E-Cat Cold fusion device passes test

Do you remember the Rossi E-cat machine? It was featured in Popular Science and debunked by skeptics. Now, a new study is out. Let’s take a peek. Hmm…

Finally! Independent Testing Of Rossi’s E-Cat Cold Fusion Device: Maybe The World Will Change After All – Forbes.

I haven’t posted about Rossi and his E-Cat since last August simply because there wasn’t much to report other than more of Rossi’s unsupported and infuriating claims that included building large-scale automated factories to churn out millions of E-Cats (the factories still have no sign of actually existing) through to unsubstantiated performance claims that sounded far too good to be true.

What everyone wanted was something that Rossi has been promising was about to happen for months: An independent test by third parties who were credible. This report was delayed several times to the point where many were wondering whether it was all nothing more than what we have come to see as Rossi’s usual “jam tomorrow” promises. But much to my, and I suspect many other people’s surprise, a report by credible, independent third parties is exactly what we got.

Published on May 16, the paper titled “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device” would appear to deliver what we wanted.

The author notes that “a few commentators have raised criticisms concerning how the measurements were made and sources of error” but says that it still portrays a process with very valuable energy output. He also notes this can’t be the final word, but sounds excited.

Considering that there are still MAJOR problems left unsolved and serious questions left unanswered, I’m not so quick to throw out good physics knowledge for a still dubious experiment. We’ll have to see how this is received and critiqued by people who know what they are looking at.

  16 comments for “E-Cat Cold fusion device passes test

  1. LREKing
    May 22, 2013 at 1:09 PM

    It should be easy enough to test this repeatedly until most people are satisfied one way or another.

  2. May 22, 2013 at 1:51 PM

    It is the 3rd company making a similat 3rd party report, and the best.
    Defkalion just leaked quick summary by Nelson, who reported a COP of 3 and freedom to test what he wanted (like Rossi allowed at last for that test).
    SRI tested the Brillouin wet reactor, still an experiment, but a COP of 2 for sure…(an atomic bomb that only vitrify Manhattan, not all new Jerzey)

    few month ago I’ve made an executive summary on LENR
    http://www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/

    it is a bit outdated…
    meanwhile Defkalion announced a demo at National instrument NIWeek2013, and a paper at ICCF18 (Uni Missouri).
    LENR-Cities, LENR-Invest, Kresenn, sign partnership… LENR-Cars is not far…

    things are moving fast.
    underground, but fast.

    AlainCo, the techwatcher of lenr-forum.

  3. JimmyJam
    May 22, 2013 at 2:34 PM

    99% chance he’s a scam artist…. 1% chances he’s an eccentric inventor with a world-changing energy production system…

  4. AmSci
    May 23, 2013 at 12:11 AM

    This is only impressive to people unfamiliar with the long history of energy scams. It is not at all rare for a perfectly reputable scientist to be taken in by the scammer. If someone ever really does find a practical approach to cold fusion, it’s not going to be some eccentric loner who refuses to share the details of their discovery,

  5. Phil
    May 23, 2013 at 2:35 AM

    I would refer you to scienceblogs. http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2013/05/21/the-e-cat-is-back-and-people-are-still-falling-for-it/
    To make it short:
    This machine has already been analyzed. The first time, there were no products formed which showed cold fusion.
    They refused to disconnect the machine from the device which started it.
    There was no measurement of gamma radiation which is a byproduct of fusion.
    Go read the post for a more critical analysis. One must wonder if this incredible machine works why they aren’t powering their house with it as we speak.

  6. Bob Day
    May 23, 2013 at 8:59 AM

    It was *not* an unbiased test done at an independent lab. According to the paper, the test was performed at EFA Srl. I checked them out in the internet, and as far as I can tell, EFA Srl is very much associated with Rossi, and apparently sets up the marketing agreements for the E-Cat. As much as I’d like LENR to be true, I have no faith whatsoever in Rossi, and I will only believe in the E-Cat when customers have a working version of the E-Cat in their hands.

  7. May 23, 2013 at 12:46 PM

    @phil LENR is known to produce few radiation, soft gamma and x-rays.
    the test was done independently, not funded by Rossi. ok don on the resort of a partner, but that does not prevent the physicists to check the mail power…

    why are you so skeptical.
    it is the 3rd company with an independent report, where the tester was free to install the instruments…
    no important what is inside, if it produce more heat that what can do chemical…

    you are not skeptical, but just try to avoid seeing the fact and admit you are wrong.

    there is a pile of experiment and business event that together let no doubt.
    it is not a free energy device, but a classic scientific experiment industrialized… theory is just missing, but not a problem for engineers…

    for scientist the absence of theory prevent them to accept fact. thomas Kuhn in “structure of scientific revolution” explain well that.
    Scientist will deny the existence of their mother if they have no theory for her. (hopefully they have one).

    see that article for the scientiofic evidence and the pathologic excuse not to see them
    -www.lenrnews.eu/evidences-that-lenr-is-real-beyond-any-reasonable-doubt/

    see also the recent business event
    -www.lenrnews.eu/lenr-summary-for-policy-makers/

    • May 23, 2013 at 12:59 PM

      Why so skeptical? SERIOUSLY? Oh my…

      This is not a site to use as your platform. There is a huge physical barrier that someone making such an extraordinary claim must clear and that has CERTAINLY not been done in this case. You can go ahead and invest in this machine. See where it gets you.

      it is not a free energy device, but a classic scientific experiment industrialized… theory is just missing, but not a problem for engineers…

      for scientist the absence of theory prevent them to accept fact. thomas Kuhn in “structure of scientific revolution” explain well that.
      Scientist will deny the existence of their mother if they have no theory for her. (hopefully they have one).

      Your comments were insulting and ignorant. You also exhibited a complete misunderstanding of how science and skeptical inquiry works.

  8. May 23, 2013 at 7:39 PM

    First thing I would like to point out is this is a Forbes/sites post. These are bloggers and, unfortunately, I’ve seen a lot of crap coming out of that site in the past month or so — particularly of a right-wing political variety. I don’t know how much actual fact-checking or editing actually occurs. Personally, I don’t give much credibility to these bloggers who, unfortunately, are using the Forbes name to get credibility or things like, oh, cold fusion machines.

  9. May 23, 2013 at 7:43 PM

    While I’m on the credibility schtick, lenrnews.eu is anonymously registered. Based on my previous experience in examining dodgy online claims, this is a bad sign (i.e. Melba Ketchum’s vanity journal site is anonymously registered).

  10. May 23, 2013 at 7:50 PM

    Sorry, I made an error. lenrnews.eu is NOT anonymous. Turns out their registrar doesn’t share the information with Network Solutions (who I used). It was registered in April of 2012.

  11. May 24, 2013 at 7:12 PM

    1MW? One Megawatt? They should connect that to a unility-approved energy meter and the uility power lines, and sell electricity to the local utility. At 10 cents per kilowatt-hour, that’s $100 per hour, $2,400 per day, or $16 thousand dollars per week! It’s not quite a million dollars per year, but I think I could retire on that income. If this guy is so smart, why isn’t he doing this?

    What brought me here is coming back across the story below from a month or so ago, about NASA investigating LENR, er, cold fusion. The comments section of that one has the usual pro-and-con comments as well.

    It’s good to see Doubtful News covering the topic (though admittedly I haven’t read much here). I’ve watched all the Virtual Skeptics episodes, but don’t recall a cold fusion story there.

    Here’s the link – I also left a comment there (and as you might suspect, I <3 Susan Blackmore):
    http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2013/04/nasas-cold-fusion-folly.html

  12. F89
    May 24, 2013 at 7:58 PM

    Question for those who are more knowledgeable on the subject-I clicked on the link, and read about the “reactor” -If the reaction was powerful enough to melt down the innards of the so-called reactor, wouldn’t it also be releasing enough radiation to be damaging?-and wouldn’t the remnants be “hot” enough to warrant special handling?

  13. Graham
    May 25, 2013 at 5:22 AM

    Universe Today has done a good article on this, several of the comments are interesting as well, with people pointing out the alleged reaction at the heart of this claim would not produce energy, but rather requires energy to happen.

    http://www.universetoday.com/102398/cold-fusion-experiment-maybe-holds-promise-possibly-hang-on-a-sec/

  14. Kanamori
    June 8, 2013 at 2:16 PM

    The heat effect that happens with the gas loading is pretty much a fact, with how many times the effect has been noted (hundreds). When reactors explode with nothing but the metals and heavy water, there’s probably something going on.

    Something not well or widely understood is going on, but that’s more reason to do research about it. Or even if the journals would lift the categorical ban on anything that smells like cold fusion. (Kinda funny to say “There’s no major peer-review” when it is the editors reviewing by dismissing them and keeping them out of the immediate sight of other scientists. So right, just get a paper published when the only thing that will keep you from being published are mentioning cold fusion without explicitly calling it bunk.)

    Covering your eyes doesn’t keep it from being there. The arguments against ‘cold fusion’ based on the assumption that the effect occurs via the strong nuclear force are red herrings. Check out Widom-Larsen if you want a theory vetted by more prominent names (weak nuclear reactions). Many of the researchers have demonstrated greater control over the effect (SRI researchers and Brillouin, Hagelstein with the NANOR, at least). There have been way too many observations of the effect for it to be a series of flukes.

    As to whether or not Rossi has it working, I don’t know. I definitely thought he was a scammer before the test, but the report led me to re-evaluate him. I think his business plans really are moving along (he has sold at least one and has production facilities purchased and supposedly closer to mass production), whether or not his device is as-advertised. The tech is going to come out, and hopefully sooner rather than later.

    The biggest thing about the report is that the whole mass of the trade secret could be made for the best possible chemical reaction, but the units wouldn’t be producing the energy that they produced. The dummy tests didn’t produce excess heat. The tests with the special sauce did. This pretty much only leaves tampering with the electricity as an explanation for the results, besides that it is indeed working. One of the authors of the paper dealt with many of the suggestions as to how Rossi could be defrauding his buyers and investors via manipulation of power, and preempted them. I think it’s also good to point out that science can’t ever prove something, EVER, but that it can only be used to disprove things.

    When I first came to reading about LENR/Cold Fusion, I thought for sure that it was pie in the sky wishful thinking and almost on par with tin-foil hats and perpetual motion. But, there are tons of data out there and good resources. To me, it is just highly unlikely that these researchers have all been doing their measurements wrong.

    The interest in this has sky-rocketed since I started following it a couple years ago. Given the disruptive nature of this tech, many governments are taking it more seriously, especially with the ever growing pile of data the point towards the effect being real. BTW, at least the Widom-Larsen theory is claimed to explain other currently unexplained, or inadequately explained, phenomena.

  15. June 8, 2013 at 5:37 PM

    ROssi does not have really the profile of a scam , but clearly he is exaggerating his sucess, hiding his problems, selling the result before confirmation…

    It is absolutely possible he would never be able to totally control his reactor, and that the melted e-cat during the test is one of such failure (like first diesel engine, and wright planes).
    I bet more on Defkalion, and by the way they explained they know more or less Rossi method, but find it too hard to control, so they developed another method…

    seems more coherent with observed facts than scam theory. even if Rossi is the least hard to swallow scam theory. anyway too hard for me. Rossi is loose, exaggerate, it may not be industrialized one day, but for now it can work… 2 times over 3 at least.

Comments are closed.