What I like about Rossi that circumvents and mitigates all his many failings that most find intolerable is his drive to commercialize LENR. Over the last century, there has been dozens of LENR systems developed that have never informed the world to the reality of the LENR reaction. Commercialization of LENR is the only way that the reality of LENR can be communicated to the rank and file of humanity. The reason that LENR is looked down upon and ridiculed as junk science is based on the unwillingness of the various inventors to go through the effort to develop a product that most people can use to their great benefit. IMHO, it does not matter how big a SCAMMER and a liar that Rossi may be, if he can get his invention into the marketplace, then he is redeemed of all his sins and shortcomings and ascend the blessed steps of heaven august as a saint and an archangel of the highest rank.

What I would like to see included in the demo is the ability of the Quark reactor to produce light. Watching a few meters oscillate will be boring but seeing the naked Quark produce light that the eyes cannot cope would be a revelation and an indication that something unfathomable was going on inside that tiny transparent tube. It will also confuse the naysayers when a few milliwatts of power can drive a light source too bright to look at. Now that demo would be something to see.

If there was some way to show the quark producing electric power with little or no input when the Quark is in self sustain mode. Now that would be something. If Rossi is any kind of showmen he will put the reactor through its paces and show what the Quark can really do, not just push the hard to understand the readings of some meters.

Alas and alack the three reactor cluster that will be used in the demo does not hold the prospect of showing these quark wonders. They will be surrounded by insulation and a blanket of water hiding the true wonders that LENR can produce.

Quote from Rigel

Interesting comment Axil so if I understand you this is a demonstration of a commercial product? maybe a dog and pony show to get new investors? or something else?

What is Alan going to look at? ( to respond to 'ask Alan' is a bit well ...)

What do you expect to see? and why do you think he is doing a demo? Notice please -- no snark here. I also have a background like Jeds (we have discussed some similarities e.g. VAX/VMS) There is a subtle difference between programming code and Rossi, it is this in a nutshell--- stuff I worked on (and I assume Jeds) are still in action. My modest contributions either fly (now) or in orbit (now) or just possibly ideas in the code that other people are using everyday (now).

They were successfully commercialized. My "team" and robotic factories were well funded and produced real products and hardware. After all this time there is no comparison; he and his project would be de-funded and his "team" disbanded. Again no snark.

Display More

To the best of my understanding, Microsoft does not distribute their source code. It is proprietary and well protected from public release.

Alan will see a reactor with a COP in the hundreds. A small amount of input will generate a large amount of output power. Alan might see periods of self sustain mode where the input energy is minimized or completely cut off and the output energy continues for an appreciable period of time. Rossi has stated that self sustain mode occurs 75% of the time. During self sustain mode, heating power is cut off but the activation signal must still be applied. That signal does not use very much power.

This mode of operation is nothing new. This self sustain output was already deminstated by the SunCell. In the video, the SunCell ran for 2 minutes without input power applied.

The purpose of the demo is to introduce the Quark to the public prior to manufacture.

Quote from Max Nozin

axil thanks. Of course everybody can Google it but I want axil to think about that one more time. Maybe he will see something different in that this time.

I don;t understand what you want me to see. Please explain in more detail.

Rossi is not a scientist and the development of the Quark is not an experiment. Why should a demonstration of a commercial product be treated like an experiment?

When Jed developed his software products, did he give his source code to other developers to inspect? I don't think so. You don't stay in business by giving away your work.

In order to test a product, you need to know how it works. Third party test development is tantamount to giving away the IP. A business does not give away its IP.

Holmlid was completely open in his experimentation but we have not seen any new research from him for awhile now. It is my guess that Holmlid is starting a bisiness and we won't see anymore stuff from Holmlid.

Quote from Shane D.

Axil,

Rossi may get his Nobel one of these days. Who knows? Oh yes, I forgot -you do! Seriously, in the court documents, he felt he deserved the Nobel for the 1 year Doral "DPS". Even though you believe it (Doral) was successful Axil, could you imagine a Nobel given to someone who orchestrated something like Doral? Even if accepted as successful as you do, Doral did not come close to the scientific rigor that would be accepted by a Nobel committee. Doctored logs, destroyed data, dismantled plumbing, oversight from your old country friends...come on, in that regards, it was a joke.

Rossi thinking otherwise, only shows what a nutcase he is.

This example of court testimony shows how worthless the Doral test was and how useless that court case was. Rossi has recently said that the E-cat was not a market ready product. Testing the E-cat for marketability was the bottom line reason for the Doral test. You just can't beleive those court documents. Don't you feel silly for wasting so much time wallowing in that court case?

Quote from Shane D.

Agree Para,

Problem with Doral, is that it is a well known address within the LENR family, and anyone can go there...and spy on. Most of the attendees do not want to be identified...for good reason. In Sweden, that is less likely.

Is spying a factor when the demo will be shown on the internet?

A Nobel is awarded to the founding person of a major field in science that advance knowledge in a big way. LENR would get to that stage long after Rossi is gone. Dead people don't get Nobels. It will take 50 years for research to find out how LENR works. It will take 10 years for the fusion meme to fade away.

Quote from Max Nozin

axil out of curiosity. What it the difference between quasi and virtual particles?

This quasiparticle is a composite particle like waveform that behaves like a fundamental particle.

By the way you are truly lazy. You can find the answer to your questions on google.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasiparticle

The is not such thing as virtual particles. The various EMF background fields are unstable and this instability is call virtual particles.

https://profmattstrassler.com/…-particles-what-are-they/

Quote

A virtual particle is not a particle at all. It refers precisely to a disturbance in a field that is not a particle.

Quote from Nigel Appleton

It thus seems an inescapable conclusion that Signor Rossi's planned QuarkX event is, in fact, planned as a dog and pony show.

Not that there's anything illegal or immoral about that - Signor Rossi has the same rights that we all have to try to attract attention and/or investment to our inventions (provided he gives honest information) - but there's no harm in calling it what it is in common English usage

It's possible that Rossi is really proud of his invention and is showing it to his supporters out of the pride of accomplishment. Rossi has said that this demo is the first of many to be staged all over the world. It could also be a counter reaction to all the naysayers to expose the world to the true character and intellectual rigor mortis of these troglobites*.

*A troglobite is an blind animal that slithers entirely in the dark parts of caves. Troglobites typically have evolutionary adaptations to the darkness of cave life.

Quote from JulianBianchi

For those interested in the science associated to the QuarkX (yes there may be some real physics beyond the QuarkX!), the QuarkX shares interesting characteristics with so-called Z-pinch fusion experiments and more particularly with those associated to capillary fusion (also called filament fusion by some). An evident one is the size of the « reactor », a filament of a few centimeters and a diameter of less than 1 mm. Back in the 1950-1970s, it was shown that filaments containing deuterium in which intense currents were passed through to create a plasma were generating large bursts of neutrons.

For those interested to read more on this subject (ahead of the Nov 24 popcorns...), I suggest to start with the article published by Peter Graneau and his son Neal in Infinite Energy in 1999. This article highlights the similarities between z-pinch fusion and cold fusion. Also, the references given in the article are really good, in particular the paper describing the first experiment in the field (Anderson et al, Neutron Production in Linear Deuterium Pinches, Phys Rev 1958), then the paper written by Lochte-Holtgreven published in 1976 in Plasma Physics and Fusion Technology (which may be the last paper by Lochte-Holtgreven, a name well known by plasma physicists), and finally the paper published by Sethian in PRL in 1987. Capillary fusion is less controversial than cold fusion, however, for both, nuclear reactions happen at low temperature and a good understanding of the underpinning is still lacking.

You are barking up the wrong tree. Rossi started his Quark development with a reactor size that produced over 100 watts not including power from light generation and electron generation. Rossi then decided to reduce the size of the Quark to as far as it could go to increase controllability. The size that the Quark now is has nothing to do with capillary fusion because the large format quark still acted the same as the small format Quark now acts. The difference is that the smallest Quark just produces less power.

The LENR reaction is a manifestation of the solution to the strong CP problem, through either the axion mechanism (Peccei–Quinn theory) or the Nelson-Barr Mechanism.

LENR has nothing to do with fusion. It is the result of hadron decay (transformation) produced by magnetically induced Quark flavor change.

Quarks that are in a strong magnetic field will generate instantons. These instantons are quasiparticles formed from magnetism that add mass to the quark. The mass added by magnetism can be great enough to change the flavor of the quark(s) thus disrupting the hadron that confine the quark(s). This is what happens in Holmlid's experiment where a proton or a neutron is converted to a kaon by magnetism via instanton generation. The up and/or down quark is changed to a strange quark through the addition of new mass carried by the magnetically induced instantons.

Metallic hydrogen produced by Holmlid is a powerful generator of magnetism.

Related to the above, I have uncovered a new dot in the LENR puzzle to connect, it is called the Nelson-Barr mechanism. I will try to understand it and will post on it when I figure it out some. If anyone already understand this mechanism, please post on it.

To become familiar with the Quark jargon, here is a video that uses a lot of it.

http://pirsa.org/displayFlash.php?id=16100033

What the presenter is after is to show why the hadron is stable under the action of instantons, But he shows a condition of "danger" where quarks change their flavor. This danger condition is what LENR is all about. This video is where I first ran across the Nelson-Barr mechanism.

Quote from IH Fanboy

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

~Upton Sinclair

This quote can be logically extended to: "his salary or that of his friends"

True wisdom, you hit the mark precisely. This is the primary motivation of most of the naysayers that populate this forum.

As simplistic as it may seem, LENR is the consequence of the soliton to the strong CP problem as explained by Peccei–Quinn theory, simple as that may be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_CP_problem

As per Peccei–Quinn theory, spin projection via unbalanced magnetic field lines produce QCD instantons that change the theta parameter from near zero to pi.

https://www.perimeterinstitute…ons-and-strong-cp-problem

"Dog and pony show" is a colloquial term which has come to mean a highly promoted, often over-staged performance, presentation, or event designed to sway or convince opinion for political, or less often, commercial ends. Typically, the term is used in a pejorative sense to connote disdain, jocular lack of appreciation, or distrust of the message being presented or the efforts undertaken to present it

Quote from LENR Calender

At some point Rossi said 4PM Miami time.

Axil used logic to determine it would be in Miami.

I don't think the demo would occur at 10PM in Sweden.

I don't believe that it would cost 1000 pounds to get Alan Smith to anywhere in Europe...not on train. America seems to be a better cost fit.

Quote from Shane D.

So Axil, where in the 365 day Doral ERV report, does it say the 1MW, composed of many Ecats, is: "hard to control and they melt"?

The fact that Rossi has to be on site for 20 hours a day for a year even when suffering from skin cancer a goodly portion of that period demonstrate that only he could keep the E-Cat from self destructing.

Andrea Rossi
November 3, 2017 at 10:08 PM

Gabriel Berra:

No, because to get that result I had to live 352 days inside it 16 hours per day, from 6 P.M. to 10 A.M of the following day, and two other persons, one engineer and one electrician, had to cover from 10 A.M. to 6 P.M., not to mention when I had to stay for 20 hours and the others of the Team had to reach me in the middle of the night for problems . It was a prototype, not a product, but the experience we made with it has generated the QX. We had strong problems and probably, from what we analyzed after the stop from all the components, it was close to die in short time after the end of the test. It was not ready to be a product, but it was a dam good prototype, by means of which an enormous experience has been made.

Warm Regards,

Quote from Shane D.

Although "crazy" is a term of endearment the way I said it, and I had a face also, I see your point. You win this time. Dang you!

Communication on the internet requires precision where body language and facial expression cannot be used to determine nuance.

Quote from Shane D.

Well thanks Axil, remind me to throw you under the bus when the opportunity arises! BTW, you avoided answering my question: where in the ERV Report is it said that the Ecat was "hard to control, and they melt down"?

Pleased be advised... this gratuitous statement hurt my feelings: "I know you will say something crazy, so do not answer...please.