NASA confirms Andrea Rossi cold fusion will make energy cheap, and oil free.

[kwhilborn]

NASA-Andrea Rossi cold fusion make energy cheap, and oil free.

How will this technology impact the world?

Spend 5-10 minutes and read the exciting new "Andrea Rossi" E-Cat Cold fusion generator. I guarantee if you have an active mind you will blow a fuse, and keep reading about it. See you in a few hours...

So.. Forget electric cars relying on batteries..

Now we can have cars with a lifetime of fuel with purchase. If you contradict this then you have not left this page to read what is happening in the world.

So we can say goodbye to gas stations, oil companies (for gas anyway except maybe in aircraft and spacecraft for now), power lines, power companies.

We can look forward to cheap electricity supplying desalination for many coastal starving countries.

And green technologies like windmill companies will fall to the wayside no matter how well meaning.. Why get a windmill when you can have a mobile generator.

The middle east will just be a desert with a surplus of non required oil.. Oh yeah! I know oil will be required to grease hinges and lubricate, but we will suddenly have 600 million or more cars on the planet that do not need gas.

for those too lazy to type in google and read one of thousands of articles..
Here is most recent about NASA involvement.
http://pesn.com/2011/07/21/9501874_Rossis_Self_Sustaining_One_Megawatt_Reactor/

or
http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/05/20/politics-and-the-e-cat/=
or
http://consciouslifenews.com/andrea-rossi-demonstrates-cat-clean-energy-reactor/116654/
or
http://nickelenergy.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/chief-scientist-at-nasa-langley-acknowledges-andrea-rossi-e-cat/


Are you excited! This technology is real, and not a hoax. Spend five minutes and google "Andrea Rossi" or "E-cat". This technology has other people claiming its invention, however there is enough information already available worldwide to stop its momentum. It is not like anyone can be assassinated and the idea will die.

How else would the world be affected?

 

[Stryder]

I would ask as to whether tests had been done in a completely sheilded environment, especially away from Radio Frequency and Microwave frequency bandwidths. I'm not suggesting there has been any foulplay or misinterpretation of information, but I do know that it is possible to utilize frequency to transmit energy (After all it's just energy conversion) I guess you can say it's a query as if the "peasoup" effect of the worlds radiological output has a factor in results.

 

[kwhilborn]

As far as I have seen the E-Cat technology only requires brief shielding of the reaction chamber. This technology has ALREADY been scrutinized by many leading scientists. In fact; discovery of the process is being claimed by more than one source.

E-Cat energy generation is also being done by more than one organization. So it adds that much more fact to the situation. The U.S. Navy claims to have working E-Cat power generation, and Andrea Rossi has licensed the technology to another organization which is making reactors independently of Mr Rossi.

Every week since its announcement I have been looking up its progress and acceptance within the scientific community. This has culminated when N.A.S.A. has verified this power generation method as valid on July 21.. Two days ago as of this writing.

You state your curiosity stems from wanting to know if the power is sapped from an outside source .. through microwaves, or maybe some sort of laser heat. I am sure this can no longer be on the level of a hoax.

The University of Bologna (insert Bologna pun here) confirmed this working over 1 year ago. This product is 100% past hoax phase as it is currently in the production phase.

This process was first demonstrated (full demonstration on youtube for those interested). in January, so six months of scrutinized testing has been finished already.

There was a huge cold-fusion hoax 20 years ago, and I believe that is part of what is holding this huge discovery as quiet as it is.

Everyone should be excited about this technology, and if you have the scientific interest or "bug" then you have hours of reading about this incredible technology.

I really wish people would look at the technology and its backers for themselves before blindly commenting or suggesting it is a hoax. It would be fun to see more comments here along the lines of how could it change the world. I suggested cars with indefinite fuel, no gas station, no power lines, electric boats. Could a 747 be electric? No idea? portable desalination trends. Middle east becoming a very bad place to live?

What else?

 

[Stryder]

I really wish people would look at the technology and its backers for themselves before blindly commenting or suggesting it is a hoax. It would be fun to see more comments here along the lines of how could it change the world. I suggested cars with indefinite fuel, no gas station, no power lines, electric boats. Could a 747 be electric? No idea? portable desalination trends. Middle east becoming a very bad place to live?

What else?

Let me put it like this, it's not a blind comment, it was a simple query. And as to if it's a hoax, it really doesn't matter to me if it is or isn't, because either way it is just fiction to me.

However this is because I have been slowly piecing together my thoughts on "Emulation Theory", in essence I have an entire philosophy into how the very world that you've been concerned with and worried about can be completely altered from it's base.... (well its Radix).

This means that some of the very things you concern yourself with (Overunity, Perpetual Motion, Free-Energy etc) I have seen from a very different angle, the angle that assumes building the universe from scratch and the various effects caused by doing that.

For instance:
Where does the energy come from to create an atom?
Some would say it's from the Big Bang, however when they say that, they are using what information their have compiled about what the Big Bang was to assume that it had a very large output of energy. It doesn't query "How" or "Why" the energy existed at the beginning or how the energy continues to manifest itself to create the very elements that you or I are made from.

In the theory I've been looking into, I have a model that explains where the energy comes from, why the universe would of had an increase in energy initially, why the universe expanded, why elements appear to have substance, why fields exist for "field theory". The theory as a whole even expresses similarities if not actually explaining "Quantum String".

I've also posed potentials of how to take the fundamentals and make allowance for engineering differences, namely taking constants and altering them to the point of being able to re-engineer physics within an enclosed environment.

So when I query something, it's because I have an angle based upon a model, no less.

 

[billvon]

We can look forward to cheap electricity supplying desalination for many coastal starving countries.

And green technologies like windmill companies will fall to the wayside no matter how well meaning.. Why get a windmill when you can have a mobile generator.

Cool, another cold fusion reactor! By my count we now have over 40 of them, all guaranteed to change the world.

And yet somehow the world hasn't changed. Odd.

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

There is another thread about this . Same Guy Rossi . Wow he got NAsa going on it too Aye! I hope it is true .

 

[cosmictraveler]

About your calculations: to get thermal energy from our reactors you do not need to make electric power, you have heat as primary source. Therefore the cost of the heat is less than 1/3 of cent of Euro per thermal kWh. The cost of electric power will be three times higher, for the efficiency limits of the Carnot Cycle

The interest on Andrea Rossi’s Nickel-Hydrogen Cold Fusion technology is accelerating [1]. However, Rossi says that about 30% of nickel was turned into copper, after 6 months of uninterrupted operation. Kowalski [2]. says that “this seems to be impossible because the produced copper isotopes rapidly decay into Ni”. But how it works?


How it works
Following Focardi Rossi [3]. a Ni58 nucleus produces a Copper nucleus according to the reaction

Ni58 + p → Cu59

Copper nucleus Cu59 decays with positron (e+) and neutrino (ν) emission in Ni59 nucleus according to

Cu59 → Ni59 + ν + e+

Then (e+) annichilates with (e-) in two gamma-rays

e- + e+ → γ + γ

Starting [3] from Ni58 which is the more abundant isotope, we can obtain as described in the two above processes Copper formation and its successive decay in Nickel, producing Ni59, Ni60, Ni61 and Ni62. Because Cu63, which can be formed starting by Ni62, is stable and does not decay in Ni63, the chain stops at Ni62 (i.e. Cu63). Each process means some MeV.

Of course how can a proton p gets captured by the Ni58 nucleus? (and subsequent Ni59, Ni60, Ni61 and Ni62). Following Stremmenos [4]. a neutron-like particle, an electron proton pair, a mini-atom, a proton masked as a neutron, gets captured by the Ni58.




If the masked proton becomes a neutron the result is Ni59.
In order to have Cu59 (increase of atomic number from 28 to 29) the electron (of the masked proton) gets ejected from the nucleus. The masked proton becomes a proton.




The same process holds for all the subsequent transformations, until Cu63.
It remains to be understood the issue of the gamma radiation in the MeV range.

Numbers
I am an electronic engineer, so I need easy numbers in order to understand.
However “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler”, says a guy. Maybe I am too simple here.
Let’s calculate.

MeV for each Ni transformation
I read that starting from Ni58 we can obtain Copper formation and its successive decay in Nickel, producing Ni59, Ni60, and Ni62. The chain stops at Cu63 stable.
For simplicity I assume all the Nickel in the reactor in the form Ni58.
For simplicity I suppose for each Ni58 the whole sequence of events from Ni58 to Cu63 and as a rough estimate I calculate the mass defect between (Ni58 plus 5 nucleons) and the final state Cu63.
Ni58 mass is calculated to be 57.95380± 15 amu
The actual mass of a copper-Cu63 nucleus is 62.91367 amu
Mass of Ni58 plus 5 nucleons is 57.95380+5=62.95380 amu
Mass defect is 62.95380-62.91367=0.04013 amu
1 amu = 931 MeV is used as a standard conversion
0.04013×931 MeV=37.36 MeV
So each transformation of Ni58 into Cu63 releases 37.36MeV of nuclear energy.


Nickel consumption
According to many blogs in the Internet “One hundred grams of nickel powder can power a 10 kW unit for a minimum of six months”.
How much of Ni58 should be transformed, in six months of continuous operation, in order to generate 10 kW?
I follow a procedure outlined in [2].
10 kW is thermal or electrical (?) power. The nuclear power must be larger. Assume a nuclear power twice:
20 kW = 20,000 J/s = 1.25 x 10**17 MeV/s.
Each transformation of Ni58 into Cu63 releases 37.36MeV of nuclear energy.
The number of Ni58 transformations should thus be equal to (1.25 x 10**17)/37.36 = 3.346 x 10**15 per second.
Multiplying by the number of seconds in six months (1.55 x 10**7) the total number of transformed Ni58 nuclei is 5.186 x 10**22.
This means 5 grams.
The order of magnitude is not exactly the same but seems to be plausible. This means also 5 grams of Nickel in Rossi’s reactor transmuted into (stable) Copper after six months of continuous operation at the rate of 10 kW.

Conclusions
Rossi says that about 30% of nickel was turned into copper, after 6 months of uninterrupted operation. At first glance this seems to agree with calculations based on simple assumptions.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...OBs0eZ8oK4ygHbQ0w&sig2=T89Flkhtz1qS1GVAJ4N8dQ

 

[kwhilborn]

WoW! I tried to keep up with that comment, and came away not knowing if you were even believing that it was true. We have apparently had some doubters i.e. billvon...

Your link at the end to the Journal of nuclear physics explaining the math involved in the process of turning 30% of the nickel into copper was also interesting in that it might help Billvon understand this is not something he has heard of before, and that this technology is transforming our world starting now.

I'd also like to mention that Andrea Rossi claims to have better results if he treats his nickel

Following is direct quote from pesn.com
"- First, the nickel powder is somehow enriched so that it contains more of two specific isotopes. These are N-62 and N-64. These two isotopes are the ones that participate in the most fusion reactions.

- Secondly, the nickel powder is processed in such a way that tubercles or protrusions form on it. After this processing, the nickel may resemble filamentary nickel. (Link) This may allow for more reaction sites where the hydrogen can fuse with the nickel.

- Third, a catalyst is used that helps to break apart the molecular hydrogen into atomic hydrogen. We also know that it is not mixed in with the nickel powder, but is placed in the reactor afterwards. There is a lot of speculation about what this catalyst or catalysts might be. Some people speculate it might be a form of carbon, such as graphite.

In the past, Rossi has stated that the processing of the nickel powder only increased the cost of it by ten percent. Now, he states that the ten percent figure includes the cost of the catalyst. This confirms that the catalyst is super cheap."

end of quote..

I hope that helps your understanding of the process Cosmictraveller, as you obviously gave the idea a lot of consideration. Glad to see others excited about this.

I didn't realize that this was a debate on the authenticity so much as I was hoping for a thread on how it will affect our homes and communities.

I was not trying to insult stryder when i mentioned people questioning the technology as I was trying to get people to use their inventive minds to think of how the technology will affect our communities and governments and way of life.

Maybe I am in the wrong section for that kind of debate. Maybe philosophy?

Doubting this technology would only makes you look foolish Billvon. This is a confirmed method in production phase. 47 countries have already agreed to purchasing reactors, as well as 1 unnamed major automotive company.

Maybe I thought of everything already..
cars with unlimited fuel
gas stations vanishing .. maybe 1 in 50 remaining at mechanic shops
middle east sheik poppers
colemans electric camping stoves
electric boats
electric planes?
rockets would need oil?
electric lines could fade away as home units took over
desalination plants could be run so very much cheaper, and food and fuel for many starving countries.
No tax on power? How would governments collect? in purchase of devices?
what about black market tax free ones? Will the middle east rebel?

 

[phlogistician]

Doubting this technology would only makes you look foolish Billvon.

No, he's perfectly right to be skeptical. So far there's only one theoretical explanation for the reaction, via Bose-Einstein condensate, and that still produces Gamma rays. AFAIK, these are not detected when the apparatus is running.

 

[kwhilborn]

I am saying that skepticism is no longer a part of this. They are producing power this way already. It is not a pipe dream, it is reality. There are 5 links to this subject so far in this thread. 4 by me and 1 by cosmictraveller.
Cosmictraveller even concluded that about 5 grams of nickel would be used in a 6 months of huge power output. 10kW. The average home only needs about 25 kW per day, so that 5 grams of nickel could be a lot less if dealing with the average home.

A top notch microwave would use less than 1kW on full.

So yes I will say that anybody just coming on here as a skeptic to working science has got a screw loose. This thread should be in philosophy section, as I was hoping for more thoughtful answers about its effects on society. Doubting this is like saying a toaster can't toast.

 

[common_sense_seeker]

How will this technology impact the world?

Spend 5-10 minutes and read the exciting new "Andrea Rossi" E-Cat Cold fusion generator. I guarantee if you have an active mind you will blow a fuse, and keep reading about it. See you in a few hours...

So.. Forget electric cars relying on batteries..

Now we can have cars with a lifetime of fuel with purchase. If you contradict this then you have not left this page to read what is happening in the world.

So we can say goodbye to gas stations, oil companies (for gas anyway except maybe in aircraft and spacecraft for now), power lines, power companies.

We can look forward to cheap electricity supplying desalination for many coastal starving countries.

And green technologies like windmill companies will fall to the wayside no matter how well meaning.. Why get a windmill when you can have a mobile generator.

The middle east will just be a desert with a surplus of non required oil.. Oh yeah! I know oil will be required to grease hinges and lubricate, but we will suddenly have 600 million or more cars on the planet that do not need gas.

for those too lazy to type in google and read one of thousands of articles..
Here is most recent about NASA involvement.
http://pesn.com/2011/07/21/9501874_Rossis_Self_Sustaining_One_Megawatt_Reactor/

or
http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/05/20/politics-and-the-e-cat/=
or
http://consciouslifenews.com/andrea-rossi-demonstrates-cat-clean-energy-reactor/116654/
or
http://nickelenergy.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/chief-scientist-at-nasa-langley-acknowledges-andrea-rossi-e-cat/


Are you excited! This technology is real, and not a hoax. Spend five minutes and google "Andrea Rossi" or "E-cat". This technology has other people claiming its invention, however there is enough information already available worldwide to stop its momentum. It is not like anyone can be assassinated and the idea will die.

How else would the world be affected?

Wow, great news for modern science at last! Thanks for sharing btw. The plant in Greece due in October 2011 will make or break the EU imo. Fingers crossed for a good news coverage with good results.

 

[Ophiolite]

Here is why scepticism is still very much a part of this, despite your emotional pronouncements to the quantity. You claim that NASA has confirmed Rossi's results. You provide a link that purports to substantiate this claim. Here is a quote from this link.

By way of clarification, we should emphasize that the relationship between Rossi and NASA is still tentative and exploratory, and that NASA has not yet validated the E-cat technology.

That's why it is right to remain sceptical: you can't even read your own frigging links. Go ahead and wallow in self delusion, but excuse me if I retain my scepticism.

 

[CptBork]

No, he's perfectly right to be skeptical. So far there's only one theoretical explanation for the reaction, via Bose-Einstein condensate, and that still produces Gamma rays. AFAIK, these are not detected when the apparatus is running.

I doubt there's any substance to the claim advertised in this topic, but if such a reaction indeed occurs, how would Bose-Einstein condensates factor in? Would you get a reduction in exchange forces allowing nuclei to come closer together, or what? Where did you read that Bose-Einstein condensates could explain it?

 

[phlogistician]

I doubt there's any substance to the claim advertised in this topic, but if such a reaction indeed occurs, how would Bose-Einstein condensates factor in? Would you get a reduction in exchange forces allowing nuclei to come closer together, or what? Where did you read that Bose-Einstein condensates could explain it?

Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer#Attempts_at_theoretical_explanation

I also googled up a whole lot of skepticism. I think yet again this is bad science.

 

[Rhaedas]

I found the one message on the Pure Energy site amusing, that all conventional power plants and ITER research needs to be shut down to prepare for this miraculous power production. That makes no sense at all. Show us something first.

 

[Read-Only]

How will this technology impact the world?

Spend 5-10 minutes and read the exciting new "Andrea Rossi" E-Cat Cold fusion generator. I guarantee if you have an active mind you will blow a fuse, and keep reading about it. See you in a few hours...

So.. Forget electric cars relying on batteries..

Now we can have cars with a lifetime of fuel with purchase. If you contradict this then you have not left this page to read what is happening in the world.

So we can say goodbye to gas stations, oil companies (for gas anyway except maybe in aircraft and spacecraft for now), power lines, power companies.

We can look forward to cheap electricity supplying desalination for many coastal starving countries.

And green technologies like windmill companies will fall to the wayside no matter how well meaning.. Why get a windmill when you can have a mobile generator.

The middle east will just be a desert with a surplus of non required oil.. Oh yeah! I know oil will be required to grease hinges and lubricate, but we will suddenly have 600 million or more cars on the planet that do not need gas.

for those too lazy to type in google and read one of thousands of articles..
Here is most recent about NASA involvement.
http://pesn.com/2011/07/21/9501874_Rossis_Self_Sustaining_One_Megawatt_Reactor/

or
http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/05/20/politics-and-the-e-cat/=
or
http://consciouslifenews.com/andrea-rossi-demonstrates-cat-clean-energy-reactor/116654/
or
http://nickelenergy.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/chief-scientist-at-nasa-langley-acknowledges-andrea-rossi-e-cat/


Are you excited! This technology is real, and not a hoax. Spend five minutes and google "Andrea Rossi" or "E-cat". This technology has other people claiming its invention, however there is enough information already available worldwide to stop its momentum. It is not like anyone can be assassinated and the idea will die.

How else would the world be affected?

Good greif, man, how dense can you possibly be!?!?!?!? Here's a direct quote from the source you linked to and the final statement - which I've bolded since you seem unable to understand - directly CONTRADICTS what you claim in the title of this thread!!!!!

" Dear Martin:
I am not authorized to give this information.
I can only say that there is really to learn.
I met extremely high level scientists. I have been really surprised and honored to discover that they have got independently throughly information about this technology. All I can say, so far, is that we will work together.

Warm Regards,
A.R.

PESN can confirm that the meeting did in fact take place, having played a role in instigating it.

By way of clarification, we should emphasize that the relationship between Rossi and NASA is still tentative and exploratory, and that NASA has not yet validated the E-cat technology.

Are you the type who will claim just ANYTHING without even paying attention to your own sources???????

 

[kwhilborn]

I admit I only put 4 links in my opening of the thread, and forget to link the thousands of links regarding this technology. I also assumed some of you might have been inclined or excited enough to actual do some of your own reading before commenting as was suggested (implored) during the opening of this thread.

Here is why scepticism is still very much a part of this, despite your emotional pronouncements to the quantity. You claim that NASA has confirmed Rossi's results. You provide a link that purports to substantiate this claim. Here is a quote from this link.

“
By way of clarification, we should emphasize that the relationship between Rossi and NASA is still tentative and exploratory, and that NASA has not yet validated the E-cat technology.
”
That's why it is right to remain sceptical: you can't even read your own frigging links. Go ahead and wallow in self delusion, but excuse me if I retain my scepticism.

NASA met at NASA on JUlY 14th, and the results of that meeting are as yet undisclosed. However that does not mean that NASA has not had support for this project, and here is a link to confirm that.

http://pesn.com/2011/05/31/9501837_Cold-Fusion_Number-1_Claims_NASA_Chief/
And he is N.A.S.A.'s chief scientist at NASA Langley research center.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_M._Bushnell

Anyways; the point of this thread was to get people to contribute ideas about how portable power generation would affect the world. That was how I tried to phrase the questioning.

You fellows can believe what you like, I am sure you have been wrong before.

I realize the question should have been posted in philosophy and have opened the question there.


and finally;

you can't even read your own frigging links

Please mind your language sir.

 

[billvon]

Doubting this technology would only makes you look foolish Billvon. This is a confirmed method in production phase. 47 countries have already agreed to purchasing reactors, as well as 1 unnamed major automotive company.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 40 times, shame on me.

This is the same line that has been applied to every cold fusion reactor from the original Fleischmann and Pons experiment in 1989. And the sales pitch is always the same. "Doubters! We have HARD PROOF that this works and is producing power NOW!"

Before 1989 it was the Dean Drive, the water-into-gasoline converter, the $1 50% efficient solar panel, zero point energy etc. All sound really great, and supporters become nearly breathless with lists of ways that this miraculous new invention will mean free energy for all, better vehicles, transportation to the stars etc.

Unfortunately every single such inventor quietly fades away after it is revealed that their system actually doesn't work, that the actual observations were in error or (in some cases) fraudulent. Sometimes they run away with the money they've collected from investors. After dozens of such embarrassing failures, the onus switches to the inventor to prove his case before anyone (beyond sycophants) takes them seriously.

A few quotes from physicists on this device:

"If this all sounds fishy to you, it should"

"In many ways cold fusion is similar to perpetual motion machines. The principles defy the laws of physics, but that doesn’t stop people from periodically claiming to have invented or discovered one."

"I am convinced that the whole story is one big scam, and that it will be revealed in less than one year."

That being said, it is likely that _something_ is going on, and we will probably learn a bit more about chemistry by discovering what it is. Even the original Fleischmann and Pons experiments led to some pretty interesting research into hydrogen absorption by metals.

I hope we do find an energy solution that is everything supporters of this (and every other cold fusion attempt since 1989) claim it can be. We haven't found it yet.

 

[Stoniphi]

I am liking thorium fission right now as it seems very cost - effective and much safer than the standard uranium fission.

This one seems to be an "extraordinary claim", with all of the appropriate accoutrements.

Sorry broski, ya' gotta do better here. We may be crazy, but our science ain't 1/2 bad when we get to the end of the thread.

 

[AlexG]

“ you can't even read your own frigging links ”

Please mind your language sir.

That doesn't address the fact that your links do not support anything that you say.

The proper word is 'fucking' not 'frigging'