eCatNews Direct to your MailBox

Enter your email address to follow the ecat story ahead of the crowd

I loathe spam. You can unsubscribe at any time. I will not pass your details to a third party

eCat News

July 31, 2015

eCat News started as an effort to illuminate the extraordinary claims of Andrea Rossi. If true, the eCat would be one of the most important developments in modern history. Supported by a number of apparently credible scientists, the claims were worth a closer look. Credibility by association can only get you so far. Over time, for me, the socio-dynamics in play became the interesting factor in this story. eCatNews has served its purpose.  Fascinating as it is, there are more productive ways to use our time. With thousands of comments and a community absorbed by slowly unfolding events, I am reluctant to close the site. For that reason, I keep it open. Unless something happens to change the eCat landscape, posts here will be a very occasional thing. I am not into spectator sports – particularly slow-motion car crashes. I encourage you all to move on. Do something that matters.

Posted by on July 31, 2015. Filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

901 Responses to eCat News

  1. Thomas Clarke

    September 14, 2015 at 6:16 pm


    Popeye is merely asking you to clarify your point. He, and I too, find it impossible to work out what that is.

    Without some definite point from you I don’t see much discussion, because as Popeye and others said Rossi’s picture with a US flag is NNNN. What else are scammers (or wholly incompetent wannabe free energy inventors) supposed to do other than seek PR however they can?

    Best wishes, Tom

  2. popeye

    September 15, 2015 at 5:49 am

    wrong place

  3. Thomas Clarke

    September 15, 2015 at 11:07 am

  4. Dale G. Basgall

    September 15, 2015 at 3:13 pm

    When I first became involved with the Rossi claims in 2011 I discussed concerns with a nuclear physicist, he is PhD in QCD and I was reading through the notes after reading the posts on this site. Amazing how time has past and are we any further along with answers to the questions I asked back in 2011?

    VPF/Cold Fusion?

    Sunday, September 18, 2011
    6:45 PM

    Q= Why cannot physicist(s) have a theory on cold fusion;
    A= Because they have not asked the right questions yet.

    Q= What do you mean by the right questions;
    A= We don’t have a coherent theory or complete list of current questions that make up the standard model of physics.

    Q=Are you saying that cold fusion is a new science?
    A=It’s definitely an expansion of the arena that we have been playing in, the standard model and all.

    Q=Why is the standard model not sufficient for the fusion process?
    A=It is for most hot fusion processes the standard model works beautifully, however for cold fusion the lacking information regarding how the virtual state interacts with the coulomb force.

    Q=What is the virtual state?

    Q=What is the lacking information?
    A=We to this date do not have a standard model that explains why matter has mass without invoking the higgs’ field (higgs boson).

    Q=Why would this higgs boson be so important, and is it the key to making this cold fusion (VPF) process be observable?
    A=To cold fusion “I don’t think that it is the key or even specific to people trying to work on making cold fusion observable. But it does point out that there must be subtle flaws in the standard model. Things that have been or are being observed need to be explained and that the cold fusion process has been observable but has not been explained.

    Q=In your opinion is there a key to explaining this process?
    A=Some of the observations can be explained as virtual probability fluctuations.

    In physics, a virtual particle is a particle that exists for a limited time and space. The energy and momentum of a virtual particle are uncertain according to the uncertainty principle. The degree of uncertainty of each is inversely proportional to time duration (for energy) or to position span (for momentum).

  5. Al Potenza

    September 15, 2015 at 11:09 pm

    Yikes! Wrong place.

  6. Thomas Clarke

    September 16, 2015 at 11:08 am


    You, I guess, like to be reasonable by avoiding extremes. In the case of cold fusion this leads many people to think that there must be something there, given so much continued noise. The two extremes to avoid being no CF, and CF as full-blooded as is adherents claim.

    I see the theoretical attraction of that view. Unfortunately it just does not hold up when you leave abstractions and look in detail at the claims and evidence. As, for example, Popeye does. I don’t think I have found one single thing he has said that I would disagree with, and I’m pretty critical of BS.

    Few people outside science look at details that require scientific understanding, which is why cold fusion and other free energy memes can maintain popular traction.

    Personally I’d love CF to be real. When I first encountered the phenomena (sociologically that is) I spent a while reading the source papers hoping that somewhere there would be some convincing physics. There was nothing – although the pseudo-scientific summaries on web-sites sound good.


  7. Juaqina Park

    September 17, 2015 at 4:51 am

    Hello again sailors! Since us folks are down and depressed by the Rossi revolution I got us a musical interlude from our favoritist sailor –

    Let’s never forget:

    “We’s strong to the finich
    Cause we eats US spinich!”

    Lots of luv fellas. 🙂

  8. Thomas Clarke

    September 17, 2015 at 8:04 am


    People are human, and some percentage have batty ideas on any topic you care to mention. Being a scientist does not stop BIS (Batty Idea Syndrome). Working actively and successfully in a specific field provides some protection – because you publish and the batty ideas get shown up by others. But science allows – even encourages – heterodoxy. Sort of the opposite of your criticism.

    If you look at the scientists who support LENR you will note that first they are a miniscule number. Maybe 0.01%. That is lower than the normal lunatic fringe because the lunacy is larger than normal. Some of these scientists suffer ALBIS – a well known disease – Aged Laureate Batty Idea Syndrome.

    Guys who have made a real contribution in one field often, in their senior years, go AWOL and start investigating something weird with ideas that are battier than usual. It is sort of understandable. However the fact that they have done great work in the past is not a good predictor for their judgement much later in a different field.

    [I’ll let Popeye deal with Schwinger’s theory papers. His later Sonofusion stuff is experimental and there is nothing more dangerous than a theoretical physicist dabbling in experimental work. Schwinger was on the abstract side of theoretical – as opposed to Feynman who had great common sense and intuition, and could hack both theory and experiment – a most unusual skill-set.]

    @Al P

    Evaluating the significance of experimental results for different hypotheses is an important part of the scientific method. Not the whole thing, which overall relies on replication and cross-testing so that whatever mistakes in evaluation are made, in the end the better hypotheses float to the top.


  9. Victor

    September 17, 2015 at 12:18 pm

    A very interesting article

    Will expect a lot of abuse for it but I am sure some of the posters will recognize themselves here. Krivit or Popeye as known here is directly named.

  10. Pingback: Il quarto Segreto: ultime notizie dalla fusione fredda | OggiScienza

  11. Al Potenza

    September 18, 2015 at 12:21 am

    wrong place


  12. NTAK

    September 18, 2015 at 8:51 pm

    OMG… is this scam still going on?

  13. Andy Kumar

    September 18, 2015 at 9:29 pm


    Buddy, What is your game?

  14. Frank

    September 20, 2015 at 7:50 pm

  15. Daniel Maris

    September 25, 2015 at 12:38 am

    Another cranky Professor Emeritus who believes the Coulomb Barrier can be overcome at low temperatures?

    When will the madness end?

  16. popeye

    September 25, 2015 at 7:07 pm

    Most of the discussion, including my impolite reply to Ascoli continues over in the unbroken thread:

  17. Thomas Clarke

    September 27, 2015 at 11:26 am



    With some meta-comments by me on your last posts.

  18. Daniel Maris

    September 29, 2015 at 1:15 am

    Meanwhile…the E Cat continues to edge into the mainstream, with Fortune magazine now featuring an interview with Darden on the subject and more general piece on cold fusion.

  19. Daniel Maris

    September 30, 2015 at 2:00 pm

    Sorry – this is not a good meal for the skep fraternity:

    A major, serious investment company claims to have done 2.5 years of due diligence on the E Cat and found it is for real.

    I particularly liked this sentence:

    “The company is currently working with numerous scientists and is acquiring both the technology and teams required to maximise the potential of this, and other, new energy technologies.”

    Hear that? NUMEROUS scientists. 🙂

  20. paul42

    September 30, 2015 at 2:19 pm

    It appears that after they “have undertaken a rigorous due diligence process that has taken two and half years”, the publically traded British investment fund, Woodford Equity Income Fund, has invested approximately $40 million in Industrial Heat.

  21. Daniel Maris

    September 30, 2015 at 2:52 pm

    Not sure why my posts keep appearing out of turn…

    I was trying to bring your attention to this wonderful news! 🙂

    2.5 years of due diligence by a big investor – determining that the E Cat is for real.

  22. Juaqina Park

    October 2, 2015 at 12:57 am

    Geez, there’s only two engineers on payroll now? Keep those fingers moving gents!

    “Nobodies listen to us skeps.” 🙁

  23. Bernie Koppenhofer

    October 17, 2015 at 3:53 pm

    Where are all the Skeps, hope they come up for air:

  24. Bernie Koppenhofer

    November 2, 2015 at 7:14 pm

    The money stopped flowing to the fake skeptics

  25. popeye

    January 1, 2016 at 12:42 am