It is beginning to dawn on people that Cold Fusion does not exist.
Andrea Rossi
August 23, 2019 at 4:25 AM
Fox:
LENR is a so wide definition, that it is not a definition and it makes a
lot of con-fusion. Since this term is commonly used to connotate “cold
fusion”, I prefer to say we are out of it, also to be honest with the
recent development of our R Isotopic changes do not imply fusion.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
Andrea Rossi
August 22, 2019 at 2:11 PM
Giovanni:
No. I arrived to think that cold fusion does not exist.
At this point of our theoretical and technological development, after 20
years of hard work, we think that cold fusion does not exist. I am sorry,
but I feel us lightyears far from the LENR community, to which we,
actually, never belonged. My effect depends on atom’s potentials that have
nothing to do with cold fusion or LENR. This, by the way, is clearly put in
evidence in my paper here:
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/330601653_E-Cat_SK_anf_long_range_
particle_interactions.
---
Gerard McEk
August 24, 2019 at 6:56 AM
Dear Andrea,
Now you have come to the insight that Cold Fusion nor LENR are the cause of
energy production in the E-Cat SK, I and many others wonder where the
energy comes from.
Does it mean that you believe the energy, generated in the E-Cat SK, is not
from nuclear origin where ‘E=mc’ plays the main role?
I really look forward to your answer.
May your final tests confirm your ideas about the Rossi effect!
Kind regards, Gerard
Andrea Rossi
August 24, 2019 at 8:10 AM
Gerard McEk:
Yes.
Thank you for your kind attention to our work.
In this very moment we are starting the final series of tests in the USA.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 4:56 PM JonesBeene wrote:
> There are a few interesting comment from Robert Godes here:
>
>
>
> http://sjbyrnes.com/cf/the-case-against-cold-fusion-experiments/
>
>
>
> It is the last comment in a long thread and you may not want to read it
> all…
>
>
>
> Godes seldom posts to News Groups or blogs, so it is unclear where he
> stands on some major points – and it would be nice to know that he is
> capable of defending his claims in the context of Internet armchair
> experts... a tough audience even when not particularly skeptical. He may be
> prepping for something, who knows?
>
>
>
> Thankfully, there are a number of nuggets in this post worth thinking
> about, but too many extraneous issues going-on… relating mostly to
> [reportedly dishonest] skeptics. Otherwise there is one detail which
> strikes me as most important in the Big Picture, even though most people
> gloss over it.
>
>
>
> Why? Well it can be interpreted as debasing or marginalizing the P/F
> effect ... ironically proving that the thermal anomaly exists while
> disproving the original details of why it exists.
>
>
>
> Quote: “H is not a control for D. Mike McKubre was shocked when I showed
> him my results and told him that they were obtained using distilled water.
> By controlling the underlying physics, it is possible to run the reaction
> in Pd using ordinary hydrogen…”
>
>
>
> In the extreme, Godes could be saying that since both H and D are equally
> active in palladium electrolysis, for producing anomalous heat - there is
> unlikely to be “nuclear fusion” going on at all. Of course, others have
> said something similar - but he is closer to being “man of the hour” and a
> successful fun-raiser to boot.
>
>
>
> Is Robert Godes positioning to “burst on the scene” as the miracle man of
> alternative energy?
>
>
>
> Let’s hope so. But to be clear – this would not mean that the gainful
> thermal reaction of loaded palladium hydride is not nuclear – it seems to
> definitely be “nuclear” but it may not be predominantly nuclear fusion.
>
>
>
> Someone, maybe it was Meulenberg has shown that even a dense hydrogen or
> Mills effect is deriving energy from the nucleus. Which is to say that mass
> is being converted into energy somehow - but the underlying reaction is not
> for the most part actual fusion of deuterium into helium. It can be argued
> that reaction always produces strong gamma radiation.
>
>
>
> Jones
>
