Andrea Rossi’s Faith

Andrea Rossi has made no secret over the years about his belief in God, and how his faith has been an important aspect in his work. There are a couple of items today that provide a little more detail about the role that his spirituality has played in his life.

On the Journal of Nuclear Physics a read asked some questions on the topic:

Based on your communications, you seem to be a man of science as well as a man of God.

1) Do you reconcile the two philosophically and if so, how?

2) What kind of God do you believe in?

3) Could your spiritual beliefs be partly the reason why you have been attacked so much in your work?

Rossi responded:

1- “Science without Religion is lame. Religion without Science is blind.” ( Albert Einstein, from “Collected Quotes From Albert Einstein” )
2- I am catholic christian and every day I read by heart the New Testament, but I respect any kind of Faith and deem freedom of Faith a pillar of the peaceful convivence of humanity.
3- some imbecile has written that my scientific work cannot be taken seriously due to my religious point of applicaton, but, you know, the mother of imbeciles is always pregnant: they count as a joker in a poker contest. By the way: atheism is still a religion, as well as negative numbers are still numbers.

In a separate article, Vessela Nikolova, author of Andrea Rossi’s biography “E-Cat The New Fire”, has a post on her blog which discusses Rossi’s religious convictions. One of her readers noticed that in the recently released photograph of Rossi with his patent, there was an image of a Madonna in his day-planner. Vessela contacted Andrea Rossi and asked him about the Madonna.

He replied to her explaining that this was an image of the “Madonna delle Grazie”. He explained that after he was released from prison he immediately went to pray in the church of Santa Maria delle Grazie which was close to the prison. He wrote:

“I prayed in that church for my future life and prayed to make useful for something all the studies made in prison on the LENR. I have taken that day, in the same church, an image of St. Mary of the Graces, which is exactly the one that you can see inside my agenda.”

Rossi is not reluctant to share his convictions on many topics, and his religious life is clearly something that is an integral part of his personality, and seems to be a key element in his motivation to continue work on the E-Cat.

Obviously religion can be a controversial topic, and it is not normally not a subject of discussion on this site, but it seems to be relevant when we discuss the life and work of Andrea Rossi. In your comments, remember one of the commenting guidelines here is that “comments arguing for or against religious beliefs or practices” may be subject to moderation. So let’s not get too carried away with religious debates.

UPDATE: Another comment by Andrea Rossi here on the role of faith. A reader from South Africa commented on how he saw similarities between Rossi’s life and that of Nelson Mandela:

Brandon Hurd:
I remember when I was in prison and was listening the television news inside my cell ( 4 meters x 2 with 6 persons inside), listening that I was accused of tremendous crimes I never made ( eventually I have been cleared ” because the facts did not exist”, as the prosecutor himself wrote); imagine: you are closed in a prison and you listen at the television that you are accused of things you never committed and that you don’t even know exactly what they mean ; you listen that all your industries have been seized, closed , all your banks asked back all the money immediately, all your money seized and you can do nothing to react and fight because you are closed and insulated indide a prison for years, while in the meantime your industries go bankrupcy and you lose all what has been built through 3 generations from your family; imagine your wife asks diverce and your sons want not to see you again after what they learnt from mass media about you; imagine all your industries go bankrupt as a consequence of banks loans retrieve and of the fact that all your suppliers take advantage of your situation not paying what they owe you ( and later you will be convicted for these bankrupcies, so that the term you served in prison will have been justified); you know how I could survive all this and came out of this stronger? Asking God: ” OK, you are testing me: now, what can I do for you?”. As a matter of fact, whatever we do, we are born in this word starting from nothing, there is nothing special if we return to be nothing: that’s just an “epochè” that allows us to be reborn.
Thank you for your kind words, but Nelson Mandela is infinitely bigger than I am.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • Stephen

    His belief is part of the story and part of what makes him who he is. He seems to me to get great strength from this. I think that building something amazing and good and drawing strength, commitment and focus to do this from your faith is one of the best things a person can do. I can respect that a lot.

    • bachcole

      If what happened to Rossi happened to me, I would be looking for some seriously illegal payback. Rossi is a much better man than I am, and I am not talking about his development of LENR. I am talking about his abandoning the desire for revenge.

  • fact police

    Einstein’s view of religion though is quite abstract, and most religious people would consider him an atheist. The context of his quote is:

    “To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

    So, the religion he is talking about is the faith that “the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason”. Not really the foundation of catholicism.

    • Daniel Maris

      Einstein was a philosophical realist and I think his religion was a type of deism i.e. an impersonal deity embodied in a physical cosmos that operates in regular fashion.

  • fact police

    Einstein’s view of religion though is quite abstract, and most religious people would consider him an atheist. The context of his quote is:

    “To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

    So, the religion he is talking about is the faith that “the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason”. Not really the foundation of catholicism.

    • orsobubu

      >Einstein’s view of religion though is quite abstract, and most religious people would consider him an atheist.

      Exactly. Also, he expressed the preferences for a socialist economic order:

      “I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils,
      namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by
      an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In
      such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and
      are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts
      production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to
      be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to
      every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in
      addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop
      in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow-men in place of the
      glorification of power and success in our present society.”

      Albert Einstein, Why Socialism?, 1949

      • bachcole

        I do not put Albert Einstein on a pedestal. I would put my version of God on a pedestal, but He is hiding in my heart and I am desperately trying to free Him from my prison of selfishness. (:->)

        • Leonard Weinstein

          bachcole, why do keep trying to make this about you? We are discussing Rossi.

          • bachcole

            People here put Einstein on a pedestal, and I am merely saying that I don’t agree with putting him on a pedestal.

            Do I notice some hostility towards me?

          • HS61AF91

            because like other people here, bachcole knows there is a little piece of Rossi in each of our hearts.

  • Jarea

    He read “everyday” the New testament?. I didn´t know he was so religious. If he use that divine motivation to save the world, then i think it is good for all.
    However, I must remember that we still don´t have replication of MFMP, or the professors from Sweden and no commercial device yet. All can be just a good dream. I just grab my hopes to Parkhomov and the Chinesse but again i don´t know them. I just hope that really all the LENR story become true.

    What i also read from his words is that going to jail was a very very bad experience for him. That is also telling me that this ECAT endeavor must be true. Nobody with those bad experiences will risk to go again to jail, but i am not in Rossi´s head.

  • Jarea

    He read “everyday” the New testament?. I didn´t know he was so religious. If he use that divine motivation to save the world, then i think it is good for all. Motivation and emotions are very important because they give us reasons to fight and keep doing all what is needed. Without them as Rossi/Einstein said everything is lame. It is like our biological reward system to keep us hard coded on track of what is (normally) good for us/evolution.
    However, I must remember that we still don´t have replication of MFMP, or the professors from Sweden and no commercial device yet. All can be just a good dream. I just grab my hopes to Parkhomov and the Chinesse but again i don´t know them. I just hope that really all the LENR story become true.

    What i also read from his words is that going to jail was a very very bad experience for him. That is also telling me that this ECAT endeavor must be true. Nobody with those bad experiences will risk to go again to jail, but i am not in Rossi´s head.

  • orsobubu

    The prison where Rossi served his term:

    https://goo.gl/maps/smQeC

    and here:
    https://goo.gl/maps/tgivv

    The church where Rossi went:

    https://goo.gl/maps/2wRnh

    see the yellow building to the left side of the church, it is the enter of The Last Supper by Leonardo.It is interesting to note that the street you see to the right side of the church is where the richest people of Milan live, and the prison is just behind the corner! There is a famous school in the street, where you can see an impressive number of mums, ex-fashion models, going to take home their childs

    The church is the home of the Cultural Centre of the Dominican Order:

    http://www.grazieop.it/grazie_op/i_frati/00000203_Presentazione.html

    so the church represents a real centre for the study and discussion of metaphysical idealism, the true philosophical foundation of the Catholic Church (Thomas Aquinas) along with Jesuits congregation; the discussion are often open to the public, some times in the past years I intervened with my marxist sermons and they carefully listened, without Kicking me out of the door! I was treated better there by Ordo Fratrum Praedicatorum then in E-catworld by Bachcole and OmegaZ! hehe 🙂

    • bachcole

      The prison where orsobubu serves his term: Das Kapital

  • bfast

    I think that LENR’s persecution, and it is being persecuted, has nothing to do with religion, and almost everything to do with hot fusion.

    I love Rossi’s “By the way: atheism is still a religion, as well as negative numbers are still numbers.” I’ll quote him on that, though I’m not sure that he didn’t mine the quote from somewhere else.

  • Jonnyb

    Hope it all goes well for you now A.R., sure it will.

  • Billy Jackson

    being wrongly accused of something you did not do is a horrible injustice. how do you prove you did not do a thing? how does anyone prove a negative? the answer is you cant. the only solution is with time. In your case the charges were eventually cleared because there was no evidence to tie you to any wrong doing despite the attempts to do so. Forced to sit and wait for someone else to go through your life and daily events hoping they find something that will clear you is not a mental situation that i would wish on anyone.

    Tack onto that the media lies and twisting of facts to generate viewership and you get a portrait that is about as hopeless and as inaccurate as you can wish for in a situation like yours. Loosing your businesses is frustrating and can feel like the end of everything you worked for.. to me that was unfair in the extreme, Your family falling victim to these lies is probably the cruelest of them all to watch those you love slowly turn on you as they begin to believe what the TV and those completely unconnected to events say.. it strikes strait at the heart of all of us.. of everything you have gone through that is where i feel your pain the most.

    Through all this you managed to hang onto the core of your faith, to seek within the strength you needed not only to survive, but to persevere in the face of all that adversity.I find it is absolutely astounding and humbling at the same time.

    That you are a man of science with a deeply religious core is something that i find much respect in.

    You say that Nelson Mandela is Infinitely larger than yourself. In this i would agree. You see Mandela united South Africa to great affect and no little accomplishment on the world stage. Something that he will be respected and remembered for long into the future. What your accomplishments means to our world is just as important and potentially more for the e-cat potentially brings with it a chance to free more than just a single nation or people.. it bring with it a chance to unite worlds.. so you are correct.. Nelson Mandela has accomplished more and is a larger story than yourself…… for now.

  • bfast

    Rossi’s discussion about being falsely imprisoned is moving. His petroldragon technology still lives. It worked, it works. Eng Rossi is an incredible inventor, not merely a one hit (home run way out of the park — you will see, when the ball finally drops) wonder.

  • Jarea

    If he is so religious, then he must understand that he is morally obligued to deliver his tecnology asap to the world

    • Christina

      If he is so religious you must understand that he believes he must deliver to the world a product that has been thoroughly tested against all eventualities so that his product doesn’t kill one person or a thousand because he was impatient. He feels responsible before God to do this right having faith that God will guide the way it goes knowing that God’s plan is sometimes crippled by men and therefore taking great care to set up his companies so Rossi and his associates can help the most people.

      LENR is not the be-all and end-all for helping the third world poor. People other than IH and Leonardo Corp must be coordinated with in order to bring basic sanitation, food, schools, and medical care to the third world.

      Hopefully, Rossi and friends have a plan while trusting in God to help them with it and being weary of the shady character of some homo sapiens.

      A Catholic,
      Christina

      • bachcole

        I actually prefer my definition of “religious” from someone like Christina who actually is religious than from someone who is not, like jarea.

      • HS61AF91

        me too

    • Tim

      I think he’s already doing that.

  • Pierre Beaulnes

    This site is about science, common sense, facts and reality.

    Using this quote

    -Science without Religion is lame. Religion without Science is blind.” ( Albert Einstein, from “Collected Quotes From Albert Einstein)

    is unethical and misleading because it does not represent reality. Einstein did NOT believe in a personal god and this quote is taken out of context. The following link is self explanatory :

    http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115821/einstein-quote-about-religion-and-science-was-wrong-misinterpreted

    Common sense, facts, reality and the constructive pleasure of sharing with everybody a common foundation on which we can all agree and built on. Religion should be outside of this foundation.

    • bachcole

      What is reality, common sense, and facts? I got the science part.

      • Pierre Beaulnes

        Things from a poem of William Blake like Who can Stand (which, incidentally speaks of God) to the evolution of the understanding of Quantum Physics, that can be shared and integrated within a common foundation without divine intervention.

      • Pierre Beaulnes

        Common sense dictates that Darwinian Evolution is a fact that describes a good portion of reality.

        • Tim

          Darwinian evolution describes how incredibly complex bacteria and other prokaryotes evolved into slightly more complex multicellular organisms and how those organisms changed into other complex organisms in order to adapt to changing environments. Darwinian evolution doesn’t even come close to explaining how relatively simple, non-living proteins combined into something alive such as a bacterium.

          Furthermore, Darwinian evolution doesn’t even touch on physics and never can or will.

          • Pierre Beaulnes

            I agree with you. This is why I talk about only a portion of reality. But it is still something that can be part of a common foundation for people with common sense, a foundation on which we can built and discover new things. Somebody who says that man lived at the same time as dinosaurs is not part of this foundation.Can’t really discuss with this guy, can’t evolve and discover new things with this guy. And this is too bad…

    • Bento

      Thanks!

    • Dave Lawton

      This piece is about Science and Religion. http://internationaltimes.it/easter-2015-the-christ-particle/

  • Pierre Beaulnes

    Incidentally, Rossi’s faith does not take away the fact that he may be one the most influential scientist of modern time.

  • Private Citizen

    While Rossi is not behaving anything like a scammer, lending hope that he has the goods, my Spidey senses tingle at anything coming wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.

    • bachcole

      I don’t see any way that a human being could go through what he went through and be able to forgive without some serious help. So, as far as I can see, his Catholic spirituality is as serious and sincere as spirituality can get for normal human beings.

      • hempenearth

        And much cheaper than a shrink

  • Bento

    Quicquid est, in Deo est, et nihil sine Deo esse, neque concipi potest.
    A. Einstein was a huge admirer of Spinoza.
    You have to read and understand the philosophy of Spinoza to understand what Einstein means by:
    “Science without religion is lame…”
    It is easy to quote these days, thanks to google.
    Pseudo-intelectual comments are really annoying. Even from Andrea Rossi.
    Oh, BTW, Spinoza was an Atheïst.

    • bachcole

      Rossi can use a quote from Spinoza and not mean exactly what Spinoza meant. Anyone who speaks English is quoting Shakespeare and the Bible numerous times a day and not even realize it and not even mean exactly what Shakespeare and the Bible meant.

    • Private Citizen

      “Whatsoever is, is in God, and without God nothing can be, or be conceived.”
      -Baruch Spinoza-

      Spinoza was closer to something like a pantheist

      • bachcole

        My kind of atheist.

  • bachcole

    I am formally not a Christian per se, but I go way beyond tolerance. I deeply appreciate his version of Christianity, and I will attend religious services with him any time that he invites me, and I will enjoy it very much and even be moved to the point of tears.

    Anyone who has a problem with his religion has a problem with me and my spirituality. I don’t talk about it here, but I try to sneak it in surreptitiously in almost everything that I say. Many of you think that I am talking philosophy (I do have a B.A. in philosophy), but it is just my way of slipping into the discussion spirituality and the fact that I care about every single person who posts comments here.

  • bachcole

    I am formally not a Christian per se, but I go way beyond tolerance. I deeply appreciate his version of Christianity, and I will attend religious services with him any time that he invites me, and I will enjoy it very much and even be moved to the point of tears.

    Anyone who has a problem with his religion has a problem with me and my spirituality. I don’t talk about it here, but I try to sneak it in surreptitiously in almost everything that I say. Many of you think that I am talking philosophy (I do have a B.A. in philosophy), but it is just my way of slipping into the discussion spirituality and the fact that I care about every single person who posts comments here.

  • bachcole

    Rossi can use a quote from Spinoza and not mean exactly what Spinoza meant. Anyone who speaks English is quoting Shakespeare and the Bible numerous times a day and not even realize it and not even mean exactly what Shakespeare and the Bible meant.

  • Private Citizen

    “Whatsoever is, is in God, and without God nothing can be, or be conceived.”
    -Baruch Spinoza-

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    Thanks Frank, these quotes from Rossi should also answer why he is not simply giving his IP away, a lot was taken from him by illegal means by “the powers that be”.

  • Dave Lawton

    This piece is about Science and Religion. http://internationaltimes.it/easter-2015-the-christ-particle/

  • GreenWin

    Does faith have any place in science? Consensus science agrees our universe originated with a “Big Bang.” Prior to that there was nothing – no matter, no energy, no laws of physics… absolutely nothing existed. Nanoseconds later, all matter, energy, forces of nature, and physical law miraculously appeared. Hallelujah!

    This theory, embraced by consensus science, appears to be deeply imbued with “faith.”

    • Warthog

      And God said “let there be light”. And the “Big Bang” and all that follows from it happened.

      What better description of the birth of the Universe do you need????

      • Alan DeAngelis

        I’ll ask the “Please, May I have a cup of tea” boys. They have all the answers.

    • bachcole

      It depends upon what we mean by the word “faith”. Blind faith is obviously silly when it comes to science. Reasoned or intuitive faith is something different. I do not have direct evidence that Rossi has anything other than the Lugano type of reactor. But I have faith in his word, the word of others, and the natural course of things that he has a much improved reactor now.

    • mwr1176

      Ok good because I’m sure there are plenty of wonderful religious websites for posts like the above. Watching what is going on in the world solidifies that organized religion is horrible for modern society. Living in isolated communities is one thing but when these different religious groups clash it’s a disaster. What are we really gaining from these archaic ideas and institutions??

      • GreenWin

        Frank, our moderator clearly noted in this post: ” In your comments, remember one of the commenting guidelines here is
        that “comments arguing for or against religious beliefs or practices”
        may be subject to moderation. So let’s not get too carried away with
        religious debates.”

        It is curious the number of great scientists (e.g. Planck, Einstein, Heisenberg) make reference in later life to some form of higher power. This is, I think, a matter of respect for the mystery that is our universe. This respect is an example of humility and an open mind willing to accept the idea we do not and may never know “everything.”

        For those interested in the arts, I suggest a recent film “I Origins” – about a biologist who finds a way for genetically blind creatures to “see.”

        • I like the Einstein quote. He sided with Spinoza who didn’t differentiate God from nature. Divinity is a perspective. If one said that tree is divine and someone else said it wasn’t they could both be right, just different perspectives. That’s how both see the tree. When Einstein looked through a telescope at the universe he saw divinity.

          I always found the idea of a blind and random universe sad and hard to believe. On the other hand, in an age of science the idea of God has to be scrutinized and looked at anew. That’s our challenge. Maybe this is what’s meant that “We cannot put new wine in old wineskins”.

          It’s interesting that an intelligent intuitive like Einstein sided with a perspective of divinity from a man who lived in the 17th century. Spinoza seemed well ahead of his time.

      • William D. Fleming

        “Watching what is going on in the world solidifies that organized religion is horrible for modern society”

        Good point, but no need to throw out the baby with the bath water.

        • William D. Fleming

          They claim to have science on their side. I guess they haven’t read Einstein, Planck, et. al.

      • Omega Z

        “Religion” has been used to subjugate people, various races and nationalities. It has been used to promote one race or group being superior to another. It incorporates tradition to block change. Questioning it’s authority has consequences.

        In the above, Insert “Science”, No other changes are necessary. Science is a Religion. And just as traditional religion, it can be manipulated & abused by the hierarchy.

        Einstein as well as others(including Darwin) believed in a higher power. It was organized religion they had issues with. The truth is any institution Science, Religion, Medical, Educational etc, can be(And Are) manipulated to the purposes of a few. The issue isn’t the Institution’s but People & their intents.

        Note it appears Science may ultimately validate a higher power or intelligence in the Universe. They are finding evidence of what appears to be a cosmic consciousness(associated with omnipresence.) It isn’t unrealistic that human consciousness would connect with this cosmic consciousness and provide the bases of what we call religion.

        On the other hand, if such a higher intelligence doesn’t exist, then humanity is nothing but a more evolved animal. Our moral values & such are merely one persons means to control another. That there really is no right or wrong, but only nature. Where at anytime, we can revert to survival of the fittest. If that’s the case, we will revert. Nature in the end, always wins.

        • let us assume thet one religion is right, or none, and let us talk of the myriad of wrong religion.
          it have been observed that religions serves few purpose quie well.

          – one is anxiolytic, is to give explanation to everything, why there is thunder, water, rain… you can predic the future with that… if it does not work well, add an explanation….
          – another linked, anxiolytic, is to justify current situation, social or material… caste system, huricane, plagues… it can justify errors of prediction, blamed on you.
          – finally, not far, is to support the existing political system.

          as you see science can do that, good or bad science, academic or experimental science.

          in fact real science is much weaker as sometime it cannot answer question, or give good predictions.

          dogmatic science, corrected regularly to match reality when there is better answers, does the job of a religion the best way.

          in fact you recognise in that adjustment the Kuhnian Paradigm shift.

          because the goal of bad science is to give answer and justify politics :
          – paradigm shift happen only when there is better theory, fully compatible, with useful applications
          the groupthink theory add a case
          – some paradigm change cannot happen if it oppose huge stupid investment done by the group, with no hope to take individual advantage without the support of the group.

          so, dogmatic science, is better than religion to
          – give answer to everything
          – justify the world
          – justify the elite positions

          good science is weaker as it cannot answer to all, and may suffer from refutations, even when it show the elite were wrong and population will suffer.

          • Ted-XX

            Science needs a reform. No theory should be considered 100% correct. The theories should be rated on various aspects, such a rating system would be most useful. Current dogmatic science is strongly incoherent: on one side some health sciences actively discuss chakras, on the other side physicist reject them totally. Some areas of science are blurred on purpose, LENR is one of them, subtle energies is another (Einstein seems to introduce the term “subtle energies”). Unexplained phenomena (there are so many unexplained physical and chemical phenomena! – several pages even from the “Wikipedia”) are just set aside and not discussed by the dogmatic science, as they do not fit in the dogma.

          • Ted-XX

            I would rate the current state of the dogmatic nuclear physics as 30% (the rating is about “correctness”):
            So, the list is:
            Nuclear physics: 30%
            Mathematics: 80%
            Chemistry: 50%.
            Chemical engineering: 60%
            Alternative medicine: 50%
            Western allopathic medicine: 40%
            Reasoning of dogmatic scientists: 1% 🙂

          • bachcole

            I only know about the so-called health sciences.

            Alternative medicine, which is really DIY self-care: 60%

            Western Allopathic medicine: 30%

            But that’s just me.

          • Sandy

            If there is a supernatural entity that wants me to pray to him or her or it then that entity is hereby invited to materialize (with gold and silver sparkles; Star Trek style) in my presence and to ask for my allegiance. Until then, I am not going to subscribe to the existence of any supernatural entities. At this point, I have zero data which indicate that supernatural entities exist.

          • Data can be arranged in a lot of different ways for or against, but it’s just headstuff. There are brief (and rare) experiences of transcendence that go beyond the mind and alter and help to define our perspective.

          • William D. Fleming

            Sassy ain’t you? 🙂

    • ecatworld

      No, that’s not the purpose of this website.

      • Jarea

        Thanks GOD! XD

  • GreenWin

    Does faith have any place in science? Consensus science agrees our universe originated with a “Big Bang.” Prior to that there was nothing – no matter, no energy, no laws of physics… absolutely nothing existed. Nanoseconds later, all matter, energy, forces of nature, and physical law miraculously appeared. Hallelujah!

    This theory, embraced by consensus science, appears to be deeply imbued with “faith.”

    • Warthog

      And God said “let there be light”. And the “Big Bang” and all that follows from it happened.

      What better description of the birth of the Universe do you need????

      • Tim

        The Big Bang theory was invented by a priest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

        • clovis ray

          Hi, Tim.

          Your comment is misleading, as you left out the science part, when the very first of the article you referenced , it says, This article is about the physicist, and priest. I personally don’t put a lot of confidence in winki.
          as they, like the msm do not recognize that the rossi effect even exist.

      • clovis ray

        Hi, warthog.
        Funny, how folks that share their thoughts with each other, sometimes think the same things, we thought it was a good example, of science, and religion as one.
        One rule of thumb, would be, if it does not occur in nature ,it is most likely in error.

        • Warthog

          Well, sometimes it exists in Nature, but not under what we would consider “normal” conditions. Things like ultra-high purity silicon don’t exist “normally”, but once they are brought into existence, they allow “unusual” things to occur. In the “usual” run of things, metallic oxides are not superconductors….yet, with the right set of material conditions, they are.

          This is what the pathological skeptics ignore. I think it was physicist Julian Schwinger who said something like…..”the conditions in the solid state are not those of a high-temperature plasma” in reference to LENR. Things not allowed in HTP’s might indeed happen inside the nano-matrix of “solid” metals.

          • clovis ray

            Hey, we do think a lot alike. I personally have thought that superconductors are playing a part,in the effect, not sure just how they are connected, but i feel that aligning the magnetic field,and using pulsating sound waves or maybe the power in feed, may play a part, it would be great to find a resistance free current,

    • bachcole

      It depends upon what we mean by the word “faith”. Blind faith is obviously silly when it comes to science. Reasoned or intuitive faith is something different. I do not have direct evidence that Rossi has anything other than the Lugano type of reactor. But I have faith in his word, the word of others, and the natural course of things that he has a much improved reactor now.

    • clovis ray

      HI, buddy.
      Yea, like let there be light, and the word, was made material, then the big bang and our universe was made.

  • Atheism is the only thing that makes sense to me personally.

    • bachcole

      Probably because you are misunderstanding what us modern folk mean by “God”. Try infinite consciousness. Our consciousnesses are part of Infinite Consciousness. (:->)

      • No, that makes no sense to me either 🙂

        • bachcole

          Well, I appreciate your candor and the calmness of this discussion. Let me try something else.

          With objective things, one should experience first and then believe; to do otherwise is absurd.

          But, for subjective things, you believe first and then experience. The discipline called “Affirmations” is an example. So is EFT. People with low self-esteem (like I used to) can be given all manner of surprise birthday parties (I was) as an act of love, but it won’t make a bit of difference (it didn’t) until the person decides to believe in themselves (I did). Belief came first, and then experience.

          Now, there is nothing more subjective in life than consciousness. Without it, there is NOTHING and no experiences, subjective or objective. Believing first about consciousness is the means for “exploration” and discovery. To me, an objective study of consciousness is far less useful than tits on a bull.

  • William D. Fleming

    It’s not science OR religion. Each, if viewed a certain way, complements the other. Most truly creative physicists since Newton have been religious, but in their own ways. Of course, if you insist on the most dogmatic and immature approach you’ll get conflict. It seems to me that courageous people, whether atheists or theists, evolve toward common ground. Others remain stuck either in materialist or religious dogma, frozen by fear.

    I really like Rossi’s ideas, especially the tolerance part.

    “The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.” -W.Heisenberg

    Max Planck said in 1944, “As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.” (Quotes from Wikipedia)

  • Alan DeAngelis

    I’ll ask the “Please, May I have a cup of tea” boys. They have all the answers.

  • mwr1176

    Are we really going to start proselytizing on this website?

    • clovis ray

      HI, mwr1176.
      answer, NO.

    • Frank Acland

      No, that’s not the purpose of this website.

      • Jarea

        Thanks GOD! XD

    • bachcole

      No. We are merely trying to understand Rossi. And his version of religion (The one that he personally believes in and practices; the one in his head) does not seem like the sort that will cause problems for other people.

  • clovis ray

    HI, mwr1176.
    answer, NO.

  • mwr1176

    Ok good because I’m sure there are plenty of wonderful religious websites for posts like the above. Watching what is going on in the world solidifies that organized religion is horrible for modern society. Living in isolated communities is one thing but when these different religious groups clash it’s a disaster. What are we really gaining from these archaic ideas and institutions??

    • GreenWin

      Frank, our moderator clearly noted in this post: ” In your comments, remember one of the commenting guidelines here is
      that “comments arguing for or against religious beliefs or practices”
      may be subject to moderation. So let’s not get too carried away with
      religious debates.”

      It is curious the number of great scientists (e.g. Planck, Einstein, Heisenberg) make reference in later life to some form of higher power. This is, I think, a matter of respect for the mystery that is our universe. This respect is an example of humility and an open mind willing to accept the idea we do not and may never know “everything.”

      For those interested in the arts, I suggest a recent film “I Origins” – about a biologist who finds a way for genetically blind creatures to “see.”

      • Michael W Wolf

        You are a smart human being GW, couldn’t agree more.

    • William D. Fleming

      “Watching what is going on in the world solidifies that organized religion is horrible for modern society”

      Good point, but no need to throw out the baby with the bath water.

    • Michael W Wolf

      Archaic? Atheistic governments have exterminated 100,000,000 people in 100 years. So if disaster is your standard for turning your back on a philosophy, you are barking up the wrong tree.

    • Omega Z

      “Religion” has been used to subjugate people, various races and nationalities. It has been used to promote one race or group being superior to another. It incorporates tradition to block change. Questioning it’s authority has consequences.

      In the above, Insert “Science”, No other changes are necessary. Science is a Religion. And just as traditional religion, it can be manipulated & abused by the hierarchy.

      Einstein as well as others(including Darwin) believed in a higher power. It was organized religion they had issues with. The truth is any institution Science, Religion, Medical, Educational etc, can be(And Are) manipulated to the purposes of a few. The issue isn’t the Institution’s but People & their intents.

      Note it appears Science may ultimately validate a higher power or intelligence in the Universe. They are finding evidence of what appears to be a cosmic consciousness(associated with omnipresence.) It isn’t unrealistic that human consciousness would connect with this cosmic consciousness and provide the bases of what we call religion.

      On the other hand, if such a higher intelligence doesn’t exist, then humanity is nothing but a more evolved animal. Our moral values & such are merely one persons means to control another. That there really is no right or wrong, but only nature. Where at anytime, we can revert to survival of the fittest. If that’s the case, we will revert. Nature in the end, always wins.

      • let us assume thet one religion is right, or none, and let us talk of the myriad of wrong religion.
        it have been observed that religions serves few purpose quie well.

        – one is anxiolytic, is to give explanation to everything, why there is thunder, water, rain… you can predic the future with that… if it does not work well, add an explanation….
        – another linked, anxiolytic, is to justify current situation, social or material… caste system, huricane, plagues… it can justify errors of prediction, blamed on you.
        – finally, not far, is to support the existing political system.

        as you see science can do that, good or bad science, academic or experimental science.

        in fact real science is much weaker as sometime it cannot answer question, or give good predictions.

        dogmatic science, corrected regularly to match reality when there is better answers, does the job of a religion the best way.

        in fact you recognise in that adjustment the Kuhnian Paradigm shift.

        because the goal of bad science is to give answer and justify politics :
        – paradigm shift happen only when there is better theory, fully compatible, with useful applications
        the groupthink theory add a case
        – some paradigm change cannot happen if it oppose huge stupid investment done by the group, with no hope to take individual advantage without the support of the group.

        so, dogmatic science, is better than religion to
        – give answer to everything
        – justify the world
        – justify the elite positions

        good science is weaker as it cannot answer to all, and may suffer from refutations, even when it show the elite were wrong and population will suffer.

        • Ted-XX

          Science needs a reform. No theory should be considered 100% correct. The theories should be rated on various aspects, such a rating system would be most useful. Current dogmatic science is strongly incoherent: on one side some health sciences actively discuss chakras, on the other side physicist reject them totally. Some areas of science are blurred on purpose, LENR is one of them, subtle energies is another (Einstein seems to introduce the term “subtle energies”). Unexplained phenomena (there are so many unexplained physical and chemical phenomena! – several pages even from the “Wikipedia”) are just set aside and not discussed by the dogmatic science, as they do not fit in the dogma.

          • Ted-XX

            I would rate the current state of the dogmatic nuclear physics as 30% (the rating is about “correctness”):
            So, the list is:
            Nuclear physics: 30%
            Mathematics: 80%
            Chemistry: 50%.
            Chemical engineering: 60%
            Alternative medicine: 50%
            Western allopathic medicine: 40%
            Reasoning of dogmatic scientists: 1% 🙂

          • bachcole

            I only know about the so-called health sciences.

            Alternative medicine, which is really DIY self-care: 60%

            Western Allopathic medicine: 30%

            But that’s just me.

  • clovis ray

    Hi, Guys.
    I truly believe there is a new paradigm change coming, this new device will be a part of that change, that will take place soon, call it what you wish, you would have to be blind not to see it.
    In this new world, energy will be as free as the air we breath, and that air will be clean as the mountain air, I breath here at home. I can hardly wait, thanks Dr. Rossi once again, i personally have known you were a man of god, from the very first,and that is one of the reasons, I was attracted to your work,

    • Michael W Wolf

      I was attracted because of it’s ramifications. I just found out Andre’s belief. And I feel no different now.

      • clovis ray

        Your choice, and the ability to change your mind, when new information is learned, I personally believe Dr. Rossi, was the brains behind everything E-CAT,and received the instructions, on how to configure this device, from on high, and my father is the architect, and e-cat will grow into many grand machines, for his and humanity’s pleasure, and i stand by my first statement, it’s my story and i’m sticking too it.
        Faith,truth, science, and responsibility =discovery

        • Michael W Wolf

          well maybe it was rossi’s faith that put him in the right frame of mind. No need to call on a higher power. Even though you may be right.

  • bachcole

    No. We are merely trying to understand Rossi. And his version of religion (The one that he personally believes in and practices; the one in his head) does not seem like the sort that will cause problems for other people.

  • radvar

    http://www.wisdompubs.org/book/middle-way

    Sub-titled: “Faith grounded in reason”

  • f sedei

    I consider myself an open minded person. I believe those of you who insist you derive from the ape family. And, I believe those of us who insist we derive from the family of a higher entity. No need for further argument or discussion.

  • f sedei

    I consider myself an open minded person. I believe those of you who insist you derive from the ape family. And, I believe those of us who insist we derive from the family of a higher entity. No need for further argument or discussion.

    • bachcole

      I know that you are being sarcastic, and I enjoyed it. But they are both right. Evolution is how the Infinite created(s) species. The separation of God from our physical life is a human invention.

    • Michael W Wolf

      No, evolutionists insist. Believers only believe. Believers think Atheists are wrong. Atheists know believers are stupid. And that makes Atheism the enemy of hope.

  • Patrick Ellul

    @ecatworld:disqus it is ok to credit the questioner when you quote them from the jonp forum 😉

  • Patrick Ellul

    @ecatworld:disqus it is ok to credit the questioner when you quote them from the jonp forum 😉

  • Warthog

    Well, sometimes it exists in Nature, but not under what we would consider “normal” conditions. Things like ultra-high purity silicon don’t exist “normally”, but once they are brought into existence, they allow “unusual” things to occur. In the “usual” run of things, metallic oxides are not superconductors….yet, with the right set of material conditions, they are.

    This is what the pathological skeptics ignore. I think it was physicist Julian Schwinger who said something like…..”the conditions in the solid state are not those of a high-temperature plasma” in reference to LENR. Things not allowed in HTP’s might indeed happen inside the nano-matrix of “solid” metals.

  • Sandy

    Rossi wrote, “atheism is still a religion”. Atheists who reject the existence of supernatural beings (gods, angels, demons,etc.) are not practicing a “religion”.

    I am a “methodological naturalist” and, as such, I neither accept nor reject the proposition that supernatural beings exist. After September 11, 2001 I almost became anti-religious because I was very tired of people committing mass murder in the name of this or that god.

    Religion can be a very powerful tool for good and for evil.

    • Omega Z

      “atheism” as “practiced” by most is a Religion. i.e., they don’t just not believe, they actively preach. Some have even opened up their own church. I call that a religion…

      • Sandy

        The people who preach atheism are not practicing a religion. In most instances, they are trying to rescue other people from the mind-destroying effects of irrational belief systems.

        • Omega Z

          “irrational” according to who’s opinion. Perhaps those who believe in a higher power “are trying to rescue other people from the mind-destroying effects of irrational belief systems.”

          You believe there is no God or higher power. Your belief is also of blind faith. When you build a church, preach atheism & file for tax exemption. Sounds like every other organized religion to me. You as well as everyone else believe in the unprovable everyday. You merely take exception to belief in a higher power.

          IMHO, Most everyone is born instinctively knowing there is something more then what is visible in everyday life. However, we do not trust our fellow humans & by extension, tend not to trust organized religion.

          Atheism is primarily of an age of 25 & under. The age of rebelliousness & distrust of the elders. After 25, a gradual transition takes place. You become the elders. Even the grand popah of Atheism in the U.S. has opened the door to the possibility of a higher power. Is he now an

          agnostic theist?
          YOU invite this higher power to materialize before you. You totally misunderstand the intent. It is YOU that is being tested. You have been given Free Will. It is easier to do what is right when that higher power is standing over you or you have proof positive it exists. The question is can you do the right thing without solid evidence of a higher power.

          IF, that entity should appear before you, there is only one thing left to say. Oh crap, Because at that point, the test is over. What’s your GPA.

          • bachcole

            Given that the Infinite is within everyone, the GPA is just how well did one stay congruent with one’s own conscience.

          • Sandy

            Above, I wrote “At this point, I have zero data which indicate that supernatural entities exist”. That is still the case. Poseidon has not materialized before me and introduced himself as a god.

            My university GPA was 3.76. I took classes about religion and I learned that religion is often a component of a larger system of social control, and that elites use religion to gain control over other people and then exploit those other people.

            “Can you do the right thing without solid evidence of a higher power”? Yes; I can be helpful and cooperative without being threatened by a supernatural police officer in the sky.

          • Omega Z

            The GPA I had in mind was how you rate as an individual in the eyes of a higher power. There are no GPA 4.0’s. Probably grading on a curve.

            Your University GPA doesn’t mean much other then you were good at the books. I have a very close acquaintance with a person with a GPA 4.0. She wanted to know who this person was listed on her degree. Suma Cum Laude.

            I didn’t even crack a smile. I did have a laugh “with her” after I explained it & she cracked up herself displaying her 7 shades of embarrassment.
            Laughter is contagious & can be good for the soul.

            “a component of a larger system of social control”
            Yes, There are those who will exploit-
            Religion, Science, Education, Politics, Wealth, Poverty, Race, Color, Nationality, Clan, Tribe, Etc, Etc, Etc,

            They will demonize, propagandize & exploit anything & everything and it begins from children’s television, toys, your education, your employment & any other means. “to gain control over other people”

            These exploitations are seldom for the benefit of society, but for the benefit of the exploiters. Usually done under the guise of being for the benefit of society. Many times, things are done by people who have already been groomed to think a certain way & are unaware.

          • cashmemorz

            Yes, I often have felt there is something more than this existence. Now the holographic universe shows me what it is. The shell of the universe where all data about the universe is contained. It is information, smeared across the shell to be forever beyond our reach inasmuch as a photographers construct of a holographic film is forever beyond the reach of the image that is seen outside the film.

        • bachcole

          My experience/belief/faith expands my mind. I suspect that your lack thereof imprisons your mind. Some things beyond the intellect are trans-rational, not anti-rational.

          My adoration for my dog Tango is irrational. According to your belief system, I should eat her.

        • Michael W Wolf

          Denying the existence of an energy source on the grounds that you deem impossible is irrational. And maybe you may need rescuing. To be so sure with so little knowledge is dangerous.

        • I can understand being an agnostic, but to say there is no God one has to throw out all of the more expanded definitions like Einstein’s (Spinoza’s) God. To say there is no God is a statement of unknowable faith.

          • bachcole

            Any logically negative statement is unprovable.

            Until Sandy denies the Reality of her own being, she continues to testify to the existence of God. Her consciousness is God bound into being Sandy.

        • William D. Fleming

          Actually, what they are preaching is more than just atheism. Their statements of disbelief in God represent a defensive reaction on behalf of what they DO believe. Generally atheism is a cover for a deeply held belief in the doctrines of materialism.

          For example, some of them assert with absolute certainty that conscious awareness arises from electric/chemical nerve impulses and that as machine-like beings we have no free will. They believe that reality is composed of matter moving in space and time and that our sensual interpretation of that reality is a more or less accurate picture of all that exists. Some postulate that the universe popped into existence by accident. These crude and immature materialist beliefs are based on pure faith–thus Rossi’s depiction of them as “religious”.

          Besides coming out as atheists, materialists frantically try to prop up their tottering world-view by going around debunking everything from ESP research to reincarnation, and even sometimes cold fusion.

          • bachcole

            Very nicely said. I think that people call what you describe as “sciencism”.

          • William D. Fleming

            They claim to have science on their side. I guess they haven’t read Einstein, Planck, et. al.

          • bachcole

            And they don’t actually practice science; they just wrap themselves in the flag of science.

    • Michael W Wolf

      And so can Atheism. Which has a body count like no other. It is in fact a religion since it owes it’s existence to the very God they say doesn’t exist. The Bible is historic. So that is the starting point of reason to think about a creator. If you were born on a remote island and never met a human outside of that island, you may be right. But since there is historic testimony, belief is the starting point and rejection must show historic or scientific proof, which can’t be done at this time in our understanding of the universe.

      I am anti establishment religion too, but I have every reason to think the possibility of a creator may be real. God bless Andre Rossi for when his world changing invention comes to fruition, He will not only destroy his skeptics, but prove you can indeed solve the secrets of the universe, and that believing in a creator does not stop you from advancing scientifically as the Atheists so often assert.

      And I wouldn’t call Islam a legitimate religion, because as with Atheism it’s existence is specifically created to counter the Bible. And that is not to say that the Bible has the essence of our creator portrayed accurately.

      You should open your mind and think a little deeper. Because I think your philosophy hasn’t been thought through and maybe your mind has shut down like you think believers’ minds are. I have been through most of the stages of this question. But I believe Pascal was right. God is the only safe bet. Until proven otherwise.

      • Sandy

        If there is a supernatural entity that wants me to pray to him or her or it then that entity is hereby invited to materialize (with gold and silver sparkles; Star Trek style) in my presence and to ask for my allegiance. Until then, I am not going to subscribe to the existence of any supernatural entities. At this point, I have zero data which indicate that supernatural entities exist.

        • Michael W Wolf

          It is historic. There must be data to disprove it. You have not found that data. Sounds to me you are more against rules than anything. and our creator may not be supernatural. maybe it is are ignorance of the realities of the universe makes us think it must be supernatural. You do realize your are as closed minded as the believers are accused of? They say what Rossi has done is impossible. Most of the people that say that are Atheists. How can you get more closed minded than that!!!?

        • Data can be arranged in a lot of different ways for or against, but it’s just headstuff. There are brief (and rare) experiences of transcendence that go beyond the mind and alter and help to define our perspective.

          • bachcole

            Barry, for you “brief (and rare) experiences of transcendence” is true. For others, it can be anywhere from zip to forever, and not all transcendence is created equal. (:->) Emerson said that even the brief experiences are enough to make the rest of life worth it.

        • William D. Fleming

          Sassy ain’t you? 🙂

        • bachcole

          The true nature of the natural entity named Sandy can best be understood and “acquired” with meditation and other spiritual practices.

          • cashmemorz

            Or by ascribing it all to the holographic universe.

      • Mylan

        “And so can Atheism. Which has a body count like no other.”

        Please, elaborate on this further.

        Whole people have been eliminated in the name of religion, countless humans have been tortured to make them believe in the god others wanted them to, just as many were prohibited from expressing their real thoughts about the divine, why we will never know what they really thought.

        In contrast, cases where an atheist killed a religious person for his believe hardly exist. Of course, there were and are murderers among atheists, just as among religious people. Atheist believe is just no reason to kill for, there is no divine order to kill those of different believe.

        Great crimes have been committd by atheists, but not in the name of atheism. This can’t be said about religions.

    • William D. Fleming

      –Atheists who reject the existence of supernatural beings (gods, angels, demons,etc.) are not practicing a “religion”.–

      Is that the definition of atheism or is it a straw man argument? According to your definition I’m an atheist. The dualistic concept of supernatural vs. natural seems totally bogus, and the idea of human-like gods, devils, and angels seems childish IMO.

      There remains a deep awe and respect for the enigmas of reality; the mystery of personal identity and free will, the miracle of conscious awareness, and the overpowering fact that anything exists at all. Religion is not about knowing the answers. It is having deep awareness of the questions.

      • bachcole

        Please define that interesting word “reality”, besides saying” anything that we can hit with a hammer”, since justice, love, the whole of geometry, honor, consciousness, etc. cannot be hit with a hammer.

        • William D. Fleming

          Hard to define. I feel that I have awakened to a wondrous, beautiful realm which I do not understand. Deep conscious awareness is somehow involved with reality. “That which is” comes to mind but then, what is the definition of “is”?

          • bachcole

            It may sound funny, but ‘is’ is not the same for everyone. And I don’t even care so much for the word “define”, which seems to put a perimeter around whatever “define” is applied to. With ‘is’, ‘is’ is whatever a person experiences. But some ‘is’ is more rewarding than others. For example, the ‘is’ for a person who shot-up heroin 5 minutes ago is delightful beyond words. 10 hours later that person’s is is not so much fun.

          • William D. Fleming

            Those times of pleasure and pain seem to be part of the bodily experience. They come and go, as do bodies themselves come and go. I lean toward the idea that in a higher realm there is only continuous harmony and joy, and that personal identities are merged. “We” are in that higher realm right now, if we could only see it.

          • bachcole

            Oh, William, you are a man after our own hearts. (:->)

            But one’s afterlife is conditioned by the thoughts, words, and deeds that one intends in this life. (:->)

          • William D. Fleming

            I’m not very interested in afterlives. As I see it our true and higher selves are extensions of universal consciousness. There is no past and future except as a bodily illusion. We always have been and always will be. The chain of organisms can be thought of as a single entity.

      • Robert Johnson, a Jungian psychiatrist said “90% of the energy is in the questions”.

  • Did anyone of us have any say in our existence or about anything in creation? Everyone believes in something they cannot prove or necesarily see, thats faith. People who think they know everything are obfusco about faith and the thought of God.

    • Sandy

      Yes, I did have a say in my existence today. I refrained from terminating myself.

      Unlike most other creatures, we humans know that we will die one day. And we know that we could terminate ourselves if the pain becomes intolerable.

      I strongly doubt that there are “People who think they know everything”.

      • cashmemorz

        Oh yes there are. They are called psychopaths. They know just enough to control others. And for that reason it is everything to them.

  • Robert Ellefson

    My upbringing in the Roman Catholic Church taught me many valuable lessons that I still hold dearly, and strive to practice daily, even though I now consider myself agnostic. The lessons that matter the most, involving compassion, love, and caring for those in need, are the ones that Rossi appears to be most notably ignoring. He is portraying his greed-driven approach to maximizing his own profits as necessary and unavoidable, even though it comes at the expense of the billions of people whose lives would be profoundly affected by the mere affirmed knowledge that this salvation is at hand, not to mention the effects of accelerated deployment of useful applications of this technology that could be saving many lives right now.

    To emphatically state that any form of sharing his technology for others to develop upon and deploy as quickly as possible for the benefit of all life on earth means giving away his technology for free to his competitors is nothing more than paranoid delusion, and blatantly false. There are many ways he could be allowing this technology to see the light of day right now, and to change the world for the better, while still earning healthy profits. Since he apparently cannot personally envision how this could occur without him being left in ruins, we are instead left with the consequences of his paranoia and greed, which is untold avoidable suffering and death worldwide.

    The notion that he cannot in good conscience release the technology until it has been thoroughly certified as safe is utter nonsense. I am a product design engineer, and I have a lot of experience with getting products validated and certified for consumer use. There are millions of people who could be accomplishing these validation tasks rapidly in parallel with him right now, instead of Rossi’s slow, paranoid-recluse solo efforts, and the outcome would be far, far more robust and safe than anything Rossi can hope to accomplish on his own. It is ego, paranoia, and allegience to the oligarchs that is causing the tragic delays we are witnessing in the delayed release of this technology, not some form of noble intent from a deeply pious soul.

    • TomR

      I have to disagree with a lot of what you say, Robert. If you had been through all the pain and suffering that Andrea Rossi has, at the hands of government people, I think you would not trust anyone else to bring the E-Cat to market either. The PTB in the USA are not that much different than the ones in Italy. I believe that Andrea has been given some kind of signal from Obama that he is not going to resist the coming changes. If the certification of the domestic E-Cats doesn’t come this winter, I might have to change my mind about Obama.

      • Omega Z

        TomR
        I do not believe it depends on Obama. There are other powers at play here.

        I believe it’s up to the Philanthropists & Business interests. All the green energies proposed to date indicate a reduction in the world standards of living for everyone. Including the well to do.

        Cheap energy can maintain & improve those standards for those in the developed world & bring the less developed to parity with the rest of the world.

        Note: I actually agree with many of the things TPTB want to achieve. It is the means they choose to get there that I disagree with.
        Their means is to slightly raise the bottom up while drastically lowering everyone else. A Leveling Down. Cheap energy changes the metrics. We can level everyone UP.

        Just keep in mind, it will still take a long time, but at least it will be in the right direction. Improving.

    • William D. Fleming

      I do not judge Rossi Ill. The human race has gotten along for a few hundred thousand years without ecats. A year or two more won’t matter that much. Besides that I can’t think of anyone more qualified to carry out the task. Mainline science won’t even look at ecats and governments screw up everything they touch.

      I say GO ROSSI!!!

      • Omega Z

        I agree, and beyond that, the quickest way to spread this technology is the market. It will be cheaper, better & faster then any other means.

  • Robert Ellefson

    My upbringing in the Roman Catholic Church taught me many valuable lessons that I still hold dearly, and strive to practice daily, even though I now consider myself agnostic. The lessons that matter the most, involving compassion, love, and caring for those in need, are the ones that Rossi appears to be most notably ignoring. He is portraying his greed-driven approach to maximizing his own profits as necessary and unavoidable, even though it comes at the expense of the billions of people whose lives would be profoundly affected by the mere affirmed knowledge that this salvation is at hand, not to mention the effects of accelerated deployment of useful applications of this technology that could be saving many lives right now.

    To emphatically state that any form of sharing his technology for others to develop upon and deploy as quickly as possible for the benefit of all life on earth means giving away his technology for free to his competitors is nothing more than paranoid delusion, and blatantly false. There are many ways he could be allowing this technology to see the light of day right now, and to change the world for the better, while still earning healthy profits. Since he apparently cannot personally envision how this could occur without him being left in ruins, we are instead left with the consequences of his paranoia and greed, which is untold avoidable suffering and death worldwide.

    The notion that he cannot in good conscience release the technology until it has been thoroughly certified as safe is utter nonsense. I am a product design engineer, and I have a lot of experience with getting products validated and certified for consumer use. There are millions of people who could be accomplishing these validation tasks rapidly in parallel with him right now, instead of Rossi’s slow, paranoid-recluse solo efforts, and the outcome would be far, far more robust and safe than anything Rossi can hope to accomplish on his own. It is ego, paranoia, and allegience to the oligarchs that is causing the tragic delays we are witnessing in the delayed release of this technology, not some form of noble intent from a deeply pious soul.

    • TomR

      I have to disagree with a lot of what you say, Robert. If you had been through all the pain and suffering that Andrea Rossi has, at the hands of government people, I think you would not trust anyone else to bring the E-Cat to market either. The PTB in the USA are not that much different than the ones in Italy. I believe that Andrea has been given some kind of signal from Obama that he is not going to resist the coming changes. If the certification of the domestic E-Cats doesn’t come this winter, I might have to change my mind about Obama.

      • Omega Z

        TomR
        I do not believe it depends on Obama. There are other powers at play here.

        I believe it’s up to the Philanthropists & Business interests. All the green energies proposed to date indicate a reduction in the world standards of living for everyone. Including the well to do.

        Cheap energy can maintain & improve those standards for those in the developed world & bring the less developed to parity with the rest of the world.

        Note: I actually agree with many of the things TPTB want to achieve. It is the means they choose to get there that I disagree with.
        Their means is to slightly raise the bottom up while drastically lowering everyone else. A Leveling Down. Cheap energy changes the metrics. We can level everyone UP.

        Just keep in mind, it will still take a long time, but at least it will be in the right direction. Improving.

    • Sandy

      Robert, I believe that it is highly probable that the banksters (and the governments owned by the banksters) have told Rossi not to start mass-production of E-Cats until very large banks have unwound their oil market derivatives. Those derivatives have a nominal value in the trillions of dollars and if they were defaulted on that would cause the collapse of huge, systemically important banks and possibly plunge the global economic system into chaos. I want to see E-Cats marketed soon, but I do not want to see financial market crashes and skyrocketing unemployment and food riots and other chaos in my city and state and around the world. Rossi should proceed carefully and be mindful of the disruptive potential of his E-Cats.

      • Omega Z

        Sandy,
        Probably, It’s just not yet ready for mass production. The only thing close is the Lt-cat. The Ht-cat is still very much in R&D. Not even ready for a pilot test.

        Beyond that, I have seen nothing to date that says this will have any real impact on Oil for some time to come(Around 20 years). Even the impact on coal will take time. In fact coal is more at risk from Natural Gas at this point & that will take at least a decade to convert existing coal plants.

        Rossi has mentioned a facility producing 1 million reactors a year. That is just a small beginning. At least 1000+ such facilities will be required for world transition in a 40 year period. Given the likely life cycle, at that point it will be time to replace those already built. A never ending loop.

    • William D. Fleming

      I do not judge Rossi ill. The human race has gotten along for a few hundred thousand years without ecats. A year or two more won’t matter that much. Besides that I can’t think of anyone more qualified to carry out the task. Mainline science won’t even look at ecats and governments screw up everything they touch.

      I say GO ROSSI!!!

      • Omega Z

        I agree, and beyond that, the quickest way to spread this technology is the market. It will be cheaper, better & faster then any other means.

    • Mylan

      I’m a baptized Roman Catholic. But I must admit that I never really believed, and as I grew older developed a serious reluctance against the indoctrination performed by the church. Looking at the Roman Catholic church’s history (both past and recent), I would highly doubt that you can argue that “the lessons that matter the most (are) involving compassion, love, and caring for those in need”. That is just one of the nicer aspects, but there are many sides of the story.

  • builditnow

    I was brought up a Catholic, but, consider I have made a decent recovery.
    I now believe in The Great Unknown, (The GUnk).
    Basic tenants are.
    1. Everything outside what we “think” we know is part of The GUnk,
    2. Everything in The GUnk is vastly larger than what we think we know,
    3. What we think we know is likely wrong and likely at least partially part of The GUnk,
    4. We have no idea what The GUnk is, so we accept we have not idea and do not make up things, just leave it all unknown.

    The Practice:
    a. Acknowledge daily that you have often fooled yourself into believing something on the basis of no evidence or very suspect evidence, called “false beliefs”
    b. Acknowledge daily those cases where you have tried to spread false beliefs and affirm that you will not do this again, rather seek to discover what you can reasonably know to be true using the original scientific principals (not the current distorted versions).
    c. Acknowledge daily that theories and principles are like tools in a tool box and that you will seek to find the most effective tool / theory for the particular issue you want to address and that you will put down the hammer or theory and pick up the screwdriver or alternative theory when that works more effectively,
    7. Celebrations of The GUnk are once per week, we discuss the things that The GUnk has allowed us humans to discover in the past week and then we crank up the music, break out the cake and beer and do some crazy celebrating of our new knowledge.

    PS: The “Great Unknown Thing” website is not the same as The GUnk, We don’t know is The GUnk is a “thing” or not.

  • Omega Z

    “irrational” according to who’s opinion. Perhaps those who believe in a higher power “are trying to rescue other people from the mind-destroying effects of irrational belief systems.”

    You believe there is no God or higher power. Your belief is also of blind faith. When you build a church, preach atheism & file for tax exemption. Sounds like every other organized religion to me. You as well as everyone else believe in the unprovable everyday. You merely take exception to belief in a higher power.

    IMHO, Most everyone is born instinctively knowing there is something more then what is visible in everyday life. However, we do not trust our fellow humans & by extension, tend not to trust organized religion.

    Atheism is primarily of an age of 25 & under. The age of rebelliousness & distrust of the elders. After 25, a gradual transition takes place. You become the elders. Even the grand popah of Atheism in the U.S. has opened the door to the possibility of a higher power. Is he now an

    agnostic theist?
    YOU invite this higher power to materialize before you. You totally misunderstand the intent. It is YOU that is being tested. You have been given Free Will. It is easier to do what is right when that higher power is standing over you or you have proof positive it exists. The question is can you do the right thing without solid evidence of a higher power.

    IF, that entity should appear before you, there is only one thing left to say. Oh crap, Because at that point, the test is over. What’s your GPA.

    • cashmemorz

      Yes, I often have felt there is something more than this existence. Now the holographic universe shows me what it is. The shell of the universe where all data about the universe is contained. It is information, smeared across the shell to be forever beyond our reach inasmuch as a photographers construct of a holographic film is forever beyond the reach of the image that is seen outside the film.

  • William D. Fleming

    –Atheists who reject the existence of supernatural beings (gods, angels, demons,etc.) are not practicing a “religion”.–

    Is that the definition of atheism or is it a straw man argument? According to your definition I’m an atheist. The dualistic concept of supernatural vs. natural seems totally bogus, and the idea of human-like gods, devils, and angels seems childish IMO.

    There remains a deep awe and respect for the enigmas of reality; the mystery of personal identity and free will, the miracle of conscious awareness, and the overpowering fact that anything exists at all. Religion is not about knowing the answers. It is having deep awareness of the questions.

    • Robert Johnson, a Jungian psychiatrist said “90% of the energy is in the questions”.

  • I like the Einstein quote. He sided with Spinoza who didn’t differentiate God from nature. Divinity is a perspective. If one said that tree is divine and someone else said it wasn’t they could both be right, just different perspectives. That’s how both see the tree. When Einstein looked through a telescope at the universe he saw divinity.

    I always found the idea of a blind and random universe sad and hard to believe. On the other hand, in an age of science the idea of God has to be scrutinized and looked at anew. That’s our challenge. Maybe this is what’s meant that “We cannot put new wine in old wineskins”.

    It’s interesting that an intelligent intuitive like Einstein sided with a perspective of divinity from a man who lived in the 17th century. Spinoza seemed well ahead of his time.

  • Omega Z

    Sandy,
    Probably, It’s just not yet ready for mass production. The only thing close is the Lt-cat. The Ht-cat is still very much in R&D. Not even ready for a pilot test.

    Beyond that, I have seen nothing to date that says this will have any real impact on Oil for some time to come(Around 20 years). Even the impact on coal will take time. In fact coal is more at risk from Natural Gas at this point & that will take at least a decade to convert existing coal plants.

    Rossi has mentioned a facility producing 1 million reactors a year. That is just a small beginning. At least 1000+ such facilities will be required for world transition in a 40 year period. Given the likely life cycle, at that point it will be time to replace those already built. A never ending loop.

  • I can understand being an agnostic, but to say there is no God one has to throw out all of the more expanded definitions like Einstein’s (Spinoza’s) God. To say there is no God is a statement of unknowable faith.

  • William D. Fleming

    Actually, what they are preaching is more than just atheism. Their statements of disbelief in God represent a defensive reaction to what they do believe. Generally atheism is a cover for a deeply held belief in the doctrines of materialism.

    For example, some of them assert with absolute certainty that conscious awareness arises from electric/chemical nerve impulses and that as machine-like beings we have no free will. They believe that reality is composed of matter moving in space and time and that our sensual interpretation of that reality is a more or less accurate picture of all that exists. These crude and immature materialist beliefs are based on pure faith–thus Rossi’s depiction of them as “religious”.

    Besides coming out as atheists, materialists frantically try to prop up their tottering world- view by going around debunking everything from ESP research to reincarnation, and even sometimes cold fusion.

    • William D. Fleming

      I’m not very interested in afterlives. As I see it our true and higher selves are extensions of universal consciousness. There is no past and future except as a bodily illusion. We always have been and always will be. The chain of organisms can be thought of as a single entity.

    • cashmemorz

      Oh yes there are. They are called psychopaths. They know just enough to control others. And for that reason it is everything to them.

    • cashmemorz

      Or by ascribing it all to the holographic universe.

  • Roland

    Reading the comments here reveal certain tensions in our online community that are fundamentally philosophical in nature and, perhaps, it would be helpful to address them from a philosophical perspective rather than a theological one.

    Let’s begin with the easy one, Scientific Materialism (SM). This doctrine arose in specific opposition to the Christian dogma that truth is revealed in divinely inspired subjective experiences and documents, the Bible’s description of the genesis of the cosmos and our place in it being the primary point of contention.

    The strongest argument in favour of SM is that truth is revealed by observation and experimentation; this forms the foundation of the scientific revolution that is the basis of our current civilization, for better or worse. The weakest aspect of SM is a narrow definition of what aspects of reality are amenable to it’s methodology and a body of 18th century dogma that is demonstrably false based on experimental results from the physics of the 20th century.

    It is notable that Quantum Mechanics experiments, far from excluding that the cosmos operates as a ‘thing’, reveal that the ‘particle zoo’ consistently demonstrates that ‘consciousness’ is an integral aspect of reality right down to blurry line between ‘stuff’ and energy.

    It gets worse, in a clever attempt to re-establish a materialistic explanation for our presence here a group of quantum physicists and cosmologists decided to settle the argument by performing a probability analysis of the Big Bang forward to the establishment of the known universal constants. It didn’t produce the expected result of showing a very high probability for the cosmos we inhabit; one of the fundamentals agreed on at the beginning of the process was that the unique properties of water are critical to the the development of any form of advanced intelligence, or even life itself. The probability of water, with all its critical characteristics intact, arising is 2 trillion to 1 against; the final conditions required to arrive at anything like us is 6 trillion to one against.

    An organising intelligence underlying the cosmos seems inescapable; hence the views of Einstein et al.

    The real debate is about the exact nature of the cosmos in all its aspects, and the closest point of departure that fits what we do know about the whole cosmos has probably been given us by David Bohm with his concept of the explicate and implicate orders. The explicate order being the one we apparently inhabit as ‘things’; and an implicate order underlying ‘reality’ that is the stubborn subject of a new generation of experimentalists, possibly including Rossi.

    I’ve been writing an essay on this topic, in conjunction with thinking about LENR, and if there’s a broader interest in kicking these concepts around in this forum I’ll post it, with Frank’s permission, as it bores right in on the blurry borderland we’re trying to understand in service to LENR.

    • ecatworld

      Feel free to submit the essay at the link on the top of the page, or send me an email.

      • Roland

        Thank you Frank, I have my plate full for the next few days, then I’ll finish it.

        • cashmemorz

          Re: the Holographic Universe. I wonder of the implications that it indicates that there may be a reality higher than the one we see or seem to live in. What I mean is, if the data of the shell of the universe gives rise to our perceived cosmos, then we and that cosmos are not as real as that which gives rise to it or its perception. This apparently is similar to what a photographic hologram does: it is used to create an image that is not there in the same sense that the medium producing the image is really or physically there. The holographic image is visible when a light specific to the photographic films encoded data is turned on. Similar reality perception in our “apparent” cosmos.

          • cashmemorz

            Edit: Maybe its my religious upbringing that is talking or conceptualizing the following but here goes: Since we,(we meaning everything in the cosmos) as an image of the data in the shell of the universe, then it seems like a parallel concept to the bibles genesis story where god created man in his image. This parallel would make the shell into god or a god-like agent. Taking another point from the genesis story about the fruit of knowledge and evil in the center of the garden, the stuff inside the universe where we are located as contrasted by the shell that gives rise to our reality, then we are in the center of what could be termed a garden but we cannot get true knowledge of what is in that center since it does not exist as the ultimate reality or knowledge of ultimate reality in that part of or center of the universe. Where the ultimate knowledge or data exists is in the shell and that part is forbidden to physically reach since we are only an image produced by the shell. It would be like the image, produced by a holographic film, trying to understand the film that produces the image. A circular concept that may not be attainable, hence forbidden, in more than one sense. It is relatively trivial to draw more such parallels between the holographic universe and what the stories in the bible tell. The shell may be heaven or god or the road to wards them. The holographic agent may be gods way of creating the universe. And heaven or god is another layer up from there inasmuch as a photographer is much more than the holographic film that the photographer makes or creates. Or maybe, more realistically, the shell is the outer part of a black hole that we inhabit. We, the inside of the universe is created as a multi -dimensional reality that is simply encoded by the shell, as the theory simply indicates and not much more than that. Whether there is anything to drawing such parallels to religious stories, I do not know. Just compelling parallels that I seem to see in this theory.

  • Roland

    Reading the comments here reveal certain tensions in our online community that are fundamentally philosophical in nature and, perhaps, it would be helpful to address them from a philosophical perspective rather than a theological one.

    Let’s begin with the easy one, Scientific Materialism (SM). This doctrine arose in specific opposition to the Christian dogma that truth is revealed in divinely inspired subjective experiences and documents, the Bible’s description of the genesis of the cosmos and our place in it being the primary point of contention.

    The strongest argument in favour of SM is that truth is revealed by observation and experimentation; this forms the foundation of the scientific revolution that is the basis of our current civilization, for better or worse. The weakest aspect of SM is a narrow definition of what aspects of reality are amenable to it’s methodology and a body of 18th century dogma that is demonstrably false based on experimental results from the physics of the 20th century.

    It is notable that Quantum Mechanics experiments, far from excluding that the cosmos operates as a ‘thing’, reveal that the ‘particle zoo’ consistently demonstrates that ‘consciousness’ is an integral aspect of reality right down to blurry line between ‘stuff’ and energy.

    It gets worse, in a clever attempt to re-establish a materialistic explanation for our presence here a group of quantum physicists and cosmologists decided to settle the argument by performing a probability analysis of the Big Bang forward to the establishment of the known universal constants. It didn’t produce the expected result of showing a very high probability for the cosmos we inhabit; one of the fundamentals agreed on at the beginning of the process was that the unique properties of water are critical to the the development of any form of advanced intelligence, or even life itself. The probability of water, with all its critical characteristics intact, arising is 2 trillion to 1 against; the final conditions required to arrive at anything like us is 6 trillion to one against.

    An organising intelligence underlying the cosmos seems inescapable; hence the views of Einstein et al.

    The real debate is about the exact nature of the cosmos in all its aspects, and the closest point of departure that fits what we do know about the whole cosmos has probably been given us by David Bohm with his concept of the explicate and implicate orders. The explicate order being the one we apparently inhabit as ‘things’; and an implicate order underlying ‘reality’ that is the stubborn subject of a new generation of experimentalists, possibly including Rossi.

    I’ve been writing an essay on this topic, in conjunction with thinking about LENR, and if there’s a broader interest in kicking these concepts around in this forum I’ll post it, with Frank’s permission, as it bores right in on the blurry borderland we’re trying to understand in service to LENR.

    • Frank Acland

      Feel free to submit the essay at the link on the top of the page, or send me an email.

      • Roland

        Thank you Frank, I have my plate full for the next few days, then I’ll finish it.

        • cashmemorz

          Re: the Holographic Universe. I wonder of the implications that it indicates that there may be a reality higher than the one we see or seem to live in. What I mean is, if the data of the shell of the universe gives rise to our perceived cosmos, then we and that cosmos are not as real as that which gives rise to it or its perception. This apparently is similar to what a photographic hologram does: it is used to create an image that is not there in the same sense that the medium producing the image is really or physically there. The holographic image is visible when a light specific to the photographic films encoded data is turned on. Similar reality perception in our “apparent” cosmos.

          • cashmemorz

            Edit: Maybe its my religious upbringing that is talking or conceptualizing the following but here goes: Since we,(we meaning everything in the cosmos) as an image of the data in the shell of the universe, then it seems like a parallel concept to the bibles genesis story where god created man in his image. This parallel would make the shell into god or a god-like agent. Taking another point from the genesis story about the fruit of knowledge and evil in the center of the garden, the stuff inside the universe where we are located as contrasted by the shell that gives rise to our reality, then we are in the center of what could be termed a garden but we cannot get true knowledge of what is in that center since it does not exist as the ultimate reality or knowledge of ultimate reality in that part of or center of the universe. Where the ultimate knowledge or data exists is in the shell and that part is forbidden to physically reach since we are only an image produced by the shell. It would be like the image, produced by a holographic film, trying to understand the film that produces the image. A circular concept that may not be attainable, hence forbidden, in more than one sense. It is relatively trivial to draw more such parallels between the holographic universe and what the stories in the bible tell. The shell may be heaven or god or the road to wards them. The holographic agent may be gods way of creating the universe. And heaven or god is another layer up from there inasmuch as a photographer is much more than the holographic film that the photographer makes or creates. Or maybe, more realistically, the shell is the outer part of a black hole that we inhabit. We, the inside of the universe is created as a multi -dimensional reality that is simply encoded by the shell, as the theory simply indicates and not much more than that. Whether there is anything to drawing such parallels to religious stories, I do not know. Just compelling parallels that I seem to see in this theory.