Rossi's energy catalyzer - Page 46

On October 10 2014 07:01 TheFish7 wrote:
Better sell all your oil stocks guys, the glorious energy revolution is here

On October 10 2014 07:26 Jockmcplop wrote:


Apparently this paper has caused some fluctuations in oil markets lol

On October 10 2014 12:19 woody60707 wrote:
So at what point does being open minded stop, and being a moron begin?

On October 10 2014 12:19 woody60707 wrote:
So at what point does being open minded stop, and being a moron begin?

On October 10 2014 22:17 oBlade wrote:
The paper is a lot of nothing. There are hydrogen ions in water, that doesn't mean you can boil water on your stove, drop a penny in and watch the copper undergo nuclear transmutation into zinc.

What conditions are there in this chamber of secrets that allow nuclear reactions that otherwise happen in supernovae? with none of the pesky associated radioactivity?

On October 11 2014 03:28 ch33psh33p wrote:


Did you read the paper? Nickel 62 came out. Not just "hydrogen ions in water"

On October 11 2014 05:58 oBlade wrote:

I did not read every word of all ~50 pages if that's what you're asking. I'm not a professional debunker so I don't have an incentive to find every hole and piece of sophistry. My post was a little shorter but it's a pretty easy experiment that should make anyone notice how ridiculous the e-cat claim is. It is not far from putting a penny in boiling water and expecting it to turn into zinc by absorbing hydrogen ions from the water.

I so wish you could just put hydrogen gas next to a metal with one of the highest nuclear binding energies on the periodic table and watch it spontaneously absorb nucleons into its nucleus with no radiation besides ANOMALOUS HEAT. But no. Cold fusion belongs only as the plot to a Hogan's Heroes episode. These claims get old fast and since "reactors" have been built there's no excuse for the absence of extraordinary evidence to complement these claims. Why aren't physics journals amazed and full of research about theoretical mechanisms for these miracle technologies? What's more likely, that the laws of nature have been turned upside down or a con man is lying?

I have a device here in my one room apartment private experimental laboratory of scientific research called the o-cat a.k.a. oBlade catalyzer, it's a cardboard box plugged into a wall socket, and inside the box I put a 1kg lead brick. I measured the isotope abundance in the lead fuel and it agreed with natural abundances. I then injected the hydrogen gas and other additives and when I measured the result it was 1kg of 197-Au. You can read my paper, 197-Au came out. Pure gold. I can't speculate as to the mechanism of the nuclear transmutation but it's not outside the realm of possibility that cold fission has taken place. There was anomalous heat also but that had nothing to do with the cardboard box catching on fire after I plugged it into the wall. So as you can see the o-cat is the solution to both the world's energy and economic problems. Shall I PM you my Paypal for more details on this investment opportunity...?

On October 11 2014 05:58 oBlade wrote:

I did not read every word of all ~50 pages if that's what you're asking. I'm not a professional debunker so I don't have an incentive to find every hole and piece of sophistry. My post was a little shorter but it's a pretty easy experiment that should make anyone notice how ridiculous the e-cat claim is. It is not far from putting a penny in boiling water and expecting it to turn into zinc by absorbing hydrogen ions from the water.

I so wish you could just put hydrogen gas next to a metal with one of the highest nuclear binding energies on the periodic table and watch it spontaneously absorb nucleons into its nucleus with no radiation besides ANOMALOUS HEAT. But no. Cold fusion belongs only as the plot to a Hogan's Heroes episode. These claims get old fast and since "reactors" have been built there's no excuse for the absence of extraordinary evidence to complement these claims. Why aren't physics journals amazed and full of research about theoretical mechanisms for these miracle technologies? What's more likely, that the laws of nature have been turned upside down or a con man is lying?

I have a device here in my one room apartment private experimental laboratory of scientific research called the o-cat a.k.a. oBlade catalyzer, it's a cardboard box plugged into a wall socket, and inside the box I put a 1kg lead brick. I measured the isotope abundance in the lead fuel and it agreed with natural abundances. I then injected the hydrogen gas and other additives and when I measured the result it was 1kg of 197-Au. You can read my paper, 197-Au came out. Pure gold. I can't speculate as to the mechanism of the nuclear transmutation but it's not outside the realm of possibility that cold fission has taken place. There was anomalous heat also but that had nothing to do with the cardboard box catching on fire after I plugged it into the wall. So as you can see the o-cat is the solution to both the world's energy and economic problems. Shall I PM you my Paypal for more details on this investment opportunity...?

On October 11 2014 08:34 hummingbird23 wrote:


I skipped the math, since it's gibberish to me, but I think you should at least read the paper before crapping on it. That's what people who rationally analyse a claim do. The claim being tested here is that there is a device that outputs energy at a rate not accounted for by present knowledge. Your dismissal of it using plausibility on present knowledge is therefore baseless. "Doesn't fit into current models, therefore bullshit" is a pretty poor perspective to have. What's presented in the paper constitutes extraordinary evidence for which the authors cannot explain, if you have a mechanism to explain the facts reported in the paper, feel free to have a crack at it, otherwise you're the one making claims for which there is no evidence.

On October 11 2014 08:47 Nyxisto wrote:


It is not a paper, it is shit this guy made up having no credible source backing him up. Trying to build a fusion reactor in your kitchen is not science, it's lunacy.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/191754-cold-fusion-reactor-verified-by-third-party-researchers-seems-to-have-1-million-times-the-energy-density-of-gasoline

Your dismissal of it using plausibility on present knowledge is therefore baseless.