Aw: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
- Original Nachricht Von: Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com, mhbar...@gmail.com, rmfor...@gmail.com, rmfor...@comcast.net Datum: 05.10.2011 02:05 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors Leaks, plugups, sudden heat excursions, and explosions are reasonable outcomes when a ceramic heating resistor is raised to high temperatures within a constricted, complex chamber with a fixed flow of water throughput. He should get a better plumber. My heating where I live does not leak ;-) It was their idea to do it this way. Without doubt there are methods that avoid this problem (use glycol, avoid boiling in the primary circuit) Also they claim, they made a lot of successful tests for years. I cannot understand why they dont have better preparation for such important demonstrations. Why didnt they test it a day before the demonstrations? This is a multimillions of dollars project if he can sell it. This is incredible.
RE: [Vo]: Another advancement toward an atomic 'strobe-light'...
Dr. K said: ... although I'm not sure that we _all_ glow! I agree... some are just the black-light of the flock! :-) And no, I don't think Dr.Mills has ever posted here, however, there is someone who does that keeps close tabs on what Mills is doing... -Mark -Original Message- From: Dr Josef Karthauser [mailto:j...@tao.org.uk] Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 10:43 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Another advancement toward an atomic 'strobe-light'... I doubt he does. (Has he ever posted here?) I like the play on words, although I'm not sure that we _all_ glow! (Well, not all the time, anyway!) :) Joe On 4 Oct 2011, at 08:41, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: Hi Dr. K, Yes, I'm sure Dr. Mills will object... *IF* he ever bothered to read this bunch of loomies! Oh, and that's loomies, as in, 'Luminaries'! :-) -Mark -Original Message- From: Dr Josef Karthauser [mailto:j...@tao.org.uk] Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 11:01 PM To: mix...@bigpond.com Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Another advancement toward an atomic 'strobe-light'... On 23 Sep 2011, at 23:23, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint's message of Fri, 23 Sep 2011 01:07:14 -0700: Hi, [snip] What are the ends of the dipole? Getting back to the above paragraph of just what's oscillating. and the aether being under tremendous stress/tension, perhaps one end of the dipole is a region of higher pressure, the other, lower pressure. These regions cause the surrounding aether to 'polarize' in some manner which helps to contain the regions from expanding or contracting infinitely, and thus, dissipating. Just looking at one side of the dipole, at When a free electron binds to a free proton in the ground state, 13.6 eV is released as photon(s), so the ground state is down 13.6 eV. This is -27.2 eV electrostatic (potential) energy, and +13.6 eV kinetic energy. The farthest possible extent of the electron occurs when that remaining 13.6 eV of kinetic energy is converted to electrostatic energy, and the electron has no kinetic energy. This happens at twice the Bohr radius, which is thus the maximum separation distance between electron and proton. In short the chance that the electron will be found beyond this is zero (unless it acquires energy from elsewhere). Of course Randell Mills will argue against this, right? Joe
Re: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:30 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This is a multimillions of dollars project if he can sell it. Multibillions (10^9+). T
Re: [Vo]: Another advancement toward an atomic 'strobe-light'...
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:59 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: And no, I don't think Dr.Mills has ever posted here, . . . That would be beneath him. T
[Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
My dear friends, I used to tell: *I think, therefore I am, I make decisions. therefore* *I live *Now I add to this *I take risks, therefore I live intensely.* While many people predict that tomorrow it will be a triumph and a Sweet Thursday for Andrea Rossi and the Rossi skeptics will do- metaphorically speaking- kind of intellectual sepukku, I do not agree and take the risk to say it. Please read: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/10/one-fat-cat-better-than-52-fat-cats.html and make your own predictions if you dare or it makes fun for you Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
Good heavens! Susan, I can't believe you're talking seriously. How did you manage to leap to the conclusion that Jed sed only one out of 52 kitties works properly? Where does Jed specifically say that? Talk about running away with a personal re-interpretation of someone else's statements. From: Susan Gipp ASAinvestors Jed, this time I can't believe you're talking seriously. Only one out of 52 properly working ? And how in the earth they could run nicely and smoothly all 52 togheter to demonstrate the 1 Mw big-mama-bozo by the end of this month? They all have to be ready right now ! Even if Italy is the land of miracles, I believe that nobody in 2 or 3 weeks can heal 51 bad e-pussies. They must work now and if Rossi wants to well impress the audience, beside the fine buffet and good italian vine, should allow the public, like a rif, to pickup a random device to put in the demonstration bed. Jed, just out of curiosity, have you received the invitation for this demo ? Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Daniel Rocha So, Rossi pulled a Steorn on NASA! Technical problems and delays are normal when testing a cutting-edge prototype machine. People at NASA know that rocket launches are often delay or scrubbed. As far as I know, Steorn has never shown any group of experts anything, whereas Rossi has managed to put on demonstrations and tests, so it is not fair to compare the two. However, the fact that the prototype failed shows that it would be risky to run 52 of these machines simultaneously in a giant machine. I think that plan is ill advised. - Jed
Aw: Re: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
- Original Nachricht Von: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 05.10.2011 13:58 Betreff: Re: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:30 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This is a multimillions of dollars project if he can sell it. Multibillions (10^9+). I dont think. He has competitors these might come up with something better. Sometimes I think we should ignore him until he comes up with something convincing thats impossible to ignore. If he has the power he must do it. There are now stirling motor devices at the market that are connected to a normal heating and that deliver 1-2 kilowatts. Using such a system he could present a selfrunning e-cat as a proof of concept.
RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
From Peter: and make your own predictions if you dare or it makes fun for you A good dare, Peter! ;-) I think it would be foolish of me to predict. I can only share a personal opinion of my own, an opinion that in the end may turn out to be inaccurate. IMO, because of the caliber of certain individuals who have personally witnessed prior demonstrations and who appear to have come to the conclusion that there is something going on, I too, suspect the distinct possibility that there is something substantial going on inside Rossi's eCats - this regardless of the fact that the contraptions occasionally behave capriciously. (It's like herding eCats!) I continue to suspect that there is something substantial, substantial enuf to be eventually commercialized. I don't know how long it may take to properly commercialize this little understood technology. I suspect the current timetable (1st quarter of 2012) is too ambitious. I suspect additional RD and proper funding... perhaps a LOT more funding may be necessary I hope the anticipated Oct 6 demo is of a caliber that produces additional convincing data, but that remains to be seen. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Some thoughts about. I predict that E-Cat when stabilized, it will produce 6-12 kW cyclically, where as average electric heating power is 800 watts, but it will also work cyclically. Therefore COP is 8-15. On average perhaps around 12. 2011/10/5 Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com: »My impression was that Defkalion had (or still has, who knows?) very skilled engineers who could solve the instability problem combined with a closed circuit of the inner cooling liquid, hopefully Rossi’s present team is also good.» This is somewhat worrysome, because if I understood correctly, Levi has designed the heat exchanger setup. I hope that he has plenty of time to think the setup, but he is still just a mere nuclear physicist and not an engineer. Peter wrote: »the clams for the output/input factor have decreased from a spectacular 200;1 to a very modest 6;1 (guaranteed) plus promises of relatively short episodes of self-sustaining functioning. But please do not forget that input is always electric energy at least 3 times more expensive than raw thermal energy.» Actually first claim was 400:1, but anyways COP is irrelevant, because there is no intrinsic reasons to use electricity as an input, but it is just convenient for prototypes, because it is easy to build and easy to control. But natural gas heater would do as well. And later of course it is possible to have auxiliary Ni-H cold fusion heater for the main reactor. Therefore thinking about input output ratio is irrelevant here. I think that the thinking goes back to the Pl-D cold fusion reactions, where electrolysis thought to be the key ingredient to the trick. Therefore there was significant attention that COP must be high enough or else the technology is just very expensive electric heater. But with Rossi's setup only heat and pressure does count, therefore COP is irrelevant. –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
2011/10/5 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com: I think that the thinking goes back to the Pl-D cold fusion reactions, I apologize my silly mistake... Pd-D cold fusion... –Jouni
Re: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
2011/10/5 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com: On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:30 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This is a multimillions of dollars project if he can sell it. Multibillions (10^9+). Multitrillions (10^12+). –Jouni
Re: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
What is that? currency devaluation? mic 2011/10/5 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com: 2011/10/5 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com: On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:30 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This is a multimillions of dollars project if he can sell it. Multibillions (10^9+). Multitrillions (10^12+). –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
No, just simple formula and economic truth: energy = money. —Jouni On Oct 5, 2011 4:48 PM, Michele Comitini michele.comit...@gmail.com wrote: What is that? currency devaluation? mic 2011/10/5 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com: 2011/10/5 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com: On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:30 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This is a multimillions of dollars project if he can sell it. Multibillions (10^9+). Multitrillions (10^12+). –Jouni
[Vo]:Energy will be worth nothing in the future
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: No, just simple formula and economic truth: energy = money. Here are some economic truths from 1840: ice = money bananas = money In the 1840s, in northern US states people would cut ice from Pons in the wintertime, store it under sawdust, and then send it by ship to Florida and other warm states were ice does not form. It was worth a terrific amount of money. In 1851, Dr. John Gorrie invented the first practical refrigerator to make ice for a sick patient (his wife, I think it was). In the 1880s refrigeration was greatly improved, and the value of ice dropped. It was no longer sent by ships, although there were still iceman delivering ice to housewives for ice boxes in the 1920s. Later people could make ice at home and it was worth nothing. Along the same lines, in the 19th century clipper ships occasionally brought bananas from Central and South America to the US. They sold for $0.50 each which was equivalent to about $10. A ship load of bananas was worth a fortune. One shipowner made a fortune bringing in one should vote successfully, and then tried again but the second time the wind was unfavorable and the entire shipment had to be dumped so he lost a fortune. After cold fusion becomes widespread, the cost of energy will fall by 2/3rds. A generation after that it will be worth ~100 times less than it is now and much later something like 10,000 times less. I base this on the the likely cost of equipment. The entire energy industry will bring in revenues roughly equivalent to the sales of bubblegum today (see chapter 2, footnote 51 in my book). To project future sales of cold fusion based on the present cost of fossil fuel makes no sense at all. It does make sense to project that many new devices will become possible in many extravagant uses of energy for things like megaprojects irrigating deserts will become possible, so economic growth in other areas may occur. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Energy will be worth nothing in the future
What will happen to my utility pension Jed? -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 5, 2011 6:14 am Subject: [Vo]:Energy will be worth nothing in the future Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: No, just simple formula and economic truth: energy = money. Here are some economic truths from 1840: ice = money bananas = money In the 1840s, in northern US states people would cut ice from Pons in the wintertime, store it under sawdust, and then send it by ship to Florida and other warm states were ice does not form. It was worth a terrific amount of money. In 1851, Dr. John Gorrie invented the first practical refrigerator to make ice for a sick patient (his wife, I think it was). In the 1880s refrigeration was greatly improved, and the value of ice dropped. It was no longer sent by ships, although there were still iceman delivering ice to housewives for ice boxes in the 1920s. Later people could make ice at home and it was worth nothing. Along the same lines, in the 19th century clipper ships occasionally brought bananas from Central and South America to the US. They sold for $0.50 each which was equivalent to about $10. A ship load of bananas was worth a fortune. One shipowner made a fortune bringing in one should vote successfully, and then tried again but the second time the wind was unfavorable and the entire shipment had to be dumped so he lost a fortune. After cold fusion becomes widespread, the cost of energy will fall by 2/3rds. A generation after that it will be worth ~100 times less than it is now and much later something like 10,000 times less. I base this on the the likely cost of equipment. The entire energy industry will bring in revenues roughly equivalent to the sales of bubblegum today (see chapter 2, footnote 51 in my book). To project future sales of cold fusion based on the present cost of fossil fuel makes no sense at all. It does make sense to project that many new devices will become possible in many extravagant uses of energy for things like megaprojects irrigating deserts will become possible, so economic growth in other areas may occur. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Energy will be worth nothing in the future
Jed wrote: » bananas = money » Indeed, bananas are money. But there one tiny little but that breaks this formula, because if you multiply both sides with term free, you will get formula: Free bananas ≠ free money. Therefore bananas = money is false, because of inflation it suffers, if there are too much bananas. Instead formula: Free energy = free money remains to be true. Money won't suffer inflation if we have free energy, but we only have unlimited amount of money. Of course E-Cat does not produce free energy. It just produces cheap energy. —Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Energy will be worth nothing in the future
fznidar...@aol.com wrote: What will happen to my utility pension Jed? I predict it will be in trouble in 20 years. Fossil fuel companies and the electric power companies will enter into a long period of decline, similar to what the US Post Office is going through now. Except that the post office is likely to survive in some diminished form, whereas conventional energy companies will all vanish, without exception. The first to go will be wind, solar and nuclear fission. In Japan they are already talking about phasing out nuclear power. It used to be considered the cheapest source of electricity but I expect that when you factor in the cost of the Fukushima disaster it is now the most expensive. By the way, the pensions offered by US steel manufacturing automobile companies are in big trouble for another reason. GM would be completely competitive with other US and Japanese manufacturers if it were not for the fact that in the 1950s and 1960s, before robots became common, they employed many workers. Most of those workers are now dead but their wives are still collecting pensions. Until that generation dies off these companies will be settled with a large burden of pension payments. This is no one's fault. That problem will eventually fix itself, but the decline of conventional energy industries is irreversible. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
Susan Gipp susan.g...@gmail.com wrote: Jed, this time I can't believe you're talking seriously. Only one out of 52 properly working ? I believe you are assuming that on September 5 Rossi had many other reactor sitting around installed in the large shipping container outdoors, and he might have brought another one of them into the laboratory. That may be true, but if that had been the case I suppose he would have done it. You are making a number of assumptions here. I have no idea whether these are true or not: * Rossi can easily locate and fix the problem. * The problem was in the reactor rather than the hoses and pumps around it. * The reactors in the shipping container are the same as the one in the lab. They are plug compatible and swappable. * You can undo one of the reactors in the shipping container and move it into the lab, and set it up in a few hours. Based on my experience with broken water heaters in my house, cold fusion devices, and Hydrodynamics Inc. pumps (which actually water heaters) I suppose it takes all day to find a leak and/or replace a boiler. Anyway, two days later whatever the problem was he fixed it. And how in the earth they could run nicely and smoothly all 52 togheter to demonstrate the 1 Mw big-mama-bozo by the end of this month? That does seem unlikely to me. As I said earlier in the thread it seems ill-advised Jed, just out of curiosity, have you received the invitation for this demo ? Nope. - Jed
Re: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: He should get a better plumber. My heating where I live does not leak ;-) It was their idea to do it this way. Without doubt there are methods that avoid this problem (use glycol, avoid boiling in the primary circuit) It is not clear to me that this method would avoid the problem experienced because I do not know exactly what the problem was. In any case: 1. glycol will cause other problems, and 2. it takes months to engineer something like this. You cannot do it on the spur of the moment. Also they claim, they made a lot of successful tests for years. I cannot understand why they dont have better preparation for such important demonstrations. I have done important demonstrations for major customers in which everything went wrong, including things we never anticipated, even after practicing many days before. Anyone who was participated in a tradeshow or invited in an important customer has experienced this. My mother referred to this phenomenon as the innate perversity of inanimate objects. Why didnt they test it a day before the demonstrations? This is a multimillions of dollars project if he can sell it. Of course they tested it. Rossi tests every day. This is incredible. No, this is what happens with prototype machines in cutting-edge technology. Something always goes wrong. See, for example, the U.S. Vanguard Rocket flight tests: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK6a6Hkp94o Things often go catastrophically wrong. That is why it is a bad idea to fire up an untested 1 MW reactor in front of a crowd of dignitaries. You are likely to kill them. People who use ordinary technology such as automobile engines, electric lights or computers have the notion that technology is highly reliable, and all you have to do is turn it on. If it does not work reliably, people think there must be something inherently wrong with the technology. Any machine eventually does become reliable, but only after hundreds of thousands of hours of testing, after people manufacture billions of copies of the machines, and machines have been turned on trillions of times. In the early years after automobiles, electric lights and computers were invented they were unreliable and unpredictable. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
I predict a conclusive success or catastrophic failure for Oct 6 test - Rossi has had his fill of getting beat up over inconclusive results and predict he will risk operating the fat cat closer to run-away during this extended test to finally make the numbers overwhelming. Fran From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 8:17 AM To: VORTEX; CMNS Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo My dear friends, I used to tell: I think, therefore I am, I make decisions. therefore I live Now I add to this I take risks, therefore I live intensely. While many people predict that tomorrow it will be a triumph and a Sweet Thursday for Andrea Rossi and the Rossi skeptics will do- metaphorically speaking- kind of intellectual sepukku, I do not agree and take the risk to say it. Please read: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/10/one-fat-cat-better-than-52-fat-cats.html and make your own predictions if you dare or it makes fun for you Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
I predict another inconclusive test. T
RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
My Two Cents: I really hate to go on the record with predictions, but why not just for fun? FWIW, I really, really hope that I am wrong. Predictions: 1) This test has the potential to be quite conclusive. It won't be. 2) It will take a LONG time for the e-Cat to come up to temperature. Only after it's stable, Rossi will begin circulating water in the secondary, and the e-Cat temperature will drop a little, and then have to stabilize again. 3) Secondary water flow will be properly measured and regularly recorded, but input primary power measurements will still be inconclusive. i would REALLY like to see Voltage and Current (Thru-Line , not clamp-on, measured from an eCat equivalent of mains distribution) 4) Power gains will be relatively small and will be reliant on calculations using a no input value during the supposed self-sustaining mode of operation to exist at all. As a result, we will all be cursing the self-sustaining mode as an unnecessary invention that only muddies the results. Many will say that the hours of warm up time should correlate to hours of cool down time, and that residual heat can explain away the maintained temperature. 5) Rossi and Jed will say that the test was conclusive (Sorry, Jed) **Note: All that we NEED here for a conclusive test is: 1) Input power properly and completely measured, time-stamped, and flagged with any Rossi-enduced duty-cycle changes during operation. 2) Secondary circuit water flow with flowmeter measurements, continually recorded and time stamped 3) Secondary circuit water flow input temperature, continually recorded and time stamped 4) Secondary circuit water flow output temperature, continually recorded and time stamped 5) Sufficient operation time to rule out a conventional reaction Extraneous data will only serve to complicate what should be very straightforward calculations. Donating to the World; Two Cents at a Time, R.L. Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 16:33:58 +0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo From: jounivalko...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 2011/10/5 Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com: I think that the thinking goes back to the Pl-D cold fusion reactions, I apologize my silly mistake... Pd-D cold fusion... –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Yeah, I predict: FUBAR f* up beyond all reason... Rich Murray
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's semptember test with NASAinvestors
Am 05.10.2011 17:02, schrieb Jed Rothwell: peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This is incredible. No, this is what happens with prototype machines in cutting-edge technology. Something always goes wrong. See, for example, the U.S. Vanguard Rocket flight tests: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JK6a6Hkp94o Things often go catastrophically wrong. That is why it is a bad idea to fire up an untested 1 MW reactor in front of a crowd of dignitaries. You are likely to kill them. People who use ordinary technology such as automobile engines, electric lights or computers have the notion that technology is highly reliable, and all you have to do is turn it on. If it does not work reliably, people think there must be something inherently wrong with the technology. Any machine eventually does become reliable, but only after hundreds of thousands of hours of testing, after people manufacture billions of copies of the machines, and machines have been turned on trillions of times. In the early years after automobiles, electric lights and computers were invented they were unreliable and unpredictable. The story of Diesel, when he demonstrated an early prototype to his investors is teached in school here. (At least it was teached, when I was young) The machine worked for some turns and then it exploded and made a lot of black smoke. He was in danger to loose support of his investors. Compared to this, the water/steam path of the e-cat is low end tech. They could build this 100 years ago. I dont understand when it leaks. Ok, I dont know if all reports about the september demonstration are true. Might be it was not the plumbing, but the Nickel melted down ;-)
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
I have two souls inside my chest: I want to believe it, but I cannot believe it. My intellectual mind says, no this will not work. They are all lying like mad. When I first heard about this I did not know much about this. I have readed that Levi claimed there where energy bursts of 100 or 200 kW some months ago. With my todays knowledge I know, this is impossible, because it is impossible to measure this amount of energy with this machine even if it would be true. If it really happens for more than some seconds then the machine must explode or the core must melt down. If it happens for less, then it cannot been measured. So I think, he told us a some obvious nonsense lies from the beginning on. I cannot trust a scientist who tells such stories without reasonable scientific and technical explanation, how this happened. Therefore I cannot trust persons who trust him. Also the claims of Defkalion in their forum must be untrue and Rossi doesnt comment this and still is big friend with Stremmenos who is Chief scientist and vice president of Defkalion. I dont know why they do this. Do they take drugs? Have they all invested money? Is Rossi addicted to this role to be an inventor like a junkie? Did they ever seriously check the amount of energy? Or is this a social group effect where every member of the group is proud to tell some new success stories and the other members believe the stories without seriously testing? This is what happens in religious groups. We know from history there are such cases. My other mind says, yes there was some energy observed by Kullander and Essen. But I dont know if this was achieved by a trick, because the amount was low. I ask myself, when NASA tested Ni-H fusion sucessfully in 1995, why didnt they follow this path and made a definitive proof? Why did Piantelli make Patents and stop this research, when they had so much success? Why doesnt Mills produce any products? Why isnt there a clear and repeatable key experiment to proove LENR effects? Metal hydrides are heavily used in industry and very well researched. When magnets are ball-milled they are converted to hydrides and they are milled in a hydrogen athmossphere. This is done because the hydrogen removes the magnetism. Why arent there cases of explosions or overheating? I remember Mallove years ago announcing devices soon going in production. This where impossible thermal pumps, producing more output than input as well as cold fusion machines. These announced machines where never seen in reality. Some of them are Perpetuum mobiles of first kind. Now, if a movement has such prophets, then it is hard to believe anything.
[Vo]:Free Work
In the comment section to Thane Heins video http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=W_wleUlcMK0 Thane cites some video demonstrations of the biot savart law: Here are a couple of great FREE WORK VIDEOS: Magnetic Force between Parallel Wires MIT Physics Demo -- Forces on a Current-Carrying Wire In each video you will see how FREE work is performed by two parallel conductors. The Law of Conservation of Energy only accounts for energy losses converted into heat through the resistance of the wires. Conventional science does not even consider the extra work performed on anything placed in between the current bearing wires. I think he means you can get FREE work from this electrical energy, if inaddition to using the electricity to power a motor, you use the same electricity to compress or stretch a spring placed between the parallel wires. Or is the some reason why doing the latter should slow the former? Harry
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: 2) It will take a LONG time for the e-Cat to come up to temperature. As far as I know it never takes more than 10 or 20 minutes. No one has ever reported that takes longer than this. The test will be at least 12 hours so warm up time is irrelevant. No form of stored chemical energy can power a device of this size at that power level for that duration. It would take roughly 5 gallons of gasoline to do that. Only after it's stable, Rossi will begin circulating water in the secondary . . . I have never heard of anyone doing it that way. You have to circulate water in the secondary loop before the test begins, to show there is no heat measured; i.e., inlet temperature equals outlet temperature. It never occurred to me anyone would start the secondary loop after the machine warms up, but I will tell them they better do it that way. , and the e-Cat temperature will drop a little, and then have to stabilize again. this will not happen if the secondary loop is on the whole time as I expect it will be. 3) Secondary water flow will be properly measured and regularly recorded, but input primary power measurements will still be inconclusive. i would REALLY like to see Voltage and Current (Thru-Line , not clamp-on, measured from an eCat equivalent of mains distribution) They say primary input power we turned off for most of the test. The machine will be run in heat after death mode. so input power measurements will not be a factor. In any case, the output power is reportedly 15 kW and there is no way an ordinary wire could conduct that much electricity, so you can rule that out. 4) Power gains will be relatively small and will be reliant on calculations using a no input value during the supposed self-sustaining mode of operation to exist at all. Power gains have been enormous with this device! As I said it will be in self-sustaining mode most of the time. That is the plan anyway. As a result, we will all be cursing the self-sustaining mode as an unnecessary invention that only muddies the results. Many will say that the hours of warm up time should correlate to hours of cool down time, and that residual heat can explain away the maintained temperature. The warm-up time is a very small fraction of the total running time. It makes no difference since you cannot store much heat in the device of this nature. 5) Rossi and Jed will say that the test was conclusive (Sorry, Jed) The previous test with 30 min. of heat after death was conclusive. The only skeptical explanation offered here is that the heat was stored in metal which is a violation of elementary physics since metal cannot hold that much energy without melting and there was no endothermic phase. (I put skeptical in quotation marks because this is not actually a skeptical hypothesis. Anyone who believes that is naïve, not skeptical.) [Note: I am impressed that DragonSpeak formats naïve correctly.] **Note: All that we NEED here for a conclusive test is: 1) Input power properly and completely measured, time-stamped, and flagged with any Rossi-enduced duty-cycle changes during operation. Eliminating input power seems like a better method to me. 2) Secondary circuit water flow with flowmeter measurements, continually recorded and time stamped 3) Secondary circuit water flow input temperature, continually recorded and time stamped 4) Secondary circuit water flow output temperature, continually recorded and time stamped 5) Sufficient operation time to rule out a conventional reaction Extraneous data will only serve to complicate what should be very straightforward calculations. I believe The plans call for points 2 through 5 to be done. 12 hours should be sufficient. The outside observers attending the test will be allowed to look inside the machine and weigh all the components so we will know whether this is long enough to eliminate a chemical source of energy. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Hi Peter, FWIW, it's been my experience that the universe seldom conforms to my anticipated calendar of events. She has a mind of her own. I do my best to remember that, particularly when I begin to notice the fact that I seem to be anticipating yet another major event coming down the pipeline. It will happen when it happens. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
yes, but what's going on since 1989 is more collective mutual delusion, rather than deliberate lying, in most cases -- as one who has twice failed radically at attempting day trading stocks, I notice that Ponzi schemes in all their variety constitute much of what is still presented as legitimate business activity -- disconfirmation is interpreted as some personal failing, not as evidence for the profound delusion of the entire field -- in addition, the unimaginable unity and subtlety of the present moment of awareness is the ultimate source of invalidation of all perceptions, concepts, and projects -- so question everything deeply for yourself, as Buddha advised -- tend the garden of your own present moment of awareness, as Voltaire ended his novel Candide -- Google nonduality... within mutual service, Rich Murray On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: I have two souls inside my chest: I want to believe it, but I cannot believe it. My intellectual mind says, no this will not work. They are all lying like mad. When I first heard about this I did not know much about this. I have readed that Levi claimed there where energy bursts of 100 or 200 kW some months ago. With my todays knowledge I know, this is impossible, because it is impossible to measure this amount of energy with this machine even if it would be true. If it really happens for more than some seconds then the machine must explode or the core must melt down. If it happens for less, then it cannot been measured. So I think, he told us a some obvious nonsense lies from the beginning on. I cannot trust a scientist who tells such stories without reasonable scientific and technical explanation, how this happened. Therefore I cannot trust persons who trust him. Also the claims of Defkalion in their forum must be untrue and Rossi doesnt comment this and still is big friend with Stremmenos who is Chief scientist and vice president of Defkalion. I dont know why they do this. Do they take drugs? Have they all invested money? Is Rossi addicted to this role to be an inventor like a junkie? Did they ever seriously check the amount of energy? Or is this a social group effect where every member of the group is proud to tell some new success stories and the other members believe the stories without seriously testing? This is what happens in religious groups. We know from history there are such cases. My other mind says, yes there was some energy observed by Kullander and Essen. But I dont know if this was achieved by a trick, because the amount was low. I ask myself, when NASA tested Ni-H fusion sucessfully in 1995, why didnt they follow this path and made a definitive proof? Why did Piantelli make Patents and stop this research, when they had so much success? Why doesnt Mills produce any products? Why isnt there a clear and repeatable key experiment to proove LENR effects? Metal hydrides are heavily used in industry and very well researched. When magnets are ball-milled they are converted to hydrides and they are milled in a hydrogen athmossphere. This is done because the hydrogen removes the magnetism. Why arent there cases of explosions or overheating? I remember Mallove years ago announcing devices soon going in production. This where impossible thermal pumps, producing more output than input as well as cold fusion machines. These announced machines where never seen in reality. Some of them are Perpetuum mobiles of first kind. Now, if a movement has such prophets, then it is hard to believe anything.
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
I wrote: It never occurred to me anyone would start the secondary loop after the machine warms up, but I will tell them they better do it that way. Better NOT do it that way. I just told them: The secondary cooling loop should be started before the Rossi device is turned on. You should confirm that the inlet and outlet temperatures are the same. In other words confirm that the inlet and outlet thermocouples are calibrated and they agree to within 0.1°C when tap water flows through. They say ok. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Am 05.10.2011 20:00, schrieb Jouni Valkonen: Very good arguments you presented. Thanks for those. I hope that you are wrong! I hope too, that I'm wrong. My hopes however are very low. It is wishful thinking, nothing more. I want a repeatable key experiment to prove LENR effects. If Rossi cannot deliver this, who will do this? This seems to be repeatable: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960016952_1996035672.pdf Unfortunately it was never finished, because there are still open questions. Why?
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: When I first heard about this I did not know much about this. I have readed that Levi claimed there where energy bursts of 100 or 200 kW some months ago. With my todays knowledge I know, this is impossible, because it is impossible to measure this amount of energy with this machine even if it would be true. The correct number was a 40°C temperature difference which indicates a nominal 130 kW. See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3108242.ece That is perfectly possible for a device of this size with this flow of water. Many automobile engines and other devices of this size produce that much energy without exploding. I doubt the power was actually that high. I expect some of the heat was being wicked. If it really happens for more than some seconds then the machine must explode or the core must melt down. The cell is roughly the size of motorcycle engine cylinders without the cooling fins. It does not need cooling fan since it is watercooled. A large motorcycle produces 40 hp of mechanical energy at roughly 25% efficiency, or 160 hp of raw heat. 130 kW = 174 hp. Of course the cylinders are heavy duty because the exploding gasoline produced a great deal of force (40 hp!), but in any case the temperature does not make it melt. I cannot trust a scientist who tells such stories without reasonable scientific and technical explanation, how this happened. Therefore I cannot trust persons who trust him. Your judgement is flawed. There is nothing unbelievable about the 40°C temperature excursion. It was dangerous, but with 1 L per second cooling it was controlled. Also the claims of Defkalion in their forum must be untrue . . . Which claims? Why do you say they must be untrue? I have not heard of any reason to believe that. I dont know why they do this. Do they take drugs? Have they all invested money? Is Rossi addicted to this role to be an inventor like a junkie? Your technical assertions are wrong. Check your arithmetic and you will find you can stop spinning hypotheses about what is wrong with these people. I ask myself, when NASA tested Ni-H fusion sucessfully in 1995, why didnt they follow this path and made a definitive proof? Obviously because there is enormous political opposition to cold fusion! Everyone knows that. Also this was not a particularly effective method of doing cold fusion and there is no indication it could ever be made into a practical source of energy. It was a laboratory curiosity. Why did Piantelli make Patents and stop this research, when they had so much success? Piantelli et al. is still doing the research is far as I know. Where did you hear they stopped? Why doesnt Mills produce any products? No idea. Why isnt there a clear and repeatable key experiment to proove LENR effects? There are such tests. Read McKubre, Storms or the papers from the ENEA and Energetics Technologies. The only thing lacking in cold fusion has been good control of the reaction. The only difference between Rossi and the others is that Rossi can control the reaction (most of the time) and therefore he can scale up. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Hi, On 5-10-2011 19:40, Jed Rothwell wrote: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com mailto:robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: 3) Secondary water flow will be properly measured and regularly recorded, but input primary power measurements will still be inconclusive. i would REALLY like to see Voltage and Current (Thru-Line , not clamp-on, measured from an eCat equivalent of mains distribution) They say primary input power we turned off for most of the test. The machine will be run in heat after death mode. so input power measurements will not be a factor. In any case, the output power is reportedly 15 kW and there is no way an ordinary wire could conduct that much electricity, so you can rule that out. I second Jed's statement with these simple facts: With a Copper resistivity/m of 0.0175 this requires a wire with a thickness of 10.0 mm^2 or a diameter of 3.57 mm (= approx. AWG 7 ! ), which results in a wire of 0.00175 ?. Such wire is VDE approved for a maximum of 66.00 A and with single phase 230V AC this results in a maximum power of 15300 W! As far as I can see from the photos of the Rossi reactor, the wires to the heating resistors are a lot thinner than the 3.57 mm diameter. Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
At 10:40 AM 10/5/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: As far as I know it never takes more than 10 or 20 minutes. No one has ever reported that takes longer than this. The test will be at least 12 hours so warm up time is irrelevant. No form of stored chemical energy can power a device of this size at that power level for that duration. It would take roughly 5 gallons of gasoline to do that. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v401.php#fakesbyvolume For Lewan's Fat-Cat test (2kW excess) Compressed Hydrogen/Air : 69 hrs Diesel/Air : 459 hrs Boron/Air : 1697 hrs Hmmm ... I forgot to print the total fat-ecat volume in the document ... about 30 litres. Only after it's stable, Rossi will begin circulating water in the secondary . . . I have never heard of anyone doing it that way. You have to circulate water in the secondary loop before the test begins, to show there is no heat measured; i.e., inlet temperature equals outlet temperature. Rossi said it's open-circuit. Andrea Rossi October 4th, 2011 at 3:52 PM October 4th, 2011 at 3:52 PM Dear Italo: Open. Warm Regards, AR Eliminating input power seems like a better method to me. 2) Secondary circuit water flow with flowmeter measurements, continually recorded and time stamped 3) Secondary circuit water flow input temperature, continually recorded and time stamped 4) Secondary circuit water flow output temperature, continually recorded and time stamped 5) Sufficient operation time to rule out a conventional reaction Extraneous data will only serve to complicate what should be very straightforward calculations. I believe The plans call for points 2 through 5 to be done. 12 hours should be sufficient. The outside observers attending the test will be allowed to look inside the machine and weigh all the components so we will know whether this is long enough to eliminate a chemical source of energy. My bet : The test will be conclusive. My expectation : and positive. Actually, I'd bet something LESS than the farm that it will be conclusive AND positive.
Re: [Vo]:Energy will be worth nothing in the future
Since the price of practically everything depends to a greter or lesser degree on the cost of energy, the price of fresh fruit and vegetables will drop. Economic policy will focus on deflation mangement instead of inflation mangement. Harry From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 10:13:57 AM Subject: [Vo]:Energy will be worth nothing in the future Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: No, just simple formula and economic truth: energy = money. Here are some economic truths from 1840: ice = money bananas = money In the 1840s, in northern US states people would cut ice from Pons in the wintertime, store it under sawdust, and then send it by ship to Florida and other warm states were ice does not form. It was worth a terrific amount of money. In 1851, Dr. John Gorrie invented the first practical refrigerator to make ice for a sick patient (his wife, I think it was). In the 1880s refrigeration was greatly improved, and the value of ice dropped. It was no longer sent by ships, although there were still iceman delivering ice to housewives for ice boxes in the 1920s. Later people could make ice at home and it was worth nothing. Along the same lines, in the 19th century clipper ships occasionally brought bananas from Central and South America to the US. They sold for $0.50 each which was equivalent to about $10. A ship load of bananas was worth a fortune. One shipowner made a fortune bringing in one should vote successfully, and then tried again but the second time the wind was unfavorable and the entire shipment had to be dumped so he lost a fortune. After cold fusion becomes widespread, the cost of energy will fall by 2/3rds. A generation after that it will be worth ~100 times less than it is now and much later something like 10,000 times less. I base this on the the likely cost of equipment. The entire energy industry will bring in revenues roughly equivalent to the sales of bubblegum today (see chapter 2, footnote 51 in my book). To project future sales of cold fusion based on the present cost of fossil fuel makes no sense at all. It does make sense to project that many new devices will become possible in many extravagant uses of energy for things like megaprojects irrigating deserts will become possible, so economic growth in other areas may occur. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
At 10:59 AM 10/5/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Better NOT do it that way. I just told them: The secondary cooling loop should be started before the Rossi device is turned on. You should confirm that the inlet and outlet temperatures are the same. In other words confirm that the inlet and outlet thermocouples are calibrated and they agree to within 0.1°C when tap water flows through. They say ok. I presume the secondary circuit + non-operating eCat will cool down fairly quickly. Could you please ask them to take photographs of everything (all tube sections, the reactor bulge, chimney etc etc) with a ruler -- both length and diameter -- so that the volumes can also be calculated.
Re: [Vo]:Energy will be worth nothing in the future
At 11:26 AM 10/5/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: Since the price of practically everything depends to a greter or lesser degree on the cost of energy, the price of fresh fruit and vegetables will drop. Economic policy will focus on deflation mangement instead of inflation mangement. Desalination/Cloud-capture becomes economical, so the price of fresh fruit and vegetables WILL drop for arid regions close to the sea. Desets blooming, and all that.
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Hmm, what does it mean for a 15 hour test? Does it mean 15 hours of fusion or 14 hours of heating plus 1 of fusion?
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Am 05.10.2011 20:21, schrieb Man on Bridges: With a Copper resistivity/m of 0.0175 this requires a wire with a thickness of 10.0 mm^2 or a diameter of 3.57 mm (= approx. AWG 7 ! ), which results in a wire of 0.00175 ?. Such wire is VDE approved for a maximum of 66.00 A and with single phase 230V AC this results in a maximum power of 15300 W! As far as I can see from the photos of the Rossi reactor, the wires to the heating resistors are a lot thinner than the 3.57 mm diameter. What if they have coils inserted in the table wood board? I have seen in Levi's curriculum vita, he is a consulting expert for industrial inductive heating at Bologna university. Also I do not understand, why do they need to heat the water, using a resistive heater? With inductive heating they could heat the core much more efficiently and much more responsive without heating the water.
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: I take an old blacksmith's anvil. I warm it in a kiln over two day to roughly orange-hot (it is going to hold this heat for a LONG time, especially if well-insulated). It will be orange hot after about 10 minutes. It will reach the terminal temperature and not store any more heat over the next 47 hours and 50 minutes. You might as well conduct your test right away. The specific heat of iron is 0.46 kJ/kg per degree K. You can calculate how much heat it is storing at a given temperature. It is nowhere near enough to explain the performance of the eCat. The energy expended in getting the anvil up to operating temperature would more than balance this equation, and is necessary beyond a doubt. Think of it as potential energy, just like a coiled spring or a raised weight. While the eCat is warming up, nearly all of the heat that goes in comes right out. Nothing is stored. The heat is balanced. There is no endothermic phase, so there is not storage. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
At 11:26 AM 10/5/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v401.php#fakesbyvolume For Lewan's Fat-Cat test (2kW excess) Compressed Hydrogen/Air : 69 hrs Diesel/Air : 459 hrs Boron/Air : 1697 hrs Hmmm ... I forgot to print the total fat-ecat volume in the document ... about 30 litres. Looks like I goofed ... it's now listing 90 liters, so my volume and times are 3* off : back to the source-code
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: What if they have coils inserted in the table wood board? That is ridiculous. It would take a huge set of coils on both sides -- in the table and in the eCat -- to induce 15 kW. Anyone looking at the device would instantly see what it is. Observers in the past have looked inside the machines and seen they are exactly what Rossi described. Observers will be allowed to look on Oct. 6. There is no place in there to hide coils, or a pair of 4 AVG wires, or 5 gallons of gasoline, or a large canister of butane. With inductive heating they could heat the core much more efficiently and much more responsive without heating the water. Whatever they end up doing, they have to transfer 15 kW of power. To do this with induction demands very large, very visible coils. To do it directly with electricity (the most compact method) you must have thick wires. It is impossible to hide such things. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
At 11:48 AM 10/5/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 11:26 AM 10/5/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v401.php#fakesbyvolume For Lewan's Fat-Cat test (2kW excess) Compressed Hydrogen/Air : 69 hrs Diesel/Air : 459 hrs Boron/Air : 1697 hrs Hmmm ... I forgot to print the total fat-ecat volume in the document ... about 30 litres. Looks like I goofed ... it's now listing 90 liters, so my volume and times are 3* off : back to the source-code No, that's RIGHT ... the 30 liters is the internal volume, excluding all the insulation. It measured about 50 x 60 x 30 centimeters
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Looks like I goofed ... it's now listing 90 liters, so my volume and times are 3* off : back to the source-code Your calculations should take into account the fact that people will look inside the thing and see that it is metal equipment, not a canister of fuel and not any sort of conventional water heater. The only part they will not be allowed to look into is the cell itself which I believe is about 1 liter. If the whole thing was a 90 L black box that no one is allowed to open up, you might have a point. But it will be an open box. These people can recognize the difference between the inside of a water heater and the inside of a cold fusion reactor. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Am 05.10.2011 20:51, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: What if they have coils inserted in the table wood board? That is ridiculous. It would take a huge set of coils on both sides -- in the table and in the eCat -- to induce 15 kW. No. http://youtu.be/k4xsqw463Hs To do this with induction demands very large, very visible coils. They could hide the coil inside the table board and feed the power through the legs or through a distant coil using resonance transformation effects.
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
At 11:55 AM 10/5/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Looks like I goofed ... it's now listing 90 liters, so my volume and times are 3* off : back to the source-code Your calculations should take into account the fact that people will look inside the thing and see that it is metal equipment, not a canister of fuel and not any sort of conventional water heater. The only part they will not be allowed to look into is the cell itself which I believe is about 1 liter. If the whole thing was a 90 L black box that no one is allowed to open up, you might have a point. But it will be an open box. These people can recognize the difference between the inside of a water heater and the inside of a cold fusion reactor. That was my report on Lewan's September trial -- when he didn't see inside. 90L total is correct, which will come down when it's stripped.
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Hi, On 5-10-2011 21:02, Peter Heckert wrote: They could hide the coil inside the table board and feed the power through the legs or through a distant coil using resonance transformation effects. And you would think that their equipment or other electronic devices are not affected by such large electro-magnetic field? Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: That was my report on Lewan's September trial -- when he didn't see inside. 90L total is correct, which will come down when it's stripped. Ah, I see what you mean. Stripped in this case means opened up and revealed down to the largest single component that cannot be opened. Anything that can be seen and identified such as a piece of lead shielding or a pipe can be discounted. I believe largest component the observers cannot look inside of will be the cell. As I said I believe that's around 1 L. The policy of allowing observers to look inside the device is intended to put to rest doubts about hidden energy sources. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Am 05.10.2011 21:08, schrieb Man on Bridges: Hi, On 5-10-2011 21:02, Peter Heckert wrote: They could hide the coil inside the table board and feed the power through the legs or through a distant coil using resonance transformation effects. And you would think that their equipment or other electronic devices are not affected by such large electro-magnetic field? Yes. If it is tuned for resonance. And if it is switched off as soon as a critical observer makes measurements ;-)
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
At 12:29 PM 10/5/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: The observers should take a thermal imaging camera. That would quickly reveal any sign of preheating. Harry And any exhaust from combustion or a heat-pump. Both way down in the probabilities, but worth doing. Also, Lewan / April : To safely exclude the transfer of external wireless energy, we measured electromagnetic fields from 5 Hz to 3 GHz. No increase could be noted except for a slight increase at the power-grid frequency of 50 Hz, close to the electrical resistor positioned around the reactor.
Re: [Vo]:Free Work
Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a free lunch. Current flowing through a conductor creates an electromagnetic field. Yes, you can exploit this electromagnetic field. But, it is not free. Think of it like a car alternator. You always have your engine driving a belt, driving the alternator, right? Why not use the alternator to charge a bigger set of batteries? The batteries can then run a DC all-electric car. When the DC car motor is running, it drives an alternator, which recharges the car batteries, and we never run out of juice! Case closed, the world's energy problems are solved. BUT: Heat is not the only mechanism for power loss. The larger the load on the alternator, the more work is required to turn it. In the same sense, as you introduce more opposition to the magnetic fields created by parallel wires, you will necessarily need more current flowing through the wires to maintain the field and output current. Electro-Magnetic Force can be converted to mechanical energy (e.g., rotational force as an electromagnet opposes a permanent magnet), a magnetic field (e.g., transformer, inductor, or electromagnet), or simple electrical current. None of these transfers are 100% efficient, and always result in a net loss. When the wires have nothing holding them together or apart there is no opposition. In any case you do not answer my question which I will rephrase: if the electricity is used to power a motor, and the same electricity is used to compress or stretch a spring placed between the parallel wires, will the movement of the spring slow the motor? BTW, You may also respond by saying I don't know ;) Harry Thane has a neat project. He's found that a shorted coil easily accepts a magnetic field, and immediately collapses. He's found optimum rotation speed where the shorted coil has a field collapse precisely as the permanent magnet swings by, pushing it a little bit. The principle was discovered before and lost to time, but he's brought it back into some limelight. If he tries to use any current from the shorted coils, they will no longer be shorted, and a whole host of problems arise. Not the least of which, they will no longer be null receptors of the field change, and their discharge time constant will immediately slow (meaning the drum would have to slow-down to maintain the effect). This is why the effect is only seen in a narrow band of RPM. The speed of the rotating wheel must precisely match the discharge time constant of the shorted coils (or some harmonic thereof). It's interesting, but he makes himself look foolish with statements like, Conventional science does not even consider the extra work performed on anything placed in between the current bearing wires. That's just absurd, and I think that Maxwell, Lenz, and a whole host of early researchers would roll over in their graves. Hope it Helps, R.L. Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 10:29:56 -0700 From: hlvee...@yahoo.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Free Work In the comment section to Thane Heins video http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=W_wleUlcMK0 Thane cites some video demonstrations of the biot savart law: Here are a couple of great FREE WORK VIDEOS: Magnetic Force between Parallel Wires MIT Physics Demo -- Forces on a Current-Carrying Wire In each video you will see how FREE work is performed by two parallel conductors. The Law of Conservation of Energy only accounts for energy losses converted into heat through the resistance of the wires. Conventional science does not even consider the extra work performed on anything placed in between the current bearing wires. I think he means you can get FREE work from this electrical energy, if inaddition to using the electricity to power a motor, you use the same electricity to compress or stretch a spring placed between the parallel wires. Or is the some reason why doing the latter should slow the former? Harry From: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com To: hlvee...@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 2:44:11 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Free Work
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
I should have said: While the eCat is warming up, nearly all of the heat that goes in comes right out. Nothing is stored. The heat is balanced. There is no SIGNIFICANT endothermic phase, so there is not MUCH storage. What storage there is, you can measure with confidence. A calorimeter works just as well to measure a heat deficit (an endothermic reaction) as excess heat (exothermic). The sensitivity of the same in either direction. Also, releasing heat from hot metal with this configuration can never cause the temperature to rise. It can only make it take longer to cool down to ambient temperature. When the input power is cut the temperature must begin falling immediately; it can never go up, the way it did in the most recent test. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Again, FWIW, I hope to God this is a conclusive test. As this argument is already raising eyebrows, let me go back to the original predictions that are raising a fuss: 4) Power gains will be relatively small and will be reliant on calculations using a no input value during the supposed self-sustaining mode of operation to exist at all. As a result, we will all be cursing the self-sustaining mode as an unnecessary invention that only muddies the results. Many will say that the hours of warm up time should correlate to hours of cool down time, and that residual heat can explain away the maintained temperature. 5) Rossi and Jed will say that the test was conclusive (Sorry, Jed) **Note: All that we NEED here for a conclusive test is: 1) Input power properly and completely measured, time-stamped, and flagged with any Rossi-enduced duty-cycle changes during operation. 2) Secondary circuit water flow with flowmeter measurements, continually recorded and time stamped 3) Secondary circuit water flow input temperature, continually recorded and time stamped 4) Secondary circuit water flow output temperature, continually recorded and time stamped 5) Sufficient operation time to rule out a conventional reaction Extraneous data, and this heat-after-death stuff, will only serve to complicate what should be very straightforward calculations. Jed, You're absolutely right that residual heat would only result in tempearture loss and not temperature gain (which briefly appeared in the last demo). But, a momentary increase in the heat after death recorded in the last test cannot reconcile all of the enormous problems I have with that test. 1) They were taking temperature INSIDE the eCat. - Unacceptable 2) They presumed where they were taking the temperature was at 1 ATM of pressure - Impossible I know, you'll say, Impossible? What do you mean impossible? My answer is that steam cannot be superheated to 130 degrees Celsius in the presence of 40% water at 1 ATM of pressure. Noone is able to reconcile this without higher pressures or exotic restrictions.
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Ok, I make a precise prediction: I make a bet with two persons: With person 1 I bet that the e-cat will work. With person 2 I bet that the e-cat will not work. When we have the results, both persons will say, they have won and will want their money.. hehe
[Vo]:Absolutely Radiant (i.e. don't do it at home)
Dear List, Just for fun while waiting for the verdict. This is a classical example of how improvised experimenters can make disasters: http://goo.gl/1hyDS (http://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1994-25.html) mic
Re: [Vo]:Steorn's CEO Posts Overunity Heater Video
I think someone in Ireland imported some experience from Italy... but the laughs are, like, sarcastic rather than of happiness...
Re: [Vo]:Steorn's CEO Posts Overunity Heater Video
http://pesn.com/2011/10/05/9501927_Steorn_CEO_Posts_Overunity_Heater_Video/ You have to admire the tenacity of Steorn: if one thing fails, they try another.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn's CEO Posts Overunity Heater Video
Is hot water the new big business? ;-) In Italian reinventing the wheel is said as reinventare l'acqua calda i.e. reinventing hot water... mic 2011/10/5 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com: http://pesn.com/2011/10/05/9501927_Steorn_CEO_Posts_Overunity_Heater_Video/ Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Steorn's CEO Posts Overunity Heater Video
Yeah, sure. And that shows up 1 day before Rossi's tst. 2011/10/5 Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com They've been researching a heater for quite some time. It's not a hey, let's come up with something in a day type of deal. They were at it back in 2010. On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:05 AM, vorl bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: http://pesn.com/2011/10/05/9501927_Steorn_CEO_Posts_Overunity_Heater_Video/ You have to admire the tenacity of Steorn: if one thing fails, they try another.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn's CEO Posts Overunity Heater Video
Well, it's not my fault you guys haven't been paying attention on the twitterverse. They got up to a 3kW back in march. The commercial product was supposed to be 12kW or 15kW. Then there was a load of silence about it. Yes, it does seem they're accidentally hitting 5th oct when rossi does 6th. On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, sure. And that shows up 1 day before Rossi's tst. 2011/10/5 Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com They've been researching a heater for quite some time. It's not a hey, let's come up with something in a day type of deal. They were at it back in 2010. On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:05 AM, vorl bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: http://pesn.com/2011/10/05/9501927_Steorn_CEO_Posts_Overunity_Heater_Video/ You have to admire the tenacity of Steorn: if one thing fails, they try another.
Re: [Vo]:Steorn's CEO Posts Overunity Heater Video
These videos have been on Facebook for a while. PESN just posted the article today. On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com wrote: Well, it's not my fault you guys haven't been paying attention on the twitterverse. They got up to a 3kW back in march. The commercial product was supposed to be 12kW or 15kW. Then there was a load of silence about it. Yes, it does seem they're accidentally hitting 5th oct when rossi does 6th. On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: Yeah, sure. And that shows up 1 day before Rossi's tst. 2011/10/5 Esa Ruoho esaru...@gmail.com They've been researching a heater for quite some time. It's not a hey, let's come up with something in a day type of deal. They were at it back in 2010. On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:05 AM, vorl bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: http://pesn.com/2011/10/05/9501927_Steorn_CEO_Posts_Overunity_Heater_Video/ You have to admire the tenacity of Steorn: if one thing fails, they try another. -- Frank Acland Publisher, E-Cat World http://www.e-catworld.com Author, The Secret Power Beneath https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/
Re: [Vo]:Free Work
On 11-10-05 03:55 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: When the wires have nothing holding them together or apart there is no opposition. In any case you do not answer my question which I will rephrase: if the electricity is used to power a motor, and the same electricity is used to compress or stretch a spring placed between the parallel wires, will the movement of the spring slow the motor? Well, of course. Mind the details, and it should be obvious. With two parallel wires in a horizontal plane, there's a vertical B field around each wire in the plane. Look at wire A, and its field. When wire B moves toward or away from wire A it's moving through a vertical B field, and that's going to exert a force on the charge carriers in B, either slowing them or speeding them up. Let's use some ASCII art and work it out. I'll look at the case where the current in the wires is going in opposite directions (they're the plus and minus wires powering the motor, rather than two stands of wire in one cable). If wires A and B go straight into the page, and A is on the left, and the current in A is going into the page, then we have this: A . B . (the wires look like dots, cause they're going straight into the page) In that case, the B field at wire B (sorry about the double use of B) is contained in the surface of the page, and is pointing down the page. (Use the right hand rule for current in wires to figure this part out: curl your fingers, point your thumb in the direction the current is going, and the fingers show you the B field.) The current in B is flowing out of the page (opposite direction to A), and the force on B is to the *right*. (Use a different right hand rule: Hand held flat, thumb pointing out; point thumb in direction the positive charges are going, fingers in direction the B field points, and the force sticks out of your palm.) If B moves to the *right* (under the impulse of the force exerted by A's B field) then there's a force on its (positive) charge carriers directed into the page, and the current in wire B slows down. (Use the flat-hand RHR again.) QED. You can work it out for two wires carrying current in the same direction, as well, and you'll get the same answer: If you let the wires move under the influence of the B fields which surround them, the current in them will be slowed by the resulting back EMF. The presence of the spring is just a red herring -- the interesting thing is the motion, not what we're using to restrain the wires. BTW, You may also respond by saying I don't know ;) Harry Thane has a neat project. He's found that a shorted coil easily accepts a magnetic field, and immediately collapses. He's found optimum rotation speed where the shorted coil has a field collapse precisely as the permanent magnet swings by, pushing it a little bit. The principle was discovered before and lost to time, but he's brought it back into some limelight. If he tries to use any current from the shorted coils, they will no longer be shorted, and a whole host of problems arise. Not the least of which, they will no longer be null receptors of the field change, and their discharge time constant will immediately slow (meaning the drum would have to slow-down to maintain the effect). This is why the effect is only seen in a narrow band of RPM. The speed of the rotating wheel must precisely match the discharge time constant of the shorted coils (or some harmonic thereof). It's interesting, but he makes himself look foolish with statements like, Conventional science does not even consider the extra work performed on anything placed in between the current bearing wires. That's just absurd, and I think that Maxwell, Lenz, and a whole host of early researchers would roll over in their graves. Hope it Helps, R.L. Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 10:29:56 -0700 From: hlvee...@yahoo.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Free Work In the comment section to Thane Heins video http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=W_wleUlcMK0 Thane cites some video demonstrations of the biot savart law: Here are a couple of great FREE WORK VIDEOS: Magnetic Force between Parallel Wires MIT Physics Demo -- Forces on a Current-Carrying Wire In each video you will see how FREE work is performed by two parallel conductors. The Law of Conservation of Energy only accounts for energy losses converted into heat through the resistance of the wires. Conventional science does not even consider the extra work performed on anything placed in between the current bearing wires. I think he means you can get FREE work from this electrical energy, if inaddition to using the electricity to power a motor, you use the same electricity to compress or stretch a spring placed between the parallel wires. Or is the some reason why doing the latter should slow the former? Harry From: Robert Leguillonrobert.leguil...@hotmail.com To: hlvee...@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 5,
[Vo]:No such thing as a perfect test, but this is shaping up to be pretty good
Regarding the October 6 test of the Russi device: I do not expect this will be the perfect test. I do not expect it the be-all, end-all test that answers all questions and convinces everyone. I doubt that is possible for this kind of machine. Other kinds of machines can be demonstrated irrefutably, such as the airplane (August 1908) and the atomic bomb (July 1945). You would be surprised how many other demonstrations throughout history did not convince all observers. For example many people who observed the first demonstrations of photography, the telegraph, the record player, the telephone, the maser, the laser and cloned sheep thought they must be seeing cheap parlor tricks such as ventriloquism, an obvious fake, or sleight-of-hand magic. I recall a prominent biologist claimed there was nothing convincing about Dolly the sheep even though she looked completely different from the surrogate mother. The controversy will not end tomorrow. Not in this discussion group and certainly not in the mass media. Irrational skeptics will not be convinced. I mean people such as Rich Murray, Robert Park, and the editors of Wikipedia and the Scientific American. They will come up with more fairytales such as stored heat or sleight-of-hand magic tricks. These people will not be convinced by anything less than commercial success acknowledged by every major newspaper, magazine and government agency. Legitimate questions will also remain, even if the test goes exactly as planned. The full range of performance characteristics cannot be established in 12 hours or even 24 hours. Rossi claimed that a commercial grade heater was in operation in a factory for over a year. This tests cannot confirm that. They cannot confirm that he is capable of scaling up to 1 MW in a safe reactor. However, if he can produce 15 kW for 12 hours, I am sure that experts at industrial corporations can scale up to any size. It is just a matter of engineering. I have been in touch with some people who will attend the demonstration, and with Rossi. I have been making suggestions to them such as: record all data into one computer, including the flow rate and the power measured in watts not just amperes. I believe they will do this. I expect this will be better than previous tests. It will be performed and reported in a more professional manner than some of the previous tests. We should aim for progress, not perfection. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: You're absolutely right that residual heat would only result in tempearture loss and not temperature gain (which briefly appeared in the last demo). It was not brief. The temperature rose from 22:35 to 22:42, 7 minutes. That's much too long for something like a momentary instrument fluctuation. But, a momentary increase in the heat after death recorded in the last test cannot reconcile all of the enormous problems I have with that test. Calling this momentary is intellectually dishonest. I don't think the problems you have discovered are enormous. They are quibbles. 1) They were taking temperature INSIDE the eCat. - Unacceptable I do not think it far inside or close to the cell. Someone would have noticed. This is a little like saying that McKubre's inlet and outlet sensors are inside the cell. They are, but they are thermally isolated from the cathode that generates the heat so it is not a problem. Not Unacceptable. I will grant Rossi should have done some calibrations to prove this is not a problem. The October 6 test will address this issue by allowing observers to measure the inlet and outlet water temperatures outside the secondary cooling loop. These measurements cannot be affected by the cell, since they will be done in a graduated cylinder far away from it, and they will be made with independent instruments. 2) They presumed where they were taking the temperature was at 1 ATM of pressure - Impossible If the pressure is higher, wouldn't that mean there is more enthalpy? 1 atm is the worst-case estimate. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
It was not brief. The temperature rose from 22:35 to 22:42, 7 minutes. That's much too long for something like a momentary instrument fluctuation. From Lewan report i see a rise of 0.7C from 22:35 to 22:40. And i see temperature spikes up to 40 degrees when “the probe being pulled out of the water for short moments.” from 30 degrees to 70 degrees. And you can see from the video that the probe is inside the water tank, far way from any heat sources. So, do you trust a 0.7 degrees spike? http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3264365.ece/BINARY/Report+E-cat+test+September+7+%28pdf%29 From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 12:17 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: You're absolutely right that residual heat would only result in tempearture loss and not temperature gain (which briefly appeared in the last demo). It was not brief. The temperature rose from 22:35 to 22:42, 7 minutes. That's much too long for something like a momentary instrument fluctuation. But, a momentary increase in the heat after death recorded in the last test cannot reconcile all of the enormous problems I have with that test. Calling this momentary is intellectually dishonest. I don't think the problems you have discovered are enormous. They are quibbles. 1) They were taking temperature INSIDE the eCat. - Unacceptable I do not think it far inside or close to the cell. Someone would have noticed. This is a little like saying that McKubre's inlet and outlet sensors are inside the cell. They are, but they are thermally isolated from the cathode that generates the heat so it is not a problem. Not Unacceptable. I will grant Rossi should have done some calibrations to prove this is not a problem. The October 6 test will address this issue by allowing observers to measure the inlet and outlet water temperatures outside the secondary cooling loop. These measurements cannot be affected by the cell, since they will be done in a graduated cylinder far away from it, and they will be made with independent instruments. 2) They presumed where they were taking the temperature was at 1 ATM of pressure - Impossible If the pressure is higher, wouldn't that mean there is more enthalpy? 1 atm is the worst-case estimate. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:No such thing as a perfect test, but this is shaping up to be pretty good
At 02:57 PM 10/5/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Regarding the October 6 test of the Russi device: The controversy will not end tomorrow. Not in this discussion group and certainly not in the mass media. Irrational skeptics will not be convinced. I mean people such as Rich Murray, Robert Park, and the editors of Wikipedia and the Scientific American. Actually, the editors of Wikipedia have been reasonable recently .. requiring reliable sources : it's primarily the lack of media coverage that's kept things out. Even New Energy Times has been semi-accepted as a source. We've more or less agreed to hold off on any new contributions until tomorrow! (And to post stuff in draft in the discussion before it goes into the article).
[Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
Hello, To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter. Presence of UoB and UoU seems confirmed. @22passi Daniele Passerini Confermata la presenza delle Università di Bologna e Uppsala domani al test. mic
Re: [Vo]:Regarding Rossi and NASA (+ some Piantelli news)
At 12:08 PM 10/1/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: From: BUSHNELL Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 06:55:10 -0500 To: Steven Krivit Subject: Request Put in your Blog. My well done remark referred to the accuracy of your reporting of my quotes from the GRC meeting. Period. Was not referring to the veracity of the entire piece. D. ... and it's STILL not on Krivit's Blog ... http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/09/30/some-responses-to-nasa-advances-evaluation-of-piantelli%E2%80%99s-lenr-research/
Re: [Vo]:Free Work
Robert and others, unless you intend to email me directly, please make sure the vortex address appears in the 'TO' box before you click send. When you choose to reply to my posts, it seems as if some code that was embedded by yahoo mail tells your mail software to reply to me instead of vortex. This problem started when Yahoo recently updated their mail system. I might resubscribe to vortex with Gmail to eliminate this problem. Thanks, Harry. From: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com To: hlvee...@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 4:35:16 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Free Work /snip/ When the wires have nothing holding them together or apart there is no opposition. In any case you do not answer my question which I will rephrase: if the electricity is used to power a motor, and the same electricity is used to compress or stretch a spring placed between the parallel wires, will the movement of the spring slow the motor? BTW, You may also respond by saying I don't know ;) Harry /snip/ I think the correct answer is It depends. But fundamentally, the same electricity cannot be doing both. It can be used or stored. If it is being consumed by the work performed on the spring, and movement of the spring allows less to be consumed, then drops total circuit reactance, leaving more voltage and less phase shift across the motor. If there is simple stored charge, the motor would (typically) have less current available and run slower during the intial charging time constants, and then speed up when the field collapses (inductive). So, I guess that I'll just take you up on that I don't know.
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote: Hello, To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter. Twitter page here: http://twitter.com/#!/22passi Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:The Apple Has Fallen From the Tree
Steve Jobs passes: http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/us/obit-steve-jobs/index.html?iref=BN1hpt=hp_t1
RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Ah... I seem to have an overpowering urge to ramble on for a bit. Please feel free skip the following soliloquy if one is easily bored by matters pertaining to the care and feeding of our inner psyches. I've noticed that on more than one occasion commentary attributed to Mr. Murray seems to bring out a desire on my part to meddle with the opinions of others. It seems to generate a desire within me to pontificate at my own expense - and obviously to the expense of anyone else so inclined to eavesdrop. You have been forewarned! ;-) From Rich: yes, but what's going on since 1989 is more collective mutual delusion, rather than deliberate lying, in most cases -- as one who has twice failed radically at attempting day trading stocks, I notice that Ponzi schemes in all their variety constitute much of what is still presented as legitimate business activity -- disconfirmation is interpreted as some personal failing, not as evidence for the profound delusion of the entire field Exactly whose delusions are we wrestling with here? As previously mentioned, I attempted to make a profit in the commodities market. I was trading commodities close to real-time. What I was doing was not all that different than trying to make a living as a Day Trader. I lost a lot of savings in my attempts, and needless to say I wasn't too happy about it. (I can sympathize with your own circumstances, and I feel your pain.) Fortunately for me, the economic damage I was personally responsible for was pretty much self-contained. I didn't pilfer the savings of anyone other than my own accounts, and as such, only had myself to blame when it came time to paying my bills. ;-) FWIW, when forced to confront very blunt lessons, such as the loss of a significant amount of money due to one's own misjudgments, it becomes easy to become overwhelmed by the painful memories the consequences that ensured. They can color one's outlook on life. It's easy to become suspicious, even cynical about the subsequent actions and motivations of ourselves and of others as well. It's at this stage that one must be alert to the possibility of projecting the memories of our personal failures onto the actions of others - particularly activities that seem to strike an unpleasant chord within our own psyches. This certainly applies to what has been going on in the CF field for the past 20 years. It also includes Rossi Co, and any potential competitors who might be out there, like Piantelli. However, trying not to project the circumstances of our own failures into of the perceived actions of others is NOT an easy lesson to master. I'm still working at it. In other words, It takes one to know one. -- in addition, the unimaginable unity and subtlety of the present moment of awareness is the ultimate source of invalidation of all perceptions, concepts, and projects -- so question everything deeply for yourself, On the surface this sounds like an interesting comment, maybe even profound on some transcendent level. However, to be honest I don't get what you're trying to say. Are you implying our perceptions at every moment in time are prone to be invalid - inaccurate??? Well, shoot! Scholars and religious leaders have been debating the reality of our existence since the dawn of mankind. In the end, who cares! Regarding the more intriguing phrase pertaining to ...the present moment of awareness - I'd like to follow up with the comment that it has been my experience that a more practical way to perceive reality is to stay focused on the present moment. Try to remain conscious of one's own inner being-ness and of one's presence in the external surroundings. Speakers like Eckhart Tolle, inform us of the fact that we often seem get overly caught up in convoluted memories of painful past actions, or we get caught up over real or imagined fears of what the future may bring for us. What Tolle and other speakers of his caliber have tried to suggest to their audiences is that all of these fixations subtract from us the simple fact that the only way to change bad things that have happened to us (from the past), or what we fear could happen to us (in the future), is to stay focused in the present moment. It's only in the present moment where we can actually do something about the past or future matters. It's only in the present moment where we can initiate changes in our life. However, I suspect there are many who find much of Tolle's writings and lectures to be a tad boring. Ah well, to each his own. as Buddha advised -- tend the garden of your own present moment of awareness. No doubt about it. Buddha was a cool dude. Well ahead of his time. Pertaining to the matter of opinions, Buddha also sed - People with opinions just go around bothering each other. http://quotations.about.com/od/spiritualquotes/a/buddhistquotes.htm Ok, I think I've done enuf bothering for one spell. * *
RE: [Vo]:The Apple Has Fallen From the Tree
From Terry Steve Jobs passes: http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/us/obit-steve-jobs/index.html?iref=BN1hpt=hp_ t1 Read about it on my iPad. Wonder what the essence of Jobs will do next. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]: prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
I think he ought to run it for a few hours and then put it in self-sustain mode, which I assume means no power to the internal resistance heater(s), and then let’s HOPE that it becomes unstable and goes critical! I say, let it melt-down… With no input power, and coolant flowing, there is absolutely no alternative explanation to explain the extreme temperatures that would results, and when the post-mortem examination reveals a molten mass of Nickel. I can hear it now… the skeptics will argue that we can’t get any first-hand data since all the eye-witnesses were killed when it exploded! As for predictions, it’s now or never; make or break for Rossi… Given the track record, I’m not holdin’ my breath, but got my fingers crossed! J -mark
Re: [Vo]:Free Work
From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 5:25:31 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Free Work On 11-10-05 03:55 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: When the wires have nothing holding them together or apart there is no opposition. In any case you do not answer my question which I will rephrase: if the electricity is used to power a motor, and the same electricity is used to compress or stretch a spring placed between the parallel wires, will the movement of the spring slow the motor? Well, of course. Mind the details, and it should be obvious. With two parallel wires in a horizontal plane, there's a vertical B field around each wire in the plane. Look at wire A, and its field. When wire B moves toward or away from wire A it's moving through a vertical B field, and that's going to exert a force on the charge carriers in B, either slowing them or speeding them up. Let's use some ASCII art and work it out. I'll look at the case where the current in the wires is going in opposite directions (they're the plus and minus wires powering the motor, rather than two stands of wire in one cable). If wires A and B go straight into the page, and A is on the left, and the current in A is going into the page, then we have this: A . B . (the wires look like dots, cause they're going straight into the page) In that case, the B field at wire B (sorry about the double use of B) is contained in the surface of the page, and is pointing down the page. (Use the right hand rule for current in wires to figure this part out: curl your fingers, point your thumb in the direction the current is going, and the fingers show you the B field.) The current in B is flowing out of the page (opposite direction to A), and the force on B is to the *right*. (Use a different right hand rule: Hand held flat, thumb pointing out; point thumb in direction the positive charges are going, fingers in direction the B field points, and the force sticks out of your palm.) If B moves to the *right* (under the impulse of the force exerted by A's B field) then there's a force on its (positive) charge carriers directed into the page, and the current in wire B slows down. (Use the flat-hand RHR again.) QED. You can work it out for two wires carrying current in the same direction, as well, and you'll get the same answer: If you let the wires move under the influence of the B fields which surround them, the current in them will be slowed by the resulting back EMF. The presence of the spring is just a red herring -- the interesting thing is the motion, not what we're using to restrain the wires. OK, you have just argued that the spring cannot add to the energy loses from induction, so now consider the system with spring. Free work means the work done in compressing the spring is greater than the energy lost during the process of induction. I can imagine it will take less work if you choose wires with the wrong electrical properties. However, except for an invocation of CoE, I see nothing which tells me that the work done in compressing spring cannot exceed the energy loses from induction. Harry
Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
I enjoy your truth-full spunk -- my wife and I have read some Eckhart Tolle every day for years -- I let A Course In Miracles work on me daily since August, 1977 -- yes, no evidence possible in any dream, while awareness-being is not dream or even source of dream -- peaceful dreams conveniently allow some vacation space to explore relaxing beyond dreaming -- row row row your boat gently down the stream, merrily merrily merrily, life is but a dream... we sang in 1954 Presbyterian summer camp in Bastrop,Texas -- yes, I've myself acted outrageously many times in life -- now limit it to posts on the Net, being 69 -- within mutual chagrin, Rich On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 6:41 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Ah... I seem to have an overpowering urge to ramble on for a bit. Please feel free skip the following soliloquy if one is easily bored by matters pertaining to the care and feeding of our inner psyches. I've noticed that on more than one occasion commentary attributed to Mr. Murray seems to bring out a desire on my part to meddle with the opinions of others. It seems to generate a desire within me to pontificate at my own expense – and obviously to the expense of anyone else so inclined to eavesdrop. You have been forewarned! ;-) From Rich: yes, but what's going on since 1989 is more collective mutual delusion, rather than deliberate lying, in most cases -- as one who has twice failed radically at attempting day trading stocks, I notice that Ponzi schemes in all their variety constitute much of what is still presented as legitimate business activity -- disconfirmation is interpreted as some personal failing, not as evidence for the profound delusion of the entire field Exactly whose delusions are we wrestling with here? As previously mentioned, I attempted to make a profit in the commodities market. I was trading commodities close to real-time. What I was doing was not all that different than trying to make a living as a Day Trader. I lost a lot of savings in my attempts, and needless to say I wasn't too happy about it. (I can sympathize with your own circumstances, and I feel your pain.) Fortunately for me, the economic damage I was personally responsible for was pretty much self-contained. I didn't pilfer the savings of anyone other than my own accounts, and as such, only had myself to blame when it came time to paying my bills. ;-) FWIW, when forced to confront very blunt lessons, such as the loss of a significant amount of money due to one's own misjudgments, it becomes easy to become overwhelmed by the painful memories the consequences that ensured. They can color one's outlook on life. It's easy to become suspicious, even cynical about the subsequent actions and motivations of ourselves and of others as well. It's at this stage that one must be alert to the possibility of projecting the memories of our personal failures onto the actions of others – particularly activities that seem to strike an unpleasant chord within our own psyches. This certainly applies to what has been going on in the CF field for the past 20 years. It also includes Rossi Co, and any potential competitors who might be out there, like Piantelli. However, trying not to project the circumstances of our own failures into of the perceived actions of others is NOT an easy lesson to master. I’m still working at it. In other words, It takes one to know one. -- in addition, the unimaginable unity and subtlety of the present moment of awareness is the ultimate source of invalidation of all perceptions, concepts, and projects -- so question everything deeply for yourself, On the surface this sounds like an interesting comment, maybe even profound on some transcendent level. However, to be honest I don't get what you're trying to say. Are you implying our perceptions at every moment in time are prone to be invalid - inaccurate??? Well, shoot! Scholars and religious leaders have been debating the reality of our existence since the dawn of mankind. In the end, who cares! Regarding the more intriguing phrase pertaining to ...the present moment of awareness – I'd like to follow up with the comment that it has been my experience that a more practical way to perceive reality is to stay focused on the present moment. Try to remain conscious of one's own inner being-ness and of one's presence in the external surroundings. Speakers like Eckhart Tolle, inform us of the fact that we often seem get overly caught up in convoluted memories of painful past actions, or we get caught up over real or imagined fears of what the future may bring for us. What Tolle and other speakers of his caliber have tried to suggest to their audiences is that all of these fixations subtract from us the simple fact that the only way to change bad things that have happened to us (from the past), or what we fear
Re: [Vo]:Free Work
From: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com To: hlvee...@yahoo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 4:35:16 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Free Work /snip/ When the wires have nothing holding them together or apart there is no opposition. In any case you do not answer my question which I will rephrase: if the electricity is used to power a motor, and the same electricity is used to compress or stretch a spring placed between the parallel wires, will the movement of the spring slow the motor? BTW, You may also respond by saying I don't know ;) Harry /snip/ I think the correct answer is It depends. But fundamentally, the same electricity cannot be doing both. It can be used or stored. If it is being consumed by the work performed on the spring, and movement of the spring allows less to be consumed, then drops total circuit reactance, leaving more voltage and less phase shift across the motor. If there is simple stored charge, the motor would (typically) have less current available and run slower during the intial charging time constants, and then speed up when the field collapses (inductive). So, I guess that I'll just take you up on that I don't know. Let's simplify the situation even more. Leave out the spring and imagine situation where all the relevant parameters, such as conductance etc., are chosen so the movement of the wires has a vanishingly small effect on the performance of the motor. Now start over but this time include the spring. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
Does it mean the universities or just a couple of professors that go in theirr spare time ? Doesn't it sound like the announcement that the test have would be in a lab of unviversity of Bologna ? 2011/10/6 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote: Hello, To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter. Twitter page here: http://twitter.com/#!/22passi Cheers, S.A.
