We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

Axil Axil • 2 years ago

Andrea Rossi
August 1, 2020 at 2:27 AM
Yes, now we must work on reliability.
Warm Regards,

The LENR reaction eats the structure of reactors. 10,000 small wires will be a reliability issue.

Axil Axil • 2 years ago

Regarding: "An EVO is basically a gravitational transformer ". An EVO has nothing to do with gravitation.

sam • 2 years ago

Andrea Rossi
July 31, 2020 at 12:49 PM
Aleksei Savchenko and All Readres of the JoNP:
Just finished now my job of today.
In September, Covid 19 permitting, we will have an important third party nominated by a Partner that will control the measurements remaking them.
Therefore for now you are just taking my word, right or wrong as it might be, albeit I think I am right.
The new Ecat SKL is the masterpiece of my life. It works in closed loop and generates the electric energy to fuel itself, plus generates 4 kWh/h of electric energy. I consumed only 130 Wh/h to flow away the thermal energy that is irradiated from the Ecat ( about 1 kWh/h of thermal energy is in total emitted ).
The volume of the Ecat reactor is in total 100 cubic cm, while the whole is contained in a heat dissipator box whose dimensions are cm 20 x 20 x 20, plus we have outside it the control box, which is extremely complex.
More work has to be done, but now for a couple of weeks I will take my holidays, because I am very tired.
A big step forward has been done. We should have an electric engine with infinite autonomy, it seems. We’ll see.
Warm Regards,

HS61AF91 • 2 years ago

heartfelt congratulations Dr. Rossi, enjoy your holiday!

Cashmemorz • 2 years ago

Then imagine what he could have attained if using Mills theory to get it even more accuretly configured. But it would have just made him lazy, as most of the work is in knowing the physics mechanism involved and the rest would be the fitting of parts, to make it do what the theory predicted. Much what Mills has been doing in making at least 4 items when Rossi just made 1. See the difference that having an accurate theory allows the inventor to attain?

Barbierir • 2 years ago

This sounds very very exciting but I have also some deja-vu vibes. I hope the third party test will be able to proceed in september and that eventually we get official informations. That would change the world..

Stephen • 2 years ago


Is my maths right?

An electric car may typically use 15 to 20 kWh per 100 km
This would produce 4kWh*24 = 96 kWh per day

Which would be 480 to 640 km a day?

Would this 100 ml reactor less than half a cup (perhaps a 5cm cylinder 5cm in diameter) in a 20cm sides cubed cooler produce enough power over one day to power an electric car for 640 km? And do the same day after day for every day it works there after?

This is more than enough for a typical household use too.

You might not be able to put it in your pocket or briefcase, a hope I had for the first SKL. But this is amazing.

Gerard McEk • 2 years ago

You would need a 100 kWh battery to match its 24 hrs energy rating.
Say you have a fully charged 50 kWh battery. Assuming you use 20 kW continuously on a motorway, coasting 100 km/h (65 M/h), you can drive 3.125 hrs = 312,5 km, and with a 100 kWh battery 625 km in 6.25 hours, while the ECat is continuously charging the battery. I’m not sure 20 kW is realistic for 100 km/h.

Leonard Weinstein • 2 years ago

20 kW is more than enough. Except for accelerating, most cars use about 15 horsepower to overcome aerodynamic drag and road friction.This is under 12 kW. Batteries of a few kW-h (say 5 or so) would allow acceleration and use of air conditioners. The need for air conditioner would add a need for 2 or so added kW capacity, so a net 15 kW generator and 5 kW-h battery covers all needs for most cars. Large vehicles obviously need more. Typical use would be about 700 hours driving a year, and the SKL would last about 10 years before needing refuel.

Bob Greenyer • 2 years ago

I have no Idea how Rossi can just stop work at that point and take two weeks off, I admire him, I know I couldn't. Piantelli would be in the lab on Christmas day monitoring a reactor that had been running for 2 years producing a COP of 1.4. A closed loop reactor, that REVOLVES ;-) - I simply would not have the will power to leave it alone and go off and chill out.

I'd be worried that I or my lab would succumb to some terrible twist of fate and the information would be lost to humanity.

When I had my SpO2 at 94% and was struggling to breathe, all I could think about (intellectually) was all the stuff that I could share that I had not shared and what a mockery of my life it would have been to have passed on and not shared it - not to mention the pointless sacrifices of my loved ones.

Stephen • 2 years ago

I would guess he set this goal for a while.

A break is important for health I hope he can take it.

I guess he won’t be far way from his reactor in these days though.

sam • 2 years ago

Andrea Rossi
July 31, 2020 at 10:27 AM
Chuck Davis and All:
I am still working with the test. Going well. We are in SSM, closing the loop: the Ecat SKL feeds itself.
I will give information about the first numbers later today.
Warm Regards,

Chuck Davis
July 31, 2020 at 10:14 AM
Dear Andrea, Congratulations on completing your marathon soldering endeavor! It reminded me of a dyslexic technician that worked for me back in my working life. 90% of the time we had trouble with a measurement was due to his reversing the + and – conductors so that was the first thing we checked. But in your case I don’t think that is a problem since there are no wire pairs, just single conductors.

Warm regards,
Chuck Davis

sam • 2 years ago

Drew G July 30, 2020 at 9:27 PM
Dr Rossi:
Looking forward to videos of the test. Best of luck tomorrow AM.
Andrea Rossi July 31, 2020 at 6:35 AM
Drew G:
Later I will publish here the surprising results.
Warm Regards,
Sam July 31, 2020 at 1:26 AM
Hello DR Rossi
When can you tell us
the results of SKL test?
Translate Andrea Rossi July 31, 2020 at 6:32 AM
Later ( goinf well)
Warm Regards,

Stephen • 2 years ago

Whew it’s “going well” so far.

Given how amazing this is already “Surprising results” Is quite a couple of words too!

I’m definitely on the edge of my seat now.

Gerard McEk • 2 years ago

Don’t fall off! ;)

Stephen • 2 years ago

Maybe I should put a cushion on the floor.... or maybe the ceiling ... just in case ;)

Seriously though I’m just happy to hear it’s working.

Bob Greenyer • 2 years ago

I find sitting on the floor helps lower your insurance costs

Desireless • 2 years ago

Hey folks!
New reactor prepared for running. It has capability for running at 1400°C or even over 3000°C with W coil.
It can work as particle/ion accelerator and can generate plasma discharge. It can generate thermionic electron emmision.
Coil is electrically separated with the outer shell.


I believe COP 5+ can be generated. I will check it during few days.

LION • 2 years ago
bob dash • 2 years ago

Congrats! What's the fuel mixture?

Desireless • 2 years ago

Identical to Mizuno R20

Gerard McEk • 2 years ago

Looks robust! What reactants do you use?
Anyway, success!

Bob Greenyer • 2 years ago


Is the outer cylinder Ferromagnetic? If not, wrap it in any cheap iron.

NOTE: Love the clover in the lawn.

Stephen • 2 years ago

Hopefully some four leaved ones even if they are inside the big metal thing ;)

Cashmemorz • 2 years ago

"Andrea says the distance involved in the interactions is between the atomic and nuclear scale, in other words it involves a reaction totally
unfamiliar with present day academic understanding i.e. entailing a major problem in the understanding of LENRs."

That admits to a location and/or scale of a reaction that is very much in line with Mills' Hydrino reaction which has that same scales of energy coming from it. That scale is 1000 times that of energy possible to release via chemical reactions as differentiated from 1,000,000 times greater scales of the energy possible to release from nuclear reactions.

Also the EVO's or Exotic Vacuum Objects is based on unfounded grounds, that being the assumed existence of the waving type of wave assumed to exist or to be derived from space, as the base on which Standard Quantum Mechanics is developed. That base has been shown to be subtly in error where the actual waves are a fixed shape in space as a circular standing wave forming a 3D sphere of resonance but not in the spatial regime but only in the energetic. That is how the orbitsphere of the electron and similar spherical topology of the photon have their mechanism operate. That similar 3D topology was recently photographically captured to allow that solid spherical shape to be inferred from the 3D sinusoids or hillocks in that photograph. That right there is a point of correlation between how the photon is modelled under Standard Quantum Mechanics and under the Grand Unified Theory-Classical Physics of Mills derivation. Other than in the particles known to exist, there are no waves possible from being produced from empty space.Since the GUT-CP is so accurate a theory it sa-can be fully depended on to also have all of its predictions be relied on to be equally accurate. That said then, space on its own is an absolute in that it cannot be further broken down or get derived from it any sub entities. This has been corroborated by the other predictions of Mills' theory GUT-CP which were corroborated in many instances of its predictions. So the Casimir Effect in which the space derived waves are assumed but not proven, is an effect actually caused by the attractive forces arising from the outer electron of atoms in smooth metallic surfaces. Making premature assumptions without understanding how those attractive forces actually cause two very smooth plates to be caused to come together and in fact weld into one piece of material as, in intermingling of the atoms at the two surface, does a great disservice to those who are learning physics, by way of misinformation about what is actually happening in the pursuit of an accurate description of the cosmos, space included.

Gerard McEk • 2 years ago

If Andrea’s reactor can run for one year without refueling and would generate say 1 kW continuously, then I guess the Mills Hydrino theory will not hold either.

Cashmemorz • 2 years ago

Mills theory was used to make 4 items that work exactly as predicted by that theory. The first was n 1986 to explain to the USA Department of Defence how the Free Electron Laser works. That was accepted by the DoD in 1986 and then by the academic physics community in 2019.

Haus, H. A. (1986). "On the radiation from point charges". American Journal of Physics. 54 (12): 1126–1129. Bibcode:1986AmJPh..54.1126H


The second items was the Millsian molecular modeller which, was fully developed in 2010 and since then used by thousands. It is 100 times more accurate than any similar item developed under the guidance of Standard quantum Mechanics:.


The third item was the validation of th Hydrino reaction in 2012 at:

"Validation of the Observation of Soft X-ray Continuum Radiation from Low-Energy Pinch Discharges in the Presence of Molecular Hydrogen Alexander Bykanov, PhD Spectroscopy was performed at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA), Cambridge, MA, USA by CfA spectroscopists under contract to GEN3 Partners".

The fourth is the Suncell now validated at over 100 hours running


and in Self Sustained Mode.:


Rossi has one items which is not much ahead of Mills fourth item in development.

Rossi=1, Mills =4

Something like at least 3 or 4 items must be working on Mills side to a very high level, like close to 100% of confidence. On the side of Rossi one item and at a 50% level of confidence.