Rossi Describes Experimental Protocols for Theory Testing

Andrea Rossi has made the following comment in response to questions about the experiments they plan to do test his theoretical hypotheses.

Andrea Rossi
December 30, 2017 at 9:03 AM

Vince and Yuri:
We are going to make dipole and quadrupole measurements of currents deflections.
For the H/Li ion current we need a magnetic field of circa 0.1 T
To achieve a measurable electromagnetic field we will sorround the plasma with a quadrupole magnet with an angle of 67 degrees with the oscillating the field between 695 and 710 MHz and then measure if an opposite magnetic dipole field gets induced on the z- axis of the quadrupole.
The numbers come from cos30 degrees times hyperfine splitting of 7L1 S2 level and cos60 degrees times the H 1420 MHz line, combined with the spin-speed tilt of the assumed spin of the positive ions and the spin tilt interaction due to the 3 quark structure of the nucleon and the Sigma meson.
From an experimental point of view it will be also good to measure a variety of quadrupole field parameters, both for static and dynamic QM ( quadrupole measurements ), wherein dynamic means adjustable electromagnets around the E-Cat QX to generate a field and static means neodym magnets.
Basic instrumentation:
Oscilloscope
IR thermometers
Thermostats
Adjustable frame able to allow assembly modifications
Dynamometer
Neodymium magnets
Heat insulators
Customized Electromagnets
Signal Generator 0.1-20 MHz
Spectrometer
E-Cat QX
Heat exchanger
Control Box

Warm Regards,
A.R.

One thing that jumps out here is Rossi’s description of a “H/Li ion current” which I have not heard Rossi describe before — I wonder if this is his description of the plasma. Maybe Rossi will update us with some results at some point.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    Here we have again the 21 cm hydrogen line, which has been mentioned on this blog some time ago. It is produced by ‘flipping’ the electron spin of hydrogen atoms in ground state ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_line ). Maybe AR/Gullström see the possibility of a resonance since the given frequencies for hydrogen and 7Li/1s2 (1420 vs. 1390 MHz) are not too far apart from each other. It is, however, not clear to me how such a process could trigger a nuclear reaction.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Proton 21(.1) Lab

      • Andreas Moraitis

        In case that you mean this group http://proton-21.com.ua/index_en.html , I do not think that there is a connection, regardless of the name. Note that photon frequencies of about 1 GHz correspond to just a few millielectronvolts.

        BTW the presented results (detection of very high and/or or unknown mass numbers) would fit rather a ‘neochemical’ than a nuclear process, IMHO.

        • Andreas Moraitis

          Should read “microelectronvolts”.

  • Gerard McEk

    This seems a very complex thing to build. They can measure the ion (both H and Li) currents with it and probably also the sigma meson current. I would expect that it disturbs the plasma. Would the QX still work when this measurement is done?
    I still wonder if Andrea has done Mass Spectrometry on the ash and electrodes of the QX to see if transmutation and fusion has taken place after a while of operation.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    I don’t understand.

  • A. Rossi should focus to commercialization of his technology – not science, which he apparently isn’t expert with. It just resembles me the recent shift of Randell Mills to “basic science” experiments with exploding wires – but why if he has already an expensive SunCell reactor working in continuous regime?

    • John Koskela

      I hope Dottore Rossi lets engineers do the engineering so he is able to continue with invention and discovery, it is sad to see him following the legacy of Mills.

  • Dr. Mike

    It’s not clear to me exactly how the measurements that Rossi is proposing is going help support his LENR theory. It would have been more meaningful it he would have explained the expected results from the measurements and how these results would be consistent with his theory. Does anyone understand what he is trying to prove with his proposed experiment?
    Although most followers of Rossi’s e-cat development probably assumed that the fuel for the QX device was similar to the hot-cat, this is the first of Rossi’s statements that I remember as specifying that QX device contains Li. What I don’t understand is that if the QX device reaction chamber is really only 0.8cm diameter by 6mm in length, where is there enough room for the fuel that is capable of producing 20W for 1 year?

    • Frank

      Good question…but to me it is also unclear why he is spending time (again) with new research, instead setting up a company that will operate robotic manufacturing lines for mass production of his device to flood the market. This should be more than a full-time job…and he finally has to deliver after all his promises, don‘t you think?

      • Gerard McEk

        I assume the Gullström does this type of work. I do not think that Andrea is experienced in this at all, so I hope Andrea leads the industriazation.
        I have no idea what Gullström wands to do with this setup and how he wants to prove the theory. Maybe they want to detect antimatter as well?
        Would Andrea have progressed with the controller and the automatic production of QuarkX’s and Qclusters would be far more relevant to ask.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          I have tried to read Gullström’s papers and slides, but thus far I understand almost nothing of them. When reading those, I get a feeling that the number of open questions increases with each new sentence.

      • Rene

        My guess is that he is, again, not really ready. That on/off period used during the QX demo is remarkably similar to the cyclic on/off (albeit longer duration) cycles he has used in the older e-cats. To me it suggests he has similar runaway reaction issues. I get the impression he is trying to commercialize a product by running it in a quasi-linear zone, that he believes to have demonstrated that works long enough to be useful (perhaps that’s his 5 sigma stuff). But running it there does not generate much excess energy if at all (again not verified by any independent party).

        Now he is likely in a show me the theory situation, perhaps with his commercialization partner. Having to make a product out of thousands of reaction zones, whether individual fragile tubes or a set of reaction zones milled into an integrated substrate is messy and fault ridden. The push would be to reduce the reaction zones and that requires higher power out per reactor. That may be where things go pop as before – back to where he started. History repeats itself because he’s not learned from the past. He has no viable theory to help deal with the instability issues.

        Dr. Mike, both older e-cats and hot cats were postulated and hinted to have Li. A few years ago in this forum, people discussed how the mouse and cat analogy Rossi kept referring to was perhaps a Li + p and Ni + n reflex reaction (sorry, cannot find the reference here).

  • HS61AF91

    I get the feeling the Doctore was assisted in composing this, but that’s OK with me. Feels like a coordinated answer. Looking to a new year of new energy sources saving many lives in this world. Get them factories up and running!

  • roseland67

    I would like him to describe in detail his measurement protocols.

  • sam

    Frank Acland
    December 31, 2017 at 4:00 AM
    Dear Andrea,

    Can you explain why, with your push to get E-Cat commercial production started in 2018, you now are focusing on testing your theoretical understanding of the technology? Doesn’t this take time away from the commercialization goal?

    Thank you, and Happy 2018!

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi

    December 31, 2017 at 9:23 AM

    Frank Acland:
    The theoretical work is not stealing time from the efferts finelized to the massive industrialization, because I am working on it with Carl Oscar Gullstrom, who is not engaged in the technological development. The laboratory for the theoretical research is independent from the industrial development, even if its results will affect, if any, the industrial production.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.
    P.S.
    Happy New Year to all the Readers of Ecatworld!

    • Gerard McEk

      That’s what I assumed below. CA Gullström is doing this theoretical work and does also the testing to verify the theory.

    • Dr. Mike

      Frank,
      Another good question asked by you! I think that Rossi’s poor explanation of the proposed experiments is a combination of his lack of understanding of just what Gullstrom is trying to accomplish and his translation of that explanation into English. However, it seems fairly obvious why Rossi has some spare time right now in that he probably does not have much expertise in most of the key tasks that need to be completed to advance commercialization efforts, such as, designing the components of the robotic equipment needed to manufacture the QX devices, re-designing the controller to make it more efficient and insure it can drive at least 100 QX devices, designing an initial module that contains 100-1000 QX devices that will serve as the basic component of an initial product(s), and eventually designing the robotic equipment needed to build the modules.
      Some of the tasks which Rossi should be working on now include:
      1. Acquiring the expertise needed to accomplish the tasks listed above.
      2. Investigating failure modes and failure mechanisms in QX devices.
      3. Running experiments to determine the minimum device spacing needed in modules (this could be determined by computer simulation with the right personnel to do the job).
      4. Determine what manufacturing tolerances are required for the robotic equipment to make reliable QX devices and to make QX devices that are consistent enough to be operated in parallel by a controller.
      5. Determine the best initial product or products. (I’m not sure that Rossi has anyone on his team to do the marketing evaluation needed to accomplish this task).

  • Alan DeAngelis
  • sam

    Eric Ashworth
    January 31, 2018 at 6:12 PM
    Dear Andrea, Further to my previous explanation that I believe incomplete due to an exclusion of Lithium I shall now attempt to complete it. Also I think I should mention that I believe Hydrogen in the periodic table is in the wrong position. It is a unique pure neutral withers zero point of gravity, central to its proton, providing its proton with an absolute maximum size positive potential (absolute by being not off centre) and its negative with an absolute maximum volume negative potential. This provides the Hydrogen atom with its superior bonding properties. In the periodic table, I believe, Hydrogen should be positioned above Nickel inline with Helium.

    Lithium is a size positive element in comparison to Nickel which can be considered as the volume negative element. T diagram the LENR process, as I see it, Draw a small circle for Lithium, leave a gap and draw a bigger circle for Nickel. Draw a series of smaller circles attached to the Lithium, these being the Hydrogen atoms, attached by there electrons which distorts the Hydrogen atom by pushing the proton off centre. Do the same for the Nickel, except these are attached by there protons which are pulled off centre by attraction and which also distorts the Hydrogen atom in an opposing direction to that of the Lithium. In the exact middle position between the Lithium and Nickel draw a small circle, this is an undistorted neutral Hydrogen atom. Then using two chains of Hydrogen atoms connect the central neutral hydrogen atom to the Nickel and Lithium by distorted atoms. One more thing is needed, I believe, to get the reaction started and this is photons. To generate the photons you need current to jump gaps between metals. Once the photons are generated by the current they are neutrals that stick to mass and acquire the charge of the particular mass, becoming charge particles (my previous explanation describes photons). The photons of the Nickel are stemless goblet shaped being negatively charged (its base facing the Nickel). The photons of the Lithium are pyramid shaped being positively charged (its apex facing the Lithium). The base of the stemless goblet and the apex of the pyramid are both of positivity but being of differing neutrals are of different charge dimensions. Thereby, to become equal in neutrality both charges travel to the middle position on there hydrogen chain where they neutralize as a potential of a photon. This activity creates an event horizon of a gravity value at some point around the central undistorted Hydrogen atom causing it to display a degree of kinetic energy which throws the proton into its electron cloud whereupon plasma is manufactured, creating photons that sustain the LENR process. If indeed this process is correct, or almost, there is, I believe, a back up method to demonstrate in a different way how a LENR process is produced. Your method uses gas which is highly energized. Flieshchman and Pons used a liquid which is less energized. Take the set up that Flieshchman and Pons used and activate the process in the dark for a duration of time then expose both the cathode and the anode to photons at the same time. This in theory will displace the absorbed Deuterium from the two plates simultaneously and create heat. I would suggest various durations regarding process and photon stimulation. Regards, Eric Ashworth

    Andrea Rossi
    February 1, 2018 at 12:04 AM
    Eric Ashworth:
    Thank you for your insight,
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

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