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

Axil Axil • 12 months ago

Looking back to the QuarkX demo, It makes sense as to what went wrong with the QX design. The test failed because an electric feedback current destroyed Rossi's controller. At that early juncture Rossi was trying to produce heat. But this controller issue became a major stumbling block to Rossi's development plans.

What Rossi then realized was that he could capture this feedback current and produce electric power rather than heat energy. Rossi spend the next few years in engineering electron capture. Rossi can to understand that the feedback current was the source of heat production and if Rossi could engineer perfect current capture, then all heat production could be avoided.

It dawned on Rossi that the production of pure electrical energy speaks against any fusion reaction as the energy source of his reaction. Fusion cannot produce electrons, fusion produces high speed neutrons and nuclear fragments only. So Rossi concluded that his energy source must come from the vacuum. It has been four years since the QuarkX demo. All that time was devoted to the development of electron capture technology development.

It is no wonder that such halting development of LENR technology takes decades to complete. At least Rossi is logical in his development efforts. Most other LENR developers are not logical. Egley for example produces electrical power in his reactor but states that fusion is its fundamental power source. The same is true for Ed Storms who has detected electrical production in his experimentation. But Ed still holds that LENR is cold fusion.

kazmroz • 12 months ago

Mills has always claimed, since 2000, that what all LENR/cold fusion or Rossi' reaction is doing dose not include nucleas reactions, but only and always involves electrons. Those electrons are always falling below ground state, from which orbital energy difference is drawn useful power.
Slowly, but surely, that one point has been made clear as the so -called LENR reactions come to be better understood. That is also due to there being only one physics theory, that can ever cover any and all phenomena. GUT-CP fills that bill ever more, as all other theories become better understood and inevitably get closer to being explained only by GUT-CP. Case for GUT-CP rests.

Axil Axil • 12 months ago

In a recent prototype of the SKLep, Rossi used photocells to convert light to electric current. This is the same as the SunCell. The recent Rossi reactors produce EUV light as well as electrons. Furthermore, the light produced by the SKL reactors is the same spectrum as that of the SunCell being in the EUV wavelengths.

It is my belief that the reaction generated in the SKL system and the SunCell is the same with both identical reactions being initiated by electrical spark production.

The conclusion is that the SunCell reaction is based on EVO production as is the Rossi reaction and associated extraction of energy from the vacuum taking place in both systems.

By the way, Rossi uses xenon gas to produce ionization based electron production of EUV photons. Mills should do the same method instead of the inelegant carbon based wavelength downshift wavelength production process and solar cells.

Mirco Romanato • 12 months ago

Every actual application MUST deal with keeping the feedback under control.
This is, maybe, the reason Rossi is "developing" proof of concept products instead of releasing a generic power source.

Bruno • 12 months ago

We should temper our enthusiasm. For something concrete to happen, 3 things need to happen:

1) The test actually needs to take place. Don't be surprised if waiting for this test drags on and on and on.

2) The test needs to be legitimate, which means conducted by an expert, recognized (and recognizable) independent third party person or organization. Rossi cannot control the test beyond what is needed to hide the contents of his black box. Up until this point, Rossi's tests have been underwhelming, with just enough to maintain excitement, but ALWAYS with holes that reasonable skeptics can view with suspicion. Let's face it. If Rossi has what he claims, there is no reason to not completely blow this thing out of the water, giving the world such a demonstration that even his biggest skeptics will have nothing to say.

3) Observed by plenty of independent people.

Over the years I have gone from Rossi cheerleader to being deeply skeptical. I remain deeply skeptical, and do not anticipate a convincing demonstration. I hope that I am wrong.

gdaigle • 1 year ago

Question and Response about the EV demo:

Dear Dr. Rossi,
I can imagine that after your test of the Ecat SSM to recharge an EV while it is being driven, there will be many skilled enthusiasts anxious to repeat your test once the Ecat and the AI employed are available through your firm.

Can you say whether or not you will be providing a schematic of components used in the test some time after its completion?

Obviously, you will not be revealing any of the interior components of the E-Cat devices or AI prior to when they are available for sale, but otherwise (while providing no guarantees of success nor any responsibility for legal liability) will you provide instructions on how to construct such an assembly of components?

Warm regards,
Greg

2023-06-24 01:11 Andrea Rossi

Gregory Daigle:
We cannot give restricted information, for obvious reasons,
Warm Regards,
A.R.

It sounds like Rossi isn't planning on providing a schematic of his assembled components for the EV demo even after the demo is completed and E-Cats and their associated AI go on sale. Why would he not make such a schematic available? That would be an immediate red flag for anyone wanting to use the ECat to duplicate his demo. Or might there be other "restricted information" that we currently are not aware of?

Axil Axil • 12 months ago

Rossi does not want anybody to replicate his research. The less that people know about what Rossi is doing the more Rossi is happy about it. Its a wonder that we know anything about what Rossi is doing.

kazmroz • 12 months ago

"Rossi does not want anybody to replicate his research."
No one can, since Rossi is replicating what Mills is doing. That is also indicated by Rossi being a few steps behind the hydrino reaction and claiming it to be something different.

Axil Axil • 12 months ago

Oh contraire, Mills is replicating what Rossi is doing. That is also indicated by Mills being a few steps behind the coherent cluster mechanism based reaction and claiming it to be something different.

This is why I predict that the SunCell will fall apart due to the production of transmutation of its structure. When you see that occur, then you will know the truth.

gdaigle • 12 months ago

I should note that Rossi changed his reply. It now reads:

Gregory Daigle:
We cannot give restricted information, because the system implies also information about parts of the Ecat that are restricted know how.
Warm Regards,
A.R.


So Rossi is saying that any schematic would necessarily have to include information about parts of the Ecat that are proprietary. I'm wondering what that would be? Since there would be no need to include details of the inside of the Ecat, I am presuming that it is the nature of the AI that would be revealed. That, or, there is an additional component specific to use with the EV maker that they would not want revealed.

kazmroz • 12 months ago

That is another point indicating that those innards are replicating the same reaction as occurs in the hydrino rection. Rossi's work, as much as any one else's in the LENR /cold fusion sector, is using the hydrino reaction, exactly as Mills has always claimed, since he left the cold fusion crowd.

Bruno • 12 months ago

I don't buy it. The E-Cat, as claimed by Rossi, can be defined as a black box that produces electricity. HOW can the innards of the E-Cat be revealed by drawing electricity from it?

Axil Axil • 12 months ago

See my post above. Rossi is happy that they all think that the reaction is cold fusion.

https://e-catworld.com/2023...

Mirco Romanato • 1 year ago

I suggest this mean they could have support from the EV manufacturer.

PaulSD • 1 year ago

If Rossi wanted to sell anything he would be demonstrating an e-cat ssm outputting 10W as his specification claims, and have that validated by a trusted third party. He could sell them immediately after that.

Steve Albers • 1 year ago

Would he want to sell the EV system with the car possibly included, rather than simple E-cats?

Bruno • 12 months ago

Rossi cannot even get funding to deliver 100w E-Cats. Where would he get money to build and sell E-Cat powered cars? If he has what he claims, his best play is to sell or license his technology to big companies, including auto manufacturers.

gdaigle • 12 months ago

That is likely. But even if EV automotive enthusiasts create "do it yourself" assemblies to turn your EV into a self-charging system, I doubt it would significantly reduce sales to the EV maker offering the system as an option. Plus, such an option could take several years for EV makers to get ready for consumers, while the automotive aftermarket producing a stand-alone assembly can turn on a dime.

Mark Levan • 1 year ago

sound like he wants to sell them to the ev makers

Steve Albers • 12 months ago

Even a single EV maker could be sufficient to reach the pre-order target with a run of about 4000 cars.

Horshu • 1 year ago

I strongly expect the demo to be the car driven about 5 miles an hour for an hour or so, before stopping due to some "technical issue" that has them working on the car for a couple of hours, rinse/repeat.

Alan DeAngelis • 1 year ago

Or use it as a slow moving platform to shoot buffalo in order to reduce global methane (win win).

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/f...

Steve Albers • 12 months ago

Probably a better methane reduction would come by switching from cows back to buffalo. WIth the more natural ecosystem there'd likely be less methane and we'd return closer to the pre-industrial background levels (about 1/3 of the present values).

Mark Levan • 1 year ago

go for texas ferral hogs insted . they are more of a problem and less well controlled.

Alan DeAngelis • 1 year ago

That would be a good topic for discussion at the Hollywood Climate Summit (at 11:30 minutes).

https://rumble.com/v2vxs16-...

Alan DeAngelis • 1 year ago
Axil Axil • 1 year ago

The question: How can an EVO (aka polariton condensate) generate anti spacetime, a condition of the vacuum that can convert spacetime into energy.

The ability to produce anti-spacetime is a characteristic of superconductivity. To set the stage, the Higgs field is a superconductor. It gives mass and charge to electrons and does not give mass to photons. Superconductivity preforms the opposite function for electrons within the superconductor by removing mass and charge from the electrons within the superconductor and gives mass to the photon. So superconductivity undoes what the Higgs field does for electrons and photons.

The mechanism that applies these properties to electrons and photons is the vacuum energy potential or value(VEV).

So the VEV of superconductivity is the negative of the VEV of the Higgs field.

A polariton condensate is a superconductor and has negative vacuum energy. This energy is the opposite vacuum energy of the Higgs field which has positive vacuum energy,

Everything remain stable because the EVO is partitioned off from the VEV of the universe by a domain wall. The EVO can exist at any temperature no matter how high because of the domain wall. For example, the SAFIRE system is a macro EVO ate temperatures of hundreds of thousands of C. The vacuum inside the EVO does not interact with the universe while it is stable except through its vortexes. Only when the EVO becomes unstable and explodes will its negative vacuum interact with the positive vacuum of the universe. This interaction which takes the form of a Bosenova will results in a dissolution of both the EVO and the spacetime that the EVO was occupying into energy.

This process was first experimentally observed in a Bosenova of a condensate of ultra cold rubidium atoms which is a superconductor https://physics.aps.org/art...

Bosenova
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

In the particular experiment when a bosenova was first detected, transitioning the self-interaction from repulsive to attractive caused the BEC to implode and shrink to a size smaller than the optical detector's minimum resolution limit, and then suddenly "explode." In this explosion, about half of the atoms in the condensate superficially seemed to have "disappeared" from the experiment altogether, i.e., they were not detected in either the cold particle remnants nor in the expanding gas cloud produced.

The 'missing' atoms are almost certainly still around in some form, but just not in a form that we can detect them in our current experiment, the two likely possibilities are that they have formed into molecules of two rubidium atoms stuck together.[2] or they have gotten enough energy from somewhere to fly away fast enough that they are out of our observation region before we look for them,"[3]

— Carl Wieman, Space.com
GordonDocherty • 12 months ago

My understanding of exciton–polaritons is that they are bosonic quasiparticles that exist inside semiconductor microcavities - there's an excellent video on what an exciton-polarton is here:

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

So, a polariton condensate would be "a stacking" of these quasi-particles "occupying the same quantum state" (spin/polarization etc.) - so, in effect and to the outside world, like a highly energetic form of a single quasi-particle.

Should such a quasi-particle "explode", however, then it would release a lot of e-m energy at a set frequency as the (super-imposed) electrons recombined with the holes they had vacated.

So, an intense e-m burst could be expected, but what I can't see is how that could support / cause an Electro Nuclear Collapse site feeding a worm hole through to an second Electro Nuclear reGeneration site.

On the other hand, it does very much look like an EVO "closes off" a "bubble" of spacetime (or, as I prefer it, a fractal aether) that can then be more energy / mass / "stuff" dense than the surrounding environment (so that an EVO is a bubble of squashed spacetime / fractal aether) - so creating a gradient across the EVO wall (analogous to a cell containing water with a higher concentrate of salts than a surrounding fluid in which the cell sits), although that gradient only becomes visible and has an effect when the EVO wall disintegrates in some way.

While the EVO wall holds, however, it also looks like the EVO does not interact with the universe. So, thinking of it this way, the "negative space" is a bubble of "more concentrated space" - but all made of the same stuff (in a spacetime / fractal aether sense).

This decoupling would have implications for the mass of an EVO, however, as the EVO is now decoupled from the Higgs field (or deeper levels of the fractal aether, assuming that "fields" and "field lines" represent connecting points of something-or-other deemed equal according to some scale providing a simplifying abstraction highlighting the value being measured over other, "non-essential" physical characteristics - like isobars, isotherms, countours, etc). This, again, appears to be the case - and explains how a "chain mail" wall of EVOS covering a body could actually partition off that body from the surrounding spacetime / fractal aether, so making the "body within the EVO shroud" appear "weightless".

Not sure about "invisibility" cloaking, however, as polaritons appear to be quite light-frequency dependent, so either light shone on an EVO would reflect or the EVO would appear as a "dark sphere / black hole" - unless, in some way, a polariton EVO shroud were able to interact with all wavelengths of light in some way, bending the light around the shroud.

Anyway, just my tuppence-worth.

Steve D • 1 year ago

Where does ZPE fit in here? Is it an encompassing term describing the above sequences or another name for (anti) space time?

Axil Axil • 12 months ago

The Higgs field defines what the universe is. If we can change the Higgs field we can redefine what the universe is.

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

Axil Axil • 1 year ago

The theory is as follows:
The EVO is a polariton condensate which is a superconductor. This type of superconductor can create a negative Higgs field (aka) anti-spacetime. When an aggregation of polaritons become coherent (all the polaritons in the aggregation assume the same global waveform) is when the anti-spacetime forms.

When the universe was a few nanoseconds old, it cooled down enough for it to become a superconductor and the Higgs field formed. So the Higgs field is a superconductor.

The Bose condensate as a superconductor has a mechanism called the Higgs (or amplitude) mode. The plot of this energy potential looks like a Mexican hat... the same as the Higgs field. This potential is associated with spontaneous symmetry breaking. Both superconductivity and the Higgs field generate spontaneous symmetry breaking except that superconductivity's potential is the opposite to the Higgs field.

The Higgs mode is the one that goes up and down (sigma - σ) the potential in the figure below.

The Higgs field defines how the ZPE works. If the Higgs field changes, so does the nature of ZPE. For example, the Higgs field defines how the electron works. If the Higgs field changes, the electron field would also change. For example, in a Higgs field change case, the electron might now behave like a photon, or a proton and neutron might not be able to form. This is what an EVO does. It can change the way particles and fields present themselves and the laws of nature to change. This is the cause of transmutation.

The EVO is unstable. When it is destroyed, the vacuum domain wall that separates the EVO from spacetime will go away and the EVO's spacetime and the spacetime of the universe will come into contact and mix. Both the EVO and the spacetime that the EVO was occupying will both be converted to energy. This is were vacuum energy production comes from.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...

Steve D • 1 year ago

Thanks Axil. So the EVO can cause local disturbances to the uniformity of the Higgs field leading to transient particle characteristic change, electron to photon as you say. Looks like a micro universe / anti space time within the EVO where upon contact with the normal a micro big bang occurs, a bosenova.
If the the ecat proves its worth there will be a big demand for explanations like you provide. The mathematics of Rossi's LRPI is beyond the scope of many to appreciate.

Ernest Dallafior • 1 year ago

Is your polariton a combination of an electron with a photon from the plasma?

Axil Axil • 1 year ago

There are over 70 types of polaritons that have been so far discovered. Each are a superposition of an electron (dressed) and some form of boson.

see for details

https://www.degruyter.com/d...

Ernest Dallafior • 1 year ago

My question is about the origination of the photon that formed the polariton specifically in the programs that claim OU results. I know about the different types of polaritons.

Axil Axil • 1 year ago

We saw in the QX reactor demo that Rossi used 100,000 cycle RF to pump the EVOs. So Rossi is using RF based photons. in the KL style reactors

Ernest Dallafior • 1 year ago

I thought the RF was used only to help ionize the gas or to impart kinetic energy to the electrons.

Axil Axil • 1 year ago

As shown at the QuarkX demo video, the 8.3 second cycle starts with a high rise spark, then a 4 second power production stage where sharp voltage spicks from bosenova of EVO show along with the RF pumping that feeds the EVOs, then the RF pumping stops for 4 seconds and so does the bosenovas.

https://youtu.be/wS7ge56CNhw

f sedei • 1 year ago

"they have gotten the energy from somewhere." Maybe this " somewhere" is the discovery for the secret to Rossi's Secret Sauce. What could it be?

Ernest Dallafior • 1 year ago

Perhaps something that enhances the supply of electrons forming the cluster.

f sedei • 1 year ago

Rossi claims that one other person knows what this something is. After all these years, it is still, surprisingly, the baffling question. Next, who is that confident. Or, does it matter?

Ernest Dallafior • 1 year ago

Maybe its me. I mentioned Cesium and he has now baned me from his site.(eernie1).

Shuttle Designer • 12 months ago

Silence of the hams.

Ernest Dallafior • 12 months ago

I guess we all are hams in one way or another. The various theories proposed by authors on this site and AR's site cannot be really proven. People also debate whether even accepted QM theories hold water. Einstein be damned. Every person to his own liking. Worst case for me is the ideas proposed by mathematicians who claim to be able to understand the workings of the universe until someone comes up with another proposal that seems more correct. Saw this happen many times in my lifetime. To each his own.

f sedei • 1 year ago

Nooooooooo!!!

Axil Axil • 1 year ago

In a superconductive molecule like ultra dense hydrogen, that formation of the Bose condensate that surrounds the molecule is amplified by the removal of the mass and charge of the dressed electrons as they each enter the condensate because the positive core of the molecule is highly positively charged and is forceful in attracting new negatively charged electrons to the surface of the molecule.

For example, in the LION micro-diamond, ultra dense deuterium forms in the lattice defects within the micro diamond. These molecules are the secret souse that supports lattice enabled LENR.

Stephen • 1 year ago

The energy expressed in the surrounding EM vacuum and “space time” via phase coupling and coherence transfer across a EM domain wall. Unless it is entangled with a specific object that it reacts against is my hunch. The “anti space time” may not be “another universe” but rather manifest as cosmological constant space time cooling/expansion in our own one, what we sometimes call “dark energy” , or perhaps manifest as gravity. I’m not sure which, but may be both depending on the local effect in play and direction of coherence transfer.

Maybe a kind of holographic quantum gravity model that is a reciprocal effect on the other side of a domain wall rather than manifested and radiating locally from the local source. That through phase manifests as a field effect in gravity and space time.

If I’m not wrong Axil’s thoughts and experience about Higgs and coherent matter and superconductivity and researched papers he cites are fitting or using established scientific models and language to explain the same concept at least it seems to be moving or converging that way to me.

I’m fascinated by it. Are we beginning to see a handshake in phase across a domain wall

https://www.thesistinechape...

Axil Axil • 1 year ago

This post
https://e-catworld.com/2023...
puts forth the theory that dark matter is a Bose condensate light years in size. Such a mega EVO would generate a zone of anti space time (aka anti de Sutter space)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

The domain wall around these mega EVOs would only allow their gravity to be detected by our universe.

This negative space time might explain the the vacuum catastrophe where the negative space time of EVO based dark matter reduces the vacuum energy potential in our universe. See starting at 5:53 in this video for an explanation

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

Axil Axil • 1 year ago

The Domain wall is a concept that comes from the science of the early universe

https://phys.org/news/2013-....

Physicists looking to test theory of 'cosmic domain walls'

Also see

https://www.encyclopedia.co...

I remember a video produced by Bob that showed a EVO structure that showed two different patterns that had been impressed into transmuted matter. These two regions were separated by a boundary that completely surrounded these regions and that was one micron in width. I speculate that this boundary was produced by a EVO based domain wall.

Axil Axil • 1 year ago

Stephen thanks for your interest

Here I will put into context the Domain wall of the EVO. Chukanov stated in his patent this experimental observation about the EVO as follows:

Note: Chukanov call the EVO a quantum macro object

https://patents.google.com/...

Methods and systems for generating high energy photons or quantum energy

Another unique characteristic of the quantum macro object is its nucleus. It is believed by the inventor that the nucleus is a two-dimensional object because a quantum material object can only be in a “closed two-dimensional formation.” The proton (nucleon) component of the quantum macro object is “open to the outside.” It has a sharp line of demarcation separating this two-dimensional object from the surrounding environment.

During some experiments, the quantum macro object was touched with a metal stick. In this experiment, the metal stick could not penetrate into the nucleus because the nucleus possessed no volume. Instead, the nucleus was deformed by the metal stick. Thus, the quantum macro object behaved like a solid. During these experiments, the dimensions of the surface of the nucleus did not change either. The quantum macro object nucleus is “closed to the inside,” therefore, no macro-material formation can penetrate through the quantum surface.

The nucleus of the quantum macro object is also impermeable to electrical current. In one experiment, a rather weak high voltage current (in some experiments: U=15,000 volts, I=0.01 amps) was used to create an arc discharge between two electrodes. Instead of penetrating the nucleus and taking the shortest route between two points (the electrodes), the electrical current traveled around the nucleus of the quantum macro object, thus sort of “sliding” along the surface of the nucleus.

Several experiments have led the inventor to formulate many beliefs about the quantum macro object. First, the quantum macro object is a giant macro atom composed of a two-dimensional quantum nucleonic nucleus and a three-dimensional electronic shelf. Second, the quantum macro object is an unusual material object behaving much like a material point in space. On the quantum surface of this two-dimensional material body, there are no differentiated points or areas. Third, the nucleus of the quantum macro object is a closed two-dimensional material formation, which can be deformed without changing the volume of the surface. Fourth, it is not possible to create the quantum macro object between two closed surfaces (like ordinary plasma). Fifth, the surface of the nucleus of the quantum macro object is much like a mirror in which every particle can see its counterpart.

Because Chukanov could produce an EVO 20 cm in size, he was able to show experimentally that the EVO cannot interact with probes from our universe. The Domain wall is what separates and protects the EVO from intrusion of anything from our universe from accessing the interworking of the EVO.

A post about negative space time to come