This concept has "a new kind of chain reaction" at the heart of a
complicated theory known as ZPED - zero point enhanced decay. Several
related old posts have been revised and included here for convenience.

Many observers have become increasingly open to the suggestion that what
Andrea Rossi has discovered, serendipitously and possibly unknown to
himself, can be characterized as a critical mass. "of something" operating
for large non-chemical gain, with mild radioactivity. Obviously, the
'something' is not directly related to nuclear fission, since neutrons are

The most puzzling detail is the lack of sufficient radioactivity to account
for the excess heat. However, energy from nuclear decay or isomeric
transition (IT) can be involved at a secondary level, if most of it can be
coupled to an exchange mechanism with the zero point field. This overall
modality is related to a physical mass of reactants, but it could easily be
leaning towards having additional intangible considerations - which casts
everything into a different light. 

Rather than change the well-known phrase 'critical mass' to the more
precise: 'critical accumulation' (in order to accommodate intangible
considerations) it seems prudent merely to acknowledge that this process is
not directly connected to standard uranium fission, except metaphorically;
but it does demand threshold levels of at least one variable and possibly

The important behavior of the underlying system becomes "emergent" - in the
way Ball describes in Critical Mass - How one thing leads to another, which
is online at Google Books. This does not delve deeply enough into quantum
mechanics to be helpful in the precise pursuit (explaining Andrea Rossi's
E-Cat discovery). However, the insight on emergent systems is helpful for
those who do not appreciate how a large jump in gain can arrive in such a
surprising way. The irony here is that QM and critical mass are antithetical
on one level of understanding - the small juxtaposed to the large.

One intangible consideration in the operation of any quantum mechanical
process is that 'probability' itself, in the sense of 'correlation fields,'
is responsive to accumulation - and/or to 'trigger' levels (leading to
emergent behavior) in systems which depend on a flux of
neutrons-substitutes, which will be called a "vector". A moderately high
stable temperature is one such trigger or vector, which operates to maximize
stress within nanocavities.

'Probability' is also found at the underlying level of 'critical mass' via
neutron interaction (fission chain reaction), but in this new form it is
related to the zero point field in two steps. There is a secondary,
accelerated nuclear decay (an isomeric conversion or a weak force reaction)
which can seem at first to be primary, without looking at all the clues. 

This process is mediated by a dense form of hydrogen known as 'pycno'. This
hypothesis is the merger of QM, cavity QED, and Casimir mechanics with
mainstream nuclear reactions, and it will lead to a theory called ZPED, or
zero point enhanced decay. The ultimate energy source is the atomic nucleus.
Let's make that clear, even though the way it arrives is not straightforward
and involves quantum mechanics, time shifting, and two distinct stages. Here
are specific details:

There is an unusual subset of heavy elements - four elements in the periodic
table which are heavier (in a.m.u.) than the next element above them in the
table. For instance, element 92 is heavier than element 93. There appears to
be only four such elements in this category.

As you might imagine (even not knowing the identity of the four) this
characteristic could be strongly indicative of nuclear instability. The
first three are quite well-known as the elements involved in nuclear
fission: thorium, uranium and plutonium. 

The 'nuclear fission' common denominator of these elements is a "too-heavy"
atomic mass, comparatively, and this property might indicate that the fourth
element in this grouping is heavy enough to have its decay rate altered.
However, this lesser known element is not known to undergo fission via
neutron capture, as are the three above - and it does not participate in a
chain reaction. At least not a chain reaction which is vectored by neutrons.
It is also the lightest of the four. It is also a singularity in having the
highest spread of atomic weight between its lowest and highest stable
isotope of any element. 

Does that make it special in any way for a new kind of nuclear reaction, not
involving neutrons as the active modality, but possibly involving another
vector such as "pycno", f/H or IRH (inverted Rydberg hydrogen) or other
names which were once more closely identified with the Mills' hydrino?

This fourth element is tellurium - element 52. It is best known in the
compound bismuth-telluride, used in thermoelectrics, or cadmium telluride in
photovoltaics. It is photoactive and tends to form into 2D layers in a way
that seems to mirror the dense hydrogen state - pycno which is also 2D.
"Topologically protected surface states" are the important 2D feature of
bismuth telluride. In the presence of spillover hydrogen, this points
directly towards the critical operative mechanism of the E-Cat device.
To help in understanding how "topologically protected surface states" might
relate to a new kind of sequential nuclear reaction of tellurium, it can be
helpful to start with the information on:
A topological insulator is a material that behaves as an thermal insulator
in its interior while permitting the movement of charges on its boundary. In
fact bismuth-telluride conducts electricity like a metal but conducts heat
poorly - like glass for instance. The internal stress resulting for this
contradictory set of physical properties on bulk bismuth telluride must be
severe. This will create nano-cracking and cavity formation.
On the surface of a topological insulator are special states which fall
within the bulk energy gap to allow good conduction. They also may allow
spillover hydrogen to accumulate via mirror charges and then further densify
in the nanocavities, which are more like nano-pits. Heat is retained in the
pit but not at the surface, providing a high stress-interface.
Once densified, there are many possibilities for excess heat. Those who
favor a nuclear-only pathway might look to the P-e-P reaction as the
aftermath. Some deuterium is expected in the ash. However, there are said to
be no detectable neutrons over background in the E-Cat, and there should be
neutrons with any significant level of fusion.
What is more likely, in my opinion is that the main initial source of heat
is NON-NUCLEAR. This creates an immediate local state of energy depletion,
which can the secondarily result in accelerated decay of a tellurium isotope
in such a way that that there is little remnant radioactivity. The most
likely isotope for this is Tellurium-125m, which should be responsive to
this kind of "balancing the books" scenario. Another unstable isotope -
previously mentioned is Zr-96, but bismuth telluride may best frame this
In either case, the "IT" kind of energy shedding may predominate. An
"isomeric transition" is a radioactive decay process that involves emission
of energy from a nucleus in a metastable state, referred to in an excited
state or deformed nucleus. There can be few traces of transmutation, when IT
operates to balance the energy withdrawn from the ZPF.
I am pretty sure that zirconia is the corresponding active material in
Arata/Kitamura/Takahashi/etc experiments, yet only used small quantities and
with less grain. Rossi may have found a much better "catalyst" (which is of
course his inaccurate description) or else he has found a critical mass
level. In both cases the nano nickel or Ni-Pd alloy can serve as spillover
Rossi's one liter capacity reactor indicates that he could not be using more
than a kilogram of powdered material - and for present purposes, it is
assumed to be mostly bismuth telluride with a few grams of a spillover
catalyst. To be a little more specific, then, in this hypothesis which I am
calling ZPED (zero point enhanced decay), most of the extra thermal energy
initiates in the first step from a known asymmetric manipulation of hydrogen
- the Lamb shift operating at infrared frequencies with a GHz offset. 
Any excess energy is severely self-limiting at a low level unless there is
provided an in situ way to replenish the zero point field. The replenishment
can comes from weak force reactions in tellurium (or other candidate nuclei)
and this effectively replaces the energy deficit. Most of the emitted gamma
radiation couples to ZPF before it can be observed in out 3-space.
Continuing operation "appears to be" nuclear, when in fact that
characterization is not accurate, and the proximate cause in zero point,
while the ultimate cause is nuclear.
This mechanism happens in two steps beginning with an asymmetrical looping
effect of QED - quantum electrodynamics, and can be interpreted as the
influence of virtual photons from the ZPE which have been emitted and
re-absorbed by the densified hydrogen atoms. The value of the Lamb shift to
this explanation is by way of a tiny mass-energy equivalent, which is about
4^-6 eV = 1 GHz = 4^-23 joules which is not much to get excited about unless
you can recycle (pump) the change (asymmetry) rapidly. With your oscillator
in the terahertz range (higher than ambient - i.e. the 'trigger'
temperature) then the slight thermal gain can be made additive and
sequential, so long as the zero point field is continually replenished
The bottom line of the ZPED thesis is that the initial (non-nuclear) gain is
via QM effects and the zero point field (the Lamb shift and/or relativistic
acceleration) - in conjunction with the rapid IR (infrared) pumping
mechanism at a thermal trigger temperature. This creates a local energy
deficit - in which an unstable nucleus, like Te-125 or Zr-96 become far more
susceptible to decay, and can effectively 'regauge' the depleted local
field, while leaving some (but comparatively little) remnant radioactivity. 
As for moving this from paper to laboratory, a set of definitive experiments
has been (is being) designed to falsify this theory.

Reply via email to