1. Joseph November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=14#comment-1128036>
Dr Andrea Rossi, Congratulations for US Patent and for the 146 patents pending and in the making. The story of your life can explain why you are able to do this and work in your plant in the factory of the customer for 16 hours per day. You are unique. J. 2. Andrea Rossi November 5th, 2015 at 11:25 PM <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=15#comment-1128107> Joseph, Thank you, but if the results will be positive, this will be due also to the work of our Team and also of the great family of this blog, from which so much I have learnt and of Prof Sergio Focardi and Prof Norman Cook, whose book has put the theoretical bases to the evolution of my work during these last 6 years. If the results will be negative, obviously, the responsibility will be totally mine, because I am the one that has taken all the decisions on the battlefield. Warm Regards, A.R. Sorry, there are 146 other patents pending. On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:48 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > That was 2 years ago before the patent was granted. Do you see anything > within the patent that fits into this form? Rossi is required to supply > information that is adequate to construct one of his systems if his patent > is to have value. > > It is quite clear that his patented device has nothing resembling a driver > module that is different for the other modules. Please point that out > within the written patent. > > Rossi appears to be playing cat and mouse with Hank! There is nothing > like this in the patent that I have seen. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 3:17 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement > > > 1. Hank Mills > December 29th, 2013 at 2:34 PM > <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=833&cpage=4#comment-891713> > Dear Andrea, > The information you are sharing is facinating. While we wait for the > full reports, it gives us something to think upon. > 1 – If the mouse over stimulates the cat so it runs around in circles > continually, not going back to sleep, does the cat always explode? > 2 – Have you ever witnessed the cat running around in circles for > extended periods of time, not needing any extra stimulation, but remaining > stable? > 3 – Other than heat from the mouse, is anything else stimulating the > cat during the drive or self sustain periods? It may not work for the hot > cat, but I wish there was some low power method of keeping the cat > stimulated. For example, like the 100 watts of radio frequencies that kept > the one megawatt plant in self sustain mode. > 4 – By how many degrees on average does the surface of the cat vary > from the end of the drive stage to the end of the self sustained stage? > 2. Andrea Rossi > December 29th, 2013 at 6:10 PM > <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=833&cpage=4#comment-891804> > Hank Mills: > 1- no > 2- confidential > 3- no > 4- the temperature of the Cat raises when the Mouse is turned off, > lowers when the Mouse is turned on > Warm Regards, > A.R. > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Rossi has provided a comprehensive explanation of the Cat and Mouse >> reactor clustering method in bits and pieces throughout his Q&A blog. One >> of them explains how the shutdown of power from the Mouse causes the Cat to >> be stimulated. >> >> I now take this to mean that when Rossi shuts off a magnetic confinements >> field coil that keeps the ENP inside the mouse, the Cats take off because >> the ENPs can then get into the Cats to stimulate the LENR reaction. >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:46 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I have also seen the reference to the 16 reactors. The question is >>> whether or not 1 is the driver with 15 following devices. Where did you >>> see anything about a special type of driver device among the other 15? Did >>> Rossi state this or is it entirely your assumption? >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >>> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 2:12 pm >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement >>> >>> Roland Bob >>> <http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/12/01/rossi-on-the-e-cats-modular-future-e-cat-x-units-can-combine-to-make-power-plants-of-any-size/#comment-2387524176> >>> • 17 hours ago >>> <http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/12/01/rossi-on-the-e-cats-modular-future-e-cat-x-units-can-combine-to-make-power-plants-of-any-size/#comment-2388142662> >>> Hi Bob, >>> Each 250kVA module is composed of 16 reactors; we were all confused >>> about this till Rossi revealed the structure a few days ago after the >>> photos and mockups were published. >>> >>> From: >>> Rossi on the E-Cat’s Modular Future: E-Cat X Units Can Combine to Make >>> Power Plants of Any Size >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:42 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Axil, where did you see a description of the tiger? I do not recall >>>> any reference to the use of one module to drive the other 15. >>>> >>>> Dave >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >>>> Sent: Tue, Dec 1, 2015 10:40 pm >>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement >>>> >>>> It has be recently revealed that each 250kVA E-Cat tiger reactor module >>>> is composed of 16 reactors. Only one of those reactors is a powered >>>> activator(mouse). The other 15 are drones driven by the activator. The >>>> activator produces a reaction catalyst that drives the other drones. I say >>>> that the reaction catalyst is the magnetic Exotic Neutral Particle(ENP) >>>> that becomes mobile as its energy content level reaches a self sustaining >>>> threshold. At low temperatures the alumina tub reactor shell that all these >>>> reactors are comprised of confines the ENP. But as all these reactors heat >>>> up, the alumina shell becomes electrically conductive. At high >>>> temperatures, the alumina becomes magnetically transparent and this allows >>>> the ENP to leave the activator an enter the drone where the ENP catalyzes >>>> the LENR reaction. >>>> >>>> http://www.thevalvepage.com/valvetek/heater/fig1.gif >>>> >>>> Electrical conductivity Vs, temperature. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The so called Erzion phenomenon was discovered in a series of >>>>> electrolytic experiments marked by unexplained changes in a pool of >>>>> cooling >>>>> water outside of the catalytic cell. After 40 minutes of electrolytic cell >>>>> operation, water on the tungsten anode side of the cooling vessel started >>>>> loosing its transparency. >>>>> Water on the stainless steel cathode of the pool of cooling water >>>>> remained transparent, at the same 40 C temperature. A sample of bubbly >>>>> water, removed from the anode side, was tested for induced gamma >>>>> radioactivity. No such radioactivity was found in it; the sample became >>>>> transparent after 24 hours. Attempts to reproduce the long-term loss of >>>>> cooling water transparency with other electrolytes, and under different >>>>> electrical discharge conditions, were not successful. But the effect was >>>>> highly reproducible when experimenting with the tungsten-anode >>>>> electrolytic >>>>> cell and the 7 M KF electrolyte containing 50% of heavy water. >>>>> [image: Thumbnail] >>>>> <http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/341fig1.jpg> >>>>> That cooling water on the outside of the electrolytic cell's glass >>>>> reactor shell at the right side (see Figure 1) is close to the anode while >>>>> cooling water on the left side is close to the cathode. The disappearance >>>>> of bubbles, after the electrolysis, was very slow (half-life of about 10 >>>>> hrs). Attempts to explain the phenomenon in terms of cavitation, and other >>>>> ultrasonic effects, were not successful. The only satisfactory explanation >>>>> was possible within the framework of the erzion model. Authors believe >>>>> that >>>>> bubbles are produced through the action of neutral Erzions. >>>>> The Erzons phenomenon behavior is consistent with the magnetic based >>>>> Exotic Neutral Particle(ENP). To begin with, the glass container is >>>>> transparent to the magnetically based ENPs both optically and >>>>> magnetically. >>>>> The LENR reaction that keeps the ENPs viable produce the vapor that forms >>>>> the water bubbles. The ENPs become energetically self sufficient in the >>>>> water of the cooling pool where the ENPs remain viable for hours. >>>>> If the Erzons phenomenon is produced by magnetically based ENPs, an >>>>> iron plate placed just on the outside of the glass wall adjacent to the >>>>> anode would prevent the ENPs from exiting the glass electrolytic cell. >>>>> With >>>>> the ENPs blocked from travel, bubble production would be eliminated. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In my opinion, the fundamental nature of the Rossi effect is based on >>>>>> magnetism. The catalytic particle that produces the reaction is magnetic >>>>>> in >>>>>> nature. This particle is produced by heat pumping and EMF stimulation. >>>>>> The >>>>>> nature of this Exotic Neutral Particle (ENP)is reflected by the behaviour >>>>>> of the E-Cat itself and reflect how the E-Cat operates. >>>>>> >>>>>> The ENP can exist at low energy pumping where the energy coming into >>>>>> the particle is equal to the energy leaving the particle. This is similar >>>>>> to the way Rossi keeps his reactor under control. Too much external >>>>>> energy >>>>>> pumping will result in the E-Cat going critical. >>>>>> >>>>>> The same process of over pumping happens with the ENP. Overpumping >>>>>> brings it to the stage where it becomes self-sufficient requiring no >>>>>> additional EMF input. The energized ENP can get EMF from the environment >>>>>> around it not requiring external heat or EMF simulation to be applied. >>>>>> >>>>>> The same is true for the E-Cat. When the E-Cat is subcritical, it >>>>>> requires heat and EMF stimulation to be applied. But when it is "over >>>>>> stimulated" it begins to meltdown since it has become independent from >>>>>> externally applied stimulation. >>>>>> >>>>>> The ENP can live as long as it can catalyze energy production from >>>>>> the material around it. The ENP can live for days on its own as it brings >>>>>> in energy from the environment to sustain its internal LENR reaction >>>>>> processes. >>>>>> >>>>>> Magnetic confinement increases efficiency of the reaction. Such >>>>>> confinement saves the externally applied energy that produced the ENP >>>>>> from >>>>>> being wasted. >>>>>> >>>>>> The ENP can leave the reactor if the material that makes up the >>>>>> reactor enclosure is transparent to the optical and magnetic nature of >>>>>> the >>>>>> ENP. This might be why electrolytic cells have difficulty in sustaining >>>>>> powerful LENR reactions. In this case, the ENPs escape the glass beaker >>>>>> reactor enclosure and all the input energy that was pumped into the ENP >>>>>> is >>>>>> wasted to the environment. outside the electrolytic cell. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the cell is made of material that can contain the ENP both >>>>>> optically and magnetically, the reactor will be efficent. Alumina is >>>>>> antiferromagnetic and will confine magnetic particles thy to escape the >>>>>> reactor shell. Another method of ENP confinement that Rossi might use is >>>>>> a >>>>>> solenoidal confinement coil that keeps the ENPs away from the reactor >>>>>> walls >>>>>> in the center axis of the reactor. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
