An Italian inventor, Andrea Rossi, claims that a 1000 MW nuclear reactor, being constructed in Greece, will become operational in October 2011. I hope he is right; how can one not be happy to have electricity which is ten times less expensive than from coal, and without any pollution? But I am skeptical. Why? Read this paper:

http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/rossi.html

But many reputable people take his claim seriously, as illustrated in these two posts:

http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/video.php?id=23096

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzL3RIlcwbY

How can such optimism be explained?
.

Duplicate post deleted. Your Wikipedia page is curious in that it does not mention anywhere a reason for you to be included in Wikipedia, citing none of your physics work or anti-communism as historically important or even interesting enough to describe or link to. Most of the content comes from a single source who cites mostly material written by you as references, and points to your recent memoirs.

This thread is similar to A great discovery or another disappointment? in Chemistry, a thread started by you on April 15 and which you never responded to, even when chemistry evidence was discussed. Now you recycle that thread title but make no mention of it or try to respond to issues raised.

This thread is similar to Rossi's "energy Amplifier", Alleges Cold Fusion in Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, New Theories, a thread started by Quantum_Conundrum on January 25. Why haven't you contributed to this discussion?

he did, I invited him. He's a professor emeritus at Montclair state university, and very objective about the subject. (he disagrees with the reactor's fusion claims)

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=29164

http://www.montclair.edu/provost/news/arti...14&ChannelID=58

If you read Andrea Rossi's paper...

He puts the Oklo natural reactor few million years ago instead of billions. Since Oklo needed a higher proportion of U-235 that vanished over billions of years, any nuclear scientist should have reacted on reading the paper.

The text processing software is the one for science papers, but that's all. The publishing journal is a joke, bearing a title that mimicks one reputable peer-reviewed science journal.

The paper describes nothing hence could never have been accepted in a science review. It's only a collection of appealing promises. Connected to it, a call for funding.

In short: a typical case of crook.

The only interesting question: is this guy really a professor, and if yes how could this be possible?