So, Does the E-Cat Work as Rossi Claims? (Poll)

There’s been a lot of information dumped into the public domain recently, mostly through the court case, but we have also had the new Rossi/Gullstroem paper published. I thought it might be interesting to put up a poll of what readers thing after all the information has come out so far.

It’s of course non-scientific, for interest and entertainment purposes only — and not to be used as evidence in court 🙂

The question is “Does the E-Cat Work as Rossi Claims?”

And by the way, this is not a poll about who you think will win the court case — simply this is about whether you think the E-Cat works as Rossi has claimed, after all you have learned so far.

Please feel free to explain your answer in the comments.

  • Guy Thomas

    I’d say it works as claimed. Blackrock wouldn’t ditch their oil interests on the back of a scam.

  • Kim G Patterson

    It works for Rossi. Yes
    Does it work for the people? No


  • Andre Blum

    The literal question “Does the E-Cat work as Rossi Claims?” is quite clearly answered with “No”, if only because of the part “as Rossi Claims”. We’ve got to know Rossi as someone who is a bit too flamboyant with his claims. The real question of course is: is there any substance to his claims that would give us a cheap, clean energy. To this, I happily answer “I don’t know”, but still leaning towards yes.

  • LindbergofSwed

    Yes, it works. Evidence is overwhelming now and have been since Lugano report. More evidence from Rossi every day. He has been honest all along actually

    • Andreas Moraitis

      Sorry Lindberg, but is exactly the Lugano report that has reduced my confidence significantly. It is almost certain that they used a wrong emissivity value for the IR camera.

      Although I think that there are probably nuclear reactions in Rossis’s reactors (not a big deal if high voltages are involved), I am still waiting for a watertight experiment that proves a COP >> 1.

      • Omega Z

        The Ferrari, Italy test was very good right down to the proper black body coating calibrated by the manufactures patch…

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Agreed. The Ferrara test was probably the best one so far. But that was not the question.

  • artefact
  • fusionrudy

    If you mean “the physics behind his ECAT” the answer is NO. If you mean “it produces excess energy” the answer is YES.

  • HS61AF91

    It’s a fluid situation, sashaying from working modes to development of newer iterations. Of course it works, and the reason it is not now on the market may pertain to more than a speculation of its validity. Like stepping on the toes of established hierarchies of profit in the energy business. Gotta kinda come in from the back door, and disrupt the ongoing narrative from an unexpected entrance.

    • attaboy

      If I read you correctly, you’re saying that he’s coming under the negative influence of the blood sucking corporate robber barons that control everything. That would make a lot of sense.

      • HS61AF91

        Yes, but rather taking into account, than coming under an influence, and we observe what’s happening.

        • georgehants

          Can I think only be one answer – don’t know.
          What is certain is that the American security madmen will have invaded R

          • kenko1


          • Observer

            The technology is needed, but millions will suffer when it does go main stream. Disruptive technologies are disruptive.

            Where would Christianity be if Christ avoided suffering?

          • Stephen

            To me it works. The evolution and eventual consistency of statements released data and theoretical understanding over the past years although not yet complete are just too subtle and developed to be otherwise. When I do the maths the ERV report only works with positive COP.

            I notice AR does not fight against or respond to those who defame him. To me he shows huge strength integrity and sincerity in his work in that he doesn’t allow these things to distract him. I think he personally finds the work on ECat much more valuable and important than responding to petty toxic defamation. This also convinces me he has something.

            Also instead of arguing his points in forums he took his case to the court of law to sort out. He knows how to schedule prioritize and delegate when that is needed. He is very smart and does everything single thing with thought out reason.

          • doug marker

            Re court of law – the upcoming trial is a jury trial that will *only* decided who met their contractual obligations and who didn’t. It will *not* decide if the eCat LENR is real or not (and that is not going to be either the Judge nor the Jury’s issue).

            If anyone is convinced the trial is about proving the science, *it won’t*.

            All that will happen from this trial is one team of lawyers will win over the jury as to their argument as to who failed to meet the contractual obligation in the original contract. However, a win for Andrea Rossi will make him wealthy and boost his position and claims greatly.

            But, if the trial looks like going in Andrea Rossi’s favour, be prepared to be told there will be an out of court settlement.

            Doug M

          • Omega Z

            I agree and have stated so before. If the trial proved anything about the reality of the E-cat, it would be pure happenstance. It’s primary purpose is to determine if the contract was breached. Also agree about an out of court settlement possibility.

            I would add that ‘SOME” Darden supporters have stated that Industrial Heat/Darden will likely not provide any or substantially less capital to other LENR ventures should they lose.

            Here’s what I see from reading whats been made available in the court documents. Darden and friends aren’t going to provide much capital for “ANY LENR R&D” Win or Lose. Rossi was their only real draw for any significant investor interest.

          • Steve D

            That’s the worst part of the trial diversion, a win by Rossi would just be an anticlimax and not provide the technical scrutiny we all want to see. Conversely, if he loses it doesn’t mean his technology is dead, but we would however have a deflated Rossi. He’d better have then some real fireworks ready to demonstrate.

          • Ophelia Rump

            Disruptive technologies are disruptive by means of displacing an old less productive paradigm with a newer more productive one. The problem with the world is not productivity. It is a failure to share the fruits of the labor with human decency.

            You would boil the goose that lays the golden eggs believing you have saved the neighborhood from the curse of prosperity.

          • Omega Z

            Part of the problem is the fruits of labor have stagnated while the population continues to grow. The problem is the people in charge no longer know how to grow the economy. Only move jobs from 1 person/country to another.

      • Sean

        Truth is, I don’t know until I see and hold it for myself. The internet states that it works. Some very intelligent physics minded persons on this board have shown ways in which it works. However since 1989 I am in a state of quandary. So with an open mind, I will wait an see. My personnel view is more research into heaver elements form and experiment with them. For instance Roger Shawyer (EM-Drive) has his invention up and running and everything about his EM Drive development is published. You can make an EM drive yourself. Even NASA has one. So why all the muss and fuss over the Ecat beats me.

        • wizkid

          F8, F9, Sigma 5 and “the creek don’t rise”.
          Even with above, need help from above – and I think he might get some …
          I voted YES.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      I think Rossi and Doble have something in common. So many iterations.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Yes, it works as claimed.
    Will ITER work as claimed?

  • Brokeeper

    I believe he has an energy device that has gone into a nuclear
    rabbit hole of understanding. There are many theories and little proof as to what is really going on among the scores of sub particle interactions.

    I don’t think a few patents will prevent others from finding alternative means to generate LENR with so many theories abound. Andrea Rossi better not delay any further from manufacturing the QX. Otherwise he will have more competition from major international companies with big clout to bring on major R&D and engineering prowess with the likes of Nissan, Airbus, Boeing, Mitsubishi, Siemens, GE, TATA, etc. The IH lawsuit will be a picnic compared to fighting against those big boys. AR might as well hang up any involvement if that happens. So get it out there Rossi.

  • R101

    I went with I don’t know option. I’d like to see another demonstration with real independent analysts, then it would tip bad into the “yes” camp.
    I do really want to believe tho.

  • Horshu

    I don’t believe the E-Cat works. My suspicion is that Rossi is trying to patent as many different LENR technologies as he can so that when someone does get everything working, he can sue them and claim he did it first. (so, by extension, I suspect one or more other reactors do work, as AFAIK none of the other ones are being run by a guy with a portfolio of fraud charges.

  • jimbo92107

    Insufficient data.

  • Gerard McEk

    I believe there is a fair chance that the plant works and gives more energy than it needs. Whether or not the data is accurate is another question. Penon’s report was poor, unfortunately.

    • fritz194

      The e-cat works – and his ideas of how it work might be the closest in the field.
      It takes some time to land such achievement – especially with “cold fusion” as example for bad science. A good example might be the ongoing paradigma change with “dark matter/energy” / MOG / MOND. It takes some time and more evidence. Science takes some time to catch up – and I expect a first “rollout/recognition” around 2020. Basically I see no product until the underlying physics are not sorted out.

  • Mike Rion


  • HS61AF91

    Tesla unfortunately had no internet to spread his influence. Dr. Rossi fortunately, does, and proceeds you could say, nice and quiet. Cautious too.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Especially that report is highly problematic. This has been explained 1000 times and even demonstrated experimentally by the MFMP. It does not mean, however, that the COP could not have been slightly greater than 1 or that all the other tests failed as well. But for me it was a serious setback. I hope that the QuarkX demonstration will be more convincing. We’ll see.

    • sam

      Heading for sigma 5.

      • I find it very illuminating that some entity is demanding 5 sigma before going public/commercializing. I don’t think that comes from Rossi since he never did before (but this is only an educated guess).

        If it is another entity then it appears to be a serious one with some technical/engineering chops and a conservative approach.

        That lends credibility.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Yes. Five sigma accuracy and Mediterranean mentality are two different worlds.

        • SD

          As a precedent, wasn’t Rossi the one to come up with the one year test? He seems to like setting up epic marathon tests.

          • The longer tests are something that one does when trying to prove reliability or prove that the fuel/reaction lasts for a certain period.

            Can’t sell reactors that are supposed to last for a year if they burn out in 8 months.

            Long tests are not a hallmark of frauds. Too much risk of exposure.

          • Omega Z

            I agree,

            If one wants to be skeptical, it’s more in line of being reliable/dependable. It can’t repeatedly break down or work some of the time. If it does, it’s more of a novelty then a usable product.

            Thus, this is why Rossi has not brought it to market. It isn’t ready.

          • Stephen

            I can understand him wanting it to be right, robust and safe before it being released. So I guess that’s part of it along with maybe being held up by being tied to NDA’s or other legal constraints for a long time.

          • SD

            LENR G: To clarify, my point is that if Rossi insisted on the 1 year test, he could very well be the one who insisted on the 5 sigma (rather than another entity)

          • Looks like we won’t know the answer to that until summer at the earliest.

          • we want LENR Fusione Fredda

            For me, it is – and has been since I first read about Dr Rossi, and afterwards reading more – a yes.

  • Steve Savage

    There are only two choices here. Rossi is a liar and a fraud or Rossi is telling the truth.

    We have some “independent” evidence which strongly supports the Rossi is telling the truth option.
    We have a lot of “spin” encouraging us to believe the liar option.

    I have followed this closely for 6 years, up and down and around and around. It can make you dizzy.

    I believed Rossi then. I remain firmly in belief of Rossi now. I have never doubted that Rossi was on to something big. I think he has been remarkably open and honest. I think he has worked collaboratively to match his experimental evidence to emerging theory. I think he has been remarkably intelligent and crafty when dealing with a variety of capitalists looking for Quick bucks and Mega money. I also believe he works as hard as he does not mostly out of greed, and not mostly for fame, but rather mostly from a set of very moral and caring values.

    For what it is worth, that is what I think !

    • Rene

      I recommend people stop forcing the “he has lenr” to a binary decision. Also consider that the question asked is if he has a working and reliable lenr device. That is, after all, what has been claimed by Rossi. There is enough evidence to support something is there albeit not highly reproducible. There is a lot of evidence (from Rossi himself) that the energy reaction is not controlled reliably. There is more evidence that the COP can range from barely over 1.0 to this newly claimed 22,000.
      Having a device that produces significant overunity but one that either fizzles or bangs once every now and then is LENR R&D and not a working product.

      • Steve Savage

        I understand what you are saying, and I don’t disagree. However, I think you may be conflating “device” with a market ready “product”. There is not enough “evidence” or “proof” to know for sure, 100% certainty is not possible given the existing situation. We don’t have a product, if we did we could say Yes I am 100% certain it is heating my house, but we don’t have it. Does that mean a device doesn’t exist? Maybe, it means it is not ready yet. A “product” must be ready for prime time… I think we are still 3 – 5 years away from a Rossi LENR product in our homes or power plants. More engineering needs to be done. However, given Lugano, given the ERV report, and given Rossi’s statements about current developments, I remain 100% convinced that Rossi is telling the truth and that is why I believe he has a working LENR device. He has made steady progress, he has provided sufficient proof (at least for me). Skeptics have done a great job trying to pick apart various aspects of the proof. I ask you, how successful has that effort been? I have read them all, some are very good, but in the final analysis they have not been able to show Rossi’s device as a fraud. It is obvious that it is not a fraud, It is obvious that Rossi tells the truth and it is clearly obvious that he does have a working LENR device, questions of reproducability and reliability aside. These questions will all be resolved as the product undergoes enhanced engineering. Rejoice, we are on the cusp of a wonderful future. 🙂

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Many good comments on page by LENR G and others. Concurring with them.

  • LT

    So, Does the E-Cat Work as Rossi Claims?

    To get an answer to the above question by reading about the ECAt gives you a lot of opinions, but much less actual data in order to get to your own conclusion.
    The most discussed document available is the Lugano report, which provides at least some data which can be verified by recalculation.
    The problem however is that the Lugano testers made several errors during the test and/or alternatively did not write down in a concise manner what they did
    (Due to reducing the length of their report ?)
    Identifying these errrors and then doing al the calculations again has given me a strong impression that the data presented is valid and that the errors I identified had only a minor impact on the power output calculations. As an example I identified the following errors made during the dummy test :

    – The fin area was not included in the radiated power calculation
    – The testers treated the rods as being single seperated tubes. However they where stacked which reduced the radiated power and convected power of the rods

    After correcting for these errors calculations show that the heating element power only differs about 1% of the radiated and convected power. Such a small difference can only be true if the measured temperatures and used emissivities where correct. Also for the actual run the calculations I did, after correcting for what I think where errors the testers made, show that everything is in line

    My personal believe thus is that the ECAT is true based on the analysis I did
    As a final note, If my calculations had shown that the ECAT does not work, I would have stated that also here, because we all want to find the truth.

  • Billy Jackson

    All of us at some point will face a gauntlet of emotions as details of behind the scenes dealings are exposed with little explanation or context. Its easy to jump to conclusions as our own bias fills the gaps in the information with theories we have conditioned ourselves to believe, that we hope are true. The problem is, we are more often wrong than right. Our ability to skew information without context is something that both sides of this debate have fallen prey to at some point.

    Elation and Disappointment are but different sides of the same coin called expectations. We invest ourselves emotionally in the outcomes of the various summaries on this board. What we must resist is allowing disappointment to progress into resentment. We are owed nothing, not even an explanation.

    Its regrettable but inevitable that this technology was going to face a fight over control and ownership at some point in its development cycle. We are talking Billions in USD. Potentially Trillions in the long run in disruption for current established markets. You can expect everything from politicians, to regulations being thrown in the path to slow the adoption or acceptance of LENR and the E-cat, due to the massive potential for loss of market share or just plain power and control.

    No technology of this level of significance has ever just quietly slipped into production. All of them have at some point faced challenges not much different than Rossi faces now.

    Its easy to see even now that long term supporters are beginning to slowly slipping into resentment with their support. Its not easy waiting. Supporting a project like this can be hard as every setback, missed deadline, or incomplete report leaves more questions than answers. Its hard to demand that skeptics be objective when we find that we ourselves are not, when faced with disappointment.

    To many have spoken in favor of Doctor Rossi for this to be a complete sham. To many reports, to many witnesses, just to much evidence has been gathered to dismiss the e-cat as just another failed inventor and his crazy dreams. We must divest ourselves of the daily emotional whiplash while remaining thoughtful enough to intelligently support, and discuss the latest findings.

    The biggest advice I can give to the readers here is to not fall prey to your own expectations. We all have huge hopes and dreams with what this technology can accomplish when we finally see the breakthrough we envisioned. The fight to change our world for the better is a worthy goal. We will have victories and losses that come with the inevitable elation of success and the disappointment of defeat sometimes in the same battle.

    Never lose your perspective and above all dare to dream!

    • Zephir

      Rossi doesn’t live in vacuum: there are many who demonstrated heat in Ni-H systems (Piantelli, Defkalion, Celani, Cravens, etc.) Even the Quark-X reactor has been anticipated with Lipinski, Minari, Me356 already – nothing is very new here with Rossi. So I’ve no reason to dismiss Rossi results en block. That doesn’t mean, I don’t consider many information noncontroversial. But I’ve no enough information for to dismiss them reliably in the same way, like accept them. The Arab’s say “Trust in Allah – but tie your camel!”

    • psi2u2

      Nice summary.

      • sam

        After going over all the Data I
        conclude 63 percent yes
        37 percent no.

    • Mike Rion

      You should post this over on LENR Forum. They really need your council over there.

    • LilyLover

      “What we must resist is allowing disappointment to progress into resentment.”
      Very well put!!
      I used to express this with excessive verbosity.
      In the context of stressed-out people about work/job situations – this sagacity is the key to pleasantness at home. Leave the office-drama out of home.

      • Mike Rion

        He’s not interested in proving it to everyone. He’s got his own agenda and it doesn’t give us much importance.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    also this is a good comment!

    • cashmemorz

      Not disruptive any more. At least one government has instituted a method
      to keep traditional energy methods being paid for with traditional
      prices and higher at least 30 more years by having us consumers paying
      for it even if there is completely free energy tomorrow. I ‘m talking
      about the Ontario, Canada Liberal Party strategy that has run up the
      bill for power by selling off large chunks of the, up till recently,
      government controlled electric power sector in Ontario. The private
      owners now have used the reasoning of augmenting the system to handle
      future increases in supply by the alternate power producer, and the
      government’s promise, in writing, to pay huge subsidized premiums covered by the users. When complained agaoinst this price was cut in half, the other half to be paid by the government. That second half to be paid off to the government over the next thirty years.

      The result of this is that, if free or low cost power is available, to say me, via a device from Leonardo Corp, that low cost energy device will, in effect, be a cost on top of what I will be forced to keep paying to the government for the next thirty years. Why would I pay for the low cost energy on top of the regular priced energy. The cost of energy to me will still be high already. So why add to that cost for the next thirty years? For altruistic or good feel reasons. No. I will have to wait till the government has decide that I have finished helping pay off the mortgage on the lowered price of traditionally priced power.

  • Omega Z

    Even Industrial heat/Tom Darden said the E-cats cost $1000’s of dollars each before Rossi developed the dog bone style reactor.

    Rossi spent Million$ of his own before the Industrial heat hookup…

    • roseland67

      Don’t know that Rossi spent a dime.
      I have heard it, but I don’t know it.
      Tesla has done everything above

  • LION

    Hi alexpassi, thanks for your honest sharing of your experience with Andrea and the e-cat and the other players.

    • bachcole

      It’s all honest criticism, unless by honest you mean being honest enough with one’s self to be able to admit to one’s self and the world that one does not know. It is a rare individual who can admit to themselves that they do not really know.

  • Dr. Mike

    “Does the E-cat work as Rossi claims?” My best guess at an answer to this question is that Rossi’s LENR devices very well may work better than anyone else’s (after all he has been working on the technology longer than anyone), but probably not as well as he claims and probably not by any theory that he has put forward in any technical paper to which his name has been attached. Rossi has demonstrated in all of his semi-published experimental work that he does not have the expertise to do proper metrology and calorimetry to get meaningful results on a COP calculation. Will the QuarkX results be different? I doubt it! Many have suggested that Rossi include a dummy reactor (no fuel) be included in his experimental demonstration of the QuarkX. While a dummy reactor is certainly a good idea, what is actually needed to prove an accurate COP calculation is an identical reactor that has an internal heater that can produce an output about the same as the functioning QuarkX (20W). If Rossi’s calorimetry shows this device produces exactly the output power that is input then we should be able to believe his calculation of the COP for the real QuarkX device, assuming metrology for measuring the input power is done well (a very simple task!).
    Rossi’s theoretical papers have no experimental results supporting the theories, so there is no reason believe that the claims of these theories are better any others.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      I once asked AR (years ago) whether he could make a dummy E-cat for companies to work with to do third party developments before the real one is out. I mean a device that has the same outer characteristics (size, output power, skin temperature), but whose heat is produced internally by a resistor instead of LENR. He answered that he has thought about it and that it might be possible, but that doing it is technically not as easy as it sounds because the temperature and the power are so high.

      • Dr. Mike

        A tungsten wire in an inert atmosphere would probably work quite well for producing 20W in the internal space of the QuarkX.

    • Leo Kaas

      To claim that Andrea Rossi is lying, perpetrating a fraud/scam,
      or worse with his E-Cat wouldn’t you also have to include Sergio Fucardi, Giuseppe Levi, Evelyn Foschi, Torbjorn Hartman, Bo Hoistad, Roland Pettersson, Lars Tegner, Hanno Essen, Fulfio Fabiani, and Fabio Penon in the deception?

      Rossi files a lawsuit to get his money, fearlessly bares all
      to public scrutiny. Another genius scam maneuver? I don’t believe a scam artist would draw out more public scrutiny if he was lying.

      I believe Sergio Fucardi. I believe the Lugano report. I believe Fulvio Fabiani when he said the plant, which he observed for a full year, worked and the E-Cat Quark developments were astounding.

      Yes, I believe Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat produces more energy than it consumes.

      • bachcole

        Good. I agree. But what about the QuarkX or whatever it is called?

      • nietsnie

        Wait… the question is not, “Does the E-Cat produce more energy than it consumes.” Rather, it’s, “Does the E-Cat Work as Rossi Claims?” A number of people have supplied evidence that they have produced slightly more energy than consumed – including Rossi at Lugano. But, Rossi claims to have produced *a lot* more energy than consumed. A whole lot more – and almost continuously for 350 days out of just over a year. That is very different.

        • Leo Kaas

          Apologies Nietsnie, you’re right. Thank you for pointing that out. Yes, I believe the E-Cat works as Rossi describes.

        • Albert D. Kallal

          I should point out that Rossi never claimed these higher cop’s. It always stated in reference to a report. So Rossi will not say his plant has a COP of 6, but ONLY that the report says a COP of 6. So Rossi ALWAYS quotes in terms of a another party – it not really lying in these cases – then is he? Rossi never says his plant has a high cop – but always states such claims in a context of some other persons report that does the claims for him.

          So one could state Rossi not lying about such claims. Rossi never says that the plant has a high cop, and HERE are reports that backup MY claim. The claims are ALWAYS made in reference to someone’s else’s testimony.


      • Andreas Moraitis

        Even the most honest persons can be wrong. That does not make them to ‘liars’. I prefer to wait until a working, reproducible Ni-H system is available before I form an opinion. For me it is irrelevant what I wish or believe – at least, when it comes to science. We might get more information soon, possibly via MFMP/me356/Suhas. So I would recommend a little more patience, and less emotion. 😉

  • doug marker

    I am not yet convinced the reaction is the same. The eCats are in sealed reactor chambers. No place for the Hydrino process to start and continue for any great time.

    But the early process in the CIHT cells ( )
    does seem to have more in common with the eCat structure.

    Axil argues that the QuarkX and the SunCell are an identical process based on energy from a plasma effect.

    The one aspect of MIlls work is that IMHO, he does have an interesting set of theories but they sure have pissed off a lot of quantum committed folk.

    See this assessment of Mills (but you probably know it already) –

    Time will tell.

    Doug M

  • Alan DeAngelis
    • Alan DeAngelis
      • Albert D. Kallal

        Well, LENR is certainly a given. I think Rossi has LENR working, but the high COP claims are not sufficiently verified. So yes for Rossi and LENR, but large questions remain in terms of high COP’s.

        I am of the view that if such high COP’s were achieved in the 1MW plant, then Rossi would have VERY little effort to have several of these plants working and would be attracting very large amounts of investments based on how “well” the 1MW plant performed. In other words the lack of additional plants in operation is a real red flag here. Any industrial customer with a brain would jump at being able to purchase such a fantastic energy device. Perhaps the legal issues are holding this back – but that’s hard to believe.

        So LENR yes, Rossi having LENR working? Yes.

        But in regards to the spectacular high COP’s, I think questions remain and this would explain the slow commercialization process of LENR in general.
        Like the kids in the mini-van commercial: Are we there yet? (don’t think so!).

        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        • bachcole

          Yes, the spectacular high COPs lost me. And I can only attribute it to either reality or age related mental decline. I suppose there are other explanations, but I can’t imagine what they would be. Like he decided to be a liar all of a sudden, or he is part of a grand scam that the oil companies are . . . . Any of those fantasies don’t work for me. Just it is true, or he has lost his marbles. (:->) No malicious intent here.

          • Jas

            The MFMP members have real lives, jobs, families. They fit their experiments around their daily life. Rossi on the other hand has the time and money and commitment to dedicate his whole existance to bringing the ecat to market. Imagine what the MFMP could do if they could run back to back experiments?
            Imagine if MFMP had the budget?

          • Pekka Janhunen

            There was a time some years ago when his COP which stubbornly resisted going over 6 was a red flag for some people. At that time also Jed Rothwell always said that he’s not interested in COP because it can be engineered to be anything.
            However, that said, I’m not aware of any facts that would directly render your concerns moot.

        • fritz194

          …if you consider the COP figures reached with hot fusion till now…. there is no excuse why companies shouldnt throw billions into LENR research.

        • Omega Z


          I don’t think the 1MW plant is ready for full production. It needs additional engineering and operations before then. This opinion is based on the deposition of Jim Murray of the Feb 16,17 2016 walk through at the termination of the test.

          As we know, Rossi had many backup reactors on hand. From Murry’s deposition, there were many a E-cat reators laid waste by the end of the GPT. Many of the backups were required.

    • LION

      Frodo, thanks for sharing your good news.

  • TVulgaris

    All of a sudden, my keyboard stopped working, so I couldn’t complete the thought (obviously, temporarily). I DO really accept his technical iteration of LENR, or whatever we wind up with as the appropriate label for this physics, but he’s made many, many claims over the years that proved bogus- but being in business myself, I understand the utmost necessity of first lying to oneself (“fake it ’til you make it”) and then convincingly to the rest of the world if you’re ever going to accomplish anything- and he believes (with, I think, ample justification) he needs to accomplish something equivalent to a national development program, all by himself.
    He has the life experience to verify the downsides of exposure to the wrong people, and not too many reasons to trust dealing with others professionally in business OR engineering, and I don’t fault him for the past years of entertainment I’ve had witnessing his saga.
    I’m going to make another batch of popcorn right now, as a matter of fact.

    • John Littlemist

      OT: I also had some issues with ECW’s Disqus. It didn’t accept any input from my keyboard for a while. I’m using Linux and Firefox.

      • Omega Z

        Do Not Be Concerned…

        That is merely the CIA software that’s integrated itself into your computer. As you know, there is vast array of software combo’s in the computer world. Sometimes integrating into certain systems, there may be minor glitches. Stand by. It will be corrected in a moment.

        For faster service and less disruptions in the future, be sure to have the latest version of Linux and Firefox installed. Thank you for your cooperation…

        • Jas

          I remember a few years ago Frank said that people who say that Lenr is not real would not be able to post anymore on Ecatworld. This is a forum for people who think it is real. The question is who has the goods? Never has Frank said that Ecatworld is a forum for only those who believe in Rossi. Yet this is what they are posting on Lenr Forum. Sorry to keep dragging them up but they are making false accusations.

          • Mike Rion

            They certainly are. I think a large part of the posters there, left after the recent purge, are paid astroturfers,

          • Andreas Moraitis

            I can ensure that I have never been ‘censored’ by Frank, although I often do post critical comments when I think they are appropriate. These comments are usually about potential problems in measurements and in the interpretation of data. I do not get a lot of votes for them, maybe because some people are not aware of the fact that experiments and the analysis of their results are prone to errors to a considerable extent. Well – no problem for me. At least, I can post here whenever and whatever I want. In contrast to that, LENR forum is for “members only”. It would be easy to show Jed R that some of his logic is built on fairly thin ice, but this is not possible without becoming a member of the club.

          • Pekka Janhunen

            I avoid forums that require logging in. Therefore I use ECW (and do so without using its login feature).

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Me, too. It is simply annoying to be forced to create an account, especially if one does not intend to post regularly at that place.

          • bachcole

            Pekka Janhunen, you have so many freaking credits with me that I don’t care if you do something weird now and then. (:->)

            I like Disqus, when it is working properly, as it gives me access to lots of old comments and often other people’s old comments. I can check to see what someone else’s general attitude is about any subject that we are discussing, etc.

          • Steve H

            It’s a “Don’t know” from me.
            Not in Rossi’s interest to tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

          • atanguy

            It should be his best interest! As many people would help him to design reactors that could be sold to the public. And even if it could not be his best interest financially in the short term (Not really sure),it will be the best interest for his family,friends,poor nations,enveronment and future generations

          • Steve H

            One day I hope all will become clear, and the technology proven and reliable. Until then I will keep an open mind.

          • Rene

            Clarification: 4. not a Galaxy *Note* 7.

        • atanguy

          He said that he is using Linux and Firefox.

          • Omega Z

            Firefox Version 5, Version 25, Version 200???

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Andrea Rossi March 28, 2017 at 5:01 PM
    Tom Conover:
    He,he,he…Yoda apart, yes, I can see in our horizon important developments related to the incoming New Fire.
    I cannot disclose yet what is maturing, but I am very optimistic ( albeit some friend of mine will think “as usual” ).
    Warm Regards, A.R.”

    • Pekka Janhunen

      Tom Con-Over, heh heh 🙂

      • LT

        The person who reported that issue stated in a later post that because of the way the PCE-830 triggers, the shown display was likely rigth after all (he showed his recalculated figures)

        And given that my calculations show that the heater element power is almost exactly the same as the radiated and convected power, then the power measurement must have been correct.

  • Mike Henderson

    I don’t know.

    Pass the popcorn.

  • Steve Savage

    I am curious as to why you don’t really believe what you wrote?

    • Omega Z

      You are merely tired of waiting.
      When will morning get here.
      It should be Christmas already.

      Waiting is hard…………..

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Perhaps these reactors could be used to hydrogenate vegetable oils without a nickel catalyst!

      • Saatana Perkele

        These things are designed for experimental hot fusion process. They can’t be used for energy production or industrial purposes (but maybe they can create some valuable components during operation, similarly to scientific fission reactors making rare isotopes).

  • HS61AF91

    Oh my! Pardon me. I was thinking about the affinity for free energy permeating Mr. Tesla and Dr. Rossi’s desires, and did not realize you referred to Tesla motors.

  • Andrew

    I think most of us here are hopefuls. I lean towards thinking Rossi has the goods based on evidence however I cannot draw a definite conclusion because all the info isn’t available. So I continue with my popcorn.

  • psi2u2

    Let’s be careful about letting those wild guesses of probabilities out of the zoo.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    It is difficult to form an opinion about the deletion of comments without having seen them. BTW, I do not agree with Frank in every respect (also regarding certain comments that he has left untouched in the past). But after all it is his blog, and so I accept his decisions.

  • nietsnie

    So, Frank, I note that the poll currently indicates 50% “Yes”, 26% “No”, and 25% “Don’t Know” – for a grand total of 101% of people with LENR interest. I still hesitate to conclude that this represents proof positive of overunity without further corroboration though. 😉

    • Rene

      Damn that round up measurement error 🙂 Is it possible to show one decimal point?
      I see it is now 49% yes, 26% no, 25% dunno.

      • nietsnie

        Just a joke. It’s my weird sense of humor… 101%? positive proof of verunity? Get it? Well…

        • Rene

          Yes, hence my skeptic measurement error accuracy humor response.

          • nietsnie

            There’s a Big Bang Theory episode in here somewhere.

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Some time ago we had a poll where you could choose between ranges of percentages. In the current poll, a “Yes” would basically mean 100% confidence, while a “No” means 0% (to simplify a bit). That is, if you are 1-99% confident you would have to choose “Don’t know”. However, the “Don’t know” fraction is the minority. That’s somewhat strange, isn’t it?

        • nietsnie

          It used to surprise me, but it doesn’t anymore.

          • cashmemorz

            Already we are getting used to LENR working. The novelty has started to wear off. Looking for the next big thing….

          • nietsnie

            Actually, I meant that it used to astonish me that so many people could be 100% sure that something so apparently unresolved was obvious. But, I’ve come to accept that some people have access to decision making capabilities that I do not. These impart to them the ability to see through non-linear data to the truth in a way that I can only imagine.

            Of course, which half will turn out to be brilliantly prescient and which half absurdly delusional is something someone like me will only know when it is actually resolved.

          • cashmemorz

            Ok, sorry for misreading you. So it is more of an about face? 180 about face, or less?

          • nietsnie

            I don’t understand. What about face?

          • cashmemorz

            At first comment above you say it won`t surprise you, seeming to imply that the workings of the e-cat are no surprise to you. Later you say you will only know when it is actually resolved.

          • nietsnie

            Ah… I see now. Easily explained. Sometimes it’s difficult to figure out which post someone responded to because the additional indentation ends sooner than the level of replies. I was the first post responder. Pekka responded to him next. And then Andreas responded to Pekka. But, the post that both Pekka and I originally responded to was:

            “Some time ago we had a poll where you could choose between ranges of percentages. In the current poll, a “Yes” would basically mean 100% confidence, while a “No” means 0% (to simplify a bit). That is, if you are 1-99% confident you would have to choose “Don’t know”. However, the “Don’t know” fraction is the minority. That’s somewhat strange, isn’t it?”

            And I replied that it used to surprise me but now it doesn’t. I meant that it also seems strange to me that so many people are dead set sure one way or the other. So – I was agreeing with him. I am in the 1-99%, “don’t know for sure”, camp – rather than either the 0% or the 100% camp.

            As a side issue, note that the pole is not about whether or not LENR is real, it’s: “Does the e-cat work as Rossi claims”?

            Later you replied with a complete non-sequitur, leading me to believe that you again misunderstood my post (which I now see is explainable). So I tried to make it more clear. But – you didn’t understand that post either (presumably, I see now, still because of the level of indentation issue).

            Considering how it reads after the fact, it’s easy to understand why you misunderstood me. But, is it clear now?

        • Pekka Janhunen

          To me, in this poll, yes/no means that “I’m at least somewhat surprised if it doesn’t/does work”, “don’t know” means that “I don’t know if I would be more surprised one way or the other”.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            I will be unsurprised if it either works or not. Otherwise, I might be surprised (tertium non datur).

  • akupaku

    Many people are putting up their percentages so here are mine:

    67.7% convinced that Rossi has something real.
    12.9% doubt that he is a conman.
    11.1% don’t know what to think.
    8.3% don’t care one way or the other.
    99.99% certain that I don’t know enough.
    100% certain I like to learn more.

    Oh my! That’s 299.99% altogether. Something must be very wrong but I can’t spot it!


  • Andy Kumar

    Never believed him! Too good to be true.

  • cashmemorz

    Joking, of course. If and/or when it gets reliably confirmed to the nth degree AND confirmed by high profile buyers saying similar, then I personally will be unjaded.

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