Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
- Original Nachricht Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 05.10.2011 20:20 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo 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. In a combustion motor the high temperature is generated inside the combustion gases and the distributed into a rather large metal surface. A lot of heat is blowed out as combustion product. In the ecat, however the source of temperature is inside the metal -inside the nicke core and lead shielding- and then it is distributed into the water. As soon as the water boils, the thermal resistance will increase dramatically and this should generate a very high temperature gradient @ 100kW that leads to metal melting and steam explosion. This could also lead to hydrogen explosions like in Fukushima, because glowing hot metal + steam gives free hydrogen and metaloxide.
W.: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
- Original Nachricht Von: peter.heck...@arcor.de An: jounivalko...@gmail.com Datum: 06.10.2011 08:48 Betreff: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo Yes without doubt this would be discovered sooner or later. It was my thought, that nobody had the idea to test the wooden table and the legs until now. I dont believe there is something, but for correctness and completeness this must be tested. It is also in the interest of Rossi to test this hypothesis - and hopefully- to rule it out. Please consider, hard critizism does not destroy Rossi if his claims are true, it will harden his claims and help him ;-) In previous experiments, however hidden energysources such as fuel tanks were not excluded. But this will be different, because it will be long enough in duration. It is always possible to hide some 1-3 kg liquid fuel, but If it is needed more than that, it is very difficult to hide. ?Jouni 2011/10/5 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de: Am 05.10.2011 20:51, schrieb Jed Rothwell: 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. 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.
W.: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
- Original Nachricht Von: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com An: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Datum: 06.10.2011 04:15 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo It is not about evidence of cold fusion. There are plenty of evidence for anomalous excess heat. Problem is that there is 10^10 times too less nuclear radiation and nuclear products present what should be associated into such a level excess heat. I dont see this as a problem. It would be very fine if there is /repeatable/ evidence for anomalous heat. If there is enough excess heat that cannot be explained conventionally then this is a definitive proof of nuclear reactions. So the procedure is this: 1) Make a key-experiment that produces reliably and repeatedly anomalous excess heat and that can be replicated on any lab-bench. 2) If this is working reliably research it for radiation, particles and element transmutations. Einstein said, we must measure that what can be measured (relative speeds and movements). If excess energy can be measured and radiation not, then the research must start with excess energy. Other research is necessary but can only follow, it is not a starting point if nothing is measured for unknown reasons. See e.g. The Status of Cold Fusion (Storms 2010) http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEstatusofcoa.pdf or more briefly: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Experimental_Evidence ?Jouni 2011/10/5 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de: 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]: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. There is also Raymond Zreick from Focus.it: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick Thing is, though, that we don't know if both him and Passerini will be allowed to post real-time updates. Chances are that they can't or can only post very limited information. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
On 2011-10-06 07:34, Andrea Selva wrote: 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 ? I think they will be there to see the test, but they will not officially represent their universities. Daniele said in a separate comment that professors from the University of Bologna won't give any interview to the press. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:New tidbits regarding Rossi's NASA tests
On 2011-10-04 19:18, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, More from New Energy Times on this matter: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/06/nasa-wont-confirm-relationship-with-rossi-2/ Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Apologize to list members, errorneous PM
Hello, I became aware that I repeatedly sent mails directly to list members. This was done in error. When Im at work I can only use a rather poor HTML online mail program. When I hit Reply on a vortex message then usually the reply is automatically sent to the list. In some cases it happened, that the answer was sent to the poster directly. I dont know why this happens, might be there is an error in the reply-adress? I will try to prevent this. I didnt want to start private communication. If, then this would be explicitely expressed in my mail. If you got a private mail from me without such a notification, it was sent in error, sorry. my apologies and kind regards, Peter
[Vo]:test
Harry
Re: [Vo]:Apologize to list members, errorneous PM
On 2011-10-06 11:59, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: I dont know why this happens, might be there is an error in the reply-adress? I will try to prevent this. Make sure that the only e-mail address in the To: header is vortex-l@eskimo.com and that there are no headers other than that (Cc:, Bcc:, Reply-To:, Followup-to:, etc.), unless you specifically want so. Cheers, S.A.
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. It appears that Twitter is giving problems to some users at the moment. This is an alternate link to follow 22passi on it: http://yfrog.com/user/22passi/profile Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:The Apple Has Fallen From the Tree
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:44 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Wonder what the essence of Jobs will do next. iBook of Jobs, part deux? T
Re: [Vo]:test
You should have used hveeder007. :-) On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:05 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Harry
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote: Hello, To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter. It appears that Twitter is giving problems to some users at the moment. This is an alternate link to follow 22passi on it: http://yfrog.com/user/22passi/profile Who is that cute brunette: http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg861/scaled.php?tn=0server=861filename=lyiv.jpgxsize=640ysize=640 :-) T
[Vo]:E-cat on music
see (listen to) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu_iwdjf1gI However a good test could be more convincing i believe in proofs Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: [Vo]:New tidbits regarding Rossi's NASA tests
From Akira, Hello group, More from New Energy Times on this matter: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/06/nasa-wont-confirm- relationship-with-rossi-2/ Last comment states: The E-Cat story has 26 days left to play out. play out? Well, Mr. Rossi has his blog, and so does Mr. Krivit. Call it even. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
Terry, I guess she is scientific journalist https://mobile.twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121895218462203904 mic Il giorno 06/ott/2011 13:25, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com ha scritto: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote: Hello, To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter. It appears that Twitter is giving problems to some users at the moment. This is an alternate link to follow 22passi on it: http://yfrog.com/user/22passi/profile Who is that cute brunette: http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg861/scaled.php?tn=0server=861filename=lyiv.jpgxsize=640ysize=640 :-) T
RE: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
I was running on the assumption that she was next door at Rossi Brothers' Tires, getting new tires for her Alfa Romeo. A scientific journalist, on the other hand, is an even better back-story. I'm calling her E-Kitten. Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 14:57:19 +0200 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present From: michele.comit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Terry, I guess she is scientific journalist https://mobile.twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121895218462203904 mic Il giorno 06/ott/2011 13:25, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com ha scritto: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote: Hello, To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter. It appears that Twitter is giving problems to some users at the moment. This is an alternate link to follow 22passi on it: http://yfrog.com/user/22passi/profile Who is that cute brunette: http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg861/scaled.php?tn=0server=861filename=lyiv.jpgxsize=640ysize=640 :-) T
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
It seems the young lady is IRENE ZREICK the wife of the journalist RAYMOND ZREICK from FOCUS.it Her profile here http://www.123people.it/ext/frm?ti=personensuche%20telefonbuchsearch_term=irene%20zreicksearch_country=ITst=suche%20nach%20personentarget_url=http%3A%2F%2Fit.linkedin.com%2Fpub%2Firene-zreick%2F18%2F413%2F38bsection=weblinkwrt_id=367 For the time given, Passerini and Zreick sending few Tweets, one of them said reactor in autosustainment!! Nothing relevant till now. Pet6er On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: I was running on the assumption that she was next door at Rossi Brothers' Tires, getting new tires for her Alfa Romeo. A scientific journalist, on the other hand, is an even better back-story. I'm calling her E-Kitten. -- Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 14:57:19 +0200 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present From: michele.comit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Terry, I guess she is scientific journalist https://mobile.twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121895218462203904 mic Il giorno 06/ott/2011 13:25, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com ha scritto: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote: Hello, To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter. It appears that Twitter is giving problems to some users at the moment. This is an alternate link to follow 22passi on it: http://yfrog.com/user/22passi/profile Who is that cute brunette: http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg861/scaled.php?tn=0server=861filename=lyiv.jpgxsize=640ysize=640 :-) T -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:WIRED: Cold fusion rears its head as 'E-Cat' research promises to change the world
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/06/e-cat-cold-fusion Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:The Apple Has Fallen From the Tree
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:44 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: From Terry Steve Jobs passes: http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/us/obit-steve-jobs/index.html?iref=BN1hpt=hp_ t1 Wonder what the essence of Jobs will do next. http://patentlyapple.com/ is incredibly informative on this one. They are working on miniature projectors for iOS devices (all the patent examples seem to be of iPad-like devices functioning as projectors). They've taken out numerous multi-touch-solar-panel patents, so the iPad/iPhone/future iOS devices will eventually be able to charge themselves. They've taken out further numerous patents on near-field-communication, so you'll be able to check-in at an airport with your phone, it'll activate itself when you arrive at your destination, you'll be able to call in a cab, and check-in with the phone at your hotel's reception. They also have taken out patents for iGoggles, a kind of glasses setup, and.. well, it just goes on and on.
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
Rossi is giving a tour of the 1 MW eLion. Obviously it has not shipped yet. Maybe he has another in the US for the real October Demonstration? T
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala + Bologna Universities present
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: It seems the young lady is IRENE ZREICK the wife of the journalist RAYMOND ZREICK from FOCUS.it Her profile here http://www.123people.it/ext/frm?ti=personensuche%20telefonbuchsearch_term=irene%20zreicksearch_country=ITst=suche%20nach%20personentarget_url=http%3A%2F%2Fit.linkedin.com%2Fpub%2Firene-zreick%2F18%2F413%2F38bsection=weblinkwrt_id=367 From that link: irene zreick's Experience support teacher public primary school Wine and Spirits industry February 2008 – June 2010 (2 years 5 months) I was never so lucky to have such talented teachers in my schools. T
Re: [Vo]:WIRED: Cold fusion rears its head as 'E-Cat' research promises to change the world
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/06/e-cat-cold-fusion Mr. Krivit is quoted. Final paragraphs: There is some irony at work here: we apparently have a number of mainstream scientists backing an outlandish project which investors are putting money into, while the most vocal critic [Krivit, in this case] comes from the world of cold fusion. Who's right? The only way to find out will be to watch out for what Rossi does later this month. Repeating something Mr. Rothwell has recently tried to warn others about, the highly anticipated Oct. 6 Rossi test is not likely to be definitive, despite all the hype that publications like WIRED might try to imply. Most who have been closely following the Rossi saga since January have probably come to a realization that additional RD, which also translates to a massive amount of additional engineering, is needed. Granted, it makes good copy for publications like WIRED to imply that a gauntlet has now been thrown to the floor, but that does not necessarily make it so. Hopefully today's October 6 test will produce what we hope will turn out to be a good collection of reliable data that will give serious scientists and researchers what they need in order to ascertain what is happening inside Rossi's mysterious eCats, but probably not enough to satisfy a collection of self appointed critics who will continue to publish a collection of here-say and opinions of doubt meant to throw water on those findings. Meanwhile, the Widom-Larsen Theory continues to give me the appearance of escaping the same kind of scrutiny over at Krivit's NET web site. I continue find it a little odd that the WLT has a link on the front page Krivit's NET web site, whereas the Rossi Show saga has never managed to garner equivalent front page coverage. For a news organization that claims to objectively publish all the relevant news on alternative energy front, it sure seems to me as if there's a little bit of cherry picking going on here. But then, NET has always been Krivit's organization. Obviously Mr.Krivit can present anything he wants there, including in any manner and slant. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report
Hello group, While we're waiting for more information about the E-Cat test currently being performed in Bologna (it looks like we will have to wait at least until tomorrow for publicly available detailed information), Daniele Passerini just posted this previously unpublished report on an earlier E-Cat test performed on July 7th, with permission by professor Christos Stremmenos. Among other things, the included photos show fat E-Cat modules very similar to those seen recently: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html I recommend reading this blogpost. The report is in English language. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report
On 2011-10-06 16:11, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html According to Passerini (in one of his comments), there were Fat-Cat modules ready for use back in June, but they haven't been shown to Krivit during his visit in Bologna for a reason or another. I wonder why. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
The test was done in July, not June. And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of kWh. And that can't do a correct integral (the formula of integral are wrong). That's italy :( -Messaggio originale- From: Akira Shirakawa Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report On 2011-10-06 16:11, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html According to Passerini (in one of his comments), there were Fat-Cat modules ready for use back in June, but they haven't been shown to Krivit during his visit in Bologna for a reason or another. I wonder why. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report
This was my number one hypothesis why Rossi did not let Krivit to see working E-Cat, because he had already perfected the self-sustaining E-Cat back then. He announced self-sustaining model in June 20th. Therefore there was not point of showing for Krivit an obsolete model, therefore electricity only was used. —Jouni On Oct 6, 2011 6:01 PM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-10-06 16:11, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html According to Passerini (in one of his comments), there were Fat-Cat modules ready for use back in June, but they haven't been shown to Krivit during his visit in Bologna for a reason or another. I wonder why. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
That part was written by a Greek not an Italian, LOL. But that is probably a typo given that it is unusual to write power as kwh/h and that the original text was in greek. 2011/10/6 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The test was done in July, not June. And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of kWh. And that can't do a correct integral (the formula of integral are wrong). That's italy :( -Messaggio originale- From: Akira Shirakawa Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report On 2011-10-06 16:11, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://22passi.blogspot.com/**2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-**2011.htmlhttp://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html According to Passerini (in one of his comments), there were Fat-Cat modules ready for use back in June, but they haven't been shown to Krivit during his visit in Bologna for a reason or another. I wonder why. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
Stremmenson can speak italian quite good. The unit of measure “kWh/h” for energy was used only by Rossicompany. It’s not a typo. Was used many many times by Rossi and you can see that it’s typed everywhere, from photos to text inside the report. From: Daniel Rocha Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:32 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report That part was written by a Greek not an Italian, LOL. But that is probably a typo given that it is unusual to write power as kwh/h and that the original text was in greek. 2011/10/6 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The test was done in July, not June. And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of kWh. And that can't do a correct integral (the formula of integral are wrong). That's italy :( -Messaggio originale- From: Akira Shirakawa Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report On 2011-10-06 16:11, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html According to Passerini (in one of his comments), there were Fat-Cat modules ready for use back in June, but they haven't been shown to Krivit during his visit in Bologna for a reason or another. I wonder why. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
Ah, Stremmenson was an professor from University of Bologna, Italy. From: Daniel Rocha Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:32 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report That part was written by a Greek not an Italian, LOL. But that is probably a typo given that it is unusual to write power as kwh/h and that the original text was in greek. 2011/10/6 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The test was done in July, not June. And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of kWh. And that can't do a correct integral (the formula of integral are wrong). That's italy :( -Messaggio originale- From: Akira Shirakawa Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report On 2011-10-06 16:11, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html According to Passerini (in one of his comments), there were Fat-Cat modules ready for use back in June, but they haven't been shown to Krivit during his visit in Bologna for a reason or another. I wonder why. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Oct 6 Test
I've been reading Passerini's tweets, and it looks like this eCat has been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now. https://twitter.com/#!/22passi Craig
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
Nice one, will start following 22passi On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.comwrote: I've been reading Passerini's tweets, and it looks like this eCat has been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now. https://twitter.com/#!/22passi Craig
RE: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report
Is there a long report for July 7th? I've noticed that the times on the graph do not match Bianchini's report at all. It appears that the graph may have been clipped during its stability phase. If it had leveled for a long period (during phase change) and then rose again, that would be interesting. What the graph currently shows contraindicates total water evaporation. This would make it a 1.22 kW E-Cat, not a 10.6 kW E-Cat. Again, this may just be a bad graph. Of course, none of this matters after today. The phase change and overflow water are taken out of the picture, right? We can only hope and pray that there is more power observed on the secondary than is supplied to the primary during peak energy application. If gains are only observed during heat after death, we will be arguing the results ad infinitum. Watching Intently, R.L.
RE: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report
I think that there has not been any serious arguments presented on heat after death discussion. Frankly it was just silly episode in discussion, where some who violently are opposing Rossi are just inventing ad hoc explantions when we are presenting them real data that is in direct contradiction to their beliefs and prejudices. But if we are judging tweets correctly E-Cat has now run four hours in heat after death mode. —Jouni On Oct 6, 2011 7:39 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: Is there a long report for July 7th? I've noticed that the times on the graph do not match Bianchini's report at all. It appears that the graph may have been clipped during its stability phase. If it had leveled for a long period (during phase change) and then rose again, that would be interesting. What the graph currently shows contraindicates total water evaporation. This would make it a 1.22 kW E-Cat, not a 10.6 kW E-Cat. Again, this may just be a bad graph. Of course, none of this matters after today. The phase change and overflow water are taken out of the picture, right? We can only hope and pray that there is more power observed on the secondary than is supplied to the primary during peak energy application. If gains are only observed during heat after death, we will be arguing the results ad infinitum. Watching Intently, R.L.
Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
At 08:10 AM 10/6/2011, Mattia Rizzi wrote: And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of kWh. per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilowatt_hour, that's most likely kWh/Heat -- but doesn't explain the Kw instead of kW
Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
http://www.google.com/search?num=100hl=ensafe=offbiw=1152bih=746q=%22kwh%2Fh%22oq=%22kwh%2Fh%22aq=faqi=g-v2aql=gs_sm=egs_upl=2926l4028l0l4521l2l2l0l0l0l0l270l443l0.1.1l2l0 2011/10/6 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com Stremmenson can speak italian quite good. The unit of measure “kWh/h” for energy was used only by Rossicompany. It’s not a typo. Was used many many times by Rossi and you can see that it’s typed everywhere, from photos to text inside the report. *From:* Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com *Sent:* Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:32 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report That part was written by a Greek not an Italian, LOL. But that is probably a typo given that it is unusual to write power as kwh/h and that the original text was in greek. 2011/10/6 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The test was done in July, not June. And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of kWh. And that can't do a correct integral (the formula of integral are wrong). That's italy :( -Messaggio originale- From: Akira Shirakawa Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report On 2011-10-06 16:11, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://22passi.blogspot.com/**2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-**2011.htmlhttp://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html According to Passerini (in one of his comments), there were Fat-Cat modules ready for use back in June, but they haven't been shown to Krivit during his visit in Bologna for a reason or another. I wonder why. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: We can only hope and pray that there is more power observed on the secondary than is supplied to the primary during peak energy application. If gains are only observed during heat after death, we will be arguing the results ad infinitum. Why do you say that?!? It is much easier to be sure the heat is real when there is no input power. It is much more definitive, not less. What you say makes no sense to me. Please explain. - Jed
[Vo]:22passi's tweets translated by Google
http://twitter.com/#%21/22passi[You have to paste the text into the Google translate box. It will not autotranslate the page from the URL.] 22passi Daniel Passerini And here she is! Krivit of the infamous coffee machine! :)) Yfrog.com/nt3upzj 1 hour ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Radio interview with Cape Town Christos Stremmenos yfrog.com/nwg21nvj http://yfrog.com/nwg21nvj 1 hour ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Mats Lewan and Raymond Zreick are exchanging impressions about the current phase of self-reliance 2 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini I can tweet from your iPhone ... I have been problems to connect the laptop with the key: poor signal: ( 3 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Prof. Raymond Zreick interview. Sergio Focardi yfrog.com/h0o6vfpj http://yfrog.com/h0o6vfpj 3 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini yfrog.com/h86vypyrj http://yfrog.com/h86vypyrj 3 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini And there I was face to face with a 1 MW yfrog.com/h826ladj http://yfrog.com/h826ladj 3 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Reactor self-sustaining! 4 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Confindustria is also a representation of Piacenza. 4 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini It also came Radio24: the great Maurizio Melis! :) 4 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini In a little 'I make a nice gift! :) 5 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Mats Lewan (Ny Teknik), Irene and Raymond Zreick Zreick (Focus) yfrog.com http://yfrog.com / nxlyivj 6 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Enrico Billi, Raymond Zreik (Focus), Andrea Rossi yfrog.com/kgt96quj http://yfrog.com/kgt96quj 6 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini yfrog.com/ny737ccj http://yfrog.com/ny737ccj 8 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Ready to start! 8 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Confirmed the presence of the University of Bologna and Uppsala tomorrow to test. 18 hours ago 22passi Daniel Passerini Evva! Cmq go 'is the story I will tell the grandchildren one day before the fireplace ... but maybe I write a book first! ;) Yfrog.com/oeh88j Oct 5 22passi Daniel Passerini And we feel a bit 'to make Tweet Tweet! Do you read me? :) Oct 3
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
At 09:19 AM 10/6/2011, Craig Haynie wrote: I've been reading Passerini's tweets, and it looks like this eCat has been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now. https://twitter.com/#!/22passi I make it not quite an HOUR : 22passi Daniele Passerini the E-Cat goes on in autosustaining 51 minutes ago
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
22passi http://twitter.com/#!/22passi Daniele Passerini The E-Cat module keeps working in self-sustained mode 45 minutes ago http://twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121983529868468224 On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 09:19 AM 10/6/2011, Craig Haynie wrote: I've been reading Passerini's tweets, and it looks like this eCat has been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now. https://twitter.com/#!/22passi I make it not quite an HOUR : 22passi http://twitter.com/#!/22passi Daniele Passerini the E-Cat goes on in autosustaining 51 minutes ago http://twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121981413682724864
[Vo]:kWh/h notation
As I mentioned here some weeks ago several Italian researchers use this kWh/h notation. It means kilowatts. I think kilowatt hours of heat would be something with a dot operator, not a slash. This would upset my sixth-grade math teacher. There are subtle differences between US and European notation. As everyone knows they sometimes use a comma rather than a period to indicate the decimal point. Generally speaking Japanese notation is similar to U.S. notation for everyone except Arata. He invents his own notation, symbols and vocabulary. He and a few others I have seen often put the units in square brackets: 16 [kW] This looks strange to me. An editor wanted to do this with a paper that I wrote in Japanese. He insisted that is the normal way to do things for nonscientific publications in Japanese. I pointed him to several nonspecialists nonscientific articles from newspapers and magazines with ordinary notation; 16 kW. Japanese people and Japanese word processors have difficulty with spaces. This is because Japanese text is run-on, with no spaces between words. So is Korean and Chinese. so many people from these countries have difficulty remembering where to put spaces in English and other European languages. They may have difficulty remembering whether to put the space before a comma or after it. So they often write 16kW with no spaces, especially in newspaper articles. By the way, here are the official rules for units and notation: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/ I tell everyone they should follow these rules but I myself do not follow them. (A typical Dad attitude: Do as I say not as I do.) NIST says you should separate thousands with a half space, but I use a comma; 3,000 not 3 000. I am not going go looking for a non-breaking half-space every time I want to write a number. Besides, most people are not familiar with that format. I follow most of the other rules. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: I make it not quite an HOUR : 22passi http://twitter.com/#!/22passi Daniele Passerini the E-Cat goes on in autosustaining 51 minutes ago http://twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121981413682724864 Did you auto-translate that somewhere? The Google version says 4 hours, as does the original Italian: 22passi Daniel Passerini Reactor self-sustaining! 4 hours ago Original Italian, which as now says 5 hours: 22passi Daniele Passerini Reattore in autosostentamento!! 5 hours ago We do not know whether it is still self-sustaining at this moment. It might have stopped some time ago but Daniel may not have tweeted that fact yet. It may need to be bumped a little to keep it self-sustaining. Previous models had to be bumped every 30 min. or so. Things appear to be going according to plan. The plan was to make it self-sustain throughout most of the test. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
PLEASE read the report He siad kilowatt-hour per hour. In images there are Kwh/h. And talk about ENERGY. kWh/h is NOT ENERGY. Here in ITALY, WE USE kWh for ENERGY and kW for POWER. kWh/h IS NOT AN INTERNATIONAL STANDARD (IS) UNIT OF MEASURE. By semplification kWh/h equal to kW, which is a measure of POWER. The report is totally wrong about this. -Messaggio originale- From: Alan J Fletcher Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 6:53 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report At 08:10 AM 10/6/2011, Mattia Rizzi wrote: And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of kWh. per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilowatt_hour, that's most likely kWh/Heat -- but doesn't explain the Kw instead of kW
Re: [Vo]:kWh/h notation
Rossi has usually used kWh/h as kilowatts per hour. That is not energy unit, but power unit. kWh is an energy unit and when it is divided by time unit, we get power. However world would be much simpler place to live if they just had used kilojoules per second to indicate power. —Jouni On Oct 6, 2011 8:20 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: As I mentioned here some weeks ago several Italian researchers use this kWh/h notation. It means kilowatts. I think kilowatt hours of heat would be something with a dot operator, not a slash. This would upset my sixth-grade math teacher. There are subtle differences between US and European notation. As everyone knows they sometimes use a comma rather than a period to indicate the decimal point. Generally speaking Japanese notation is similar to U.S. notation for everyone except Arata. He invents his own notation, symbols and vocabulary. He and a few others I have seen often put the units in square brackets: 16 [kW] This looks strange to me. An editor wanted to do this with a paper that I wrote in Japanese. He insisted that is the normal way to do things for nonscientific publications in Japanese. I pointed him to several nonspecialists nonscientific articles from newspapers and magazines with ordinary notation; 16 kW. Japanese people and Japanese word processors have difficulty with spaces. This is because Japanese text is run-on, with no spaces between words. So is Korean and Chinese. so many people from these countries have difficulty remembering where to put spaces in English and other European languages. They may have difficulty remembering whether to put the space before a comma or after it. So they often write 16kW with no spaces, especially in newspaper articles. By the way, here are the official rules for units and notation: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/ I tell everyone they should follow these rules but I myself do not follow them. (A typical Dad attitude: Do as I say not as I do.) NIST says you should separate thousands with a half space, but I use a comma; 3,000 not 3 000. I am not going go looking for a non-breaking half-space every time I want to write a number. Besides, most people are not familiar with that format. I follow most of the other rules. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
The precise calculation of the output ***thermal energy in Kwh per hour***, which the reactor produces through the exothermal nuclear reaction of NICKEL-HYDROGEN. Look at image: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-k4ysf4H8ntA/To2cA6P_50I/Fjs/ERVWCfAKflk/s1600/BOLOGNA+TEST+7-7-11tre.png 15 kg/h (water) Χ 627,5 wh (needed energy for the evaporation of 1 kg of water) = 9412 wh/h = 9,412 ***Kwh/h ENERGY produced*** in a hour during the phase shift (evaporation). http://22passi.blogspot.com/ -Messaggio originale- From: Mattia Rizzi Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 7:29 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: July 7th E-Cat test report PLEASE read the report He siad kilowatt-hour per hour. In images there are Kwh/h. And talk about ENERGY. kWh/h is NOT ENERGY. Here in ITALY, WE USE kWh for ENERGY and kW for POWER. kWh/h IS NOT AN INTERNATIONAL STANDARD (IS) UNIT OF MEASURE. By semplification kWh/h equal to kW, which is a measure of POWER. The report is totally wrong about this. -Messaggio originale- From: Alan J Fletcher Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 6:53 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report At 08:10 AM 10/6/2011, Mattia Rizzi wrote: And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of kWh. per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilowatt_hour, that's most likely kWh/Heat -- but doesn't explain the Kw instead of kW
Re: [Vo]:22passi's tweets translated by Google
[You have to paste the text into the Google translate box. It will not autotranslate the page from the URL.] If you use the Google Chrome Browser, you can right-click on the page for a translation. Craig
Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
Mattia Rizzi wrote: Here in ITALY, WE USE kWh for ENERGY and kW for POWER. Not all of you. I know several Italians who use kWh/h, as I mentioned. Not just Rossi. kWh/h IS NOT AN INTERNATIONAL STANDARD (IS) UNIT OF MEASURE. By semplification kWh/h equal to kW, which is a measure of POWER. The report is totally wrong about this. A notation that many professional people actually use cannot be called totally wrong. A little odd, perhaps. Nonstandard. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 10:05 -0700, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 09:19 AM 10/6/2011, Craig Haynie wrote: I've been reading Passerini's tweets, and it looks like this eCat has been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now. https://twitter.com/#!/22passi I make it not quite an HOUR : Keep going back in the list. --- 22passi Daniel Passerini Reactor self-sustaining! 5 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply --- Craig
RE: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report
I think that you're misunderstanding me. If-And-Only-If the power at the secondary is LESS than the peak power input to the primary, there will be arguments about the heat after death or self-sustaining operation. If the most energy that you put into the E-Cat is 1 kW, and 2 kW is observed at the output, then the H.A.D. operation is totally unnecessary, but may impress some people. However, if you put 1 kW into the input for two hours, seeing a slow build-to-parity at the secondary (where the secondary only achieves 1 kW), then how long the heat takes to decay when power is removed will be a bone of contention. I think H.A.D. could serve as a distraction. What we HAVE TO SEE is more kW at the secondary than is ever applied to the primary. Was that cogent? This was the prediction I'd supplied yesterday - that power gains would be reliant on the no input mode of operation, less than the peak power applied at the primary. And this would leave people arguing over residual, or stored, heat vs. a maintained reaction. I truly hope that they are observing 3kW out, and less than 10 Amps peak power consumption. Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 12:58:55 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: We can only hope and pray that there is more power observed on the secondary than is supplied to the primary during peak energy application. If gains are only observed during heat after death, we will be arguing the results ad infinitum. Why do you say that?!? It is much easier to be sure the heat is real when there is no input power. It is much more definitive, not less. What you say makes no sense to me. Please explain. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
At 10:28 AM 10/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: I make it not quite an HOUR : 22passi Daniele Passerini the E-Cat goes on in autosustaining 51 minutes ago Did you auto-translate that somewhere? The Google version says 4 hours, as does the original Italian: 22passi Daniel Passerini Reactor self-sustaining! 4 hours ago Original Italian, which as now says 5 hours: 22passi Daniele Passerini Reattore in autosostentamento!! 5 hours ago We do not know whether it is still self-sustaining at this moment. It might have stopped some time ago but Daniel may not have tweeted that fact yet. It may need to be bumped a little to keep it self-sustaining. Previous models had to be bumped every 30 min. or so. Things appear to be going according to plan. The plan was to make it self-sustain throughout most of the test. - Jed From Chrome : (But I DID turn on auto-translate for 22passi's website : maybe it's a global setting. I'll unset it.) http://twitter.com/#!/22passi --- but I'm getting new posts in English, not Italian ? 22passi Daniele Passerini Everything is ready to inerview the special guest 1 minute ago Favorite Retweet Reply That JUST came up 22passi Daniele Passerini The E-Cat module keeps working in self-sustained mode 1 hour ago
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
22passi Daniel Passerini At 19:00, after 4 hours in continuous self-sustaining mode, the reaction has been interrupted as planned... If confirmed, this should remove all doubt. Woot... Craig
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
22passi Daniele Passerini At 19:00, after 4 hours in continuous self-sustaining mode, the reaction has been interrupted as planned... 3 minutes ago Favorite Gee .. I thought they were going for 12+ hours. 22passi Daniele Passerini ...the end of the operations is planned for 00:00. 3 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply 22passi Daniele Passerini ...this will allow some time for the E-Cat module to cool down. Afterwards, it will be disassembled and inspected... 4 minutes ago
Re: [Vo]:kWh/h notation
Jouni Valkonen wrote: However world would be much simpler place to live if they just had used kilojoules per second to indicate power. That would be the same kind of notation as kWh/h; i.e., power energy expressed as energy over time. It would be much simpler if they would would use watts, or kilowatts. Joules are a measure of energy. Power is measured in watts. Anyway, people will do what they do. We should try to understand what they mean, and we should not quibble about the details. Mind you, when I edit papers, my job is to quibble, and I do. I sometimes impose U.S. units and notation on European papers. One thing I never do is convert British spelling to American; i.e. programme = program; defence = defense. Doing that upsets the poor dears to no end. Chris Tinsley once said to me you Americans use such quaint words such as gasoline. I told him that British English sounds quaint to us. In point of fact, most American English is older than British forms. We are the quaint ones. When people immigrate to areas with low population and few interactions, older forms are preserved. From the 17th to 19th centuries English speakers in North America were isolated and cut off from other speakers, compared to those back in England. So the pace of change in American English was slower than in England. Immigrant groups of people speaking Japanese and Chinese have preserved 19th-century versions of these languages more than the larger groups of speakers in those countries. The other major difference between American and British English is that American English in the 18th century among upper-class people such as George Washington tended to be more formal than typical British English. Visitors from England noted this. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
Alan J Fletcher wrote: From Chrome : (But I DID turn on auto-translate for 22passi's website : maybe it's a global setting. I'll unset it.) http://twitter.com/#!/22passi http://twitter.com/#%21/22passi --- but I'm getting new posts in English, not Italian ? I believe he is now posting in English. - Jed
[Vo]:Stop fretting about stored heat!
Robert Leguillon wrote: I think that you're misunderstanding me. If-And-Only-If the power at the secondary is LESS than the peak power input to the primary, there will be arguments about the heat after death or self-sustaining operation. In most of these test runs the output power from the reactor has been far greater than input power. It varies from 6 times great to hundreds of times greater. In only a few instances has it been more or less equal to output. I assume in these instances the device was not working. Obviously there will be some losses in the heat transfer to the secondary cooling water loop. That should be negligible compared to the difference between input and output. If the most energy that you put into the E-Cat is 1 kW, and 2 kW is observed at the output, then the H.A.D. operation is totally unnecessary, but may impress some people. However, if you put 1 kW into the input for two hours, seeing a slow build-to-parity at the secondary (where the secondary only achieves 1 kW), then how long the heat takes to decay when power is removed will be a bone of contention. It will not be a bone of contention to people who can do arithmetic. During the time the device is heating up, the balance of input and output is nearly even. Very little heat is stored in the system. It is easy to determine that the total heat release during heat after death far exceeds any endothermic storage during the buildup. As I mentioned yesterday, a calorimeter can measure an endothermic reaction as easily and as accurately as an exothermic reaction. In your hypothetical example with 2 kW going into the system for two hours, you will definitely see 1.98 kW emerge from the system during the entire two hours. Only a little will be left over. Your hypothetical situation would only be a problem if the temperature of the secondary loop did not rise during the entire two-hour event, indicating that all of the heat was magically stored. That's ridiculous. There is not the slightest chance that a device of this nature is storing heat to any significant extent. Furthermore, when the eCat works, it always turns on in about 10 minutes, not two hours. during most of those two hours it would be producing far more output heat than input power. To be little more specific, someone just wrote to me that the inside of the eCat has a volume of 30 L and the water in it might be superheated. I wrote back: I do not think the water could be any hotter than 200°C. I doubt it is pressurized to be that hot. Anyway, assuming it is 200°C, that would be a 180°C rise in temperature. With 30 L of water that comes to 5,400,000 cal, which is 22.6 MJ, or 6.3 kWh. I believe the output is around 15 kW, so this much stored heat would be released from the device in ~25 min. The temperature would fall rapidly during that time and everyone would see that it is cooling down. The device has reportedly been in heat after death mode for about five hours according to Daniel's latest tweet, so obviously this cannot be stored heat. You need to stop fretting about stored heat. It cannot explain any of the significant cold fusion reactions that have been reported. It is orders of magnitude too small for that. It is a non-issue. We can always tell how much heat is stored and we always know that it cannot explain the reaction. Stored heat and recombination are the bugbears of pathological skeptics who do not understand elementary physics. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Stop fretting about stored heat!
Also, obviously, after the reaction is turned off all the stored heat comes out as the reactor cools down. You can measure it easily. The numbers are right there. There is no mystery to this. You can do the same thing during a calibration with a joule heater. I advised them not to turn off the calorimetry after the cold fusion reaction is quenched. I suggested they leave the calorimetry running until the cell reaches room temperature and inlet equals the outlet temperature. That should take about 20 min. I hope they do this. If they do, you will see all stored energy released during this phase, and you can add it into the total energy balance. You will see that total input energy is far exceeded by total output. - Jed
[Vo]:Handy online energy converter
This one has more units than others I have seen, and it is easier to use: http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/units-converter/energy/c/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Stop fretting about stored heat!
At 11:22 AM 10/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: I advised them not to turn off the calorimetry after the cold fusion reaction is quenched. I suggested they leave the calorimetry running until the cell reaches room temperature and inlet equals the outlet temperature. That should take about 20 min. I hope they do this. If they do, you will see all stored energy released during this phase, and you can add it into the total energy balance. You will see that total input energy is far exceeded by total output. Isn't the primary steam circuit a closed loop? Surely the flow in that will stop very quickly, so nothing will get to the heat exchanger and the secondary circuit. Do they have instrumentation in the primary as well as the secondary? The only real measurement they can make is the dump of the water from the eCat.
Re: [Vo]:Handy online energy converter
At 11:31 AM 10/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: This one has more units than others I have seen, and it is easier to use: http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/units-converter/energy/c/ - Jed That's no good ... it doesn't convert kWh to Hartrees !!! Convert kilowatt-hour to Hartrees ( kWh to Ha ) http://www.conversion-website.com/energy/kilowatt-hour_to_Hartree.html
Re: [Vo]:Handy online energy converter
At 11:38 AM 10/6/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: That's no good ... it doesn't convert kWh to Hartrees !!! May bad ... it was scrolled off the bottom of the list!
Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report
I wouldn't evn take more output heat as input heat as the sine qua non. In fact there's nothing going on in the e-cat that can proove cold fusion- its not about a cold fusion proof, there just isn't one of those contemplated. If you want CF proof maybe look at the Navy's data. - Original Message - From: Robert Leguillon To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 1:37 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report I think that you're misunderstanding me. If-And-Only-If the power at the secondary is LESS than the peak power input to the primary, there will be arguments about the heat after death or self-sustaining operation. If the most energy that you put into the E-Cat is 1 kW, and 2 kW is observed at the output, then the H.A.D. operation is totally unnecessary, but may impress some people. However, if you put 1 kW into the input for two hours, seeing a slow build-to-parity at the secondary (where the secondary only achieves 1 kW), then how long the heat takes to decay when power is removed will be a bone of contention. I think H.A.D. could serve as a distraction. What we HAVE TO SEE is more kW at the secondary than is ever applied to the primary. Was that cogent? This was the prediction I'd supplied yesterday - that power gains would be reliant on the no input mode of operation, less than the peak power applied at the primary. And this would leave people arguing over residual, or stored, heat vs. a maintained reaction. I truly hope that they are observing 3kW out, and less than 10 Amps peak power consumption. -- Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 12:58:55 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:July 7th E-Cat test report From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: We can only hope and pray that there is more power observed on the secondary than is supplied to the primary during peak energy application. If gains are only observed during heat after death, we will be arguing the results ad infinitum. Why do you say that?!? It is much easier to be sure the heat is real when there is no input power. It is much more definitive, not less. What you say makes no sense to me. Please explain. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Stop fretting about stored heat!
I wrote: As I mentioned yesterday, a calorimeter can measure an endothermic reaction as easily and as accurately as an exothermic reaction. In your hypothetical example with 2 kW going into the system for two hours, you will definitely see 1.98 kW emerge from the system during the entire two hours. On average, I mean. When you first start heating there is a large gap between input and output. You can observe this when you heat a large, covered pot of water on the stove. You can hold your hand 10 cm above the pot comfortably for a while. After the water comes to boil you cannot do this. . . . you will see all stored energy released during this phase, and you can add it into the total energy balance. You will see that total input energy is far exceeded by total output. Please note I mean the total energy balance for the entire run. Not the power balance at any given moment. You need to concentrate on the _energy balance_. During a test with a joule heater and a good calorimeter the energy balance is about 0.9 units of energy per 1 unit of energy produced. (Produced means either input, or generated internally in a chemical or nuclear reaction.) With a superb calorimeter the recovery rate rises to 0.95 or 0.98. I expect this is a lousy calorimeter because of the heat transfer to the secondary loop, and I expect it will recover ~0.7 or ~0.8 of the heat produced by the cell. Since the thing was running for hours with no input, and the heat balance includes all of the energy originally input to heat up the water (which must come out after the reaction is quenched) obviously the output heat will far exceed input energy. Leguillon seems to have notion that heat originally stored as the water is warmed up somehow vanishes and is never accounted for. That is not how a calorimeter works. - Jed
[Vo]:other tweets
See the tweets of the other journalist from Italy. http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick It seems the FatCat has worked at ~ 3.5 kW. Till we will not discover something tricky and if this experiment can be repeated with many generators, it seems this day was a Sweet Thursday for the Rossi believers. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
Where did you find that value? 2011/10/6 Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com See the tweets of the other journalist from Italy. http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick It seems the FatCat has worked at ~ 3.5 kW. Till we will not discover something tricky and if this experiment can be repeated with many generators, it seems this day was a Sweet Thursday for the Rossi believers. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Handy online energy converter
Alan J Fletcher wrote: This one has more units than others I have seen, and it is easier to use: http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/units-converter/energy/c/ - Jed That's no good ... it doesn't convert kWh to Hartrees !!! Yes, it does. 1 kWh = 8.257357615e+23 Hartree energy and 8.257357615e+23 Rydberg constant That's on the bottom of the scale, below therm (EC) and therm (US). - Jed
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
3.5kW is lower value than what I estimated, therefore it must be false. . . But anyway, perhaps we can take it as absolute minimum. If then E-Cat produced about 64 kJ excess heat. That would translate into 3kg ethanol need to fake the results. Therefore, test is not conclusive!! However, i still think that Raymond's value for output power is too low and may present e.g. power level at 110°C. So perhaps demonstration was sufficient, if they will examine the fat cat carefully. —Jouni On Oct 6, 2011 9:54 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: See the tweets of the other journalist from Italy. http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick It seems the FatCat has worked at ~ 3.5 kW. Till we will not discover something tricky and if this experiment can be repeated with many generators, it seems this day was a Sweet Thursday for the Rossi believers. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:kWh/h notation
Am 06.10.2011 19:19, schrieb Jed Rothwell: everyone except Arata. He invents his own notation, symbols and vocabulary. He and a few others I have seen often put the units in square brackets: 16 [kW] This looks strange to me. An editor wanted to do this with a paper that I wrote in Japanese. He insisted that is the normal way to do things for nonscientific publications in Japanese. I pointed him to several nonspecialists nonscientific articles from newspapers and magazines with ordinary notation; 16 kW. This notation was very common here in germany. I learned this in school. (I am 58 now). It was then deprecated, when the SI Units came up and other units where forbidden by law. Then we had to use dimensioned calculations. The units had to be calculated, not defined in square brackets. Old Notation: U[V]/I[A] = R[O](O means Omega dont find the symbol on my keyboard) This is forbidden now. (It is still used in technical empirical formulas where the units cant be calculated) New Notation: U*V/(I*A) = R*O. Possibly some of these old guys have studied in germany or had german professors
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of 5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour According to the husband of the cute brunette. :-) T
Re: [Vo]:kWh/h notation
Hi, On 6-10-2011 19:47, Jed Rothwell wrote: Chris Tinsley once said to me you Americans use such quaint words such as gasoline. I told him that British English sounds quaint to us. In point of fact, most American English is older than British forms. We are the quaint ones. When people immigrate to areas with low population and few interactions, older forms are preserved. From the 17th to 19th centuries English speakers in North America were isolated and cut off from other speakers, compared to those back in England. So the pace of change in American English was slower than in England. Immigrant groups of people speaking Japanese and Chinese have preserved 19th-century versions of these languages more than the larger groups of speakers in those countries. Indeed a similar thing occurs when I hear South-Africans speak their language, as it is the quaint version of the Dutch language so it's quite easy for me to understand them and likewise they are generally able to understand me when I speak Dutch. Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
Well, that means 600,000/3600*5*1W = 833W. That's the old electric heater hypothesis. Odd coincidence, although there was no input electricity. 2011/10/6 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of 5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour According to the husband of the cute brunette. :-) T
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 15:11 -0400, Terry Blanton wrote: between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of 5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour According to the husband of the cute brunette. :-) This is what I get. 0.6 cubic meters / hour = 600 liters / hour = 10 liters / minute = 167 ml /sec, with a 5 deg temp diff. If all these numbers are correct then 5 * 167 ml /s = 835 cal /s = 3.5kw for this demo. That's a lot of heat for a unit running with no power. That's in the range of what he's been getting with these latter units. Craig
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
3000 kcal per hour = 3.49 kW True? I am very tired after this day of info-hunting Peter On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of 5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour According to the husband of the cute brunette. :-) T -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
Oh, right. That's calories!
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of 5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour Back of the envelope, that's 50.3 Mjoules.
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
You must not forget the losses due the conversion between the heat exchangers. If it was 70%, that means around 5KW for the core. 2011/10/6 Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com 3000 kcal per hour = 3.49 kW True? I am very tired after this day of info-hunting Peter On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of 5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour According to the husband of the cute brunette. :-) T -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of 5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour Back of the envelope, that's 50.3 Mjoules. or 13.97 Kwh in 4 hrs = 3.49 kW T
Re: [Vo]:Stop fretting about stored heat!
Alan J Fletcher wrote: Isn't the primary steam circuit a closed loop? Surely the flow in that will stop very quickly, so nothing will get to the heat exchanger and the secondary circuit. I do not understand what you mean by this. Heat will continue to transfer from the primary to the secondary until both cool down to ambient temperature. The primary circuit will have steam for a while, then hot water, then finally water at room temperature. Heat transfer does not stop just because the steam condenses. That seems to be what you are suggesting, but perhaps I misunderstand. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Stop fretting about stored heat!
Leguillon seems to have notion that heat originally stored as the water is warmed up somehow vanishes and is never accounted for. That is not how a calorimeter works. Rothwell seems to like putting words into my mouth. If the ENTIRE energy balance is looked at, it will obviously balance. ALL of the warm-up time (from initial power-application to dry steam) needs to be in the equation just as much as cool down. I can't overstate this: Noone will be fretting about stored heat UNLESS the output power observed at the secondary never surpasses the peak input. I haven't seen any results yet. A lot of emphasis is being placed on the H.A.D., and that concerns me. H.A.D. is unnecessary and will only muddy the water if it is merely a slow temperature decay that is LESS THAN peak input. I really hope for definitive results. I hope that this is a conclusive test. It has a better opportunity than all previous tests, because there is no opportunity for water overflow. These are extraordinary claims, and dismissing any criticism out of blind faith is ridiculous. It needs to be evaluated critically. If there is not a positive energy yield before the E-Cat is turned off, then the Heat-After-Death will necessarily be in question, because there is no evidence of Heat-Before-Death.
Re: [Vo]:Stop fretting about stored heat!
Robert Leguillon wrote: Rothwell seems to like putting words into my mouth. If the ENTIRE energy balance is looked at, it will obviously balance. ALL of the warm-up time (from initial power-application to dry steam) needs to be in the equation just as much as cool down. Well of course. That's how calorimetry works. In all cases reported so far, the ENTIRE energy balance has far exceeded input energy. That has been true even when they cut off the measurements and did not bother to measure the cool-down. (They should not have done that, but doing that only reduces the measurement of total output. It hurts their case.) What are you disputing? It would seem you do not want to take yes for an answer. Noone will be fretting about stored heat UNLESS the output power observed at the secondary never surpasses the peak input. It always has in the past. Why do you think it will not now? and what difference does the peak input power make if it only lasts a short time? the thing went for four hours with no input power. Unless input power was far above output during the warm-up period, and unless most of that energy vanished into nowhere without heating the water, it is unimportant. I haven't seen any results yet. A lot of emphasis is being placed on the H.A.D., and that concerns me. H.A.D. is unnecessary and will only muddy the water if it is merely a slow temperature decay that is LESS THAN peak input. No it does not muddy the water. It makes calorimetry much simpler. I still do not begin to understand why you think it muddies the water or confuses the issue. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:other tweets
Am 06.10.2011 21:25, schrieb Daniel Rocha: You must not forget the losses due the conversion between the heat exchangers. If it was 70%, that means around 5KW for the core. If the heat exchanger is well isolated, it will not loose energy. It will reduce the temperature, because it has a finite thermal resistance 0 . But the water mass flow on the secondary side will be higher. This gives the same energy, if there are no isolation losses. Anyway, they have to accept this. Many industrial machines use heat exchangers and are working. kind regards, Peter
[Vo]:Raymond Zreick tweets translated by Google [copy 2]
I do not think this came through. Others have reported this. I ran it though Google to save readers here the trouble. From: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick http://twitter.com/#%21/raymond_zreick Note that the fifth message down, from 46 minutes ago, says the Delta T was 5°C for 0.6 cubic meters of water per hour. That 600 L/h, 10 L/min, 1666 ml/s. It indicates 3.4 kW if I have done my arithmetic right. Translated by Google: raymond raymond_zreick zreick There we can say more about the black box when we see it we'll tell you more about the black box, we'll see it When 40 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick we'll be Able to take pictures of all the components SMALL BUT the black box with the So Called Secret Ingredient 41 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick When The device will be cooler (the steam temerature to Be Measured's been over 110 ° C), it will be OPENED for us! 42 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick Among the guests there are Levi, Stremmenos and Ferrari (alma mater of bologna), Focardi Physicists and other companies from different 45 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick Between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the average temperature of the delta has-been 5 ° C (trace input / output) for 0.6 cubic meters per hour 46 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick Worked on self-and cat-substained fashions from 14:58 UNTIL 19. 19 started at the cooling down 49 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick In short we can photograph all the components: we can not, however, open the black box that contains SMALL so-called secret ingredient 59 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick when the car is reasonably cold (steam was always kept above 110 ° C), the machine will be unmounted before us ! 1 hour ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick among these are: Levi, Stremmenos and Ferrari (alma mater of bologna), and a series of physical Focardi sent by their respective companies 1 hour ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick from 15 to 19 the difference in average temperature was 5 ° C (water inlet and outlet water), for 0.6 cubic meters / hour 1 hour ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick E-Cat has been put into self-sustaining (disconnected from the power) at 14:58. At 19:00 it began shutting down the reactor 1 hour ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick We are in Bologna: Rossi, however, I was recalled the commitment we made with him for being here. That is not to publish anything until tomorrow. 8 hours ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick x leaving Bologna tomorrow testing of e-cat by Andrea Rossi Oct 5 Gian Mattia igiamma Bazzoli by raymond_zreick Mini nuclear accident in Belgium (2 / 2): an inspector of the international agency was still slightly contaminated bit.ly/mZ3Sr2 http://bit.ly/mZ3Sr2 Oct 5 Gian Mattia igiamma Bazzoli by raymond_zreick Mini nuclear accident in Belgium (1 / 2) in a nuclear waste reprocessing plant was dropped a bottle of plutonium. Oct 5 Stay in touch with raymond zreick
[Vo]:Raymond Zreick tweets translated by Google
From: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick Note that the fifth message down, from 46 minutes ago, says the Delta T was 5°C for 0.6 cubic meters of water per hour. That 600 L/h, 10 L/min, 1666 ml/s. It indicates 3.4 kW if I have done my arithmetic right. Translated by Google: raymond raymond_zreick zreick There we can say more about the black box when we see it we'll tell you more about the black box, we'll see it When 40 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick we'll be Able to take pictures of all the components SMALL BUT the black box with the So Called Secret Ingredient 41 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick When The device will be cooler (the steam temerature to Be Measured's been over 110 ° C), it will be OPENED for us! 42 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick Among the guests there are Levi, Stremmenos and Ferrari (alma mater of bologna), Focardi Physicists and other companies from different 45 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick Between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the average temperature of the delta has-been 5 ° C (trace input / output) for 0.6 cubic meters per hour 46 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick Worked on self-and cat-substained fashions from 14:58 UNTIL 19. 19 started at the cooling down 49 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick In short we can photograph all the components: we can not, however, open the black box that contains SMALL so-called secret ingredient 59 minutes ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick when the car is reasonably cold (steam was always kept above 110 ° C), the machine will be unmounted before us ! 1 hour ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick among these are: Levi, Stremmenos and Ferrari (alma mater of bologna), and a series of physical Focardi sent by their respective companies 1 hour ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick from 15 to 19 the difference in average temperature was 5 ° C (water inlet and outlet water), for 0.6 cubic meters / hour 1 hour ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick E-Cat has been put into self-sustaining (disconnected from the power) at 14:58. At 19:00 it began shutting down the reactor 1 hour ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick We are in Bologna: Rossi, however, I was recalled the commitment we made with him for being here. That is not to publish anything until tomorrow. 8 hours ago raymond raymond_zreick zreick x leaving Bologna tomorrow testing of e-cat by Andrea Rossi Oct 5 Gian Mattia igiamma Bazzoli by raymond_zreick Mini nuclear accident in Belgium (2 / 2): an inspector of the international agency was still slightly contaminated bit.ly/mZ3Sr2 Oct 5 Gian Mattia igiamma Bazzoli by raymond_zreick Mini nuclear accident in Belgium (1 / 2) in a nuclear waste reprocessing plant was dropped a bottle of plutonium. Oct 5 Stay in touch with raymond zreick
Re: [Vo]:Raymond Zreick tweets translated by Google [copy 2]
Hi, On 6-10-2011 21:45, Jed Rothwell wrote: I do not think this came through. Others have reported this. I ran it though Google to save readers here the trouble. From: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick http://twitter.com/#%21/raymond_zreick Note that the fifth message down, from 46 minutes ago, says the Delta T was 5°C for 0.6 cubic meters of water per hour. That 600 L/h, 10 L/min, 1666 ml/s. It indicates 3.4 kW if I have done my arithmetic right. 1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.502 kW Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:Raymond Zreick tweets translated by Google
Hi, On 6-10-2011 21:30, Jed Rothwell wrote: From: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick http://twitter.com/#%21/raymond_zreick Note that the fifth message down, from 46 minutes ago, says the Delta T was 5°C for 0.6 cubic meters of water per hour. That 600 L/h, 10 L/min, 1666 ml/s. It indicates 3.4 kW if I have done my arithmetic right. 1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:Handy online energy converter
Am 06.10.2011 20:31, schrieb Jed Rothwell: This one has more units than others I have seen, and it is easier to use: http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/units-converter/energy/c/ Thanks. Another tip: Wolfram alpha can convert units and does arbitrary calculations too. It can also solve complicated equations given in quasi natural language. Simple example: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1+kWh+%3D+x+millicalory
[Vo]:Overall efficiency is not known but it is probably low
Daniel Rocha wrote: You must not forget the losses due the conversion between the heat exchangers. If it was 70%, that means around 5KW for the core. I pulled 70% out of a hat, by the way. I do not know what the overall efficiency is. I am just guessing, based on large, crude experimental calorimeters I have seen in various labs and at Hydrodynamics, Inc. McKubre's calorimeter is superb, and it recovers something above 95% of the heat, as I recall. Or was it 98%? Anyway, the Rossi's reactor is the opposite of superb. It has a large surface area which must be hot and must be radiating a great deal of heat. Large, uninsulated boxes like this that are not engineered with multiple tubes inside and lots of internal heat transfer surface area recover no more than 80% in my experience. I do not know how efficient the heat exchanger is, but top-notch good industrial ones are about 90% efficient according to on-line sources. I have no idea what this heat exchanger looks like but if it is experimental equipment put together by Rossi or by professors in the last month I'll bet it is well below good industry equipment. So I am guessing maybe 80% again. That would be 64% recovery overall. The right way to do this is to perform a calibration with a joule heater boiling water. That would tell us the recovery rate. Knowing Rossi I'll that they did not do that. Anyway, it can't be anything close to 100%. You can bet the surface of that machine and of the heat exchanger was hot. How hot? I asked several people who attended the demonstration to try to measure that surface temperature but I doubt any of them did it. I don't think they had time to prepare for that. As I said this test was an improvement over previous ones but I expect I will find plenty of ways in which it could have been done better, such as calibrating and using a IR sensor. Having said that, we should not lose sight of the fact that finding out how much heat is lost from the system unaccounted for can only improve the numbers for Rossi. It can only strengthen the claim. I am sure that total output energy exceeded total input by a large measure. With 4 hours of heat after death no other result is possible. You cannot begin to store 4 hours of heat at 3.5 kW in a device this size. That notion is preposterous. If the heat recovery was 98% (which it could not be; that is far too high) this result is definitive. If the recovery was 70% or 40% it is even more definitive. You do not actually need to know what it was. Knowing it would be icing on the cake. In some early cold fusion experiments, there was only excess heat if you took into account of the measured losses from the calorimeter, which are measured by calibrating with a joule heater. In other words, you would only believe there was excess heat if you trusted the calibrations were done right, and the recovery rate was correctly measured. Such results were close to the margin. In Rossi's case, you can ignore the recovery rate. You could pretend it is 100% (which is impossible) and you still get large excess in most tests. This inspires much more confidence than the early marginal tests. Rossi does not trust precision measurements or complicated methods, so he would never ask anyone to trust his recovery rate, and he probably does not even bother to measure it. Still, it would be a good idea to establish the performance of the instrument. - Jed
[Vo]:Oct 6 Test
1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out 20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment. And so is the fact that it ran for only 4 hours, which may not rule out a chemical reaction. If that is the best Rossi can do I guess we will have to stick with Big Oil.
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
Hi, On 6-10-2011 22:30, vorl bek wrote: 1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out 20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment. Excuse me? This would result still for 52 eCats in 182 kW ! Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]: Passerini's gone home
Passerini : 22passi Daniele Passerini Torno a casa! Bellissima giornata, veramente da incorniciare. Grazie a tutti e alla prossima 22passi Daniele Passerini I get home! Beautiful day, very suitable for framing. Thanks to all and the next
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
Hi, On 6-10-2011 22:32, Man on Bridges wrote: Hi, On 6-10-2011 22:30, vorl bek wrote: 1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out 20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment. Excuse me? This would result still for 52 eCats in 182 kW ! Wait a minute, didn't each eLion consist of four eCats. So multipling by 4 results in 728 kW ! Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
Hi, On 6-10-2011 22:32, Man on Bridges wrote: Hi, On 6-10-2011 22:30, vorl bek wrote: 1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out 20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment. Excuse me? This would result still for 52 eCats in 182 kW ! Wait a minute, didn't each eLion consist of four eCats. So multipling by 4 results in 728 kW ! Are you saying there are 4 ecats in each fatcat (or elion)? That is even worse: 3.5kw / 4 = .875kw per ecat. Rossi was touting the ecats as putting out 6kw or more each. Now we are down to .875kw. It sounds like this whole ecat OU business is no more than a fantasy. Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
.875kw is the power of a coffee machine of Krivitz test!
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
Am 06.10.2011 22:36, schrieb Man on Bridges: Hi, On 6-10-2011 22:32, Man on Bridges wrote: Hi, On 6-10-2011 22:30, vorl bek wrote: 1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out 20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment. Excuse me? This would result still for 52 eCats in 182 kW ! Wait a minute, didn't each eLion consist of four eCats. So multipling by 4 results in 728 kW ! It could also be, because the primary circuit is a closed circuit, that the input temperature for the e-cat is too high an so it gets no chance to show the full power. Anyway, tommorow morning I must go to a customer, diagnosing an electronic fire-alarm system. If I dont find the source of trouble and cannot offer a solution he will probably kill me. So I will never learn about the full e-cat truth ;-)
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
vorl bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out 20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment. In what universe is that a disappointment? If any other cold fusion test have produced 50.4 MJ in four hours with no input the researchers would think they had died and gone to heaven. If you showed that test to Robert Park I guarantee he would think he had died and gone to hell. Rossi announced previously that he would run the cell below the level it will be at in the 1 MW reactor. I was hoping it would be somewhat higher but 3.5 kW, measured in the secondary loop, is plenty high. And so is the fact that it ran for only 4 hours, which may not rule out a chemical reaction. Only 4 hours? It does rule out a chemical reaction. That is more energy than you get from 1 kg of gasoline (45 MJ), which also requires oxygen, which is not present in the cell. After they open up the machine they will find that the cell is small. The best possible chemical fuel is hydrogen and oxygen and you could not begin to produce 50 MJ with a small cell. You could not store it or ignite it. (Note that 1 kg of gasoline is considerably more than 1 L. I don't recall how much, but gasoline is lighter than water.) If that is the best Rossi can do I guess we will have to stick with Big Oil. There is no indication that this is the best Rossi can do. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
At 01:42 PM 10/6/2011, vorl bek wrote: Rossi was touting the ecats as putting out 6kw or more each. Now we are down to .875kw. It sounds like this whole ecat OU business is no more than a fantasy. (.875 + 0) / 0 = ..? This test was probably limited by the water flow and heat exchanger size.
Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
In reply to Mattia Rizzi's message of Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:31:58 +0200: Hi, [snip] The precise calculation of the output ***thermal energy in Kwh per hour***, which the reactor produces through the exothermal nuclear reaction of NICKEL-HYDROGEN. Look at image: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-k4ysf4H8ntA/To2cA6P_50I/Fjs/ERVWCfAKflk/s1600/BOLOGNA+TEST+7-7-11tre.png 15 kg/h (water) ? 627,5 wh (needed energy for the evaporation of 1 kg of water) = 9412 wh/h = 9,412 ***Kwh/h ENERGY produced*** in a hour during the You put the *** in the wrong place. Try reading it like this: 9,412 Kwh/h *** ENERGY produced in a hour *** during the phase shift (evaporation). http://22passi.blogspot.com/ Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
In reply to Mattia Rizzi's message of Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:31:58 +0200: Hi, [snip] PS - Try reading it like this: 9,412 Kwh/h *** ENERGY produced in a hour *** during the or if it makes it clearer, 9,412 Kwh/h *** ENERGY produced per hour *** during the (Energy per unit time = power). phase shift (evaporation). http://22passi.blogspot.com/ Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
vorl bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out 20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment. In what universe is that a disappointment? If any other cold fusion test have produced 50.4 MJ in four hours with no input the researchers would think they had died and gone to heaven. If you showed that test to Robert Park I guarantee he would think he had died and gone to hell. Rossi announced previously that he would run the cell below the level it will be at in the 1 MW reactor. I was hoping it would be somewhat higher but 3.5 kW, measured in the secondary loop, is plenty high. And so is the fact that it ran for only 4 hours, which may not rule out a chemical reaction. Only 4 hours? It does rule out a chemical reaction. That is more energy than you get from 1 kg of gasoline (45 MJ), which also requires oxygen, which is not present in the cell. After they open up the machine they will find that the cell is small. The best possible chemical fuel is hydrogen and oxygen Really? I should have thought that by now some exotic space-age compound would exist that would Allow Rossi to power the device for 4.1 hours. and you could not begin to produce 50 MJ with a small cell. You could not store it or ignite it. (Note that 1 kg of gasoline is considerably more than 1 L. I don't recall how much, but gasoline is lighter than water.) If that is the best Rossi can do I guess we will have to stick with Big Oil. There is no indication that this is the best Rossi can do. This is 11 out of 11 tries, according to Krivit, and most people are yawning, if not indignant, at the lack of results. He really knows how to hide his light under a bushel. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Raymond Zreick tweets translated by Google
5 deg rise in water from input to output thermister -- need to disconfirm the possibility of a small local heater hidden within the thermister... Rich Murray [ never a pathological skeptic... -- merely pragmatic ]
Re: [Vo]:Raymond Zreick tweets translated by Google
At 02:08 PM 10/6/2011, Rich Murray wrote: 5 deg rise in water from input to output thermister -- need to disconfirm the possibility of a small local heater hidden within the thermister... Rich Murray [ never a pathological skeptic... -- merely pragmatic ] You're right ... but did they make sure that hordes of mice aren't peeing into the water flow? Here's a chart of mouse body-temperature fluctuations, which you'd better take into account. http://www.hhmi.org/news/popups/20060131_pop.html
