Dear readers, after a long pause, due mainly to my work commitments and to lack of important news, waiting for the demo, announced by Andrea Rossi and scheduled in November, I decided to write this post taking as a starting point the preprint of two works that will be published in Volume 25 of the JCMNS (Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science), having an unusual title: “Maxwell’s Equations and Occam’s Razor” and “The Electron and Occam’s Razor”. Some of the arguments presented in these two papers were briefly introduced by the same authors at the ICCF20 Conference (held in Sendai, Japan), in a poster titled “The Zitterbewegung interpretation of quantum mechanics as theoretical framework for Ultra Dense Deuterium and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions”. Not having the scientific knowledge needed to make a judgment on these theoretical physics works, I decided to ask for the collaboration of a physicist and science writer, Mario Menichella, during his summer holidays in the city where I live, Viareggio. Following his suggestion, we publish, with the help of the authors, some intriguing hypotheses presented in the above cited publications. We put it in the form of an interview, to make all more interesting and easy. I hope that what you will read could be stimulating for those who want to deepen these fascinating themes with an open mind.
Enjoy the reading!
“It is now easier to smash an atom than to break a prejudice”
A Zitterbewegung Model for Ultra-Dense Hydrogen and Low Energy Nuclear Reactions
In the two papers, the Authors suggest a “purely electromagnetic model of the electron”. What is the fundamental feature of the proposed model?
It’s the attempt to respect, as much as possible, Occam’s razor, a principle proposed by the English philosopher William of Occam, which suggests to not introduce information and concepts that are not strictly necessary in solving problems. This principle can be considered as an excellent epistemological tool for the creation and evaluation of models. If we want to formalize the concept, we can say that the quality of a model is defined by two fundamental parameters: the first one is related to the achievement of the desired goals, such as the adherence of the model predictions to the data and concepts that we want to encode or interpret, while the other one is the simplicity of the model, a parameter that is inversely proportional to the number of informations, concepts, exceptions, postulates and parameters needed by the model itself.
Which mathematical formalism was used?
Scientific knowledge is based on mathematical language, but the importance of choosing the right tools is often underestimated, as the Authors point out. The formalism used is based on space-time algebra, one of the Clifford algebras introduced by the mathematician William K. Clifford in 1878. The advantages of such formalism in physics have been described in detail by prof. David Orlin Hestenes in the work “Oersted Medal Lecture 2002: Reforming the Mathematical Language of Physics”. Space-time algebra respects the Occam’s razor criteria in terms of simplicity and universality, and allows a precise geometric interpretation of concepts often hidden by the formalism of complex matrix algebra traditionally used in modern physics.
Prof. David Orlin Hestenes (on the left)
Can you briefly describe the currently widespread and accepted model of the electron and the differences with the model proposed by the Authors?
Simplifying, we could say that in Quantum Mechanics the electron is a point-like particle having an “intrinsic” mass, a charge, a magnetic moment, an angular momentum and “spin”. The particle behavior is described by a complex function of space and time. The “square” of this function represents the “probability density” of finding the particle in a particular point of space-time. According to classical physics, the point-like particle concept is incompatible with the observed electron properties. In order to justify such incompatibility, some exceptions are introduced, thus seriously violating the Occam razor’s principle. According to the laws of mechanics and electromagnetism, a point-like particle cannot have an “intrinsic angular momentum”, and a magnetic moment must necessarily be generated by a current, that cannot exist in a point-like particle. Moreover, the electric field generated by a point-like charged particle should have an infinite energy! Moreover, Quantum Mechanics does not even try to derive the concepts of charge and mass, which are simply considered as “intrinsic properties” of the particle. Simplifying, the model proposed by the Authors consists in a current ring generated by a massless charge that rotates at speed of light along a circumference whose length is equal to the Compton wavelength of the electron: about meters. The charge is not point-like but distributed on the surface of a sphere, whose radius is equal to the classic radius of the electron: about meters. Similar models, based on the concept of “current ring”, have been proposed by many authors but have often been ignored for their incompatibility with the most widely accepted interpretations of Quantum Mechanics. It is interesting to note how, already in his “Nobel lecture” of 1933, P.A.M. Dirac made reference to a high-frequency internal oscillation of the electron: “It is found that an electron which seems to us to be moving slowly, must actually have a very high frequency oscillatory motion of small amplitude superposed on the regular motion which appears to us. As result of this oscillatory the velocity of the electron at any time equals the velocity of light”.
In scientific literature the German term Zitterbewegung is often used to indicate this very fast swing / rotation.
Zitterbewegung trajectory radius rE ~ 0.386e-12 m [1.957e-6 1/eV]. Charge [in red] radius ~ rE/137.04.
How can you reconcile the concept of massless charge with the experimental value of 511 keV for the electron mass ?
In this model the mass is not an “intrinsic property” of the particle, but it is a value that can be derived from other parameters of the model itself. A key point of the model consist in assigning to the rotating charge a purely electromagnetic momentum , whose value is equal to the product between the charge q and the vector potential A associated with the current generated by the charge itself. In natural units both the light speed and the Planck constant are adimensional scalars with value and the physical quantities dimensions are integer (positive, negative, or zero) powers of one electron-volt (eV). The rotating charge momentum has – when expressed in natural units – the dimension of an energy and a value equal to electron mass. Using natural units, the electron mass is also equal to the angular frequency of the charge rotation, and is equal to the inverse of the ring radius. But the mass value can also be obtained by integrating the square of the electric and magnetic field or by integrating the product of the current density for the vector potential. Starting from such model, it is thus possible to obtain the electron rest mass in six different ways.
There is a point which needs to be cleared up: how is it possible that a charge having a momentum is subject to a circular motion without a positive charge at the center of the orbit, as in Bohr atomic model ?
A magnetic flux equal to the ratio h/q –where h is the Planck constant and q is the elementary charge- is associated to the current ring: . The centripetal force, at the origin of the rotating movement, is the Lorentz Force due to the magnetic field.
I observe that, multiplying the amount of momentum of the rotating charge by the radius, we obtain a value of the angular momentum of the free electron equal to a single quantum of action . I would expect a value equal to half of this value, the commonly accepted value of the electron spin…
The hypothesis proposed by the Authors distinguishes spin and “intrinsic” angular momentum. Spin is interpreted as the component of the intrinsic angular momentum vector along the direction of an external magnetic field. This component can have only the two values when the electron is subject to the well-known Larmor precession.
Spin as a component of intrinsic angular momentum
Interesting hypothesis, but the concept of light-speed moving charges, fundamental for the proposed model, does not seem widespread discussed and studied in the mainstream scientific literature. What theoretical foundations suggest the existence of such charges ?
The conceptual foundation is the application of Occam’s razor to Maxwell’s equations. In the mainstream scientific literature, the so-called “Lorenz gauge” is often applied. It is a particular operation consisting essentially of zeroing an expression that appears in Maxwell’s equations. This expression represents a “scalar field”, a function that associates a single real value with the space-time coordinates. In the paper Maxwell’s equations and Occam’s razor, Lorenz’s gauge is considered as a normal “boundary condition”, that cannot be always applied. The hypothesis of the existence of a scalar field is not new: many authors, often quoting Nicola Tesla’s works, dealt with this subject. In particular, it is interesting to mention a recent project of the Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL) entitled “Electrodynamic Scalar Wave Transmission and Reception” evaluating the possibility of an innovative communication system based on the concept of transmission and reception of scalar waves. The acceptance of the existence of a scalar field allows an interesting interpretation of the concept of “charge density” as the time derivative of the scalar field, as suggested by Giuliano Bettini in the work “Manuscripts of the late century”, published in the viXra archives. In this case, Maxwell’s equations describe only light-speed moving charges. It is interesting to note that Richard Feynman’s intriguing hypothesis that positron can be interpreted as an “electron traveling back in time” emerges immediately from this particular charge definition. Positron, differs from the electron only for the charge sign. Obviously, if you consider the charge density as the time derivative of the scalar field, the sign change of the time variable automatically flip the sign of the charge.
In natural units, the electron rest mass-energy is equal to the Zitterbewegung angular frequency and is equal to the momentum of the rotating charge. Starting from these observations, is it possible to formulate a purely electromagnetic interpretation of both Newton’s laws and Special Relativity?
Yes. An example particularly easy to study describes an electron moving at constant speed vz along a direction orthogonal to the xy plane of charge rotation, which, consequently, will follow an helicoidal path at light speed. In this case the charge momentum vector qA = mc will have a component along the z axis. Calling the rest mass of the electron we observe that the angular frequency and the module of the component of momentum in the plane xy is a value that does not depend from . It is thus possible to derive directly the value of the electron relativistic mass m by applying the Pythagorean theorem, considering that the component of the momentum is orthogonal to the component :
A variation in speed will therefore result in an electric force
or, for non-relativistic speeds:
Zitterbewegung trajectories for different electron speeds: v/c = 0, 0.43, 0.86, 0.98
Can you describe the proposed relativistic model using a simple, easy to understand metaphor?
Considering the invariance of light speed c of the electric charge, it is possible to visualize the charge helicoidal trajectory of an electron moving at velocity within a fixed time interval , as a spring of length formed by a thin elastic wire of constant length . The electron mass is exactly equal to the inverse of the radius r of the spring when expressed in natural units: . An increase of , will be represented by a spring elongation and a spring radius reduction. The radius reduction is inversely proportional to the relativistic mass increase. If we call the spring rest radius , it is possible to write the value of the radius r and mass m as a function of :
Of course, if the electron is observed at a spatial scale far greater than its Compton wavelength and at a timescale far greater than the very short period ( sec ) of the Zitterbewegung rotation, the electron can be approximated by a point-like particle that moves along the helix axis.
How can we describe shortly, by using simple concepts, the relation between Maxwell’s equations and the proposed model?
Space-time algebra uses an orthogonal basis of four unit vectors that obey the following simple rules:
The algebra thus defined is isomorphic to the algebra of Majorana matrices. Now we define a generic function
that associates each point of space-time with a four values vector. We define also a special vector
whose components represent the derivative operators along the four directions of space-time.
Applying the derivative operators of to the vector field A, a “spinorial field” is obtained, a function that associates a spinor to each point of space-time. The spinor, in space-time algebra, is a particular mathematical structure identified by seven values: a scalar field S, characterized by a single value and a “bivectorial” field F with six distinct values. The number six corresponds to the number of possible orthogonal planes (bivectors) of space-time: xy, xz, yz, xt, yt, zt.
If A is the electromagnetic four potential, the six F values are related to the three values (Ex, Ey, Ez) of the electric field and to the three magnetic field values (Bx, By, Bz). The S field, defined by a single value, is generally ignored in mainstream literature, where the “Lorenz gauge” is often applied, an operation that, as already mentioned, consists in assuming S = 0.
Applying the operator to the field and setting the result to zero,
we obtain the Maxwell equations rewritten in a compact form, if we identify the four partial derivatives of the scalar field S, along the four space-time coordinates, as the electromagnetic field sources, i.e. the three values of the current density J and the charge density ρ. According to Occam’s razor principle, therefore, charge and current concepts are not introduced ad hoc in the model, but are derived from a single core entity, the electromagnetic four potential. The equation , if expanded, leads to a system of eight equations that link together the six values of the electromagnetic field F and the sources.
Beyond the formalism, what are the substantial consequences of this particular interpretation of Maxwell’s equations?
This rewriting of Maxwell equations implies the existence of scalar waves and the existence of light speed moving charges. Their equations are very simple:
How this proposed model relates with Dirac’s equation ?
For m = 0, the Dirac equation
becomes the Weyl equation
an expression similar to equation , if rewritten using the formalism of space-time algebra.
The solution of these equations is a field of spinors. A spinor is a mathematical structure that has some analogies with complex numbers. As it is well known, a complex number with module 1 and argument encodes a generic rotation of radians. In space-time algebra, the product has, like imaginary unit i, a negative square:
and the expression represents a spinor that encodes a rotation in the xy plane. The product γzγt has a positive square (we remember that ):
in this case the spinor implements a hyperbolic rotation in the zt plane. Simplifying, the (non-commutative) product of the two spinors encodes the helicoidal trajectory of the electron charge if we set and .
What are the main differences with Hestenes model?
In the Hestenes model the charge is point-like shaped. In his more recent works, the Zitterbewegung radius is equal to half the value of the reduced electron Compton wavelength. Moreover, in the Hestenes model, the Zitterbewegung angular speed decreases as a result of the relativistic time dilation when the electron is accelerated. This point, in particular, is not compatible with the model proposed in the two papers of Vol. 25 of the JCMNS, where the value of the mass, the ZBW radius, the Zitterbewegung angular frequency, the current and the vector potential associated with the charge motion are strictly interdependent parameters. The correlation between these parameters demands a relativistic contraction of the radius, an increase in the instantaneous angular speed and the invariance of angular frequency in the xy plane orthogonal to the direction of motion.
Are there any experimental results that could be interpreted using this particular electron model?
A series of experiments conducted over the last ten years by prof. Leif Holmlid (University of Gothenburg) have proved the existence of a very compact form of deuterium. Starting from the kinetic energy value (about 630 eV) of the nuclei emitted in some experiments where this particular form of ultra-dense deuterium is irradiated by a small laser, he calculates a distance between deuterium nuclei of about m, a much smaller value than the distance of about between the nuclei of a normal deuterium molecule. A preliminary hypothesis about the structure of the ultra-dense hydrogen (or deuterium) structure can be proposed starting from the electron and proton Zitterbewegung models. The proton can be seen as a current ring generated by a positive elementary charge that moves at the velocity of light along a circumference whose length is equal to the Compton proton wavelength . According to this hypothesis, the proton would be much smaller than the electron, being the ratio between the radii of the two current rings equal to the inverse of masses ratio: . An hypothetical structure (Z-Hydrino or Zitterbewegung Hydrino) formed by an electron with a proton (or a deuteron) in its center would have a potential energy of , a value equal to the energy of an X-ray photon with a wavelength of about . The distance between the deuterium nuclei in the Holmlid experiment could be explained by an aggregate of these structures. In these hypothetical aggregates, the Zitterbewegung phase difference of two neighboring electrons is radians and the distance between the charges of the two electrons is equal to electron Compton wavelength . In this case the distance between the nuclei can be obtained by applying the Pythagorean theorem:
Ultra Dense Hydrogen model. Proton distance ~ 2.3e-12 m [1.16e-5 1/eV]
at this point, it is important to briefly mention the interesting work of Jan Naudts, “On the hydrino state of the relativistic hydrogen atom“, where the author, applying the Klein-Gordon equation to hydrogen atom, finds an energy level .
Prof. Leif Holmlid
In the Iwamura experiment, a low energy nuclear transmutation of deposited elements was observed on a system consisting of alternate thin layers of palladium (Pd) and calcium oxide (CaO). A transmutation occurs when the system is crossed by a deuterium flow. The CaO layer, essential for the transmutation, is hundreds of atomic layers away from the area, near the surface, where the atoms to be transmuted have been implanted. It is therefore interesting to find an hypothesis that explains the action at distance and the role of CaO and the deuterium nuclei overcoming of the coulomb barrier.
Prof. Yasuhiro Iwamura
A possible hypothesis may arise from considering essential the ultra-dense deuterium (UDD) formation at interface between calcium oxide and palladium, an area where the high work function difference between Pd and CaO favors the formation of a layer with an High Electron Density (SEL, Swimming Electron Layer). The ultra-dense deuterium could later migrate to the area where the atoms to be transmuted have been implanted. This hypothesis seems more realistic than the hypothesis of di-neutrons (couples of neutrons) formations, consequence of an hypothetical nuclear capture of the electron, considering the very high energy required to balance this process (~ 0.78 MeV). A more realistic hypothesis sees the Ultra-dense deuterium aggregates, having no charge, as the be probable cause of the transmutation of Cs into Pr and Sr into Mo. Using the Holmlid’s notation “D(0)” to indicate the “mini-atoms” of ultra-dense deuterium, the hypothesized reaction for Cesium transmutation into Praseodymium in the Iwamura experiments would be very simple:
In this context, the electrons would have the role of carrier of deuterons towards the nuclei to be transmuted.
Andrea Rossi in his Miami office with one of his favorite paintings
Seems that a possible role of electrons in low-energy nuclear reactions has also been proposed by Gullström and Rossi in the their last theoretical work “Nucleon polarizability and long range strong force from σI = 2 meson exchange potential”:
“A less probable alternative to the long range potential is if the e-N coupling in the special EM field environment would create a strong enough binding to compare an electron with a full nuclide. In this hypothesis, no constraints on the target nuclide are set, and nucleon transition to excited states in the target nuclide should be possible. In other words these two views deals with the electrons role, one is as a carrier of the nucleon and the other is as a trigger for a long range potential of the nucleon”.
Ultra-dense hydrogen or deuterium aggregates could be the cause of “many-body” nuclear reactions ? These reactions are currently considered impossible or highly unlikely.
We do not know, but if confirmed it would be difficult to find an alternative explanations for such reactions. Interestingly to note that, already in the 1990s, Brian Ahern’s patent US5411654 refers to “many-body” nuclear reactions:
“Condensed matter systems in which the deuteron nuclei motions are synchronized to such a high degree are expected to generally tend toward conditions that favor 3- and 4-body strong force interactions. Such many-bodied, cooperative oscillations permit 3 nuclei to be confined in, or close, to, the strong force envelope simultaneously, providing a corresponding increase in interaction potential. Prediction of reaction by-products of 3- and 4-body strong force interactions are beyond current understanding. High energy scattering experiments are of no predictive use, owing to the immeasurably low probability of even a 3-body interaction.”.
Incidentally, the cited patent also addresses other key issues such as, for example, the phenomena of energy localization in nano-structured materials.
What are the main differences with Randell L. Mills’ hydrino?
In Mills’ theory, the charge density equation ρ involves the existence of charges moving at speed v < c:
while the equation of the model proposed by the Authors
demands, as already mentioned, the existence of light-speed moving charges. Moreover Mills’ theory contemplates the possibility of many energy levels for the hydrogen atom below the commonly accepted fundamental level.
Other experimental results that suggest the hypothesis of compact forms of hydrogen?
In the 1960s, in an attempt to demonstrate the hypothesis that a neutron is a compressed form of hydrogen, Don Carlo Borghi has conducted an experiment in which partially ionized hydrogen was crossed by a 10 GHz microwaves beam generated by a Klystron. The experiment aimed to test the possibility of synthesizing neutrons from protons and electrons. The neutron synthesis should not be a considered a realistic hypothesis, taking into account the energy necessary to balance the nuclear electron capture . More likely, though not yet proven, is the possibility of ultra-dense hydrogen formation: .
In conclusion, I would like to point out the possibility of asking questions and commenting on my blog for those who want to deepen the topics discussed or want clarifications about them. A sincere thank to Mario Menichella and to those who have collaborated for the realization of this post.
On December 19th I participated in Rome, at the ENEA Headquarters, the seminar organized by the Commission Research and Innovative Reactors in the Nuclear Area on the subject of LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions).
It was a technical meeting which saw a considerable success and the presence of some active researchers in this field that, as shown by the E-CAT of Andrea Rossi, could have interesting developments from the industrial point of view, contributing to the advent of a real “energy revolution”.
The main report was presented by Eng. Vittorio Violante, who explained (showing charts and diagrams) that, from his point of view, the LENR are a reality, however referring to the Deuterium – Palladium reactions. To a specific question asked by an audience member – whether he knew the work of Andrea Rossi – Eng. Violante replied, I believe so surprising, that he knew nothing!
The event was broadcast live by streaming, and participated as a guest the Honorable and environmental engineer Davide Crippa (next to me in the photo at right), belonging to the Parliamentary Group of Five Stars, demonstrating how he and the movement of which he is part are very attentive to the problems regarding the development of sustainable energy technologies.
During the lunch break (which preceded the talk of Prof. Alberto Carpinteri) I had with him an exchange of views and enjoyed the “healthy skepticism” of those who approach the areas of research that have not yet had the backing of the mainstream scientific community.
Unfortunately there are those who, in the spirit of contrarian or worse for personal interests, continues today – despite the events – to feel the LENR junk science and Andrea Rossi not credible, as evidenced by certain statements that may be found on the web.
However, I find significant that a research institution with a glorious past as ENEA has made available the premises of its headquarters, which organizes congresses, conferences and national and international workshops.
A slide presentation by Eng. Alberto Taglioni (President of Commission Nuclear Engineering by the Order of Engineers of the Province of Rome).
Maybe something is really moving in Italy and maybe, even if the general public has almost not yet received information, that “signals” to be taken seriously begin to flow to the Institutional organs.
While in the United States continues the lawsuit brought by Andrea Rossi (Leonardo Corporation) against Industrial Heat – accused of breach of contract for not having paid the sum of 89 million $ at the end of the 1-year test of a 1 MW E-Cat – and the development tests of the new reactor “Quark X” travel towards “5 sigma”, in Italy continues to grow an interest in LENR, the nuclear reactions at low energy capable of generating, in the case of Rossi’s reactor, thermal energy clean and free of harmful radiation.
Not surprisingly, on December 19 the Commission Research and Innovative Reactors in the Nuclear Area, established by the Order of Engineers of the Province of Rome, in collaboration with ENEA (former National Agency for Alternative Energies), offers to its subscribers a free informational seminar on the topic of Nuclear reactions at Low Energy as part of the technical-scientific and cultural series of lectures “Magistra Vitae”. See here.
I hope that during this conference the organizers will also speak of the fundamental role played by Andrea Rossi in this area, since the invention of his reactor with potential commercial applications has reignited again, in recent years, the media interest for this kind of research that, after the famous announcement of cold fusion made in 1989 by Fleischmann and Pons, the scientific community has deliberately denigrated and marginalized.
I also find really interesting that the Manager of Energy Services (GSE) – a major company of the Italian Stock Exchange, controlled by the Italian Ministry of Finance as it provides the incentives for renewable energy – has published in the issue 38 (August-November 2016) of its magazine “Elements” an article entitled “The Cold fusion. From fiction to reality?“, in which Andrea Rossi provides interesting answers during an interview about the E-Cat: the ingredients used, the products of the reactions, and so on. Get it here (pp. 68-70).
Rossi interviewed by the magazine of GSE, a big company controlled by the Italian State.
I decided to publish an interesting document of which I have come into possession a bit of time ago, and commissioned by the management of an important Italian company quoted at the Stock Exchange, very active in the field of renewable energies, which – although two years “old” and then not updated with the latest and more promising developments – attests the growing interest in LENR by those who see in this new way of producing energy a great business opportunity.
Significant in this regard are the cover page and the title of the document, of which you can see below and in detail the index and some significant excerpts.
So, while someone still believes Andrea Rossi a visionary – or worse, a clever con man – some people however, often behind the scenes, are working hard and without much “publicity” trying to replicate the E-Cat and the results achieved by the Italian inventor.
I think, as I said in a previous post published on the Italian version of my blog, that in the coming months (also because of the ongoing developments in the US legal dispute between the Leonardo Corporation and Industrial Heat), we will see more interesting news. And I also have a surprise which, if everything goes in the right way, I will put you soon aware.
To conclude this post, the first after the summer break, I take this opportunity to greet all the kind readers of my blog. Stay tuned!
In psychology “prejudice” is defined as a preconceived opinion, not drawing on any precise or well-defined conception of the matter or the person in question, but based instead in rumors or clichés.
The meaning of the word prejudice has changed in time: we have gone from defining it as a preceding judgment to something closer to a premature judgment, and, lastly, to a nuance more similar to an unmotivated judgment, creating a positive or negative idea of others without backing it up with any sufficient reason (in such cases a prejudice is generally negative).
An ‘idea’ becomes a ‘prejudice’ only when it becomes persistently irreversible – even in the light of new information.
Is it possible to eliminate prejudices?
Encouraging contacts between groups whose ideas are different improves our knowledge of those people who, for one reason or another, are seen as ‘diverse’, and this can be useful in reducing ‘prejudice, but it is, naturally, vital for each one of us to be effectively disposed towards revising our convictions.
This is one of the reasons that has driven me to writing this book, my first literary effort.
Dear Readers, it gives me great pleasure to announce the publication of the extended version of my book, ‘E-Cat The New Fire – The Biography of Andrea Rossi’, which you will find for sale on Amazon, both in digital and paper format, for the moment in Italian, but very soon also in English.
This edition has been updated in content and you will find included a number of as yet unreleased documents which I hope will help to clarify the figure of this Italian inventor, who (and this is something that is all too common as regards our country) has had to move abroad in order to make his dream come true.
Those who, for example, have labeled him with contempt as a crook or a swindler will now, I am sure, have to change their tune, unless, of course, they wish to continue to discredit the words written about him and his invention by a Public Prosecutor of the Italian Republic in the document, the contents of which you will find (though of course I have omitted sensitive data out of respect to privacy laws) in the pages of my book.
Besides which, there can be no doubt that we have to recognize the merit in Andrea Rossi’s work of having brought the so-called ‘Cold Fusion’ to the limelight once again in the mass media and in the scientific world after years of discredit and oblivion. Above all, for the first time ever, he has created a 1MW plant for the production of process heat – which works on the basis of a principle of physics whose theory is still under scientific scrutiny: the Rossi Effect – reliable and ready for the market: the E-Cat … a “New Fire” for humanity!
After one year of uninterrupted operation, the 12-months test on the world’s first 1 MW power plant – for the production of steam for industrial process and powered by four 250 kW E-Cat modules – was concluded on February 17, 2016 at 12 a.m.
Andrea Rossi said that, for the results, we should wait the report that will be delivered by the third party entity which performed the measurements on the system during the period of operation. But, if the results will be positive, this date will be remembered, because it will put the bases to the use of a new form of low-cost, clean and safe energy: a kind of “New Fire” for humanity.
Andrea Rossi while flying on a private jet during one of his many business trips.
Thanks Andrea for your tenacity and for being able to show the world a new direction!
we are now close to the end of the 1-year long test regarding the Andrea Rossi’s 1 MW E-Cat reactor. So, there is a growing interest for those following this story from the beginning on what the final result will be, and especially on the data that will be released by the involved parties.
Although many people (including me) have tried to inform all those who would have interest in a so big scientific discovery and technological revolution – including scientific and/or political institutions – the news has been shamefully ignored on mainstream media.
I ask you to spread the video below, created by Prof. Neri Accornero (University “La Sapienza”, Italy, see his CV in Italian here), to as many people as possible in order to break the wall of silence interposed by those who have a vested interest because it does not happen.
I would do all of you and your families my best wishes for a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! May all of your wishes and dreams come true… 🙂
After about 3 years since the first request of explanation presented in the “Question time” to the Italian Chamber of Deputies by the member of the Italian Parliament Domenico Scilipoti (see here), the “E-Cat affair” gains ground, and become protagonist in a workshop on “Frontier Researches”, held in Rome on November 24, 2015, organized by Scilipoti himself.
I was really pleased to participate as a speaker in this conference, where I could intervene with a presentation titled LENR and the E-Cat: Energy of the future?.
My intent was to illustrate the huge potential of this invention and describe the most interesting facts related to its development in their real succession.
For the occasion, Andrea Rossi kindly granted a new brief interview that I projected at the end of my talk. I decided to share its content with all the people who follow my blog.
A new short interview with Andrea Rossi about the current status of the E-Cat.
Finally, I would take this opportunity to thank Senator Scilipoti (next to me in the photo shown here) for the invitation and Mr. Rossi for his willingness.
I wish you a good vision!
P.S. The interview has been translated and subtitled in English by a professional service.
Dear friends and readers of this blog, good morning!
Last night, I had the opportunity to participate in a live web TV broadcast, conducted by Eng. Salvo Mandarà, on the theme “E-Cat The New Fire – A look to the energy of the future”.
I would like to share with you this addictive and constructive experience. You can find the interview at this link: http://www.salvo5puntozero.tv/e-cat-il-nuovo-fuoco-uno-sguardo-allenergia-del-futuro-intervista-con-vessela-nikolova-27102015/.
I also take this opportunity to thank again Salvo Mandarà and congratulate him for his courageous choice of life that makes accessible and undisclosed information and news that otherwise would be left out from the mass media mainstream.
Greetings to all of you,
Many of you have suspected that Andrea Rossi could have a high-level protection that would allow him to work at his best. Surely you are in the right, but perhaps you didn’t think exactly what you’re going to read. 🙂
A photo was recently released by Andrea Rossi with him while proudly shows the US patent for his invention, the E-Cat. On the left you see a my elaboration of such image.
After a few days, I received by a reader an e-mail whose content is reported below, apart from the private conclusion:
Good morning Dr. Nikolova,
I follow the story of the E-Cat since it became public in 2011 and, to stay updated, I read several blogs that talk about this affair. On one of them I saw the attached image, seeming to be a Madonna placed between the pages of Rossi’s agenda. You are the author of his biography, so do you know something about it? Hoping for a your kind response, I thank you in advance, complimenting also for your book which I thoroughly enjoyed. […]
I am a psychologist and then, by nature and profession, an inquisitive person. The detail visible in the image shown below, probably prepared by an expert in photography, struck me too.
Detail of the Rossi’s personal agenda on his desk.
It is the agenda of Rossi, visible on the desktop, where you can see, on its right hand page, an image that seems a Madonna or something like that. So, I asked Andrea what it was…
“Dear Vessy, here is the story of the image you asked about,” Andrea begins the unexpected story. “That is the image of the ‘Madonna delle Grazie‘ “, he explains.
So, I immediately searched on the web, where I found a beautiful picture of the Madonna, Santa Maria delle Grazie or, in English, ‘St. Mary of the Graces’, which coincides with the silhouette of the image analyzed above.
Andrea told me in detail the story:
“When I have been made free and exited from the prison of Milan, Italy, after being cleared, I went immediately to prey in the church of ‘Santa Maria delle Grazie’ (the prison is not far from there)”.
Rossi, in fact, was arrested several years ago in Italy for a long story, as an unpredictable consequence of a previous and important discovery, as described in detail in my book “E-CAT THE NEW FIRE – A biography of Andrea Rossi,” which you can find here.
Andrea continues the story underlining that this is an important church: “It is, by the way, the church with inside the famous fresco ‘The Last Supper’ by Leonardo Da Vinci”.
Indeed, on the end wall of the refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie, there is one of the world’s most famous religious paintings, a masterpiece of the Italian Renaissance.
Leonardo Da Vinci’s “The Last Supper” (1495-97).
Then he explained how the events took place:
“I prayed in that church for my future life and prayed to make useful for something all the studies made in prison on the LENR. I have taken that day, in the same church, an image of St. Mary of the Graces, which is exactly the one that you can see inside my agenda”.
Finally, he reveals why the image of Our Lady is so faded:
“From the day I have taken it, many years ago, I prey everyday looking at it, to make useful my work on LENR, so that now it is very worn and barely visible”.
The church of Santa Maria delle Grazie, in Milan.
That’s it. If, from now on, you wonder how Rossi was able to discover the effect that carries his name, you should consider that, in addition to the “material” things, an important role – in my opinion – may have been played by the more ethereal spiritual component.
Good morning Dear Readers,
this post is, definitely, one of the most significant ever written on this blog.
Since a while, it was felt in the air that something was going to happen: something special and important; or something that you know or you hope, but cannot be said until the right time comes. Because, as we use to say in Italy: the Gods could be jealous…
But now it is possible. The moment has come!
So, with great pleasure, I am publishing the cover of a “historical” document: the first patent for the E-Cat issued to Andrea Rossi from the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO). [Full Pdf]
I join to all those who believe in the work of Andrea Rossi’s to make our most authentic compliments reminding him that winning the single battles you finally win even the War.
I also take this opportunity to inform you that, on next October 3, a Conference on Renewables and LENR will hold in Terni (Italy). I was invited to the event as author of the book “E-Cat – The New Fire” – Biography of Andrea Rossi. For the occasion, I prepared a surprise.
Our collaborator Alessandro Cavalieri sent me, on my request, an original review post about the last developments in research labs related to the E-Cat and some desirable future strategies:
In the last weeks, some news have indirectly revolutionized the field of research connected to the E-Cat, as the more attentive readers know. In practice, two new lines of research completely “pure” have emerged: Hydrogen-Lithium (Li-H) and Nickel-Hydrogen (H-Ni), both with positive results (excess heat and not only) at high temperature and, therefore, surprising.
I thought it would be useful, for the readers and also for the specialists, to summarize in a very simplified table made with Excel the framework of the various lines of current research, directly or indirectly related to the E-Cat. Since the table was too wide, I had to divide it into two parts. Clearly, the two tables should be read as if they were part of a single larger table with the two parts aligned horizontally on the same line. Click on the pictures to enlarge them.
A simplified review of the lines of research connected, directly or indirectly, to the E-Cat.
In both the tables, I highlighted with a different color all the cells with the most relevant data. They are in fact a useful basis for more extensive evaluations or for future research strategies by professional researchers. However, here are a number of my preliminary comments:
1) First, we note that there are 5 different lines of research: two by Andrea Rossi/IH (Low Temperature E-Cat and Hot-Cat, respectively), and three by other independent groups, among which the China Institute of Atomic Energy and the Unified Gravity LLC (USA). Two lines of the three are the “pure” lines previously mentioned, while the third is the “classical” H-Ni + Li followed by Alexander Parkhomov, the MFMP and others.
2) The lines followed by independent researchers are all at high temperature, while those developed by Rossi are at low and medium temperature, respectively. This is not surprising, given that Rossi has some “secret” still not revealed: probably, but not necessarily, a chemical catalyst (in alternative, a special treatment of the fuel, or other).
3) We note that the line of research H-Li has shown the existence of nuclear reactions Hydrogen-Lithium in the presence of a plasma proton-Lithium (p-Li), that according to the researchers you can have only at temperatures higher than 750 °C, when Lithium vaporizes.
The Hydrogen-Lithium Fusion Device used by Unified Gravity LLC, including a proton-Lithium plasma generator (from their international patent application).
4) The line of pure research H-Ni is particularly interesting because, with a reactor consisting of a wire of Nickel in an atmosphere of Hydrogen, the aforementioned Chinese group has shown that it produces excess heat – but also clear hot-spots, as we can see from the SEM photos below – without the use of catalysts, and this seems a very important result probably obtained for the first time, at least with a so simple device.
Clear hot-spots obtained in a “pure” Ni-H experiment by the China Institute of Atomic Energy.
5) Regarding the correlation of the reaction products effectively detected with the expectations from theory, only the line H-Li gave fully satisfactory results. In fact, the cited reactor allowed to detect the production of alpha particles, i.e. Helium nuclei, of high-energy (some MeV), which is exactly what it is expected from fusion reactions of Hydrogen-Lithium.
The expected reactions Li-H for standard metallic Lithium: a very good agreement with the experimental data by Unified Gravity LLC, a rare occurrence in LENR!
6) The situation begins to be apparently quite clear also with regard to the line of research H-Ni + Li, where the Chinese group has detected, analyzing the ashes of the fuel used, a depletion around 1% of only two isotopes, Ni- 64 and Li-6, with no material changes in the other isotopes. It should be noted that these are the first public data on this type of analysis.
7) On the contrary, the public data provided in the Third Party Report (TPR-2) by Lugano Team are very contradictory with those of the H-Ni + Li line of research. In fact, they show that, apart from the Ni-62 and Li-6, all remaining isotopes are depleted. The authors of the TPR-2 explain in a plausible manner the possible depletion of Li-7, but not that of the various Nickel isotopes, which thus remains a mystery.
8) We believe, however, that probably Rossi uses one or more unknown chemical catalysts, which could be a plausible explanation for these anomalous and contradictory results. In addition, we know that the E-Cat produces energy mainly through gamma rays in the range 50-100 keV, as revealed by the same Rossi in Zurich and anticipated by the physicist Hanno Essen in a private communication to some Swedish colleagues (30-150 keV).
9) It is unclear whether the E-Cat produced gamma rays at 511 keV, the absence of which would exclude reactions of the type p + Ni(x) -> Cu(x+1) because some of the unstable (and radioactive) copper atoms should undergo a beta decay and the produced positron an electron-positron annihilation at 511 keV, as noted by the nuclear physicist Sergio Focardi in 2008. The gamma rays at 511 keV were confirmed by Hanno Essen to his Swedish colleagues but they have never been detected in public tests, perhaps for not good measurements. An official statement from Rossi in this regard would be highly desirable.
Even from a simple analysis such as the just presented, it is clear the need to carry out, in the future, investigations in several directions, not limiting to explore only the “classical” line a-la-Parkhomov, or H-Ni + Li. The research institutions and state universities could (and should!) provide the largest contribution to this study, given the necessity of isotopic analyses of reagents and products taken from the hot-spots.
The isotopic analysis of fuels and ashes should be a “must” in LENR research. Here we see a Ionization Mass Spectrometer (IMS), which can measure isotopic ratios.
This historical period reminds one that revolutionized Physics in the first half of the last century, and it is embarrassing to see, in this century, the silence of the mainstream science. Some free and enterprising men are literally rewriting Physics under our eyes and Academia seems literally “to sleep”, although each of the lines of research illustrated may generate, sooner or later, one or more Nobel Prizes for Physics and/or Chemistry.
I recommend, finally, to read the patent application WO 2014/189799 A9 (Hydrogen-Lithium Fusion Device) by Unified Gravity LLC and the Power Point presentation titled Low Energy Nuclear Reaction Occurring in Hydrogen-Loaded Nickel Wire written by the Ni-H Research Group operating at the China Institute of Atomic Energy. You can find them easily on Internet and most of this post is based on these lighting documents.
ALESSANDRO CAVALIERI is a physicist who teaches Mathematics and Physics in a secondary school, in Northern Italy. His cultural interests goes from Chaos Theory to the Mind-Matter connections. He loves to read books on the history of Physics.
I received from Alessandro Cavalieri the following contribute about the NANOR reactor developed by JET Energy, a clean promising energy multiplier very different from Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat:
I would like to resume and integrate the interesting paper “Dry, preloaded NANOR®-type CF/LANR components” by Mitchell R. Swartz (JET Energy, Inc., USA), Peter L. Hagelstein (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA) and others, recently published by Current Science.
Indeed, the ZrO2–PdNiD NANOR®-type reactor is a device capable of significant energy gain over long periods of time with reasonable reproducibility and controllability. So, it could be used, in the future, as an effective, clean, highly efficient, energy production system.
The NANOR® components are smaller than 2 cm in length, and with 30–200 mg of active LANR material. Their ‘core’ contains active ZrO2–PdD nanostructured material [Zr (66%), Ni (0–30%), and Pd (5–25%) by weight], loaded with additional deuterium (D) to achieve loadings (ratio of D to Pd) of more than 130%.
Indeed, nanostructured materials have incredibly large surface area to volume ratios. Second, many also have new unexpected quantum mechanical properties: they enable quantum confinements, surface plasmon resonances, and superparamagnetism.
A two terminal NANOR™ device containing active ZrO2-PdNiD nanostructured material.
The ZrO2–(PdNi)D is prepared in a complicated process that begins by oxidizing a mixture of zirconium oxide surrounding metallic palladium, nickel or Pd–Ni islands, located and dispersed within the electrically insulating zirconia dielectric.
The desired nanostructure islands of NiPdD have characteristic widths of 2–20 nm size. This nanostructure size is selected because it can react cooperatively, generating large amplitude, low frequency oscillations. The characteristic width is between 7 and 14 nm.
The zirconia dielectric matrix is insulating at low voltage and keeps the nanoscale metal islands electrically separated. It also prevents the aggregation of the islands. Each nanostructured island acts as a short circuit elements during electrical discharge.
The fuel for the nanostructured material in the core is deuterium, and the product is believed to be de novo 4He produced by the deuterium fusion. The ‘excess heat’ observed is thought due to energy derived from coherent de-excitation of molecule D2 to ground state 4He.
According to a previous Swartz’s paper, the helium-4 excited state is either the first excited state, or one energetically located above it, all at least 20 million electron volts (20 to ~23+ MeV) above the ground level. This is significant in magnitude and clearly we cannot say that they are “low energy” reactions.
Swartz adds, in the same paper, that “Melvin Miles of China Lake with Johnson-Matthey Pd rods was the first to show the correlation of heat and helium-4 production. Arata and Zhang reported de novo He4 with LANR, including with Zr2O4/Pd powder exposed to deuterium gas, but not with hydrogen gas”.
Well, the excess energy gain of a NANOR compared to driving input energy is up to 20 times. The reactor openly demonstrated an energy gain (COP) which ranged generally from 5 to 16, a much higher energy gain compared to the 2003 demonstration unit (COP 2.3).
Input and Heat Output of a two terminal NANOR™-type device Series 6-33ACL131C2 device, showing the calorimetric response at several input powers, for the device and the ohmic control.
The input powers were below 100 mW. Therefore, the output power of a NANOR, considering a COP of 20 and no more of 200 mg of active powder, would be about 2 W. It is interesting to compare this parameter with the E-Cat, a much larger device.
You have to consider that the Andrea Rossi’s Hot-Cat illustrated in the TPR-1 had a reaction chamber of about 200 cubic centimeters, which may contain about 100 grams of active powder. So, a NANOR using 100 grams of active powder would produce a thermal power of (100000 / 200) x 2 = 1000 W, or, more simply, 1 kW.
Thus the difference seems not so great. Indeed, in the test on a Hot-Cat performed in December 2012 the E-Cat power production was almost constant, with an average of 1609 W, as illustrated in TPR-1. So, there is approximately a factor 2 between the performances of the two different reactors.
Although small in size, the LANR excess power density of a NANOR is more than 19,500 W/kg of nanostructured material. According to TPR-1, the power density of a Hot-Cat can be estimated in about 50,000 W/kg for the test performed on March 2013. We find again a factor 2.
Photo of a NANOR reactor (credit: Barry Simon).
NANOR is a two terminal device in which the activation of the desired cold fusion reactions is, for the first time, separated from the loading. The proprietary prepared preloaded ZrO2–(PdNi) nanostructured materials are dry, and glued into electrically conductive, sealed configurations (see the photos).
According to Swartz’s papers, the production of the preloaded core material is a complex engineering problem, because it involves “preparation, production, proprietary pretreatment, loading, post-loading treatment, activation, and then adding the final structural elements”.
The NANOR reactor, which generates significant excess heat from applied electric fields, is driven by a high DC voltage circuit up to 1000+ V rail voltage, required to surmount the extremely high electrical resistance of the nanostructured material.
The reactor is easily activated, driven by an electrical circuit and controlled by an electrical driver. The controlled driving system uses pulse wave modulated microcomputer control of specialized very high voltage semiconductors linked to a current source driving system.
NANOR excess heat generation is produced thanks to complicated polarization/transconduction phenomena, including an avalanche transconduction electrical breakdown through the ZrO2-NiD Nanostructured CF/LANR component, as explained by Hagelstein at ICCF-19.
Peter Hagelstein illustrates the NANOR at ICCF-19, in Padua, Italy. See here the video.
As the voltage was increased to about 24V, the impedance suddenly decreased to very low values. It was shown theoretically that this sudden reduction can be attributed to an “avalanche effect” that is typical of the current–voltage behavior that occurs in Zener diodes.
Finally, I would add that the papers on NANOR by Swartz and Hagelstein lack of many details about how the reactor works and is made, so the just reported resume is, in reality, only a partial description. Rossi’s reactor is known in much more detail, thanks also to the public TP tests.
ALESSANDRO CAVALIERI is a physicist who teaches Mathematics and Physics in a secondary school, in Northern Italy. His cultural interests goes from Chaos Theory to the Mind-Matter connections. He loves to read books on the history of Physics.
Eng. Antonio La Gatta does not seem to love the interviews, as our readers well know, but his sister – Concetta La Gatta (in the photo) – seems, luckily, to have a very different attitude towards the media.
A few days ago a very intriguing interview with Concetta made by Gianni Avvantaggiato has been published by an Italian website that, sincerely, I never heard before: Ambienteambienti.com. You can find it here.
The piece is very interesting, because it says that a family business founded in 2000 is now guided by Concetta, who has a degree in Sciences of Education.
Indeed, she is CEO of Skeda srl, which markets in Italy and in the world the products of the mother Company, TSEM, which on the contrary is born in the late 90s on the outskirts of Naples, being her father of Neapolitan origin.
She says about TSEM: “Later we entered in the medical nutrition field with a patent that still allows us to maintain the exclusive, reproduced in different models and variants. Today, NRL SRI, ENEA, are agencies for which the TSEM is the design innovation in research”.
It is not clear which is the relationship between a medical nutrition patent and the cold fusion field, but sometimes clarity for the Italian journalists is an optional.
But the most interesting part of the interview is the final answer given by Concetta: “Soon the excellent captain who is my brother Antonio will move to the US to direct the new US operating units in North Carolina, in collaboration with MIT, Texas Tech University, Industrial heat”.
Some medical products made by TSEM (from TSEM website).
Mrs La Gatta continues: “And the administration of TSEM in Italy will be transferred to me, and this is a stimulus even stronger towards the study and comparison with other businesses”.
I wonder which kind of business there is between Industrial Heat and TSEM. We know that in the past the Italian Company has provided to SRI a calorimeter, but with the high COPs obtained by IH a very sensible device seems not necessary.
Thus, it seems a different kind of collaboration… Hmmm, here “La Gatta ci cova…”. However, I’ve not found on the web official information about products or services provided by TSEM in the LENR field. It is a secret business, shhhhh!
Someone should warn Concetta… 🙂
LENRIA, the new LENR Industry Association presented at ICCF-19 by Steve Katinsky and David Nagel – and now also online with a website – is potentially one of the most important news in the field.
It is a not-for-profit organization, as described in the website, “to advocate for both scientific study and, especially, commercial advancement of the field”. It joins the already existing LENR Cities on the marketing front of these new technologies but it aims to provide a variety of services to its members.
LENRIA’s recipients are, from one hand, LENR companies, Government agencies, Universities laboratories and, on the other side, Engineers, Scientists, Consultants, Technical personnel, Students. It’s incredible to see how many important companies are already involved in research on LENR (see the extremely clear picture).
A very well done slide presented by Katinsky and Nagel at ICCF-19.
The importance of an industrial association lies in being able to defend, in an organized way, the common interests of its members. These associations usually do a work seemingly invisible but actually very important to creating a lobby operating in the appropriate venues.
LENR may, for example, be deemed comparable to renewables, but a specific legislation is needed to enjoy similar incentives in the future. Organizations like LENRIA can be supportive of political initiatives in such a direction, and this is only the tip of the iceberg of the possible significant contributes to our movement.
In Italy, in recent years, many “Parliamentary Questions” have been submitted (you can see an example in the picture below) and they have not yet been received an answer. In this Country many politicians at the highest level are already aware of the revolution that might be coming and they still do not know what position to take.
An official question about LENR presented to the Italian Parliament on May 16, 2014.
Structures like LENRIA can help the stakeholders to decide for funding LENR research or support this revolution, if they act in an active way in the “circles” that counts. A completely new business is rising and it is an opportunity for all the people directly or indirectly involved.
Obviously, it is not a game for children. It is a demanding job that must be done by experts and authoritative people. I think LENRIA was founded by the right people, although soon they will need the support of other forces and perhaps input from the outside.
Steve Katinsky is a successful entrepreneur who became in recent years a LENR advocate and thus can be a game changer if he take it as a mission. He has founded multiple Internet based enterprises and now is a board member of Technorati, which is one of the 10 most important companies of USA in its category.
David Nagel does not need any presentation, being notoriously one of the most experienced scientists in the field of LENR and beyond, as well as an excellent teacher. He is retired from the Naval Research Laboratory, a US Navy research center in the USA, but the world of LENR still needs his endless enthusiasm and his clear vision of the situation.
The just published website of LENRIA, where you can register and download some files.
I hope LENRIA can stimulate a wide international cooperation in the field of LENR, although I realize that it is not easy, for many reasons. MFMP paved the way of a collaborative venture. It is only with the joining forces that we can achieve important results of which everyone can benefit. We must choose between a bright or dark future!
Here follows my translation into English of the very clear explanation of the physics behind the Fleischmann-Pons experiment, given in 2010 to a wide audience by the Italian theoretical physicist Emilio Del Giudice, in one of his popular conferences:
“The famous article by Fleischmann and Pons published in the ‘Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry‘ was very well written, so Giuliano Preparata and I thought we had figured out what was the phenomenon, and we felt that such explanation fit very well with our ideas about ‘coherence‘, which at the time Giuliano was developing.
The original paper by Fleischmann and Pons published on the J. Electroanal. Chem.
So, within a month and a half, we wrote a paper in which we proposed a possible explanation of the phenomenon. It should be said that the deuterium nuclei are formed by a proton and a neutron, so two deuterium nuclei consists of two protons and two neutrons, which would correspond to a helium nucleus if they were held together.
Given that, because of the Einstein’s Theory of Relativity the energy of an helium nucleus is a bit lower than the sum of the energies of the two deuterium nuclei, the fusion process leads not to a stable helium nucleus, but to a helium nucleus that I would say ‘hot’, i.e. that must get rid of energy. How can it get rid of this excess energy?
One option is usually studied by nuclear physicists, namely that the two nuclei come together on their own, without connections with others, in the empty space. There are no third bodies to which immediately transfer the excess energy. Due to momentum conservation, the only way that the core has to dissipate this energy is to break.
An example of outcome from a D-D fusion in the empty space.
In practice, from the core is ejected a proton or a neutron, or, with a probability of 1/1,000,000, a gamma photon, namely a ‘packet’ of electromagnetic energy. And this is the conventional nuclear fusion, or ‘hot fusion‘, so called because the nuclei are electrically charged, so they repel and a big effort is required to bring them closer to one another.
Simple calculations show that, to achieve the kinetic energies necessary to keep off nuclei enough to produce a nuclear fusion, it takes temperatures of millions of degrees, which we find only in the stars or in a nuclear bomb. For example, the hydrogen bomb, or H-bomb, is composed of a nuclear fission bomb which acts as a detonator, developing the temperatures required to ignite the nuclear fusion of deuterium.
To realize a hot fusion reactor, on the other hand, is a real challenge, because there are no materials that can withstand temperatures of millions of degrees, and to prevent the nuclei from touching the walls with the aid of powerful magnetic fields is an extremely difficult enterprise. Therefore, the hot fusion is certainly the energy of the future, in the sense that it will never have a present!
Using a metaphor, we can say that the problem of merging the two nuclei is in a way similar to the meeting of two candidate lovers that, if they can to overcome the hurdle of their bad character, would lead to an overwhelming passion. The just described road of the hot fusion, in this metaphor, corresponds to a ‘rape’.
There may be, however, another way to nuclear fusion, and it is the ‘cold fusion’, i.e. a fusion that does not require the high temperatures necessary for the hot fusion. In practice, instead of increasing the kinetic energy of the nuclei, we decrease the potential energy. In my metaphor, it is the path of ‘seduction’. But since the two nuclei repel, they cannot follow this route by themselves: a third body is required.
So if, instead of being in the empty space, we are in the matter – where there are not only positive charges but also negative charges, the electrons – there may find clouds of electrons that facilitate the fusion of two deuterium nuclei favoring their approach, a bit like the ‘old aunt’ who, once allowed two young people meet and fall in love, then disappear from the scene.
So, we could understand why, if the deuterium nuclei were placed not in the empty space but inside a metal – where there is an abundance of electrons that can perform the function of the old aunt – there is a density threshold such that when it is exceeded deuterium nuclei spontaneously begin to merger, as found by Fleischmann and Pons”.
EMILIO DEL GIUDICE (1940-2014) was an Italian physicist who has worked in the field of condensed matter. Theoretical physicist and professor at the University of Naples and pioneer of string theory in the early Seventies, later became known for his work with Giuliano Preparata at the Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics (INFN). It is also known for its excellent qualities of popularizer, in particular on quantum mechanics.
I asked Alessandro Cavalieri to explain us the achievements described in the Brillouin Energy’s poster presented at ICCF-19:
Brillouin Energy’s reactor, with still only a few watts produced, is (on the paper) one of the possible future alternatives to Rossi’s E-Cat, whose 1 MW plant in these days has outperformed all the competitors with its huge COP: >20 according some rumors from Mats Lewan and others.
But what is interesting in the case of Brillouin’s reactor is not the quantity of energy produced (in 2015, at 642 °C they have 24 W of thermal production from a 6 W power input), but the fact that there is a quite clear theory behind their device and – the most important thing – it seems to be in agreement with the experimental results.
Therefore, it can be useful to analyze this theory in the light of the latest info presented in a poster at ICCF-19 by the Company of Robert Godes, to see if there may be points in common with the E-Cat. He said in Padua that the theoretical basis of their reaction is the Electron Capture and that multiple tests run by Tom Claytor, formerly at Los Alamos National Laboratory, detected a production of Tritium which matches this hypothesis.
The poster presented by Brillouin at ICCF-19 (courtesy Brillouin Energy).
Indeed, as shown in the poster, in 2014 they detected, near their running reactor, a slight increase in activity of the background radiation level from the 0-18 keV tritium window, whereas the higher energy window 18-150 keV showed no excess activity.
Tritium, or H-3, is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen, containing one proton and two neutrons. Naturally occurring tritium is extremely rare on Earth, where trace amount are formed by the interaction of the atmosphere with the cosmic rays. It has a half-life of 12.3 years and decays (through a so-called “beta decay”, a type of radioactive decay in which a proton is transformed into a neutron) into Helium-3, releasing 18.6 keV of energy in the process.
Brillouin’s technology converts the hydrogen – most easily directly from water – to helium gas, a process that releases large amounts of useful heat. The process starts by introducing hydrogen into a suitable piece of nickel. Then, a proprietary electronic pulse generator creates stress points in the metal where the applied energy is focused into very small spaces.
This concentrated energy allows some of the protons in the hydrogen to capture an electron, and thus become a neutron. This step converts a small amount of energy into mass in the neutron. Further pulses both create more neutrons and allow neutrons to combine with some of the hydrogen to form deuterium, or H-2 (a form of hydrogen with both a proton and a neutron in the nucleus). This ‘combination’ step releases energy.
The process continues, again, with some neutrons combining with deuterium to form tritium (hydrogen with one proton and two neutrons). This step actually releases still more energy. The process continues with some neutrons combining with the tritium to form the so-called “quadrium”, or H-4 (hydrogen with one proton and three neutrons).
As pointed out by Brillouin, since quadrium is not stable, it quickly turns into helium in a process that releases more energy than it took to create all the preceding steps (2.4 units of energy go in and 24 units come out). The released energy is initially absorbed by the metal element, and then made available as heat for thermal applications.
The Brillouin controlled Electron Capture reaction (courtesy Brillouin Energy).
In Brillouin’s theory, the nickel (or other metal elements with the correct internal geometry) acts only as a host and catalyst, and is not consumed, the only consumable is hydrogen, and the electron capture reaction is controlled by the proprietary electronics developed by Godes (an electronic engineer), which compress the electrons to create the right conditions: probably coherent phonon waves within the metal lattice created by electro-magnetic pulses.
Hydrogen enters as an ion in the nickel (or metal) lattice, where it is highly confined. According to a study of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) – a U.S. Department of Energy research laboratory – confinement energy alone can drive electron capture events. However, it is the electrical stimulation to provide energy levels in excess of the 782 KeV threshold needed to produce a neutron out of the combination of an electron and a proton.
The lattice, stimulated with precise, narrow, high voltage, bipolar pulse frequencies (called “Q-pulse” by Brillouin) cause protons to undergo electron capture. The Q-pulse reverses the natural decay of neutrons to protons, plus beta particles, catalyzing – through a dramatic increase of the phonon activity – an electron capture in a first endothermic step, then an ultra cold neutron is formed. This triggers the cascade of reactions described above, resulting in a beta decay transmutation to Helium-4 plus heat.
ALESSANDRO CAVALIERI is a physicist who teaches Mathematics and Physics in a secondary school, in Northern Italy. His cultural interests goes from Chaos Theory to the Mind-Matter connections. He loves to read books on the history of Physics.
An interesting post sent by Alessandro Cavalieri on a scientifically promising Ni-H research line performed in Italy producing an unexplained “side effect”:
I found extremely intriguing – because it could open a completely new area of research in Physics if it will be confirmed by other researchers – the effect of spontaneous generation of a potential difference, or voltage, found in Constantan wires by Francesco Celani (Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics, INFN), Giorgio Vassallo (University of Palermo, Italy) and their many collaborators.
The experiments performed by the professional Italian group are very original and instructive for many aspects and have been well described in the poster presented at ICCF-19, and that you can find here.
Since the end of 2011 Celani et al. introduced, in the LENR research field, a new (low
cost) material, Copper-Nickel alloy, named “Costantan” (ISOTAN 44, Isabellenhutte – Germany, composition: Cu 55% Ni 44% Mn 1%), and demonstrated that it, at nano/micrometric dimension and at high enough temperatures (>120°C), catalyzes the dissociation of H2 to 2H and absorb/adsorb protons in the lattice.
In a typical setup, they have a Platinum wire (diameter = 100 Micrometers) used mainly for calibration purposes (“reference”) and two Constantan wires (the “active”) with different diameters (100 and 200 Micrometers, respectively) and/or surface treatments. Each wire is inserted inside a Boro-Silicate Glass fiber sheet (the 3 sheaths are closely braided each other).
Photo of the small, dissipation type, transparent reactor operating at INFN-LNF. The
volume is about 250cc. The 2 wires, reference and active, are rounded on a mica support. The thermocouples are Type K, SS screened (diameter 1.5 millimeter).
Some of the results obtained using these wires in a simple dissipation reactor (see the picture above) made of a thick-walled boro-silicate glass tube, were quite reproducible and the Anomalous Heat Effect (AHE) detected (at Constantan wire surface temperatures of 160 – 400°C) was about 5-10W with 50W of electric input power.
Periodically, the resistance of one constantan wire was measured by a general-purpose multimeter to evaluate the presence of absorbed Hydrogen. They observed that the wire resistance decreases (up to values as low as 70% of initial one, the so-called R/Ro ratio), when the Constantan wire is heated in presence of Hydrogen.
Details of first loading by H2-Ar mixture. The “trigger” temperature, to get the large resistance decrease of sub-micrometric Constantan wire, was about 125°C. Temperature measured by a type K thermocouple (SS sealed) inside the gas cell.
On June 25, 2014, the group noted, almost by chance, that Constantan wire generates by itself a macroscopic voltage (>>100 Microvolts), that is function of many parameters (temperature, gas type, pressure, value of R/Ro). Maximum values (not stable over time, only few hours) were of the order of 1400 Microvolts and current of 120 Microampere. Stable values were about half.
What is more interesting is that the effect is not the usual Seebeck effect, because they use only one wire, NOT a junction of 2 different materials, like in thermocouples. According to Celani et al., the new spontaneous voltage (and the low excess heat) are related to some of the following parameters and conditions:
- absolute value of temperature (as large as possible, avoiding material sintering);
- enough amount of Hydrogen absorbed/adsorbed by the catalytic material, i.e. to the use of a proper nanomaterial;
- flux (as large and fast as possible) of Hydrogen from a region of high concentration to a lower one;
- the addition of elements that have Hydrogen concentration increasing with temperature (like Fe);
- the wires that have good performances from the point of view of excess heat values show values of spontaneous voltages quite remarkable;
- the non-equilibrium conditions, as large as possible, look the most important condition to get any type of thermal or electrical anomalies.
So, it is clear that more work is necessary to better understand the complex phenomenology and to increase further useful “anomalies”. There are also clear “connections” with the results obtained by Andrea Rossi and Brian Ahern – which are a first indirect confirmation of this excellent work – but Celani’s apparatus seems more suited to a further experimental study of the parameters and physics involved, hopefully under the umbrella of the INFN.
ALESSANDRO CAVALIERI is a physicist who teaches Mathematics and Physics in a secondary school, in Northern Italy. His cultural interests goes from Chaos Theory to the Mind-Matter connections. He loves to read books on the history of Physics.
As you can see from all my previous posts, I have many first-hand sources. When I prepared the book “E-Cat – The New Fire”, I contacted one of the people who had worked on the development of the E-Cat (therefore, not Rossi). He told me that the Hot-Cat running was a sort of “Sun in a box” and that once he had also seen the reactor sublimate!
Also Andrea Rossi, later, has described this type of event in a comment posted on JoNP:
December 28th, 2013 at 8:32 PM
Very sorry, I cannot answer to this question exhaustively, but I can say something. Obviously, the experiments are made with total respect of the safety of my team and myself. During the destructive tests we arrived to reach temperatures in the range of 2,000 Celsius degrees, when the “mouse” excited too much the E-Cat, and it is gone out of control, in the sense that we have not been able to stop the raise of the temperature (we arrived on purpose to that level, because we wanted to study this kind of situation). A nuclear Physicist, analyzing the registration of the data, has calculated that the increase of temperature (from 1,000 Celsius to 2,000 Celsius in about 10 seconds), considering the surface that has increased of such temperature, has implied a power of 1 MW, while the Mouse had a mean power of 1.3 kW. Look at the photo you have given the link of, and imagine that the cylinder was cherry red, then in 10 seconds all the cylinder became white-blue, starting from the white dot you see in the photo (after 1 second) becoming totally white-blue in the following 9 seconds, and then an explosion and the ceramic inside (which is a ceramic that melts at 2,000 Celsius) turned into a red, brilliant stone, like a ruby. When we opened the reactor, part of the AISI 310 steel was not molten, but sublimated and condensed in form of microscopic drops of steel.
The photo cited by Rossi: a Hot-Cat exhibits a hot-spot during a destructive test, in 2012.
Sublimation is a process during which a solid on heating changes directly into the vapor phase without passing through the intermediate liquid state. When the vapors are cooled, they condense to form solid. The temperature at which a solid changes into vapor is called the sublimation point (and corresponds to the boiling point of the liquid).
Typically, the pressure at which a material sublimate is atmospheric pressure, so the sublimation points are normally referred to the standard pressure of 760 mm Hg, and the temperature is the determining factor to the change of state in those cases. However, more in general, a material will change from solid state to gas state at specific combinations of temperature and surrounding pressure.
The temperature of a material will increase until it reaches the point where the change takes place. It will stay at that temperature until that change is completed. Some substances sublime at room temperature. A common example of this is dry ice, where solid carbon dioxide becomes gaseous without being a liquid during the process.
You can see below its phase diagram:
The phase diagram for carbon dioxide (from Wikimedia).
For each solid, raising temperature at low enough pressure takes the material directly from solid to gas, but at higher pressure it will go through the liquid between. The pressure where that behavior changes turns out to be a lot different for different materials, so at atmospheric pressure some behave some way, some the other. For water, if you lower pressure to about 1/160 of atmospheric pressure, it will go straight from solid to gas.
It is interesting that metals exhibit evidence of a tendency to sublimate – or, more exactly, show volatility – at temperatures considerably below their melting points. Krafft already in 1903 investigated in some detail the volatilization of a number of metals at low pressures. Rosenhain obtained beautiful crystals of sublimed zinc by heating a piece of zinc to 300 °C for some weeks in a glass tube containing hydrogen (!) at atmospheric pressure.
From the book “Hot-Cat 2.0 – How last generation E-Cats are made” we know that the reactors used in these destructive tests were made of metallic and non metallic materials: steel (external cylinder and inner cylinder), a ceramic material (between the two steel cylinders), some heating resistors (made of metal) and nickel (main component of the charge). So it is interesting to check what are the sublimation points for some of such materials.
The sublimation point for nickel is 2800 °C. However, very few metals are used in pure, or even relatively pure, forms. Steel, for example, is the name for a whole family of iron alloys (containing carbon and often some other elements). The boiling point of iron (not steel) is 2750 C, so the sublimation (or boiling) point of steel is likely to be close for most steels: around 3000 °C. Steel melts at much lower temperatures: around 1300-1500 °C.
The phase diagram for pure iron (from Wikipedia).
In the phase diagram above you can see that iron is solid at room pressure and at standard temperature (25 °C), but melts around 1540 °C and sublimate around 2750 °C. Alpha (α) iron, or ferrite, is the name given in material science to pure iron with a body-centered cubic crystal structure. It is this structure which gives steel its magnetic properties and is the classic example of a ferromagnetic material. Mild steel consists mostly of ferrite.
Regarding the ceramic materials contained in Rossi’s type of Hot-Cat used in the destructive tests (different from the alumina used in the Lugano test, as described in the cited book), their melting point is around 1900-2000 °C, and their sublimation point is about 3000-3500 °C.
Therefore, at the end of this “exploration” we can conclude – taking into account also the temperature gradient along the reactor from inside to outside – that the temperature reached in the destroyed Hot-Cats was well beyond 3000 °C! This is extremely interesting, because there is no way to obtain such a result using electrical heating resistors…
This post has been written with the kind collaboration of the physicist Alessandro Cavalieri.