Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

· Home
· Forum
· Special Sections
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 58 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

  • (June 9, 2021 - June 11, 2021) ICCF-23 online

  • Hot Links

    American Antigravity

    AESOP Institute

    Closeminded Science



    Integrity Research Institute

    New Energy Movement

    New Energy Times

    The Orion Proj.




    Science Hobbyist

    Tom Bearden's Page


    Want to Know

    Other Info-Sources
    NE News Sites
    Alternative Energy News
    E-Cat World
    NexusNewsfeed ZPE
    FringeEnergy News
    NE Discussion Groups
    Energetic Forum
    Energy21 YT Channel
    Energy Science Forum
    Free_Energy FB Group
    The KeelyNet Blog
    Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
    Vortex (old Interact)
    Magazine Sites
    Electrifying Times (FB)
    ExtraOrdinary Technology
    IE Magazine
    New Energy Times

    Interesting Links

    Click Here for the DISCLOSURE PROJECT
    SciTech Daily Review
    NEXUS Magazine
    Find Jobs

    Focardi and Rossi LENR (Cold Fusion) Demo today
    Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2011 @ 14:04:35 MST by vlad

    Devices Jan 14, 2011, from NextBigFuture.com: I had reported that the Focardi and Rossi demo would be on Jan 15th (based on an online notice) that was the online press conference and that will happen tomorrow. Today there was the italian press conference.

    UPDATE - The online "press conference" was question and answer in a comment thread, but it had some more technical answers.

    Full article here: http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/01/focardi-and-rossi-lenr-cold-fusion-demo.html

    [Vlad] Check the comments on these articles and the Journal of Nuclear Physics site as well (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360). Here is an interesting dialog:

    froarty: I would agree they don't have the correct theory and that the energy SOURCE is not nuclear - But - I believe they are unknowingly extracting energy from an interaction of a synthetic skeletal catalyst with different bond states of hydrogen along the lines of Moller's MAHG, Lyne's Furnace or Mill's BLP reactor. No one has totally nailed the theory yet (Jan Naudts may be real close with relativistic hydrogen) but it doesn't matter, if they have learned to reliably reproduce the energy at this level, the race for low hanging IP will ensue.

    Goat Guy: The fall-back position, isn't it? Well, it doesn't really have a nuclear signature, so, hmmm... yeah, that's it... its probably related to the work by Mills 'n' Dunderhead(s) AKABlacklight Power, etc Little hydrino fairies that everyone in physics somehow missed (except Mills, Moller, Naudts...) that using nothing more intriguing than a bottle of powdered metals and a magic wand, create kilowatts of thermal heat. (For how long? - never for days, that's for sure!)

    The same goes for the whole hydrino thing. Hell, I'm not even seriously "taking on the proof", just noodling on the backs of napkins with my trusty spreadsheet calcs.

    BLP and its derivatives have exactly the same "problem" - they bear the burden-of-proof in either 'fessing to having none of the byproducts expected from their theory, or, having an abundance of easily quantifiable data that supports their contention. It is a matter (per another of my posts) of scale. You simply cannot produce kilowatts of heat - even for periods as short as "minutes" - and not have macroscopically observable changes in reactant density, consumed hydrogen, and if nuclear in nature, all sorts of alarmingly nasty radioactive byproducts. No significant radiation == no nuclear signature. In the case of BLP, either the magic pixie powder gains weight (bonding to hydrogen), which can be weighed - and reversed by applying high heat (which then isn't very magic at all, but clearly just good old hydrogen surface adsorption) - or there is the presence of a stunning new form of hydrogen (the hydrinos) that necessarily exhibit all sorts of OMG, wow! behavior.

    NOTHING can be subtle about "new physics", goats - and still get away with producing kilowatts of thermal signature. It is upon this fulcrum that I balance the claims versus the results. Hard radiation ("peg the needle"), copious byproducts, milligram-to-kilogram changes of mass, intense UV, X-rays, ... but not "oooh, we think we might have seen an increase in neutrons but our detector was having calibration issues; we're buying new, more sensitive equipment."

    : Above Goat Guy says [snip] NOTHING can be subtle about "new physics", goats - and still get away with producing kilowatts of thermal signature. [/snip]

    The "heat" itself doesn't have to come from new physics - it is far more likely the conditions are making a normal reaction an endless reaction - it is the conditions that are subtle. When you dismiss chemical reactions you do so because h1 falls to h2 only once under normal conditions and cannot do so again until you supply energy to disassociate it. I am saying mother nature can also supply this energy when gas law forces h2 to migrate betwen different casimir geometry which is a form of super catalytic action based on supression of vacuum energy density. changes in energy density are associated with time dilation due to equivalent acceleration in a gravity well accumulating over time. the abrupt changes and negative acceleration due to supression inside a cavity would suggest a relativistic interpretation of catalytic action that would greatly multiply the number of chemical reactions occuring inside the cavity from our perspective outside the cavity to , as you put it, "still get away with producing kilowatts of thermal signature".
    The only premise needed would be an opposition to changes in Casimir geometry by h2 vs little or no opposition by h1. I think the lack of gamma radiation and shortage of nuclear ash point to a relativisticly powered oscillation between h1 and h2 where thermal energy is rectified from HUP using gas atom bonding states. I think gas law can discount disassociation requirements when h2 opposes changes in energy density inside a cavity to a thermal runaway point where more energy is released upon association then is required to disassociate.

    Andrea Rossi: January 16th, 2011 at 4:01 PM

    Dear Mr William :
    1- I am the inventor of the method and the apparatus.
    2- You are asking to me to give away for free technology and know how. It is impossible, for obvious reasons.
    3- We have passed already the phase to convince somebody. We are arrived to a product that is ready for the market. Our judge is the market.
    In this field the phase of the competition in the field of theories, hypothesis, conjectures etc etc is over. The competition is in the market. If somebody has a valid technology, he has not to convince people by chattering, he has to make a reactor that work and go to sell it, as we are doing.
    You are not convinced? It is not my problem. My problem is make my reactors work. I think that the reason for which I arrived to a working reactor is that I bellieved in my work, therefore, instead of chattering and play the big genius with mental masturbations, spent all my money, without help and financing from anywhere, to make thousands of reactors that didn’t work, until I made the right one, following my theories that may be are wrong, but in any case gave me the result I wanted.
    If somebody is convinced he has a good idea, he has not to convince anybody by chattering, he has to make something that works and sell it to a Customer who decides to buy because can see a product which works. If a Customer wants not my product no problem, I go to another, without chattering or giving away free technology.
    What I made is not a “Holy Graal”, as you ironically say, is just a product. My Customers know it works, this is why they bought it,that’s enough for me. We are investing to make thousands of reactors and is totally irrilevant for us if somebody or manybodies make negative chatterings about our work.
    To ask us to give away as a gift our technology, in which I invested my life, to convince somebody or morebodies that my reactors work is contrary to the foundamental rules of the economy.
    To convince the World of our product we have just to sell products which work well, not to chatter. If somebody is convinced to have invented something better or equal to our product, he has not to chatter, he has to make a product better or equal to ours and sell it.
    Thank you for your useful inquiry,

    Warm Regards,
    Andrea Rossi



    Security Code: Security Code
    Type Security Code

    Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

    Related Links
    · More about Devices
    · News by vlad

    Most read story about Devices:
    Overunity magnet motor released !

    Article Rating
    Average Score: 5
    Votes: 1

    Please take a second and vote for this article:

    Very Good


     Printer Friendly Printer Friendly

    "Focardi and Rossi LENR (Cold Fusion) Demo today" | Login/Create an Account | 10 comments | Search Discussion
    The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

    No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

    Rossi Discovery What to Say? (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Monday, January 17, 2011 @ 22:48:40 MST
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
    Critical comment posted by Steven Krivit in his New Energy Times Blog:
    http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/15/rossi-discovery-what-to-say/ [blog.newenergytimes.com]

    Please read the comments as well. Her is my respected friend, Dr. Peter Gluck's comment and Steve's reply:

    Peter Gluck: Dear Steve,

    This time, I disagree with your approach- the main subject, the essence, the core of the thing is that this event was a first official demonstration of commercial LENR. I have no doubts regarding the validity of the results, mainly on the basis of the results obtained by Prof. Francesco Piantelli- and this was a kind of continuation, variant, etc. of the Piantelli system. It works- and I have waited almost 22 years for that.

    The fact that Rossi is not a Lancelot is interesting, some of his sins could actually be technical failures- they happen to the best of us is not the most relevant issue. Have these character flaws- if proved, some influence on the efficiency of the generators?

    Best wishes,


    Steven Krivit: Dear Peter,

    I treasure your optimism and enthusiasm, it is worth its weight in gold. In my years of following this topic, I have learned to become cautious. There are two crucial things I have learned, above all others: 1) Trust the scientific process. 2) Do not trust claims of promoters unless independently verified.

    As far as your assertion of the “first official demonstration of commercial LENR,” I think your enthusiasm has overtaken your memory. Let’s not forget the Patterson Power Cell. Or Russ George’ [www.newenergytimes.com]s 1 kiloWatt fusion powered heater. Or Innovative Energy Solutions Inc. [www.newenergytimes.com]

    Your optimism is essential, as is a demand for scientific rigor and independent validation.

    Best regards,

    Focardi and Rossi LENR (Cold Fusion) Independent Tests (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Thursday, January 20, 2011 @ 20:57:03 MST
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
    Via Directory:Andrea A. Rossi Cold Fusion Generator at PESWiki [peswiki.com]:

    Independent Testing

    According to a Rossi-Focardy paper [www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com] (p. 4 of 9), similar results have been obtained in the factory of EON in Bondeno (Ferrara, Italy) in a test performed with ENEL [www.enel.com] spa on June, 25th 2009; as well as in tests made in Bedford, New Hampshire (USA) in a lab of LTI [www.lti-global.com] with the presence of the U.S. Department of Energy (November 19 2009) and of the U.S. Department of Defense (November 20 2009).

    Some related research [www.newenergytimes.com] was published by New Energy Times in 2004. And even earlier in November 1998 at LENR-CANR.org [www.lenr-canr.org] In March of 1995 came a report [babelfish.yahoo.com] titled "Italian cold fusion succeeded", stated that a 40-watt battery had been operated for four months continuous. So these guys have been at this for a long time.


    In addition to WO/2009/125444, they have another patent filed. Once the second patent is awarded, then the information about how they achieve their results will become public knowledge. Meanwhile, they are keeping that information proprietary.

    Abstract A method and apparatus for carrying out highly efficient exothermal reaction between nickel and hydrogen atoms in a tube, preferably, though not necessary, a metal tube filled by a nickel powder and heated to a high temperature, preferably, though not necessary, from 150 to 5000C are herein disclosed. In the inventive apparatus, hydrogen is injected into the metal tube containing a highly pressurized nickel powder having a pressure, preferably though not necessarily, from 2 to 20 bars.

    Cold Fusion Steams Ahead at World's Oldest University (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Tuesday, March 08, 2011 @ 21:03:00 MST
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
    Progress accelerates as a year long study of Andrea Rossi's Nickel-Hydrogen Cold Fusion technology (energy catalyzer) at the University of Bologna is announced. The birthplace of higher education has become the developmental womb for a game changing technology!

    by Hank Mills with Italian translation editing help from Sepp Hasslberger
    Pure Energy Systems News

    The saga of Andrea Rossi's Nickel-Hydrogen Cold Fusion technology is only accelerating and not slowing down. Physicists are warming up to the technology, new calorimeter tests are forthcoming, media announcements are on the way, and a year long testing program at the University of Bologna has started. With a demonstration of the one megawatt system in the USA in the works (before it is shipped to Europe) and the opening of the one megawatt plant in Greece by late this October things are only going to keep moving faster...

    Full article: http://pesn.com/2011/03/07/9501782_Cold_Fusion_Steams_Ahead_at_Worlds_Oldest_University/ [pesn.com]

    Re: Focardi and Rossi LENR (Cold Fusion) Demo today (Score: 1)
    by ChrisCooper on Monday, January 31, 2011 @ 17:20:58 MST
    (User Info | Send a Message)
    What do you mean "NOTHING can be subtle about "new physics", goats". This [www.bbc.co.uk] is nonsense.

    Rossi LENR tested with at least 15 kilowatts of heat continuously for 18 hours (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Wednesday, February 23, 2011 @ 21:40:36 MST
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
    Recently a technical test of Andrea Rossi's Ni-H reactor (energy catalyzer) was conducted in which a minimum of 15 kW of heat was produced continuously for 18 hours, observed by Dr. Joseph Levi and others...

    Full article: http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/02/ossi-low-energy-nuclear-reactions.html [nextbigfuture.com]

    Cold Fusion: It May Not Be Madness (Score: 1)
    by vlad on Thursday, February 24, 2011 @ 20:59:52 MST
    (User Info | Send a Message) http://www.zpenergy.com
    By Mike Martin/ TechNewsWorld / 02/22/11 5:00 AM PT

    A handful of intrepid scientists are reigniting interest in work that was dismissed as junk science more than 20 years ago, claiming to have found a way to create more energy from less. The most recent excitement was generated by Italians Sergio Focardi and Andrea Rossi, who demonstrated a device that turned 400 watts of heat power into 12,400 watts. If their results are reproducible, the implications could be monumental.

    Full article: http://www.technewsworld.com/story/Cold-Fusion-It-May-Not-Be-Madness-71916.html [www.technewsworld.com]


    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
    Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.