Rossi: Ash Sample Size from Lugano Test ‘Not Representative’ of Whole Charge

Here’s an interesting comment from Andrea Rossi regarding the sample of fuel that was taken for analysis from the spent fuel (ash) used in the Lugano test E-Cat reactor. A number of people have commented that the sample size was too small to be representative of the makeup of the fuel used in the reactor, and on the Journal of Nuclear Physics today a Øystein Lande asked Rossi what his thoughts were on the subject.

Dear Mr. Rossi

Have you concluded If the 0,2% Ash sample analysed in the Lugano test was representative for the whole reactor core, or did some isotopic separation occur, that made the Ash sample not representative?

Andrea Rossi
October 18th, 2015 at 10:06 AM
Oeystein Lande:
I concluded that the 0.2% ash sample of the charge was not representative for the whole charge, as you can read also in the Cook Rossi paper published on Arxiv.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Following the publication of the Lugano report Rossi expressed surprise about the results of the isotopic analysis. He said at the time: “the results from the test have gone well Beyond what we found before during our internal R&D.” It sounds like the discrepancies have led Rossi to conclude that the sample size taken by the testing team at the conclusion of the test was not large enough.

  • Obvious

    The sample size was fine. The lack of homogenization of the ash, before selecting the sample, is the problem.

    • Oystein Lande

      I still think Rossi could have been a litle more genereous than allowing them only a 0,2 weight% Ash sample. Homogenization would be less of an issue is they could take a few different samples of say 10% of the total charge.

      • Obvious

        They took 10 mg. The lab only used 2.13 mg for each sample.
        If the lab homogenized the sample before splitting, then the numbers are are probably close to reality for the sample as removed from the reactor. If the sample submitted was not representative, then the GIGO principle applies.
        This also means that 5.74 mg of sampled powder is not accounted for, or the professors’s scale was not sufficiently accurate for the task of weighting out 10 mg as reported.

        • Dr. Mike

          Obvious,
          I agree. If it assumed that somehow just Ni-62and Li-6 were scooped from one special part of the ash, then one would have to conclude that the LENR effect is very spatially dependent within the reactor. Of course, this is possible, but also unlikely. If there is such a spatial dependence, then LENR theory would need to explain this dependence. The Rossi- Cook theory ignores the ICP data. If even a few Ni particles were nearly completely converted to Ni-62 (those few picked for analysis), a LENR theory needs to explain how this happened.
          Dr. Mike

          • Obvious

            Indeed.

            The fact that both Li and Ni particles both were grossly different from the fuel argues against spectacularly lucky/selective sample collection. Then the onus goes to explaining why the “acceptable” Li change is found only along with the “unrepresentative” Ni particles.

            No isotopically normal Li particles were found in the ash.
            No isotopically normal Ni particles were found in the ash.

            If any were, I am fairly confident they would have been reported.
            The absence of isotopically normal particles is far more strange than finding the isotopically abnormal particles.

          • Axil Axil

            I have done this explanation.

          • Oystein Lande

            Particles Completely converted?

            But ToF-SIMS analyse only the surface of particles as I understand it ?

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_ion_mass_spectrometry
            What am I missing?

          • Axil Axil

            The method used in appendix 4 tests the entire particle. The all is almost pure Ni62 in that test.

            Results ECAT ICP-MS and ICP-AES
            Jean Pettersson
            Inst. of Chemistry-BMC, Analytical Chemistry
            Uppsala University

            The reaction originates on the surface but the results are actioned far from the site of causation. I call this “action at a distance”

          • Oystein Lande

            Particles Completely converted?

            But ToF-SIMS analyse only the surface of particles as I understand it ?

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_ion_mass_spectrometry

          • Dr. Mike

            Oystein,
            The ToF-SIMS certainly was a surface analysis; however, the ICP data is a bulk analysis in which the entire sample is first dissolved in acid before the sample is analyzed. The analysis procedure and results are given in Appendix 4 of the Lugano report.
            Dr. Mike

  • Obvious

    The sample size was fine. The lack of homogenization of the ash, before selecting the sample, is the problem.

    • Oystein Lande

      I still think Rossi could have been a litle more genereous than allowing them only a 0,2 weight% Ash sample. Homogenization would be less of an issue is they could take a few different samples of say 10% of the total charge.

      • Obvious

        They took 10 mg. The lab only used 2.13 mg for each sample.
        If the lab homogenized the sample before splitting, then the numbers are are probably close to reality for the sample as removed from the reactor. If the sample submitted was not representative, then the GIGO principle applies.

        So the profs had another 5.74 mg, more or less to test. Do we assume that roughly 5 mg (each) of fuel and ash were collected, altogether? And that the fuel and ash samples, comprising 5 mg each, were split between ICP and EDS. Probably a fair assumption.

        And the total vs surface methods matched, for both fuel and ash respectively, at least qualitatively.
        The idea that only 0.2% was tested is exaggerated. Roughly one percent was collected of the nickel powder for analyses, in two separate one-half percent samples (roughly 5 mg each). The fuel and ash samples were both split without crushing, homogenizing, micro riffle splitting, coning and quartering, or any particularly careful method. And yet the various methods used to test the sample splits for both fuel and ash were in general agreement, considering the differences between methods. So the ash sample analyses are certainly representative of something. The chance of scooping only Ni-62 and Li-6 bearing powder from some random location in a comparable ocean of nearly 1000 times more particles is very unlikely. Not impossible. But very unlikely.

        • Dr. Mike

          Obvious,
          I agree. If it assumed that somehow just Ni-62and Li-6 were scooped from one special part of the ash, then one would have to conclude that the LENR effect is very spatially dependent within the reactor. Of course, this is possible, but also unlikely. If there is such a spatial dependence, then LENR theory would need to explain this dependence. The Rossi- Cook theory ignores the ICP data. If even a few Ni particles were nearly completely converted to Ni-62 (those few picked for analysis), a LENR theory needs to explain how this happened.
          Dr. Mike

          • Obvious

            Indeed.

            The fact that both Li and Ni particles both were grossly different from the fuel argues against spectacularly lucky/selective sample collection. Then the onus goes to explaining why the “acceptable” Li change is found only along with the “unrepresentative” Ni particles.

            No isotopically normal Li particles were found in the ash.
            No isotopically normal Ni particles were found in the ash.

            If any were, I am fairly confident they would have been reported.
            The absence of isotopically normal particles is far more strange than finding the isotopically abnormal particles.

          • Axil Axil

            I have done this explanation. Here it is:

            There is a natural assumption all of us will make assuming that the buildup of lithium and nickel isotopic change in the ash happened at a relatively constant rate over a long period of time. But what may have happened is a one time explosive reaction where lithium and nickel interacted in a singular and monolithic event involving trillions of atoms. Such an event was seen in Holmlid’s experiment where trillions of fusion reactions produced huge numbers of neutral particle reaction products.

            Just by chance, the analysts of the isotopic change in the Lugano ash content picked up this one in a million 100 micron nickel particle as the object of their examination.

            This one particle was so unusual that it is near impossible for it to be fabricated by someone who wanted to salt the ash sample.

            The salter would have had to remove the 100 micron fuel particle and
            replace it with the Ni62 and Li6 coated ash particle. The fuel was divided into parts where some was reserved for latter isotopic analysis and another part was loaded into the reactor.. The devil is in the details when the method of scam is considered.

            We must try to understand how a massive burst LENR reaction involving trillions of atoms can occur in a single event. And how a single isotope can result from many different precursors that fed into this singular reaction.
            ===========

            The complete conversion of a proportionally large micro sized nickel particle with a 100 micron diameter might provide convincing supporting evidence that protons find their way into the center of these massive nickel particles by quantum teleportation. This quantum mechanical based movement is supported by the entanglement of protons in the hydrogen gas that surrounds the outside the nickel particle and the atoms of nickel inside the particle. Yes, Teleportation…like in star trek. A proton located in the hydrogen gas envelope does not need to find its way through large amounts of nickel by bumping and grinding their way through all that nickel. These protons just appear like magic inside the micro particle.

            This conclusion might seem ridiculous on it face but this conclusion is fully supported by the experimental evidence from Lagano.

            If the protons or in fact any subatomic particle did physically penetrate the nickel particle, we would expect that the outer layers of the particle would experience more nuclear reactions than the center of the particle. This penetration type of reaction would produce a layered ash profile. The outmost surface of the particle should have some copper and/or zinc content, and the inside should still have some untouched lower Z isotopes of nickel…like Ni58.

            But NO, the particle is pure Ni62, completely homogeneous Ni62, utterly pure Ni62. It must be that the protons that make up the gas envelope see no material resistance to the penetration of the nickel. The entangled protons mated with each nickel atom move through the nickel particle via the 5th dimension in which entanglement works directly through the nickel bulk to its entangled nickel mate into the center of the micro particle or to its dedicate nanowire edge with equal probability. This looks like proton teleportation to me.

            And even more perplexing, the delicate nickel nanowire surface covering of the microparticle is pure NI62. This delicate surface nano sized feature has suffered no subatomic particle impact damage what so ever. This ash looks the same as the fuel…physically unchanged but isotopically different.

            No neutrons were detected so the active subatomic particle supporting the Ni58 to Ni62 transmutation must be protons from the gas outside the particle. These protons change themselves into neutron after they enter the Ni58 nucleus.

            Yes, this is impossible to believe, If it weren’t for logic and the results of Lagano experiment, what other answer could there be?

            Norman D. Cook abd Andrea Rossi are inventing theory that has no experimental foundation from Lagano data. How can you admire such a misrepresentation of reality?
            ============
            Regarding the announcement of the replication attempts made by Igor Stepanov et al: “After three trials with fast destruction of the cell due to uncontrollable overheating, at June 19, 2015 it was succeed to obtain constant function of the cell with excess heat observed.”

            One of the major issues that face the replicators of the Lugano experiment deals with destruction of the reactor as a result of a massive production of power at the onset of the LENR reaction that has been called a “blowout”. The question arises as follows: What produces these blowouts and how can they be avoided?

            The Quantum mechanical theory of LENR (QMLT) provides guidance as to the cause and solution to this issue. To start off, it has been observed in the analysis of the fuel from the Lugano report that large aggregations of nickel particles form as a consequence of electrostatic attraction between 5 micron nickel particles. A nickel particle aggregation of up to 100 microns in size is formed in the fuel sometimes before the LENR reaction fires off.

            The QMLT explains that this large super nickel particle aggregation forms of Bose Einstein Condensate of SPPs that are coherent and entangled with the atoms of hydrogen that surround the Nickel particle aggregation (NPA). The NPA acts as a single system as if it were a superatom that was 100 microns in size.

            When the LENR reaction begins, the entire NPA acts in unison and a global Fusion reaction happens to all the nickel atoms throughout the NPA. The same fusion reaction happens to each and every nickel atom in the same way and at the same time. The NPA produces a combined instantaneous power spike from each and every nickel atom no matter if the atom was Ni58 or N60 an so on. All the nickel atoms instantaneously become Ni62 in a single global unitary nuclear reaction. This single reaction is why only Ni62 is seen in the ash of the NPA. This is called super radiance.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superradiance

            The energy production from all the millions of nickel atoms happen at the same time and produce an enormous amount of heat. This destroys the NPA and the reactor structure near it.

            The solution to possibly avoiding this fusion explosion is to reduce the size of the NPA to a 5 micron size and spread the zone of the lenr reaction over a large volume. That is, to insure that the nickel particles are distributed over and throughout a very large volume. The goal is to avoid global entanglement at startup and postpone it untile the reaction has matured. This might be done by placing the nickel particles inside a metal foam mesh to keep them from moving together under the influence of electrostatic attraction. The nickel foam mesh will dissipate the static charge that usually aggregates free moving particles,
            ==========
            In the Lugano test, the 100 micro nickel particle swapped either 1, 2, 3 or 4 neutrons from lithium 7 to get to pure Ni62 from Ni58, Ni60 and Ni61 and this swap happened to all billion atoms of the that particle in one shot. This is what this latest theory cannot explain. This is called cluster transformation.
            ==========
            This is called super-absorption. The energy release would be spread equally throughout a BEC of a billion coherent solitons each getting a few hundred thousand electron volts. These solitons store energy. Their energy holding capacity is 64 GeV each but most hold far less. Then there is the energy that produce subatomic particles such as muon and mesons. These particles need a lot of energy devoted to their creation. The release of energy is buffered by these subatomic particles because they have a relatively long lifetime. Muons decay over a very long time and release their energy content very slowly.
            ============
            The energy from muon decay leaves electrons and the remainder of this energy is reabsorbed back into the SPP soliton. All the while more muons are generated in a continuing cycle from the SPPs. The Solitons are also slowly decaying through the emission of hawking radiation in the infrared range, This is part of the thermalization of high energy radiation. Also, these SPPs explode in a bosenova when they reach energy storage capacity, they then release XUV and soft x-rays which will also thermalize.

          • Oystein Lande

            Particles Completely converted?

            But ToF-SIMS analyse only the surface of particles as I understand it ?

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_ion_mass_spectrometry
            What am I missing?

          • Axil Axil

            The method used in appendix 4 tests the entire particle. The entire particle is almost pure Ni62 in that test.

            Results ECAT ICP-MS and ICP-AES
            Jean Pettersson
            Inst. of Chemistry-BMC, Analytical Chemistry
            Uppsala University

            The reaction originates on the surface but the results are actioned far from the site of causation. I call this “action at a distance”

          • Oystein Lande

            Particles Completely converted?

            But ToF-SIMS analyse only the surface of particles as I understand it ?

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_ion_mass_spectrometry

          • Dr. Mike

            Oystein,
            The ToF-SIMS certainly was a surface analysis; however, the ICP data is a bulk analysis in which the entire sample is first dissolved in acid before the sample is analyzed. The analysis procedure and results are given in Appendix 4 of the Lugano report.
            Dr. Mike

          • Mike you I don’t think the quantity was a problem.
            if well mixed, a hundred of grains would be representative at 10% error.

            my feeling is that there was a systematic bias, this mean it was sampled somewhere not representative… not mixed.

            imagine you sample the ash of a barbecue, a just scratch the rust…

  • Omega Z

    If it’s still available, Rossi indicated to someone on JONP a while back that additional analysis of the Lugano test were performed. He also said no further info would be given about this until after the pilot test is complete.

  • Omega Z

    If it’s still available, Rossi indicated to someone on JONP a while back that additional analysis of the Lugano test were performed. He also said no further info would be given about this until after the pilot test is complete.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    We have to remember that Rossi didn’t have his patent at that time. He couldn’t give away all his secrets. In fact he revealed a lot. From that sample we were able to guess that lithium aluminum hydride was in the fuel.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    We have to remember that Rossi didn’t have his patent at that time. He couldn’t give away all his secrets. In fact he revealed a lot. From that sample we were able to guess that lithium aluminum hydride was in the fuel.

  • Gerard McEk

    Yes, that was expexted. The interesting thing is that a single particle converted from a natural isotopic composition into a near to fully enriched Ni62. The only plausable explanation (although quite ‘advanced’) comes from Axil below: The whole particle, all the trillion atoms of it, participated in a nuclear reaction. I agree with him that only that could have happend.

  • Gerard McEk

    Yes, that was expexted. The interesting thing is that a single particle converted from a natural isotopic composition into a near to fully enriched Ni62. The only plausable explanation (although quite ‘advanced’) comes from Axil below: The whole particle, all the trillion atoms of it, participated in a nuclear reaction. I agree with him that only that could have happend.

  • wpj

    This was mentioned by Rossi in the recent interview that he gave, where he said that analysis of the bulk was being conducted.

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/10/06/rossi-interviewed-by-bailey-and-borwein/

  • wpj

    This was mentioned by Rossi in the recent interview that he gave, where he said that analysis of the bulk was being conducted.

    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/10/06/rossi-interviewed-by-bailey-and-borwein/

  • Timar

    I remember that the very small sample size was a limitation imposed on the Lugano investigators by Leonardo Corp./Industrial Heat. One year ago when I heard about this limitation, I wondered why they would find it necessary to be that restrictive and allow the researchers to sample only 0,2% of the ash – a few mg. Surely they would have enough ash to analyze from many different reactors, and even if not, it shouldn’t make any difference for any of their practical purposes whether they allowed Essen et al to collect 0,2 or, say 2% of the ash – but it would have made all the difference for the investigators. Back then I thought that the only reasonable motive for being so restrictive is not because it would provide them with any benefit to keep 99,8% instead of 98% of the ash of only one of a multitude of reactor runs, but in some way to obstruct the investigation of the independent researchers. But how, if the sample size was still sufficient to conduct those analysis? It didn’t make much sense to be back then, but it does now. Rossi and IH probably must have known about fractionation effects within the ash and that if they allowed only for a sufficiently small sample, it would show erratic results not representatice of the nuclear reaction scheme inside the reactor. It was an intentional misdirection of the Swedes in order to prevent them from figuring out the reaction and replicating before a patent was approved. Rossi has shown on several occasion to be a master in this art of camouflage and intentional misdirection about his technology – not by outright deception of course, but by cunningly spreading half-truths, exaggerations to cook up a soup of red herrings and ever changing theories to serve it to his potentional competitors. It is frustrating for the interesting audience (us) and the scientific investigators who took great risks in terms of credibility within the establishment but certainly understandable from a business point of view.

    • I don’t think IH had anything to do with the sample size. I think that test forced IH to give Rossi somewhere around $10MM under terms of there agreement.

  • Timar

    I remember that the very small sample size was a restriction imposed on the Lugano investigators by Leonardo Corp./Industrial Heat. One year ago, when I heard about this limitation, I wondered why they would find it necessary to be that restrictive and allow the researchers only to sample 0,2% of the ash – a few meagre milligram. Surely they would have had more than enough ash to analyze from many different reactor runs, and even assuming they hadn’t, it shouldn’t have made a difference for any of their practical purposes whether they allowed Essen et al. to collect 0,2% or, say, 2% of the ash – but it would probably have made all the difference for the investigators. Back then I thought that the only reasonable motive for being that restrictive is not that that it would provide them with any practical benefit to keep 99,8% instead of 98% of the ash of only one of many reactor runs, but to obstruct the investigation of the independent researchers in some way.

    Yet how, if the sample size was still sufficient to conduct those analysis? It didn’t seem to make much sense back then, but it does now. Rossi and IH may have known about fractionation effects occuring within the ash and hence that if they only allowed a sufficiently small sample to be taken, it would most likely show erratic results not representative of the nuclear reaction scheme occuring inside the reactor. It may have been an intentional misdirection of the Swedes in order to prevent them from figuring out the reaction and replicating it before Rossi obtained patent protection.

    He has shown on several occasions to be a master in this art of camouflage and intentional misdirection about his technology – not by outright deception of course, but by cunningly dispensing half-truths – understatements now (F9), exaggerations then (Home Depot) – and ever changing, contradictory theories to cook up a turbid soup of red herrings to serve to the public and therefore his potential competitors. At the same time, the fishy smell of this soup is inevitably picked up by the (hyper)sensitive noses of the skeptics, who act as useful idiots to his purpose by helping him to further operate under the general public’s radar. It is frustrating for the interested audience (us) and even more so for the scientific investigators, who took great risks in terms of their own credibility within the establishment, but certainly understandable from Rossi’s business point of view.

    Now, having basic patent protection, he can reveal the fact that the sample was not representative.

    • I don’t think IH had anything to do with the sample size. I think that test forced IH to give Rossi somewhere around $10MM under terms of there agreement.

  • Omega Z

    As to WHY they only had a limited sample.
    The reason Rossi was involved with extraction of the sample was he didn’t want the Professors to analyze the internals of the reactor. Rossi stated this at the time. Everyone seems to have missed that.
    I don’t have that link but,
    Follows is some additional info provided by Rossi
    ———————————————————————–
    Alexvs October 19th
    Why the sample withdrawn from the E-Cat in Lugano was only 2 mg from a 1 g charge ?

    Andrea Rossi October 19th

    Alexvs:
    Because that was the maximum amount that was possible to withdraw from the E-Cat by the Professors without breaking the reactor, due to its complex internal design.
    Warm Regards, A.R.
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=10#comment-1125510
    ———————————————————————–
    Everyone assumes the reactor is a smooth bore. It could contain ridges internally as it does on the exterior, or fluted along it’s internal length.
    It could also be of a threaded nature having been molded around a piece of threaded ready rod.

    These could have various effects. One is it could allow increased heat transfer in from the resistors & out when producing excess heat. It could also aid in the circulation of the Li/H around & into the Nickel catalyst reducing hot spots. The internal shape of the reactor can even control the temperature zones and focus the heat to specific zone of the reactor. It would definitely provide more surface area and definitely make it much harder to scrap out the used fuel.

    • Axil Axil

      Particle 2 of the ash assey on page 45 of the Lugano report shows a particle that is a silicon dioxide particle. This leads to the speculation that the inside of the Lugano reactor is filled with silica based Aerogel. Like carbon, silicon is a Hydrogen Rydberg matter catalyst. Silicon monoxide is also LENR active since it mimics potassium in terms of electron outer shell bonding. It also may be necessary to keep the nickel particles separated to avoid overheating at startup in order to give the reaction some time for the reaction to establish itself.

      • It is also possible that the 27Al in the fuel picked up a neutron to become 28Al which has a T1/2 of 2.24 minutes to become 28Si.

        • Mats002

          Hi Robert! Have you done fuel/ash analysis from the Brillouin reactor? I guess for it to be relevant the reactor has to run with a significant COP for weeks, or having a good procentage of SSM?

        • Axil Axil

          That particle was over 200 microns long and 100 microns wide and would have had to have trillions of transmutation reactions occur to get to its final state all producing same result. Not very likely.

          But possible in the light of a 1000 micron pure Ni62 particle generated.

    • Obvious

      Since we doing the zombie thread thing (below), I will add that the reactor was opened by breaking one of the caps (page 8), and the wires were cut off before weighing (page 2). So the reactor was broken already.

  • Omega Z

    As to WHY they only had a limited sample.
    The reason Rossi was involved with extraction of the sample was he didn’t want the Professors to analyze the internals of the reactor. Rossi stated this at the time. Everyone seems to have missed that.
    I don’t have that link but,
    Follows is some additional info provided by Rossi
    ———————————————————————–
    Alexvs October 19th
    Why the sample withdrawn from the E-Cat in Lugano was only 2 mg from a 1 g charge ?

    Andrea Rossi October 19th

    Alexvs:
    Because that was the maximum amount that was possible to withdraw from the E-Cat by the Professors without breaking the reactor, due to its complex internal design.
    Warm Regards, A.R.
    http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=10#comment-1125510
    ———————————————————————–
    Everyone assumes the reactor is a smooth bore. It could contain ridges internally as it does on the exterior, or fluted along it’s internal length.
    It could also be of a threaded nature having been molded around a piece of threaded ready rod.

    These could have various effects. One is it could allow increased heat transfer in from the resistors & out when producing excess heat. It could also aid in the circulation of the Li/H around & into the Nickel catalyst reducing hot spots. The internal shape of the reactor can even control the temperature zones and focus the heat to specific zone of the reactor. It would definitely provide more surface area and definitely make it much harder to scrap out the used fuel.

    • Axil Axil

      Particle 2 of the ash assey on page 45 of the Lugano report shows a particle that is a silicon dioxide particle. This leads to the speculation that the inside of the Lugano reactor is filled with silica based Aerogel. Like carbon, silicon is a Hydrogen Rydberg matter catalyst. Silicon monoxide is also LENR active since it mimics potassium in terms of electron outer shell bonding. It also may be necessary to keep the nickel particles separated to avoid overheating at startup in order to give the reaction some time for the reaction to establish itself.

      • It is also possible that the 27Al in the fuel picked up a neutron to become 28Al which has a T1/2 of 2.24 minutes to become 28Si.

        • Mats002

          Hi Robert! Have you done fuel/ash analysis from the Brillouin reactor? I guess for it to be relevant the reactor has to run with a significant COP for weeks, or having a good procentage of SSM?

        • Axil Axil

          That particle was over 200 microns long and 100 microns wide and would have had to have trillions of transmutation reactions occur to get to its final state all producing same result. Not very likely.

          But possible in the light of a 1000 micron pure Ni62 particle generated.

          When any impossible thing is possible, anything can happen.

    • Obvious

      Since we doing the zombie thread thing (below), I will add that the reactor was opened by breaking one of the caps (page 8), and the wires were cut off before weighing (page 2). So the reactor was broken already.