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.

  • Guy Thomas

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

  • attaboy

    I was an ardent follower and supporter well before that promised start date in 2011. I continued to be up until lately. But I now feel that at this 2017 point in time we should have had commercialization long before this. So I now am a doubter and put myself in the “Don’t know” category/

  • Kim G Patterson

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

    Respect
    Kim

  • Kim G Patterson

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

    Respect
    Kim

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • I think there are many signs that point to him having an over-unity technology from scientific, engineering, business and social angles.

    There’s also lots of evidence that he’s cunning, sometimes deceitful, sloppy as hell and perfectly fine with the ambiguity that surrounds his efforts.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    The only sincere answer that I can currently give is: I do not know. Hopefully, this will change in the foreseeable future. Another six years of uncertainty would be counterproductive.

  • Ophelia Rump

    You cannot make such extravagant claims about the capability of your product and not produce the product some time soon,

    Dottore Rossi is running out of highway, he must deliver product soon or fade into shadow.

    Is there a release version of the E-Cat X waiting for production or is it still a development project?

    When are we expecting this to hit market?

    • nietsnie

      I don’t know about fading into shadow. I think Steorn proved that you can milk people’s hope and good will almost indefinitely without a shred of repeatable evidence.

      Count me among those who really *want* to believe. Yet, there is so much deliberate obfuscation that I find it difficult to. There is clearly *something* wrong with this picture – but with what, and why, and how much? Those are the questions I have. It could go either way, I think. Unfortunately – nothing to do but wait for the picture to resolve and just hope against hope that it eventually does.

  • 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.

  • 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
  • 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.

  • fusionrudy

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

  • G

    No. Too many years he’s been claiming to perform miracles but he delivers nothing plus nobody else can reproduce it. So no, he might have something but not what he claims

  • 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

            agreed

          • 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.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUg_ukBwsyo

  • 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.

    • roseland67

      Like Tesla?
      Nice and quiet?

      • HS61AF91

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

        • roseland67

          HS,

          I was not referring to Nikola but to Tesla Motors, who have built and rebuilt entire auto mfg facilities, gigafactories for battery mfg, and 4 brand new batter powered vehicles from the ground up.
          Many, many thousands of employees have built and sold these vehicles and the company went from an investment value of 0$ to many billions.
          In about the same amount Rossi can’t seem to cobble together $100 worth and plumbing and electrical parts to build a working Ecat

          • 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

          • 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. Guess it’s easier to introduce a new car than to revolutionize the entire world’s ability to obtain free energy. Congrats to Tesla motors, and go get ’em, Dr. Rossi, the world is waiting for that nice and quiet revolution!

    • 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.

  • Rene

    By his own actions, Rossi has damaged good will received from others. He has made several claims that cannot be verified:
    – Old e-cats (the 2010-12 elbow ones) COP6, can run all the time – COP6 unproven, reliable, false
    – Newer warm-cats (2012-2017 aka various industrial applications) COP>6, often >50 – maybe, not proven. ERV says COP80 but murky tainted proof.
    – QuarkX COP > 20,000, run all the time (aka sigma 5) – unproven COP, measurement method controversial, sigma5 not announced.
    So, no, he does not have any e-cats that work as claimed. There is no untainted proof of such accomplishments. His stuff is vaporware until such time as he demonstrates something that can be verified independently.
    Is there a LENR effect (COP 1.xish), likely given scattered positives, but those require better reproducibility. This is why open science groups like MFMP are so important. Is there a LENR+ effect (COP 3+), nothing has been shown to date. Yes, there are a few people who have made such claims then promptly hidden any ability to verify independently, all for dubious reasons.

    • Rene

      P.S. Here’s a link to Rossi talking up the QuarkX

      https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5183-rossi-describing-the-quark-on-a-whiteboard/

      Looking at him in the photos, I am concerned about his health.

      • piet

        This is the way I see it in that picture of lenr-forum user “can”:

        There’s a 1 Ohm resistance at the bottom of circuit diagram and 0.12 V over it (DC current?), and power is V^2/R = 0.0144 W = E2

        At the top there’s a plasma thing with E1 = 25.6 (W?) based on Wien, Bolzmann etc calculations.

        COP is calculated as COP = E1/E2 = 1777.7 (=25.6/0.0144)

        Does that make any sense?

        • Rene

          It would if 1777 were equal to 22,000 (it’s not), and had Rossi not said the 1ohm was the impedance of the reactor. Too many claims and statements in conflict.

    • Chris

      What about the Lugano report? Can this seriously be dismissed out of hand?

      • 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.

    • Stanny Demesmaker

      Since when does Rossi try to convince the public that he has a working product? The best proof that we all have, is that he has no problem finding money. Even IH who claims wrongdoing doesn’t want to cancel their licence.

      • Rene

        He has tried since 2011. He’s always tried to convince people of that. He had in 2011 a campaign for tens of thousands of people to sign up for a domestic e-cat. Why? to get seed money. Then in 2012 he did the same money harvest with regional investors, etc. We all have seen what appears to be some evidence of LENR (some may say no), but nothing of the likes of a reproducible high energy effect, and certainly nothing reliable.

        • Stanny Demesmaker

          Rossi’s reactor doesn’t have to be reproducible by others, only by himself. And he did show that a lot times, especially in the first demo’s. His technology advanced over time, he wants to make a product that is very cheap to produce and very hard to compete with and he is almost there with the Quark. Everbody here can try to find some investors with a LENR reactor that doesn’t work, you won’t find anyone to invest. A low temperature LENR reactor with a COP of 6 is very easy to measure and hard to fool with.

          • Rene

            I’m happy for you, Stanny.

          • Stanny Demesmaker

            Explain me the fraud Rene, Enlighten me, the so called incompetence of the measurements is a very weak hypothesis

          • Rene

            Fraud is your word, not mine. You can review everything I have written yourself. But, seriously ask yourself: Do you see any e-cat verified independently? Now, from your comments I surmise you are a true believer, so more evidence of inadequacy is not going to change that belief. Hence, be happy. It is an interesting poll.

        • Omega Z

          The sign up for a domestic e-cat was to gauge the home market. Rossi accepted ZERO dollars from any who signed up.
          Rossi has been involved with IH/Darden since mid 2012. Even then, Darden sought Rossi out and wined and dined him…

          Realty is, LENR is hard. Harder then even Rossi likes to admit himself. He thinks he will overcome the next problem shortly, but always takes longer. Then followed by additional issues.

          • Rene

            His goal was to get seed money from investors by creating an interest and sales list. That he didn’t collect anything from people interested is understood. That is history and well documented. But, he peddled vaporware hoping to get it happening once he had the money. It’s a technique used by startups. You start with something that kinda/sorta works and you are sure that with more money you can get the kinks worked out and have a viable product. So, you put out all this wonderful and terrific talk about how it works, ask for money from investors while noting to them at how many people are out there ready to buy this terrific tech: “Here’s my list!”

            It’s now 6 years later since the domestic e-cat offer, since the industrial offerings, since the claimed robotized factories producing e-cats too cheap to copy, etc. Result? No viable product, some test devices with no permitted independent verification.

            Yes, LENR is hard. I’m glad there are groups working hard for replication. He has something, so have others. Much of it needs more eyes on it to get it to work well and reliably, to derive theories beyond the armchair ones to date. Rossi claims daily, weekly, monthly, yearly he’s got it down. Nothing to date shows he’s there. Nothing to date shows he has a working e-cat as claimed.

            I’m happy Frank asked this question as he did: “Does the E-Cat Work as Rossi Claims?” The operative word is ‘claimed’.
            Based on that question, my answer is ‘no’.

  • Miles

    He’s got a working real product and all the reports are honest and true. Yes, i believe Rossi.

    Bit then again, Why didn’t Bill Gates back his product or contribute money?? 😕 I hear of production lines for the e-cat, Where are they?

    • attaboy

      Maybe Rossi wasn’t willing to work with the shoddy Bill Gates business ethics.

    • pangoo

      Bill Gates supposedly invested money for research at Texas A & M so he’s probably looking to develop it himself 😀

  • Alan DeAngelis

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

  • Alan DeAngelis

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

    • Saatana Perkele

      Chinese tokamak EAST works as claimed, British tokamak JET works as claimed, German Wendelstein 7-x works as claimed, Japanese JT-60 works as claimed (it is under upgrade now), Korean KSTAR works as claimed, Russian T-10, T-15 work as claimed (under upgrade now), and those are just the most notable examples of HF experimental reactors – there are few dozens of them working today. Plus I didn’t mention some more exotic HF setups like magnetic mirrors (one interesting I know is located in Russian Novosibirsk).
      So why shouldn’t ITER, when it’s done, work as claimed?

  • Jerry Soloman

    brillouin energy has a working device verified and acceptable to IH then YES Rossi has a working LENR generator.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Dms

    I believe free markets are reasonably efficient and if he had working device, it would be in market after 5 years. The operative word here is working. Same is true for brillouin and others.

    Someone told me 5 years ago when I got excited about this tech and made an investment. He said we would be lucky to have it in our lifetime and I think that statement will end up being true

    We are not close yet to a working device

  • Gyor

    Yes.

  • Old_Skeptical

    He and Mr Trump have something in common. The truth is malleable. He has an effect that may or may not truly produce more usable power than is required to prepare the crucible and its parts. So many iterations over the years without a reproduced operational copy. My vote is that Mr. Rossi is convinced that he is ever so close to the magic bullet – if it just actually worked a little better!

  • FC

    Short answer: Yes.

    Longer answer: I believe that the Rossi effect is real. But, as has always been the case throughout history with any newly discovered phenomenon, “taming” such effect has proved to be a huge engineering challenge (based mostly on trial and error) due to the lack of understanding of the physics involved. Apparently, both the theoretical understanding and the experimental know-how have reached a point where the effect might finally be reproduced so reliably and with such a high COP as to easily dispel any fundamental doubts or measurement error claims.

  • 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.

  • R101

    I went with I don’t know option. I’d like to see another demonstration with real independent analysts, then it would tip me back 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.

  • 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.

  • roseland67

    LENR, probably
    Rossi, no

    • bachcole

      I have been saying for more than a year that Rossi may be suffering from age related mental decline.

      • Stanny Demesmaker

        based on what information? He always finds investors when he needs to, you can’t do that when you have nothing to show for. (Look @ Defkalion and other LENR startups)

        • bachcole

          Based upon his appearance and the fantastic claims that he is making about the quarkx and the fact that everyone gets old and many of them lose their marbles. Keep in mind, Stanny, that I said “may have lost his marbles”. I have way too little evidence to be even close to being sure.

      • roseland67

        I’ve been saying it since inception and you labeled me a skeptopath,
        Hmmmmm?

  • jimbo92107

    Insufficient data.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Mike Rion

    Yes!

  • Mike Rion

    Yes!

  • HS61AF91

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

  • Steve D

    The question is really, do you believe the ERV report?, which more or less concurred with Rossi’s own data recordings. If one is satisfied with the ERV’s work and given that some good COPs are shown, then the easy answer is YES. IH may have agreed with the choice of Penon and by extension his results (of course debatable), but that doesn’t necessarily make him the most suitable for the job and it might just demonstrate IH’s inexperience in the matter.
    Is LENR real? There are too many respectable academics and groups with their names on it to deny its reality. Has Rossi got it? Others have said before that if Rossi was a fraud he wouldn’t risk being exposed in court. His work has been duplicated by Parkhomov which adds credibility. Rossi probably has got it, but can he control it? Is it reliable? Is it reproducible? Is it market ready? I don’t know.
    The tests to date have been done in private which isn’t good enough. What’s needed is a Rossi out sight/site public test done by respected groups such as MFMP. If an E-cat ever hits the market this will almost certainly happen (and even be dismantled a la Orbocube!).

  • pangoo

    Yes it works but Rossi’s theory stuff is waffle. The underlying reaction is obviously some variant of Mill’s hydrino reaction. Just watch the video from Fresno State on youtube and read Brett Holverstott’s book.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dCzVUnnL00

    http://www.brettholverstott.com

    You can watch this 2009 video from BLP about their Raney Nickel heater if you want to connect more dots.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Bomq8S0ynQ

    • doug marker

      Pangoo,
      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 ( https://brilliantlightpower.com/ciht-cell/ )
      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) – go to the PHYSICS PROBLEM title to see the issue re QM.
      http://brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/SunCell-TrendsJournal-Winter2017-03-03.pdf

      Time will tell.

      Doug M

      • pangoo

        Hadn’t seen that article actually! Thanks for link.

        Holverstott outlined a mechanism by which the e-cat and LENR reactions could take place in his book. Successive hydrino reactions to lower levels and a particle behaving similar to a neutron as it shrinks.

        Interesting thing about the quark x is its size. Like Mitchell Schwartz nanor device shrinking source could lead to amazing developments especially withs advances in 3d printing. Could you print power? No need for power distribution then.

        Time will tell for sure!

  • georgehants

    Can, I think, only be one answer – don’t know.
    What is certain is that the American security madmen will have invaded Rossi’s space and will know all his secrets (if genuine)
    Second it seems almost inconceivable that a religious man would allow millions to suffer and die for 7 years just for obscene amounts of profit.

    • kenko1

      agreed

    • Jerry Soloman

      your Freedom of Speech depends on it George.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

        • LesioQ

          Exactly. I have a Lancia car.

      • 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.

          • Mike

            Accelerated tests is one option. I have talked to European gas boiler manufacturers. They claim that they need less than a year of an accelerated test. It includes full load, part load, on/off operation etc. Should be possible for the Ecat as well

          • 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.

          • Steve D

            This is a totally new product and yes, its got to be right, robust and safe. Nothing would be worse for the whole LENR field than a product recall, particularly one for which there is no field repair possible which may mean a total withdrawal from market for redesign.

          • 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.

  • 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. 🙂

  • 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. 🙂

    • roseland67

      He could be delusional

  • Pekka Janhunen

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

  • orsobubu

    I don’t believe really in my following contrarian hypothesis, but I like to think it’s true: yes, the e-cat works, I know it since the first times I translated in human content the subtle meanings in his sentences and mood (perhaps because I’m italian as well). Rossi thinks that prolonging his efforts in research, he’ll be able to give its maximum contribution to humanity by a technical-scientific point of view. In reality it is not so interested in money, he already has enough. He also knows the dangers that will accrue, economic instability, military applications… he graduated with a great marxist and knows the subject well. Perhaps it was also covertly induced to behave in such a way by politically influential characters. The search extension, the self-reclusione in a bunker for a year, are not justified by the thirst for money, which could be met immediately years ago entering the reactor on the market. Instead he prefers to keep everything under control, defending his creature in courts, tying the technical and theoretical aspects of the invention to his name for posterity, and wait to introduce the world to a realization that fully meets his plans. This way, he also feels psychologically more comfortable in delaying the revolutionary effects and bad undesired consequences that the e-cat adoption will have on a geopolitically instable world. Capitalism is not the right context for a thing like the e-cat, but he’s not so versed in revolutionary poiltics, so he contributes as best as he can, with revolutionary science.

    • Pekka Janhunen

      also this is a good comment!

    • Steve Savage

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

      • orsobubu

        I am referring to the part about Rossi and capitalism. On his blog, he told me many times that “he doesn’t like communism” and he remains absolutely convinced that capitalism is the best production and distribution system available today.But he studied the principal authors, he fully experienced the period of student protest in the late sixties and early 70s in metropolitan italy. Here is an excerpt of what he personally wrote to me:

        “I greatly admired Trotsky in high school, his October Revolution was one of my essential reading. In 68 I was 18 … I think I met you at a conference in Rome in 1969 (…) However, the cultural setting they gave me and those readings remained for me a fundamental pillar, albeit in a very complex building, as the architecture of the Spanish cathedrals…”

        Rossi has a really large and deep philosophical perspective point, considering he’s not a professional in the field. Surely he abhors communism and surely he admires capitalism in its pre-financial era, above all the great classic american industry captains, with whom he identifies. He’s miles away from speculating with a relatively small economic return from licensing his invention or whatever. Also, it has always affirmed that there will be no economic and social upheaval because of LENR and new technologies will integrate positively in the economy. So he absolutely is not a communist, but he understands and has a great respect of marxism, I think he innerly feels that it is the definitive real humanist philosophy of our historical age (as the Dalai Lama says). Remember that, in Europe, society in general has a very different, scientific attitude with marxism than in US, where it is mainly confused with “cultural marxism” (from wiki: “Cultural Marxism” is a snarl word used to attack anyone with progressive tendencies. The term alludes to a conspiracy theory in which sinister left-wingers have infiltrated media, academia, and science and are engaged in a decades- or centuries-long plot to undermine western culture.)

  • Pekka Janhunen

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

  • Mark D

    I have been following this saga from the beginning and was a solid supporter and believer in the ecat from the first demo. Over time the following has changed my opinion

    – Professors from Lugano report have been silent and have not come out in support of the ecat claims. Or presented their independent replication they were working on.

    – IH and their employees do not believe it works as claimed. Despite some positive tests they now claim as measurement errors.

    – MFMP have not been able to replicate the ecat results.

    – No customer stepped forward Military or not that claims it works.

    – no truly independant test or demo by a certifying agency has come forward to say it works as claimed.

    – the ecat/hotcat/tiger/quark keeps changing as do the claimed results COP

    I know this will be highly unpopular here. There is ambiguity around all my statements above. I truly hope I’m wrong and that it works as claimed but this is my current opinion.

    • 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?

  • 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.

  • 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.

    • LesioQ

      And did they ever rectify the plausible error of misconnecting the PCE-830, suspected from it’s display image taken before the test ?

      • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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 significant positive COP (even when I try to consider faulty or incorrecty placed meters)

    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 every 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. In a nutshell the contract says “I will deliver x or x+y results from a 1MW reactor over z period and when done you pay me $89M”. At the moment AR says “I delivered” but IH says, “no the results are incorrect and thus invalid”. >>The jury will agree with one or the other !.<< If, the trial lasts the full course.

      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
      PS I voted *don't know* as IMHO that is the only honest answer devoid of positive wishful thinking towards yes or the no vote which can be seen as resentment/skepticism towards Andrea Rossi.

      • 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.

  • I think it works.
    But when is its going to work for me.

  • 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!” https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/60rcdd/rossi_and_gullstr%C3%B6m_report_quarkx_lenr_experiment/df97ovj/

    • 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.

  • 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!

    • psi2u2

      Nice summary.

    • 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.

  • If Rossi had something that really works, he would have shown it.

    So far it looks to me as though LENR is real–and inconsequential.

    • Bicke Dutte

      The problem is not only scientific/technical in nature, this technology is highly disruptive

      • cashmemorz

        Not disruptive any more. This is because at least one government has instituted a method to keep traditional energy methods being paid for with traditional prices and higher for 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 ended in extremely high costs of electricity. This started by the government selling
        off large chunks of the, up till recently, government controlled electric power sector in Ontario. The private owners then used the reason of making the system more robust to handle future increases in power that is to be supplied by alternate power producers. To pay for the upgrade the private owners increased the power bills by 25%. This is on top of the huge subsidized premiums, 200% of normal power bills, paid to those alternate power producers, contracted for by an earlier governing party. This part also to be paid by the power customers. The customers complained, price ended in being cut in half, for the customers the other half to be paid by the government. That second half to be repaid by customers 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 device on top of the grid priced energy. The cost of both will be even higher if only by a little bit. What reason would anyone have for adding 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.

        So my answer is: it will make no difference to me if the e-cat is real or not. I will be paying for traditionally produced power with traditional prices for the next thirty years in any case.

        Edit:I am hoping that a future government, maybe a green party will backtrack on paying the 30 year mortgage. Or some other way to make it feasible to use LENR devices.

        Or the devices will not reach market until fully ready in that 30 year time.

        Edit #2: That LENR works is a given. What must be next of concern is, given that it will be disruptive, will the powers that be, allow it to be marketed freely.

        In the above statements I had assumed that the local government of Ontario, Canada would be forcing all Ontario residents to pay for on grid power for the next thirty years. After having discussed this point with someone I consider dependable regarding up to date current events, I have come to understand that
        only those connected to the electric power grid and paying for the electricity this way would have to pay off the power mortgage electricity for the next 30 years. This would allow anyone who has their own source of power, such as a LENR device,
        to opt for disconnecting from the grid and thereby not have to pay of the mortgage for electric power. There still could be a change in government strategy to have all pay for this mortgage if too many power customers were to opt for getting off the grid.
        Until that point is reached it would be a positive option to install a LENR device in my home and hope for the best in terms of what the provincial government may decide to do at a later time about who will have to be included in paying off the electric power mortgage.

  • Bob K

    Count me in as a ….Yes

  • 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!” https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/60rcdd/rossi_and_gullstr%C3%B6m_report_quarkx_lenr_experiment/df97ovj/

  • 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.

  • alexpassi

    Yes, it works as claimed.
    Why do I say this?
    I’ve been following this for six years. I’ve met the principal characters, seen the earlier model reactors operate in Bologna and Ferrara, and have kept generally up to date on what’s going on. I have a marked antipathy to voicing my opinions on line, so you’re not going to see me re-appearing on these premises (much as I appreciate the work done on ECW) again. But, yes, to the best of my knowledge, the e-cat works.

    • LION

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

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Trying to be short, what I consider known:
    – AR seems brilliant inventor
    – his physics theory skill looks amateur level
    – truth theory fits data: he probably has “something”
    – scam theories have extreme trouble explaining data
    What I also think:
    – AR is altruistic although plays capitalist (ref. orsobubu below)
    – business is war to him: no trouble deceiting, betraying
    – outside business he doesn’t lie, but is very sloppy
    – AR is difficult person to work with, is very stubborn
    – AR is usually right, but sometimes wrong

    – AR has trouble selecting good people, tends to fall for wondermen
    – AR works hard (and tells about it)

    – how good product he wants until marketable, we don’t know
    – how good the product is currently, we don’t know

    • bachcole

      Thanks for saving me the trouble of saying all of those things, and much more.

    • Michael W Wolf

      Now there is honest criticism. Can’t say I disagree with anything you wrote.

      • 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.

    • John Kari Koskela

      Yes, it works. But AR has to be there in person to control the temperature so it won’t get out of hand and there might be some other similar red herrings. Only he has the experience to make it work. QuarkX tries to solve these problems.

      • Pekka Janhunen

        Has to remember though that 1MW test ran 1/3 of the time without him. If the overall COP was about 100 (Penon), it must have been at least about 30 when Rossi was absent, and probably more since COP likely wasn’t infinite when Rossi held the helm.

  • NoMCA

    Yes; Rossis devices work.

  • Navdrew

    I’ve followed the e-CAT developments since the Bologna demonstration in 2011. I believe Rossi has been coyly honest in his open discussions considering all the controversy over the subsequent 1 Megawatt demo, the Lugano test and the IH investment, tests, and lawsuit. I believe his technology is real. The recent announcement by Saudi Arabia of the upcoming ARAMCO IPO and the lack of public response by DoD to the Congressional request for a briefing on LENR lend credence to my suspicion that the technology is definitely not a scam.

    • G

      Yeah but does it work as claimed by rossi? If it does, if it is mature and can be brought to the market why doesnt it? Naahhh… he has something but not what he claims.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

          R
          Albert

      • 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. 😉

  • 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.

  • doug marker

    Pangoo,
    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 ( https://brilliantlightpower.com/ciht-cell/ )
    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) –
    http://brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/SunCell-TrendsJournal-Winter2017-03-03.pdf

    Time will tell.

    Doug M

  • TVulgaris

    I’ll just bite the big one here-
    No, NOT as he’s claimed, as he’s claimed many different things, some of them contradictory

  • 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!).

        Regards,
        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

          Albert,

          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???

  • 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…

        • atanguy

          He said that he is using Linux and Firefox.

          • Omega Z

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

  • CWatters

    Has Rossi actually explained _how_ it works in sufficient detail to answer the poll question? I don’t think he has.

  • GGluek

    I believe that Rossi does (did) have a pipe that connects a shipping container to a hole in the wall. What, if anything, was in that pipe is anyone’s guess.

  • 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!).

    Regards,
    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.

      • 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.

        • bachcole

          I think that you just gave a thumbs up to my concerns, but I am not sure. (:->)

          • Omega Z

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

            Waiting is hard…………..

          • bachcole

            LOL. Or maybe Santa is so old that he forgot that it was Christmas. (:->)

    • 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

      Albert,

      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.

  • 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.

  • 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 🙂

  • Gian Luca

    After so many years of technical information and news you want not?
    Beyond the purely technical issues, after so many years it would still make sense to lie? Perhaps lying is contagious seen what are realizing Black Light Power & C.?
    Cherokee may have been wrong? I don’t think!!!
    No.
    I believe that ECAT is now a reality like SunCell and others.
    It’s easy to think that the big brake on their public statement is tied firmly to the pressure that some lobbies are able to exercise on Rossi & C.
    Rossi knows and understands that should not be repeated in 1989 as a new F & P.
    You can not go wrong …..

  • Frodo

    Yes, I know it works.
    Why can I be so sure on that?
    As many I became interested in E-cat in 2011.
    In 2012 I visited the Zurich conference, listened to the first Hot-cat presentation and decided this indeed was something to follow up further.
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/09/10/report-from-zurich-conference-attendee/
    Well home I then bought some shares in Hydrofusion in order to become as close as possible to the future development of E-cat.
    That strategy was proven a good one and I received some informative updates during the years,
    also including more that one opportunity to directly meet Rossi with convincing presentations.

    Please accept that this will be my only comment on this forum until further.
    Hopefully still it may add to increase somewhat the faith of those who like to believe.

    • LION

      Frodo, thanks for sharing your good news.

  • Mike Henderson

    I don’t know.

    Pass the popcorn.

  • 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).

  • piet

    Does the E-Cat Work as Rossi Claims?

    My estimate:

    Yes: 5% probability
    No: 95% probability

    I don’t have enough knowledge to decide one way or other, I have no need to decide one way or the other, but the consequences of “Yes” would be so significant that it makes sense for me to follow this saga even with that 5% likelihood. Probabilistic pragmatics, or whatever one might call it, that’s my life philosophy.

    I’m rooting for “Yes” and if given 50 to 1 odds I’d might put 20 euros for a possible 1000 euros win, lol.

    • bachcole

      “I don’t have enough knowledge to decide one way or other”, then it seems to me that you should have written:

      Yes: 1% probability
      I don’t know: 80% probability
      No: 19% probability

      Or something like that. But that doesn’t really work because I am 100% certain that I don’t know, but I’ll say 62% probably yes and 38% probably no. I guess there can be overlaps with uncertainty.

      • piet

        Hmmm… I don’t have enough knowledge to decide between Yes or No. But I can always make wild guesses of probabilities. Not much knowledge is needed for that. Of this, I’m 100% certain.

        • psi2u2

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

          • piet

            Guesses “from” probabilities would have been the direct translation from/outof/of the inflectional suffix of my own language to/in/into the preposition of English. I had a hunch that it isn’t right and flipped a coin between “of” and “about”.

            Sometimes you win, sometimes you loose.

      • sam

        After going over all the Data I
        conclude 63 percent yes
        37 percent no.
        I am 99 percent sure that am not
        sure but still pretty sure that A.R.
        is going to make it work.

  • Omega Z

    Here’s a thought.

    What does Rossi claim.
    He claims the Rossi effect and guaranteed COP>6.

    Most everything else has been speculations by the interweb repeated often enough to become fact. He also lets people come to their own conclusions of tests reported by others.

    What about Lugano.
    Rossi’s responds: The test speaks for itself.
    The professors speak for themselves.

    What about the Final Penon Report.
    Rossi’s responds: The Report speaks for itself.
    Rossi never says COP>50 or average COP=50 or anything else.

    “Rossi” has also never said COP=22K

    In fact, in 2011 when a COP>200 was reported in tests done by Rossi/Focardi, the COP>200 came from Focardi.

    Does the E-cat work as Rossi claims. Probably and MORE…

    It’s just not stable and reliable enough yet for market.

    • Rene

      “It’s just not stable and reliable…” indeed. That has been my suspicion to date. Something is there, meaning there is an effect, but Rossi has been unable to tame it, so it seems.

      He’s always talked about higher COPs being dangerous. Over time he went from “never greater than COP 6” (2011) to higher COPs in his warm cats. As for COP 200, Rossi did mention that of his quark, though he couched by saying 1/2 watt electrical in 100W thermal out*. Then later when his first Quarks kept popping (mini explosions), he worked his way down to 20W out and, interestingly, no direct statement of input power. I think that photo of him in front of a board full of equations is the closest to a number.

      So, perhaps his latest quark meets his claim but no one has been able to verify that. This could be so much easier if he weren’t so secretive.

      * http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/06/14/report-on-preliminary-findings-from-e-cat-quarkx-testing-posted-on-ecat-com/

      • Omega Z

        It would be easier if he was less secretive, but there are those who would steal his IP without a second thought if they could.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • SteveA

    5 years ago I was an optimistic skeptic. Now after time and not seeing an indisputable demo I’m more skeptical – or in the Poll’s vernacular, I “don’t know”. It seems that if it works the way Rossi claims it would be very easy to provide a public demo that would prove it once and for all for everyone. He should definitely be able to prove excess heat, even if the control can be temperamental at times.

    • 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.

      • G

        Funny that rossi is engaged in all that discussion with those to whom he doesnt give much importance tho

  • 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.

      • roseland67

        Andreas,

        Well my experiences, experiments and observations suggest the opposite.
        I have been “censured” by moderators on this site, not often, but often enough to see a pattern.

        Being a fervent non believer from day 1 in anything Rossi/Ecat, many of my posts have been “moderated”.

        • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • skeptik

    Personally I am not convinced ..He had too long of a time just to proof it..and he hasn’t shown nothing just anomalies and these anomalies can be explained away by statistical noise..and experimental error.
    I had my suspicions two year ago, when he mentioned about a year long test and involvement with I.H.
    Then a fallout with I.H. resulting in a long winded ongoing court case. The masses never saw that coming 🙂 (I did)…now he has the audacity to talk about a new refines fire aka quark.
    Statistically I
    I do think that this website is fantastic in bring like and unlike minded people together for debate.

  • Joe

    I agree that it does work. What I am not so sure of is whether it is ready to be sold to the general public.
    Commercial success requires
    1. Significant life span. (Think water heater and how often it gets changed)
    2. Cost. Will everything included is it cheaper than natural gas
    3. Reliability. I live in Minnesota, it CAN NOT fail in the winter.
    4. Safety. To hit the home market it can not be a galaxy 7

    • Rene

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

        R
        Albert

    • 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. 😉

  • 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.

  • interstellar hobo

    It may “work” but I don’t think it works as claims or he’d have something to show the world by now. Every person with one of these world-changing-made-privately-by-me-in-my-own-secret-lab inventions plays the same game of stringing interested parties along, waiting for that magic investor. I’d like for one of these to be legitimate while I really wait on actual fusion to become reality, but I don’t have a lot of hope in it.

  • 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).

  • 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?

          • roseland67

            Cash,
            You’re almost right.

            We are getting used to a lot of people say it is working,
            but actually working? Not so much

          • 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.

        • 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).

    • bachcole

      I actually got it. Thanks.

  • 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!

    ;o)

  • 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!

    ;o)

  • clovis ray

    Everyone knows where i stand 100% real.
    I think that most folks dont understand is when this thing hits the market this old world will change fast so get ready you want reconise this place in 10years. God help us.

  • Andy Kumar

    Never believed him! Too good to be true.

  • 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.