Rossi: E-Cat QX Has ‘Zero’ Resistance (Update: ‘Not a Superconductor’)

There has been a lot of discussion here recently about the resistance of the E-Cat QuarkX, and Andrea Rossi had said that he considered the matter of the electrical resistance of the E-Cat QX to be confidential information.

Today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics, however, Rossi gave a direct answer to a question on the subject:

Prof
August 10, 2017 at 4:21 AM
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
Which is the internal resistance of the Ecat QX?
Cheers
Prof

Andrea Rossi
August 10, 2017 at 2:33 PM
Prof:
Zero.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

If this really is the case, then the E-Cat QX would be a superconductor — making it even more remarkable than “just” being an energy catalyzer/energy multiplier.

On a related note, when asked for a general update, Rossi today responded:

Andrea Rossi
August 10, 2017 at 2:32 PM
JPR:
We are strongly reducing the energy consumption of the control panel.
Pretty good standing.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

I hope that these developments can be verified somehow when Rossi makes the QX presentation, but I am not sure that we can count on that, based on what he has said so far regarding what to expect from the demonstration.

UPDATE: I posted this question on the JONP and got a reply.

Frank Acland
August 10, 2017 at 5:21 PM
Dear Andrea,

Based on your comment to Prof about the resistance of the E-Cat QX, would it be accurate to say that the E-Cat QX is a superconductor?

Andrea Rossi
August 10, 2017 at 6:40 PM
Frank Acland:
No.
Superconductivity is a completely different thing.
Obviously my “zero” was not absolute, it was jargon for good conductor ( otherwise I wouldn’t write it in letters). I just wanted to say that it is a good conductor, like copper, so that its resistance ( that cannot be R = 0 ) does not affect the circuit.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • Thomas Baccei

    I am sorry but Rossi is just simply hilarious. I suppose if you are building a pipe dream, it can have any features you can imagine. This is the sum of all dreams, super-conducting, anti-gravity free energy. I’ll bet it also reads minds and time travels ! I’ll have a red one, please.

    • Chris Marshalk

      He should also build a coffee machine into the QuarkX, now that’ll sell. 😉

      • Ophelia Rump

        Cappuccino or don’t even bother.

    • Observer

      Show me something that does not travel through time.

  • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

    That is indeed hard to believe. According to our current understanding of physics that would make it a superconductor at *extremely* high temperatures. Far, far beyond anything ever achieved in laboratories.

    If true it really shows something extraordinary goes on, but you know what they say about extraordinary…

    • LarryJ

      In an earlier posting Rossi compared the resistance of the QX with that of silver. Perhaps when he says zero he is not actually saying that it super conducts but simply that its resistance, for practical purposes, is vanishingly small.

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        Possible, but confusing if true.

        In science you want to be precise and saying it has no resistance when it turns out you meant very low resistance is introducing confusion.

        Still it would be more acceptable if very low resistance is what he means instead of superconductivity at what, 1200C?

      • Eyedoc

        Bingo !

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        Seems like you have the right interpretation.

        Just not 100% happy that Rossi needs interpretation again and again, though I’m not sure I could do better in his situation as my native language is not English either.

        Still think the man has something and might turn out to be a real genius. However I’m more cautious than a couple of years ago.

    • The dude who runs the superconductors.org website says that there have already been high-temperature superconductors created…but I don’t know if they are that high-temperature…

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        From wikipedia: “In 2015, hydrogen sulfide (H2S) under extremely high pressure (around 150 gigapascals) was found to undergo superconducting transition near 203 K (-70 °C), the highest temperature superconductor known to date.[8][9][10]”

        Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-temperature_superconductivity

        It’s wikipedia, but still from -70C to 1200C is quite an advancement to put it mildly…

        • The dude who runs the website that I mentioned, in my last post, claims that mainstream scientists are ignoring some advancements that have pushed superconductor technology up way higher than that – like 100 degrees Celsius, I think. You’ll have to check his website for the exact numbers and claims that he is making.

    • DocSiders

      I’m weary of Sagan’s “extraordinary proof” nonsense. Under the umbrella of science, an extraordinary claim requires only “proof”…nothing extraordinary is required. In fact, the less extraordinary the better!

      Acceptance of an extraordinary claim is politically difficult, but a reproducible experiment is a reproducible experiment. P & F never got the “reproducible” part “polished up” well enough…so here we are !

      A simple proof with some verifiable predictions is generally helpful…AR (if he has a COP>10 device) could INEXPENSIVELY build a closed loop Sterling engine system driving a visible load for a long time…a long enough time so that “before and after” isotopic analysis of the ash is not in doubt. Two big birds…one relatively inexpensive little stone.

      • Zeddicus Zul Zorander

        Oh man, I’m totally with you about Sagan’s extraordinary thing. To be honest that phrase is used far too much for too many a mundane thing.

        It was more of a joke with myself than it was to make a point to others. Not my best example.

        My point was more that something extraordinary was going on if he really has superconductivity at +1200C degrees.

        I retract the implied extraordinary proof thingy 😉

  • GiveADogABone

    I am thinking AC power theory.

    Z=R+jX coupled with the ‘S’ type curve of a hydrogen filled gas discharge tube. The QX could well have inductance and capacitance that affects the AC component of the current but not the DC.
    X=wL- 1/wC
    The problem then becomes identifiying the Z=0 which implies R=X=0 when the current varies from i1 to i2.

    Is this just saying that the AC generated by the QX is at its resonant frequency? https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b7c9254277a98a1f8f0363a681e48ca2999e9ba22ca100f8de51b0cf0cd12201.png

    • Ted Rygas

      I agree with you. The quark QX is resonating, but i think that the resonance is FORCED on the Quark by an external resonating circuit consisting of a capacitance and a coil. I posted a schematic illustrating the circuits on another thread of ecat world, showing that the DC current is “chopped” and synchronized with the resonating main circuit. The near-zero resistance is known in plasma lamps, such as Xenon stroboscopic lamps.

      • GiveADogABone

        Websearch ‘negative differential resistance oscillator’
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance
        ‘Examples of devices with negative differential resistance are … and gas discharge tubes …. ‘

        I really like the dynamic graphic alongside :-
        ‘In a passive negative differential resistance, … only the AC component of the current flows in the reverse direction. The static resistance is positive[6][9][21] so the current flows from positive to negative:’

        For me, this Wikipedia page explains what the QX does. The QX, powered by LENR, is both a DC power absorber and an AC power generator with the AC frequency probably in the several MHz range.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          The Wiki article demonstrates that there is nothing ‚mysterious’ about NR. Maybe AR thinks it is a unique feature of his QX, and that’s why he hesitates to be more specific.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    Ah yes, my April 1st 2013 “rossion”. https://coldfusionnow.org/interview-with-dr-edmund-storms-on-lenr-theory/

    An exciton that would be formed from a hydride and a hole.

    H(-) + (+) > H(-)(+) a rossion

    https://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photos/uncategorized/2007/09/24/q1_silver_anthracite_rear1.jpg

    • Alan DeAngelis

      PS

      A Bose gas of rossions:

      4 H(-)(+) > 4[H(-)(+)] (Bose gas) > Helium-4 + 2 e+
      (beta plus decay)

      3 H(-)(+) > 3[H(-)(+)] (Bose gas) > Lithium-6 + 3 e+ (beta plus decays)

      62 H(-)(+) > 62[H(-)(+)] (Bose gas) > Nickel-62 + 34 e+ (beta plus decays)

  • Steve Swatman

    Its fair to say that Mr Rossi’s use of “zero” in this case was not in fact misleading or incorrect, he has stated before that the QX has minimal resistance like silver or copper, so if it is less that 0.99 it is fair to zero, Negligible would probably be better, but hey, English is not his first language and the forum isnt really a purely scientific forum.

    • Chapman

      Unfortunately, this forum has EXACTLY the right mix of technical knowledge and unrestrained imagination such that stating ZERO RESISTANCE actually DOES mean exactly that, and kicks off a frenzy of “superconducting” nonsense.

      While it is true that WE should be mature enough to think like adults, and dismiss the idea, and interpret the intent accordingly, the blame must also be shared by Rossi. He NEEDS to stop saying silly things like that. He is out there working in what we would agree is a field that requires just a wee bit of precision, accuracy, and attention to detail, and yet he can not seem to form coherent sentences to adequately convey his thinking??? I think not.

      • Gerard McEk

        Yes, AR should have said ‘very low’. Probably he has not been able to measure the real resistance, because that is very difficult for very low resistance circuits. At the same time you have to admit that he has never mentioned ‘super conductive’. I have done that, based on his not so conclusive replies on JONP, so you should give him some credit, especially because he has corrected it quite soon after his ‘zero’ comment.

        • Chapman

          You are always right, Gerard. Do not worry. I am not bashing him over it. Simply wishing he would be more precise. The LAST thing a scientific researcher like him needs is more reasons for folks to doubt and dismiss him. I may not believe he has any moral obligation to submit papers for peer review before proceeding, but I sure wish he would start polishing up his communications skills as though he was PREPARING to… It would save a lot of headaches.

          • GiveADogABone

            I believe POTUS has a ex-communications director who could help. You know the number to ring but a tweet might work better.

          • Chapman

            I wonder if Sean has any technical training…

            Or Mooch could help him with language. But some of the sensitive readers may be shocked by the colorful and creative descriptions of how the QX self-regulates!!!

  • Chapman

    Here we go again…

    He puts out a statement, and then repeats it and confirms it over and over, then suddenly says “well, what I meant was”…

    Rossi, My FRIEND!
    Please!!!
    Just STOP saying things bassackward and upside down!
    It just gets everyone worked up when you appear to be claiming superconductivity (which was clearly BS, and we had established that fact back when he published), and then sends your detractors into a tizzy when you backpedal.
    Hire a publicist, and a proofreader. The hokey and confusing italian-translation cryptic jargon has exceeded it’s “adorable” factor. Enough already.

    It is well past time to start speaking precisely and accurately. Stop with the nonsense. It is getting on EVERYONE’S nerves.

    • Mylan

      I’m not a big fan of Rossi, but in this case I must say, people simply read too much into it. Personally I interpreted the zero as more or less zero, it was clearly about the whole power measurement thing. For this it is enough if it is nearly zero. Though I’m still afraid the demo won’t show the COP conclusively.

      • US_Citizen71

        I would wait and see before jumping to any conclusions! I would find it very hard to believe that Rossi or someone that works for him doesn’t read the comments here and elsewhere. If he does visit here it would be hard for him to miss the want for a clear easily understandable ‘power in’ measurement. I think his recent comment about making the controller more efficient is evidence that he does pay attention. If he can build a one off controller for his bundle that allows for a COP >1 when the power in measured from the battery, my bet is that is what we will see in the demonstration.

      • Vinney

        People are trying to get Rossi to release some ‘gems’ of his invention.
        I am happy with the demo how it is, the control system is a ‘work in progress’, and anyway it appears he is making ready for a power consumption measurement of the control system for a determined period of time of the demo, enabling a calculation of total COP.
        The period of time of this continual measurement could be in excess of an hour, but not during start-up or shutdown (confidentiality reasons) periods.

      • Bernie Koppenhofer

        Right, a skeptic feeding frenzy.

      • Chapman

        Without a doubt. At less than 5% in comparison to R1 (1 ohm) it disappears into the background noise and is lost in the tolerance factors of the circuit as a whole. Pretty simple concept. But I guess there is as much a tendency to see superconductors under every bed as there is to see those nefarious BEC’s…

        It is funny though, You are specifically NOT a big Rossi fan, while I eat my Rice Crispies from an official Leonardo Corp. Breakfast Bowl and named my hamster “Andrea”, and yet we both still come to the identical conclusion. That proves that the underlying analysis is not based on any BIAS, but just a simple application of an ounce of intellect.

    • Omega Z

      Hey Chapman,

      Rossi actually indicated that the resistance was so low as to be nearly negligible like maybe a week or so ago. But the “zero” was confusing had one not read his earlier post. It is hard to keep up with. Skip a couple days and you have a lot of catching up to do.

      Actually, it seems the only time anything interesting happens is when “I” am to busy to visit ECW for a few days. Like, The case has been settled. Wait what? What’d I miss? How did that happen? One starts to get paranoid about missing a day…

      • Chapman

        HA!!!

        But in THIS case you did not miss anything. Rossi really did make it clear early on that it was “inconsequential”, which fit with the functions of the bias/driver/swamping resistor.

        But after a couple of days we were back on the superconducting trip.

        I am as lost as you are on the issue, because it appears Rossi threw out a few ill-chosen replies on his site in which he appeared to double down on the ZERO thing. Then suddenly sees where everyone is getting confused and he posted a retraction/clarification. Thats is why I expressed my exasperation. Credibility wise, it was a self inflicted wound. A pointless distraction.

        The QX is a fantastic device just as it is. It does not need to be hyped with: superconducting,
        hover,
        remotely detonate IEDs,
        cure cancer,
        feed the starving using urban waste,
        lower the CO2 levels,
        or teleport one’s underwear two feet to the left.

        But I guess some avenues of speculation are simply more FUN than just another run-of-the-mill Cold Fusion Low Energy Nuclear Reaction device that works over unity and uses only commonly available fuel elements and device materials…

        On the OTHER hand, THAT’S WHAT YOU GET FOR MISSING A DAY!!!

        • Omega Z

          “or teleport one’s underwear two feet to the left.”

          OK, That’s reason enough to stop this line of R&D!!!

          I think Rossi sometimes just gets tired if the same question ad nauseam and throws something out there. I’ve seen on JONP in the past where people ask the same question everyday for a week or 2. It’s like read a few posts before posting.

          Reminds me of my kids when they were little. Can we go to, can we go to. After a while you just say- NO, It burnt down and you can never ever ever go there again. Leaves them wide eyed and in shock. 🙂

        • Rene
      • Vinney

        No! You miss very little, the majority of commentators here go off on a ‘tangent’ at the slightest opportunity.
        Your comments seem to rein a lot of them in.
        Most have the tone of envious disbelief.
        Left to their own devices, the world would be headed towards pending doom in 2 or 3 days, if a forced disclosure of Rossi’s secret is not enacted, or worse, they’d claim the atmosphere would be set on fire by the E-cat.
        I hope Rossi doesn’t take the comments here too seriously.

  • GiveADogABone

    Four hours from ‘zero’ to correction!
    It was fun to be there but I hope this does not happen at the demo.

    Back to where we were. Another QX puzzle:
    The QX is stated to reach 2636K.
    Melting point of Nickel 1455C = 1728K

    The Nickel electrodes do not appear to be cooled, so how does that work?

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.05249.pdf
    The circuit of the apparatus consists of a power source supplying direct current, a 1-Ohm resistor load, and a reactor containing two nickel rods with LiAlH4 separated by 1.5 cm of space.

    The temperature of the surface of the reactor ( a perfect black body ) was calculated with Wien’s equation: 2900/λ (micron) = 2900/1.1 = 2636 K

    • US_Citizen71

      “The Nickel electrodes do not appear to be cooled, so how does that work?” – Of course the electrodes are cooled, it is via conductive heat transfer down the power wires. Rossi has even complained about the heat causing the control to overheat and breakdown.

      • Omega Z

        The heat source would be the plasma. You just need to keep the heat from building up in the electrodes. My gas stove produces enough heat to melt aluminum, but the burner cap diffusers are aluminum and do not melt.

        • GiveADogABone

          I guess what I was wondering was, “Where is the LENR reaction taking place?” Is it where accelerated charged particles impact the electrodes or is it in the middle space and hence LENR occurs purely in the plasma at the right spot with charged and neutral particles impacting each other. Also arcs have a tendency to magnetostriction so avoiding the walls of the cylinder.

          • Stephen

            Could it be that LENR is generating the ions and free electrons as a fast cool plasma that is later thermalized in a dense 1, 2 or a few atmospheres environment?

          • US_Citizen71

            That is close to what I have been guessing myself. My working idea is the nickel ionizes the hydrogen and then due to a combination of the high temperature of the plasma and acceleration due to the current the ionized hydrogen impacts lithium vapor atoms with enough combined force to fuse. So it is essentially Walton and Cockcroft’s experiment but heat does most of the accelerating of the atoms involved. I wish I knew enough about plasma physics to judge my hypothesis.

          • Omega Z

            To speculate, my best description would be- from the overall size of the QX, that it would be a very small very bright pin point of plasma between the electrodes. And correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe plasma resistance is very small, nearly negligible at that scale as Rossi has indicated.

            I think one of the issues many of us have is our brains tend to gravitate to the familiar myself included and obviously this isn’t familiar turf. An example would be those familiar with electronics need to remember that plasma doesn’t always react the same as electronics.

          • GiveADogABone

            Websearch ‘negative differential resistance space charge’
            e.g. https://arxiv.org/pdf/0708….
            Some explanation of the plasma physics involved.

          • US_Citizen71

            Link doesn’t work.

      • Stephen

        If we consider a bulb such as a halogen torch bulb or small plasma lamp the heat source is extremely small and hot but since the heat is radiative it is already significantly cooler at distances of cm on the surface of the lamp. It would still be very hot but much lower than at the heat source. So I wonder if maybe if the “electrodes” are sufficiently distant from the small hot heat source such as a thermalized plasma so that they are still cool enough not to melt and retain their critical properties (such as an ability to adsorb Hydrogen) I wonder is cm or so distant is sufficient.

    • cashmemorz

      In real use there could be heat removal coils with fluid, surrounding the nickel reactor tube, moving inside the coils fast enough to remove the excess heat to keep the nickel just below melting point. In the supplied photo of the setup it could be just in demo mode without full power and therefore no cooling coils to keep temperature the below melting point of the nickel.

      • GiveADogABone

        It is certainly possible to cool the electrodes and looking on the web at xenon arc devices like cinema projectors and searchlights, electrode cooling is part of the package. It is also worth noting that the 2636K that Rossi quotes from an experiment is the black body surface temperature, so the peak plasma temperature would have been hotter again, much hotter is it was almost a point source.

  • Optimist

    I haven’t followed all the comments on this but what if this is control input is simply a coil for creating a strong magnetic field in the device. Low DC resistance but not zero. Series resistance for constant current creation at a fixed voltage. Control box to regulate the dc voltage and possibly shoot higher current spikes for some purpose. Would make sence.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    At least, he has stated that the input is plain DC. But…what if the plasma were not continuous, so that the reactor itself ‘chops’ the input? Obviously, that would complicate things, even if there was no impedance issue.

    • GiveADogABone

      Hit the bullseye with that one. The fireball core potential can rise above the anode potential, according to references.

  • Frank Acland

    Frank Acland
    August 11, 2017 at 3:33 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    You mentioned that you were working on reducing the power consumption of the control system.

    At the upcoming demonstration, would it be possible to measure and reveal the power consumption of the control system in a way that does not reveal any data that you want to keep confidential?

    Andrea Rossi
    August 11, 2017 at 4:23 PM
    Frank Acland:
    We’ll see what we can do.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Dr. Mike

      It would be great to be able to see the power consumed by the control system, even if it is not yet optimized. The present system COP can be calculated and perhaps Rossi would also provide an estimate of how much more efficient the control system might be made with further development.

    • Gerard McEk

      I maintain hoping that next to measuring the direct input power into the reactor, also the mains side of the controller will be measured. Obviously if that gives a COP just over 1, LENR will be proven by it and the measurement is so much more credible! I hope Andrea realizes that.

  • doug marker

    Frank – sorry to cut in here, just sent you an ECW email of an article just released by BLP. Am posting here to be sure you see the article sent to you. There is no dramatic information, just a progress report from them.

    My article sent to you just now, is an extraction of the main part of their update and reformatted to be easy to read.

    Cheers Doug Marker

    https://brilliantlightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/presentations/August-2017-Briefing-Presentation.pdf

    • Frank Acland

      Thanks, Doug — got it!

  • Chapman

    (pssst… I was actually making MORE of an observation regarding the fact that many of US around HERE refuse to use our own brains for what God intended and read between the lines. We keep going off half-cocked every time Rossi says something like that, even though we all KNOW how he speaks. It was evident from the beginning he was not talking about superconductivity, and we had long conversations regarding the threshold at which the reactor resistance is simply swamped out and becomes inconsequential in terms of first or second approximations of the circuit’s function. It was a wonderful discussion and I thought it established the circuit parameters fairly clearly. Next thing I know folks are going on about superconductivity again… amazing. Anyway, My only critique of Rossi was that he knows he has a good number of marginally unstable followers, and I wish he would just take a moment to maintain a little precision in his statements. It would certainly improve his scientific gravatas if he were to tighten up his scientific terminologies and vernacular. But this is just between you and I. I would not want anyone else hearing me criticize their over-exuberant tendancy to “go nuts” and get pissyy with me, so just burn this after reading…)

    • Omega Z

      “marginally unstable followers”

      HEY, You better take that back before I go all psychopathic on your …..
      🙂

  • sam

    Frank Acland
    August 11, 2017 at 3:33 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    You mentioned that you were working on reducing the power consumption of the control system.

    At the upcoming demonstration, would it be possible to measure and reveal the power consumption of the control system in a way that does not reveal any data that you want to keep confidential?

    Many thanks,

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi
    August 11, 2017 at 4:23 PM
    Frank Acland:
    We’ll see what we can do.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • GiveADogABone

    Are the positive ions at the centre of the CSCC the location of LENR?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IjgZGhHrYY
    Jerry Lee Lewis – Great Balls of Fire

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/0708.4066.pdf
    On the “mystery” of differential negative resistance (DNR)
    CSCC – complex space charge configuration
    DL – electrical double layer

    The aim of the present paper is to show that the S-shaped DNR is related to a first level of self-organization, the final product of which is a stable (static) complex space charge configuration (CSCC). The stability of CSCC is ensured by an electrical double layer (DL) at its boundary.
    The sensitive dependence on the current of the emergence and deaggregation of the stable CSCC attributes to the gaseous conductor, in which such a self-organization structure appears, the quality of an S-shaped NDR.
    This is a steady state of the CSCC during which the DL from its border sustains and controls a rhythmic exchange of matter and energy between the complexity and the surrounding environment.
    This reveals that the system “locked” in a state for which the power required to maintain it is ensured by a minimal “effort” from the external dc power supply. This minimal value of the power extracted from the dc power supply is related to the emergence of the stable CSCC acting as a new source of charged particles.
    [ The QX plasma makes its own ions, as well as heat, light and AC electricity! No surprise then that the external DC supply is minimal? ]

    http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/19/047/19047997.pdf
    Ball lightning as a self-organization phenomenon

    http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/p015008.pdf
    Electronic circuits during oscillations of an anode double layer

    https://archive.org/stream/DTIC_ADP015008/DTIC_ADP015008_djvu.txt

    http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP_2013032116323955.pdf
    Negative conductance oscillations are stimulated by the fireball.
    In the plasma diode, the external constraint is the electric field sustained by the dc power source.

  • Axil Axil

    Superconductivity is just as or maybe even more controversial than LENR is. Who could imagine that a material could become superconducting at room temperature let alone at 3000K. But there are indicators in LENR experiments that point to superconductors partially forming at room temperature and even at higher temperatures.

    For example, the electrical resistance of Celini’s wire goes down when its temperature rises. Also hydrogen loaded palladium becomes a room temperature superconductor when the hydrogen loading is high.

    One of the factors that can be causing this drop in electrical resistance is the formation of islands of superconductivity that form in the lattice or the plasma that is producing the LENR effect.

    Electrons could be jumping from island to island in their trip across the lattice. When the electron is moving past the LENR Island on its boundary, it gets a free ride but the resistance returns in its trip between islands.

    Ultra-dense hydrogen has been found to be a room temperature superconductor and produces the messier effect. Highly loaded palladium could contain a high number of Ultra-dense hydrogen islands of superconductivity in its lattice.

    Rossi’s plasma could contain a high number of LENR reaction generating superconducting nanowires (Ken Shoulders called them EVOs) that let electrons travel on them with no resistance.

    I believe that Rossi adds vanadium oxide to his fuel mix as LENR reaction booster. This additive vaporizes at 3000K. In this way, this additive produces vanadium nanowires at 3000K when the vanadium condenses like rain drops in a cloud; the electric current jumps from nanowire to nanowire as they get a free ride across the plasma thereby reducing the electrical resistant to near zero.

    This negation in electrical resistant produced by a hot research topic is sciences these days called non-equilibrium Bose-Einstein condensates, a state of matter produced in polaritons. The vanadium nanoparticles like most other transition metal nanowires carry polaritons on their surface.

    See how quantum mechanics can generate this Bose condensate that can form at 3000K here.

    http://nanophotonics.spiedigitallibrary.org/data/journals/nanop/929631/jnp_8_1_083899_f004.png

    https://arxiv.org/abs/1509.05264

  • sam

    Andrea Rossi
    August 13, 2017 at 3:41 AM
    It’s 4.40 A.M. here in the laboratory, and we are working on the E-Cat QX because of some problems, resolved.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • CWatters

      Anyone know who “we” are? Rossi and ????

      • GiveADogABone

        His ‘wonderful team’?

  • GiveADogABone

    Am I looking at two photos of the same thing?

    http://www.physics.ucla.edu/plasma-exp/references/publications/IEEE/IEEETrans-36-1000-2008.pdf
    Fig 1(f) Fireball in hydrogen in a dipole magnetic field

    http://e-catworld.com/2016/06/14/report-on-preliminary-findings-from-e-cat-quarkx-testing-posted-on-ecat-com/
    DESCRIPTION OF THE QUARK X:
    Extremely interesting is the blue light, the analysis of which has resolved theoretical problems related to the roots of the effect.
    NOTE: THE PHOTO HAS BEEN MANIPULATED TO FORBID HIGH DEFINITION. The colors have been partially obscured.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7e2c78c707fe7cf439f5c28f5745213e83218747b1299c2533bea37d236b5cee.jpg

  • Axil Axil

    It has

    See

    coldfusionnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/SC-LENR.pdf

  • Mylan

    DT
    August 17, 2017 at 2:49 AM
    Dr Andrea Rossi
    You cannot disclose the voltage across the Ecat QX because there lies the core of your industrial secret, correct?
    From Russia, with love
    DT

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    August 17, 2017 at 8:25 AM
    DT:
    Right.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    That makes no sense. If the resistance is nearly zero, as Rossi states, then there is no voltage to measure across the E-Cat.

  • SD

    Unfortunately not knowing the voltage across the QX makes it that we don’t know the input power.

    Rossi could find an alternative way to measure input power but he chose not to.

    I’m concerned that he will have the same setup for the October test and that it will therefore be inconclusive.

  • Albert D. Kallal

    All Rossi is saying that the wires don’t really have any resistance. I mean, when you use a volt meter, you don’t count the wires from the meter – you zero it out. A rather simple statement by Rossi that causing all kinds of speculation. In effect he saying the resistance is a non issue in this context.

  • sam

    Matt
    August 23, 2017 at 9:48 AM
    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Do you think that the control system you made is now reliable, after your last troubles?
    Cheers
    Matt

    Andrea Rossi
    August 23, 2017 at 10:36 AM
    Matt:
    We are continuing to improve through our experiments. I am very satisfied on the control system as it is working and allowing us dramatic improvement of the efficiency.
    Nonetheless, allow me to say we are still in an R&D phase, albeit in the making of a great progress.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

    Frank Acland
    August 23, 2017 at 3:35 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    Do the improvements you have made lately mean that you are getting greater efficiency with the E-Cat QX than was reported in the paper you co-authored with Carl-Oscar Gullstroem?

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi
    August 23, 2017 at 3:40 PM
    Frank Acland:
    No: we are improving the reliability of the E-Cat QX by means of a very sophysticated control system.
    Warm Regards
    A.R.

  • sam

    Ugo
    August 24, 2017 at 5:12 PM
    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    How is gone the important test of the control system of today?
    Cheers,
    Ugo

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    August 24, 2017 at 5:23 PM
    Ugo:
    Very, very well.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • sam

    JPR
    August 28, 2017 at 6:36 AM
    Update?

    Andrea Rossi
    August 28, 2017 at 7:24 AM
    JPR:
    We are continuing to work very well. Now the control system is final.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.