Zephir

        Yes, but it cannot drop too much. For example the voltage at neon lamp is still some 60 V and the voltages bellow few eV are prohibited with quantum mechanics. But people at lenr-forum provided a better explanation of this controversy: A. Rossi did actually use voltage spikes (pulses) and he just reported the average values of voltage/current. After all, the usage of pulses (voltage spikes) gives a good meaning in LENR. Piantelli and Defkalion also initiated their fusion experiments with sparks or voltage spikes.

    • US_Citizen71

      Interestingly enough:
      March 24, 2017 at 4:13 PM
      Dear Dr Rossi,

      About the Arxiv publication, could you clarify the input power ?

      I suppose the 1 Ohm refers to a shunt resistor, the 0.105V beeing the voltage between the terminals of the resistor.
      This voltage would give the input current measurement, so 0.105A.
      If correct, then we need the input voltage to get the input power, for example 24V DC. Could you give the correct value?
      In this example (24V x 0.105A) would give 2.52W input power.

      If the 1 Ohm is the input impedance of the reactor, then ok the input power is 0.105×0.105/1 = 11mW



      Andrea Rossi
      March 24, 2017 at 6:54 PM
      It is the input impedance of the reactor.
      Warm Regards,

    • Rene

      It is the input impedance of the reactor.
      Warm Regards,
      And there, it was *not* a shunt resistor being measured. How weird is that?

      • Zephir

        Why the shunt resistor was there after all? How it comes, that the resistance of reactor is exactly 1 Ohm? More question than answers…

        • US_Citizen71

          Maybe the core is carbon and housed inside a quartz glass or other high temperature resistant ceramic tube either at vacuum or with a noble gas surrounding it? The carbon tube would present the same problem Edison had, so why not use a similar solution? This might account for use of spectrography for the temperature measurement as well since the surface wouldn’t be accessible. A 11mW draw light bulb that produces 220W equivalence of light would have uses and with the right outer tube much of the heat could be passed through. I know there are ceramic glasses that pass 80% upwards of IR through.

  • hunfgerh

    Electron capture – the hole repair

    The e-capture of a shell electron by a nuclear proton leads to an electron hole
    in the k-shell. This hole is simultaneously repaired by moving electrons from
    higher shells to the k-shell. Here, energy is released in the form of radiation E = h ν. The wavelength of the radiation is in the range (IR – UV = 10exp-6 – 10exp-7 m).
    For e-capture reactions, it is thus necessary to distinguish between the endothermic reaction (p+ + e-) = n and the exergonic hole repair of the electron shell.
    Maybe this could explain:
    “Energy output: The wavelength of the radiations out of the reactor has been measured by a spectrometer ( Stellar Net spectrometer 350-1150 nm ) and was integrated with the value of 1100 nm ( 1.1 microns ).

  • Omega Z

    Dear Dr Rossi,

    There is a typo in the report published on Arxiv : current in Amps not Volts …
    “Input: 0.105 V of direct current over a 1 Ohm resistance”

    Regards, Michel

    V/ Ohm = A: it’s obvious. But I admit that the way we wrote it can be confusing, albeit the meaning is obvious: the input of direct current ( obviously A) is given by a voltage of .105 over 1 Ohm.

    Warm Regards, A.R.

    • Gerard McEk

      It is clear that the calculated input power for the plasma is wrongly calculated. It is the power over the input resistor, not over the plasma. The COP (22,223) cannot be calculated, based on the provided data. It can be any value.

      • Observer

        Rossi Blog:
        March 23, 2017

        In your recently described experiment, is the one ohm resistance the ballast resistance, the steady-state plasma resistance, or a combination of both?

        Andrea Rossi’s Answer:
        A combination of both.

        • Zephir

          In this moment A. Rossi is losing it definitely, because no plasma would leave the 0.1 V voltage drop

          • Observer

            Who told you that Rossi’s plasma was low pressure?

            • Zephir

              Me356 did use low pressure hydrogen discharge. Regarding the A. Rossi I’m not sure, but the higher pressure would increase the ignition voltage even more. See also my comment bellow

              • Obsever

                Go back to the picture of the quark x rossi released earlier.


                What color is the plasma?

                • Zephir

                  Yes, it’s also the pink color of low pressure hydrogen discharge. At higher pressures the spectra of gases get white color due to washing out the spectral lines. And the reactor is surrounded with blue glow of Cherenkov radiation released by particles of unknown origin (probably the electrons given the size of that glow).

                • Zephir

                  Yes, it’s the typical pink color of low pressure hydrogen discharge. It could be also nitrogen, though…


                  At higher pressures the spectra of gases get white color due to washing out the spectral lines. And the reactor is surrounded with blue glow of Cherenkov radiation released by particles of unknown origin (probably the electrons given the size of that glow).

          • Rene

            I think at this point I conclude there is, again, deliberate obfuscation going on in that paper to basically makes those claims unverifiable, even incalculable. Very disappointed in Rossi again. He may have something but he is making it impossible to verify.

  • Omega Z

    If your contradiction in terms is about of the grid cheap energy,

    People have very simplistic views on this. People are clueless about the cost and maintenance of maintaining our energy systems and all the redundancies that keep it reliable. We do not see it thanks to our modern convenience of just flip a switch mentality. Once you put it in your home, that all changes.

    When you get home, will you have lights. How many days till a technician is available. Will they need to order the parts etc, etc..

    I think people will opt for a standard $30 a month utility bill. Cheaper then an anual system recharge that technician will charge and none of the worries.

    From the Grid: No heat system disposal or utilization cost, No peak demand capacity(This would be a huge individual cost. Likely 5x what a utility would need).

    Note: I envision a small local grid system without the costs of transmitting energy 100’s of miles from a large central power plant.

    • roseland67

      My comment was in response to Omega first post,
      “It receives continuous input power while in continuous self sustain mode”

      • Omega Z


        From what Rossi answered to a question, Even in self sustain, it requires some power input. I assume a lower level of input.

        Also, Rossi claim the same for the 1MW plant. Even in self sustain with 1MW output, it still required between 8K to 13K of input.

        Also, Mouse/Cat- Mouse required input even when the cat was in self sustain.

        I actually suspected this clear back during the Ferrara, Italy test that brought about the Lugano test. About 10 watts unaccounted for.

        It appears some kind of stimulation is required to maintain self sustain…
        Rossi dribbles information out and I think this hurts his credibility. But it’s always possible that’s his intent. If completely believable, how many people would be jumping in to compete.

        I also think the technology works. Except sometimes. That makes it not ready for market.

  • Frank Acland

    I have put up a new thread for discussion of the Penon report and other new court documents here,

    Let’s keep this thread for discussion of the Gullstrom-Rossi paper.

  • Regarding the court documents – could someone explain what [proposed] means at the beginning of court orders; If it’s only a proposed order, when will the decision on the order be made, and are there any examples in the court docket of proposed orders that have later been confirmed or rejected?

    • The judge will often ask the side requesting an order to write the draft for it and this gets marked [Proposed].

      I’ve read where judges usually don’t do this until after a judgement has been made (so the order will eventually almost certainly be approved) and the purpose of the draft is to allow the sides to haggle over the exact terms/wording as necessary. However, it is not clear if that rule of thumb applies with these judges.

  • Now it gets very very dark for Rossi.
    Looks like the crappy Gullström paper was an attempt to divert his followers from the court case.

    • Bicke Dutte

      No, it only looks dark for IH and friends, who could have scrounged info on Rossi’s IP, from all of this

  • bachcole

    Me to.
    Gullström just makes it “Rossi says” enhanced.

  • Axil Axil

    What the paper is postulating is that the nature of the fundamental forces don’t always behave as science says. That means that the fundamental forces are not actually fundamental. These forces emerge from more fundamental properties of nature that can direct them. There are special conditions that magnetic fields produce that changes the way the strong and the weak force can control matter.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      It’s somewhat scary to imagine what the existence of a long-range strong force component might imply…

      • radvar

        Bell’s Theorem opens the door for all the weirdness we will ever need.

    • guitarwebs

      now you are on the right track…the true nature of the aether is being exposed.

  • Jas

    If you want a good laugh then go to the Lenr Forum and read Dewey dismiss this report as nonsense. A few people tell him to shut up.

    • Bicke Dutte

      I’ve been following his ramblings for a year, can’t wait to read that.
      Truly the best timeline!

  • Zephir

    it just seems for me, that Gullström-Rossi report completely neglected the heat input from outside: the working temperature of reactor must be somehow reached and this heat isn’t for free, especially not at high temperatures. Other than that, these experiments should be easy to replicate, as there are anecdotal reports about palladium glow discharge tube filled with hydrogen, which kept itself in glowing state, once the electricity passed through it. I presume, the QuarkX device would work in similar way. What I meant with it was, we already have enough of information for independent research of the same arrangement. Of course there can be some hidden tricks, but given the reliability and efficiency reported, I wouldn’t consider serious problem with it.

    • As far as I understand, the Quark doesn’t need to be heated for the reaction to start. It’s instant on, triggered by electricity and maybe something else.

      • Omega Z

        According to a couple responses from Rossi on JONP, if not instant on, the reaction starts within seconds at least.

  • New court docs = TREASURE TROVE.

    Reading thru some of Rossi’s video testimony… under oath he says ‘customer side’ had platinum sponges and graphene… He measured steam temp with a Penon thermometer but Penon also collected data electronically from thermocouples and stored on computer… Fabiani took separate set of measurements at Darden’s request…

    • Heat escape mystery TWIST… second story window completely removed from office portion of warehouse…

    • Fabiani and Bass worked together on control system for JMP side.

    • Husky

      Where do you see video testimony?

    • Rossi has trouble swallowing… needs surgery!

      • Rene

        See? Muons at work. 🙂

    • Jim Bass moved over to Leonardo as a consultant once JMP closed their plant in Doral (~March 2016) to study roboticization — in connection with a proposed effort with Di Giovanni (JMP owner) to further develop the technology that JMP was investigating with their plant.

    • JMP plant was also in a shipping container, wrapped in black insulation.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Was that (1) the customer? Or do I interpret the statement (2) wrongly?


      (2) See 207-19 (Exhibit 19), p. 219 (14 in the PDF).

      • Nice find!

        But it’s likely a small error in testimony. Southern Industrial Constructors was previously tied to a location used by Rossi in North Carolina!


        • Andreas Moraitis

          Most likely. They considered this company as a possible customer in NC. (see p. 192). But that idea has obviously not been realized.

    • wpj

      Interesting in -47 that Darden says in an email that some reactors work and some don’t.

      • Stanny Demesmaker

        Mr Tom – (I can’t remember that / I don’t know) – Darden 🙂 He indicates that there could be fraud, and then IH still cashes 50 million dollar of WF in the meanwhile, who is then the fraud?

    • Barbierir

      It seems 197-03 is the Penon report

      • It is. But we’ve already seen key pieces of it so not much drama there.

        The flow meter being marked as on the return pipe from the JMP side to the 1MW side will be an item of import.

        Basically, IMO… not much question steam was produced at 103+ deg C. Not much question cold water on input. Thus it comes down to if the water flow was measured accurately or not. If it’s right or off by less than a factor of ~10 then we have an over-unity technology.

        • wpj

          The Bass deposition (-48) certainly implies that there wasn’t much going on in the JM side of the warehouse.

  • artefact


    Bob Higgins commences fully automated Ni + LiAlH4 experiment

    “The GO button has just been clicked for an automated Ni + LiAlH4 experiment. Whilst Bob will always be able to intervene, but if he doesn’t, it will take 6 days.
    The experiment contains 1.02g of pre-processed AH-50 carbonyl Ni powder and 0.11g of LiAlH4. That was all that he could fit in the 2″ end of my smaller ceramic tube.
    There is a very slow temperature rise and the system will not be >600C until late tomorrow. The script includes soaking and evacuation cycles to clean out residual water vapor and O2.”

  • bachcole

    Do I print this paper out, put it in my fireplace, and burn it to keep warm on cold nights. We need more than papers. We need physically objective results in the real, physical world. All that we have had for years now, since the various tests on the immature E-Cat, is more “Rossi Says”. I hope to get excited again when people with real credibility get excited about Quarkx or the E-Cat. Until then, on this issue, I will go back to sleep. Another paper or another announcement doesn’t do anything for me.

    • Vinney

      Yes! Another paper, but an introduction to a new talent, with outstanding physics credentials, although young.
      But at these COP results, the effect is undeniable.
      The higher the COP, the less the likelihood the effect is false, and the less the margin for error.
      I believe the results.

    • georgehants

      Roger, I think the scientific term you are describing re. Rossi for the last seven years is that he is “a waste of space”.
      Seven years of a life saving discovery hidden for nothing but greed. (if genuine)
      Come on MFMP put Rossi in the shadows.

      • bachcole

        George, I do not go as far as you do. My belief has withered and needs watering. But I do not disbelieve. I am not saying that the E-Cat, the quarkx, and everything that Rossi has done and is doing is fakery. (I leave the fakery to the mainstream news media and politicians.)

        • georgehants

          Roger, I also in no way have suggested that it is not genuine (beyond their being no confirmed open repetition of the effect), my point as always is the delay in allowing work to start on the benefits Cold Fusion can bring to the World.

    • Ophelia Rump

      That was burn enough for a whole season.

    • Gerrit

      Sometimes I wonder what the Rossi tales will be in 5 years from now. What have we seen since 2011, ECat, Warm Cat, Hot Cat, Cat mouse, Xcat, GasCat.

  • Omega Z

    Socialism is a race to the bottom.

    Someone will always produce less then you so that you must share your’s with them. Thus enslaving you to them. Overtime(a matter of a few years), there will be less and less per person.

    Note that people today benefit more then ever while being less productive then ever. Thanks to technology. However, everyone still wants even more while doing even less.

    Perhaps in time, we will create a matrix and plug everyone in. They can have their hearts desire while their body decays away in a life support module.

  • Dr. Mike

    The English in this paper should have been corrected prior to submission of the paper. The Doral experiment is so poorly explained that any attempt to gain any useful scientific information is close to useless. My interpretation of the 1 ohm resistor is a current measurement resistor, therefore no information is given on the voltage applied to the device. Even an online published paper should have included a basic schematic diagram of the experiment. It is hard to determine the merits of the theory presented in this paper from the poor way it has been written. I did not see how any of the presented experimental data supported this theory at the exclusion of other theories.

    • Axil Axil

      The input wattage is calculated to develop the COP. Is this calculation invalid in your opinion?

      • Obvious

        There is zero information on how input power was measured. Therefore it is impossible to determine how accurate and/or precise that information is.

        • Omega Z

          Probably Rossi does not want to expose to much info until after the legal situation is concluded.

          • Rene

            So once again titillating claims for press, glory and investors. It is time for due diligence.

            • Omega Z

              Could a judge order Rossi to hand over his IP. Hard to do if one is not certain if that IP truly exists and if it does, what it entails. Rossi can determine his course of action when things settle accordingly.

              To be certain, Rossi is a little paranoid about people trying to steal his IP. Sadly. It is highly justified. Attempts of out right theft, secretly attemping to scan the E-cats in operation and probably much more we haven’t even heard about.

              Rossi has spent Million$ of his own money. Enough that he could have lived well had he never worked with LENR. This is not what scammers do. They use other peoples money.

              There are perfectly legitimate questions we can ask. Reliable, dependable and many more. I can even answer that it obviously has issues to work out or Rossi would have already brought it to market.

              I think Rossi’s very concerned about putting a product on the market prematurely. Recalls and liabilty can quickly destroy ones plans. And insult to injury, the governmeny hits you with a few billion in fines.

              This is a new technology. A fiasco from the start could keep LENR products off the market for many years to come.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          One could grant the Lugano authors that they at least described their experiment exactly enough to allow a critical evaluation. That is not possible in the present case. However, I take this rather as a theory paper. As such it might be of some value, but testing the theory empirically would require a different kind of experiments (that’s basically what the authors say at the end). So the ‘experimental part’ appears to be superfluous in a way.

          • Dr. Mike

            The experimental part also seemed superfluous to me. Very hard to determine if the theoretical part has any merit due to the way it was written.
            Dr. Mike

      • Rene

        Yes because it is not clear what the actual current was. The power is derived from a stated voltage and a derived amperage based on a vaguely worded description of the cell resistance. It is not clear if the 1 ohm resistance is the cell when off, or on, or if the resistance is a measurement blank.
        I cannot determine if the resistance varies upward or downward once it is in operation.

      • Vinney

        It’s called ‘professional envy’, but it’s still green.
        The COP is the only figure that matters, but was it measured correctly.
        Even if there is some margin of error, 22,000 could come down to 220.
        They still would be envious.

        • Vinney

          In other words, the higher the COP, the more any idiot can measure it.
          Rossi is laying down the gauntlet to especially the high priests of physics,
          “I got 22,000, but you can’t even get over ONE”.

          • Philip James

            Frank Acland claimed the COP… not Rossi.

      • Dr. Mike

        Axil Axil,
        The power dissipated in the 1 ohm resistor was as Frank calculated, but the input power to the device is unknown. There also was not enough information on the determination of the output power to begin to calculate a COP. Was the device temperature really 2636K? What was the outer material? Was it alumina, which melts at about 2345K? Was it really a perfect black body material? Finally, was this the QuarkX device that has an output power of 20W?
        Dr. Mike

        • Thomas Kaminski

          I agree that the power seems to be that dissipated in a current sensing resistor, not the input power to the plasma. I find it hard to believe that 0.1 Ampere of current at 0.1 volts can sustain the plasma, but I admit that I do not understand the theory expounded in the paper. Taking a more conservative approach and assuming that the voltage sustaining the plasma is on the order of 100 volts still leads to a COP of over 20.

          • Dr. Mike

            If the voltage sustaining the plasma was 100V (quite reasonable), then the input power would be 100V times 0.1A equals 10W. If the device is Rossi’s 20W QuarkX, the COP would be 2. Nothing wrong with a COP of 2, but all such calculations are worthless when a good paper would have provided data for an accurate calculation.
            Dr. Mike

            • Thomas Kaminski

              The 100V was a guess, and I just used the estimated power from the black body radiation calculation to get the factor of 1000. Obviously, a good flow calorimetry setup would be preferable to get a more accurate power out result.

          • Zephir
    • MorganMck

      You assume that the authors really want you to fully understand and be able to replicate their work. I really doubt they do. I think they had something much more limited in mind.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Obviously so. Some of Gullström’s ideas sound interesting, but his way of thinking and way of formulating sentences feels challenging for me to follow. I also know too little of nuclear physics to be able to judge the ideas because they are at so advanced level.

      I figure that Gullström is a recent student who has probably listened to all the nuclear physics courses that are available in his university and who is an idea-rich person. Probably due to his excitement he has overlooked certain basics such as putting in dimensions in the equations (especially in calculations on page 3, top) or that the “Summary and discussion” section should give discussion and summary – and of course the language overall as you said.

      Overall: tantalising hints, a few inspiring thoughts, poor language, poor rigour, a lot of “trash DNA” riddled stuff whose meaning remains unclear. Frustrating to read. Familiar Rossi style.

      • Axil Axil

        Getting a long term job in particle physics is hard these days. Many post docs put in their time at the local particle accelerator to get their degrees then look at tons of data while the projects last. I think that the particles are getting very hard to find.

        LENR is coming of age at the right time for these young folks. There are more people than jobs. If there is money to be made in LENR research, they will come.

        • radvar

          That’s a great observation. The “fusion” of materials science and particle physics will greatly expand the career opportunities for young scientists. That’s exciting!

      • Dr. Mike

        I agree totally!

  • roseland67


    In your opinion, Does this mean the Ecat development is obsolete?

    • Frank Acland

      In my opinion, the QuarkX is an E-Cat, and the result of development so far. If it is obviously superior to previous models (and it does seem to be) I would focus on it, and not go backwards.

      • Rene

        If I were to suspend disbelief (because none of this is verified), I’d agree. It looks like the evolution of the COP6 Elbow steamer cat, to the much larger low-temp cube-e-cats with COPs ranging from 6 to 20ish), to the hot-cat, and now to the downsized quarkX (with COPs all over the map). If small size was needed to manage reaction excursions, presumably automation will drive the costs down of the myriad qXs needed to deliver the power levels of the cube-e-cats.
        So, Rossi went from many exploding elbow cats, to sometimes exploding cube-e-cats, then a period of experimentation with the hot cats which somehow led to QuarkX-cats that popped too often, and finally to something that presumably is now fully controllable. But, this is hearsay presently. Looking forward to independent confirmation.