Andrea Rossi Comments on Open Letter to Stefan Pomp (Then Deletes)

Patrik Wiksten has posted an open letter to Uppsala University (Sweden) professor Stefan Pomp who has been critical of the work of the authors of the Lugano E-Cat report (and the previous one published last year), and has suggested that the whole E-Cat affair is a fraud.

Wiksten does not claim in his letter that the E-Cat is proven, but he does ask that Pomp be less closed minded in his refusal to take seriously the research surrounding the E-Cat and other LENR experiments. He states:

The thing is mr Pomp, you are an authority. Mainstream media won’t dare to touch something this controversial, especially when you, as an authority, chose to accuse the whole team including Rossi as a fraud. Because that’s what you’re doing with your “The cat is Dead” with your wink at Schrodinger. Because of this, people in general doesn’t get the full story. And as you know every story has two sides…

Someone posted a link to this open letter on the Journal of Nuclear Physics, and Andrea Rossi commented on it — and then apparently deleted the comment, because it can’t be found on the JONP any more. The response has been captured, however, in a screenshot posted on the LENR forum. By the formatting. It looks like the screen capture comes from the Rossilivecat.com site, but I can’t find the original on that site either. Perhaps when Rossi deletes from the JONP, the entry is deleted from Rossilivecat. I suppose there is an outside chance that this is a total forgery, but I doubt it. The style is certainly Rossi’s.

Here is the text of Rossi’s (now deleted) apparent response:

Andrea Rossi
October 19th, 2014 at 10:45 PM
Patrik Wiksten:
I do not know if you will read this comment, because probably you do not know we published the link to your “Open Letter” published on LENR Forum.
I just want to thank you for the paradigma you offered of a Galilean way of thinking opposed to a paradigma of “Sancta Inquisitio” way of thinking.
The Professors just made measurements, and, while I agree upon the difficulty to reconcile the 62Ni percentage shift, I did not see any serious critic of the calculations, while I saw many clowneries, like ” the clamps have been swapped” (false), ” the calculation of the resistances shows that the E-Cat does not respect the Ohm’s
Law” (false, the resistances do not have a linear response to the temperature in the coil of the E-Cat and the heat dissipation is totally different from the copper cables), ” the color of the alumina at 1300°C is whiite heat” ( stupidity, Alumina becomes White heat only when it melts at 2070°C and compare it to the glass is an elementary mistake), “the multiplication of voltage time amperage gives an amount of energy superior to the one declared” ( yes, but the control system continues to change the phase angle, and this wtong calculation has been made assuming that the values are always at the peak, and this is obviously wrong” and so on, with a theory that assumes that the Professors of the ITP are not able to connect a Wattmeter, to measure a Temperature, and insulting them: exactly like the Sancta Inquisitio, who wanted to burn alive Galileo, just because he was discovering something that was
different from the consolidated and universally shared knowledge of the time.
About ” The Cat is dead”: I am sorry for Dr Pomp, but the Cat is very healthy and on the verge of a commercial breakthrough, because to make him alive or dead is not the Sancta Inquisitio of Dr Pomp, is the market. If the Customer makes profits with the E-Cat, it is alive, otherwise it is not: I can assure the Cat is pretty healthy:
makes many exercise, does not drink alcohol, does not get illegal drugs and somebody has experienced it could be a tiger; not counting the fact that the Cat has not used a single cent of the Taxpayer.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • Dods

    After reading I had 3 thoughts come to mind.

    Frankie go’s to Hollywood – Two Tribes Video.
    Harry Hill “There’s only one way to find out?”.
    MTV’s celebrity deathmatch.

    All would make great parody’s

    My money is on Rossi BTW.

  • Dods

    After reading I had 3 thoughts come to mind.

    Frankie go’s to Hollywood – Two Tribes Video.
    Harry Hill “There’s only one way to find out?”.
    MTV’s celebrity deathmatch.

    All would make great parody’s

    My money is on Rossi BTW.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Rossi for the win, but he is more right to take the high road and leave the trolls to the handling of other experienced trolls.

    It does not feel right for you to publish here what he retracted.

    • Buck

      OR,

      Rossi’s response is on RossiLiveCat.com. If it was deleted, it is now back.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        On JoNP the comment is still missing.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Excellent Smithers!

    • Bernie777

      Good reporting, Frank. We need more investigative reporting, it has become a lost art.

      • Bernie777

        Ophelia, sorry I meant this to be a general comment.

      • timycelyn

        Andrea has given an unusually long and passionate response toa question on JONP regarding the Inonel wires. In the process he reveals both his irritation withthe questioner and the ‘Professor’ the questioner is citing.

        I’m afraid I am strugging with the detail but hope that those more expert here can translate this to a point where I may comprehend it!

        Andrew
        October 20th, 2014 at 3:17 AM
        Dear Andrea Rossi,
        I believe that there are some clarification that either you, or the professors through you have to make, to justify the relevance of the TPRII.
        You have already commented on this but your answer was not satisfying at all.
        You stated that the behaviour of the resistances changes and it’s Not linear (in particolar behaving as a negative resistance from 500-1200 and holding constant from that temperature on) .
        But we all know that inconel has not that characteristic, with or without reactions involved.
        Therefore i believe that you can’t just state that you cannot comment further on this, especially being aware that through the report some fundamental mistakes are carried out such as :
        Page 14:

        ”Measurements performed during the dummy run with the PCE and ammeter clamps allowed us to measure an average current, for each of the three C1 cables, of I1 = 19.7A, and, for each C2 cable, a current of I1 / 2 = I2 = 9.85 A.”

        That is sistematically wrong since I2=I1/1.732

        Andrea Rossi
        October 20th, 2014 at 11:36 AM
        Andrew:
        Your comment is a typical example of the effects of the stupidities made by fake experts like “Raman”, that act as Professors, but lack the foundamentals of Physics, Electronics and Electrotechnics. The effects are that persons like you, clearly missing a professional understanding of the matter, instead of reading seriously a Report written by 6 Professors with a life dedicated to Science and Physics in particular, read the stupidities of imbeciles with an agenda and make us loose time to answer to absurd objections. I am not angry at you, you are just a candid non-expert-person, I am angry because every stupidity gets attention and we, honestly, do not have the time to answer. As you have perhaps read, I already suggested as a reference the wonderful book “Electronics for Dummies” to the “Prof” you got inspiration from, but he does not listen to me and continues to repeat the same stupidities.
        Again:
        The coils of the reactor are made with a proptietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it. Your phrase “”with or without reactions involved” is pretty arrogant, and such arrogamce, perhaps, forbids you to try to understand what I wrote. If you read carefully what I wrote and what is written in the Report, you will see that “with or without reactions” is a stupidity. The nature and composition of the coils are of paramount importance in our IP and for obvious reasons I will not give any more information, albeit you demand to me not to “state that (I) cannot comment further on this, ESPECIALLY BEING AWARE THAT THROUGH THE REPORT SOME FUNDAMENTAL ( SIC!) MISTAKES ARE CARRIED OUT, SUCH AS..” and at this point you add another titanic stupidity that the Readers can find in your comment: whom do you think you are talking with ?
        And here is the answer to your titanic stupidity ( I know, you are not the author of the titanic stupidity, you are just parrotting the suggestions of “Prof” Raman): just, please read … I will write in very simple language, to allow you (and “Prof” Raman, who insists not to buy ‘Electronics for Dummies’ as I suggested him) to understand, with a small effort and some focus (to Raman I suggest not to chew a gum at the same time).
        THE ALIMENTATION CABLING OF THE REACTOR IS COMPOSED BY MEANS OF 2 PARTS FOR EVERY ROW:
        1- ONE PART FROM THE CONTROL SYSTEM TO THE JOINT (C); THIS PART IS NAMED C1
        2- AFTER THE JOINT C THE SAME CURRENT IS SUBDIVIDED INTO 2 ROWS HAViNG THE SAME SECTION AND LENGTH: WE CALL THEM C2
        BASED ON THE KIRCHHOFF LAW ( ALSO CALLED KICHHOFF JUNCTION RULE) , WE CAN MAKE THE DEDUCTION THAT THE CURRENT THAT FLOWS THROUGH THE ROW C1 IS EQUAL TO THE DOUBLE OF THE CURRENT THAT FLOWS ALONG EACH OF THE ROWS NAMED C2.
        Warm Regards,
        A.R.

        • Curbina

          Fantastic non diplomatic response.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          I have no idea if Kirchhoff’s first rule is applicable in this case. We have three phase current here, and the ends of the C2 lines are connected to different phases. Are any electrical engineers here who could clarify his?

          • Andreas Moraitis

            According to Kirchhoff, the current in the C1 lines should equal the sum of the currents in both C2 lines. The question is if both currents in C2 are identical. If not so, one could not say that the sum equals the double of the current in one of the lines.

          • Obvious

            If the two wire sections (diameter) and length are the same, are constructed of the same alloy, and operate the same load, then the currents will be the same.

            If the two segments do not supply identical loads, or the segments are of different resistances, then all bets are off.

            In effect, Rossi is telling us that the three resistors, supplied by the three phases of electricity, are identical. This is useful information. This is simpler to build anyways, but it need not be that way, if there was a reason to do it differently.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Figure 4 is not a schematic. Which is to say that cables which share the same C block connection are not necessarily of the same polarity.

            In fact it would be impossible for all the cables connected to the same blocks to be of the same polarity. All three cables must go to ground.

            One end connection must be the opposite polarity of the other, the middle therefore must have both.

          • Obvious

            The equivalent loads are indicated by Rossi saying that the legs of the delta have exactly 1/2 of the current supply leads.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Remember 3 phase. They may be temporally offset.
            Unless they tampered with the timing of the 3 phase, they most certainly are temporally offset.

          • Obvious

            If they use the “wall outlet” three phases as the three phases of feed (C1), then each leg of the delta (two legs at each feed) carries the square root of the three phases’ current, which 1.73 times the current carried in a single phase feed. This is due to the temporal AC sine overlaps. In this instance, each leg of the delta carries more than 1/2 of the feed line current, counter to what Rossi has emphatically stated.
            If DC pulses were applied down the feed to the delta ends, then things change at each leg/C2…
            If only two out of three phases are supplied, then things change.
            If diodes are inserted into series with each leg, things change.
            If the timing of the phases is altered…

          • Ophelia Rump

            I don’t think a high leg delta is indicated. I do not see an indication of a ground to the middle leg. Using 1.73 may not be appropriate.
            I am sorry but I am decades rusty on three phase, and I am probably not up to giving you quality feedback on this.

          • Steve H

            As you will remember:-
            Total 3 phase power can be calculated using line voltage and current or phase voltage and current.

            1.732*VL*IL*cos phi. or

            3*Vph*Iph*cos phi

            With a star connected load, the line voltage is 1.732*phase voltage (line and phase current are equal).
            With a delta connected load, line current is 1.732*phase current (line and phase voltage are equal).

            These equations are only true for standard 3 phase ac. A pure sine wave with 120 degree displacement between phases – as you would expect from a normal industrial supply.

          • LCD

            you seem to have something there but I got lost. Perhaps you could rephrase?

          • Obvious

            That’s it.

          • US_Citizen71

            Since the heaters are coils under an alternating current load they should be viewed as inductors not resistors. (see Steve H’s response to me below for more detail)

          • Obvious

            Steve H’s response below was partial when I wrote the above post.
            Re: Steve’s response: The wiring, whether inductors or resistors, is in a Delta pattern, as described in the caption below the diagram (figure 4).
            What the control box exactly does is an open question. What the inductance properties of the coils are, depends on what is inside their coils. I suppose they could be tuned to act as IR antennae also, confounding deliberation further.
            My point was that Rossi was indirectly indicating that the paired lengths are acting equivalently, and therefore the loads are equivalent, greatly simplifying evaluation of what might be going on. If we assume something more complicated, then we disregard the info given us, and we might as well disregard everything else, too.

          • US_Citizen71

            I agree. I also now remember why I ended up choosing another career path instead of electronics. ; )

          • Ophelia Rump

            You left out temporal differences, remember phase offset with three phase.

          • Obvious

            I am thinking that over now. The 1.73 times delta leg amperage value for the supply applies to three phase power to the delta. So for the values to be the same, only two phases must be fed to alternating sets of delta ends… which happens to be what the image in figure 5 shows. Two peaks, and a blank third (the OL channel).

          • Daniel Maris

            DickieFix – I think anyone sensible here understands what you are all about it and that therefore everything you say is cancelled out.

          • Steve H

            As far as I remember, Kirchoffs rule applies to dc not ac.

        • Josh G

          OK, nice work. But this looks pretty flat across the range of temperatures. We’d need something that has a high resistivity at low temperatures and much lower resistivity at higher temperatures.

          I have a feeling that whatever Inconel is used here is not a standard commercial product. Rossi has said it is doped.

          BTW, if anyone is curious, here is a link to a table listing the melting point of different metals and alloys, including different varieties of Inconel, starting on page 16. The highest melting point is for Inconel MA956 at 1482 C, which is I believe is well above the estimated temperature inside the E-cat.

          http://solarmfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Critical-Melting-Point1.pdf

          And to think, a few days ago I didn’t even know what inconel was… 🙂

        • Fortyniner

          “The coils of the reactor are made with a proptietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it.” (Rossi seems to have fingers that are larger than the keys on his keyboard – I have the same problem!).

          There seem to be several clues here – over to the replication thread experts for some speculation …

  • Ophelia Rump

    Rossi for the win, but he is more right to take the high road and leave the trolls to the handling of other experienced trolls.

    It does not feel right for you to publish here what he retracted, but it was an interesting read.
    It was certainly within the realm called Excellent Reporting. But that is a questionable standard.

    • Buck

      OR,

      Rossi’s response is on RossiLiveCat.com. If it was deleted, it is now back.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        On JoNP the comment is still missing.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Excellent Smithers!

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      Good reporting, Frank. We need more investigative reporting, it has become a lost art.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Ophelia, sorry I meant this to be a general comment.

  • Freethinker

    Nice catch Frank (or whomever caught it, LENR forum login and I don’t agree well) . From IH standpoint the self censoring may be a good thing, but I am glad it was caught.

  • Freethinker

    Nice catch Frank (or whomever caught it, LENR forum login and I don’t agree well) . From IH standpoint the self censoring may be a good thing, but I am glad it was caught.

  • Ged

    Too bad he deleted it, as that was a very good response.

    • Ophelia Rump

      I thought it would have been if he had someone edit it first.
      Rossi needs an editor for translation to English. His writing could be very powerful with the appropriate help.

      • GreenWin

        Hello IH???

        • clovis ray

          Hi, GW
          i would think IH hopes he would shut up altogether, at least for a while, smile

  • Ged

    Too bad he deleted it, as that was a very good response.

    • Ophelia Rump

      I thought it would have been if he had someone edit it first.
      Rossi needs an editor for translation to English. His writing could be very powerful in English with the appropriate help.

      • GreenWin

        Hello IH???

        • clovis ray

          Hi, GW
          i would think IH hopes he would shut up altogether, at least for a while, smile

  • Josh G

    “the resistances do not have a linear response to the temperature in the coil of the E-Cat and the heat dissipation is totally different from the copper cables”

    It’s a bit vague, but it could presumably explain the discrepancies in the watt-to-joule heating discrepancies of ammeter-gate, no? If the resistance goes down (asymptotically) as heat goes up, this could account for the lower watt-to-joule heating ratio during the test of the live reactor. Or am I mistaken?

    • Ophelia Rump

      Since he does not have the raw data for resistance values, because none are given in the report, how would he know resistance ?

      He is speculating up conjecture to contradict the findings.
      You are attempting to back engineer the speculation, so yes, this is a mistaken endeavor.

      • Josh G

        Ophelia dear, I think there is some confusion here. I was quoting Rossi, who should know very well what the resistances are. I just got a response from Mats Lewan on his blog. Here is what he wrote:

        “That’s right, but it’s not new — this was the immediate explanation Rossi gave before to this issue. And it’s is still the explanation I have received when I have asked. What is required, more in detail, is a material in the resistors with a resistivity that decreases by a factor three somewhere in the interval from 450 to 1200 degrees Celsius, and then remain fairly constant in the interval from 1200 to 1400 degrees. I have been told by materials physicists that such materials are possible.”

        • Ophelia Rump

          Ah thank you sorry my mistake.

          The following was my mistake, taken from the original above to avoid confusing others so I could label it here for posterity as being what it is.

          Since he does not have the raw data for resistance values, because none are given in the report, how would he know resistance ?

          He is speculating up conjecture to contradict the findings.
          You are attempting to back engineer the speculation, so yes, this is a mistaken endeavor.

      • Pierre

        Yes, what all those quasi-scientists out there should remember is that they need to STFU until they have enough cajones to take a new phenomena as far down the road as Rossi has, perfected or not, while not using a cent of taxpayer money. Once they have gone as far as he has, then they can speak.

        And why are these quasi-scientists bothering to complain anyways? We all know very well that Rossi is never going to reveal the secret sauce with his IP, because this is a BUSINESS PROCESS!

        The definition of a scientific process, coming from all these quasi-scientists out there, is that the process has to be open source, peer-reviewed, and full of BS dogma about previously known theories. We’ll tell that to Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and see what they say.

        Rossi is a business man who knows full well about the “culture” of the scientific method, as well as about the scientific method itself.

        He believes something is happening, and he needs to prove it WITHOUT revealing whatever IP he has. And if he can get his patent without revealing the secret sauce, he will laugh all the way to the bank with IH.

        Pomp and all these quasi-scientists are just revealing their naïveté and their lack of business sense. Oh yeah, and their jealousy. A pompous jealousy indeed.

        • Ophelia Rump

          Wow, nice rant!
          I like it. Genuinely, that felt good for me too!

          • Pierre

            Btw, if there are any real scientists out there who are worth their salt, get off you butts and go beg for some replication funding. We don’t need people who sit around and complain, we need do-er’s.

            Assuming you give 2 cents about energy science and the possibility that GW and population growth are real…

            That includes you, Pomp.

            Duh!

        • dickyaesta

          Very well said. Only the spanish word is cojones see : http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cajones This isnot meant to play down what you said, the word ‘cojones’ goes usually with the very suggestive gesture which enforces the meaning even further.;)). And yes Sr. Rossi certainly has……

        • Donk970

          What continues to surprise me is the religious fervor with with the skeptics respond to Cold Fusion. The mere mention of Cold Fusion causes heads to explode.

    • Ged

      That’s what MFMP sees happen with their wires in a hydrogen environment. Not sure if that’s the same exactly, as it’s very different wire materials.

    • US_Citizen71

      “the resistances do not have a linear response to the temperature in the coil of the E-Cat and the heat dissipation is totally different from the copper cables”

      This could possibly be explained by the fact that we are not dealing with standard resistors, but instead with inductors that are under an alternating current load. Changes in frequency are just as likely if not more likely to change the resistance as a change is their physical temperature would.

      • Steve H

        2pi*F*L

        • US_Citizen71

          Thanks! I remembered enough of my basic electronics course from 20 years ago to know we were dealing with more than simple resistance but couldn’t remember the basic formulas and ins and outs.

      • clovis ray

        did a little googling, on Inconel; is a family of austenitic nickel-chromium-based superalloys.

        Austenite, also known as gamma phase iron (γ-Fe), is a metallic, non-magnetic allotrope of iron or a solid solution of iron, with an alloying element.

        ‎Allotrope of iron – ‎Austenitization –

        Austempering is heat treatment that is applied to ferrous metals, most notably steel and ductile iron. In steel it produces a bainite microstructure

        • Ophelia Rump

          small amounts of niobium combine with nickel to form the intermetallic compound Ni3Nb or gamma prime (γ’). Gamma prime forms small cubic crystals that inhibit slip and creep effectively at elevated temperatures.[10]

          Sounds familiar. It reminds me of the cubic crystals in the powder.

  • Josh G

    “the resistances do not have a linear response to the temperature in the coil of the E-Cat and the heat dissipation is totally different from the copper cables”

    It’s a bit vague, but it could presumably explain the discrepancies in the watt-to-joule heating discrepancies of ammeter-gate, no? If the resistance goes down (asymptotically) as heat goes up, this could account for the lower watt-to-joule heating ratio during the test of the live reactor. Or am I mistaken?

    • Ophelia Rump

      My mistake, sorry.

      • Josh G

        Ophelia dear, I think there is some confusion here. I was quoting Rossi, who should know very well what the resistances are. I just got a response from Mats Lewan on his blog. Here is what he wrote:

        “That’s right, but it’s not new — this was the immediate explanation Rossi gave before to this issue. And it’s is still the explanation I have received when I have asked. What is required, more in detail, is a material in the resistors with a resistivity that decreases by a factor three somewhere in the interval from 450 to 1200 degrees Celsius, and then remain fairly constant in the interval from 1200 to 1400 degrees. I have been told by materials physicists that such materials are possible.”

        • Ophelia Rump

          Ah thank you sorry my mistake.

          The following was my mistake, taken from the original above to avoid confusing others so I could label it here for posterity as being what it is.

          Since he does not have the raw data for resistance values, because none are given in the report, how would he know resistance ?

          He is speculating up conjecture to contradict the findings.
          You are attempting to back engineer the speculation, so yes, this is a mistaken endeavor.

          • clovis ray

            miss O,hi
            I have heard Dr. Rossi, say that he himself didn’t know how this works precisely, and he was still working on the theory, wouldn’t that kinda leave a hole in the equation, to be filled in by some one.

    • Paul Smith

      From the table of resistivity of inconel 625:

      temperature °C resistivity
      21 128.9
      38 129.6
      93 131.9
      204 133.9
      316 134.9
      427 135.9
      538 137.9
      649 137.9
      760 136.9
      871 135.9
      982 134.9
      1093 133.9

      Higher values aren’t known but we can try extrapolate higher values
      (with some error, certainly):

      1100 133.21
      1200 131.14
      1300 128.66
      1400 125.77

      • Josh G

        OK, nice work. But this looks pretty flat across the range of temperatures. We’d need something that has a high resistivity at low temperatures and much lower resistivity at higher temperatures.

        I have a feeling that whatever Inconel is used here is not a standard commercial product. Rossi has said it is doped.

        BTW, if anyone is curious, here is a link to a table listing the melting point of different metals and alloys, including different varieties of Inconel, starting on page 16. The highest melting point is for Inconel MA956 at 1482 C, which is I believe is well above the estimated temperature inside the E-cat.

        http://solarmfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Critical-Melting-Point1.pdf

        And to think, a few days ago I didn’t even know what inconel was… 🙂

    • Ged

      That’s what MFMP sees happen with their wires in a hydrogen environment. Not sure if that’s the same exactly, as it’s very different wire materials.

    • US_Citizen71

      “the resistances do not have a linear response to the temperature in the coil of the E-Cat and the heat dissipation is totally different from the copper cables”

      This could possibly be explained by the fact that we are not dealing with standard resistors, but instead with inductors that are under an alternating current load. Changes in frequency are just as likely if not more likely to change the resistance as a change is their physical temperature would.

      • Steve H

        I agree.
        As you will be aware (but for the benefit of other readers).

        XL = 2pi*F*L

        XL=inductive reactance
        F=frequency. (60 Hertz being the standard ac frequency in the USA)
        L=inductance of the heating coil (in Henry’s)

        I think some people on here are confusing resistance with impedance. If Rossi is using 60 Hz sine wave ac, and the resistive heater is actually an inductor; then the equation to be used should be :-

        Z = square root of (R squared + XL squared)

        Z=impedance/phase
        R=pure resistance component of the heating coil/phase
        XL=inductive reactance of the heating coil/phase

        In a three phase system it then comes down to whether the load is connected in Star or Delta for power consumption values.

        If Rossi varies the frequency then the impedance will also vary. No mention of a dc supply or inverter in their equipment however.

        • US_Citizen71

          Thanks! I remembered enough of my basic electronics course from 20 years ago to know we were dealing with more than simple resistance but couldn’t remember the basic formulas and ins and outs.

      • DickeFix

        We discuss the ratio of total dissipated power (reactor coils+cables) with dissipated power in the cables (Joule heating). Since the wires are effectively coupled in series with the reactor coils (resistance+inductance), the inductance of reactor coils can not affect this ratio. Power dissipation only occurs in the resistive part of the load, not the inductive.

  • GregL

    Maybe he decided the different ‘phase’ of V and I was giving too much away

    • Ophelia Rump

      Usually with three phase power all three phases are discreetly offset so that the three separate wave forms overlap in a manner which appears more flat like DC when viewed as a conglomerate. If the phases were manipulated temporally it would introduce interesting pulse behaviors or wave forms where you normally expect none.

    • That was my first thought too. “… the control system continues to change the phase angle, and this wrong calculation has been made assuming that the values are always at the peak, and this is obviously wrong”. (‘wtong’ corrected to ‘wrong’)

      This does seem to be to do with field generation for control purposes, using the triple helix of resistances as a field winding. An oscillating static field might induce magnetostrictive movement of Ni lattices and/or induction heating. A rotating or otherwise dynamic field might perhaps physically pick up and ‘stir’ the ferromagnetic particles in the fuel.

      On edit: Most of these possibilities (with the exception of magnetostriction as far as I can see) have already been considered in depth on the ‘replication’ thread)

  • Pierre

    Yes, what all those quasi-scientists out there should remember is that they need to STFU until they have enough cajones to take a new phenomena as far down the road as Rossi has, perfected or not, while not using a cent of taxpayer money. Once they have gone as far as he has, then they can speak.

    And why are these quasi-scientists bothering to complain anyways? We all know very well that Rossi is never going to reveal the secret sauce with his IP, because this is a BUSINESS PROCESS!

    The definition of a scientific process, coming from all these quasi-scientists out there, is that the process has to be open source, peer-reviewed, and full of BS dogma about previously known theories. We’ll tell that to Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and see what they say.

    Rossi is a business man who knows full well about the “culture” of the scientific method, as well as about the scientific method itself.

    He believes something is happening, and he needs to prove it WITHOUT revealing whatever IP he has. And if he can get his patent without revealing the secret sauce, he will laugh all the way to the bank with IH.

    Pomp and all these quasi-scientists are just revealing their naïveté and their lack of business sense. Oh yeah, and their jealousy. A pompous jealousy indeed.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Wow, nice rant!
      I like it. Genuinely, that felt good for me too!

      • Pierre

        Btw, if there are any real scientists out there who are worth their salt, get off you butts and go beg for some replication funding. We don’t need people who sit around and complain, we need do-er’s.

        Assuming you give 2 cents about energy science and the possibility that GW and population growth are real…

        That includes you, Pomp.

        Duh!

        • GreenWin

          Orthodox “science” always gets in the way of innovation. That’s why it should stay locked up in academia where it can beat itself to death without retarding progress. Professor Pomp has simply stepped into the shoes of John Huizenga, Dick Garwin, and Robert Park. Extremely tiny shoes I should add.

    • dickyaesta

      Very well said. Only the spanish word is cojones see : http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cajones This isnot meant to play down what you said, the word ‘cojones’ goes usually with the very suggestive gesture which enforces the meaning even further.;)). And yes Sr. Rossi certainly has……

    • Donk970

      What continues to surprise me is the religious fervor with with the skeptics respond to Cold Fusion. The mere mention of Cold Fusion causes heads to explode.

  • GregL

    It seems the deleted post has been reinstated

    • Freethinker

      Confirmed.

  • bfast

    Rossi, “on the verge of a commercial breakthrough, because to make him alive or dead is not the Sancta Inquisitio of Dr Pomp, is the market.”
    I am very glad that Eng. Rossi takes this position. I think that nothing less will convince the idiot scientific community of the reality of this technology. I am waiting with bated breath to see, touch, announce and invest into this commercial breakthrough.

  • bfast

    Rossi, “on the verge of a commercial breakthrough, because to make him alive or dead is not the Sancta Inquisitio of Dr Pomp, is the market.”
    I am very glad that Eng. Rossi takes this position. I think that nothing less will convince the idiot scientific community of the reality of this technology. I am waiting with bated breath to see, touch, announce and invest into this commercial breakthrough.

  • Donk970

    It seems to me that Industrial Heat is at a very tricky spot on the path to commercialization. On the one hand they really need to keep the investors interested and willing to continue putting money into R&D on the E-Cat and they need to get China and India on board to build these things. On the other hand they need to be very wary of the US government. The US government could kill the E-Cat over night by declaring that it is a nuclear device and therefor dangerous and simultaneously restricting export of the technology for national security reasons. I understand Rossi’s desire to be recognized as having built something revolutionary but right now about the last thing he needs is an important government agency like the DOE deciding that the E-Cat really is real and a threat to existing corporate and government interests. The sooner IH gets the Chinese building these things the better I think.

    • Bernie Koppenhofer

      The Feds already know it is a “real and a threat to existing corporate and government interests” The Navy and NASA have been working on LENR for years. NASA scientists have openly discussed it in interviews. It is my opinion the Feds do not want to kill it, just slow the implementation, to let the fossil fuel industry and our economy adjust.

      • Donk970

        I could see that. It may be a case of if they could stop it they would but they can’t. The real beauty of LENR in general is that the materials are all common as dirt and the technology is stuff that you could build in your kitchen. Add to that the fact that you have so many people who have gotten positive results and you have an impossible to control technology. So you might be right, they can’t shut it down but they could certainly delay it.

        • Bernie Koppenhofer

          Right, they might not want to shut it down, just slow it down,LENR, creates a lot short term problems but solves a lot of long term problems

          • Donk970

            It makes you wonder about the long term prospects for commercialization though. Making a profit from this is going to depend on keeping the “how” of it secret but “how” just isn’t going to stay secret for long no matter how hard Industrial Heat and Rossi try. Not only that but, pardon the pun, it’s going to turn out that there is a lot more than one way to skin a cat. Even if Industrial Heat could keep Rossi’s particular formula secret I think that there will turn out to be many more ways to do it, maybe even better ways. In the end everyone and his pet monkey will be building these things and the price will go way way down. Good for us but not great for anyone thinking they’ll make a lot of money at it.

      • Michael S

        Thats also why some Ecats are most probably in Europe – in order to avoid a Clampdown for national interest (ie Oil & Gas corporates) by US Government.

    • Ophelia Rump

      Yes the China connection. A case could be made that they already know everything.
      Certainly with that simple statement by IH, whether it be positive or negative, containment would be impossible.

  • Oystein Lande

    The world needs dreamers and the world needs doers. But above all, the world needs dreamers who do.

    Professors Martin Fleischmann and Pons said it started with an idea, a dream.

    And we noted then and now the theoretical physicists that likes to talk.

    Unfortunately, talkers are usually more articulate than doers, since talk is their specialty.

    But talkers have never been good doers. It’s the doers that change this world.

    • Ophelia Rump

      For some odd reason reading that makes me want a drink of scotch whiskey.

      • GreenWin

        De war’s on.

        • Ophelia Rump

          Indeed it is.

  • LilyLover

    I know, I know – once online, the record doesn’t go away. But in this case, Frank, for the reasons Dr. Rossi deleted the response, you should too. Perhaps, sub-scientific status affords him some obscurity and grand unveiling. Then again, we need as much awareness as possible. If I were you, I would paraphrase the simple key points – Rossi dismissed clamp clownery, assures the Cat is healthy, and insists on In Mercatu Veritas. Perhaps, you won’t agree, but may be he wants no pompus-of-the-World being associated with fame – positive or negative -however it may be. I’d go so far as to say, even if you decide to keep this up – maybe not impart credibility to that pompus name. Why advertise Galileo-killers? But then again you might want to let Rossi know about this and ask if he’d like you to keep this up or take it down. This way we won’t turn you into a Rossirazzi for our curiosity’s sake. And he may not withdraw completely/somewhat from you in the future. I’m sorry if I’m stepping the line, but I feel that’s we are doing to Rossi if we keep talking about pompous people.

    • Gerrit

      apparently Rossi put it up again.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        No, he didn’t. You have to look at JoNP. The Rossi blog reader is not controlled by him.

        • Omega Z

          It is present at both JONP & Rossilive Blog Reader.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            True. It is in the comments section of an older article. I had checked only the last two of them.

      • Omega Z

        Priceless. And well deserved I might add.

  • LilyLover

    I know, I know – once online, the record doesn’t go away. But in this case, Frank, for the reasons Dr. Rossi deleted the response, you should too. Perhaps, sub-scientific status affords him some obscurity and grand unveiling. Then again, we need as much awareness as possible. If I were you, I would paraphrase the simple key points – Rossi dismissed clamp clownery, assures the Cat is healthy, and insists on In Mercatu Veritas. Perhaps, you won’t agree, but may be he wants no pompus-of-the-World being associated with fame – positive or negative -however it may be. I’d go so far as to say, even if you decide to keep this up – maybe not impart credibility to that pompus name. Why advertise Galileo-killers? But then again you might want to let Rossi know about this and ask if he’d like you to keep this up or take it down. This way we won’t turn you into a Rossirazzi for our curiosity’s sake. And he may not withdraw completely/somewhat from you in the future. I’m sorry if I’m stepping the line, but I feel that’s we are doing to Rossi if we keep talking about pompous people.

    • Gerrit

      apparently Rossi put it up again.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        No, he didn’t. You have to look at JoNP. The Rossi blog reader is not controlled by him.

        • Omega Z

          It is present at both JONP & Rossilive Blog Reader.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            True. It is in the comments section of an older article. I had checked only the last two of them.

  • Giuliano Bettini
    • Andreas Moraitis

      Ah – thanks. I have been wrong.

      • Ophelia Rump

        I thought I looked fabulous in it, now it just seems geek chic.

  • Giuliano Bettini
    • Andreas Moraitis

      Ah – thanks. I have been wrong.

  • Arvid

    Rossi: “Alumina becomes White heat only when it melts at 2070°C”. But Aluminum melts at 660C, what am I missing? And the report states a temperature of 1400 C, AND that it was pure aluminum. Don’t understand.

  • Arvid

    Rossi: “Alumina becomes White heat only when it melts at 2070°C”. But Aluminum melts at 660C, what am I missing? And the report states a temperature of 1400 C, AND that it was pure aluminum. Don’t understand.

    • artefact
    • bachcole

      Alumina is not the same as Aluminium. Alumina is chemical the same as sapphire, which as you know is very different from aluminium foil.

      • Ophelia Rump

        So the hat is not priceless?

        • bachcole

          If it serves the purpose for which it was designed, isn’t that enough? (:->)

          • Ophelia Rump

            I thought I looked fabulous in it, now it just seems geek chic.

        • robyn wyrick

          Ophelia, that is freaking hilarious! Just cracked me right up. I am generally a big fan of civility, especially on these pages, but that is a brilliant gibe. “So the hat is not priceless” – that is awesome. Can I steal it? (Seriously, no irony, it’s just a great joke)

          • Ophelia Rump

            I was not jibing bachcole. I was speaking of my hat.

            I think he understood that, hopefully.

  • Guru Khalsa

    Hilarious:

    Rossi on http://www.rossilivecat.com

    “”I will write in very simple language, to allow you (and “Prof” Raman, who insists not to buy ‘Electronics for Dummies’ as I suggested him) to understand, with a small effort and some focus (to Raman I suggest not to chew a gum at the same time).

    • Omega Z

      Priceless. And well deserved I might add.

  • GreenWin

    Did Pomp refuse to take part in the ITPR2? If so, what was his reasoning?

      • GreenWin

        Thanks barty. I cannot read the text as the resolution is too low on my screen. Do you have a transcript of just what Pomp wrote?

      • Ophelia Rump

        That was the most ignorant reasoning I have ever seen.

        1, The technology has no accepted theory so I will not look.

        2, If it were possible, finding it would be impossible, so he could not have found it.

        He would have perfected circular logic, if such a thing existed but there is no formal proof of it. If there were a formal proof of circular logic, he could not possible be capable of finding it on his own, considering his posture and the location of his head.

        .

        • Omega Z

          “considering his posture and the location of his head”

          Ahh yes, It is a very dark place.
          Until he rectrumfies this condition, oops, I mean rectifies this condition he will never be able to see the light.

          “1, The technology has no accepted theory so I will not look.”

          And yet people of his ilk wonder why people are developing a dislike/distrust of Science & question it’s funding.

          With a proven degree in B.S., It is my opinion that people like Pomp should have their title removed & given a new Job, Manure Remediation And with it we shall give them a new title: “Sanitation Engineer.” Should they ever get tired of slinging B.S., and becomes rehabilitated, We can consider their reinstatement.

          As rehabilitation can not be replicated 100% of the time, It is an unproven Science. As there is no accepted theory as how to accomplish 100% rehabilitation, Consideration of reinstatement should be suspended indefinitely. We should not even look.

  • GreenWin

    Did Pomp refuse to take part in the ITPR2? If so, what was his reasoning?

      • GreenWin

        Thanks barty. I cannot read the text as the resolution is too low on my screen. Do you have a transcript of just what Pomp wrote?

      • Ophelia Rump

        That was the most ignorant reasoning I have ever seen.

        1, The technology has no accepted theory so I will not look.

        2, If it were possible, finding it would be impossible, so he could not have found it.

        He would have perfected circular logic, if such a thing existed but there is no formal proof of it. If there were a formal proof of circular logic, he could not possible be capable of finding it on his own, considering his posture and the location of his head.

        .

        • Omega Z

          “considering his posture and the location of his head”

          Ahh yes, It is a very dark place.
          Until he rectrumfies this condition, oops, I mean rectifies this condition he will never be able to see the light.

          “1, The technology has no accepted theory so I will not look.”

          And yet people of his ilk wonder why people are developing a dislike/distrust of Science & question it’s funding.

          With a proven degree in B.S., It is my opinion that people like Pomp should have their title removed & given a new Job, Manure Remediation And with it we shall give them a new title: “Sanitation Engineer.” Should they ever get tired of slinging B.S., and becomes rehabilitated, We can consider their reinstatement.

          As rehabilitation can not be replicated 100% of the time, It is an unproven Science. As there is no accepted theory as how to accomplish 100% rehabilitation, Consideration of reinstatement should be suspended indefinitely. We should not even look.

  • Arvid

    Ok, so there is a difference between aluminum and alumina 🙂

    • Gerrit

      and aluminium. and probably aluminia too.

  • Rossi made some changes on the re-posted comment. You can see them highlighted in the picture here:

    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/802-Rossi-responds-to-critics/?postID=1611#post1611

    • Ophelia Rump

      That was the most ignorant reasoning I have ever seen.
      1, The technology has no accepted theory so I will not look.
      2, If it were possible, finding it would be impossible, so he could not have found it.

      He would have perfected circular logic, if such a thing existed but there is no formal proof of it. If there were a formal proof of circular logic, he could not possible be capable of finding it on his own, considering his posture and the location of his head.

  • Rossi made some changes on the re-posted comment. You can see them highlighted in the picture here:

    http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/802-Rossi-responds-to-critics/?postID=1611#post1611

    • Ophelia Rump

      Sorry replied to wrong statement, not my day.

  • Omega Z

    I have just read this on JONP.
    It is dated-
    October 19th, 2014 at 10:45 PM

  • Omega Z

    I have just read this on JONP.
    It is dated-
    October 19th, 2014 at 10:45 PM

  • timycelyn

    Andrea has given an unusually long and passionate response to a question on JONP regarding the Inconel wires. In the process he reveals both his irritation with the questioner and the ‘Professor’ the questioner is citing, and some interesting information that I don’t recall reading previously about the nature of the coil metal. It’s an alloy ‘doped’ with Inconel. Will this have a bearing on the MFMP upcoming series of tests?

    I’m afraid I am strugging with the detail but hope that those more expert here can translate this to a point where I may comprehend it!

    Andrew
    October 20th, 2014 at 3:17 AM
    Dear Andrea Rossi,
    I believe that there are some clarification that either you, or the professors through you have to make, to justify the relevance of the TPRII.
    You have already commented on this but your answer was not satisfying at all.
    You stated that the behaviour of the resistances changes and it’s Not linear (in particolar behaving as a negative resistance from 500-1200 and holding constant from that temperature on) .
    But we all know that inconel has not that characteristic, with or without reactions involved.
    Therefore i believe that you can’t just state that you cannot comment further on this, especially being aware that through the report some fundamental mistakes are carried out such as :
    Page 14:

    ”Measurements performed during the dummy run with the PCE and ammeter clamps allowed us to measure an average current, for each of the three C1 cables, of I1 = 19.7A, and, for each C2 cable, a current of I1 / 2 = I2 = 9.85 A.”

    That is sistematically wrong since I2=I1/1.732

    Andrea Rossi
    October 20th, 2014 at 11:36 AM
    Andrew:
    Your comment is a typical example of the effects of the stupidities made by fake experts like “Raman”, that act as Professors, but lack the foundamentals of Physics, Electronics and Electrotechnics. The effects are that persons like you, clearly missing a professional understanding of the matter, instead of reading seriously a Report written by 6 Professors with a life dedicated to Science and Physics in particular, read the stupidities of imbeciles with an agenda and make us loose time to answer to absurd objections. I am not angry at you, you are just a candid non-expert-person, I am angry because every stupidity gets attention and we, honestly, do not have the time to answer. As you have perhaps read, I already suggested as a reference the wonderful book “Electronics for Dummies” to the “Prof” you got inspiration from, but he does not listen to me and continues to repeat the same stupidities.
    Again:
    The coils of the reactor are made with a proptietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it. Your phrase “”with or without reactions involved” is pretty arrogant, and such arrogamce, perhaps, forbids you to try to understand what I wrote. If you read carefully what I wrote and what is written in the Report, you will see that “with or without reactions” is a stupidity. The nature and composition of the coils are of paramount importance in our IP and for obvious reasons I will not give any more information, albeit you demand to me not to “state that (I) cannot comment further on this, ESPECIALLY BEING AWARE THAT THROUGH THE REPORT SOME FUNDAMENTAL ( SIC!) MISTAKES ARE CARRIED OUT, SUCH AS..” and at this point you add another titanic stupidity that the Readers can find in your comment: whom do you think you are talking with ?
    And here is the answer to your titanic stupidity ( I know, you are not the author of the titanic stupidity, you are just parrotting the suggestions of “Prof” Raman): just, please read … I will write in very simple language, to allow you (and “Prof” Raman, who insists not to buy ‘Electronics for Dummies’ as I suggested him) to understand, with a small effort and some focus (to Raman I suggest not to chew a gum at the same time).
    THE ALIMENTATION CABLING OF THE REACTOR IS COMPOSED BY MEANS OF 2 PARTS FOR EVERY ROW:
    1- ONE PART FROM THE CONTROL SYSTEM TO THE JOINT (C); THIS PART IS NAMED C1
    2- AFTER THE JOINT C THE SAME CURRENT IS SUBDIVIDED INTO 2 ROWS HAViNG THE SAME SECTION AND LENGTH: WE CALL THEM C2
    BASED ON THE KIRCHHOFF LAW ( ALSO CALLED KICHHOFF JUNCTION RULE) , WE CAN MAKE THE DEDUCTION THAT THE CURRENT THAT FLOWS THROUGH THE ROW C1 IS EQUAL TO THE DOUBLE OF THE CURRENT THAT FLOWS ALONG EACH OF THE ROWS NAMED C2.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Curbina

      Fantastic non diplomatic response.

    • Andreas Moraitis

      I have no idea if Kirchhoff’s first rule is applicable in this case. We have three phase current here, and the ends of the C2 lines are connected to different phases. Are any electrical engineers here who could clarify his?

      • Andreas Moraitis

        According to Kirchhoff, the current in the C1 lines should equal the sum of the currents in both C2 lines. The question is if both currents in C2 are identical. If not so, one could not say that the sum equals the double of the current in one of the lines.

        • Obvious

          If the two wire sections (diameter) and length are the same, are constructed of the same alloy, and operate the same load, then the currents will be the same.

          If the two segments do not supply identical loads, or the segments are of different resistances, then all bets are off.

          In effect, Rossi is telling us that the three resistors, supplied by the three phases of electricity, are identical. This is useful information. This is simpler to build anyways, but it need not be that way, if there was a reason to do it differently.

          • Ophelia Rump

            I missed something here, using a delta configuration with three phase the out of phase legs act as ground.

          • Jouni Tuomela
          • Obvious

            The equivalent loads are indicated by Rossi saying that the legs of the delta have exactly 1/2 of the current supply leads.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Remember 3 phase. They may be temporally offset.
            Unless they tampered with the timing of the 3 phase, they most certainly are temporally offset.

            The three phases may be equivalent but they are never equivalent at the same moment.

            Picture three moments in time equidistant A B C.
            Phase one will peak at A
            Phase two will peak at B
            Phase three will peak at C

            This assumes that they use each phase like single phase, rather than the usual three phases combined into a single power input.

          • Obvious

            If they use the “wall outlet” three phases as the three phases of feed (C1), then each leg of the delta (two legs at each feed) carries the square root of the three phases’ current, which 1.73 times the current carried in a single phase feed. This is due to the temporal AC sine overlaps. In this instance, each leg of the delta carries more than 1/2 of the feed line current, counter to what Rossi has emphatically stated.
            If DC pulses were applied down the feed to the delta ends, then things change at each leg/C2…
            If only two out of three phases are supplied, then things change.
            If diodes are inserted into series with each delta leg, things change.
            If the timing of the phases is altered…

            But if the current in each leg of the delta (C2) is 1/2 the feed (C1), and not 1.73 times the feed, then the number of solutions diminishes greatly.

          • Ophelia Rump

            I don’t think a high leg delta is indicated. I do not see an indication of a ground. Using 1.73 may not be appropriate.
            I am sorry but I am decades rusty on three phase, and I am probably not up to giving you quality feedback on this.

          • Steve H

            As you will remember:-
            Total 3 phase power can be calculated using line voltage and current or phase voltage and current.

            1.732*VL*IL*cos phi. or

            3*Vph*Iph*cos phi

            With a star connected load, the line voltage is 1.732*phase voltage (line and phase current are equal).
            With a delta connected load, line current is 1.732*phase current (line and phase voltage are equal).

            These equations are only true for standard 3 phase ac. A pure sine wave with 120 degree displacement between phases – as you would expect from a normal industrial supply.

          • Obvious

            That’s it.

          • US_Citizen71

            Since the heaters are coils under an alternating current load they should be viewed as inductors not resistors. (see Steve H’s response to me below for more detail)

          • Obvious

            Steve H’s response below was partial when I wrote the above post.
            Re: Steve’s response: The wiring, whether inductors or resistors, is in a Delta pattern, as described in the caption below the diagram (figure 4).
            What the control box exactly does is an open question. What the inductance properties of the coils are, depends on what is inside their coils. I suppose they could be tuned to act as IR antennae also, confounding deliberation further.
            My point was that Rossi was indirectly indicating that the paired lengths are acting equivalently, and therefore the loads are equivalent, greatly simplifying evaluation of what might be going on. If we assume something more complicated, then we disregard the info given us, and we might as well disregard everything else, too.

          • US_Citizen71

            I agree. I also now remember why I ended up choosing another career path instead of electronics. ; )

          • Ophelia Rump

            More or less. Perhaps less. If you look at it in a hydrodynamic model Three Phase is more like a very deep flow of DC with a little ripple of AC waveform on top. If you overlap the waves.
            If you combine only two waves of the three, you get a bastard.

          • Ophelia Rump

            You left out temporal differences, remember phase offset with three phase.

          • Obvious

            I am thinking that over now. The 1.73 times delta leg amperage value for the supply applies to three phase power to the delta. So for the values to be the same, only two phases must be fed to alternating sets of delta ends… which happens to be what the image in figure 5 shows. Two peaks, and a blank third (the OL channel?).

      • DickeFix

        I don´t buy Rossis explanation.

        This is a common circuit problem that all electrical engineers learn. The resistance of the heating coils (including the resistance in C2 wires) are coupled in Delta-constellation (see fig 4 in the report). You can use the Y-Delta transform to convert it to an equivalent Y-circuit.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-%CE%94_transform

        If we assume all three resistor coils are approximately same you get three equal resistors, one in each Y branch, with virtual ground 0V in the middle. The ends of the Y are connected to the the three C1 wires.

        According to above transformation, each phase in the C1 circuit will feel an equivalent resistance to ground that is (R_coil+2*R_C2)/3 where R_coil is the resistance of a single heating coil and R_C2 is the resistance of a single C2 wire.

        You can now see that, since the same current flow through the equivalent resistances, the total power dissipation should be proportional to the power dissipation (Joule heating) in the C1 and C2 wires unless any of the resistances are nonlinear with temperature.

        Mats Lewan speculates if one can save the stated measurement values in the report by assuming that the resistance of heating coils drop a factor of 3.34 in the active test compared to the dummy test due to hidden semiconductors somewhere in the heating circuit. That seems to me very, very unlikely considering the high temperatures and high currents we have in the circuit. You would need highly doped and high bandgap material like silicon carbide to have such low resistance and not get destroyed by the high temperature. Also most of the heating would take place in the semiconductors during dummy test, not the heating coils.

        A simpler explanation is that the input power was wrongly measured in the active reactor. The good thing with that explanation is that it would also explain the mysterious excess heat, the lack of radioactivity and save the standard nuclear science.

        • Brokedi

          The debunkers are like watching a 3 year old try and calc E=I/R. LOL!

      • DickeFix

        Rossi and the report are wrong. I also thought that the relations between the C1 and C2 currents would be a factor of two but that is wrong. It should indeed be sqrt(3) since the currents are 120 degrees out of phase. Andrew is right!

        https://www.watlow.com/reference/tools/3phase.cfm

        • Ophelia Rump

          Would you mind sharing what inputs to enter into which calculator and such? Was it the 3-Phase Delta (Balanced Load) calculator?
          Can you please share how you derived that conclusion. It would be so scientific of you.

          You have left me befuddled, I simply do not know where to begin to draw that conclusion from what you have pointed to.

          • DickeFix

            I made a premature conclusion. I and Andrew and the calculator assumed sine wave but Rossis three phase regulation chops the current in a complex way. The answer then depends on the overlap and shape of the current pulses in the three phases.

      • Steve H

        As far as I remember, Kirchoffs rule applies to dc not ac.

    • fact police

      Actually Kirchhoff’s law says the current in C1 is *sum* of the currents in each of the C2 wires. Those two currents do not have to be the same.

    • Mark E Kitiman

      This needs its own thread… Maybe with the heading ‘Pseudo-Skeptic-Stupidities’.

    • Andrea Rossi: “SHUDDUP!”

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOVgwWw3EuQ

    • “The coils of the reactor are made with a proptietary alloy, and the inconel is only a doped component of it.” (Rossi seems to have fingers that are larger than the keys on his keyboard – I have the same problem!).

      There seem to be several clues here – over to the replication thread experts for some speculation …

  • Jonnyb

    Good one.

  • Gerrit

    and aluminium. and probably aluminia too.

  • clovis ray

    People who say it can’t be done, should not interrupt those who are doing it.
    (George Bernard Shaw)

  • clovis ray

    did a little googling, on Inconel; is a family of austenitic nickel-chromium-based superalloys.

    Austenite, also known as gamma phase iron (γ-Fe), is a metallic, non-magnetic allotrope of iron or a solid solution of iron, with an alloying element.

    ‎Allotrope of iron – ‎Austenitization –

    Austempering is heat treatment that is applied to ferrous metals, most notably steel and ductile iron. In steel it produces a bainite microstructure

    • Ophelia Rump

      small amounts of niobium combine with nickel to form the intermetallic compound Ni3Nb or gamma prime (γ’). Gamma prime forms small cubic crystals that inhibit slip and creep effectively at elevated temperatures.[10]

      Sounds familiar. It reminds me of the cubic crystals in the powder. I do not recall there being any mention of Nb in the ash.

      • clovis ray

        would there be Nb in the nickle ash, if it were bound up in the resister material, or does it work that way, this is over my head, material science, but i do so love to learn about it.

        • Ophelia Rump

          I was thinking in terms of possibly the resistor also being a fuel source since it contains nickle. And if it was there might be some transfer due to sputtering. Which might influence the crystals in the ash.

          The cubes relate to Magnetocrystalline anisotropy in three or four axes.
          I have no idea of what the significance of that is. I assume it is a product of the unique forces which make the reaction possible and so a probable indicator of the nature of the forces. I would like to see an analysis of the resistor composition before and after.

          It would be a hoot if the resistor is the catalyst and also part of the fuel.

          I’m with you on the way over my head part. But it is interesting to reference the bits and pieces and see how they fit.

          • clovis ray

            Yep. so many things, seems to come into play. mechanics, chemical energy, electronics, magnetism, metallurgy , quantum mechanics, thermal energy, and could even include, semiconducting property’s .wow what a puzzle,

      • clovis ray

        I see, So it could help stabilize the fluctuation of temp in the core and act as a control agent

  • Ophelia Rump

    So the hat is not priceless?

    • robyn wyrick

      Ophelia, that is freaking hilarious! Just cracked me right up. I am generally a big fan of civility, especially on these pages, but that is a brilliant gibe. “So the hat is not priceless” – that is awesome. Can I steal it? (Seriously, no irony, it’s just a great joke)

      • Ophelia Rump

        I was not jibing bachcole. I was speaking of my hat.

        I think he understood that, hopefully.

  • gautea

    Heaters can easily change resistance with temperature. I have 7 years of experience with testing heaters in electromotors.

    • clovis ray

      Hello,Gautea.
      Would you like to expand on your comment, we welcome your thoughts on the subject,

    • Veblin

      With measured voltage, if resistance changes, then measured current changes.
      Measured voltage times measured current equals measured wattage.
      Ohm’s law respects Ohm’s law.

      • Ophelia Rump

        Which causes temperature change which changes resistance which changes current. All one happy little vortex.

  • Sandy

    “A growing number of amateurs have performed nuclear fusion using simple fusor machines.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor#Basic_fusion

    Many “amateurs” have built table-top nuclear fusion devices. Why is it unthinkable that one of those amateurs has built a small device that produces more energy than it consumes?

    The kind of criticism offered by people like Pomp is not reasonable. It’s overtly unfair!

    • jousterusa

      Sandy, I hope you get to read “An Impossible Invention” by Mats Lewan. I am enjoying it tremendously, and for the first time have been able to see Rossi’s very strong intellectual ability in the many ways it’s been exercised over the past 40 years. He has really come through the fire and is an intellect and a man to be reckoned with. Mats’ book is full of true anecdotes and provides a very thorough foundation for understanding the man who conquered the Coulomb barrier and mastered cold fusion. It is a very, very readable book, very interesting and detailed as to the challenges and assaults Rossi has faced in his life, which would have stopped or crippled a lesser man. You have to feel like he is one of the great heroes of history, and one who went to prison for his ideas, not for any crimes – much like his hero, Galilei Galileo. Did you know that, as a young man, he set a world record for the longest run, which took 24 uninterrupted hours of straight running? Rossi made it! He has arrived and he’s here to stay!

  • LCD

    Will somebody please ask Rossi when the provisional non-published patents on the more sensitive parts of the ecat will become public?

    • Ophelia Rump

      I would love to know that too!

  • LCD

    Will somebody please ask Rossi when the provisional non-published patents on the more sensitive parts of the ecat will become public?

    • Ophelia Rump

      I would love to know that too!

  • Ophelia Rump

    I was thinking in terms of possibly the resistor also being a fuel source since it contains nickle. And if it was there might be some transfer due to sputtering. Which might influence the crystals in the ash.

    The cubes relate to Magnetocrystalline anisotropy in three or six axes.
    I have no idea of what the significance of that is.

  • Ophelia Rump

    Would you mind sharing what inputs to enter into which calculator and such? Was it the 3-Phase Delta (Balanced Load) calculator?
    Can you please share how you derived that conclusion. It would be so scientific of you.

    You have left me befuddled, I simply do not know where to begin to draw that conclusion from what you have pointed to.

  • AdrianAshfield

    I am more interested in proof that the E-Cat works than how it works, interesting though that is.

    My concern is therefore confirmation of the operating temperature of the E-Cat during the Lugano test. Direct experience tells me the temperature of the E-Cat shown in the photo in the report is not white enough to be at the claimed temperature. The caption doesn’t claim it was at operating temperature, but this is still confusing.

    Different refractories in a glass furnace at 1400 -1500C all look white, including AZS, Alumina and Silica. In that temperature range the difference appears to be more in brightness than color. You need tinted glass to look for more than a few seconds. Temperatures need to be quite a bit lower to look distinctly red as in the photo.

    My experience with IR pyrometers is that the geometry of the viewed surface effects the reading. Certainly the ribbed cylinder of the E-Cat is not flat. It would be most interesting to hear what efforts were made to confirm the measured temperature and how this compared with the output of the control thermocouple, even though that is just one spot.

    It would be simple to take either the remains of the tested E-Cat, or another one, heat it up to the claimed operating temperature in an oven and see what the IR camera reported.

  • LucaS

    Well said Andrea!

  • Dennis D

    Godspeed Rossi! Weather those storms, for your hands on the
    wheel of something so worthwhile and real.

  • Thomas Kaminski

    There seems to be several incorrect concepts being discussed here. The fact that the line current is twice the phase current in the ITR3 is perfectly normal for a 3-phase control with less than 60 degree phase angle firing. In effect, the current pulses are separate in time, allowing them to “add” so that they seem to disobey the standard laws for three phase currents. If this were in fact a sinusoidal three phase power source with a resistive delta load, the phase currents (through the resistors) wold be down by the square =root of three from the line currents (as measured in the line to the AC source).
    What happen with triac 3phase controllers, is pairs of triacs are triggered and current flows through the resistor until the voltage across the triac drops to zero. Then the triac ceases to conduct. For less than a 60 degree firing angle, the pulses never overlap. Measuring the current in line 1 (connected to line 2 and line 3 through two separate resistors) we see a pulse to line 2, a pulse to line 3 at a different time, then a pulse from line 2 and a pulse from line 3. The pulses do not overlap in time. Line one sees two positive current pulses and two negative current pulses for a total of four. The resistor between line 1 and 2 sees one positive pulse and one negative pulse. The resistor between line 1 and line three sees one positive pulse and one negative pulse at a different time than the resistor between line 1 and line 3. Fours pulses on line 1 and two pulses trough the resistors in each line means that you will measure half the line current through each resistor as you see on the line.
    Once the firing angle goes over 60 degrees, both line 2 and line 3 will be “conducting” through the resistors making the analysis more like textbook 3phase.
    Ross is both correct and wrong. He is wrong under the assumption that we are dealing with 3-phase sinusoidal power. He is correct under the assumption that the conduction angle of the triacs is under 60 degrees which must have been the case here.
    I have read other “documents” which seem to prove that the current clamp was backwards. In the case of 3-phase sinusoids with resistive loads, there wold be a 3 to one power difference. Reversing the current sensor turns a positive power flow into the resistors to a negative power flow where the resistors are seeming to “generate” power. I find it unbelievable that the IR analysis would be wrong by a factor of three. The document also seems to “explain” that the ITR2 is wrong and shown some complicated analysis that the error cold also have produced a factor of three less power read by the meters. In ITR2, the power, though connected to three phase power, had one leg with zero current, meaning that it was really a single phase powering the device. With two clamps, one on backwards the meter should have read “zero” power — the currents through a single phase load are identical at both ends.

    • LCD

      you seem to have something there but I got lost. Perhaps you could rephrase?

      • Thomas Kaminski

        1). The measured currents in the ITR3 are consistent and not bogus. People who claim otherwise don’t understand three-phase Triac circuits. Apparently Rossi does not understand them either, but he did later remark that he was wrong.

        2) People who claim that a reversed current probe in ITR2 would explain a factor of three COP as a measurement error are even more off base. The supply in ITR2 was actually a single phase load. A reversed probe should report ZERO power showing a COP of infinity.

        3) A reversed current probe in ITR3 could have produced an input power measurement 1/3 of what it actually was, leading to a COP of 3 when it is actually 1. To believe this you have to assume the testers were grossly incompetent. Not very likely.

        • LCD

          Isn’t point 3 what people were claiming as the only real source of confusion? Even if it somehow were true wouldn’t that mean the cop was above 1 anyway? This would not change the energy density by orders of magnitude so in the end it is still above chemical, right?

          Also what was your take on the resistance not matching up with what was expected?

          Thanks

          • Thomas Kaminski

            Point 3: I think those who do not agree with the measurements will criticize any measurement, but to say the probe was backwards and measurements were off by factor of three is absurd. Most careful scientists and technicians make multiple measurements with more than one device when testing devices. A simple clamp-on hand held meter could have been used to measure the magnitude of the RMS current and even using an estimate for the line voltage, you could calculate an estimated input power. Finding a factor of three difference would be an easy test.

            Resistance: I did not look at this carefully, but I think the controversy arises over the fact that the IR measurement differs from the predicted joule heating. In a read of the report, I did not see any estimate of thermal conduction through the wires. Perhaps part of the difference was heat conducted through the wires, heating the entrance wire much hotter than the joule heating. The non-linear result of active verses passive might also be due to some sort of energy generation in the alumina surrounding the wires, heating the exit wires more than the joule heating alone of the passive test. One point, though — the numbers are small, so even if we chalk them up to errors, it does not invalidate a COP much greater than one.

            One point that I find hard to understand is a negative resistance verses temperature change. It is easy to find Negative Temperature Change devices (usually a semiconductor material), but I am not aware of NTC metallic materials. Perhaps a portion of the wire is in fact melting, but remains a conducting path. Mercury, a metal that is liquid at room temperature still conducts well.

          • LCD

            Yeah that bugs me too

  • jousterusa

    What a great response from Rossi! He is still a boxer and a champion!

  • jousterusa

    What a great response from Rossi! He is still a boxer and a champion!

  • jousterusa

    Sandy, I hope you get to read “An Impossible Invention” by Mats Lewan. I am enjoying it tremendously, and for the first time have been able to see his very strong intellectual ability in the many ways it’s been exercised over the poast 20 years. He has really come through the fire and is an intellect and a man to be reckoned with. Mats’ book is full of true anecdotes and provides a very thorough foundation for understanding the man who conquered the Coulomb barrier and mastered cold fusion. It is a very, very readable book, very interesting and detailed as to the challenges and assaults he has faced in his life, which would have stopped or crippled a lesser man. As a young man he set a world record for the longest run, which took 24 hours of straight running. Rossi has arrived and he’s here to stay!

  • LCD

    Isn’t point 3 what people were claiming as the only real source of confusion? Even if it somehow were true wouldn’t that mean the cop was above 1 anyway? This would not change the energy density by orders of magnitude so in the end it is still above chemical, right?

    Also what was your take on the resistance not matching up with what was expected?

    Thanks

    • Thomas Kaminski

      Point 3: I think those who do not agree with the measurements will criticize any measurement, but to say the probe was backwards and measurements were off by factor of three is absurd. Most careful scientists and technicians make multiple measurements with more than one device when testing devices. A simple clamp-on hand held meter could have been used to measure the magnitude of the RMS current and even using an estimate for the line voltage, you could calculate an estimated input power. Finding a factor of three difference would be an easy test.

      Resistance: I did not look at this carefully, but I think the controversy arises over the fact that the IR measurement differs from the predicted joule heating. In a read of the report, I did not see any estimate of thermal conduction through the wires. Perhaps part of the difference was heat conducted through the wires, heating the entrance wire much hotter than the joule heating. The non-linear result of active verses passive might also be due to some sort of energy generation in the alumina surrounding the wires, heating the exit wires more than the joule heating alone of the passive test. One point, though — the numbers are small, so even if we chalk them up to errors, it does not invalidate a COP much greater than one.

      One point that I find hard to understand is a negative resistance verses temperature change. It is easy to find Negative Temperature Change devices (usually a semiconductor material), but I am not aware of NTC metallic materials. Perhaps a portion of the wire is in fact melting, but remains a conducting path. Mercury, a metal that is liquid at room temperature still conducts well.

      • LCD

        Yeah that bugs me too