They have some dinky new high-level vent-pipes on black water drains these days, I cant find an image, but they are very sleek-looking stainless steel about 40 feet high with a flared top.
Makes sense if you need to comply with those stringent restrictions. If we were to comply those here in Chile, we would have to abandon the country!
This one is interesting.
Welcome back Sam! What do you think about all of Rossi's latest iterarations of the ecat? Do you still think they work? Do you think "Prof" is not Rossi? Curious if you have finally figured it out
Rossi is quite proud that the DoD mentions the Ecat and his paper. What the report actually says is that those buzz words he uses, “electron aggregates,” “virtual particle reactions,” the “Aharonov-Bohm Effect,” “Zitterbewegung”, do exist. That's about it. It doesn't say anything about the Ecat.
(needless to say that SMG is a sock puppet).
QuoteDisplay More2022-09-16 04:35 Silent Majority Guy
Dear readers of the JONP,
I think it is time to admit that the history of the LENR and the derivate forms of energy (included the Zero Point Energy) must be divided in two main periods: before Andrea Rossi and after Andrea Rossi. Before Dr Rossi the LENR had been substantially abandoned, although still conserved by a restrict group of “aficionados”; after Andrea Rossi these energies arrived to the point that the Governments of the USA and of Europe are financing the R&D upon a technology substantially derived from the patent of Dr Rossi. The epiphany of this fact (because it is a fact) is the report made by the Department of Defense of the USA here:
https://HDIAC.org/technical-inquiries/notable/concepts-behind-e-cat-sk/
With respect to all,
SMG
Rossi is quite proud that the DoD mentions the Ecat and his paper. What the report actually says is that those buzz words he uses, “electron aggregates,” “virtual particle reactions,” the “Aharonov-Bohm Effect,” “Zitterbewegung”, do exist. That's about it. It doesn't say anything about the Ecat.
(needless to say that SMG is a sock puppet).
I agree.
Welcome back Sam! What do you think about all of Rossi's latest iterarations of the ecat? Do you still think they work? Do you think "Prof" is not Rossi? Curious if you have finally figured it out
Welcome back Sam! What do you think about all of Rossi's latest iterarations of the ecat? Do you still think they work? Do you think "Prof" is not Rossi? Curious if you have finally figured it out
I'm even curious 'bout the next promised demo of the latest magic device SkLed, SkLep, SkNap, SkBlah, SKWhatewer ... Is still in schedule? Delayed? Cancelled? I apologize if I'm not daily following the only 2 sources remaining on the planet (JONP and ECW).
Any news? When the next dog and pony show (if any) will come? Tanks in advance for any update 
Sam, are you able to write few sentence by yourself? Why linking useless and ridicolous YT videos?
Wouldn't it be easier for you to free yourself from this obsession once and for all and admit that the doctor made fun of so many people?
It is like going to confession to the priest. You will feel much lighter afterwards ...
Sam, are you able to write few sentence by yourself? Why linking useless and ridicolous YT videos?
Wouldn't it be easier for you to free yourself from this obsession once and for all and admit that the doctor made fun of so many people?
It is like going to confession to the priest. You will feel much lighter afterwards ...
I always look forward to your smile.
thanks,and thumbs up symbol reply’s.
Sam, are you able to write few sentence by yourself? Why linking useless and ridicolous YT videos?
Wouldn't it be easier for you to free yourself from this obsession once and for all and admit that the doctor made fun of so many people?
It is like going to confession to the priest. You will feel much lighter afterwards ...
Sam may just have hope that there is somehow something "real" in the E-Cat bs.
He is not like some long gone LF-Members, who tried to missionate us to the "Church of Rossi".
It's just Sam 
Here is something about the paper on Researchgate and its number of reads.
The structure of RG is somewhat chaotic and unclear. What is what and where is not easy to comprehend (profiles, publications, projects, labs…).
On the landing page of the paper there are only parts of the public information about it, the numbers are added up for all publications of the author. Here is the path to get a little bit deeper.
Click on the name, go to „Projects“, scroll down and click on „show all“.
At this point it is notable that Rossi is member of quite a lot „projects“, where many of them seem to be about internal RG referencing, recommendations and „achievements“. I don’t know exactly how, but I think this is part of the way he got so many views on his paper. For example the project „Technical Science, Goal: 1-Sharing & recommending publications“.
Somewhere down the list of projects there is „E-Cat Project“, note that there is not much really going on, 1,162 Reads 4 Updates 76 Followers, click on view.
On the project page scroll down, the last entry is the paper. Here we can see the current number of reads and recommendations. The recommendations give us a pop-up with some names. Unfortunately the whole list is only for members of RG. The number of recommendations is way smaller than what „Prof“ tells us regularly, it’s even smaller than the sum of all recommendations for all publications on the E-Cat project page. It’s either a made up number, or it is from the author’s statistics, taking into account some numbers we can’t see or that are not apparent.
Now click on the title and go back to where we started. Scroll down to the end of the paper, note that despite the awe inspiring number of reads, the paper has been cited zero times, „ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication“.
The also oftentimes cited „Research Interest Score“ number by "Prof" cannot be found anywhere on the public side of RG. Maybe it’s only for members or maybe even only for the author on his statistics page. There also seems to exist a comments section for the paper, which is also either only for members or the author.
This one is for the Rossi skeptics and anyone else who is interested.
Display MoreHere is something about the paper on Researchgate and its number of reads.
The structure of RG is somewhat chaotic and unclear. What is what and where is not easy to comprehend (profiles, publications, projects, labs…).
On the landing page of the paper there are only parts of the public information about it, the numbers are added up for all publications of the author. Here is the path to get a little bit deeper.
Click on the name, go to „Projects“, scroll down and click on „show all“.
At this point it is notable that Rossi is member of quite a lot „projects“, where many of them seem to be about internal RG referencing, recommendations and „achievements“. I don’t know exactly how, but I think this is part of the way he got so many views on his paper. For example the project „Technical Science, Goal: 1-Sharing & recommending publications“.
Somewhere down the list of projects there is „E-Cat Project“, note that there is not much really going on, 1,162 Reads 4 Updates 76 Followers, click on view.
On the project page scroll down, the last entry is the paper. Here we can see the current number of reads and recommendations. The recommendations give us a pop-up with some names. Unfortunately the whole list is only for members of RG. The number of recommendations is way smaller than what „Prof“ tells us regularly, it’s even smaller than the sum of all recommendations for all publications on the E-Cat project page. It’s either a made up number, or it is from the author’s statistics, taking into account some numbers we can’t see or that are not apparent.
Now click on the title and go back to where we started. Scroll down to the end of the paper, note that despite the awe inspiring number of reads, the paper has been cited zero times, „ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication“.
The also oftentimes cited „Research Interest Score“ number by "Prof" cannot be found anywhere on the public side of RG. Maybe it’s only for members or maybe even only for the author on his statistics page. There also seems to exist a comments section for the paper, which is also either only for members or the author.
I logged the # reads hourly for a month as part of a complaint, and they come in waves, sometimes 300 in an hour and then one or two for a few hour periods, then 115, 80, 168, 65, 1, 0, 0, 0.
….
RG claimed to be investigating the anomalous reads on Rossi’s paper about 2 years ago. They must have a ton of data by now.
.... and here the statistics for the great demo video:
Further example of irrational behaviour...
At its longest, the queue to view Queen Elizabeth II lying in state was 16 kilometres long and took 24 hours to traverse. “Nobody’s ever seen a queue as long as this before,” says crowd-safety consultant Andy Hollinson, who helped to plan the events following the queen’s death. Crowd scientists outline how infrastructure, modelling and the psychology of British people combined to make a queue fit for a queen.
A bit of Ego Out history 2012
Peter Gluck certainly pushed the dry cell vs wet cell debate. Plasma electrolysis,
high temperature, etc. I think he influenced a few teams direction in a positive way.
Big Thanks - Gregory Goble 2022
Rest in Peace ✌️
Quote Peter Gluck
In 1989 when I have joined the Cold Fusion movement irreversibly, I was convinced that the first technologies will appear no later than in 5 years. My unique worries were the scarcity of the magic metal palladium and the expected production of lower currency energy that cannot be converted in electric energy. However the vision of a world using cold fusion energy was quite natural and vivid.
The problem of bad reproducibility became “a rich source of troubles, despair and skeptics from the start of the cold fusion story” as I wrote during the third year of CF history. Take care please, I was speaking about ‘troubles” and not problems (problems are solved, troubles, in the best case get old and fade away) because I already was disappointed with the passive approach- advanced calorimetric methods instead of radical measures for intensification of the heat release.
It was then an open question, in which extent the active, creative method was THEN possible?
Was THEN possible- in principle to understand what happens scientifically, to build a working theory that can lead to good, repeatable, controllable experiments?
Was THEN feasible to start an action of scale up and technological development?
It is more important to answer today; so many years later to the same question- can be the existential and developmental problems of the classic CF/LENR systems solved?
Are they actually solvable in principle?
According to my 20 Rules of Problem Solving-appended to this for your convenience to this editorial, after the Igari Mizuno abstract, Rule No. 18 is special for unsolvable problems. These can be solved only if their premises are radically changed. In the same manner, cold fusion has to be metamorphosed in such an extent that even its parents could not more recognize it, in order to become productive indeed..
This metamorphoses can be described in the style of the problem solving rules- by “complete definition. An other quotation from Henry Moore wisely states:
To know one thing, you must know the opposite. Therefore a good definition combines a negative one- what the thing, concept is NOT with what it actually is, or has to be. The list is still not complete. Usable, energy generating cold fusion is:
Accomplished NOT by Science First, BUT by Technology first;
Created NOT via Theory, BUT using smart Engineering,
Based NOT on wet (aqueous) systems BUT only in vapor phase;
Working not at low temperatures (> 100 C), BUT at higher ones (>200 C);
Using NOT palladium, BUT transition metals *e.g.) nickel:
Using NOT deuterium, BUT light hydrogen;
Being NOT simple, static, linear, BUT complex, dynamic,
Structured NOT as one step, BUT multi-step multi-phase;
Belonging NOT to electrochemistry, BUT to nanoplasmonics;
Incorporating NOT nuclear reactions, BUT nuclear interactions;
Correctly called NOT LENR BUT LENR+, HENI
I make the most pernicious assertion include here explicit:
“The reproducibility problem and scale up practically cannot be solved for WET cold fusion systems- as the FP Cell. Wet systems are technologically dead."
This will not contribute much to my popularity, but I would be very happy if somebody proves this is idiotic, with data, solid data, and longer term. The simplest reasons for this:
First reason: it seems that deep degassing of the active surface is an absolute necessity; the presence of any non hydrogen gas inactivates fatally the cathodes. Purely electrochemical tricks as electrode inversion and co-deposition are not effective to solve the dreadful reproducibility problem
Second reason the spatial density of the places or zones where the reactions that generate heat, happens is much too low and decreases fast in time
Third reason, due to the presence of a water (heavy or light) phase the temperature is limited to ~100 C, high pressure electrolysis cells are inconvenient. Recent discoveries converge to showing that a higher temperature is able to accelerate the reactions considerably- a sine qua non condition for scale up.
Fourth reason- it seems electrolysis cannot deliver deuterium or hydrogen in the necessary active form.
ATTENTION PLEASE; this: “wet systems, no technology” is my direct message too, for Eijiro Igari and Tadahiko Mizuno- I hope one of my readers will let them know before they start the presentation at JCF14.
Mizuno is the greatest specialist worldwide in plasma electrolysis- and this is NOT a wet system because the active site of the cathode is not in contact with water, but with plasma.
Strictly in principle plasma electrolysis is NOT hopeless. I cannot do more; I am not able to communicate in Japanese.
Help us please!
Peter
Reference and Further Reading
We recently learned that our friend and colleague Dr. Peter Gluck passed away on March 23, 2021 at the age of 83. Given that he contributed so much to the cold fusion field, it is quite fitting that the day he left this earthly realm was the anniversary date of the Pons-Fleischmann cold fusion announcement of March 23, 1989.
In addition to writing numerous articles for Infinite Energy, Dr. Gluck served on our Scientific Advisory Board from 1995 until his death.
Dr. Gluck received his Ph.D. in chemical engineering from Jassy Technical Institute in 1983. He held a position at the Romanian National Institute for Research and Development of Isotopic and Molecular Technologies from 1991 until his retirement in 1999.
He became active in the cold fusion field in the early 1990s, and published his first paper in the field in 1991 (Palibroda, E. and Gluck, P. 1991. “Cold Nuclear Fusion in Thin Foils of Palladium,” Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, 154, 153-161).
Dr. Gluck had an optimistic outlook on life and scientific research. In an article in the first issue of Infinite Energy, he wrote: "Accept both the positive and the negative results, that is, be positive toward both, and make use of both." He noted that he had "used negative data to obtain positive and possibly essential information."
Currently, Dr. Gluck’s blog website Ego Out is still active at:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/.
He posted from 2010 to 2018, with a final posting earlier this year, for a total of 1,408 posts over the years.
The blogs are dedicated almost exclusively to various aspects of the LENR field. Dr. Gluck publicized his site widely and it became a sort of informal forum, with commentary and debate from readers.
In 2020, Thomas Grimshaw and David Nagel started the Ego Out Documentation Project (EODP), a project of the LENR Research Documentation Initiative led by Grimshaw. As part of this project, they archived all of the pages of Dr. Gluck’s blog site, which will be useful in the future if the website goes defunct. See a report about this collection in Infinite Energy #151/152.
As a testament to his ever-positive outlook, in one of our last communications with Dr. Gluck, he wrote: "During my next reincarnation I will solve the problem of cold fusion."-endquotes
GBGOBLENOTE
LENR FAQ for Students
Peter Gluck's cold fusion paper was published in a notable peer reviewed journal in 1991.
https://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com › ...
Generalized Theory of Bose-Einstein Condensation Nuclear Fusion for Hydrogen-Metal System
by Yeong E. Kim Department of Physics, Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA. Direct download. ABSTRACT Generalized theory of Bose-Einstein...
Also
References
Y. E. Kim, “Theory of Bose-Einstein Condensation Mechanism for Deuteron-Induced Nuclear Reactions in Micro/Nano-Scale Metal Grains and Particles”, Naturwissenschaften 96, 803 (2009) and references therein.
Y. E. Kim, “Bose-Einstein Condensate Theory of Deuteron Fusion in Metal”, J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 4, 188 (2010), Proceedings of Symposium on New Energy Technologies, the 239th National Meeting of American Chemical Society, San Francisco, March 21-26, 2010.
Y. E. Kim, “Theoretical interpretation of anomalous tritium and neutron productions during Pd/D co-deposition experiments”, Eur. Phys. J. Appl. Phys. 52, 31101 (2010).
Y. E. Kim and A. L. Zubarev,
“Mixtures of Charged Bosons Confined in Harmonic Traps and Bose-Einstein Condensation Mechanism for Low Energy Nuclear Reactions and Transmutation Processes in Condensed Matter”, Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, Proceedings of the 11th International conference on Cold Fusion, Marseilles, France, 31 October – 5 November, 2006, World Scientific Publishing Co., pp. 711-717.
Andrea Rossi, “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CARRYING OUT NICKEL AND HYDROGEN EXOTHERMAL REACTION”, United States Patent Application Publication (Pub. No.: US 2011/0005506 A1, Pub. Date: Jan. 13, 2011); http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/ja/WO2009125444.
S. Focardi and A. Rossi, “A new energy source from nuclear fusion”, March 22, 2010. http://www.nyteknik.se/incomin…/Rossi-Forcardi_paper.pdf
https://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=66 , February 2010
H. Essen and S. Kullander, “Experimental test of a mini-Rossi device at the Leonardocorp, Bologna, 29 March 2011”, a travel report, April 3, 2011; http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter…energi/article3144827.ece
Table of Isotopes, 8th Edition, Volume I: A = 1-150, edited by R. B. Firestone et al., published by John Wiley and Sons, Inc. (1999), pages 270 and 284.
Reactions (ii) were suggested by T. E. Ward, private communication, May 11, 2011.
Y. E. Kim, “Deuteron Fusion in Micro/Nano-Scale Metal Particles”, an invited talk to be presented at the Fifth Asia Pacific Conference on Few-Body Problems in Physics 2011(APFB2011), August 22-26, 2011, Seoul, Korea. (http://www.apctp.org/conferences/2011/APFB2011/)
Here's a new twist :
Dear Andrea,
1.Is the Jet Engine now in R&D having similar grounding challenges as the ECat SKLep?
2.If not, is it because the Jet Engine depends on heat generated from the ECat SK?
Thank you,
Brokeeper
Brokeeper:
1. no
2. yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Display MoreHere's a new twist :
Dear Andrea,
1.Is the Jet Engine now in R&D having similar grounding challenges as the ECat SKLep?
2.If not, is it because the Jet Engine depends on heat generated from the ECat SK?
Thank you,
Brokeeper
Brokeeper:
1. no
2. yes
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Electric jet engines don’t need heat. They are mostly high bypass turbofans nowadays and with unlimited electricity to spin the fans it is a waste of time and weight to try to heat air for more thrust.
Consider.
Fleischmann was pondering such matters... Thinking along these lines. Led him to an award in 1986. Quite the electrochemist, I'd say.
In crystals of the rocksalt structure the electro-optic coefficient as well as the first derivative of the electronic polarizability with respect to an ionic displacement vanishes because every ion is at a center of inversion. Consequently, the zone center optical phonons are inactive in first order Raman scattering.
However, these phonons are infrared active, and the transverse optical (TO) phonons form polaritons when the retardation of the Coulomb interaction is taken into account.
Because of the axial vector character of the magnetic field, the first derivative of the electronic polarizability with respect to the macroscopic magnetic field associated with the polaritons does not vanish in rocksalt type crystals.
Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids
Volume 31, Issue 5, May 1970, Pages 1075-1083
Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids
A Theory of the First Order Raman Scattering of Light by Polaritons in Crystals of the Rocksalt Structure
A.A.Maradudin∗S.Ushioda
Department of Physics, University of California, Irvine, Calif. 92664, U.S.A.
Received 8 September 1969, Revised 27 October 1969, Available online 20 September 2002.
Thus the polaritons in crystals of the rocksalt structure can give rise to first order Raman scattering. In this note we present a theory of the Raman scattering intensity by polaritons via the magneto-optic effect, and estimate the intensity of the light scattered by this mechanism.
