A new energy source from nuclear fusion

ScienceRocks

Democrat all the way!
Mar 16, 2010
59,455
6,793
1,900
The Good insane United states of America
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Rossi-Focardi_paper.pdf

Abstract
A process (international patent publication N. WO 2009/125444 A1)
capable of producing large amounts of energy by a nuclear fusion process
between nickel and hydrogen, occurring below 1000 K, is described. Ex-
perimental values of the ratios between output and input energies obtained
in a certain number of experiments are reported. The occurrence of the
e¤ect is justi…ed on the basis of existing experimental and theoretical re-
sults. Measurements performed during the experiments allow to exclude
neutron and gamma rays emissions.

1. Introduction
It is well known that in chemical reactions, and more speci…cally in processes
used to obtain energy, as for example oil, gas and carbon combustion, only some
electronVolts (eV) can be obtained for every couple of atoms involved. This
depends on the fact that binding energies of external atomic electrons are in the
eV range.
On the other hand, in nuclear transformations, the energy quantities that
can be absorbed or released are of the order of mega-electronVolts (MeV) for
every couple of nuclei involved in the process. As a consequence, for every given
amount of energy obtained, the mass to be transformed by a nuclear process is
about a millionth of that necessary for a combustion.
It is a general rule, valid for all stable compounds, that the mass for a
compound is lower than the total mass of all constituents. In such conditions, the
mass-energy conservation principle guarantees stability against the spontaneous
disintegration into the components. As a consequence, for the nuclei, the mass
of every stable nucleus turns out to be lower than the sum of the masses of all
its components (protons and neutrons).
he sum of the masses of all
its components (protons and neutrons).
If we denote by mp and mn the mass values of free protons and neutrons, and
by np and nn the numbers of protons and neutrons belonging to a given (stable)
nucleus N, the nuclear stability is insured by the always positive di¤erence
= npmp + nnmn �� mN

Figure 1: Binding Energy versus number of nucleons
where mN represents the nucleus mass.
An important parameter, whose value is directly connected to the nuclear
stability, is the binding energy for a nucleon B [1], de…ned as the ratio between
 and the mass number, that is the total nucleon number np+ nn:
B =

np + nn
. (2)
Fig.1 shows, for all stable nuclei, the binding energy B (express
 
Last edited:
"The application does not meet the requirements of Article 5 PCT as the description does not disclose in a manner sufficiently clear the invention. ... there is no explicit evidence of energy production in the description or Figures..."
 
Take a look at the link I provided in post #2 above.

Once there, click on the "Documents" tab.
Then open the PDF "Written Opinion of the International Search Authority"

Quote: "The application does not meet the requirements of Article 5 PCT as the description does not disclose in a manner sufficiently clear the invention. ... there is no explicit evidence of energy production in the description or Figures..."
 
Someone is trying to patent nuclear fusion before it exists?

I got a patent on the sun. Gonna start charging everyone for sunlight soon.
 
go under resoures on the side of right side and it is the third one down.
Journal of Nuclear Physics

You and I are referencing the same patent.

So help me out here. One of the "related documents" on file with the International Bureau of the World Intelllectual Property Organization contains the following (my abbreviated) statement:

The application does not meet the requirements of Article 5 PCT as the description does not disclose in a manner sufficiently clear the invention. ... there is no explicit evidence of energy production in the description or Figures..."

Here's the link to the document:

http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/docservicepdf_pct/id00000011868762

I didn't scour the entire document files, but maybe you're more familiar with the subject.

If the very patenting body casts such doubt on the process as to make such an attached statement a part of the application, how are we to give it much credence?
 
go under resources on the side of right side and it is the third one down.
Journal of Nuclear Physics

You and I are referencing the same patent.

So help me out here. One of the "related documents" on file with the International Bureau of the World Intelllectual Property Organization contains the following (my abbreviated) statement:

The application does not meet the requirements of Article 5 PCT as the description does not disclose in a manner sufficiently clear the invention. ... there is no explicit evidence of energy production in the description or Figures..."

Here's the link to the document:

http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/docservicepdf_pct/id00000011868762

I didn't scour the entire document files, but maybe you're more familiar with the subject.

If the very patenting body casts such doubt on the process as to make such an attached statement a part of the application, how are we to give it much credence?

He would have to tell them the secret element that makes it run. Rossi is a man that wants to keep everything close to his chest as he got fucked over pretty badly within Italy...He is gun shy.
 
Cold fusion: turning point or bluff

». "We should be starting soon, in a few weeks - Campari tells Henry, professor of experimental physics and the scientific research with Giuseppe Levi - in summer you could have the first scientific report of the results obtained disclose to scientific journals."
Google Translate

This is very good news!
 
go under resources on the side of right side and it is the third one down.
Journal of Nuclear Physics

You and I are referencing the same patent.

So help me out here. One of the "related documents" on file with the International Bureau of the World Intelllectual Property Organization contains the following (my abbreviated) statement:

The application does not meet the requirements of Article 5 PCT as the description does not disclose in a manner sufficiently clear the invention. ... there is no explicit evidence of energy production in the description or Figures..."

Here's the link to the document:

http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/docservicepdf_pct/id00000011868762

I didn't scour the entire document files, but maybe you're more familiar with the subject.

If the very patenting body casts such doubt on the process as to make such an attached statement a part of the application, how are we to give it much credence?

He would have to tell them the secret element that makes it run. Rossi is a man that wants to keep everything close to his chest as he got fucked over pretty badly within Italy...He is gun shy.

I unnerstand. Here's hoping it comes to fruition.
 
Andrea Rossi’s reply to Brian Josephson
Dear Professor Josephson,
I do understand your concerns, but as I already explained, I am not going to give any other demonstration of the E-Cat because at this point it wouldn’t make any sense: we already got industrial manufacturing underway and the E-Cat is a ready product for the market. Our customers will buy a working device; if it didn’t work, they wouldn’t buy it. Besides, I’m in such a busy and demanding stage that, even if I wanted, I wouldn’t have the time to arrange any test.

Please allow me to underline that professor Celani is not just a scientist, but a competitor too. This is one of the reasons I cannot accept his offer. The market plays by different rules than the academic world, and even if I realize that a scientist needs to know and understand the theory, I need to protect my invention, if not I could lose my job. Please try to understand my point, I don’t mean to disregard the scientific needs. I would like to remind everyone that we are working on that too: in my letter to professor Celani, I explained that the university of Bologna is about to start a complete work of research on the E-Cat; not to mention that the positive feedback from a 30 years experienced customer should drive all doubts away.

A question seems to be legitimate here.
Why are you suggesting me to take Francesco Celani’s offer? Don’t you think that a complete study from a university is precisely what is needed, with regard to the theoretical and engineering develop? Don’t you think that, with regard to the scientific praxis and credits, it would be more appropriate to rely on the university than on an individual researcher?

In summary, I don’t intend to give any other dimostrative test: the last one has been the one of Oct, 6th. We are selling plants to customers who run their own tests and decide whether to buy the E-Cat or not relying on their results: they don’t mind what’s inside the reactor. Meanwhile, the university of Bologna will take scrupulous care of the scientific work. If the DECC, or any other public or private organization, has taken an interest in this technology, I suggest them to get in touch and discuss any possible business agreement with me.

Thank you for your support and your balance in pointing out to me such important and sensitive questions.
Best regards
Andrea Rossi

| Rossi’s Cold Fusion 2.0 - Independent eCat News
 
http://e-catsite.com/2011/10/22/dr-george-miley-replicates-patterson-names-rossi/#comment-280

slide21.jpg


slide27.jpg


slide29.jpg


slide48.jpg



http://www.usmessageboard.com/energy/193579-report-on-a-conversation-with-george-miley.html
 
Last edited:
Andrea Rossi’s reply to Brian Josephson
Dear Professor Josephson,
I do understand your concerns, but as I already explained, I am not going to give any other demonstration of the E-Cat because at this point it wouldn’t make any sense: we already got industrial manufacturing underway and the E-Cat is a ready product for the market. Our customers will buy a working device; if it didn’t work, they wouldn’t buy it. Besides, I’m in such a busy and demanding stage that, even if I wanted, I wouldn’t have the time to arrange any test.

Please allow me to underline that professor Celani is not just a scientist, but a competitor too. This is one of the reasons I cannot accept his offer. The market plays by different rules than the academic world, and even if I realize that a scientist needs to know and understand the theory, I need to protect my invention, if not I could lose my job. Please try to understand my point, I don’t mean to disregard the scientific needs. I would like to remind everyone that we are working on that too: in my letter to professor Celani, I explained that the university of Bologna is about to start a complete work of research on the E-Cat; not to mention that the positive feedback from a 30 years experienced customer should drive all doubts away.

A question seems to be legitimate here.
Why are you suggesting me to take Francesco Celani’s offer? Don’t you think that a complete study from a university is precisely what is needed, with regard to the theoretical and engineering develop? Don’t you think that, with regard to the scientific praxis and credits, it would be more appropriate to rely on the university than on an individual researcher?

In summary, I don’t intend to give any other dimostrative test: the last one has been the one of Oct, 6th. We are selling plants to customers who run their own tests and decide whether to buy the E-Cat or not relying on their results: they don’t mind what’s inside the reactor. Meanwhile, the university of Bologna will take scrupulous care of the scientific work. If the DECC, or any other public or private organization, has taken an interest in this technology, I suggest them to get in touch and discuss any possible business agreement with me.

Thank you for your support and your balance in pointing out to me such important and sensitive questions.
Best regards
Andrea Rossi

| Rossi’s Cold Fusion 2.0 - Independent eCat News

So, why can't this Joesphson guy simply wait until the "customers" purchase a unit and then go and watch the magic happen. Are the customers going to be just as secretive?
 
Think about it. What's the hurry? The more customers who buy this gizmo, the more exposure to the market. Word of mouth is the best and cheapest marketing tool.

The more I read into this product, the more horse shit I smell.

That scam I am, I do not like that scam I am. I do not like him here or there- I do not like him anywhere.
 
Andrea Rossi
November 28th, 2011 at 1:15 AM

Dear Hank Mills (regarding the answer to RH):
I am very sorry, but I must say I do not agree on the fact that further public tests could have any importance, the puppett-snakes would increase the attacks ( they are paid for this from the puppetteers) and the Customers would be disturbed from the exposition. The real duty now is to make good working plants. Nevertheless I have deep respect for your intellectual honesty, I know you want to help us; I just do not agree. New public tests could only make me lose time just to replicate the usual clownery rising with the usual aggression, whatever we do; by the way: if they think that this technology does not work, I wonder: why are they so aggressive against it? If it doesn’t work, it will die by itself; for example: there are around many wannabe competitors I know perfectly have nothing working really: did you ever see any comment of mine regarding their work? Did you ever read an attack from me to a competitor regarding the fiascos of their stuff? (and believe me: I know everything of everybody).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
 
Theres one thing that would prove it to me…
Here is how it would go
1# Set up the e-cat
2# Run power through e-cat
3# Once ready for sustain mode-- allow it to go into sustain mode!
4# Once electric system is ready(steam to electric) unplug the plug from the power outlet.
5# Plug the power "generated by the steam" into the fans, coolent system and what ever that needs to be working. Now you have a loop. No power in or out, no way!
6# Get a web cam, turn it on and make a web page on your offical site called e-cat t.v.
7# Run it for 6 months straight for the world to see!

All that would be attached is the water hose, but the power supply would loop back into its self.
THIS WOULD CONVINCE ME and likely make every last scienctist on gods earth crap there selfs. Me, I’d be convinced within a week.
 

Forum List

Back
Top