‘Mining Diamonds with LION’ (New MFMP Video)

Here’s a new video from the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project

Video description:

“Overview of the LION reactor structure, fuel, treatment and experimental protocol, it’s extraordinary results in relation to other work in the field and what is planned for the early part of 2018 to verify and build
on the data gathered so far.”

The video discusses how the Francesco Celani had previously found that micro- and nano- diamonds had been found on wire he had used for LENR experiments. He then goes on to describe work done by LION with the LION reactor using a Looking for Heat experimental platform.

Bob Greenyer provides the following summary of the results of the experiment:

“Very strong evidence of Charge Cluster presence.

Witness tracks of strange radiation in reactor ceramics

Best strange radiation track observed to date

‘Two spots’ all over dental film

Liquification of core

Apparently near metamorphosis of copper wire to cuprous oxide

Cold Electricity – splat cooling of Cuprous Oxide and lighting of bulb”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Research Team in Japan Reports Excess Heat from Exothermic Reaction between Metal and Hydrogen”Encouraging Towards Industrial Application of Thermal and Electric power Devices”

Thanks to Michelangelo de Meo for posting about the following on the Journal of Nuclear Physics.

Researchers from Technova Inc. Nissan Motors Co., Kyushu University, Tohoku University, Nagoya University and Kobe University in Japan have published a paper in which they report on research activities conducted between October 2015 and October 2017 in which they have been carrying out experiments in search of excess heat in reactions between hydrogen and various metals.

A link to the report is here.

Heat measurement were carried out with an oil-mass calorimetry system that has been set up at Tohoku University, and 16 different experiments have been carried out over the course of two years.

The experiments have found that excess heat production (assumed to be non-chemical) in some of the experiments which have been carried out with various metals at different temperatures. The report states:

Form these obtained knowledge, we will be able to conclude that Ni-based multi-metal nano-composite samples are of very required necessary condition for generating sustainable high intensity heat-power generation at elevated temperatures more than 200°C. It is encouraging towards industrial application of thermal and electric power devices.

The researchers state that a full-length report has been published in Japanese language only.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Rossi’s Spectrometry Based Power Calculation at the 10/24/2017 Demonstration (Michael Lammert)

The following post has been submitted by Michael Lammert

Rossi’s Spectrometry Based Power Calculation at the 10/24/2017 Demonstration
by Michael Lammert (aka Dr. Mike)

1/9/2018
Although Andrea Rossi was unable to complete a measurement of the output power of his 3 QX devices using spectrometry in the 11/24/2017 demonstration, he did make a calculation of the output power based on spectrometry data previously observed, which is described in the video of the demonstration from about 2:25:00 to 2:28:00. At about 2:27:45 Rossi asserts that “believe me, the final result will be about 70-71W”. How did Rossi arrive at 70-71W? The 70-71W does not agree with the 61W he calculated when he mistakenly used degrees C, rather than degrees K, in the Stefan-Boltzmann equation, or the ~40W when he did the calculation correctly.

I believe there was an error in his area calculation. At the 2:27:25 mark in the demonstration Rossi calculates the area (in cm^2) of the reactor as “2 times 0.08 times pi times 0.6”, whereas the actual area should have been “pi times 0.08 times 0.6” (πDL). (Note: In this calculation Rossi did specify the internal reactor diameter as 0.08cm and the length as 0.6cm, not mm.)

This means that Rossi’s calculation was off by a factor of 2, and therefore the result of his math in the presentation should have been “80-81W”, which would have been a factor of 2 greater than correct calculation of 40W. (Note: It has already been pointed out in comments on e-catworld that Rossi was neglecting that the spectrometer would have been measuring the output of 3 devices so the devices area should have been multiplied by a factor of 3.)

If the spectrometer measurement had been successful in the demonstration, would the measured spectrum have really shown an energy peak at a wavelength of 1.1μm? The answer is “no” assuming Rossi was really running 3 QX devices in parallel at 30% output power as he claimed. If it assumed that the full power temperature of reactor is 2636ºK (as claimed by Gullstrom in an earlier paper and Rossi in his JONP blog calculation), then the operating temperature of a reactor operating at 30% output power should be equal to 2636ºK divided by the 4th root of 1/0.3, or 1951ºK. The wavelength at the energy maximum on the spectrometer’s output should have been 2900μm-ºK / 1951ºK = 1.49μm (Wien’s Law). The total output power for the 3 QX devices would have been calculated from the Stefan-Boltzmann equation (assuming ɛ=1.0) as:
Pout = 3 x π x .08cm x 0.6cm x 5.67E-12W/cm^2/ºK^4 x (1951ºK)^4 = 37.2W

Does Rossi’s claim that the expected energy maximum for the spectrometer output should have been at a wavelength of 1.1μm mean that he hadn’t measured the devices with the spectrometer when operating at 30% power prior to the demonstration? The only other explanation for the claim that energy spectrum would show a peak at 1.1μm would be that the demonstration really consisted of a single device operating at full power. It’s too bad the spectrometer measurement in the demonstration didn’t work as it would have given some valuable information on how the demonstration was really run.

(Notes: 1) For those that might argue that a QX plasma temperature might really be 2636ºK when operating at 30% power, the full output power temperature would have to be 2636ºK times the 4th root of 1/0.3 or 3562ºK- way too hot! 2) An argument could be made that Rossi turned up the controller to full power for the spectrometry measurement. However, Rossi was very concerned with the QX devices over heating during this test, therefore it is unlikely that he would have made the over heating problem worse by turning up the power for this portion of the demonstration.)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Unexpected Plasma Behavior (Dieter Preschel)

The following post has been submitted by Dieter Preschel

I’ve seen Andrea Rossis demonstration of the Ecat QX, but I wasn’t impressed about the measurements he did, particularly with the oscilloscope. I’ve been a computer professional working for IBM from 1963 til 1996 and I really know how to use a scope. Andrea Rossi didn’t show very much. Actually he did hide a lot of important things. But there was a hint about what was going on. Every few seconds there was a flash inside the reactor. Many others have seen this and the common understanding is that Andrea Rossi restarted the EcatQX by igniting a plasma discharge every 7 or 8 seconds which then started the LENR process for a few seconds. The electricity and light generation is possibly only a byproduct from the plasma discharge.

I’ve got a few additional pieces of information about Plasma behavior which even Andrea Rossi may not know about.

In 2006 the US Sandia National Laboratory reported an unknown plasma behavior which I think Andrea Rossi is also experiencing. At least some of his controller issues may come from this.

https://share-ng.sandia.gov/news/resources/releases/2006/physics-astron/hottest-z-output.html

Excerpt:

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — Sandia’s Z machine has produced plasmas that exceed temperatures of 2 billion degrees Kelvin — hotter than the interiors of stars.

The unexpectedly hot output, if its cause were understood and harnessed, could eventually mean that smaller, less costly nuclear fusion plants would produce the same amount of energy as larger plants.

The phenomena also may explain how astrophysical entities like solar flares maintain their extreme temperatures.

The very high radiation output also creates new experimental environments to help validate computer codes responsible for maintaining a reliable nuclear weapons stockpile safely and securely — the principal mission of the Z facility.

“At first, we were disbelieving,” says Sandia project lead Chris Deeney. “We repeated the experiment many times to make sure we had a true result and not an ‘Ooops’!”

The results, recorded by spectrometers and confirmed by computer models created by John Apruzese and colleagues at Naval Research Laboratory, have held up over 14 months of additional tests.

A description of the achievement, as well as a possible explanation by Sandia consultant Malcolm Haines, well-known for his work in Z pinches at the Imperial College in London, appeared in the Feb. 24 Physical Review Letters.

Sandia is a National Nuclear Security Administration laboratory.

What happened and why?
Z’s energies in these experiments raised several questions.

First, the radiated x-ray output was as much as four times the expected kinetic energy input.

Ordinarily, in non-nuclear reactions, output energies are less — not greater — than the total input energies. More energy had to be getting in to balance the books, but from where could it come?

Second, and more unusually, high ion temperatures were sustained after the plasma had stagnated — that is, after its ions had presumably lost motion and therefore energy and therefore heat — as though yet again some unknown agent was providing an additional energy source to the ions.

The next links are patents from Paulo and Alexandra Correa about a plasma discharge device creating excess energy and a possible explanation from Harold Aspden.

“Direct current energized pulse generator utilizing autogenous cyclical pulsed abnormal glow discharges”
http://www.google.com/patents/US5502354

Energy conversion system “
http://www.google.com/patents/US5449989

“Electromechanical transduction of plasma pulses”
http://www.google.com/patents/US5416391

“Power from Space: The Correa Invention”
http://www.aetherometry.com/Reprints/Aspden_Power_from_Space.pdf

Excerpt:

Essentially the core element of the Correa apparatus is an electrical discharge tube containing a rarefied gas. It is a tube having a special construction but which can be manufactured in much the same way as a fluorescent lamp.Its objective, when used in a special circuit, is not the emission of light but rather the generation of electrical power in excess of the input power needed for its operation.

This seemingly impossible feat is proved by providing a battery of electric d.c. storage cells large enough to deliver a high enough voltage to trigger the discharge which in turn feeds output to a separate battery of d.c. storage cells which store the electrical energy generated.Since the generation of electricity is the objective there can be no better way of proving that,over a period of time, the net energy output exceeds by far the net energy input. Measurements of instantaneous power and the energy transients can reassure an investigator that there is a power gain but sustained performance conditions are essential for a definitive proof.Indeed,this will be better understood when the principle of operation is explained. The pulse of energy input is ahead of the output pulse in time-phasing, owing to the intervening opening of the gate,otherwise described as the radial electric field, which allows entry of energy from the quantum activity of the vacuum field.The battery tests, repeated during a succession of charge and discharge cycles, using two banks of cells, one charging on output power as the other discharges input power, provide indisputable evidence of a substantial gain in power. This gives a verifiable accounting of an energy inflow that can be put to good use while enough energy is returned to sustain operation of the system. Though a cumbersome part of the overall apparatus in comparison with the small and light-weight tube, which is the heart of the system, such a battery of conventional electric storage cells satisfies a research need, but ultimately, since power feedback should make the device self sustaining, one can foresee a compact product not requiring these cells and which operates to deliver electric power, as if from nowhere.

A few words about Harold Aspden. He was working like me for IBM a long time. Harold Aspden died in 2011. He was a critic of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and had proposed a whole new concept of Physics. I don’t share all of his findings but there are a lot of gems in his work.

http://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=Harold_Aspden

Most of his work is freely available on the internet. I got a message when Harold Aspden was very ill and I saved his work from his servers. After his death his wife gave his work free to the public.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

The Power Density of the E-Cat QX

A comment from Alberto on the Journal of Nuclear Physics came up with the following calculation

I understood that the E-Cat reactor has a diameter of 0.08 cm and a length of 0.6 cm. This makes a volume of 0.04^2 x Pi x 0.6 cm^3, which makes 0.003 cubic centimeters. The power that has been measured during the Stockolm test is 20 W. These two numbers make the power density of the E-Cat QX 20 W/0.003 cm^3. This energy density is stunning, it makes a power density of 333 x 20 W/cm^3= 6.6kW/cm^3
Now I understand why you are thinking to a jet engine operated by the E-Cat QX. We are at the eve of a new industrial revolution.

I asked Andrea Rossi if the calculations were correct, and he replied ” the density of power of the E-Cat QX is very high and yes, I think that jet engines or gas engines can be born by this technology. The numbers are what they are.”

If my calculations are correct, converting cm^3 to liters are as follows:

6600kW/l = 6.6MW/l

One point of comparison I have found is from Wikipedia here where it states that Plutonium has a power density of 38,360W/m^3.

In terms of m^3, the E-Cat QX numbers we are working with would be 6.6GW/m^3

Please someone correct me if I am wrong, and maybe there are some people out there who can help to see how this compares to other energy sources.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

UFOs Hit Mainstream News with Revelations about Pentagon Research Program

All of a sudden anomalous technology is front and center in the mainstream news. The New York Times on December 16 published an article about the Pentagon’s $22 million “Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification” program that investigated reports of UFO sightings. The program officially ended in 2012, but actually continued in secrecy led by Pentagon military intelligence official Luiz Elizondo who resigned from the program in October 2017 because of what he thought was excessive secrecy and from internal opposition.

The following video shows Mr. Elizondo being interviewed on CNN by Erin Burnett about his participation in the program, along with some footage of a US Military encounter with an anomalous craft.

In the interview, Elizondo states that there is still a lot that is unknown about some of the observations made in the program, but he says that they have identified some “very, very interesting anomalous type of aircraft, things that don’t any obvous flight surfaces, any obvious forms of propulsion, and maneuvering in ways that include extreme maneuverability, beyond, I would submit, the healthy g-forces of a human or anything biological, hypersonic velocities, low observability, positive lift — again seemingly defying the laws of aerodynamics . . . I will tell you unequivocally that through the observations, scientific methodologies that were applied to look at this phenomenon, that these aircraft are displaying characteristics that are not currently within the US inventory, nor any foreign inventory that we are aware of.”

Former Nevada Senator and Senate Majority leader Harry Reid was a leading force behind the program, and much of the research of the program was carried out by Navada billionaire entrepreneur Robert Bigelow. Bigelow told the New York Times that he considers the United States to be the most backward country in its approach to UFO phenomena: “Our scientists are scared of being ostracized, and our media is scared of the stigma.”

According to the New York Times article, Senator Reid pushed for more secrecy over the program, recommending that it be given a “restricted special access program” designation. Luis Elizondo, on the other hand, after resigning from the Pentagon has joined with a commercial venture, a Public Benefit Corporation called To The Stars Academy of Arts and Science which has the goal of bringing more attention to the subject of transformative technologies that could benefit the human race.

The New York Times story has triggered a host of coverage in the news media across the United States, and around the world. Over recent decades there have been thousands and thousands of reports of unidentified aircraft doing things that could not be possible with known human technologies, but which have been mostly ignored or dismissed by mainstream science and the press — this is the stigma that Robert Bigelow refers to. With more openness, that might change.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Mats Lewan’s Updates on the Stockholm Demo

Mats Lewan, who organized Andrea Rossi’s E-Cat QX Demo in Stockholm on November 24, has been compiling his thoughts about the event in a post on his An Impossible Invention Blog here:

Reflections on the Nov 24 E-Cat QX demo in Stockholm

We have covered at length on this site what happened at the demo, but since the event took place, Mats has provided some updates to his post based on new information and insights. Here are a few key new points from Mats’ blog:

“At the demo . . . Rossi several times states that the dimensions of the plasma inside the E-Cat QX are ‘0.08 x 0.6 mm.’ (49:20, 1:33:20, 1:57:23). However, Rossi later recognized that he was mistaken about the unit that should be cm. In other words, Rossi’s claim is that the plasma inside the reactor has the form of a cylinder with the diameter 0.8 mm and the length 6 mm”

“The method for measuring electrical input power was more problematic. The total consumption of the control system could not be used, since the system, according to Rossi, was using active cooling to reduce overheating inside, due to a complex electrical design. [Update 4]: One hypothesis for the overheating issue is that the reactor produces an electrical feedback that will be dissipated inside the control system and has to be cooled”

“At the demo, as seen in the video recording, Rossi was adjusting something inside the control system just before making the dummy measurements. Obviously, someone could wonder if he was changing the system in order to obtain a desired measured value.

His own answer was that he was opening an air intake after two hours of operation since the active cooling was not operating when the system was turned off.

[Update 2]: Someone also saw Rossi touch a second switch close to the main switch used for turning on and off the system. Rossi explained that there were actually two main switches—one for the main circuit and one for the active cooling system—and that there were also other controls that he couldn’t explain in detail. [end update].”

I have now dismantled the pump and I found no hidden heaters or other modifications . . . I also cut through the plastic block on which the 1-ohm resistor, and later also the 800-ohm resistor, were mounted and found no hidden devices or energy sources inside [pictures on Mats’ site]

I think these comments help clear up a few questions, especially regarding the size of the plasma which has been quite a confusing point, and to confirm that he found no hidden heating elements that could have been used to fake the heating effect.

There will of course still be questions surrounding the demo. It is impossible for the results to be verified in a rigorous scientific way since details were withheld by Rossi, and everything was carried out under his control. But I think most people realized it would not be that kind of event. Rossi has stated it has been good enough for him to secure an important agreement, but only the awaited introduction of a commercial product will answer critical questions about the validity of Rossi’s claims.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Rossi’s Business Plan for the E-Cat

From recent comments I think we can now have a fairly clear idea of what Andrea Rossi’s strategy now is in terms of business development.

Some Q&As from the Journal of Nuclear Physics

Anonymous
December 3, 2017 at 9:39 AM
Dr Andrea Rossi,
Can you explain better what did you mean saying that the Ecat industry will go public?

Andrea Rossi
December 3, 2017 at 12:20 PM
Anonymous:
The strategy is proceed to the industrialization process immediately, put in the market a product and, after its success, make an IPO for a worldwide rapid expansion.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

Anonymous
December 9, 2017 at 9:29 AM
Dr Andrea Rossi
Is it correct to say that your new partners have invested with the specific goal to make the industrialization?

Andrea Rossi
December 9, 2017 at 2:08 PM
Anonymous:
Yes.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

The following are selected quotes by Andrea Rossi from the webcast with the Energy 2.0 Society on December 9th, 2017

Now after the Stockholm demonstration, we go to the next step. The next step will be the presentation of the product. We will try, and I think we can arrive to a massive production, at least for the industrial line of products within 2018, and so in this moment we are working very hard to make the factory and the lines necessary to make a massive production. And what about the future? The future is in the hands of God, but what we hope is that this technology will have an exponential to give to the society all its potential.

To put the product out as soon as possible, we are working on it, and I think that if we will be able to respect the scheduling I said, that would be a miracle, because to make a massive industrialization of a product in this time frame is more unique than rare.

The presentation of the product will be public. It will be the launch of the product.

For now we prefer not to license, but to develop the industrialization worldwide, and eventually, as I said before, give licenses for the utilization of the technology in specific fields. For example, a company that makes cars can be interested to be licensed to use this technology, to make something useful for cars that they know better than anybody else. This will obviously happen once the product will be out. So in this moment we are not looking for licensees, we are looking for industrial expansion, and we have made in Stockholm a very important agreement in this sense, that I think will bring to a fast development of the product, and eventually to the company go public.

My best guess (I have no special info on this at all) is that the important agreement made in Stockholm that Rossi frequently mentions seems to be with some company or entity that has been convinced enough by his presentation of E-Cat technology to put up the funds to bring Rossi the point where he has a product to sell. The next step following a successful product launch would then seem to be an initial public offering that would bring in the funds needed for a large expansion of production capability, which would also bring in returns on investment for this initial investor(s).

At this point it seems to me that it would make sense for Rossi and his team to work flat out to try and get the initial product to market before potential competitors can do so, and to make as big a splash as possible when the product is ready for launch, in order to attract the capital he is looking for.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Major Advance in Cold Fusion Touted as Energy Solution (Adrian Ashfield)

The following is a letter to the editor of the Delco Times (Delaware County, Pennsylvania newspaper) written by Adrian Ashfield originally published here. It is republished on E-Cat World in full with the author’s permission.

Cold Fusion, now called Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR), took a large step forward on Black Friday Nov. 24, 2017, when Andrea Rossi demonstrated his third generation E-Cat QX (Energy Caratylizer) at the Royal Society of Engineering Science in Stockholm, before a crowd of 70 professors, scientists and business people.

This tiny reactor, about 1 cm long by 0.6 cm in diameter, was shown to produce 20 Watts of heat from a negligible input of power. The Coefficient of Performance (COP) was over 500. That is to say it produced more than 500 times the power required to run it. It can also be switched on and off instantaneously, something no other reactor has been capable of, and can operate at a temperature of 2300 C.

Cold fusion, as it was then called because it was thought incorrectly to be the same mechanism as hot fusion, first hit the headlines in 1989 when two respected electrochemists, Fleischmann & Pons, announced it, claiming excess heat from Palladium and Deuterium. The hot fusion scientists were very skeptical because it did not produce neutrons and dangerous radiation.

MIT and Cal Tech both tried to replicate it and failed. It is now known they failed to prepare and load the Palladium with enough Deuterium for the process to start. It was a pity they didn’t consult with the discoverers on how to do it or history might be different. Academia accepted the negative results and declared cold fusion bogus.

It has since been replicated successfully some 100 times, but the damage had been done and academia refuses to look at the new results.

Looking back over the century, researchers found a number of different reactions that had shown generation of excess heat but none of them were ever followed up to investigate why.

Following Fleischmann’s and Pons’ discovery a number of people started to investigate alternative materials, as the original system used expensive elements, was unreliable and could not be easily scaled up.

Andrea Rossi started to experiment with nickel powder ad hydrogen in the early 2000s. Finding some success he sought out a leading expert, Professor Forcardi of Bologna University, and asked him whether he should give up his day job and devote himself to cold fusion full time.

Later, Forcardi became ill and persuaded Dr. Rossi to give a public demonstration in 2011. His E-Cat produced as much as 35 kW/hr but proved to be difficult to control. He went through a number of developments to make the reactor controllable and operate at higher temperatures that would be more suitable for generating power. Two landmarks were his “hot cat” running at 1300C independently tested by a group of professors in Lugano, and his collaboration with Industrial Heat (IH) to build and run the second generation 1 MW plant for a year. The latter ended up in court as the independent referee said it passed the test but IH refused to pay the $900 million called for by the contract. It was settled out of court and they have now parted.

It is important to recognize the Nov. 24 demonstration was to provide people with the characteristics of the E-Cat QX and was not a scientific experiment whose results would allow others to replicate it.

Parts of the reactor are secret so it was difficult to display everything. The measurements made were adequate to show the properties of the E-Cat QX. To ensure there was no trickery some other proprietary measurements must be made. This would be simple for a potential investor to do, so there is no logical reason to doubt the results The QX still needs some engineering development to make it commercial and an automated factory to mass produce them will take another year.

It is hard to overestimate the effect LENR will have on our civilization. First use will be supplying industrial heat. Probably 10 years to start getting vehicles powered by LENR. That will be everything: cars, trucks, trains and ships. Imagine being able to drive a car continuously for a year without refueling or 2.4 hours a day for 10 years. Robots will be fully mobile. Airplanes will take longer but Dr. Rossi is already looking at the possibility of LENR turbines. Don’t throw away your household furnace and water heater yet: it will take years to get UL approval.

Cheap energy is the key to improving life. Electricity will probably cost 1c/ kW.hr. There are millions of people who now have no electricity at all. There will be problems for countries and industries that depend on oil but the transition will take many years. LENR promises cheap, safe, clean power and will end the debate on the need to reduce CO2.

Adrian Ashfield, Havertown

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

From Pons and Fleischmann to Rossi (Gerard Hunf)

The following post has been submitted by Gerard Hunf

From P @ F to Rossi (Gerhard Hunf)
In 1989, the chemists Pons and Fleichmann claim that one electrolysis cell – Electrolyte: (heavy water + LiOD); Cathode: Pd wire; Power source: 24 V battery – gives off more heat than it consumes in electrical energy. They did not have an explanation for that.

A closer look at the electrolysis process revealed that after a long period of electrolysis, lithium had been deposited on the cathode. This led to the speculation that a surface skin of Pd / Li / D on the Pd cathode has a special property. Our investigations http://google.com/patents/DE102008047334B4?cl=pt-PT on the system Pd / Li / H showed that this combination has superconducting properties.

With these findings, the e- / n-capture theory https://disqus.com/home/discussion/ecw/e_capture_gerhard_hunf/ could be developed, which can explain the heat development in the P @ F experiment.

Further possibilities for producing such surface layers on special substrates result from the deposition of lithium from the vapor phase (in the H2 atmosphere) or by thermal decomposition of LiH-compounds which are mixed with the substrate material and heated.

Andrea Rossi takes takes the last path. http://www.google.com/patents/US9115913 For the heating of the mixture a resistance heater is used, which is disconnected after the onset of the reaction. If current flows through the surface layer thus produced, the e- / n-reaction occurs in this layer as in P @ F. When reaching 120 oC, the superconductor turns off the power, when falling below again on.

As in FIG. 3. https://disqus.com/home/discussion/ecw/a_picture_to_explain_e_capture_gerhard_hunf/
shown, the current flow through the surface skin is accompanied by a highly concentrated magnetic field, which alternates by the on / off function of the superconductor. The non-contact interaction of this magnetic field with the (disconnected) heating coil results in induction heating with temp.> 1000 oC

Let’s summarize:

In the case of P @ F, e- / n-reaction leads to max 120 oC  in the superconducting layer. In the case of Rossi,the combination of coil and superconductor, max 120 oC via the superconductor, > 1000 oC via the induction heater can be tapped.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged