Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Roarty, Francis X]

Axil, considering this thread in conjunction with Calvert’s 5D windows it 
almost suggests that a magnetic field in or around the reactor becomes more 
confining if nested inside a magnetic shielding material than just a magnetic 
field alone [ was Parkhov’s iron pot closed?] – Jones has often promoted the 
virtue of magnetic fields in LENR but what if this effect could be scaled, 
either nested or folded layers of magnet and shield layers wrapped around the 
reactor –perhaps this is what Rossi effectively does by virtue of how he 
positions the cats around the mouse [sorry that was your idea but am seeing 
your argument just now].. you have mentioned the case of radiation being 
detected at a distance from the reactor but not near the reactor walls – 
whatever the reason it does suggest a sweet spot displaced from the reactor 
walls that could perhaps be extended with nesting magnetic fields. I suspect 
that like Refrigeration’s confinement of volume wrt pressure to vary temp we 
also need to confine one variable in LENR to reveal a robust LENR – since I am 
a proponent of vacuum engineering this variable could well be manipulated via 
magnetic fields but we haven’t fine tuned it enough yet to reveal make the 
relationship certain.
Fran

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2015 11:14 AM
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

We can’t build a bridge without a plan. We can’t get LENR to work without a 
valid theory. I am beginning to think that LENR is caused by magnetic 
particles, let’s call them Exotic Neutral Particles (ENP) that can float on 
currents of air. This theory has implications to getting LENR to work. If a 
reactor is build out of material that is transparent to ENPs then these 
important particles could escape the reactor without producing more ENPs thus 
keeping the LENR reaction energy starved. But if the reactor could be insulated 
from EMP escape, then the reactor would hold onto the energy that it produces 
and become gainful.

Replicators are perplexed by the success of Parkhomov’s reactor. Why can’t 
anybody get the Parkhomov reactor to work even with the same fuel that he used? 
But everybody is amused by the old iron pot that Parkhomove ran his experiment 
in. That iron pot could be keeping the magnetic ENP from escaping the confines 
of his reactor. All the other replicators let their precious ENPs escape into 
the air.

Why does Rossi enclose his fuel in a cartridge containing layers of steel? 
Could the iron particle in the Lugano fuel sample come from a magnetic 
confinement system? Does Rossi have an iron mesh inside the alumina tube to 
produce magnetic confinement? If theory says that keeping ENPs confined is 
important, then the use of iron and steel in Rossi type reactors becomes 
interesting.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Axil Axil 
<janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:11 PM, David Roberson 
<dlrober...@aol.com<mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>> wrote:
I assume that your concepts include the various particles such as the 
polyneutron, Erzion, etc. but Rossi has never mentioned any of these.  They may 
be involved in the LENR process, but I suspect that Rossi has never used those 
terms within his postings.

http://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/

Rossi’s closest technician and engineer since 2012, Fulvio Fabiani:

"And then you realize that it is something unique. We have it all filmed, which 
still cannot be disclosed. We have photographs of creatures that emit pure 
light that have completely melted the reactor down, all in a very quiet way. 
You just turn off the stimuli system and the reaction is switched off. It’s 
impressive."

These "creatures that emit pure light" are the photonic based Exotic Neutral 
Particles(ENP) the other people has seen in their experiments.

The ENPs looks and act differently because they are holding different light 
wavelengths based on the level of power they contain.

These ENPs are weak in the infrared, visible at intermediate light strength 
levels, and very powerful in the XUV and x-ray ranges. This is what R, Mills 
sees as black light in his experiments.

This is what I call dark mode Surface Plasmon Polaritons.

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

IMHO, magitism is not stimulative. At 770C the Curie point is exceeded and
the iron is ineffective as a magnetic material. The Glowstick requires
temperatures over 1000C to startup. The is no material that can be used as
a outside container above 1100C because of the Curie point. That is why a
sinusoidal coil is the only device that can force magnetic material to the
center of the reactor tube.

Could it be that the three coils in the Rossi reactor as used for different
things: one coil is used as a heater, another used as a sinusoidal magnetic
containment coil, and the last for RF stimulation? Notice the three wire
connections on the hot cat coils.



On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil  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.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

Posts are combined and improved as follows:

IMHO, magnetism is not stimulative. Iron provides magnetic containment up
to a reactor operating temperature of 770C. At 770C, the Curie point is
exceeded and the iron is ineffective as a magnetic material. The Glowstick
requires temperatures over 1000C to startup. The is no material that can be
used as an outside container above 1100C because of the Curie point. That
is why a sinusoidal coil is the only device that can force magnetic
material to the center of the reactor tube.

Could it be that the three coils in the Rossi reactor are used for
different things: one coil is used as a heater, another used as a
sinusoidal magnetic containment coil, and the last for RF stimulation?
Notice the three wire connections on the Hot Cat coils. But things are not
as simple as that. The Rossi's control system produces complex waveforms.
Could these complex waveforms produce the three functions of heating,
magnetic containment and RF stimulation?

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/docservice_image_drawings/WO@@@id0030363131@@@10873194@@@200@@@0@@@59.tif


It may be possible to multiplex the three required waveforms that perform
the three functions of heating, magnetic containment and RF stimulation
into a square wave. Is there anybody here who can dope out that required
squarewave to duplicate Fulvio Fabiani's work?

>From another perspective:

http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/108/04/0565.pdf

"AHE has been observed during electrolysis following dynamic stimulation of
the cell by time dependent electrolytic currents (SuperWaves) and
ultrasonic excitation."

The "SuperWave" remains protected IP of Dardik. But in current replication
attempts three separate coils could be used. A this early juncture, it is
easier to adjust each waveform component separately. Then there is no need
to do a complex waveform calculation to change something.

There is a beautiful animation by LucasVB explaining the Fourier
decomposition of a square wave:

[image: Inline image 2]

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

 But things are not as simple as that three coil feed. The Rossi's control
system produces complex waveforms. Could these complex waveforms produce
the three functions of heating, magnetic containment and RF stimulation? There
is a beautiful animation by LucasVB explaining the Fourier decomposition of
a square wave.

It may be possible to multiplex the three required waveforms into a square
wave.


On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> IMHO, magitism is not stimulative. At 770C the Curie point is exceeded and
> the iron is ineffective as a magnetic material. The Glowstick requires
> temperatures over 1000C to startup. The is no material that can be used as
> a outside container above 1100C because of the Curie point. That is why a
> sinusoidal coil is the only device that can force magnetic material to the
> center of the reactor tube.
>
> Could it be that the three coils in the Rossi reactor as used for
> different things: one coil is used as a heater, another used as a
> sinusoidal magnetic containment coil, and the last for RF stimulation?
> Notice the three wire connections on the hot cat coils.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil  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.
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Roarty, Francis X]

Axil, I am glad you included the tachyon because it embraces relativistic 
effects and would explain some of the odd radiation measurement claims  made a 
short distance from the reactor  while not detectable at or within the reactor 
wall as mentioned in a recent thread.  Jones recently cited 
http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Articles/3-1/calvet-final.htm which taken in 
conjunction with your suggestion of tachyons would provide a 5D vector “around” 
the reactor wall that seemingly contracts and then re-expands in our 3d exactly 
opposite of the virtual particles which  very briefly “bend” into our 3d then 
back out into 5d..  IMHO gravitational force on the macro and Casimir force on 
the nano are both virtual particle density. We have established open space 
/dirac sea as 0 gravity which is the isotropic density of our 3d plane BUT just 
like the atmosphere you can create a vacuum where that density is even lower 
such as Casimir effect. Going negative by breaching the isotropy with nano 
geometry is radically different than near C spatial displacement and unrelated 
to the squared Pythagorean relationship between V and C. I shudder every time I 
talk about time dilation and contraction because we are so ingrained with the 
near luminal velocities and energies required for a particle to achieve these 
effects on a macro scale –there is also the square law effects that we also 
wrongly assign to Casimir effects, the gravitational effects achieved do not 
have to effect all the surrounding 3d space in the conventional square law 
nature we assume for “equivalent” acceleration. We have to assume “equivalent” 
decleration for the same reason we would select equivalent acceleration for a 
space craft –  because the energy the particle or spacecraft are reacting to 
are not self contained, a black hole gravity well enlarges what Calvert calls a 
“ window” between our 3d and 5d and the bending virtual particles stream slows 
down in a ventorii like effect we perceive as negative time dilation. In the 
case of a  Casimir cavity we accelerates this particle flow by suppressing the 
window that increases the pressure and flow rate around the visiting hydrogen 
atoms in the cavity – with Casimir suppression  positive time dilation occurs 
which we loosely perceive as catalyzation or in the extreme decay rate 
anomalies. So far no substantiated claims of gravity anomalies beyond the EM 
drive are known and even attempts to stack Casimir cavities by Italian 
researchers in the early 2k failed to prove the gravitational connection 
between Casimir effect and gravity I am convinced this will all change soon. A 
relativistic effect in a confined space means both extreme differences in 
inertial frames and linkage with the cavity walls creating the field are 
already established – something that is excluded in “equivalent”  near C 
Lorentzian effects where the square law would place a spaceship in a gravity 
well too distant and diluted to exploit from outside the well despite the huge 
difference in equivalent gravity of the ship and stationary observer outside 
the well. IMHO the anomalous energy in LENR is based upon this interaction with 
5D and we will discover gravitational anomalies are already present immediately 
after we engineer a robust sustained LENR reaction.

Fran


From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 7:49 PM
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

That is what the Rossi says

I have found that Rossi doen not make misstatements when it comes to egineering 
details. When his product are finally revailed, this pre release statements are 
consistent with the product. Also, synthsys of all available experimental data 
lends insight to what Rossi says. Magnetic confinement of ENPs comes from 
various ENP theories including  the tachyon, the leptonic monopole, the 
polyneutron, and the Erzion...all ENPs and all informative as to how the cause 
of LENR behaves.



On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:30 PM, David Roberson 
<dlrober...@aol.com<mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>> wrote:
That is what the Rossi says!  Unfortunately, we do not have any of the other 
patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is structured.  
Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we are speculating 
on a particular issue so that everyone understands that that is the situation.  
When you state with authority that 1 device is driving 15 others people are 
left with the impression that Rossi has made that clear in his writings.

I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing that 
mentioned.  In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have missed 
one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models are based 
upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that information 
accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[ChemE Stewart]

Maybe the steel shipping container helps, just a wild add guess. Steel
reflects EMR, i.e., radar

On Thursday, December 3, 2015, Axil Axil  wrote:

> We can’t build a bridge without a plan. We can’t get LENR to work without
> a valid theory. I am beginning to think that LENR is caused by magnetic
> particles, let’s call them Exotic Neutral Particles (ENP) that can float on
> currents of air. This theory has implications to getting LENR to work. If a
> reactor is build out of material that is transparent to ENPs then these
> important particles could escape the reactor without producing more ENPs
> thus keeping the LENR reaction energy starved. But if the reactor could be
> insulated from EMP escape, then the reactor would hold onto the energy that
> it produces and become gainful.
>
>
> Replicators are perplexed by the success of Parkhomov’s reactor. Why can’t
> anybody get the Parkhomov reactor to work even with the same fuel that he
> used? But everybody is amused by the old iron pot that Parkhomove ran his
> experiment in. That iron pot could be keeping the magnetic ENP from
> escaping the confines of his reactor. All the other replicators let their
> precious ENPs escape into the air.
>
>
> Why does Rossi enclose his fuel in a cartridge containing layers of steel?
> Could the iron particle in the Lugano fuel sample come from a magnetic
> confinement system? Does Rossi have an iron mesh inside the alumina tube to
> produce magnetic confinement? If theory says that keeping ENPs confined is
> important, then the use of iron and steel in Rossi type reactors becomes
> interesting.
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Axil Axil  > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:11 PM, David Roberson > > wrote:
>>
>>> I assume that your concepts include the various particles such as the
>>> polyneutron, Erzion, etc. but Rossi has never mentioned any of these.  They
>>> may be involved in the LENR process, but I suspect that Rossi has never
>>> used those terms within his postings.
>>>
>>
>>
>> http://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/
>>
>>
>> Rossi’s closest technician and engineer since 2012, *Fulvio Fabiani:*
>>
>> "And then you realize that it is something unique. We have it all filmed,
>> which still cannot be disclosed. We have photographs of creatures that emit
>> pure light that have completely melted the reactor down, all in a very
>> quiet way. You just turn off the stimuli system and the reaction is
>> switched off. It’s impressive."
>>
>> These "creatures that emit pure light" are the photonic based Exotic
>> Neutral Particles(ENP) the other people has seen in their experiments.
>>
>> The ENPs looks and act differently because they are holding different
>> light wavelengths based on the level of power they contain.
>>
>> These ENPs are weak in the infrared, visible at intermediate
>> light strength levels, and very powerful in the XUV and x-ray ranges. This
>> is what R, Mills sees as black light in his experiments.
>>
>> This is what I call dark mode Surface Plasmon Polaritons.
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

We can’t build a bridge without a plan. We can’t get LENR to work without a
valid theory. I am beginning to think that LENR is caused by magnetic
particles, let’s call them Exotic Neutral Particles (ENP) that can float on
currents of air. This theory has implications to getting LENR to work. If a
reactor is build out of material that is transparent to ENPs then these
important particles could escape the reactor without producing more ENPs
thus keeping the LENR reaction energy starved. But if the reactor could be
insulated from EMP escape, then the reactor would hold onto the energy that
it produces and become gainful.


Replicators are perplexed by the success of Parkhomov’s reactor. Why can’t
anybody get the Parkhomov reactor to work even with the same fuel that he
used? But everybody is amused by the old iron pot that Parkhomove ran his
experiment in. That iron pot could be keeping the magnetic ENP from
escaping the confines of his reactor. All the other replicators let their
precious ENPs escape into the air.


Why does Rossi enclose his fuel in a cartridge containing layers of steel?
Could the iron particle in the Lugano fuel sample come from a magnetic
confinement system? Does Rossi have an iron mesh inside the alumina tube to
produce magnetic confinement? If theory says that keeping ENPs confined is
important, then the use of iron and steel in Rossi type reactors becomes
interesting.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:11 PM, David Roberson  wrote:
>
>> I assume that your concepts include the various particles such as the
>> polyneutron, Erzion, etc. but Rossi has never mentioned any of these.  They
>> may be involved in the LENR process, but I suspect that Rossi has never
>> used those terms within his postings.
>>
>
>
> http://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/
>
>
> Rossi’s closest technician and engineer since 2012, *Fulvio Fabiani:*
>
> "And then you realize that it is something unique. We have it all filmed,
> which still cannot be disclosed. We have photographs of creatures that emit
> pure light that have completely melted the reactor down, all in a very
> quiet way. You just turn off the stimuli system and the reaction is
> switched off. It’s impressive."
>
> These "creatures that emit pure light" are the photonic based Exotic
> Neutral Particles(ENP) the other people has seen in their experiments.
>
> The ENPs looks and act differently because they are holding different
> light wavelengths based on the level of power they contain.
>
> These ENPs are weak in the infrared, visible at intermediate
> light strength levels, and very powerful in the XUV and x-ray ranges. This
> is what R, Mills sees as black light in his experiments.
>
> This is what I call dark mode Surface Plasmon Polaritons.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Daniel Rocha]

What axil says is true. Not regarding odd particles and stuff. But the
confinement to improve. But this is not something Rossi discovered. Rather,
it was one of the things that led another group to be discredited.

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[David Roberson]

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.





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 i

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

   1. Hank Mills
   December 29th, 2013 at 2:34 PM
   <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=833=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=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 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

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

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 ba

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

Rossi has provided a comprehensive explanation of the Cat and Mouse reactor
clustering method in bits and pieces throughout his Q 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 t

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[David Roberson]

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 • 17 hours ago


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.





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

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[David Roberson]

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





Hank Mills
December 29th, 2013 at 2:34 PM
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?


Andrea Rossi
December 29th, 2013 at 6:10 PM
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 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 • 17 hours ago


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, wat

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

Rossi has said that he has 64 more patents to submit. The patent that he
how has is relevant to the Hot Cat which is not capable of SSM. The 1 MW
E-Cat is where SSM applies, It has yet to be patented in whole or in part.

Rossi has said that the E-Cat X which is the updated Hot Cat might be
capable of SSM but Rossi has not gotten down to that level of R yet with
the E-Cat X..

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:13 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:

> But Axil, Rossi's patent does not show any such cat and mouse structure.
> He has answered a question of mine about the structure of the new CAT by
> telling me that the patent is where to look.
>
> I suspect that you are attempting to make the design fall into a pattern
> that you believe is required instead of following the actual data.
>
> Each tiger probably contains 16 smaller identical units.  Perhaps Rossi
> has modified the coolant flow so that it is more effective in balancing the
> thermal load than with the earlier system.With only 3 modules per
> active unit there were far too many pumps, etc. to deal with.  Now, he
> reduces that requirement by a factor of roughly 5.
>
> Rossi seems to be wise to keep 4 main tigers together so that if 1 fails,
> the other 3 can likely be adjusted to take up that slack for a short period
> until the repairs are completed.  It may be as simple as that.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 3:11 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>
> Rossi has provided a comprehensive explanation of the Cat and Mouse
> reactor clustering method in bits and pieces throughout his Q 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
>>

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

That is what the Rossi says

I have found that Rossi doen not make misstatements when it comes to
egineering details. When his product are finally revailed, this pre release
statements are consistent with the product. Also, synthsys of all
available experimental data lends insight to what Rossi
says. Magnetic confinement of ENPs comes from various
ENP theories including  the tachyon, the leptonic monopole, the polyneutron,
and the Erzion...all ENPs and all informative as to how the cause of LENR
behaves.



On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:30 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:

> That is what the Rossi says!  Unfortunately, we do not have any of the
> other patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is
> structured.  Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we
> are speculating on a particular issue so that everyone understands that
> that is the situation.  When you state with authority that 1 device is
> driving 15 others people are left with the impression that Rossi has made
> that clear in his writings.
>
> I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing
> that mentioned.  In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have
> missed one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models
> are based upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that
> information accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point to
> state that you are speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is
> actually written by Rossi?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>
>
>1. Joseph
>November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
><http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892=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=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=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 th

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[David Roberson]

I assume that your concepts include the various particles such as the 
polyneutron, Erzion, etc. but Rossi has never mentioned any of these.  They may 
be involved in the LENR process, but I suspect that Rossi has never used those 
terms within his postings.

I too have found that he is careful to reveal actual portions of his design but 
sometimes it is nearly impossible to know exactly how to interpret his 
descriptions.  He divulged a great deal of useful information concerning the 
PWM operation of his original ECAT that I found to be applicable within my 
thermal models.  It was with this information that I was able to convince 
myself that it is indeed possible to control a large amount of thermal power 
with a much smaller quantity.  His actual duty cycle works within my computer 
model when I make certain reasonable assumptions.  I was able to achieve a COP 
of 6 in this manner.

It is important to carefully interpret the words that he uses when he writes 
and that is why I request that we are careful to not add our own ideas to what 
is revealed unless acknowledged in our text.  So far I do not see any proof 
that he currently is using 1 drive device to handle 15 others.  That may be the 
case, but his latest patent does not reveal that structure.

It might make sense to use this design if the COP of the new devices is 15 or 
greater except for one situation.  My models show that you need extra power to 
get over the 'hump' before the gain maxes out to 15.  The required drive for 
each to overcome the 'hump' is too great unless driven a few at a time.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 7:49 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement



That is what the Rossi says



I have found that Rossi doen not make misstatements when it comes to egineering 
details. When his product are finally revailed, this pre release statements are 
consistent with the product. Also, synthsys of all available experimental data 
lends insight to what Rossi says. Magnetic confinement of ENPs comes from 
various ENP theories including  the tachyon, the leptonic monopole, the 
polyneutron, and the Erzion...all ENPs and all informative as to how the cause 
of LENR behaves.  







On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:30 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:

That is what the Rossi says!  Unfortunately, we do not have any of the other 
patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is structured.  
Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we are speculating 
on a particular issue so that everyone understands that that is the situation.  
When you state with authority that 1 device is driving 15 others people are 
left with the impression that Rossi has made that clear in his writings.

I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing that 
mentioned.  In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have missed 
one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models are based 
upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that information 
accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point to state that you are 
speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is actually written by 
Rossi?

Thanks,

Dave



 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>

Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement





Joseph
November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
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.


Andrea Rossi
November 5th, 2015 at 11:25 PM
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

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[David Roberson]

That is what the Rossi says!  Unfortunately, we do not have any of the other 
patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is structured.  
Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we are speculating 
on a particular issue so that everyone understands that that is the situation.  
When you state with authority that 1 device is driving 15 others people are 
left with the impression that Rossi has made that clear in his writings.

I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing that 
mentioned.  In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have missed 
one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models are based 
upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that information 
accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point to state that you are 
speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is actually written by 
Rossi?

Thanks,

Dave



 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement





Joseph
November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
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.


Andrea Rossi
November 5th, 2015 at 11:25 PM
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





Hank Mills
December 29th, 2013 at 2:34 PM
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?


Andrea Rossi
December 29th, 2013 at 6:10 PM
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 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: A

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Ludwik Kowalski]

Why are Rossi's patents and intentions important, in the context of validating 
his CMNS claims? What the world is waiting for is a protocol which allows 
reputable scientists to replicate his results, and to obtain similar (+/- 30%) 
results. That would be a tremendous contribution, much more valuable than tens 
of his patents.

Ludwik  Kowalski (see Wikipedia) 

===

On Dec 2, 2015, at 7:49 PM, Axil Axil wrote:

> That is what the Rossi says
> 
> I have found that Rossi doen not make misstatements when it comes to 
> egineering details. When his product are finally revailed, this pre release 
> statements are consistent with the product. Also, synthsys of all available 
> experimental data lends insight to what Rossi says. Magnetic confinement of 
> ENPs comes from various ENP theories including  the tachyon, the leptonic 
> monopole, the polyneutron, and the Erzion...all ENPs and all informative as 
> to how the cause of LENR behaves.  
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:30 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
> That is what the Rossi says!  Unfortunately, we do not have any of the other 
> patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is structured. 
>  Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we are 
> speculating on a particular issue so that everyone understands that that is 
> the situation.  When you state with authority that 1 device is driving 15 
> others people are left with the impression that Rossi has made that clear in 
> his writings.
> 
> I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing that 
> mentioned.  In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have missed 
> one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models are 
> based upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that information 
> accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point to state that you 
> are speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is actually written 
> by Rossi?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
> 
> Joseph
> November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
> 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.
> Andrea Rossi
> November 5th, 2015 at 11:25 PM
> 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
> 
> Hank Mills
> December 29th, 2013 at 2:34 PM
> 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 
> duri

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:11 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

> I assume that your concepts include the various particles such as the
> polyneutron, Erzion, etc. but Rossi has never mentioned any of these.  They
> may be involved in the LENR process, but I suspect that Rossi has never
> used those terms within his postings.
>

http://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/11/25/rossis-engineer-i-have-seen-things-you-people-wouldnt-believe/


Rossi’s closest technician and engineer since 2012, *Fulvio Fabiani:*

"And then you realize that it is something unique. We have it all filmed,
which still cannot be disclosed. We have photographs of creatures that emit
pure light that have completely melted the reactor down, all in a very
quiet way. You just turn off the stimuli system and the reaction is
switched off. It’s impressive."

These "creatures that emit pure light" are the photonic based Exotic
Neutral Particles(ENP) the other people has seen in their experiments.

The ENPs looks and act differently because they are holding different light
wavelengths based on the level of power they contain.

These ENPs are weak in the infrared, visible at intermediate
light strength levels, and very powerful in the XUV and x-ray ranges. This
is what R, Mills sees as black light in his experiments.

This is what I call dark mode Surface Plasmon Polaritons.

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Ludwik Kowalski]

1) Thank you for the  links to your articles, Axil. I will read them tomorrow. 

2) Are you saying that Lugano scientists followed Rossi's published protocol, 
and that their quantitative results were approximately the same as his? My 
recollection is that this did not happen. Otherwise, ;-).

3) What is Rossi waiting for? In his place I would have published the protocol 
(without trying to offer a theory) a long time ago, waited for at least two 
independent quantitative confirmation of results, and expected a prestigious 
recognition  ;-).

4) Unable to publish, I would start selling reactors, counting on great 
commercial success.  ;-).

Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)

=== 

On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:47 PM, Axil Axil wrote:

> Rossi has revealed his Hot Cat technology in the Lugano test. Using this 
> report, multiple experimenters SAY that they have replicated the Hot Cat. The 
> patent submitted by the Industrial Heat is  filed with quotes pulled directly 
> from the Lugano report. 
> 
> I have drawn important insights from the Ni62 100 micro ash particle analyzed 
> in the Lugano report about how the LENR reaction works.
> 
> See
> 
> http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/07/05/lugano-fuel-analysis-axil-axil/
> 
> http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/10/18/rossi-ash-sample-size-from-lugano-test-not-representative-of-whole-charge/
> 
> http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/05/19/my-opinion-regarding-rossicook-reaction-theory-axil-axil/
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Ludwik Kowalski 
> <kowals...@mail.montclair.edu> wrote:
> 
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:13 PM, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:
> 
>> Why are Rossi's patents and intentions important, in the context of 
>> validating his CMNS claims? What the world is waiting for is a protocol 
>> which allows reputable scientists to replicate at least one of his setups, 
>> and to obtain similar (+/- 30%) results. That would be a tremendous 
>> contribution, much more valuable than tens of his patents. He has a lot to 
>> gain from this. What is he waiting for?
>> 
>> Ludwik  Kowalski (see Wikipedia) 
>> 
>> ===
>> 
>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 7:49 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
>> 
>>> That is what the Rossi says
>>> 
>>> I have found that Rossi doen not make misstatements when it comes to 
>>> engineering details. When his product are finally revailed, this pre 
>>> release statements are consistent with the product. Also, synthsys of all 
>>> available experimental data lends insight to what Rossi says. Magnetic 
>>> confinement of ENPs comes from various ENP theories including  the tachyon, 
>>> the leptonic monopole, the polyneutron, and the Erzion...all ENPs and all 
>>> informative as to how the cause of LENR behaves.  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:30 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
>>> That is what the Rossi says!  Unfortunately, we do not have any of the 
>>> other patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is 
>>> structured.  Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we 
>>> are speculating on a particular issue so that everyone understands that 
>>> that is the situation.  When you state with authority that 1 device is 
>>> driving 15 others people are left with the impression that Rossi has made 
>>> that clear in his writings.
>>> 
>>> I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing that 
>>> mentioned.  In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have 
>>> missed one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models 
>>> are based upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that 
>>> information accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point to 
>>> state that you are speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is 
>>> actually written by Rossi?
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>>> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>>> 
>>> Joseph
>>> November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
>>> 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 pla

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

; missed one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models
>>> are based upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that
>>> information accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point to
>>> state that you are speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is
>>> actually written by Rossi?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>>> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>>>
>>>
>>>1. Joseph
>>>November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
>>>
>>> <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892=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=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=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 sta

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[David Roberson]

But Axil, Rossi's patent does not show any such cat and mouse structure.  He 
has answered a question of mine about the structure of the new CAT by telling 
me that the patent is where to look.

I suspect that you are attempting to make the design fall into a pattern that 
you believe is required instead of following the actual data.

Each tiger probably contains 16 smaller identical units.  Perhaps Rossi has 
modified the coolant flow so that it is more effective in balancing the thermal 
load than with the earlier system.With only 3 modules per active unit there 
were far too many pumps, etc. to deal with.  Now, he reduces that requirement 
by a factor of roughly 5.

Rossi seems to be wise to keep 4 main tigers together so that if 1 fails, the 
other 3 can likely be adjusted to take up that slack for a short period until 
the repairs are completed.  It may be as simple as that.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 3:11 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement



Rossi has provided a comprehensive explanation of the Cat and Mouse reactor 
clustering method in bits and pieces throughout his Q 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 • 17 hours ago


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.





That cooling water on the outside of the electrolytic cell's glass reactor 
shell at the right side (see Figure 1) is close to th

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

   1. Joseph
   November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
   <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892=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=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=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=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 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-catw

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

Rossi has revealed his Hot Cat technology in the Lugano test. Using this
report, multiple experimenters SAY that they have replicated the Hot Cat.
The patent submitted by the Industrial Heat is  filed with quotes pulled
directly from the Lugano report.

I have drawn important insights from the Ni62 100 micro ash particle
analyzed in the Lugano report about how the LENR reaction works.

See

http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/07/05/lugano-fuel-analysis-axil-axil/

http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/10/18/rossi-ash-sample-size-from-lugano-test-not-representative-of-whole-charge/

http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/05/19/my-opinion-regarding-rossicook-reaction-theory-axil-axil/



On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Ludwik Kowalski <
kowals...@mail.montclair.edu> wrote:

>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:13 PM, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:
>
> Why are Rossi's patents and intentions important, in the context of
> validating his CMNS claims? What the world is waiting for is a protocol
> which allows reputable scientists to replicate at least one of his setups,
> and to obtain similar (+/- 30%) results. That would be a tremendous
> contribution, much more valuable than tens of his patents. He has a lot to
> gain from this. What is he waiting for?
>
> Ludwik  Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
>
> ===
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 7:49 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
>
> That is what the Rossi says
>
> I have found that Rossi doen not make misstatements when it comes to
> egineering details. When his product are finally revailed, this pre release
> statements are consistent with the product. Also, synthsys of all
> available experimental data lends insight to what Rossi
> says. Magnetic confinement of ENPs comes from various
> ENP theories including  the tachyon, the leptonic monopole, the polyneutron,
> and the Erzion...all ENPs and all informative as to how the cause of LENR
> behaves.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:30 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> That is what the Rossi says!  Unfortunately, we do not have any of the
>> other patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is
>> structured.  Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we
>> are speculating on a particular issue so that everyone understands that
>> that is the situation.  When you state with authority that 1 device is
>> driving 15 others people are left with the impression that Rossi has made
>> that clear in his writings.
>>
>> I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing
>> that mentioned.  In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have
>> missed one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models
>> are based upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that
>> information accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point to
>> state that you are speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is
>> actually written by Rossi?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>>
>>
>>1. Joseph
>>November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
>>
>> <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892=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=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:

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Ludwik Kowalski]

On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:13 PM, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:

> Why are Rossi's patents and intentions important, in the context of 
> validating his CMNS claims? What the world is waiting for is a protocol which 
> allows reputable scientists to replicate at least one of his setups, and to 
> obtain similar (+/- 30%) results. That would be a tremendous contribution, 
> much more valuable than tens of his patents. He has a lot to gain from this. 
> What is he waiting for?
> 
> Ludwik  Kowalski (see Wikipedia) 
> 
> ===
> 
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 7:49 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
> 
>> That is what the Rossi says
>> 
>> I have found that Rossi doen not make misstatements when it comes to 
>> egineering details. When his product are finally revailed, this pre release 
>> statements are consistent with the product. Also, synthsys of all available 
>> experimental data lends insight to what Rossi says. Magnetic confinement of 
>> ENPs comes from various ENP theories including  the tachyon, the leptonic 
>> monopole, the polyneutron, and the Erzion...all ENPs and all informative as 
>> to how the cause of LENR behaves.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:30 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
>> That is what the Rossi says!  Unfortunately, we do not have any of the other 
>> patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is 
>> structured.  Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we 
>> are speculating on a particular issue so that everyone understands that that 
>> is the situation.  When you state with authority that 1 device is driving 15 
>> others people are left with the impression that Rossi has made that clear in 
>> his writings.
>> 
>> I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing that 
>> mentioned.  In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have missed 
>> one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case.  My models are 
>> based upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that 
>> information accurate.  Can I count on you and others to make a point to 
>> state that you are speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is 
>> actually written by Rossi?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Dave
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>> 
>> Joseph
>> November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
>> 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.
>> Andrea Rossi
>> November 5th, 2015 at 11:25 PM
>> 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
>> 
>> Hank Mills
>> December 29th, 2013 at

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

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]


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  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.
>
>
>

[Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

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.

Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement

[Axil Axil]

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  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]
> 
>
> 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  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