You are here: PureEnergySystems.com
> News > October
13, 2014; 16:20 GMT
Leaked Second Paper With High Magnification of Rossi's Nickel Particles Brings Replication Closer
A previously withheld paper from last year has appeared and provides detailed analysis of Andrea Rossi's E-Cat powder. The images provided of the nickel, at high magnification, show detailed structures that provide important clues to facilitate replication of the E-Cat.
By Hank Mills
Pure Energy Systems News
On October 8th of 2014, a group of scientists and researchers from across Europe released a
describing a month long test of Andrea Rossi's E-Cat or Energy Catalyzer. (See PESWiki's
news chronicle of this as it unfolds.) In addition to reporting on a clearly anomalous production of heat -- ~3.5 times more than the energy put into the system -- this paper, completely uncensored, revealed crucial information about the composition of the fuel used in the device. The high performance of the device ruled out any known chemical source of power by many orders of magnitude. PESN posted a feature story about this paper titled,
Apocalypse: The Four Horsemen of Andrea Rossi's
Now, an additional paper has been released that provides additional analysis and even higher magnification scanning electron microscope images of the powder used in the reactor. In particular, nickel particles have been zoomed in on to reveal fine, detailed structures. These tubercles, cracks, and folds are most certainly critical to the ability of the E-Cat to produce practical quantities of power.
The article titled, Analysis of Two Types of Nickel
was written in Swedish, but Google provides an adequate translation to English that seems fairly easy to read. The primary author of the paper is "Curt, Edstrom, Ralon", and is dated January 17th, 2013.
The twenty-one-page paper provides the following introduction (translated by
Google, with a few edits).
|Samples obtained from Sven Kullander in December have been analyzed. The samples consisted of two bottles with approximately 1 gram in each bottle. One bottle is called NEW and contained the nickel powder Rossi used in the reactor, taken before any activity has occurred. The second bottle is called OLD and it contained powder used in one of Rossi's reactors for about 6 months. This bottle also contained approximately 1 gram of powder.
When you look macroscopically on the samples, one can get the impression that nickel transformed by a nuclear reaction. At a more detailed level, it seems unlikely that the nickel is first converted to other elements where these then format the new structures. The only difference between the nickel powder in the new and old sample is a little hump in spectrum at the iron (Fig. 13 and 17 but not in Fig. 4), the signal is so weak that it is about trace amounts and may be derived from contamination of adjacent iron particles. If there is an exothermic nuclear reaction that can transform nickel isotopes or iron isotopes [they are] are unfamiliar [to us].
On the grain that contained Ni in the old sample measured no Cu whatsoever. The detection limit for Cu is lower than 1%, but to safely determine, the level should be about 1% Cu present. If there is some kind of unknown nuclear reaction where Cu is formed from Ni in any greater amount that is not decayed back to Ni, Cu must be embedded in the Ni grains.
Figure 9: The particles, which contained Cu in the old sample, contained 18% phosphorus, 12% oxygen and 70% copper.
A portion of this fragment can be oxidized, hence the presence of oxygen. Cu and P occur in a very common alloy used in brazing. Lod with CuP at these proportions are particularly common in plumbing jobs. Is it possible that this fragment is derived from such solder joints? The reactors constructed by Rossi seems to have consisted, among other things, of a brazed copper details.
To understand this paper, written in 2013, to the most recent paper released on Oct. 8th of 2014, you must realize that the powder tested in this older analysis was not from a different type of reactor. Certainly, the powder tested in 2013 did not come from the same model of high temperature reactor as in the 2014 analysis. Most likely, the powder came from a low temperature E-Cat reactor. Because of this, the additives or catalysts used in the two different powders are most likely different to some degree. However, I think it is likely that the basic nickel powder used is probably very similar. Both the old and new powder can produce vast quantities of excess heat when correctly stimulated by alternating current and heat.
A professional, high quality comparison of the analysis of the powder in both of these papers would be time consuming and require a great deal of knowledge in the field of material analysis. So in order to get the news out about the release of this paper, I will avoid going into excessive detail about every aspect of this paper. Other individuals, far more qualified than myself, will be more capable of providing such a comparison. Instead, I will post several facts and observations I have gathered from looking at the figures and reading the text of the paper.
More Fascinating Information
As mentioned in the excerpt above, in this paper, two types of powder are studied: new and old. The new powder is fuel that had never been placed in an E-Cat reactor, and the old powder is fuel that had been used for six months. In alignment with the paper released on Oct. 8th, the new powder was composed of uniform particles of about one millimeter by one millimeter. The old powder, however, had a variety of particle geometries and was of a clumpy appearance. It seems that reactions took place in the old powder that may have caused the non-uniformity.
Analysis of the new powder revealed only carbon, oxygen, and nickel to be present. It is also important to understand that this method of testing cannot detect hydrogen or Lithium both of which were found in the Oct. 8th paper. So these elements may, or may not, be present. The sample was prepared for analysis by placing it on a piece of tape which contained the elements carbon, hydrogen, and, according to the authors, possibly oxygen. This means it is possible that some percentage of the carbon and oxygen detected in the sample may be from the tape. The old powder, however, shows a wider variety of elements present, including the elements C, O, Mg, Si, P, Ca Fe, Cu, and Ni.
Various particles of the old powder contain different percentages of these elements. The report speculates that
some of these elements may be contaminates or from material used in the soldering of the reactor. Another important fact is that the testing method only determines the composition of the particles near their surface. The different composition of the old powder from the new powder could possibly be partly due to elements present deep in the particles.
Lithium and iron are both mentioned as potential catalysts, even though lithium was not detected. In the report released on Oct. 8th, both of these elements were detected. One aspect of the Oct. 8th report that excited me were the Scanning Electron Microscope images of the various particles. The ability to actually see, in some detail, the nickel particles was very exciting, because the protrusions or tubercles were visible. In the 2013 paper, however, the images are even more detailed, more numerous, and of a much higher magnification.
The Nickel Masterpiece of Andrea Rossi
My jaw dropped, literally, when I saw the images of the nickel particles in this paper. Although images of other particles were included, the nickel particles under high magnification were beautiful. Some of them appeared to be square in shape and composed of smaller cubes. Each sub-unit was visible, and they reminded me of brick work. Other particles were even more magnificent with spike like protrusions, ribbons, folds, and cracks. One very highly magnified particle seemed to contain geometric shapes. Although I've seen many images on the internet of nickel particles (commonly available for sale by suppliers) Rossi's powder seemed more intricate and varied.
The above images show nickel particles at various levels of magnification. If the E-Cat is to be replicated, these surface features will need to be reproduced. (Sterling's Comment: I've not followed this as closely as others, but an obvious question to me seems to be: Were the nickel particle attributes a pre-requisite condition by some preparatory process, or are they a function of the reaction itself -- not a prerequisite, but a result?) I feel this will be every bit as critical in producing excess heat as choosing other additives and applying proper magnetic or RF stimulation with alternating current. What we do not know is if Andrea Rossi custom fabricates these particles in house from raw nickel, or if he purchases carbonyl nickel from a supplier and then further modifies them.
Bob Higgins is a researcher who has produced a document titled, Surface Processing of Carbonyl Nickel Powder for Ni-H LENR
Applications. In this document, he obtains carbonyl nickel with surface features similar to those found in Andrea Rossi's powder from a supplier and further modifies it through a process of adding nano FeO3 powder. He then runs the powder through a series of processing including the application of heat, sintering, and grinding. The result are particles that look similar to those in Rossi's powder.
JITTERBUG EFFECT ANALOGUE?
The experimental work being done by Dr. Iraj Parchamazad at La Verne University near Los Angeles, California, working also with Dr. Melvin Miles, also of La Verne should be taken into consideration here as a possible value of these geometric structures. Ruby Carat has reported on this at
Iraj Parchamazad: LENR with Zeolites
| 2. New Energy Emerging at LASER
| 3. Melvin Miles on Calorimetry: We got excess heat)
Iraj, who is Chairman of the Chemistry Department, is convinced this isn't a chemical reaction but is cold fusion, because of the transmutation of Copper.
Their process is purportedly around 1000 times more efficient than what Rossi is reporting, though their materials are more expensive.
They use nano-palladium loaded
zeolites, which is like a ceramic metal that is porous, and expose these to Deuterium gas to initiate excess heat. The theoretical model says that the Zeolites and Paladium form a configuration that acts like a geometric resonant cage. When the is material is introduced to a container with deuterium gas, without any input power in the form of heat, the reaction takes off. Some call it the "Jitterbug transformation."
They see transmutation of copper. They have a track record of 10 positive results in 10 experiments, making it 100% reproducible so far.
The key point here is that the geometry is what creates an environment conducive to LENR; and this is what may be going on with Rossi's reactions as well.
According to Higgins and others, the nano iron powder may perform at least two functions in the fuel. First, it may act as a catalyst breaking apart the molecular hydrogen into atomic hydrogen. Secondly, it may serve to further enhance the growth of tubercles and other surface features on the nickel when combined with heat. These two functions of iron may be critical to the performance of an E-Cat, but only successful replications will allow us to know for sure. Lithium, another element found in the E-Cat, may also serve catalytic functions and potentially be a fuel in and of itself.
My personal opinion is that for successful replications capable of producing high COP and kilowatts of excess heat, there will need to be many variations of nickel powder tested. These variations will include the type of commercial nickel purchased, the different processing performed on them, the amounts of other additives (iron, lithium, hydrogen, and so fourth) added to the powder, etc. Different sizes of particles with different surface features may also require different frequencies or levels of magnetic stimulation.
Since these two documents have provided us with so much additional information about the recipe for the E-Cat, I think a successful replication is now far more likely. But there are still some unknowns that may require trial and error testing. Andrea Rossi tested hundreds or thousands of combinations of factors to come up with powders that could produce practical levels of output. Just because we know much more than we did a couple weeks ago, does not mean replication attempts will be successful on the first try. My guess is several tries may be needed, but far fewer than if such attempts had begun before these two papers were released.
In a response to certain Swedish professors, Andrea Rossi has stated he intentionally removed (most likely did not add) certain additives to the powder that he did not want to be revealed. This could be why certain elements like Iron were found in the ash but not in the unused powder. Although an element being found in the ash and not the new fuel is not proof of it being an additive, it does make certain elements, like Iron, also found in the Oct. 8th, 2014 report, seem to be possible catalysts.
I fully recognize that many replication attempts may not be well funded and may depend on donations. In fact, the history of cold fusion is filled with experiments performed on a shoe string budget. My hope, though, is that potential replicators will do their best to prepare for a series of tests not only one attempt. A successful replication of this technology producing high COP and kilowatts of excess power could be the catalyst that starts the cold fusion revolution. After one successful replication, hundreds more could follow in a short period of time, optimizing both the efficiencies and the costs of materials and procedures, as well as rapidly developing theoretical models to explain what is happening. Whatever resources are used to produce the first successful, totally open source replication will be worth it, maybe not from a financial return point of view, but from a benefitting-the-planet point of view. But hopefully, whoever sacrifices to bring forth such a replication will be rewarded financially as well.
I want to warn readers of this document that any replication attempts should be performed with safety in mind and only by qualified individuals in laboratory settings. Amateurs should not be tinkering with E-Cat replications in their kitchens or garages. For example, despite the fact I'm fascinated with the technology, I would never attempt to build one myself. I simply do not have the experience and knowledge of electronics, chemistry, and fabrication to do so
safely. If I tried, I could potentially electrocute myself or expose my body to harmful chemicals.
In conclusion, this document provides even more information about the composition of the powder. The SEM images reveal far more details than the lower magnification images found in the Oct. 8th report. Both of these reports should be studied in depth and compared by experts in the LENR community.
It seems like the floodgates of information about the E-Cat are opening.
May the deluge continue we may need every drop!
P.S.: Thank you to whoever released this report.
P.P.S.: As always, we strongly urge that anyone who might go commercial with this technology should do so in agreement with Andrea Rossi and Industrial Heat, LLC, which procured the rights to his technology. Do the right thing.
# # #
What You Can Do
- See Suggestions for How to Get Involved with the Roll-out of Exotic Free Energy
- Pass this on to your friends and favorite news sources.
- Donate to PES Network
to help us keep this news and directory and networking service going.
- Subscribe to our newsletter
to stay abreast of the latest, greatest developments in the free energy
- Let professionals in the renewable energy sector know about the promise of
PESN Coverage of LENR
For a more exhaustive listing, see News:Rossi_Cold_Fusion
Digest -- May 16, 2015 - Domestic heater E-Cat photo, long
self-sustain periods, size getting smaller (PESN)
Digest -- March 7, 2015 - photos of 1 MW E-Cat with 30,000 components;
rudimentary direct-to-elec. achieved (PESN)
LENR-to-Market Digest -- January 30, 2015 - New report by Alexander Parkhomov showing excess heat in E-Cat
LENR-to-Market Digest -- January 22, 2015 - McKubre reports on a variation of Rossi's 3rd party test in Lugano
A Late Night Speculative Raving From Hank Mills - (PESN; October
Andrea Rossi's E-Cat Devours Lockheed's Hypothetical Compact Fusion Reactor - (PESN; October
The Inconel Mouse of Andrea Rossi's E-Cat - (PESN; October
Hell Freezes Over: Brian Ahern's Doubts on E-Cat Test Resolved - (PESN; October
Leaked Second Paper With High Magnification of Rossi's Nickel Particles Brings Replication Closer - (PESN; October
Sterling Allan on Coast to Coast AM about E-Cat breakthrough - (PESN; October
Revealed The Four Horsemen of Andrea Rossi's E-CatLithium Iron Nickel
Hydrogen - (PESN; October 10, 2014)
Fuel Analysis and Validation Paper Posted October 8, 2014 - (PESWiki;
October 9, 2014)
Digest -- August 22, 2014 - Safety Certification Obtained for Low and High Temperature E-Cats
LENR-to-Market Digest -- April 9, 2014 - Rumblings about pending E-Cat test results
LENR-to-Market Weekly -- March 6, 2014 - Lattice Energy transmutation (PESN)
LENR-to-Market Digest -- February 20, 2014 - Rossi Hopes to Retrofit Coal Power Plants With
LENR-to-Market Digest -- February 5, 2014 - Nanors availability announced at Cold Fusion 101 at
LENR-to-Market Weekly -- January 30, 2014 - Industrial Heat acquires E-Cat
LENR to Market Digest, January 22, 2014
- Blacklight Power claims MW capability (PESN)
LENR-to-Market Digest -- January 6, 2014 - Cherokee identified as
Rossi's partner (PESN)