Claud
December 4th, 2011 at 12:58 PM
Dear A.R. to show an e-cat working on a video livestream, a mere laboratory corner framing with a single device on a table would be enough!
It would be fabulous!
Andrea Rossi
December 4th, 2011 at 3:20 PM
Dear Claud:
This could be arranged, we have to think about.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
DARK ENERGY NEW SCIENCE – by ROSEMARY AINSLIE
link
************************************************************
Two stories (lessons learned?) and a question
From Defkalion forum
We are following very carefully forum member’s discussions and suggestions on possible further development strategies of the Hyperion products. Based on these discussions/suggestions, we would like to share with you two stories from the 80’s and a question, hopping that they can play their role in understanding our product and business/marketing development strategy.
Story 1: The IBM mainframes
It was a time back in the 80’s when critical mission applications (almost all) where hosted on series IBM 3800 series mainframe computers. These “dinosaurs” were sold with accessories an armed guard (24/365 outside the maschine glass container) and a bunch of high class plumpers to watch over the hydraulics cooling the CPU. The end of this period started with the PC explosion, as we all know. Today there is no main-frame servicing most critical mission applications. For example, your Google-search is serviced by hundreds of PCs, working in parallel in arrays or “farms”.
Story 2: Mr. Osborne’s success
Some years before PC invention, a man named Osborn introduced the first portable personal computer in the US market. This 20kg portable with a floppy and a 9inch screen, came to be a huge market success. Every salesman in US wanted to buy one! As a result, Osborn’s company bankrupted within a year, as a result of its product big success that the company could not produce in numbers demanded by the market. A few months after, Olivetti and then Philipps introduced similar products that had a successful entry, till the PC rise.
A question
Would the PCs look like the ones we are using right now if Internet was not around?
…and back to Hyperions and your discussions/suggestions:
It is possible to design and to build single reactor single kernel Hyperions in the range of hundreds of kW, or Hyperion systems with a kernel of 142 reactors, for example. We didn’t try it and maybe we will not try it as far we do nor believe in dinosaurs, all suffering of very low redundancy and scalability (and licensing in certain countries of course). And we do not like machines with a main mission to service the existing hierarchical structure of any energy network. On the contrary, we like the PC/Internet story, keeping all the needed analogies in mind.
Hyperions of the first generation have been designed to service the demanding needs on energy in residential/public buildings, agriculture and industry, allowing also their use as a source of energy for several applications, including electricity or water production, by third party existing products. Yet, it is still too early to talk about automobile applications based on the existing Hyperions, even though dreaming on those too should never be absent from engineer’s minds. Moving this direction requires further “know-ability” on several other parameters that could be involved in the reactions or product’s functionality. And these last require more hard work and new instrumentation and responsibility in our business development, which we have promissed.
We appologize for this long post.
Thank you for your attention.
DGT
11/04/2011
************************************************************
Italo A. Albanese
December 4th, 2011 at 3:24 AM
Dear Andrea Rossi,
May I remember you this is not the first time you say “I’ll do a video live stream”?
Best regards,
Italo A.
Andrea Rossi
December 4th, 2011 at 7:18 AM
Dear Italo A. Albanese:
You are right, but to do this we must wait to have the right Customer, who allows us to put his plant online. I will do it, as soon as I will have this chance.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
Kim Patterson
December 3rd, 2011 at 12:40 PM
With all due Resepect
You need to set up 1 unit and
run it 24 hours a day on video
live stream.
(This is a simple thing and this
is what the people want)
All else is mental masturbation
Respect
Kim
Andrea Rossi
December 3rd, 2011 at 2:52 PM
Dear Kim Patterson:
Great idea, we will make it ( not the mental bricolage)
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
Authorizing the e-Cat
E-Cat World
12/03/2011
************************************************************
E-Cat: Is it Cold Fusion or Hot Air?
link
************************************************************
MU research chief wants ‘cold fusion’ puzzle solved
link
************************************************************
LENR Presentation by Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA, Langley
link
************************************************************
Scientific Cultist Antonio Turiel Bashes the E-Cat
PESN
12/02/2011
************************************************************
12/02/2011
************************************************************
Nuclear power, there is growing support for the E-Cat
link (Translated via Google)
************************************************************
Defkalion Caught In a Clear Lie?
eCat News
12/02/2011
************************************************************
The Defkalion Triangle Proof – Ownership – Certification
Independent eCat News
12/01/2011
************************************************************
Letter from Christos Stremmenos
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Dear Mats Lewan,
With regard to recent statements from Defkalion GT, I declare, also in terms of repercussions in a legal sequel, as follows:
1. My complete absence from any scientific or technological contribution to the alleged technology development that Defkalion GT claims to have carried on after the termination of the agreement with the EFA (Rossi).
2. For ethical reasons, I have no personal relationship with that company since about half a year.
3. The adoption by them of any suggestion from me, or working hypothesis discussed calmly at a scientific level, before the termination of the contract with Rossi, is a violation of my intellectual property rights.
4. I can assure you that the core technology of the E-cat of has not been granted by Mr. Rossi, and neither by me as I have no knowledge about it.
I think for what I’m concerned, that I have provided sufficient evidence to resolve any transfer of technology from Rossi to Defkalion GT. For the rest … no comment!
Cordial Greetings
Prof. Ch Stremmenos
12/01/2011
************************************************************
Defkalion shows specs but no technology
NyTeknik
12/01/2011
************************************************************
Is Rossi’s E-Cat Yesterday’s News? Australian Company Claims to have a Working Fusion Reactor
From Oilprice.com
12/01/2011
************************************************************
Andrea Rossi
December 1st, 2011 at 12:44 AM
WARNING: SOMEBODY IS ON THE ROAD SAYING THEY HAVE SUCCEEDED IN STEALING OUR TECHNOLOGY ( WHOSE PATENT HAS BEEN GRANTED IN ITALY AND IS PENDING IN THE WORLD) AND ARE TRYING TO SELL A MOCK UP SAYING IT IS AN UPGRADED COPY OF THE E-CAT. ATTENTION: NOBODY HAS EVER COPIED OUR TECHNOLOGY. PROBABLY THIS IS A STUNT AIMED TO COLLECT MONEY FROM UNCAUTIOUS BUYERS. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE EVERYBODY WELL CONSCIOUS OF THE FACT THAT WE ARE TOTALLY UNRELATED TO ANY PRODUCT THAT HAS NOT BEEN SPECIFICALLY MARKED BY US AND THAT HAS NOT OUR CERTIFICATION. AT THE MOMENT OUR E-CATS ARE FOR SALE ONLY FOR WHAT CONCERNS 1 THERMAL MW PLANTS, BECAUSE THE 10 KW E-CATS ARE NOT YET CERTIFIED.
WARM REGARDS,
A.R.
************************************************************
Jaroslaw Bem
November 27th, 2011 at 5:49 PM
Dear Andrea Rossi
You told, that one core swap takes 30 minutes. Is that means, in 1 MW reactor swap process takes 30 x 52 modules = 1560 minutes = 26 hrs ?
Recharge time of fuel, including time for cooling reactor, and again heating process, takes approximately 2 days.
Will each the swap process makes reactor 2 days out of order ?
Best regards,
Jaroslaw Bem (Poland)
Andrea Rossi
November 27th, 2011 at 9:24 PM
Dear Jarioslaw Bem:
While you swap one reactor the others can work.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
Charlie Zimmerman
November 28th, 2011 at 9:32 AM
Dear Mr. Rossi,
I was interested in your comments regarding intentionally causing explosions of the device during safety testing. I had previously understood that short half lived radioactive isotopes of Copper and Nickel were rapidly decaying within the device and that this radioactivity was shielded. But, during an explosive event, the radioactive isotopes would be exposed to the environment without shielding before they would have a chance to decay.
1) Are there short lived radioactive isotopes as in your patent and paper published here?
2) Do those radioactive isotopes escape during an explosion?
3) Are you taking proper precautions yourself against such dangers?
A concerned fan,
Charlie Zimmerman
Andrea Rossi
November 28th, 2011 at 7:01 PM
Dear Charlie Zimmerman:
I confirm that no radiations above the background in relevant measure have been found in the controlled explosive tests. I cannot enter in particulars, because I cannot give information regarding what happens in the reactors.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
Mark Saker
November 29th, 2011 at 9:01 AM
Dear Andrew Rossi,
Will the 1st Generation home e-cat provide only heating, and not electricity? If this is true, is the start-up time of the e-cat quick enough so that it could be used with a timing switch as a normal boiler would, or can you reduce the reaction low enough so it is constantly working, but the reaction can be increased rapidly when required?
If the 1st generation e-cat will provide electricity as well, then it would want to be on 24/7. What will you do with the waste heat/water when it is not required?
Many Thanks
Mark
Andrea Rossi
November 29th, 2011 at 9:26 AM
Dear Mark Saker:
1- yes
2- we can reduce the reaction
3- when we will also be able to supply electricity, it will be a co-generation. The heat will always be useful, to produce either heat or cool. If no use of the heat will be possible, a passive heat exchanger will dissipate the heat, as it happens in normal air conditioners. Bu it will be rare, I suppose.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
Luca Salvarani
November 30th, 2011 at 1:30 AM
Dear Andrea Rossi
1- I’m very happy for the latest developments… expecially the opportunity to see the 1 MW plant just sold to a normal customer in operation…. it will be a great promotion for you!
2- After the great improvements in electric production, thanks to cooperation with Ingegner Fioravanti, can we expect an electric 10W e-cat for home in LESS than 2 years?
3- Don’t you think the expectable and likely improvements (mainly in performances and costs) for a virgin technology as e-cat could stop some clients from buying your product? Perhaps you need a sale formula that let clients benefit from these improvements. It’s just my humble idea.
4- Can I ask you how many 1 mw plants have you already sold? I’m eager to know all news.. Sorry for my not perfect english and good luck!
Andrea Rossi
November 30th, 2011 at 9:03 AM
Dear Luca Salvarani:
You are right: in fact, I confirm that all the improvements will be applied to the E-Cats already bought if in the meantime such improvements will have been actually consolidated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
A Week of E-Cat News Flurry
11/29/2011
************************************************************
Per 22Passi blog (translated)
@ All
Tomorrow I’m curious as you read the news from Greece.
I tell you also that there are large movements in the area Nichenergy … DGT is a case that called into question precisely the University of Siena? it is true that there are ongoing contacts Piantelli + NASA? it is true that there is among the sponsors of Piantelli chop lines on what action to take? But above all: we will finally see a running-dog, and Siena, and a greek-frog, and a Chinese or-blob Rossi Rossi before this happens again surprise everyone? All we can say except that this story is not exciting! 🙂
Also attributed to 22Passi but I cannot find the exact thread in the above where it exists.
@ all
When last week Roy (Virgilio) denied any involvement Piantelli / Defkalion I told him so:
“To be fair I tell you that my other sources claim that Piantelli has an agreement with DGT. I keep myself out of the game and look to see what happens. Embrace you”.
And that’s exactly what I did. Now the news published by NYT confirms that the items I had collected had a foundation. I am convinced that one day all the behaviors of Rossi (….) will prove of great clarity and foresight.
************************************************************
Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
Per NYTeknik
11/29/2011
************************************************************
Herb Gillis
November 28th, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Andrea Rossi:
How long do you think it will be before there is a 1MW customer that is willing to talk about their experiences with the product and act as a reference? Having another customer out there who is willing to act as a reference could provide tremendous leverage. This would be far more valuable than any public test. It would silence the skeptics forever.
Andrea Rossi
November 28th, 2011 at 6:48 PM
Dear Herb Gills:
Today we sold in the USA a 1 MW plant which will go to a normal Customer. This installation will be visitable by the qualified public.
We wait to have completed the contractual procedure through the attorneys, then we will give communication. It will be in the North East of the USA, where I have been in these days.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
Dear all,
We will release the expected info pre-announced on November 14th 2011, on Wednesday, November 30th 2011.
Thank you for your attention
Defkalion Green Energy
11/28/2011
************************************************************
Did Dr. McKubre Let the E-Cat Out of the Bag?
Read more
************************************************************
Hank Mills
November 27th, 2011 at 10:42 PM
Dear RH,
You stated the following.
—
To Hank Mills:
Your suggested experiment would have no value.
At this point, the only thing a customer would be interested in is to confirm that the E-cat he is about to purchase generates enough excess heat to justify his investment, not that it creates more energy than a non-working one.
You hope the customer would release the data for such an experiment. For me it would be amply enough if he just confirms that the E-cat works as advertized. Who cares if a E-cat without hydrogen in core does not work?
While Rossi has customers then there is no need for public tests.
He should just concentrate on refining his product and be ready with a household model when he has secured his invention with patents.
—
The experiment would indeed have value, because it would prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat technology produces massive excess heat. I personally think the evidence provided so far (even with no control utilized) proves the technology works exactly as claimed. However, not everyone is convinced, including some “honest” skeptics that simply want to see incontrovertible proof of the technology. The evidence so far simply has not been quite convincing enough, in their opinion (not mine). A test utilizing a “control” would change their minds, because the results showing excess heat would be so obvious and clear to see. It would be as simple as seeing one unit producing no output (after a couple minutes), and another unit producing a huge output for HOURS. The DIFFERENCE is the key result, in such a test with a control.
Simply put, the use of a “control” is a key tool of the scientific method. It is utilized in many fields including engineering, biology, and medicine. It is utilized because it offers many benefits, and the ability to determine what happens when certain variables are changed. In this case, an E-Cat with hydrogen, verses an E-Cat without hydrogen. If we want to convince the great scientific minds on our planet, I think using one of the most important scientific tools (the control) would be a good thing to do.
I sincerely believe there are potential customers of one megawatt plants that are “on the fence” because they are not yet quite convinced of the reality of the E-Cat technology. I’m a fairly open minded person, but even I can see how some people of a more skeptical nature would want to see incontrovertible evidence that the solution the world’s energy crisis is upon us. Not just any solution, but one that produces energy in a clean, safe, and *extremely* cheap manner. A single test utilizing only two individual modules (no need for using two entire 1MW plants) could be performed in a single evening, and would present the CLEAREST and most OBVIOUS evidence of the E-Cat yet provided.
You seem to be already 100% convinced the E-Cat works. That is great, because I am too! But not everyone is so convinced. And I’m not just talking about Rossi’s competitors, detractors, and the snakes. I’m talking about folks who could give the go ahead for orders of one megawatt plants to take place.
Making plants and shipping them out to customers is important. Working on the home units is also important. However, what I’m suggesting could help generate more orders, so Rossi could ship out plants to even more customers. Also, it could be performed in a single afternoon taking up relatively little time, for a significant reward.
To summarize, I see the advantages of a test utilizing a “control” E-Cat as follows…
1) The ability to use a fundamental tool of science to provide the great scientific minds on this planet with the most incontrovertible evidence yet.
2) The opportunity to eliminate the last shreds of doubt in the minds of *honestly* skeptical, potential customers. This could result in more orders for E-Cat products. (I’m not talking about the competitors and cynics here.)
3) The ability to produce super-clear test data, that would refute all the false and ridiculous issues the snakes are pushing out on the net. For example, steam quality, thermal inertia, water over flow, etc. It would take these “tools” of information warfare out of their hands, and expose them as liars.
If I was a wealthy man (which I’m not), I would purchase an E-Cat plant in a heartbeat. I’m sure you would too, because we are both convinced of the reality of the technology. That is not the case for everyone though, and there are potential allies and customers that could be brought to Rossi’s side if such a simple test was performed.
I’m already dreaming of solid state E-Cats that are producing electricity with no moving parts, E-Cat devices powering space craft, and the use of the technology to allow human kind to colonize space. However, we are not there yet. I think we can get there sooner if we bring as many people to the side of the E-Cat as possible, sooner rather than later.
Hank Mills
Andrea Rossi
November 28th, 2011 at 1:15 AM
Dear Hank Mills (regarding the answer to RH):
I am very sorry, but I must say I do not agree on the fact that further public tests could have any importance, the puppett-snakes would increase the attacks ( they are paid for this from the puppetteers) and the Customers would be disturbed from the exposition. The real duty now is to make good working plants. Nevertheless I have deep respect for your intellectual honesty, I know you want to help us; I just do not agree. New public tests could only make me lose time just to replicate the usual clownery rising with the usual aggression, whatever we do; by the way: if they think that this technology does not work, I wonder: why are they so aggressive against it? If it doesn’t work, it will die by itself; for example: there are around many wannabe competitors I know perfectly have nothing working really: did you ever see any comment of mine regarding their work? Did you ever read an attack from me to a competitor regarding the fiascos of their stuff? (and believe me: I know everything of everybody).
Warm Regards,
A.R.
************************************************************
Hank Mills
November 27th, 2011 at 11:01 PM
Dear Andrea Rossi,
You stated,
–
Dear G.Singh:
No, this is just what we achieved so far with acceptable stability. We are approaching the solution.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
–
The fact that stability is the limiting issue right now, is one thing that tremendously excites me about your technology. My understanding, is that power density is a non-issue. You have already produced such high temperatures, you have melted the nickel powder in a reactor core. That requires around 1600 degrees Celsius! Also, on this very blog, you stated a 50cc reactor core could produce a maximum safe output of 10kW! That is a phenomenal output.
To me, this signifies that the *only* limitation right now with the E-Cat technology is STANDARD engineering issues. For example, designing the best heat sinks with maximum surface area, finding the best cooling liquids for the primary circuit, finding gaskets that are leak-proof, finding the best geometries for pressure vessels, etc. All of these issues can be sorted out by engineers, such as the one that conducted the test on the 28th.
It’s so obvious why your competitors are jealous! You did not simply discover a practical cold fusion technology, but hit the JACKPOT. Your combination of nickel powder isotopes, catalysts, frequencies, and so fourth are the equivalent of winning the lottery (but in your case is the result of years of hard work and research). Other researchers who have not had such success, are bound to be disappointing. Those of poor character and who do not have proper ethics, are bound to lash out against you, out of envious frustration.
What is even more significant, is you are producing such high outputs of energy with light hydrogen (not deuterium) and the inexpensive common element nickel (not palladium or platinum), as fuel. This makes your technology extremely economically viable.
I’ve said it before, but it deserves to be said again. Congratulations on not just discovering a practical cold fusion technology, but one that is both powerful and economically viable. The best of both worlds!
Andrea Rossi
November 28th, 2011 at 1:00 AM
Dear Hank Mills,
A lot of work has to be done, but we are approaching. Just have to work without distractions.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
e-Cat Site 