E-Cat Test Coverage Roundup

There’s been quite a bit of attention paid to the recent Hot Cat test report, and I thought I would bring attention to a few sites where it has been mentioned so far (we have already pointed out the Forbes article). As you can see below there is a mixed response to it — but despite some misgivings about the report itself from some quarters there seems to be a new level of respect towards Rossi for carrying through with a commitment that was made, and which some people didn’t think would ever come to light.

I think that many people from here on out are going to take Rossi — and therefore LENR in general — more seriously.

UPDATE:

Thanks for Alain Coetmeur for sharing this link to his collection of E-Cat related articles on Scoop.it — a good source for additional coverage.

The ECAT Revolution Slope of Hope

“. . . The issue was that Rossi’s claims were not supported by any evidence. Two years passed, and many started to accuse him to be building a giant hoax, when finally, a couple of days ago, on May 20th, a group of serious academics (all with reputations to lose), published a detailed and thorough paper titled “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device” where they did show that Rossi’s invention is not a hoax: his device produces clearly an incredibly large amount of heat from a still unknown/unexplained sort of non-radioactive nuclear reaction. . . “

Cold Fusion, independent tests: the Hot Cat works and produces more energy than traditional sources International Business Times (Original Italian)

Some quotes from an interview with Guiseppe Levi:

As stated in the article, we are faced with a non-conventional source of energy  . . .  We have been able to operate in complete autonomy and freedom. outset it was clear that we could publish the results whatever they were . . . Definitely not chemical in nature  . . . the absence of radiation makes us say that it is a nuclear power is still new in nature  . . . ”

E-Cat Validation Creates More Questions PESWiki — article by Hank Mills

“I wish that the report would have shown a system self sustaining for a long period of time, at least an hour, without dropping in temperature. My thinking is that this could easily be done by simply applying the radio frequencies for the entire hour without applying the resistance heating coils. But this might create a situation like in the first of the three tests in which the reactor over heats, goes out of control, and destroys itself. I think it is clear that the enemy of control in the E-Cat is temperature, but at the same time the COP increases with temperature. So this creates an enigma — how to increase temperature while maintaining control. “

Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas Extreme Tech — Sebastian Anthony

“Against all probability, a device that purports to use cold fusion to generate vast amounts of power has been verified by a panel of independent scientists. The research paper, which hasn’t yet undergone peer review, seems to confirm both the existence of cold fusion, and its potency: The cold fusion device being tested has roughly 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline. Even allowing for a massively conservative margin of error, the scientists say that the cold fusion device they tested is 10 times more powerful than gasoline — which is currently the best fuel readily available to mankind.”

Cold Fusion Machine Gets Third-Party Verification, Inventor Says Popular Science — Francie Diep

“A well-known promoter of cold fusion technology—who’s been demonstrating his latest invention here and there over the past two years—has announced that an independent third party has verified his machine works . . . There’s plenty of reason to be skeptical. Rossi has a history of blocking even simple tests of the E-Cat. Many established experts are skeptical of his invention and with the idea that cold fusion is even possible . . .”

Is Cold Fusion for Real?  Science 2.0 — Tommaso Dorigo

“A model is direly needed, I would say; the secrecy behind the project does not help figuring out whether this is a very elaborate scam or a Nobel prize worthy discovery . . . I continue to believe in the scam hypothesis, but I must admit that this study impressed me for its reported result.”

HotCat Independent Report eCat News  — Paul Story

“I have to admit to being surprised. Never have I longed to be proven wrong so much in my life. We are not there yet, but at face value, this appears to be a giant step in the right direction. Healthy scepticism of the scientific kind is still advised since there are, as yet, many unanswered questions.”

 

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.