Rossi Provides Projected Timeline of E-Cat Development

Andrea Rossi was asked yesterday by a reader on the Journal of Nuclear Physics if he could provide a schedule for upcoming E-Cat deadline.

Rossi’s response was this:

Andrea Rossi
August 30, 2016 at 8:44 AM
Eugenio Mieli:
1- continue the manufacturing of the industrial plants: NOW
2- complete the R&D of the QuarkX to sell the first unit: within 2016
3- presentation of the QuarkX prototype: within 2016
4- start massive production of the E-Cats in the USA and in Sweden: 2017- 2018
Thank you for your attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

There’s apparently a lot going on at the moment with manufacturing and R&D — although not on a mass-production level. We don’t have details on who has made the first orders, but from what Rossi has said, he seems to refer to at least two customers — one being the parent company that used the energy from the Doral plant, and the other being a district heating customer in Sweden.

Interesting that he says there will be a “presentation” of the QuarkX prototype this year — that sounds like a newsworthy event if it happens. I hope we get more details on that. Rossi has always talked about his hope for “massive” production of the E-Cats. If it works as he says, I can understand the excitement, but there will be a lot to do to get mass production set up, especially with the current lawsuit pending. Rossi has said recently that he is spending 40 per cent of his time on the legal case.

  • Bob Greenyer

    What 3 means is most interesting to me.

    • What we hope it means: publication of QX specs, test results, independent validation, vouched for by the new partner. With video demos posted to the web.

      What it will probably mean: an unverifiable Rossi-says that he has successfully delivered the QX prototype to his new partner and they have decided to move ahead with commercializing it.

      • Ged

        I’m thinking more like a car commercial, with dubbing by the truck guy voice and everything.

      • Jas

        Hmm, deadlines.
        BLP Q2 2017. Rossi 2017-2018.
        I hope they can stick to them.

      • Bob Greenyer

        ooo – you cynic / realist

  • Bob Greenyer

    What 3 means is most interesting to me.

    • Ged

      Sounds like he’ll allow orders of the prototype to early testers, taking 3 and 2 together. Hopefully the individual units will be available and much cheaper than an entire industrial plant, so that the community could spring for one. Unlikely it’ll be that easy though.

      • roseland67

        Tabletop Quark X?
        If you can in fact order one,
        and it does in fact work as stated,
        how long before it is dis-assembled, reverse engineered and made public?

        • Ged

          Within hours would be my guess (a few days for fuel and isotope analysis). Even if potting was used. So, patents and prior art would be the only defense.

          • sam

            Ged
            What do you mean if potting
            was used?
            Why is this Reverse engineering so easy?
            Will the Ecat be easy to reverse
            engineer also?
            If patents and prior art are the only
            defense how many Countries would look at that as a defense?
            Thanks
            Sam

          • Ged

            As we found out with the Orbo, potting is a good way to conceal electronics from the casual observer. Of course, it can still be removed. Anyone with metal working tools could cut their way into an Ecat and dissect it, see how the electronics and circuits are built, cut open the core and reverse engineer its dimensions, geometry, and materials. Electronic equipment could allow people to dissect out the activity and programming of any electronic chips or processors, as is done when building emulators of electronic devices.

            The only part that is hard to reverse engineer is the fuel, as the processing done to it is not easily discernable. But isotope analysis and EM microscopy would help crack that. The physical device and electronics are a piece of cake in comparison.

          • Ooh… I didn’t really follow the Orbo testing drama. Was intentional misdirection/doesn’t work the consensus?

          • Ged

            The potting epoxy proved a serious challenge as Frank and most observers didn’t want to risk damaging anything while trying to remove it. We could still see some features, and despite the potting, some amazing electronics folks here were able to diagram the circuit using the terminals available for testing with.

            The end consensus is that the Orbo does Not work as advertised. Neither the OCube nor Ophone core properly functioned, though we isolated the main problem with the Ocube to being a faulty USB controller that was shorting it (probably damaged by the potting process, ironically). However, there was some very odd behavior that is hard to explain, particularly from the better functioning Ophone core, and both devices are not simply batteries as we discovered by the shorting and charging tests.

            Still, we found no way to draw from it at a rate that would allow firm conclusions about the underlying technology (i.e. if the principle behind it works and if it really is generating energy), and it will take… quite a number of months still of constantly drawing energy at equilibrium (as fast as it “recharges” itself) from it to prove the energy density is too high to be a battery, or not. A frustrating inconclusive conclusion for the time being.

          • Thanks.

            So at best it sounds like trickle recharge from ambient energy that was hyped into much more to bilk early adopters.

            I wonder how much they made.

          • Ged

            That seems the most likely case, for sure. The Ophone core’s recharge rate appeared consistant with the high end of energy harvesters, as Pekka pointed out. Still, far below the hype, or usable rates.

          • SG

            But really quite mysterious even then because it had no characteristics of an energy harvester, and the metal-enclosed packaging would block all EM fields. Heat and vibration were still candidates, but didn’t seem too plausible. It was all quite inconclusive though, as Ged pointed out, and did not work as claimed.

          • Omega Z

            It may simply be that lab prototypes work, but production models don’t stand up to the claims. Thus, if each unit needs to be lab built, they will never be an economical product. Frankly, this happens often in the real world. Batteries are a big case in point.

          • sam

            From the Internet!
            Apple has sued a lot of companies for allegedly copying or stealing its intellectual property over the past three decades. In 1988, Apple sued Microsoft and HP for copyright infringement over similarities of Windows and NewWave to the graphical interface of the Macintosh and Lisa. More recently, the late Jobs had declared war against Google’s Android mobile operating system, resulting in a flurry of suits against Samsung, Motorola, HTC, and others who dared to copy ideas expressed in the iPhone and iPad.

            “I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs told his biographer Walter Isaacson. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

            This from the same Steve Jobs who famously said in 1996: “Picasso had a saying — ‘good artists copy; great artists steal’ — and we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.”

          • INVENTOR INVENTED

            Who has the resources to reverse engineer like that? The DOD, the Chinese or Russian military? Corporations that spend unlimited amounts of money on stealing secrets and reverse engineering are found in cyberpunk novels, but not in reality.

          • Ged

            Err… we the community did a lot of reverse engineering with limited access and testing. It isn’t hard (depending on your definition), and it doesn’t take unlimited money. Here is an example of hobbyists reverse engineering an entire computing device and making a hardware emulator for people to use: http://zsnes.com/ . To create the emulation of the hardware, they had to reverse engineer the computing behavior of each chip and circuit that composed that hardware via empirical testing. Read their logs on that, it’s really interesting stuff (if they still have it up; some of the chips were very hard to decipher the behavior of).

            If you start delving into the world of reverse engineering, it may open your eyes to whole new horizons.

          • INVENTOR INVENTED

            Yeah, but the computer hardware you are dealing with is already known making the software work easier. Its a lot harder to reverse engineer something with unknown catalysts, and with unknown processing conditions to synthesize them.

          • clovis ray

            Hi, guys,
            Let’s, analyze , this a bit, Dr. Rossi has spoke to this, back when the robo factories were first brought up, by using robot factories, he can build them so cheap no one, will be able to match his price even if reverse engineered.
            Besides he will be so far ahead no one can catch his production.
            e-cats can be built by robots, as EASY as the chinese, or others .
            Secondary, is this very sobering insight, how many machines has humanity seen, that can do what the E-CAT does, answer’ none.
            Now, let’s say someone, reverse engineers, his cat, what would he hope to do with it, if he tries to market such a device, he will have to get Leonardo corp. to ok is sale.
            so i would say that the public will not get any pertinent info, until his production has started, then ‘katy’ bar the door,

          • roseland67

            GED,
            Rossi must realize this, no?
            Maybe that is why he insists on selling MW sized reactors, at least this way he’ll get $1M out of you before you reverse engineer it.

      • SG

        We should press for this, seriously. We have a good track record giving Steorn a fair shake with the Ocube, and reporting as we found it. Few people would question the conclusions from this community. We could all pitch in to purchase the QuarkX just as we did with the Ocube. I’d be one of the first (if not the first) to contribute. Although I can’t speak for Frank (obviously), I bet you he would be willing to coordinate the effort, run the test in accordance with community input, and openly share the results. I would be supportive of this effort even if we agreed to test it as a “black box” as it were, with an agreement not to dismantle / reverse engineer.

        What do you all think? How can we persuade Mr. Rossi to let the ECW community do this? After all, we as a community have been extremely open and patient, if not his most ardent supporter on the Internet. I almost (almost) feel like Mr. Rossi owes it to this community.

        • Omega Z

          I imagine Rossi appreciates the community support, but I doubt Rossi feels he owes what you propose to this community or any other.

          In addition, If ECW found the E-cat didn’t live up to expectations, you would be applauded. However, if the ECW community found it to be all it is said to be, then you’re all a bunch of uneducated crackpots.

          You Know I’m Right….

        • Ged

          It was a heck of a lot of fun playing with the Orbo together, theorizing, and experimenting. I would love to see this done with the QuarkX, and utterly agree with you. Steorn also gets a lot of props for being brave enough to send us not one but two devices.

          Rossi could even request a two month or other generous time limit to play with it, after which the device has to be sent back to show no tampering or reverse engineering. More control than he would have over any industrial customers. If he’s got the goods, this could only be a win for him.

    • What we hope it means: publication of QX specs, test results, independent validation, vouched for by the new partner. With video demos posted to the web.

      What it will probably mean: an unverifiable Rossi-says that he has successfully delivered the QX prototype to his new partner and they have decided to move ahead with commercializing it.

      • Ged

        I’m thinking more like a car commercial, with dubbing by the truck guy voice and everything.

      • Bob Greenyer

        ooo – you cynic / realist

  • Bob Matulis

    If what Dr Rossi says is accurate the “Doubting Thomas” proof should be happening within the next 2 years.

    “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”

    I look forward to the day I can put my hands on one of his machines!

    • Albert D. Kallal

      I agree – we need that better witness and testimony.
      Following this saga?

      I think there is rather good and legitimate engineering in the 1MW plant.

      Rossi has shown a continues “progressing” of his devices from 2009 onwards.

      Most of what he stated and plans to do has occurred.

      However, on the downside?

      Rossi has thwarted open tests and verifications of his plant. So while “some” have occurred, quotes about people walking into the room with a thermal gun and Rossi becoming “nervous” or asking people to leave etc. are red flags.

      And not wanting other engineers to look at and inspect the plant are also red flags. If the plant works as claimed – then Rossi would be full of smiles and WELCOME additional visitors. Another “red flag” is Rossi using and dropping OTHER people’s names in place of HIMSELF
      vouching and taking responsibility for his claims.

      For example anyone with a brain would know after 3 weeks of running he plant that said plant is producing SPECTACULAR results. So why would Rosso not flat out state that the plant is working well and producing a high COP?

      So why would Rossi constantly answer “F8”.

      Now I realize that F9 is a Rossi “slang” Essentiality Rossi is says for better or for worse.

      This is stupid in such answers and contexts. By saying the above “better or for worse” then Rossi can state he constantly DID NOT MISLEAD anyone in regards to how well the plant was working. He can say that he ALWAYS cast doubt on the public! This gives Rossi an out but MORE important means he NOT taking responsibly for his claims.

      However, the instant SOMEONE Else’s name is on a report that says a COP of 50, then Rossi is “all in”. But note CAREFULLY that “all in” is ALWAYS in the context of the other person’s authority – not Rossi’s own!

      When such “agency” is directed towards Rossi? – then he “waffles” like a greased pig.

      The continued “obfuscation” by Rossi is a serious issue. As one who has spent time fighting with people who have committed fraud – and tons of lawyers? You begin to notice certain patterns of behaviors – and Rossi has too many of these behaviors for my comfort level.

      So, how do I see this?

      Rossi has a plant that produces heat. I think this is a given.

      However, HOW much heat the plant produces and the COP for me is still VERY MUCH in question. Are we talking like most LENR devices, or that rather high COP that Rossi does not claim, but says the ERV claims!

      So for every good aspect of Rossi, there are patterns of his behaviors that does not fit anything REMOTE close to my experience when working with people of high integrity and high values of excellence. This kind of “BS” and dancing around the issue is not my experience with smart people – unless they are in fact dancing around facts!

      For example, you don’t say my instrument readings “match” that of the ERV. You say I measured a high COP of 50, and the readings of the ERV match what I measured and claim. Rossi ALWAYS puts things in the reverse context and forces the responsibility and agency on the ERV or other parties – not himself. So Rossi will say I put meters “beside” the ERV’s
      and I saw the same readings as the ERV. Note how the agency and responsibly of
      this statement really simply rests on the actions of the ERV and not Rossi.

      This is a “constant” theme of Rossi – using agency of others in any solid
      claim. And this is ALSO my experience with people who are hiding things.

      If Rossi was taking agency for his measuring, he would have stated that my measuring and results resulted in a COP of 50, and independent measurement by the ERV agreed with my measurements. Rossi ONLY saying he measured things the SAME way as the ERV and thus I am agreeing with the ERV (but nowhere is Rossi saying that there is a COP that he measured –
      only that the he is seeing the same as the ERV!!!).

      This lack of agency on Rossi’s part is a serious shortcoming.

      If not for the IH lawsuit, then I could perhaps ignore these warning flag behaviors – but now Rossi is on far more of a short leash so to speak.

      I can only hope to see a new plant working soon and hopefully the lawsuit with IH sheds light on IH’s perplexing position. As I stated many time, IH’s position does not make sense. If the
      plant has a COP of 50+ then LOTS OF WIGGLE room would exist in terms of the
      test being to the “letter” of the test or who cares one hoot about some company!
      If you have a machine with a COP 50? It is GAME OVER – you don’t care about anything!
      . Call a press conference, invite popular science and some news media, and you have people lined up around the block. Bring in some more testers!

      And for those that need some reading on a 25 year “energy” fraud, then this story about Neely motors is an enjoyable read:

      https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/keely/keely.htm

      I have “little” doubt that Rossi has LENR. The evidence piled up suggests this reasonable concluding.

      However, what output Rossi been achieving is not at this point in time supported with high quality evidence. And when we reached a point in which high quality verification can and should occur – it has not and “something” occurs which prevents this high quality verification from occurring. It again is a pattern.

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

      • clovis ray

        hogwash,

      • It’s not rocket science really.

        Either there’s an inexplicable 4+ person conspiracy that has been active for many years putting in a lot of hard engineering work and hours that has already netted $11M — but is risking freedom and financial calamity for a long-shot at $89M more…

        …OR…

        There’s inexplicable obstruction/destruction by a company that had the world wrapped around its little finger, staring at hundreds of billions in future revenue with a black swan technology — either because they are greedy, are pursuing other options, are at the mercy of larger forces which now direct them, or outsiders derailed their confidence at the 11th hour.

        Either way it’s ridiculous, captivating, frustrating, important, confusing and astoundingly complex.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          Well, actually, Penon was not part or involved in the Lugano report. From that report, it likely heat was produced, but not as much due to measuring errors.

          So, I think the Lugano testers did their job, but the testing methods “given” to them or “adopted” was less than ideal. The result was a poor test. And thus by most accounts a poor COP was the result. So heat, sure, but it looks to be a low COP.

          I think we only have to worry about two people – Penon and Rossi.

          Most interesting about the Neely Motor fraud I linked to. They hired an “independent” engineer to poke and look around. After about one month of going to the facility this engineer agreed and accepted the Neely motor was an amazing new technology.

          Of course one month is a nice amount of time to “hang” around with the builder who no doubt could offer him a job. Lo and behold – a month later that supposed independent engineer declared the Neely Motor works and was an amazing technology!

          I am surprised that no one asked Penon directly – do you stand by your measuring methodology – do you agree and think the plant has this high COP of 50?

          I mean, 90 million is a “big” incentive to measure things in a “less” than ideal way or the “preferred” way depending on which side of the paycheck you are on. Hey, if you do a really good job, I will give you a 10 million dollar bonus for such good measuring after a successful year long test!

          So, really, there not a “long” list of people here that I see that mislead or committed fraud, or would even be required to commit fraud. We at about two people – and that’s not a lot or a long list.

          However, when the chips are laid down, and time to show the poker hand? – That’s the instant the results are elusive and that is as I stated a warning flag.

          I don’t see this situation as much complex. That 1MW plant produced large amounts of heat or it did not. And as noted while a million watts would not heat up the room where the container is – dumping that heat out or using that heat is significant. So there is some “wishy” washy in regards to the use of that output heat.

          The fact that “details” are still wishy washy in this regards is a red flag.

          I don’t think the issue here is does the ecat work, or does LENR work. There are clearly real world engineering choices and designs and even “progress” shown by Rossi.

          However the above does not NOT override nagging questions that remain. My experience in life and business shows that this type of obfuscation is not how thigs tend to move forward unless something is wrong.

          As others stated, either IH is way off base, or Rossi/Penon are.

          I in no way in some position to know or state which party is at fault there, and we can only hope soon that these doubts are resolved.

          So LITTLE question in my mind that the 1MW is built to do what it is supposed to do. The question really centers on performance, and specifically that HIGH COP – that’s where my doubts are – I hope to be shown wrong, with egg on my face – but my mind and instincts are really good.
          If I a wrong, I will take full agency for this position I taken in public.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • Nope. If there is fraud, logic dictates that Rossi, Penon, Johnson and Fabiani must be active participants.

            One could also make a strong argument for Levi and Fioravanti being on the team. And possibly West. And the actor currently known as John Doe.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            I have to agree. Your point actually bodes VERY well in favor of Rossi.

        • clovis ray

          Are you kidding, 4+ don’t you mean 400+ , ridiculous

      • Omega Z

        Rossi only went public in January 2011. No one entered the room with a thermal gun. It was a detector of some type(It’s been a while, Gamma possibly) that could give clues as to the process taking place inside the reactor during startup.

        As to the statement- “F8”. The result of the 1 year test may be positive, but could also be negative. Any other statement would be just plain wrong. You can’t give a result that hasn’t yet been concluded. Even should you have a clear idea of said results.

        The Lugano test. Rossi has given no opinion other then read the report. Of the 1 year test, Rossi has said nothing about COP>50. In fact, on Leonardo’s ecat website, it still reads of guaranteed COP>6. Nothing more. Much of the confusion comes from speculation on the blogs. Rossi just doesn’t correct what others say. Seriously. That would be a full time task that he doesn’t need to waste time on.

        Average COP>50. What I read said the 1MW system spent a substantial period of time at COP 50 or above. Substantial is a very subjective word. If the 1MW operated in SSM for 9 hours out of 10, that would be very substantial. It would also only be COP>10. Quite simply- Pick your time frame and pick your COP.

        From what Rossi said, the 1MW plant sometimes required as little as 8.5KW input during SSM. I could pick a 1 hour period of SSM and claim a COP=100. However, that would be meaningless as to the average COP.

        Note: COP=6 is of economic use for some tasks. COP=10 makes it economical for nearly all uses. COP>20 provides diminishing returns as 95% of energy cost has already been eliminated. i.e., going from COP=20 to 100 only saves an additional 4% of the original input.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          I disagree with the F8 – a simple statement that a high COP and the plant been running well for a month is MORE then enough – the fact that Rossi did not do this is a red flag.

          No, Johnson is only the lawyer – he will simply do in most cases as the client asks.

          I am only pointing out “worrisome” behaviors.

          And I do not think a “long list” of people involved in some fraud exists. In near every successful deception there are VERY VERY few people involved. The famous Canadian Bree-X fraud comes to time. An amazing tale and a short video on that fraud can be seen here:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxX4niytWFU

          Note again in the above the use of OTHER people’s authority.

          I can say that for as many “red flags” we see from Rossi, we have an EQUAL number of POSITIVE things in Rossi’s favor.

          The sound engineering, and Rossi also charging forward is a positive sign. Charging forward as Rossi is doing suggests he in the good and in the pink so to speak. However like any train, until it falls off the tracks or reaches its destination is how these events pan out.

          However, a public demo of a working reactor would help much in terms of promoting LENR and destroying the negativity that the IH debacle has brought to the LENR community.

          I mean, look at what Telsa did against Edison. Edison had cronies paying children to steal dogs and pets for weekly public “electrocution” of those pets in public. Frankly, this kind of behaviors makes me feel that Thomas Edison was scum.

          However, Telsa was also a great showman, and he responded with a SPECULAR public demo showing huge bolts of lighting and electricity flow right through his body in public – after that demo is was “game over” for those silly Edison supports telling everyone that AC was some kind of death electricity.

          Key in above is HOW Telsa responded – so lack of a strong response from Rossi such as a demo is “strange”.

          So Rossi not taking the public bull by the horns and doing some demos is NOT typical of highly intelligent people full of legitimate pride and accomplishments. Perhaps Rossi feels any more demos are a waste of time and public opinion does not matter, but clearly Rossi does care about public opinion due to his engagement with the public on a constant basis.

          And I also MUCH agree that is Rossi’s SSM mode is as he claims, then a COP of 50 makes much sense.

          As noted, the position of IH does not make sense unless they are confident of their position, or they are outright trying to hold back and destroy LENR.

          I will say that I find the current situation rather exciting since when the chips fall – the claim(s) of both parties cannot be correct and the ramifications of which party is correct will result in some spectacular conclusions about human nature.

          LENR is a new great hope for mankind, and I am still rooting and betting on Rossi.

          Coming to a theater near you is the epic conclusion of the Rossi saga – and I for one will keep the bowels of popcorn full.

          I simply do not like the “list” of red flags and some of Rossi’s behaviors (but so what!). These behaviors in my life experience have more often than not have pointed to less than ideal outcomes.

          I also want to state in public that it is “difficult” to take a position that we are being outright hoodwinked by Rossi – and I apologize in public for suggesting as such. We owe Rossi a gratitude of debt for his LENR work and how he promoted LENR for the masses.

          It is fair to say that we (I) am NOT yet in a position to determine how this story will end.

          Regards,
          Albert D. Kallal
          Edmonton, Alberta Canada

          • My2c

            Good video – worth the time to watch it.

          • Omega Z

            “F8″ applies to the 1MW E-cat test.

            F8=”The test could be positive, but also, the test could be negative”
            Rossi used “F8” as shorthand in place of this statement.

            The 1MW test had to meet certain criteria/milestones. It had to operate a total of 350 days excluding downtime without exceeding 400 days in total(ie- allowed upto 50 days downtime). It also needed to meet minimal average COP levels during those 350 operational days to determine the amount of payment if any.

            At what point should Rossi declare F8=Positive or F8=Negative.
            1 Month?… 6 Months?… Or when the test is concluded?

            Or perhaps when the “ERV” determines that “F8” is Positive or Negative as it is his job and not Rossi’s to do so…

            What some claim as red flags, I call normal progression. If everything went exactly as planned, then I would call that a red flag. Nothing ever goes as planned in real life…

  • MasterBlaster7

    Thanks Rossi!
    That is what I like to hear.

  • MasterBlaster7

    Thanks Rossi!
    That is what I like to hear.

  • Ged

    Within hours would be my guess (a few days for fuel and isotope analysis). Even if potting was used. So, patents and prior art would be the only defense.

    • sam

      Ged
      What do you mean if potting
      was used.
      Why is this Reverse engineering so easy?
      Will the Ecat be easy to reverse
      engineer also?
      Thanks

      • Ged

        As we found out with the Orbo, potting is a good way to conceal electronics from the casual observer. Of course, it can still be removed. Anyone with metal working tools could cut their way into an Ecat and dissect it, see how the electronics and circuits are built, cut open the core and reverse engineer its dimensions, geometry, and materials. Electronic equipment could allow people to dissect out the activity and programming of any electronic chips or processors, as is done when building emulators of electronic devices.

        The only part that is hard to reverse engineer is the fuel, as the processing done to it is not easily discernable. But isotope analysis and EM microscopy would help crack that. The physical device and electronics are a piece of cake in comparison.

        • Ooh… I didn’t really follow the Orbo testing drama. Was intentional misdirection/doesn’t work the consensus?

          • Ged

            The potting epoxy proved a serious challenge as Frank and most observers didn’t want to risk damaging anything while trying to remove it. We could still see some features, and despite the potting, some amazing electronics folks here were able to diagram the circuit using the terminals available for testing with.

            The end consensus is that the Orbo does Not work as advertised. Either the OCube not Ophone core properly functioned. However, there was some very odd behavior that is hard to explain, and both devices are not simple batteries as we discovered by the shorting and charging tests.

            Still, we found no way to draw from it at a rate that would allow firm conclusions about the under laying technology (i.e. if the principle behind it works and if it really is generating energy),and it will take… quite a number of months still of constantly drawing energy at equilibrium (as fast as it “recharges” itself) from it to prove the energy density is to high to be a battery, or not. A frustrating inconclusive conclusion for the time being.

          • Thanks.

            So at best it sounds like trickle recharge from ambient energy that was hyped into much more to bilk early adopters.

            I wonder how much they made.

          • Ged

            That seems the most likely case, for sure. The Ophone core’s recharge rate appeared consistant with the high end of energy harvesters, as Pekka pointed out. Still, far below the hype, or usable rates.

          • SG

            But really quite mysterious even then because it had no characteristics of an energy harvester, and the metal-enclosed packaging would block all EM fields. Heat and vibration were still candidates, but didn’t seem too plausible. It was all quite inconclusive though, as Ged pointed out, and did not work as claimed.

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            You are now producing industrial plants; will they also be delivered this year (2016)? Rossi’s answer to this question was “maybe”. Rossi’s inability to get his reactors to market is becoming a very serious issue.

          • Steve Swatman

            A serious issue for whom? I suspect that any corporate/industrial client will understand perfectly the problems with new technology and will have factored that into doing any business with Leonardo.

            Of course, if you have bought and paid for one of those ecats personally and it has not turned up on the delivery date agreed by yourself and leonardo I can understand why it would be a serious issue to you and your company.

            Have you bought and paid for an ecat that has not been delivered?

          • Bernie Koppenhofer

            Rossi credibility, once lost, good luck.

          • Omega Z

            It may simply be that lab prototypes work, but production models don’t stand up to the claims. Thus, if each unit needs to be lab built, they will never be an economical product. Frankly, this happens often in the real world. Batteries are a big case in point.

        • sam

          From the Internet!
          Apple has sued a lot of companies for allegedly copying or stealing its intellectual property over the past three decades. In 1988, Apple sued Microsoft and HP for copyright infringement over similarities of Windows and NewWave to the graphical interface of the Macintosh and Lisa. More recently, the late Jobs had declared war against Google’s Android mobile operating system, resulting in a flurry of suits against Samsung, Motorola, HTC, and others who dared to copy ideas expressed in the iPhone and iPad.

          “I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong,” Jobs told his biographer Walter Isaacson. “I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go thermonuclear war on this.”

          This from the same Steve Jobs who famously said in 1996: “Picasso had a saying — ‘good artists copy; great artists steal’ — and we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas.”

          • Guru Khalsa

            No wonder you are disappointed. Somehow you thought this blog was a religion of Rossi says real believers. I couldn’t disagree more. My experience is that the people who participate on this blog are thinking, rational and intelligent individuals who like to follow and comment on the progress of the Ecat from invention to pre-production and hopefully to market. In fact in my opinion some of the comments by the engineers on this blog have elevated the conversation and taken it to another level, especially in retaliation to the accusations by IH. Surely this is more interesting than anything on TV.

            In typical ‘Rossi says’ you want to make a wager on something Rossi never said. Rossi gets asked ‘Obviously without obligation …make a schedule of upcoming major deadlines in the long road of E-Cat …that reflects your feelings today,’ and this gets interpreted as Rossi said the quarks would be presented to the public in 2016. Any other time Rossi mentions the quarks and 2016 he uses the words I hope. This actually happens a lot. People take Rossi’s comments out of context all the time.

            I am sorry you won’t be entering the Ecat energy field as you hoped, but do you really feel the readers on this blog owe you $5000.00 for your vigilance and participation? If so please let us know, considering how many comments you made in those 5 years, how much does that come out to per comment?

            Eugenio Mieli
            August 30, 2016 at 7:32 AM
            Dear Andrea Rossi,
            considering the many variables we must consider (technical, legal, political) and consequently the difficulty in being precise in predictions, may you now make a schedule of upcoming major deadlines in the long road of E-Cat?
            I’m sure that on certain issues you will be forced to repeat yourself, but I think it is interesting to have an overall timing pattern that reflects your feelings today. Obviously without obligation . . .
            Thanks so much,
            Eugenio
            Andrea Rossi
            August 30, 2016 at 8:44 AM
            Eugenio Mieli:

            1- continue the manufacturing of the industrial plants: NOW

            2- complete the R&D of the QuarkX to sell the first unit: within 2016

            3- presentation of the QuarkX prototype: within 2016

            4- start massive production of the E-Cats in the USA and in Sweden: 2017- 2018
            
Thank you for your attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

          • Omega Z

            Guru Khalsa, Thank You

            ->”Obviously without obligation”

            I wonder how many missed that 1 little phrase. MANY. Happens far to often. I actually think many don’t even read the threads but go straight to comments. Especially the trolls as many of them seem to be the least informed.

      • clovis ray

        Hi, guys,
        Let’s, analyze , this a bit, Dr. Rossi has spoke to this, back when the robo factories were first brought up, by using robot factories, he can build them so cheap no one, will be able to match his price even if reverse engineered.
        Besides he will be so far ahead no one can catch his production.
        e-cats can be built by robots, as EASY as the chinese, or others .
        Secondary, is this very sobering insight, how many machines has humanity seen, that can do what the E-CAT does, answer’ none.
        Now, let’s say someone, reverse engineers, his cat, what would he hope to do with it, if he tries to market such a device, he will have to get Leonardo corp. to ok is sale.

    • roseland67

      GED,
      Rossi must realize this, no?
      Maybe that is why he insists on selling MW sized reactors, at least this way he’ll get $1M out of you before you reverse engineer it.

  • Christina

    Oh, great! Wonderful!

  • Jas

    Hmm, deadlines.
    BLP Q2 2017. Rossi 2017-2018.
    I hope they can stick to them.

  • twobob

    I wonder if all the people that had orders in for E-cats.
    Will get first refusal?
    5 years and I still Await, with baited breath.

  • Massive production of E-cats?
    Does that mean we, who have orders in for E-cats get offered first refusal.
    OR? do the domestic customers get the QuarkX, Which is witch.

  • Ophelia Rump

    What does this mean? To whom and how formally?

    “presentation of the QuarkX prototype: within 2016”

    • I personally think he means the point at which enough R&D has been done that the QX passes the acceptance test set up by the new partner.

  • clovis ray

    Hi, Frank.
    It occurred to me, that the quark x, needs a proper name, before it’s debut. Dr. R said the x was just a placeholder.
    So, a contest to name the quark, would be cool,, i think Dr. R wanted to retain the quark part, but maybe not, we could ask, this to give him a choice of some possibilities. you Frank could select the top ten, to submit for Dr.R’s final approval,of the winner.
    Wouldn’t it be great if we had a hand in on, naming the greatest invention of all time, smile.
    If we ask , we might get the go ahead, from the good doc. what you think. i would bet there are some good names out there.,,,, btw I take credit for coining the name, the Rossi effect.
    1. Supercat.
    2.Quarkcat.
    3.helcat.

    • sam
      • clovis ray

        Thanks guys, thought there would more interested in helping, but i guess not,
        I’l leave it open , and hopefully more will participate,

        • Chapman

          Don’t get discouraged, friend. It was a great idea.

          Blame ChrisC. Because you just can’t top “HELCat”… It ended the contest before the other contestants had even finished their stretches and warm up routines… 🙂

          (and I really DO wish to God I had thought that one up!)

    • ChrisC

      As it produces Heat, Electricity & Light (HELCat) would be quite cool. But maybe not really Rossi’s cup of tea. Not sure how to fit in quark?

      • Stephen

        Hehe I agree with everyone that name is unbeatable. I just hope it doesn’t come in kit form and Levitate and Oscillate too 😉

    • mailin

      Before finding a name, it would be better to make a machine that actually works! Its a bit like worrying of the shape of the car body when the engine hasn’t yet been built…

    • Chapman

      Dang It, Clovis,

      I think it was a GREAT idea, and an opportunity for some friendly banter and camaraderie. As such I would LOVE to back you up and participate… But I can’t beat “HELCat”!!!

      ChrisC had to go and score a perfect 10,10,10,10,10 in the first round, so what are the REST of us supposed to do??? I mean, come on. It fits the family name, it is an effective and functional acronym, and it is just basically Bad Ass. I am not sure weather to congratulate the guy or call him a know-it-all smart-ass! All I know is I wish I had thought of it!

      • clovis ray

        Hi, Chapman,
        Smile, i take it you like the name, H,heat- E,electricity- L, light,–cat,
        I would have to admit it’s pretty good,
        better than mine,lol.
        Come on, everyone, you going to let Chris.C, be the only one, that gets a chance to have his name( Helcat) go down in history, as the name of the newest member of the e-cat family .
        P.S. Chris, you can Strengthen your lead, by multiple entries,

        • ChrisC

          I don’t think I can beat it myself, so I think I will quit while i’m ahead. Has anyone asked Rossi what he thinks?

    • INVENTOR INVENTED

      I like quark X

      • clovis ray

        inventor, x is just a place holder, not sure about quark, this will not become the final name. sorry.

  • adriano

    Hi all, no troll intended but everytime I hear Rossi make statment about “massive production” I always wonder how people that follows him and supports him feel about it. Because he makes this kind of statments on a monthly basis since 2013-2014. Do you really think they are relevent? And if you think they are not what is your thoughts on why he makes them?

    Personaly, I see those statments as a way to gain time and to not make a precise date. If my impressions are correct I wonder why he does so. He could clearly states that at the moment he has no idea when the production will start and nobody would mind. But the fact that he always put a target date that always is missed makes me wonder what is the reason behind this

    • My2c

      In 2012 Rossi promised to have a huge production line up an running in 2013:

      Andrea Rossi, March 24th, 2012 at 9:06 AM

      Dear “Barney” (or, better, Giovanni Cesaretti):
      Thank you for this comment of yours, which gives me the chance to answer to all the stupidities that some imbeciles, like your friend B., have put around, after tips got from some puppeteers.
      Here are the answers:
      1- I confirm that we are manufactiring a production line to make 1 million pcs per year
      2- in this process we had all the permissions so far necessary from the competent Authorities, and to say that we have been stopped is totally false
      3- it is totally false, as the puppet said, I am losing my collaborators: actually, I didn’t lose one, while they increase by the day
      4- where the factory is in construction is confidential, and the reason for which is confidential is that we want to work in peace, without hurdles are put by puppeteers and puppets like the Snake or B., just to give a paradigmatic example, full time paid, to try to stop us, from their puppeteers
      5- you say that to maintain confidential such a factory is impossible: obviously, you understand nothing of making a factory. Ask to somebody able to make a factory and get information to improve your knowledge of the matter.
      6- conserve this comment of mine: if within 16 months we will not have in operation this factory, I will pay you pizza and bier.
      Say hello to your friend B.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

      • adriano

        Wow. Point 6 is really depressing me now

        • Ged

          Ask him for some pizza and beer then ;), that oughty cheer anyone up!

          • adriano

            I dont think its a good idea. He is italian. He doesnt know nothing about good “bier”!! 🙂

          • INVENTOR INVENTED

            wine

      • wpj

        Correct, and he also said that the plans changed when IH came on board which was later in 2012.

        • adriano

          What im trying to point out is that in my opinion he misleads people with those staments and thats not fair. At least people should be aware that in the past those deadlines has always been disregarded. So they can judge the whole picture insthead of setting a clock that will ring 2 years from now

          • wpj

            Correct; it would have been wise for him to update things when it all changed with IH, but I don’t think that he really believed that things would be delayed so long.

    • Omega Z

      First, Why does Rossi repeat the mass production statement?

      Because people continuously repeat similar questions. That’s it in a nutshell.

      Keep the above Rossi timeline in context. By reading the Q&A on JONP over time, this is merely Rossi’s hope. It is not written in stone. One of the big issues of the internet, and life in general actually, things can easily be misconstrued even with the best intentions.

      Here’s what mass production will look like if one has followed on JONP for some time. Initially hand built units sold in small numbers to 1st adapters who fully understand there will be problems. Over time as issues are resolved, the numbers will increase. Mass production will be arrived at over several years should all go well.

      • Jarea

        Don´t blame the people for listen to Rossi and expect that what he says become true. Words are words and facts are facts. It is better that Rossi just doesn´t tell any date than what he does.
        Up to now, the things he said, have become true, however, he has always been too optimistic about dates. That must be acknowledged and corrected. Do that, if you want to be predictable and accountable so that future investors trust you.

        • Omega Z

          You can blame the people for hearing what they want to hear.

          Average COP=50, Average COP=50 all over the blogs. Rossi never said that. Rossi still stands by COP>6. What was revealed in the court papers was a claim of substantial periods of time of COP>50. Pick your SSM time frame and you can claim any COP you want. However, Average can be substantially different.

          Even Rossi has pointed out he’s sometimes overly optimistic, but should Rossi say something “may” happen in 3 to 6 months, people’s expectations focus on 3 to 6 weeks. I really like the– It’s been a month already. How long can a 1 year test take anyway???

          Also, Should Rossi decide to say nothing, People will still read more into that then is said… This will be followed by what others speculate such as the imaginary Rossi saids that would make the rounds.

          Note many people jump into the comments without reading the topic. This takes place on every blog on the internet regardless of topic and some read but don’t comprehend what they’ve read.

          • clovis ray

            Hi, Omega man.
            Oh, so correct,here is a few quotes,

            “How you think about a problem is more important than the problem itself.

            So always think positively.” – Norman Vincent Peale.

            Many people swing into action only to make things worse. They’re not coming from love, they’re coming from negative feelings. They’re coming from guilt, anger, hate; from a sense of injustice or whatever. You’ve got to make sure of your “being” before you swing into action. You have to make sure of who you are before you act.”

            -Anthony de Mello, Jesuit Priest and Psychotherapist (1931-1987)

            (And one more for good measure,)

            John Michell took this idea one step further, describing what he saw as the universe’s habit “of reflecting back ideas projected onto it, of seeming to provide positive evidence for any theory that can possibly be formulated.” He claimed you could test it for yourself. “Take the wildest idea imaginable, commit yourself to believing it, become obsessed with it, and you’ll soon find all kinds of evidence turning up as confirmation of it.

          • Zavod

            For a period of a few days, I believed in flying monkeys. Sadly, I saw no evidence of flying monkeys. I so wanted to have a flying monkey.

          • clovis ray

            monkeys fly all the time, you didn’t know, although some might call it jumping, and they also travel by plane form zoo to zoo, so you see, you just haven’t been looking, you just assumed it was impossible, you have to do the work to enjoy rewards,

          • artefact

            Rossis court docs say so:

            “71. … By all accounts, the amount of energy produced by the E-Cat Unit during the Guaranteed Performance Test was substantially greater than fifty (50) times the amount of energy consumed by the E-Cat Unit during the same period.”

            http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/04/06/complaint-of-andrea-rossi-and-leonardo-corp-court-document-cop-substantially-greater-than-fifty-50-during-test/

        • adriano

          Thats exactly what I ment. There is no reason at all for him to deliver a date for the supposed mass production if he already knows that it is not going to happen. To be completly honest, what I dont like about this and what scares me is that there are people that after reading this statment are now seriously beliving that now they have to wait another 2 years to see the “historical breaktrough”. I dont like this prospective because it gives me the feeling that he is in some way cheating on people. And I also think this is an issue that should be pointed out in order to not mislead people and in order to keep all of us with feet on the ground

  • sam
  • SG

    We should press for this, seriously. We have a good track record giving Steorn a fair shake with the Ocube, and reporting as we found it. Few people would question the conclusions from this community. We could all pitch in to purchase the QuarkX just as we did with the Ocube. I’d be one of the first (if not the first) to contribute. Although I can’t speak for Frank (obviously), I bet you he would be willing to coordinate the effort, run the test in accordance with community input, and openly share the results. I would be supportive of this effort even if we agreed to test it as a “black box” as it were, with an agreement not to dismantle / reverse engineer.

    What do you all think? How can we persuade Mr. Rossi to let the ECW community do this? After all, we as a community have been extremely open and patient, if not his most ardent supporter on the Internet. I almost (almost) feel like Mr. Rossi owes it to this community.

    • Omega Z

      I imagine Rossi appreciates the community support, but I doubt Rossi feels he owes what you propose to this community or any other.

      In addition, If ECW found the E-cat didn’t live up to expectations, you would be applauded. However, if the ECW community found it to be all it is said to be, then you’re all a bunch of uneducated crackpots.

      You Know I’m Right….

      • wpj

        Correct, and he also said that the plans changed when IH came on board which was later in 2012.

    • Ged

      It was a heck of a lot of fun playing with the Orbo together, theorizing, and experimenting. I would love to see this done with the QuarkX, and utterly agree with you.

      Rossi could even request a two month or other generous time limit to play with it, after which the device has to be sent back to show no tampering or reverse engineering. More control than he would have over any industrial customers. If he’s got the goods, this could only be a win for him.

  • Omega Z

    First, Why does Rossi repeat the mass production statement?

    Because people continuously repeat similar questions. That’s it in a nutshell.

    Keep the above Rossi timeline in context. By reading the Q&A on JONP over time, this is merely Rossi’s hope. It is not written in stone. One of the big issues of the internet, and life in general actually, things can easily be misconstrued even with the best intentions.

    Here’s what mass production will look like if one has followed on JONP for some time. Initially hand built units sold in small numbers to 1st adapters who fully understand there will be problems. Over time as issues are resolved, the numbers will increase. Mass production will be arrived at over several years should all go well.

    • Jarea

      Don´t blame the people for listen to Rossi and expect that what he says become true. Words are words and facts are facts. It is better that Rossi just doesn´t tell any date than what he does.
      Up to know the things he said, have become true, however, he has always been too optimist about dates. That must be acknowledged and corrected if you want to be predictable and accountable so that future investors trust you.

      • Omega Z

        You can blame the people for hearing what they want to hear.

        Average COP=50, Average COP=50 all over the blogs. Rossi never said that. Rossi still stands by COP>6. What was revealed in the court papers was a claim of substantial periods of time of COP>50. Pick your SSM time frame and you can claim any COP you want. However, Average can be substantially different.

        Even Rossi has pointed out he’s sometimes overly optimistic, but should Rossi say something “may” happen in 3 to 6 months, people’s expectations focus on 3 to 6 weeks. I really like the– It’s been a month already. How long can a 1 year test take anyway???

        Also, Should Rossi decide to say nothing, People will still read more into that then is said… This will be followed by what others speculate such as the imaginary Rossi saids that would make the rounds.

        Note many people jump into the comments without reading the topic. This takes place on every blog on the internet regardless of topic and some read but don’t comprehend what they’ve read.

        • clovis ray

          Hi, Omega man.
          Oh, so correct,here is a few quotes,

          “How you think about a problem is more important than the problem itself.

          So always think positively.” – Norman Vincent Peale.

          Many people swing into action only to make things worse. They’re not coming from love, they’re coming from negative feelings. They’re coming from guilt, anger, hate; from a sense of injustice or whatever. You’ve got to make sure of your “being” before you swing into action. You have to make sure of who you are before you act.”

          -Anthony de Mello, Jesuit Priest and Psychotherapist (1931-1987)

          (And one more for good measure,)

          John Michell took this idea one step further, describing what he saw as the universe’s habit “of reflecting back ideas projected onto it, of seeming to provide positive evidence for any theory that can possibly be formulated.” He claimed you could test it for yourself. “Take the wildest idea imaginable, commit yourself to believing it, become obsessed with it, and you’ll soon find all kinds of evidence turning up as confirmation of it.

          • Zavod

            For a period of a few days, I believed in flying monkeys. Sadly, I saw no evidence of flying monkeys. I so wanted to have a flying monkey.

        • artefact

          Rossis court docs say so:

          “71. … By all accounts, the amount of energy produced by the E-Cat Unit during the Guaranteed Performance Test was substantially greater than fifty (50) times the amount of energy consumed by the E-Cat Unit during the same period.”

          http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/04/06/complaint-of-andrea-rossi-and-leonardo-corp-court-document-cop-substantially-greater-than-fifty-50-during-test/

          • Anon2012_2014

            Rossi’s proposed 2016 schedule is aggressive for Rossi.

            I would like to see a working Rossi Quark-X machine in 2016 sold to a third party to regain his credibility with independent observers like myself.

            Quark-X has the advantage it small so more easily subject to test compared to the test logistics for a very large shipping container units.

      • adriano

        Thats exactly what I ment. There is no reason at all for him to deliver a date for the supposed mass production if he already knows that it is not going to happen. To be completly honest, what I dont like about this and what scares me is that there are people that after reading this statment are now seriously beliving that now they have to wait another 2 years to see the “historical breaktrough”. I dont like this prospective because it gives me the feeling that he is in some way cheating on people. And I also think this is an issue that should be pointed out in order to not mislead people and in order to keep all of us with feet on the ground

  • Jarea

    Off topic,
    Frank what do you think about having a photo/video gallery of the different ecat products/main topics. Maybe including PDF too. It would be good to collect all the pictures posted here. Having a centralized place is good and we can always have a place where we can recall some documentation.
    Just a suggestion.

  • georgehants

    It seems interesting that Mr. Rossi is apparently going into a
    multi-million dollar court case where it has been mentioned here many
    times, that, trial by jury can never be relied upon in either direction.
    Of course it would not be logical or intelligent for Mr. Rossi to
    turn-up in court with a piece of paper, from a third party respected
    source, that the court would undoubtedly treat as expert witnesses,
    reporting that the basic E-cat produces an unexplained Cop above 1
    reliably, repeatably and openly.
    Far better to fight the case without these untainted, fully independent reports.
    I wonder if his lawyers have suggested such a silly idea.
    Allowing that it is possible that Mr. Rossi is acting with the above reasoning and just not telling anybody.

    • Ophelia Rump

      All he needs is one satisfied customer. The rest is a matter of contractual obligations.

      The customer is Heisenberg’s cat. It both exists and does not exist until the Judge looks inside the box. Then it either is in the box or it is not. Interestingly the cat can be in multiple state if it is inside the box at all, it can be alive and well, sick, or dead.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        Rossis cat is in custody . And there is no question whether it exists or not , there is only one question is this cat alive or dead ?

    • kdk

      It’s harder to buy off jurors than it is to buy off a judge.

    • BillH

      Unfortunately this wouldn’t help secure the money, a test would have to be carried out on the actually plant mentioned in the LA and this is currently impounded. Even if AR wins his case it may be that IH as a LLC will just declare bankruptcy and AR will still be chasing redress for years. Exactly why IH was set up as a shell company in the first place. It’s a modern day shell game on both sides.

      • Omega Z

        However, Rossi doesn’t depend on IH alone, but other players as well as individuals named. Anyway, Rossi’s primary goal is likely that all IP rights of the defendent are legally termed relinguished/forfeited and Leonardo retains sole ownership of that IP.

        It’s been stated that Rossi offered to return the $11.5 million back to Darden inc if they relinguished all claims to any of Rossi’s IP before filling suit. If true and I think it is, then Darden inc apparently see value in Rossi’s IP.

  • georgehants

    It seems interesting that Mr. Rossi is apparently going into a
    multi-million dollar court case where it has been mentioned here many
    times, that, trial by jury can never be relied upon in either direction.
    Of course it would not be logical or intelligent for Mr. Rossi to
    turn-up in court with a piece of paper, from a third party respected
    source, that the court would undoubtedly treat as expert witnesses,
    reporting that the basic E-cat produces an unexplained Cop above 1
    reliably, repeatably and openly.
    Far better to fight the case without these untainted, fully independent reports.
    I wonder if his lawyers have suggested such a silly idea.
    Allowing that it is possible that Mr. Rossi is acting with the above reasoning and just not telling anybody.

    • Ophelia Rump

      All he needs is one satisfied customer. The rest is a matter of contractual obligations.

      The customer is Heisenberg’s cat. It both exists and does not exist until the Judge looks inside the box. Then it either is in the box or it is not. Interestingly the cat can be in any state if it is inside the box at all, it can be alive and well, sick, or dead.

      • roseland67

        Ophelia,

        What about the original plant in Milan?
        Also the military customer in Europe?
        How about the sponge guy in Miami?

        There have supposedly been 3 existing customers that have working Ecats,
        Maybe they’re not all satisfied?

      • INVENTOR INVENTED

        Have you read Schrodinger’s baby? Its a murder mystery and they cant determine the id of the killer.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        Rossis cat is in custody . And there is no question whether it exists or not , there is only one question is this cat alive or dead ?

    • kdk

      It’s harder to buy off jurors than it is to buy off a judge.

    • BillH

      Unfortunately this wouldn’t help secure the money, a test would have to be carried out on the actually plant mentioned in the LA and this is currently impounded. Even if AR wins his case it may be that IH as a LLC will just declare bankruptcy and AR will still be chasing redress for years. Exactly why IH was set up as a shell company in the first place. It’s a modern day shell game on both sides.

      • Omega Z

        However, Rossi doesn’t depend on IH alone, but other players as well as individuals named. Anyway, Rossi’s primary goal is likely that all IP rights of the defendent are legally termed relinguished/forfeited and Leonardo retains sole ownership of that IP.

        It’s been stated that Rossi offered to return the $11.5 million back to Darden inc if they relinguished all claims to any of Rossi’s IP before filling suit. If true and I think it is, then Darden inc apparently see value in Rossi’s IP.

    • INVENTOR INVENTED

      I find it hard to believe that there are no independent government agencies he could entrust an E-Cat to for testing. Can you imagine the government buying planes from Boeing without knowing how they were built? Defense contractors obviously trust government agencies with their deepest darkest secrets.

  • Bernie Koppenhofer

    You are now producing industrial plants; will they also be delivered this year (2016)? Rossi’s answer to this question was “maybe”. Rossi’s inability to get his reactors to market is becoming a very serious issue.

    • INVENTOR INVENTED

      I agree. I think its possible he hasnt yet perfected a reactor and he’s scamming the investor community to raise money to make a practical reactor he can sell in the future.

      • MikeP

        Except he’s apparently not going to the investor community for funds … ?

        • INVENTOR INVENTED

          Somebody is funding the quark X.

          • cashmemorz

            Must be some source of funds. but is it investors or something else. He has several properties in Florida. Mortgages? If he is betting his properties against success of E-CATs then he is following the purely private VERY limited company business model where the proprietor is king. He actions indicate this to be more probable than any other business model. Also remember he does not accept money until he has delivered a successful machine. That is what I call integrity.

          • Steve Swatman

            But that is not any of your or our business is it.

          • INVENTOR INVENTED

            you feel its’ none of your business?

          • Steve Swatman

            No, I know that it is none of our business.

    • Steve Swatman

      A serious issue for whom? I suspect that any corporate/industrial client will understand perfectly the problems with new technology and will have factored that into doing any business with Leonardo.

      Of course, if you have bought and paid for one of those ecats personally and it has not turned up on the delivery date agreed by yourself and leonardo I can understand why it would be a serious issue to you and your company.

      Have you bought and paid for an ecat that has not been delivered?

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Rossi credibility, once lost, good luck.

  • Ged

    Ask him for some pizza and beer then ;), that oughty cheer anyone up!

  • Anon2012_2014

    Rossi’s proposed 2016 schedule is aggressive for Rossi.

    I would like to see a working Rossi Quark-X machine in 2016 sold to a third party to regain his credibility with independent observers like myself.

    Quark-X has the advantage it small so more easily subject to test compared to the test logistics for a very large shipping container units.

  • BillH

    What disappoints me about all this is a lack of urgency, this leads me to believe that if AR does have what he says, that it is currently unreliable or even worse maybe even uneconomical. The evidence I have note(regarding the 50+ days of partial downtime during the 1 year test ) is clearly indicative of serious reliability issues. To be generous, you could say AR’s deceptions regarding Customers, factories, ERV could all be put down to his attempts at getting cash to fund development, others probably think differently.

    Most of the current LENR research has AR as it’s catalyst. Isn’t it conceivable that one of these other groups will crack the problems and scoop the prize? Otherwise you have to conceive of the whole thing as a big scam and will undoubtedly see LENR fade back into obscurity.

    If AR wants to get some recognition(in his own lifetime) then he better get moving or it will be too late, 2 years more is too long, for sure.

    • Chapman

      Dang It, Clovis,

      I think it was a GREAT idea, and an opportunity for some friendly banter and camaraderie. As such I would LOVE to back you up and participate… But I can’t beat “HELCat”!!!

      ChrisC had to go and score a perfect 10,10,10,10,10 in the first round, so what are the REST of us supposed to do??? I mean, come on. It fits the family name, it is an effective and functional acronym, and it is just basically Bad Ass. I am not sure weather to congratulate the guy or call him a know-it-all smart-ass! All I know is I wish I had thought of it!

      • clovis ray

        Hi, Chapman,
        Smile, i take it you like the name, and would have to admit it’s pretty good,
        better than mine,lol.

    • Freethinker

      Well, well….

      You are disappointed, apparently about many things, but foremost about the lack of urgency.

      “The evidence I have note(regarding the 50+ days of partial downtime
      during the 1 year test ) is clearly indicative of serious reliability
      issues”

      Wow. You have evidence of what?

      ” Isn’t it conceivable that one of these other groups will crack the problems and scoop the prize?”

      They can crack whatever. I hope they do. I have tried myself. But AR has a patent, and the point from the “crack” to the “scoop” means to be able to make a viable product. Developing products, especially on groundbreaking new technology does take time.

      “… he better get moving or it will be too late, 2 years more is too long, for sure”
      🙂 Too late? Too late for what? For sure? How do you know? Who have claimed to have real customer test yet on the same scale as AR?

      No sir. I think you troll.

      • BillH

        Court case documentation and downtime recorded by AR himself and recorded here. With only an incomplete record of monthly bill requests submitted by JM’s representative it shows at least 50 days when the the plant ran at only 750KW/h
        Unless of course the billing requests were false or contested, or there were no customer.

        A patent is useless if you can’t explain how your system works whereas someone else can. It doesn’t stop someone submitting a more detailed and less ambiguous patent.

        Too late to be announcing things that might happen in the future after the last test that was supposed to precede full production after a year’s testing came to nothing, or worse a legal battle……too late indeed in so many more ways.

        • Omega Z

          ->”A patent is useless if you can’t explain how your system works whereas someone else can.”

          Total NONSENSE.

          Next you’ll claim a Theory is necessary before a patent is even valid.

          As to “monthly bill requests”, I’m only aware of a single month of billing. Not for the duration of the test. I believe Freethinker hit the nail on the head.

          No sir. I think you troll.

          • BillH

            Your awareness is lacking, see exhibit 18 of IH’s August submission which show 5 requests for billing from JM’s representative and a total of 50 days where the plant was running at 75% capacity,

            If anything a patent is used to protect innovation and accrue financial advantage from licensing that innovation, it’s not a lock on improvement or further innovations. It’s up to a patent office to decide based on previous patents and applicability whether some is genuinely innovative.

            Ask AR how much money he has made from his current patent and you’ll see how much it is worth so far.

            There was no next claim…

  • BillH

    What disappoints me about all this is a lack of urgency, this leads me to believe that if AR does have what he says, that it is currently unreliable or even worse maybe even uneconomical. The evidence I have note(regarding the 50+ days of partial downtime during the 1 year test ) is clearly indicative of serious reliability issues. To be generous, you could say AR’s deceptions regarding Customers, factories, ERV could all be put down to his attempts at getting cash to fund development, others probably think differently.

    Most of the current LENR research has AR as it’s catalyst. Isn’t it conceivable that one of these other groups will crack the problems and scoop the prize? Otherwise you have to conceive of the whole thing as a big scam and will undoubtedly see LENR fade back into obscurity.

    If AR wants to get some recognition(in his own lifetime) then he better get moving or it will be too late, 2 years more is too long, for sure.

    • Freethinker

      Well, well….

      You are disappointed, apparently about many things, but foremost about the lack of urgency.

      “The evidence I have note(regarding the 50+ days of partial downtime
      during the 1 year test ) is clearly indicative of serious reliability
      issues”

      Wow. You have evidence of what?

      ” Isn’t it conceivable that one of these other groups will crack the problems and scoop the prize?”

      They can crack whatever. I hope they do. I have tried myself. But AR has a patent, and the point from the “crack” to the “scoop” means to be able to make a viable product. Developing products, especially on groundbreaking new technology does take time.

      “… he better get moving or it will be too late, 2 years more is too long, for sure”
      🙂 Too late? Too late for what? For sure? How do you know? Who have claimed to have real customer test yet on the same scale as AR?

      No sir. I think you troll.

      • BillH

        Court case documentation and downtime recorded by AR himself and recorded here. With only an incomplete record of monthly bill requests submitted by JM’s representative it shows at least 50 days when the the plant ran at only 750KW/h
        Unless of course the billing requests were false or contested, or there were no customer.

        A patent is useless if you can’t explain how your system works whereas someone else can. It doesn’t stop someone submitting a more detailed and less ambiguous patent.

        Too late to be announcing things that might happen in the future after the last test that was supposed to precede full production after a year’s testing came to nothing, or worse a legal battle……too late indeed in so many more ways.

        • Omega Z

          ->”A patent is useless if you can’t explain how your system works whereas someone else can.”

          Total NONSENSE.

          Next you’ll claim a Theory is necessary before a patent is even valid.

          As to “monthly bill requests”, I’m only aware of a single month of billing. Not for the duration of the test. I believe Freethinker hit the nail on the head.

          No sir. I think you troll.

          • BillH

            Your awareness is lacking, see exhibit 18 of IH’s August submission which show 5 requests for billing from JM’s representative and a total of 50 days where the plant was running at 75% capacity,

            If anything a patent is used to protect innovation and accrue financial advantage from licensing that innovation, it’s not a lock on improvement or further innovations. It’s up to a patent office to decide based on previous patents and applicability whether some is genuinely innovative.

            Ask AR how much money he has made from his current patent and you’ll see how much it is worth so far.

            There was no next claim…

  • Gerrit G

    I have been following Rossi for 5 years with a keen interest in both the possibility that the E-cat could radically change the energy production paradigm of the world, and the possibility that I, as an alert and knowledgeable scientist could “get in early” on this new revolution and make a new career of it. I have certainly lowered expectations on the latter. So, in a last ditch effort to get something out of 5 years of following this soap opera, are there any real believers out there who want to wager $5000 on whether there will be a “presentation of the QuarkX prototype: within 2016” ? I have basically lost my faith, but $5000 would make my vigilance over 5 years seem less of a waste of time. I am willing to accept a rather weak fulfillment of this claim as evidence against my bet because I am very sure that come Jan. 2017, there will be absolutely no evidence that the QuarkX exists beyond “Rossi says” with an F9 or F8. In fact, I will offer in advance a double or nothing bet that the same will be true of Jan. 2018 if I win.

    If you are interested, let me know.

    • f sedei

      Patience. A target date cannot be set for success, no matter how much and hard we wish.

    • Guru Khalsa

      No wonder you are disappointed. Somehow you thought this blog was a religion of Rossi says real believers. I couldn’t disagree more. My experience is that the people who participate on this blog are thinking, rational and intelligent individuals who like to follow and comment on the progress of the Ecat from invention to pre-production and hopefully to market. In fact in my opinion some of the comments by the engineers on this blog have elevated the conversation and taken it to another level, especially in retaliation to the accusations by IH. Surely this is more interesting than anything on TV.

      In typical ‘Rossi says’ you want to make a wager on something Rossi never said. Rossi gets asked ‘Obviously without obligation …make a schedule of upcoming major deadlines in the long road of E-Cat …that reflects your feelings today,’ and this gets interpreted as Rossi said the quarks would be presented to the public in 2016. Any other time Rossi mentions the quarks and 2016 he uses the words I hope. This actually happens a lot. People take Rossi’s comments out of context all the time.

      I am sorry you won’t be entering the Ecat energy field as you hoped, but do you really feel the readers on this blog owe you $5000.00 for your vigilance and participation? If so please let us know, considering how many comments you made in those 5 years, how much does that come out to per comment?

      Eugenio Mieli
      August 30, 2016 at 7:32 AM
      Dear Andrea Rossi,
      considering the many variables we must consider (technical, legal, political) and consequently the difficulty in being precise in predictions, may you now make a schedule of upcoming major deadlines in the long road of E-Cat?
      I’m sure that on certain issues you will be forced to repeat yourself, but I think it is interesting to have an overall timing pattern that reflects your feelings today. Obviously without obligation . . .
      Thanks so much,
      Eugenio
      Andrea Rossi
      August 30, 2016 at 8:44 AM
      Eugenio Mieli:

      1- continue the manufacturing of the industrial plants: NOW

      2- complete the R&D of the QuarkX to sell the first unit: within 2016

      3- presentation of the QuarkX prototype: within 2016

      4- start massive production of the E-Cats in the USA and in Sweden: 2017- 2018
      
Thank you for your attention,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

      • Omega Z

        Guru Khalsa, Thank You

        ->”Obviously without obligation”

        I wonder how many missed that 1 little phrase. MANY. Happens far to often. I actually think many don’t even read the threads but go straight to comments. Especially the trolls as many of them seem to be the least informed.

    • Nelson Vogel

      Imagine you are at year 1905 and a brazilian genius called Alberto Santos Dumont said that he would fly an aircraft heavier than air within one year. So, on 23 October 1906 he flew his 14-bis to make the first powered heavier-than-air flight in the world certified by the Aéro Club de France and the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI), starting a new era for the world. Rossi is a kind of Santos Dumont, let him work and accomplish his mission whenever he wants. His ”airplane” will fly, soon or later, and will save this planet of extinction.

    • Steve D

      And sorry, no free ecats either for dedicated followers of his work. In fact Rossi owes us nothing apart from providing a title to this web site. We need to be grateful he does communicate with the peanut gallery which stirs up some interesting conversation. It would be nice to know how others groups are progressing because the silence here is bit boring. Despite optimism and prediction invention does not happen to any ones timetable, not the inventors and least of all the cheer squads.

    • Andy Kumar

      Gerritt,
      I wanted to propose a wager like this too. I am a long time “student” of irrational beliefs. I turned atheist when I was 11 years old. For me, just watching the discussions here is a reward by itself.
      .
      On the right side, I see the results of the e-cat poll. 17% people have zero confidence in the e-cat. I suggest that everybody put their money where their mouth is, and bet $20 (a week’s worth of Starbucks). That way we skeps can multiply our bet by 6.

    • Maybe we can place side bets when Hot Fusion will also “deliver”? Just my 2 cents.

    • Dave

      Gerrit why would you wager on a presentation? They mean nothing. All of those E-Cat table top presentations gave us no real evidence that the E-Cat worked. Seeing the 1MW plant didn’t tell us anything about the actual heat output. If you want to wager on something, put a wage on when there will be an actual working product to buy.

  • georgehants

    From goax via LENR Forum with thanks
    ———-
    LENR Cities is bankrupt!
    See: shabex.ch/en/co/lenr-cities_sa…on_CH-645.4.111.722-2.htm

  • wpj

    Correct; it would have been wise for him to update things when it all changed with IH, but I don’t think that he really believed that things would be delayed so long.

  • Bear1145

    Mr. georgehants,
    You have spent a great deal of time and energy on these E-Cat boards. You are a man, I assume, who has a fair amount of intelligence. What I can’t understand and I hope you might clear up, if you would be so inclined, is why? This seems like a fair question and is not meant nor intended to set you up, to demean you in anyway. It may be easier by me asking you a few questions, some may insult you by me asking them, but then again the answer would clear the issue, if you indeed tell the truth.
    1. Have you every invested money on an invention that did not pan out and you lost money?
    2. Do you know anyone at IH or are you affiliated with them?
    3. Have you ever received money or any form of compensation, real or promised in the future for your participation on this board?
    4. Have you every invested in money in LERN directly or indirectly?
    5. Have you every talked to or know anyone personally who have invested in LERN?
    6. If so, did they show any proof?
    7. If so, who approached them to invest that money and how was the money exchanged?
    8. Do you have a degree in any science major or maybe a doctorate, if so, what field.
    9. There are many ideas on the internet these days. There is UFO, faith healing, weight reduction pills, and age prevention pills; do you take your question to those sights if you think them to be untrue?
    10. If not why are you focusing so much of your energy on the e-cat and Rossi?
    11. Are you man of faith in anything, if so why and if not why?

  • Flo

    It’s always next year with Rossi.

    • Omega Z

      It’s always 20 years for Hot Fusion.

    • INVENTOR INVENTED

      That’s what I’ve noticed. Very frustrating.

  • Stephen

    Hehe I agree with everyone that name is unbeatable. I just hope it doesn’t come in kit form and Levitate and Oscillate too 😉

  • Omega Z

    It’s always 20 years for Hot Fusion.

  • Steve Swatman

    No, I know that it is none of our business.

  • Ged

    Err… we the community did a lot of reverse engineering with limited access and testing. It isn’t hard, and it doesn’t take unlimited money. Here is an example of reverse engineering an entire computing device and making a hardware emulator for people to use: http://zsnes.com/ . To create the emulation of the hardware, they had to reverse engineer the computing behavior of each chip and circuit that composed that hardware. Read their logs on that, it’s really interesting stuff (if they still have it up; some of the chips were very hard to decipher the behavior of).

    If you start delving into the world of reverse engineering, it may open your eyes to whole new horizons.

  • sam

    Pietro F.
    September 18, 2016 at 11:58 PM
    Mr Andrea Rossi:
    What is the situation of the industrialization of the 1 MW E-Cats?

    Buon lavoro

    Pietro F.

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    September 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM
    Pietro F.:
    Small scale industrialization is on course. Large scale industrialization needs longer times, but not too long I hope.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • sam

    Pietro F.
    September 18, 2016 at 11:58 PM
    Mr Andrea Rossi:
    What is the situation of the industrialization of the 1 MW E-Cats?

    Buon lavoro

    Pietro F.

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    September 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM
    Pietro F.:
    Small scale industrialization is on course. Large scale industrialization needs longer times, but not too long I hope.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • clovis ray

    HIi guys
    Thank you,Frank and to you Dr.R for keeping us so well informed about your invention,
    i for one, await with baited breath,on your demonstration of the new power plant that will free the world of the disease of pollution. your name will go down in history and people will remember your name through the ages, i know the gift was God given, and you were just his conduit , but you alone knew how to build and refine it to the standards that he demands,
    And i personally thank you from the bottom of my being, for being such a good worker.–C.R.

  • clovis ray

    HIi guys
    Thank you,Frank and to you Dr.R for keeping us so well informed about your invention,
    i for one, await with baited breath,on your demonstration of the new power plant that will free the world of the disease of pollution. your name will go down in history and people will remember your name through the ages, i know the gift was God given, and you were just his conduit , but you alone knew how to build and refine it to the standards that he demands,
    And i personally thank you from the bottom of my being, for being such a good worker.–C.R.