Unless AR is lying to us about the ~ 3 days duration of the SKL running in SSM, 3 days of running in SSM ensures me that AR isn't just fooling himself.

This only assumes that the SKL's output is significant...like over 100 watts continuous.

Has a single member of Rossi's team come forward and vouched for Rossi, saying these SSM tests were performed?
Has a single customer of the SK come forward (you know, the Industrialized one)?
Has a partner admitted working with him? (ABB?, National Instruments?...)
Do the readers of his blog have any concrete evidence to believe anything Rossi posts now?
Extraordinary claims DO NOT require extraordinary evidence, but they DO require evidence just like any claim, to be believed.
If you are swallowing this hook line and sinker, you should think about why you are, before you get taken by someone else at the very least.

When someone comes forward who can be shown as a real person with some kind of real reputation to uphold and directly working with Rossi (not "James Bass") vouches for the ecat SSM test results, I will considering changing my my mind that "Rossi might have something".

https://www.amazon.com/gp/p...

Actually, National Instruments did make a public statement that they had worked with Rossi. Note they could have just stayed silent, but chose to make the statement.

They also donated 100's of thousands in electronics to several parties for research in the field including Universities and participated in an ICCF conference. They weren't writing the possibility off.

There's also Bill Hurley(an engineer of special projects of Andeavor Petroleum, now a subsidiary of Marathon Petroleum who has been involved with Rossi's E-cat. This association is still ongoing.

I no longer have the link, but Hurley has an impressive CV. Is he one of the 6 involved with the current SSM system. I wouldn't be at all surprised. It's just the type of project he'd be involved with according to his history.

William Hurley was on-scene during the Stockholm QX demonstration. I never could never figure out his exact role, however. I don't think he designed any part of the test system for the demonstration nor did he physically handle anything. He made some extremely simple power calculations using numbers that Mr Rossi gave him. I made the same calculations at home at the time and I think anyone in the Stockholm audience could have done the same.

A summary report with some of the calculations was sent to Mats Lewan by Mr. Rossi. It purported to be from William Hurley and had Hurley's name and business affiliation at the end. Lewan published it on his Impossible Invention blog. But the report itself was clearly written by Rossi, not Hurley (it has Rossi's usual fractured English and characteristic misspelling of Stockholm). I asked Lewan if he knew whether Hurley actually had anything to do with it and he replied that he didn't.

As far as I can make out, therefore, Mr. Hurley was window dressing for the Stockholm demonstration. He is a long-time fan of Rossi's with entries on Rossi's blog going back to 2012. He is someone with impressive credentials who nonetheless had no real role in the demo and probably knew nothing about Rossi's device or the nature of the demo before he saw it live, along with the rest of the audience. I would argue that he is very much a James Bass sort of figure. This is exactly the sort of thing we need to guard against in the upcoming SK-Leonardo demonstration. The testers need to have a real role in all aspects of the testing procedure. And there should be no direction, or interference, or deceptive writing of "reports" by Mr. Rossi.

This site should be full, right now, of arguments over what is an acceptable procedure for the upcoming tests of Rossi's newest device. Having Mr. Rossi choose the testers and the conditions of the test is simply not adequate. We need to come to a view on this and then make ift very public. We need to do this because if we don't, Mr. Rossi will try and force feed us something that will cause the usual indigestion in the LENR community. And then where will we be? Where will Rossi himself be? No farther. And that would be a shame.

We don't have the right to demand anything. It's Rossi's decision to do it anyway he wants. We can wait and see how he does it or we can move on.

We have the right to decide what standard of evidence we will find persuasive. And I think it is only a kindness to Mr Rossi to let him know, ahead of time, what those standards are. Otherwise he is wasting his time.

Please help out Mr. Rossi and let him know what type of evidence you would find persuasive.

Omega Z said ...

"Actually, National Instruments did make a public statement that they had worked with Rossi. Note they could have just stayed silent, but chose to make the statement."

However, I note that Steven Krivit looked into a statements from National Instruments and found this... http://news.newenergytimes.... . Krivit claims that there never was a working relationship between Rossi and National Instruments.

Can you reconcile Krivit's claim with yours? Are yo, perhaps referring to a different statement from National Instruments?

Kravitz wanted a private demo of the E-cat. Rossi refused. After that he started attacking Rossi. He said Rossi's petroldragon didn't work.(Depolymerization). The technology worked for many decades before Rossi did it. Germany used it to derive oil from coal.

He then claimed a thermal electric converter that Rossi designed didn't work. A report by the DOD said otherwise even having a university under contract to test it. What they said was it wasn't up for mass production do to manufacturing technology not being up to the task. There's like a 150+ page DOD pdf about it. Kravitz has a vendetta.

I think I will believe Krivit's reporting about National Instruments never having a working relationship with Rossi. Whenever I check out what he says it turns out to be accurate.

You are wrong about the DOD report on Rossi's thermoelectric converter. Krivit is right. You should read the report.

I think Omega Z was referring to a comment from a NI spokesperson quoted here:

https://e-catworld.com/2012...

His comment this morning is intriguing:

========
Andrea Rossi
November 27, 2019 at 8:40 AM

Peter Forsberg:

Welcome back !

With the right partners this could take not much time, because our module has been designed using parts already off the shelf asnd already manufactured in millions of pcs per year. I used all the experience made
in the last years to avoid bottlenecks in the industrialization phase.The passage to a strong industrialization could be much faster than the time to realize the prototype.

Warm Regards,
A.R.
======

My guess is that he is using chips developed to power the cores of CPU chips that now require very high current, low voltages (less than 0.8 volts) and need efficient converters. This Wiki in VRMs summarize some of the requirements for it. Since Rossi has previously stated that the voltage across the device is very small, an efficient power convertor from a low voltage to a high voltage wold also be needed. The VMRS should be able to operate in reverse mode.

VRMs: https://en.wikichip.org/wik...

This situation is causing a lot of emotional response and that placed in context is very understandable, looking at the picture in a humane way, the number of people Worldwide dying and suffering from lack of clean water etc. runs into many millions.
One would think that should be our priority of use if Rossi is genuine.
Rossi is like a man who says he has discovered the cure for all illnesses but for his own reasons is not going to freely release that information to get that cure as quickly as possible to those most in need.
Imagine if one of our own children has Cancer and is dying but the person with the cure will not release it, how would you react and what would you want Rossi to do.
It seems many people are unable to sympathise if those suffering are not very close to them, but all these people have family's that suffer greatly and could be helped very quickly with cheap energy.

Even if Rossi gave them the energy for free, filtration systems would still be far cheaper to produce potable water. And filtration continues to improve. Given time, filtration could and likely will provide potable water as a byproduct to be given away. Boiling water to steam or vapor will never be cheap. It's the nature of the beast.

Speaking of water, maybe Rossi and the E-Cat can help with what Moses has been doing with making water. Really - that's his name:

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

The more people you put on it the faster it will go. Right.

https://cdn.quotesgram.com/...

Have you heard the saying "Slow and steady wins the race" it's typically taken to mean that "haste makes waste" and that things work out better if they're done right the first time. Pushing the timeline hard always entails greater risk of failure and that's an outcome no one should wish upon us, going to market with a product that has hidden flaws won't help anyone or save any kids.

The whole world has cancer, let's not fumble the cure through impatience.

yes

http://static.nautil.us/290...

Oil cartel,natural gas ,and even the solar crowd will jump on ANY reason to kill this and they all have big bucks .Third parties are not to be trusted .Look at pons/fleischmann and M.I.T. Rossi must get it 100% right and release it carefully or the cartels and influencers WILL shoot it down.

Nonsense. Conspiracy theories are for children. This isn't the X Files.

If Rossi or anyone else had a real, working, replicable high-COP over-unity device that they demonstrated to the public, there would be no way to contain the disruption.

Nobody has yet demonstrated such a device. BLP and other folks have devices that are like alternative medicine: they work so poorly that you cannot reliably detect whether or not they work at all. If something ACTUALLY works, it is not "alterantive" medicine, it is just medicine.

If any legitimate scientist had an ACTUAL working LENR device that showed unambiguous high-COP over-unity performance, this could be demonstrated in one afternoon and the world would never stop talking about it.

The reason Pons & Fleischmann were disgraced is precisely because they did NOT have such a device. And even still, the entire world talked about cold fusion for years after their failed demonstration.

Big Industry wars are plentiful in actual historical accounts.

Many labs disproved the MIT work against Pons and Fleischmann. The press helped squelch the science. Replication was tricky and unreliable but it was done.

Corrupt science is seen all the time...see Nutrition Studies by the thousands that were "settled science" at one time but were found out to have been crap promoted by effective political and commercial propaganda...over and over again.

Name call all you want. You are smugly wrong.

yeah,

https://upload.wikimedia.or...

Surely it will ultimately be refined by others - over the years. The concern is that we only have Rossi's word that it will come out, in the event of his demise. He could be another Maurice Ward & take the secret with him. & how many lives could Srarlite have saved.
The real problem is that we let our ego's get in the way of acknowledging that we are only the channels for inventions to come through - for the benefit & service of others ; that's what it's really all about. He already has enough cash he will never spend, if he wants more - people will crowdfund him for his services , he would be richer than Gates in a few days. Then he could spend the rest of his life trying to get rid of his wealth.

You are not taking into consideration that Rossi made his first breakthrough nine years ago, if that had been shared then thousands of scientists Worldwide could have been doing the Research he for some reason does alone.
It is obvious to a five year old child that had that been done, then we could be far ahead of the present situation and SAVING LIVES.
I am asking you how you would feel if you had a dying child and what I suggest above was not done, would you be saying, O I don't mind "Slow and steady wins the race"?

Scientists work on what they're told to work on. Not what they want. The phrase, stay in your own lane bro, comes to mind. Step outside that lane, not only will you not obtain funding, but you may not even have a job. Those 1000's of scientists won't be researching this even if Rossi made the info available.

I'd think with all the funding projects that's been of topic here at ECW, you'd have noticed that. Like 30 million in funding for nuclear energy research. Then they draw the lines on what is acceptable. Like no LENR ect. Going outside those lines. No funding for you.

Decades ago some scientists noted that a treatment for I don't remember what at this time correlated to partial and occasionally complete remission of type 1 diabetes and sometimes type 2.

Only recently has research began to look into this. Funded primarily by philanthropists.

Note should Rossi put a product into the market, it's very likely funding criteria will change, but until then, don't hold your breath.

Go the F&P route?

Who are you blaming for the "F&P route"?

F&P told the world and got gang raped. Success has enemies.

“It is obvious to a five year old” but Rossi has a little
more real life experience than a five year old has.

PS

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

You seem to believe you have some claim on another's labour.Don't know where your entitlement comes from.If Rossi's claim is true and it does enable escaping this earth (and its governments) then those who feel entitled to other's production will lose their control and ability to manipulate through 'feelings'.Bring it on!

What a strange and illogical reply. please explain in some kind of rational English.
You think that the Nazi's labour is not to be criticised?

"If it is closed loop and silent it wouldn’t surprise me if over time the
E-Cat SKL was engineered into something as small as a AAA battery and
could be incorporated into everyday portable consumer products as well
as larger appliances and vehicles."
Why don't you ask Andrea if he thinks this is likely?

I find this very unlikely. The electronics and control box requires a bigger footprint than anything that small. You'll have to settle for a USB and rechargeable batteries.

Mark your calendars!!!!!!!

I have "only" been following this for 4 years, so I guess I am a "newbie". But this is incredible stuff!

One of the nicest no-cost benefits of keeping a google or other e-calendar is that it makes it incredibly easy to enter reminders for birthdays, anniversaries, or any regular or special date in the future you absolutely don't want to forget. Using such features has saved my ass many times in the past years.

So I want to urge all readers of this site to mark Nov. 23 as "ECat-Day", to commemorate the momentous 10/23/2019 announcement by Rossi. We should celebrate this day each year as a community to give our appreciation to Rossi and to celebrate his and our spirit of open-minded exploration that underpins LENR research.

Is it exaggeration to suggest that 11/23 will become a "world wide" holiday? I am thinking like May 1 or Earth Day. If so, may WikiPedia please recognize me as founding it!!!!

J.W.

In response to the following two exchanges with Rossi, all I can say is INCREDIBLE . . . . For when the SKL is engineered into an Ecat SKL hybrid electric car, it starts as fast as an ICE ! ! !
And with a power modulation response time measured in seconds, it should be easy to maintain sufficient charge of the on-board batteries . . . where the batteries may only need to be sufficient for a 40-50 mile range rather than 300-400 mile range, yet with the SKL you have an unlimited range for all intents and purposes.

==============================================

toussaint françois
November 26, 2019 at 9:45 PM

Dear Andrea Rossi,
May I ask 2 questions please.
1- How long does it take to start up the SKL.
2- Is it easy to modulate the power?

Warm Regards
Toussaint François
_________________________________________

Andrea Rossi
November 26, 2019 at 10:10 PM

Toussaint Francois:
1- several seconds
2- yes

Warm Regards,
A.R.

======================================================
2nd===================================================

Steven N. Karels
November 26, 2019 at 10:27 PM

Dear Andrea Rossi,
You said it is easy to modulate the output power. By this do you mean
1. a slow variation, as in seconds, OR
2. a Fast variation, as in a 60 Hz modulation of a DC source?

_____________________________________________

Andrea Rossi
November 26, 2019 at 10:32 PM

Steven N. Karels:
1

Warm regards,
A.R.

Thank you Frank, for keeping this site so engrossing with a large lovely set of great participants including our passionate, knowledgeable and excitable Bob Greenyer and our delightful resident theoretician Axil Axil,

Rossi provides more details, with some being key to this being SLRPI and not LENR/Cold Fusion. He opens the door for SLRPI being a phenomenon extracting from a previously unknown energy source from within the quantum field/foam. With this in mind, he had better find extremely credible people/organizations for 3rd party testers . . . this is an assertion that goes way way way beyond Pons & Fleischmann, IMO.

==================================

PlasmaFan
November 26, 2019 at 1:56 PM

Dear Andrea,
Congratulations on your achievement! It’s extremely exciting to hear that you have been able to close the loop.

1) Does the closed looped E-Cat SKL produce the same total output (thermal and electrical) per unit of internal reactor volume as the E-Cat SK (which primarily produced only heat)?
2) Did the required input power for the E-Cat SKL go up or down compared to the E-Cat SK which consumed only a minuscule quantity of input?
3) Is the plasma ball in the E-Cat SKL free floating (not touching the electrodes)?
4) Is the E-Cat SKL like the E-Cat QX in that it has one cathode and one anode?
5) Once you stated that one of your systems could produce thrust for propulsion. Have you performed any tests to determine if the E-Cat SKL is producing thrust or any sort of field configuration that could manipulate apparent mass, inertia, or gravity?
6) Do you believe the scalar and vector potentials are indeed physical realities and not mathematical abstractions?
7) Do you believe that you have minimized any type(s) of nuclear reactions (LENR, cold fusion, etc) and are now mainly tapping energy from the fabric of space?

Thank you very much for any answers you can provide.

Sincerely,
Plasma Fan

_________________________________________

Andrea Rossi
November 26, 2019 at 6:32 PM

Plasma Fan:
Thank you!

Answers:
1- no
2- the Ecat has not input energy, it generates the energy it needs
3- confidential
4- yes
5- no
6- a potential cannot be an abstraction
7- my effect is not cold fusion and is not LENR as this term is commonly defined. The definition “Energy from the fabric of the space” in itself is privy of meaning unless you define the meaning of every term of it

Warm Regards,
A.R.

He has better than a theory, he has a working prototype to study.
Many theories will emerge regardless.
As long as it's continually tested to be safe (and safer and more environmentally friendly) than other options, it should be implemented.
Initially in controlled facilities with small-scale, modular power generating gensets.
These would be on industrial facilities very close to large consumers, with 24/7 monitoring.
In markets as the USA, Europe and Japan.
Producing and renting these gensets will make him a trillionaire in less than two years, whilst remaining largely a private company.
Meanwhile, the E-cat will be gaining a reputation for safe and clean operation.

Rossi has already affirmed that having this prototype allows him/his team to push the envelope defined by the 2-5-10 control parameters that enable the Self Sustain Mode. Thus, enabling him to "map" the SLRPI phenomenon, driving toward a comprehensible manageable theory of SLRPI. Thus, to improve the SSM technology.

What a time to be alive.

What do you mean by SLRPI ?

Rossi's paper at ResearchGate is titled "Long Range Particle Interaction" (LRPI)
I once asked him if he would update his paper to reflect his success with the Ecat SK Leonardo, renaming it "Stable Long Range Particle Interaction" (SLRPI)? He said "Yes".

Thanks for this explanation!

Note that the answer to question #1, No, doesn't specify whether power density has increased or decreased relative to the standard SK.

Nor was Rossi asked what percentage of the potential output the test is being run at; the conservative approach would dictate starting small and waiting for issues to arise before gradually increasing the output in stages. Among other things the electricity to heat ratio may improve simply by running it harder, but if there are only a couple of prototypes available, right now, caution would be the order of the day till more show up and you can push one of them to the wall to see what happens.

The answer to #7 is interesting, Rossi, by implication, retorts that the question is poorly framed but doesn't actually rule out interaction with the 'vacuum'. A more carefully constructed question might elicit a less ambiguous answer.

I think it fair to say that it would be impossible for Rossi to answer every conceivable question to everyone's satisfaction at this point so early in the game. He is facing a tsunami of curiosity.

Hi Buck,

I confess; it was a gibe at Bob's glib analysis.

I get it. There is a bit of fun watching one and all, optimists and pessimists, come to terms with what has been said and what is currently being shared . . . putting a puzzle together with the picture facing away as an extreme metaphor for the situation.

Is it similar to Thomas Henry Moray’s device? (4:50 min.)

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Good questions, I think I know who wrote them also.

Ross shares his definition of an “independent test” and “certification”.

=============================

Colin Watters
November 26, 2019 at 1:08 PM

Dear Mr Rossi,
Please can you clarify what you mean by an “independent test” and “certification”? Thanks.
__________________________________

Andrea Rossi
November 26, 2019 at 6:46 PM

Colin Watters:
Independent test means a test made by specialists that do not depend from us, Certification in this case means to certify the data related to the efficiency. In other words: means certify that there are not other energy sources and that the energy necessary to make the Ecat operation is generated by the same Ecat.

Warm Regards,
A.R.

good

He seems to mean verification, not certification. That is indeed good.