Rossi Rejects Paper Due to Carbon Catalyst Theory?

[Vo]:Rossi Rejects Paper Due to Carbon Catalyst Theory?
noone noone
Mon, 11 Jul 2011 02:40:01 -0700

Hello Everyone,

On the following page a person details how Rossi stated he would publish their
paper, but then did not do so. The person theorizes that the paper might have
not been published due to the fact he mentions CARBON as a possible catalyst.

http://www.chemicalforums.com/index.php?topic=49923.0

Could carbon be the catalyst?

What do all of you think?

Do any of you have an idea of what the catalyst might be?

------------------------------------------------------

Andrea Rossi promissed to publish
in June
a paper by W. Guglinski
in his blog Journal of Nuclear Physics ,
but Rossi did not fulfill his promise

See what happened ahead

THE MISTERY OF ANDREA ROSSI'S CATALYZER
http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?...rder=0&thold=0

WGUGLINSKI writes:
In March-2011 my article Introduction to quantum ring theory was published in the Andrea Rossi's blog: the Journal of Nuclear Physics.

In February-2011 I had also submitted other two papers. They are:

1- How Repulsive Gravity Contributes for Rossi-Focardi Cold Fusion Experiment
2- Anomalous Mass of the Neutron

In the paper on the Rossi-Focardi experiment, it's suggested what should be the best element to be used as a catalyzer in the E-Cat, according to the new nuclear model proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.

Andrea Rossi replied the following to my email:

---------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 21:28:18 +0100
From: info@leonardocorp1996.com
To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
CC: info@dpinformatica.it
Subject: Re: Rossi-Focardi cold fusion explained by QRT

Thank you very much, this is gonna be published together with the former one.
Warmest regards,
Andrea
-----------------------------------------------------

However, the two papers were not published in March as he promissed, and then I sent to Andrea an email. Ahead are the emails we exchanged:

-----------------------------------------------
From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
To: info@leonardocorp1996.com
Subject: RE: Rossi-Focardi cold fusion explained by QRT
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 19:48:39 -0300

Hi, Dr. Rossi,
Two months ago I sent you two papers:
- How Repulsive Gravity Contributes for Rossi-Focardi Cold Fusion Experiment
- Anomalous Mass of the Neutron

Did you give up to publish then in your Journal of Nuclear Physics?
Regards
WLADIMIR GUGLINSKI
-------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:58:57 +0200
From: info@leonardocorp1996.com
To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Rossi-Focardi cold fusion explained by QRT

Dear Wladimir:
They will be published, but we have a long list...by the way: send them to me again, I will make personally the reviewingto save time.
Warmest regards,
Andrea
---------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
To: info@leonardocorp1996.com
Subject: RE: Rossi-Focardi cold fusion explained by QRT
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 09:53:37 -0300

Dear Dr. Rossi,
I am sending again the two papers (attached):
- How repulsive gravity contributes for cold fusion occurrence in Rossi-Focardi experiment
- Anomalous mass of the neutron

Regards
WLADIMIR GUGLINSKI
---------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 15:41:09 +0200
From: info@leonardocorp1996.com
To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Rossi-Focardi cold fusion explained by QRT

Dear Wladimir:
Your article about the ORT has been published two months ago.
Can you explain which are the substantial differences?
Warm regards,
Andrea Rossi
----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
To: info@leonardocorp1996.com
Subject: RE: Rossi-Focardi cold fusion explained by QRT
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:33:00 -0300

Dear Dr. Rossi
that article about QRT is only a brief introduction to the theory.
QRT proposes several models, as for the photon, the hydrogen atom, the neutron, the nucleus, etc. But in that article published in your blog I did not address some specific cold fusion mechanisms.

Cold fusion requires a model of neutron n=p+e. Quantum physicists do not accept the model n=p+e because of some theoretical restrictions against such model.

- The article ANOMALOUS MASS OF THE NEUTRON shows that all the theorectical restrictions against the model n=p+e can be eliminated, by considering a model of electron which moves with helical trajectory.

- The article How repulsive gravity contributes for cold fusion occurrence in Rossi-Focardi experiment shows that gravity has the magnitude of the electromagnetism, and so gravity contributes for the cold fusion occurrence.

I think these two papers are very important for the understanding of cold fusion mechanisms
Regards
WLADIMIR GUGLINSKI
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 18:51:32 +0200
From: info@leonardocorp1996.com
To: wladimirguglinski@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: Rossi-Focardi cold fusion explained by QRT

OK: in June both papers will be published,
Warmest regards,
Andrea
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the begginning of June, somebody had posted a comment in the article A detailed Qualitative Approach to the Cold Fusion Nuclear Reactions of H/Ni [www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com] , by prof. Christos Stremmenos.
The author of the comment told that there is a researcher (I dont remember his name) who is proposing that a kind of anomalous gravity can be responsible for some of the phenomena that current theories of Physics cannot explain.
And he asked to Andrea Rossi if he already had thought on the possibility of anomalous gravity can be influencing in cold fusion occurrence.

Well, of course I immediatelly realized that my paper (where I show how repulsive gravity can contribute for cold fusion) would be of the interest of that person, and also many people would be interested to read it.

Then I posted a comment in Andrea Rossi's blog, asking him which of the two papers of mine would be published firstly. I recommend to Andrea to publish firstly the paper How Repulsive Gravity Contributes for cold fusion in Rossi-Focardi Experiment.

Andrea Rossi posted a reply in his blog saying the following:

"Both will be published"

But Andrea Rossi changed his decision...
Misteriously, he decided do not publish my papers.
And so that to eliminate the proof that he had lied, he deleted from his blog that post of mine (where I asked him what paper he would publish firstly). And he deleted his reply to me too.

In the upcoming years, Andrea Rossi will be one the most powerful man in our planet. His E-Cat will change the world. Thanks to his invention, he will enter the pages of the mankind history.

So, why does Andrea Rossi needs to lie ?

Perhaps you can think:
"Well, dear Guglinski, in your paper you have suggested what is the best element to be the catalyzer for the E-Cat. And since Andrea Rossi keeps it as a secret. Then, if the element you had suggested is that used by Andrea Rossi in his E-Cat, that's why he decided do not publish your paper".

I dont think so. I suggested one element. However, probably the catalyzer is a mixture of some elements (and I think carbon is one of them). And so there is need to know what is the correct percentage of each of the elements.

I think the reason is other. Let me tell what I think.

Any acceptable theory for explaining cold fusion must be able to give the response for this fundamental question: how can a particle to surpass the Coulombic barrier?

Among all the theories proposed, no one of them is able to give the response.

As known, Andrea Rossi claims that he has a theory capable to explain his cold fusion experiment, and he states that there is no need a New Physics.
However, no matter what theory he has, his theory must be able to explain this fact: how is the Coulombic overcome ?

By reading my paper, Andrea Rossi has realized that my hypothesis of gravity with the magnitude of electromagnetism is a good idea, and it can solve the question on how the nucleons surpass the Coulombic barrier.

Therefore, my theory can be the unique capable to explain cold fusion. And more: my hypothesis of gravity with the magnitude of the electromagnetism cannot be stolen. There is no way other theorists to make a plagiarism.
Because such hypothesis can be justified only by taking in consideration the models proposed in Quantum Ring Theory. For instance, there is need a repulsive gravity working into the photon model of QRT, otherwise the model collapses. Repulsive gravity also must be considered in my new nuclear model, in order to distribute symmetrically the Dirac strings in the nuclei.

On another hand, as there is not any theory capable to solve the question on how the Coulombic barrier is surpassed, all the cold fusion theorists can continue their theoretical work, trying to get the solution by proposing a new theory.
So, actually the cold fusion theorists want the following: that cold fusion continues without theoretical explanation.
By this way, they can continue in their attempt. And time from time one of them will be considered to have the best theory, and so he gets his 15 minutes of fame.

While there is no answer for the question of the Coulombic barrier, the theorists can continue with their attempts.

That's why a new fundamental idea (as the gravity with the magnitude of electromagnetism) is not wellcome. It breaks the dream of each theorist to become the discoverer of the solution for the mistery of cold fusion occurrence.

what is your opinion ?

So, in May-2011 Andrea Rossi had promissed to Guglinski to publish, in June 2011, his paper How repulsive gravity contributes for cold fusion in Rossi-Focardi experiment, in Rossi's blog Journal of Nuclear Physics.

Misteriously, Rossi did not fulfill his promise. He changed his mind, and did not publish the paper.

Why did he decide do not publish the paper ?

What is your opinion ?
There are the following possibilities:

1- In his paper Guglinski predicted correctly the element used in Rossi's catalyzer. So, Andrea Rossi cannot publish the paper, because it reveals the secret of his catalyzer.

2-Andrea Rossi recognized that Guglinski's proposal on the gravity with the same magnitude of electromagnetism solves the greatest unsolved mistery of cold fussion: how the Coulombic barrier is surpassed. And as Andrea Rossi has his own theory for explaining cold fusion, he does not want Guglinski's idea spread worldwide

3- Other

The guys on the Thorium Energy website came up with a good candidate for the catalyst: Technetium (or just Thorium).

Grappling with Whether the E-CAT is a fraud
Tuesday, June 07, 2011 6:13:45 PM · by Kevmo · 99 replies
Energy from Thorium ^ | May-June 2011 | Various

Axil Post subject: Re: Cold Fusion againPosted: Mar 06, 2011 3:39 am

Joined: Aug 21, 2008 12:57 pm Posts: 1963 Going back to the assumption that the secret catalyst must be radioactive based of the reluctance to allow radiation analyzers to be used during the first demo of the Rossi reactor. And taking into account the interest Rossi had in waste to oil production using nickel catalysts, a new radioactive catalyst candidate has emerged.

Quote: Edmund Storms: Rossi hit upon this somewhat by accident. He was using a nickel catalyst to explore ways of making a fuel by combining hydrogen and carbon monoxide and apparently, observed quite by accident, that his [?????] was making extra energy. So then he explored it from that point of view and, apparently, over a year or two, amplified the effect.

He’s exploring the gas loading area of the field. This is also a region, a method used in the heavy water, or the heavy hydrogen, system. But in this case, it was light hydrogen, ordinary hydrogen and nickel and what happens is quite amazing.

You create the right conditions in the nickel, and he has a secret method for doing that, and all you do is add hydrogen to it and it makes huge amounts of energy based upon a nuclear reaction.”

The Case for Technetium-99

Technetium-99 decays almost entirely by beta decay (.294 MeV is about 10% of the speed of light), emitting beta particles with consistent electron energies and no accompanying gamma rays.

Moreover, its long half-life means that this emission decreases very slowly with time. It can also be extracted to a high chemical and isotopic purity from radioactive waste. It is a world class beta emitter which has been considered for nanoscale nuclear battery applications. In other words, Technetium produces fast (heavy) electrons in great abundance.

Like rhenium and palladium, technetium can serve as a catalyst. For some reactions, for example the dehydrogenation of isopropyl alcohol or saturated fats, it is a far more effective catalyst than either rhenium or palladium and is the top absorber of hydrogen among all the metals.

Its melting point is very high at 2200C and it can take the high heat in Rossi’s reactor.

Reaction of technetium with hydrogen produces the negatively charged hydride [TcH9] ion.

You can see that Technetium can absorb a huge load of hydrogen.

On another note, rare earths have some of the lowest work factors around. They are in the 2.5 range give or take.

It has been found that the radiation from Technetium lowers there work factors substantially. That means that these rare earth elements radiate electrons like crazy; that is, there thermionic electron emissions are very large.

When a combination of the rare earth oxides: europium oxide, ytterbium oxide and lutetium oxide are used in combination with Technetium their already low work functions compound on themselves reducing there combined work functions even further thereby generating large thermionic electron emissions at low temperatures. This work function reduction is somehow produced as a result of the radiation from Technetium.

This conjecture supports both the production of both vast amounts of high speed electrons and the absorption of loads of hydrogen; two key factors that must be optimized for LENR to occur.

This Technetium and rare earth admixture is now my leading contender for the Rossi secret catalyzer. It is also consistent with what the Rossi patent states.

[Vo]: again from Vortex-L

[Vo]:Defkalion's Carbon Rings of Benzene
noone noone
Mon, 11 Jul 2011 02:59:15 -0700

The following was posted on the Defkalion forum.

The forum was closed the next day.

---

Dear Defkalion,

In your recent video posted to Youtube (in which you present the Hyperion
technology to the world) the screen in the background has a partial chemical
formula. The part that I could make sense of, was the empirical formula for
"benzene." In the background, were carbon rings of some benzene like molecule.

I found this quite interesting, because "officially" carbon and benzene has
nothing to do with the E-Cat or Hyperion technology (unless you are suggesting
that the technology is preventing carbon from being produced). Unofficially,
there are a few theories floating around the net that some form of carbon may
be utilized as a catalyst in the system. The carbon could potentially promote
the creation of Rydburg matter in the form of hydrogen ion clusters. This
cluster of hydrogen ions (Rossi has already stated that the ability to create
atomic hydrogen and utilize it appropriately is key to make the device work)
can then penetrate inside of the defects in the nickle powder. These clusters
acting like one large atom could then interact with the nickle to produce
fusion reactions. Here is the link to the full theory.

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@es ... 47026.html

Also, a previous cold fusion researcher used carbon as a catalyst, but did
not
produce near as much heat as Rossi's system. Here is a link about his work...

http://www.infinite-energy.com/iemagazi ... date2.html

There are a few differences between his system and Rossi's. He used deuterium
instead of ordinary hydrogen (Rossi claims that deuterium does not work), and
used platinum instead of nickle enriched with N62 and N64. The platinum metal
he used was also not in nano-sizes (as far as I know). The researcher actually
speculated someone could use nickle or other metals.

Finally, there is another bit of info that might indicate carbon is involved
somehow with the processes in the E-Cat. This is from Ed Storms who is a
famous
cold fusion researcher...

http://newenergyandfuel.com/http:/newen ... n-reactor/

Quote:
On Rossi’s path to discovery: “Rossi hit upon this somewhat by accident. He
was using a nickel catalyst to explore ways of making a fuel by combining
hydrogen and carbon monoxide and apparently, observed quite by accident, that
his [apparatus] was making extra energy. So then he explored it from that
point of view and, apparently, over a year or two, amplified the effect.”

Oh, one more thing.... mainstream scientists have found a use for carbon as a
catalyst in fuel cells. The following link explains the discovery.

http://www.lanl.gov/news/releases/cheap ... cells.html

--

So here are my questions...

1) What is the significance of putting the empirical formula for benzene (CH)
and carbon-benzene rings on the first slide of your presentation?

2) Did you put the formula and carbon-benzene rings on the slide for no reason
at all (randomly) or does it have some meaning?

3) Does carbon or benzene (in any form) have anything to do with the Hyperion
or
Energy Catalyzer? If so, what?

4) Was the formula and benzene rings a clue of some sort about the catalyst?

If the posting of the (CH) and benzene rings were random or meant something
different I apologize for this post.

Please realize that there are many people in the alternative energy community
that feel our civilization is not going to exist as we know it that much
longer, without some sort of exotic new energy technology. I personally don't
think the world has another twenty years left, without an extreme energy
breakthrough. Many of us are convinced your technology works and have intense
curiosity about the processes involved. To be blunt, it could be the
technology
that buys humanity enough time to get it's act together, so we do not destroy
ourselves or the planet.

Thank you for any information you can provide.

----

Defkalion responded with the following.

----

We used this presentation template, that you can download from microsoft
taplate site, because of the colors. The chemical formula in the background
has
nothing to do with our technology. We use benzene (βενζίνη)-gaz or gazoline
(or
what ever you call it) only to run our company cars.

Thank you for your interest and remark.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.