Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
On 30 Oct 2011, at 23:44, Man on Bridges wrote: However the title Professor is to my knowledge not a protected title, so anyone could use it. Here in the UK at least, professor is a job title not a qualification. Joe
[Vo]:NASA: LENR powered aircraft so large that other aircraft can land on them in future.
NASA: LENR powered aircraft so large that other aircraft can land on them in future. http://www.slashgear.com/nuclear-powered-aircraft-so-large-other-aircraft-can-land-on-them-in-our-future-25190555/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/photogalleries/airborne-metro-concept/
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
Jed try to google ivano marescotti. Have fun :) Susy 2011/10/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com As noted, there is a photo of Fioravanti and some comments about him by Lewan here: http://theeestory.com/posts/215391 I asked Lewan: Do you know anything about this person? Do you think it is possible he is a fake who actually works for Rossi? He looks a little old for that. I do not seriously think this is fake. But if we had some proof that he really is an independent licensed engineer, that pretty much proves it is real. A licensed engineer would never take part in a fraud. He would lose his license and his livelihood. This is a widely publicized event and the authorities would find out about it. . . . Is there an on-line registry of licensed engineers in Italy? Can someone look this guy up? Someone who speaks Italian, please? Here is a registry in California, License Lookup (Verification) for California-Licensed Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, Geologists, and Geophysicists: http://www.pels.ca.gov/consumers/lic_lookup.shtml Here is one for Georgia: http://sos.georgia.gov/plb/ I found a registry in Georgia for people who are *not* registered HVAC engineers, that is, people convicted of practicing without a license, or who had their licenses revoked. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
On Mon, 2011-10-31 at 10:02 +0100, Susan Gipp wrote: Jed try to google ivano marescotti. Have fun :) Susy It's not the same guy. :) Craig
[Vo]:Defkalion Congratulates Andrea Rossi
The following message was posted (waiting for moderation) in Journal of Nuclear Physics: *Our congratulations to Andrea Rossi. Defkalion Green Technologies SA* http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=418
[Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water -- cup of tea, anyone?]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31 [ Rich Murray: this nail in the coffin goes right to the point... using Rossi's own data... ] http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/H-Ni_Fusion/message/791 [H-Ni_Fusion] megawatt ecat produces 70 kW fromjoshua.cude joshua.c...@yahoo.com reply-toh-ni_fus...@yahoogroups.com to h-ni_fus...@yahoogroups.com dateMon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:02 AM subject [H-Ni_Fusion] megawatt ecat produces 70 kW mailing listH-Ni_Fusion.yahoogroups.com 4:02 AM (1 hour ago) The presented evidence from the megawatt demo does not support output power above 70 kW in the 1 MW reactor. The calculation used by Rossi and Fioravanti to claim 470 kW assumes that essentially all the water pumped through the system is vaporized. However, there is no evidence presented in the report to support that assumption. Rossi collects liquid water at the exit of the reactor, but there is no evidence presented that liquid cannot be carried past this collector, entrained in the fast flowing steam, and into the heat exchanger. The only measurement reported is the temperature of the fluid as it exits. This is on average about 105 C, which probably corresponds to the boiling point inside the conduit at an elevated pressure due to the formation of some steam. The fact that no independent measurement was reported of pressure or steam quality indicates that Fioravanti is no more competent than Essen and Kallunder were. If one accepts the notion that above 100 C, the steam is dry, then the total power transfer is proportional to: T2-T1 if T2 = 100 T2-T1 + 540 + (T2-100)(.5)if T2 100 By this calculation, at 100 C, the power transfer is about 65 kW, and at 100.1 C it is about 470 kW. The blue line in the attached figure (PowerTransfer.jpg) represents the result of this calculation for Rossi's latest data in arbitrary units. (The plateau would be about 470 kW.) Or even if you want to claim that the steam is only dry when it reaches 105 C a few minutes later, then the power would follow the dashed line. So Rossi and Fioravanti want us to believe that although it takes 2 hours for the power transfer to reach 65 kW (100C), it takes only a few minutes to go from 65 kW to 470 kW. The power transfer to the water is proportional to the temperature difference between the water and the heating elements. So this amounts to a claim that the temperature of the heating elements changes essentially discontinuously by a huge amount, and exactly when the water begins to boil. How does it know? And how does it know to stop increasing essentially as soon as all the water is vaporized? If the power increased by another 10%, the steam temperature would increase to more than 200 C. Yet it settles in nicely to a fairly constant temperature just above 100 C, just as if regulated by a mixture of phases at the boiling point, which fluctuates a little because of irregular internal pressure. Such a discontinuous change in the temperature is simply not plausible. A few minutes after it reaches 100 C, the power transfer must still be quite close to the 65 kW, even as the temperature reaches 105 C. That means that the temperature is no indication of dry steam, and so the most we can say from the data presented, if it is accepted, is that the power output is higher than about 70 kW. No data is presented to determine how much higher.
[Vo]:How fast was the steam moving?
A while back, somebody here did a rough calculation that, given the size of the outlet in the 1mw ecat, steam would have to be flying out of it at greater than the speed of sound if it were really putting out 1mw. Since there were two outlets from the look of it, that means the steam would move at half that, say 400mph. And since the ecat was only at half-power, that means that each pipe would have steam in it that was whizzing out at 200mph. Even that seems a lot for the device; and wouldn't 200mph steam blow apart the radiators that Sterling Allen made a video of?
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Because all energy was finally converted into hot air, this should become obvious from the fan-driven heat radiators. I have developed this formula for air flow: air flow[m^3/s] = 0.77 * P[kW] / delta_T[°K] At 470 kW and initial air temperature of 20°C and final air temperature of 100°C we have a hot air flow of 0.77*470/80 [m^3/s] = 4.5 m^3/s of 100°C hot air. This amount of heat cannot been unnoticed, it must have bee rather hot near the heatradiators. If we assume lower temperature, the air flow increases and it must be rather loud and stormy. Because 1 m^3 of air has a mass inertia of 1.3 kg, this must also give some noise and force effects on the direct environment. Am 31.10.2011 13:54, schrieb Rich Murray: megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water -- cup of tea, anyone?]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31 [ Rich Murray: this nail in the coffin goes right to the point... using Rossi's own data... ] http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/H-Ni_Fusion/message/791 [H-Ni_Fusion] megawatt ecat produces 70 kW fromjoshua.cude joshua.c...@yahoo.com reply-toh-ni_fus...@yahoogroups.com to h-ni_fus...@yahoogroups.com dateMon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:02 AM subject [H-Ni_Fusion] megawatt ecat produces 70 kW mailing listH-Ni_Fusion.yahoogroups.com 4:02 AM (1 hour ago) The presented evidence from the megawatt demo does not support output power above 70 kW in the 1 MW reactor. The calculation used by Rossi and Fioravanti to claim 470 kW assumes that essentially all the water pumped through the system is vaporized. However, there is no evidence presented in the report to support that assumption. Rossi collects liquid water at the exit of the reactor, but there is no evidence presented that liquid cannot be carried past this collector, entrained in the fast flowing steam, and into the heat exchanger. The only measurement reported is the temperature of the fluid as it exits. This is on average about 105 C, which probably corresponds to the boiling point inside the conduit at an elevated pressure due to the formation of some steam. The fact that no independent measurement was reported of pressure or steam quality indicates that Fioravanti is no more competent than Essen and Kallunder were. If one accepts the notion that above 100 C, the steam is dry, then the total power transfer is proportional to: T2-T1 if T2= 100 T2-T1 + 540 + (T2-100)(.5)if T2 100 By this calculation, at 100 C, the power transfer is about 65 kW, and at 100.1 C it is about 470 kW. The blue line in the attached figure (PowerTransfer.jpg) represents the result of this calculation for Rossi's latest data in arbitrary units. (The plateau would be about 470 kW.) Or even if you want to claim that the steam is only dry when it reaches 105 C a few minutes later, then the power would follow the dashed line. So Rossi and Fioravanti want us to believe that although it takes 2 hours for the power transfer to reach 65 kW (100C), it takes only a few minutes to go from 65 kW to 470 kW. The power transfer to the water is proportional to the temperature difference between the water and the heating elements. So this amounts to a claim that the temperature of the heating elements changes essentially discontinuously by a huge amount, and exactly when the water begins to boil. How does it know? And how does it know to stop increasing essentially as soon as all the water is vaporized? If the power increased by another 10%, the steam temperature would increase to more than 200 C. Yet it settles in nicely to a fairly constant temperature just above 100 C, just as if regulated by a mixture of phases at the boiling point, which fluctuates a little because of irregular internal pressure. Such a discontinuous change in the temperature is simply not plausible. A few minutes after it reaches 100 C, the power transfer must still be quite close to the 65 kW, even as the temperature reaches 105 C. That means that the temperature is no indication of dry steam, and so the most we can say from the data presented, if it is accepted, is that the power output is higher than about 70 kW. No data is presented to determine how much higher.
Re: [Vo]:How fast was the steam moving?
On 11-10-31 09:15 AM, vorl bek wrote: A while back, somebody here did a rough calculation that, given the size of the outlet in the 1mw ecat, steam would have to be flying out of it at greater than the speed of sound if it were really putting out 1mw. Since there were two outlets from the look of it, that means the steam would move at half that, say 400mph. And since the ecat was only at half-power, that means that each pipe would have steam in it that was whizzing out at 200mph. See Horace's recent post(s) on this. The second pipe was larger diameter than the first, and area goes as the square of the diameter; the upshot, as I recall, is that your final number is still too high by a factor of several. Even that seems a lot for the device; and wouldn't 200mph steam blow apart the radiators that Sterling Allen made a video of?
[Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed. I will add a short note about the Oct. 28 test to the LENR-CANR.org news section. I guess I will say: Rossi conducted a test of the megawatt reactor on October 28, 2011, as planned. Several scientists and reporters were present, but they were not allowed to make independent observations or look closely at the instruments, so the results cannot be confirmed. Rossi announced that the test was conducted by independent engineers, but the name of the company they work for was not released. Rossi uploaded a spreadsheet of data and a report claiming that the reactor ran for five and a half hours in self-sustaining mode, with no input power, producing an average of 470 kW of heat. If this is correct, it proves that the reactor is produce massive amounts of anomalous energy. NyTeknik published a short report and video of the test here. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/**nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/**article3303682.ecehttp://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This amount of heat cannot been unnoticed, it must have bee rather hot near the heatradiators. Yes, it was. I believe that is why they were surrounded by barriers. You can see this more clearly in Lewan's video, that was just uploaded. You can also see that the radiators were placed outside. If they had been in the warehouse it would have been intolerably hot. The video shows that the outlet pipe valve handle from the reactor was hot to the touch. If Rossi have allowed observers to look carefully at the genset power meters, they might have confirmed that there was no power going into the reactor, but only to the pumps and radiator fans. With such a large, sophisticated genset I expect each circuit was monitored individually. If you could confirm there is no power going into the reactors, and you know the outlet pipe is hot, and the air around the radiators is hot, this would be proof of an anomalous reaction. The power from the pumps alone could not heat the water enough to make the valve handle palpably hot. It is a shame that Rossi did not allow the observers to confirm the claim. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
Am 31.10.2011 15:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha: 4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. I feel a hot stream of air if my car stands in front of the garage, it is still hot and the motor fan is running. My car has 55 kW. Believe me, the ecat was in sustained mode and running for hours. Everything in the direct ambient must have been heated up by this air blow. There must be MUCH more heat than the Diesel generator was producing at this time and this does not stay cool. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
2011/10/31 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com It is a shame that Rossi did not allow the observers to confirm the claim. - Jed Probably Peter Svensson did look closely. Look at his tweets today, right after he came back from his trip to watch the E-Cat: http://twitter.com/#!/petersvensson petersvensson petersvensson @ @DanielMTd2 The Spatula Cartel and Big Liverwurst got to me first. I'm their man. há 34 minutos Favorito Retweetar Responder petersvensson petersvensson @ @propagare Sure, follow @ap. If I write something you'll have no problem finding it. há 1 hora petersvensson petersvensson I'm back in the office to find a cobweb with a spider on my monitor. Hey! It was only four days! há 1 hora petersvensson petersvensson @propagare @guidavinocom @johnpfrade Sorry, there's nothing I can say at this point há 1 hora petersvensson petersvensson @hanzjager @dobermanmacleod @ronnmaswan @jockety @FreeEnergyNews @darshansingh @docbennett Sorry, there's nothing I can say at this point * He behaves as he were under NDA.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
Peter Heckert wrote: When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. I asked him about that. He said he did not have a chance to reach over the barrier and check. I believe others have said it was hot. As I mentioned, the pumps could not have made the outlet pipe valve handle palpably warm. Assuming there was no input power to the reactor, as claimed, this is proof of anomalous heat. However we have no independent verification that the power going to the reactor was turned off. It is not easy to tell with such large equipment. As I said before the test, it is much easier to confirm a kilowatt level reaction. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
That is open field and and there was wood surrounding the radiator. And even the wood close to were the viewing was done was not close to the radiator air exit. -- Forwarded message -- From: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Date: 2011/10/31 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Am 31.10.2011 15:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha: 4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. I feel a hot stream of air if my car stands in front of the garage, it is still hot and the motor fan is running. My car has 55 kW. Believe me, the ecat was in sustained mode and running for hours. Everything in the direct ambient must have been heated up by this air blow. There must be MUCH more heat than the Diesel generator was producing at this time and this does not stay cool. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
Am 31.10.2011 15:47, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert wrote: When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. I asked him about that. He said he did not have a chance to reach over the barrier and check. I believe others have said it was hot. As I mentioned, the pumps could not have made the outlet pipe valve handle palpably warm. Assuming there was no input power to the reactor, as claimed, this is proof of anomalous heat. However we have no independent verification that the power going to the reactor was turned off. It is not easy to tell with such large equipment. As I said before the test, it is much easier to confirm a kilowatt level reaction. Possibly not. Some m^3 of hot air per second are impossible to fake. Somebody who has technical experince with air condition systems or large machines should be able to estimate this. But of course, we have also seen in the video that Rossi has a lot of equipment and very large water containers. He could easily do a steam sparging test with a single ecat module if he wanted this. But he doesnt want it. Very strange that he made all these efforts at October 6 with an additional heat exchanger. If he had done a steam sparging test with these large containers he had needed almost no time to do this. Why does he waste his time? He always says he has no time to waste. Peter
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
Peter Heckert wrote: They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. The mass flow is known. It is in the report. It was 675 L/h. Of course you have to trust that Fioravanti reported it correctly. It would be difficult to independently check such a high flow rate. That is one of the reasons I say it is easier to confirm heat at the kilowatt level. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
Am 31.10.2011 15:51, schrieb Daniel Rocha: That is open field and and there was wood surrounding the radiator. And even the wood close to were the viewing was done was not close to the radiator air exit. Not open enough. 470 kW is what comes down to earth surface on 470 m^2 on a hot summerday. Now imagine this amount of energy concentrated on an area of 47 m^2. And this area was less. Probably 25 m^2. -- Forwarded message -- From: *Peter Heckert* peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de Date: 2011/10/31 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Am 31.10.2011 15:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha: 4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. I feel a hot stream of air if my car stands in front of the garage, it is still hot and the motor fan is running. My car has 55 kW. Believe me, the ecat was in sustained mode and running for hours. Everything in the direct ambient must have been heated up by this air blow. There must be MUCH more heat than the Diesel generator was producing at this time and this does not stay cool. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
But the heat from the sun is in form of EM waves whereas in this case it is already being carried by a convective current and unless it mixes with surrounding air, the heat will hardly be carried by long IR waves. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 31.10.2011 15:51, schrieb Daniel Rocha: That is open field and and there was wood surrounding the radiator. And even the wood close to were the viewing was done was not close to the radiator air exit. Not open enough. 470 kW is what comes down to earth surface on 470 m^2 on a hot summerday. Now imagine this amount of energy concentrated on an area of 47 m^2. And this area was less. Probably 25 m^2. -- Forwarded message -- From: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Date: 2011/10/31 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Am 31.10.2011 15:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha: 4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. I feel a hot stream of air if my car stands in front of the garage, it is still hot and the motor fan is running. My car has 55 kW. Believe me, the ecat was in sustained mode and running for hours. Everything in the direct ambient must have been heated up by this air blow. There must be MUCH more heat than the Diesel generator was producing at this time and this does not stay cool. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
When I was young, I was working in an aluminium casting house for some weeks. This was only one small oven and all windows and large large doors where left open. It was incredibly hot inside and for sure this where less than 470 kW heating power. I was happy I survived this ;-) Am 31.10.2011 16:01, schrieb Peter Heckert: Am 31.10.2011 15:51, schrieb Daniel Rocha: That is open field and and there was wood surrounding the radiator. And even the wood close to were the viewing was done was not close to the radiator air exit. Not open enough. 470 kW is what comes down to earth surface on 470 m^2 on a hot summerday. Now imagine this amount of energy concentrated on an area of 47 m^2. And this area was less. Probably 25 m^2. -- Forwarded message -- From: *Peter Heckert* peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de Date: 2011/10/31 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Am 31.10.2011 15:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha: 4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. I feel a hot stream of air if my car stands in front of the garage, it is still hot and the motor fan is running. My car has 55 kW. Believe me, the ecat was in sustained mode and running for hours. Everything in the direct ambient must have been heated up by this air blow. There must be MUCH more heat than the Diesel generator was producing at this time and this does not stay cool. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
[Vo]:Nature's laws may vary across the Universe
Nature's laws may vary across the Universe http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-10-nature-laws-vary-universe.html I have arrived at the opinion that the set of axioms known as the laws of nature need only apply to our measuring instruments. Our instruments should work according to such axioms, otherwise they would provide us with unreliable measurements. We design the laws of nature into our instruments, but the laws of nature need not supply us with a framework for explaining all that transpires in the universe. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
In that case, there was a ceiling, so, even though the windows were opened, the hot air was trapped. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de When I was young, I was working in an aluminium casting house for some weeks. This was only one small oven and all windows and large large doors where left open. It was incredibly hot inside and for sure this where less than 470 kW heating power. I was happy I survived this ;-) Am 31.10.2011 16:01, schrieb Peter Heckert: Am 31.10.2011 15:51, schrieb Daniel Rocha: That is open field and and there was wood surrounding the radiator. And even the wood close to were the viewing was done was not close to the radiator air exit. Not open enough. 470 kW is what comes down to earth surface on 470 m^2 on a hot summerday. Now imagine this amount of energy concentrated on an area of 47 m^2. And this area was less. Probably 25 m^2. -- Forwarded message -- From: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Date: 2011/10/31 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Am 31.10.2011 15:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha: 4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. I feel a hot stream of air if my car stands in front of the garage, it is still hot and the motor fan is running. My car has 55 kW. Believe me, the ecat was in sustained mode and running for hours. Everything in the direct ambient must have been heated up by this air blow. There must be MUCH more heat than the Diesel generator was producing at this time and this does not stay cool. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
I think, these 470 kW heat dissipators compare to those of a large truck. But not to a large truck that is running idle. It compares to a large truck running the hill upwards under maximum full load for hours. Under such circumstances most trucks would overheat and must do a pause or slow down very,very much. Am 31.10.2011 16:27, schrieb Daniel Rocha: In that case, there was a ceiling, so, even though the windows were opened, the hot air was trapped. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de When I was young, I was working in an aluminium casting house for some weeks. This was only one small oven and all windows and large large doors where left open. It was incredibly hot inside and for sure this where less than 470 kW heating power. I was happy I survived this ;-) Am 31.10.2011 16:01, schrieb Peter Heckert: Am 31.10.2011 15:51, schrieb Daniel Rocha: That is open field and and there was wood surrounding the radiator. And even the wood close to were the viewing was done was not close to the radiator air exit. Not open enough. 470 kW is what comes down to earth surface on 470 m^2 on a hot summerday. Now imagine this amount of energy concentrated on an area of 47 m^2. And this area was less. Probably 25 m^2. -- Forwarded message -- From: *Peter Heckert* peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de Date: 2011/10/31 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Am 31.10.2011 15:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha: 4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. I feel a hot stream of air if my car stands in front of the garage, it is still hot and the motor fan is running. My car has 55 kW. Believe me, the ecat was in sustained mode and running for hours. Everything in the direct ambient must have been heated up by this air blow. There must be MUCH more heat than the Diesel generator was producing at this time and this does not stay cool. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
Maybe that's one of the reasons why the test didn't last very long ;) 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de I think, these 470 kW heat dissipators compare to those of a large truck. But not to a large truck that is running idle. It compares to a large truck running the hill upwards under maximum full load for hours. Under such circumstances most trucks would overheat and must do a pause or slow down very,very much. Am 31.10.2011 16:27, schrieb Daniel Rocha: In that case, there was a ceiling, so, even though the windows were opened, the hot air was trapped. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de When I was young, I was working in an aluminium casting house for some weeks. This was only one small oven and all windows and large large doors where left open. It was incredibly hot inside and for sure this where less than 470 kW heating power. I was happy I survived this ;-) Am 31.10.2011 16:01, schrieb Peter Heckert: Am 31.10.2011 15:51, schrieb Daniel Rocha: That is open field and and there was wood surrounding the radiator. And even the wood close to were the viewing was done was not close to the radiator air exit. Not open enough. 470 kW is what comes down to earth surface on 470 m^2 on a hot summerday. Now imagine this amount of energy concentrated on an area of 47 m^2. And this area was less. Probably 25 m^2. -- Forwarded message -- From: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Date: 2011/10/31 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Am 31.10.2011 15:38, schrieb Daniel Rocha: 4 m^3/s is not too much. That is a column of 1.6m^2 ascending at 1.6m/s. The area that concealed the radiators was much bigger. I feel a hot stream of air if my car stands in front of the garage, it is still hot and the motor fan is running. My car has 55 kW. Believe me, the ecat was in sustained mode and running for hours. Everything in the direct ambient must have been heated up by this air blow. There must be MUCH more heat than the Diesel generator was producing at this time and this does not stay cool. 2011/10/31 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de They test the temperature at the output pipe, but this does not say much about the energy when the mass flow is not known. When Lewan looked over the fence to the heat dissipators then he should have feeled A LOT of hot air. He did not mention anything. It would be interesting to know. I have calculated there must be more than 4 m^3 of hot air (ambient + 80 degrees) per second. This is assuming that the air was heated by 80 degrees. If it was heated by 40 degrees then there must be 8m^3/s of hot air and so on. Am 31.10.2011 15:10, schrieb Jed Rothwell: See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece The quality of that video is better than the other ones. Lewan held the camera steady and explained what the viewer is seeing. There is less background noise. By the way, Lewan says he believes input power was measured using the genset internal meter. This is a highly reliable method. The thermocouples used in this test can be seen in Lewan's video. They are professional quality, and they are properly placed.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report : more tea-leaf reading
a) [00:00 - end] The genset was very loud ... could they really measure the eCat at 56 dB ? b) There were apparently two steam pipes coming out [00:42] , but there was a thermocouple [00:43] (and fluid water collector [00:44]) on only one . c) The pipe was cool, and the ball-valve handle was barely hot [01:34] d) You can clearly see the exhaust cap on the generator [01:19] ... lets see : we can calculate the exhaust velocity from the angle of the cap and the strength of gravity and/or the restraining spring and from that we can calculate the power being generated.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report : more tea-leaf reading
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: [00:43] (and fluid water collector [00:44]) on only one . And the valve was closed... —Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Rides into Sunset : answered a few questions from the saddle
On Defkalion : The following message was posted (waiting for moderation) in Journal of Nuclear Physics: Our congratulations to Andrea Rossi. Defkalion Green Technologies SA (Not yet posted on JNP_.
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
Daniel Rocha wrote: In that case, there was a ceiling, so, even though the windows were opened, the hot air was trapped. The fans were placed outside the building. The barriers around the fans will prevent much of warm air from getting into the building. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
I was not referring to Rossi's building... 2011/10/31 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Daniel Rocha wrote: In that case, there was a ceiling, so, even though the windows were opened, the hot air was trapped. The fans were placed outside the building. The barriers around the fans will prevent much of warm air from getting into the building. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report
Daniel Rocha wrote: I was not referring to Rossi's building... Oh. I guess you were talking about the aluminum casting factory described by Heckert. These e-mail conversations can be hard to follow. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Rides into Sunset : answered a few questions from the saddle
T.R. October 31st, 2011 at 9:47 AM Dear mr. Rossi when the second customer will recive his plant? Andrea Rossi October 31st, 2011 at 10:44 AM Dear T.R. 3 months, Warm regards, A.R. . . . . G P October 31st, 2011 at 11:17 AM Dear Mr. Rossi, I have followed for some time with passion and hope your endeavours, and hope you will be able to change things for the better. If you have time could you let me know: 1- How will you be able to build between 30 to 100 plants in 2012 if it is going to take 3 months to deliver the second one. 2- Is the second customer requiring the same level of secrecy as the first one? I am asking you this because all the skeptics/snakes will argue that you are just buying more time here (without any real buyer in sight), so if you dont have a nondisclosure agreement as strict as the one with the first customer, you would be doing yourself and all people that are supporting you a great favour giving a little more detail. Thank you in advance for the consideration. G P Andrea Rossi October 31st, 2011 at 11:20 AM Dear GP: 1- we are ready for 30-100 units per year 2- no Warm regards, A.R. - - - - - Andrea Rossi October 31st, 2011 at 12:37 PM Dear Strat: we sell the 1 MW plants at 2000 Euro/kW. [ $2,786,606 each ] Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
Cross-posted from the general Rossi replies Andrea Rossi October 31st, 2011 at 9:12 AM Dear James Bowery: The dissipator has been designed by me and the person who leaded the test, an engineer of NATO ( a Colonel) who has 30 years of experience in thermopower plants and thermodynamical systems.
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
So he is a colonel. Or was. Interesting. There are not too many of them in NATO. Perhaps there is a list somewhere. It is a shame he is not a general. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
Hi, On 31-10-2011 3:11, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I wonder if this is related? http://www.fioravanti.it/ (Power source for sports cars?) Probably not according this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_Fioravanti_%28engineer%29 Kind regards, MoB *Leonardo Fioravanti* (born 1938) is an Italian http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italy automobile designer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_design and CEO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CEO of Fioravanti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fioravanti_%28automotive%29 Srl. He studied mechanical engineering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_engineering at the Politecnico di Milano http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politecnico_di_Milano, specializing in aerodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerodynamics and car body design. He worked twenty-four years with Pininfarina http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pininfarina, joining as a stylist in 1964, aged 26, and eventually becoming Managing Director and General Manager of Pininfarina's research arm, Pininfarina Studi Ricerche. Before founding Fioravanti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fioravanti Srl in 1991 he held the positions of deputy General Manager at Ferrari http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari and the director's role at the Centro Stile Alfa Romeo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfa_Romeo. Fioravanti designed the Ferrari Dino http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_Dino, the Ferrari Daytona http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_Daytona, the Ferrari P5 and P6, the Ferrari 512 Berlinetta Boxer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_512_Berlinetta_Boxer, the Ferrari 365 GT4 2+2 (the forerunner of the Ferrari 400 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_400), the Ferrari 308 GTB http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_308_GTB, Ferrari 288 GTO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_288_GTO and the Fiat 130 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_130. His two sons, Matteo, an architect, and Luca, an attorney, have also worked with him at Fioravanti Srl. On January 16, 2009 Leonardo Fioravanti was elected Chairman of ANFIA Car Coachbuilders Group for a 3 year mandate from 2009 to 2011.
[Vo]:Re: Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
Maybe an Emperor, Jed? -Messaggio originale- From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 8:26 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti? So he is a colonel. Or was. Interesting. There are not too many of them in NATO. Perhaps there is a list somewhere. It is a shame he is not a general. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
Hi, On 31-10-2011 3:11, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I wonder if this is related? http://www.fioravanti.it/ (Power source for sports cars?) Probably not according this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_Fioravanti_(engineer) Kind regards, MoB *Leonardo Fioravanti* (born 1938) is an Italian http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italy automobile designer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_design and CEO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CEO of Fioravanti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fioravanti_%28automotive%29 Srl. He studied mechanical engineering http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_engineering at the Politecnico di Milano http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politecnico_di_Milano, specializing in aerodynamics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerodynamics and car body design. He worked twenty-four years with Pininfarina http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pininfarina, joining as a stylist in 1964, aged 26, and eventually becoming Managing Director and General Manager of Pininfarina's research arm, Pininfarina Studi Ricerche. Before founding Fioravanti http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fioravanti Srl in 1991 he held the positions of deputy General Manager at Ferrari http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari and the director's role at the Centro Stile Alfa Romeo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfa_Romeo. Fioravanti designed the Ferrari Dino http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_Dino, the Ferrari Daytona http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_Daytona, the Ferrari P5 and P6, the Ferrari 512 Berlinetta Boxer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_512_Berlinetta_Boxer, the Ferrari 365 GT4 2+2 (the forerunner of the Ferrari 400 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_400), the Ferrari 308 GTB http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_308_GTB, Ferrari 288 GTO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_288_GTO and the Fiat 130 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_130. His two sons, Matteo, an architect, and Luca, an attorney, have also worked with him at Fioravanti Srl. On January 16, 2009 Leonardo Fioravanti was elected Chairman of ANFIA Car Coachbuilders Group for a 3 year mandate from 2009 to 2011.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 15:40, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This amount of heat cannot been unnoticed, it must have bee rather hot near the heatradiators. Yes, it was. I believe that is why they were surrounded by barriers. You can see this more clearly in Lewan's video, that was just uploaded. You can also see that the radiators were placed outside. If they had been in the warehouse it would have been intolerably hot. Look here: http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Eglise_St_Thomas_-_Strasbourg.JPGfiletimestamp=20090714091321 This is an image of the famous St. Thomas Church in Strasbourg. The thermal energy needed to heat this is 480 kW. (Thats obviously enough to heat this unisolated holy big building in winter) They use remote waste heat from industry to heat it. This is the engineering company that built the system, look Nr. 9. http://www.ib-breiden.de/referenzen/ From there I learned this. I cannot imagine this heating energy being compressed on some m^3 small space without becoming very hot. There must be an air flow of 4 m^3 / s if 20° air is heated to 100° (without thermal expansion of air being considered) If the air is only heated from 20° to 40° the air flow must be 16 m^3 / s But there is nothing where the cold air can flow in from below in Rossis setup. Efficient stationary air coolers are built this way, that cold air comes from below and hot air goes up like here: http://www.directindustry.de/prod/heatcraft-europe-friga-bohn-hk-refrigeration/flussigkeits-ruckkuhler-8259-439364.html Rossis system is inefficient and cannot cool down the condensed water to 18 degrees (This was the water input temperature) Maybe my imagination is not good enough, but I fear, the recherge and calculation of others is not good enough. kind regards, Peter
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
http://www.nyteknik.se//template/ver03/fragments/comment/commentsFetch.jsp?articleId=3303682endPosition=25 [ Comment by Joshua Cude, after his comment very similar to the post quoted here. ] It's the old steam trick again In the first place, the report comes from Rossi, with no identification of the customer, so it's just his word. We had Rossi's word yesterday, so there's nothing new today. And the amateurish quality of the report is amazing. In the second place, if you accept the data as given, there is no verification that the units weren't pre-heated for any number of hours through the night. Again, we have only Rossi's word. In the 3rd place, he's back to his old tricks of claiming all the water is converted to steam, without any measurement provided to verify it. That gives him a big factor of 8 in the output power. Remove the factor of 8 for claiming dry steam without evidence, add in 3 or 4 hours of heating during the night, and once again, there is no evidence for excess heat, let alone heat from nuclear reactions. That's if you accept the data that is given. Rossi has succeeded in prolonging uncertainty again; probably because certainty would not further his goals. Joshua Cude 29 Oct 2011 02:59
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: I cannot imagine this heating energy being compressed on some m^3 small space without becoming very hot. There must be an air flow of 4 m^3 / s if 20° air is heated to 100° (without thermal expansion of air being considered) I cannot imagine that either, but what is your point? The heat is not being confined or compressed in a small space. It is outdoors. It is being blown into the air. The amount of heat and fans and radiators are roughly the same size as those on the diesel locomotive parked in a railroad station. When you walk by a locomotive you feel a blast of hot air but the air is not confined and the platform does not get hot. Modern diesel electric locomotives range from 3 to 5 MW. They produce a lot more waste heat than that when they are underway. When they are sitting at the platform after a trip, cooling down, I suppose they emit roughly 1 MW of heat. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:NASA: LENR powered aircraft so large that other aircraft can land on them in future.
Quoting this article: . . . Once near their destination the conventional aircraft could take back off from the back of the giant LENR machine and then land on the ground. The thought is that an air transport scheme like this could save 40% of the fuel required for a conventional flight on a 1000km route and on a longer 10,000km route; the savings could be as high as 85-90%. That is one of the dumbest projections of the future with cold fusion that I have ever seen. If you have cold fusion, why the heck would anyone bother to save 40% of the fuel?!? That's a few grams of heavy water. Worth a few pennies with cold fusion extraction techniques. Or it is a cup of ordinary water if Rossi is right. Why on earth would you launch these gigantic machines just to save a little water? There might be other uses for gigantic airborne machines but this is definitely not one of them. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 21:17, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert wrote: I cannot imagine this heating energy being compressed on some m^3 small space without becoming very hot. There must be an air flow of 4 m^3 / s if 20° air is heated to 100° (without thermal expansion of air being considered) I cannot imagine that either, but what is your point? The heat is not being confined or compressed in a small space. 480 kW is enough to heat the big St Thomas Church in winter. They use many spatial distributed heaters to heat the church. Compared to this the heating source in Rossis system is compressed to a footprint of some m^2. It is outdoors. It is being blown into the air. The amount of heat and fans and radiators are roughly the same size as those on the diesel locomotive parked in a railroad station. When you walk by a locomotive you feel a blast of hot air but the air is not confined and the platform does not get hot. The use some splywood boards like Rossi and build these airtight around the locomotive, this way that the flow of cold input air is inhibited, set the locomotive to 470 kW power and see what happens. Modern diesel electric locomotives range from 3 to 5 MW. They produce a lot more waste heat than that when they are underway. When they are sitting at the platform after a trip, cooling down, I suppose they emit roughly 1 MW of heat. - Jed
[Vo]:Rossi Q and A : Series and parallel
Rossi-speak ? Every time he says something, he raises more questions than he answers http://pesn.com/2011/10/31/9501942_After_the_E-Cat_Test--Report_and_Q-A_with_Rossi/ Sorry, it is not allowed smoke here. Anyone who is smoking is requested to stop the cigarette. (Just a bit of hydrogen ?) Mr. Professor Stremmenos has asked if the modules were connected only in parallel or also in series, and when it would be possible to connect the modules in series enough long to allow higher levels of temperatures to allow us to produce electricity. To produce other kinds of energy, but thermal energy. Now I answer in Italian and then English. Now in English. I answered Professor Stremmenos that what we have seen tonight is an assembly of series of three enclosed in the boxes which have been put in parallel. So we had a mixed systems made of series and parallel. - - - - - - That doesn't match what we were told/shown about the Oct 6 eCat ... supposedly three cores are contained in the wafer, which has heat exchanger fins attached at the top (and bottom ... not actually seen). So is inlet water/steam actually sent in through the three cores in series? (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Q and A : Series and parallel
I wonder whether the italian version of the answer matches with the english one :) 2011/10/31 Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com Rossi-speak ? Every time he says something, he raises more questions than he answers http://pesn.com/2011/10/31/**9501942_After_the_E-Cat_Test--** Report_and_Q-A_with_Rossi/http://pesn.com/2011/10/31/9501942_After_the_E-Cat_Test--Report_and_Q-A_with_Rossi/ Sorry, it is not allowed smoke here. Anyone who is smoking is requested to stop the cigarette. (Just a bit of hydrogen ?) Mr. Professor Stremmenos has asked if the modules were connected only in parallel or also in series, and when it would be possible to connect the modules in series enough long to allow higher levels of temperatures to allow us to produce electricity. To produce other kinds of energy, but thermal energy. Now I answer in Italian and then English. Now in English. I answered Professor Stremmenos that what we have seen tonight is an assembly of series of three enclosed in the boxes which have been put in parallel. So we had a mixed systems made of series and parallel. - - - - - - That doesn't match what we were told/shown about the Oct 6 eCat ... supposedly three cores are contained in the wafer, which has heat exchanger fins attached at the top (and bottom ... not actually seen). So is inlet water/steam actually sent in through the three cores in series? (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
On 11-10-31 04:30 PM, Peter Heckert wrote: Am 31.10.2011 21:17, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert wrote: I cannot imagine this heating energy being compressed on some m^3 small space without becoming very hot. There must be an air flow of 4 m^3 / s if 20° air is heated to 100° (without thermal expansion of air being considered) I cannot imagine that either, but what is your point? The heat is not being confined or compressed in a small space. 480 kW is enough to heat the big St Thomas Church in winter. They use many spatial distributed heaters to heat the church. Compared to this the heating source in Rossis system is compressed to a footprint of some m^2. It is outdoors. It is being blown into the air. The amount of heat and fans and radiators are roughly the same size as those on the diesel locomotive parked in a railroad station. When you walk by a locomotive you feel a blast of hot air but the air is not confined and the platform does not get hot. The use some splywood boards like Rossi and build these airtight around the locomotive, this way that the flow of cold input air is inhibited, set the locomotive to 470 kW power and see what happens. Uh, let me think, here ... Splinters go in all directions when the train runs into the side of the box? Modern diesel electric locomotives range from 3 to 5 MW. They produce a lot more waste heat than that when they are underway. When they are sitting at the platform after a trip, cooling down, I suppose they emit roughly 1 MW of heat. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: When you walk by a locomotive you feel a blast of hot air but the air is not confined and the platform does not get hot. The use some splywood boards like Rossi and build these airtight around the locomotive, this way that the flow of cold input air is inhibited, set the locomotive to 470 kW power and see what happens. What do you mean airtight? Those are not even a little airtight. The top is open to the sky! The space is roughly as confined as the underground platforms at Grand Central Station in New York City, or Back Bay station in Boston. The plywood boards are about as confining the posters, dividers or glass waiting area walls in those stations. The stations are not intolerably hot, even when you stand next to the locomotive. It is my favorite place to stand. As I said, I do love enormous noisy dangerous machinery. I am sure the fan boxes are quite hot, which is why they erected the plywood. So are the blowers in a diesel locomotive. You do not want to get too close to those things. But oh they are lovely and I even like the smell. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 21:41, schrieb Jed Rothwell: What do you mean airtight? Those are not even a little airtight. The top is open to the sky! What I have meant is an airtight fence made out of plywood boards, going down to ground and going above the hight of the fans. It is very obvious that it was open to the sky I didnot think it would need special explanation but obviously not all people are bright enough to see the obvious. SCNR Peter
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: What do you mean airtight? Those are not even a little airtight. The top is open to the sky! What I have meant is an airtight fence made out of plywood boards, going down to ground and going above the hight of the fans. It is very obvious that it was open to the sky I didnot think it would need special explanation but obviously not all people are bright enough to see the obvious. Yes, well, since it is open to the sky, it is not confined. Do you agree? So what are you talking about? The hot air blows away instantly, just as it does from a locomotive sitting in a station. I seem to be missing your point here. Are you talking about a hypothetical test in an enclosed space? This test was nothing like that. There is no expectation that anything will get hot. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 21:47, schrieb Peter Heckert: Am 31.10.2011 21:41, schrieb Jed Rothwell: What do you mean airtight? Those are not even a little airtight. The top is open to the sky! What I have meant is an airtight fence made out of plywood boards, going down to ground and going above the hight of the fans. This arrangement /must/ become hot, because the airflow is hindered, especially the inflow of cold air is hindered, and the air is enturbulated. This arrangemen must become hot like a locomotive under open sky, it cannot cool the condensate down to 18°C . You would never get permission to do this with a locomotive or truck under open sky, you would damage it. It is very obvious that it was open to the sky I didnot think it would need special explanation but obviously not all people are bright enough to see the obvious. SCNR Peter
[Vo]:Order your e-cat today
*Andrea Rossi October 31st, 2011 at 9:01 AM Dear Manik Sahai: We have started the manufacturing of 1 MW plants. Who wants to buy them whatever its Nation, can contact us at: i...@leonardocorp1996.com Warm Regards, A.R.* So get a couple of thousand people to chip in a couple of thousand each and they can each own a few grams of secret sauce.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 21:57, schrieb Jed Rothwell: I seem to be missing your point here. Are you talking about a hypothetical test in an enclosed space? This test was nothing like that. There is no expectation that anything will get hot. Obviously you do not want to understand. I will not explain every little bit in such a way that dumb little Klein Erna can understand it. If you dont understand it, then dont answer.
Re: [Vo]:NASA: LENR powered aircraft so large that other aircraft can land on them in future.
In reply to David ledin's message of Mon, 31 Oct 2011 10:50:20 +0330: Hi, [snip] NASA: LENR powered aircraft so large that other aircraft can land on them in future. http://www.slashgear.com/nuclear-powered-aircraft-so-large-other-aircraft-can-land-on-them-in-our-future-25190555/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/photogalleries/airborne-metro-concept/ If the carrier can be nuclear powered, then so can the planes that would land on it. Once any plane is nuclear powered it has effectively unlimited range, hence making the carrier concept obsolete, so this plane will never leave the drawing board. Furthermore, why bother carrying conventionally powered planes when their cargo can more efficiently be placed in the LENR powered plane directly and it can itself take off and land? This concept reminds me of early steamers that still had sails. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: What I have meant is an airtight fence made out of plywood boards, going down to ground and going above the hight of the fans. This arrangement /must/ become hot, because the airflow is hindered, especially the inflow of cold air is hindered, and the air is enturbulated. This arrangemen must become hot like a locomotive under open sky, it cannot cool the condensate down to 18°C. Ah, you finally got to your point. How do you know the condensate went back to 18°C? The feedwater temperature rose throughout the test, from 15°C to 18°C. The test lasted 8 hours. 5,400 L of water was pumped through the reactor and (presumably) vaporized during that time. I think there was more than 5,400 L in the holding tanks. The condensate could have been coming back at a higher temperature than the tanks. Plus, the open reservoir tanks would cool down on their own. Anyway, there is no problem cooling down equipment in this situation. I have seen large power company transformers behind shopping malls placed in small confined areas, sometimes bricked in to keep people away from them. They produce a great deal of waste heat. It goes straight up. Not a problem. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
I wrote: I think there was more than 5,400 L in the holding tanks. The condensate could have been coming back at a higher temperature than the tanks. I should have said the condensate *must* have been coming back at a higher temperature than the water in the tanks. It must have been well above 18°C or the tank temperature would not have risen. It would be hard to estimate how much higher it would be because the tanks also lose heat, and we do not know the ambient temperature. The feedwater temperature is recorded in the spreadsheet, and it gradually rises. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 22:18, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Anyway, there is no problem cooling down equipment in this situation. I have seen large power company transformers behind shopping malls placed in small confined areas, sometimes bricked in to keep people away from them. They produce a great deal of waste heat. It goes straight up. Not a problem. A 10 MW transformer, if it has an efficiency of 99% produces 10 kW waste heat. That is another dimension. Without telling numbers this cannot been compared. We are talking about 470 kW waste heat.
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Am 31.10.2011 22:44, schrieb Jed Rothwell: I wrote: I think there was more than 5,400 L in the holding tanks. The condensate could have been coming back at a higher temperature than the tanks. I should have said the condensate _must_ have been coming back at a higher temperature than the water in the tanks. It must have been well above 18°C or the tank temperature would not have risen. It would be hard to estimate how much higher it would be because the tanks also lose heat, and we do not know the ambient temperature. The feedwater temperature is recorded in the spreadsheet, and it gradually rises. Yes this can be. Unfortunately the usage of the second watertank is not known. It is also not known if the second heatdissipator and the second stem tube where in use. Possibly these where connected to the idle side of the plant. Too much unknown factors. Peter
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert wrote: A 10 MW transformer, if it has an efficiency of 99% produces 10 kW waste heat. Good point. In any case, I do not think you can show the temperature of the condensate must have been at some temperature or another. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:megawatt ecat produces 70 kW [very little steam, mixed with water]: Joshua Cude: Rich Murray 2011.10.31
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The feedwater temperature is recorded in the spreadsheet, and it gradually rises. Yes this can be. Unfortunately the usage of the second watertank is not known. It is also not known if the second heatdissipator and the second stem tube where in use. Possibly these where connected to the idle side of the plant. I believe the feedwater tanks were linked together with a pipe. I think someone said that in a video. The water level seemed to be falling to the same level in both tanks. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
I was skimming AR's comments on his web log and found this one: Andrea Rossi August 5th, 2011 at 8:48 AM Dear Mr Domenico: The risk is zero, because we do not use radioactive material and we do not produce radioactive wastes. In all the cases you listed H is cut. If the temperature rises too high, Nickel melts, powder becomes ingot and the process is stopped: intrinsecally safe situation. Warm Regards, A.R. Domenico August 4th, 2011 at 4:40 PM Egregio ing. Rossi (If you already have answered this question previously in your blog, please apologise) – What are the risks of an E-Cat in operation being damaged/destroyed by a collapsing building (e.g. earthquake), by shieldbreaking firearm bullets or explosives (never underestimate human madness or stupidity), by floods/tsunamis or other destructive action, in terms of gamma ray exposure intensity and duration? Thank you – in your work lies hope of many people. Cordialmente Domenico end Now there are a lot of Domenico's in the world; but, this is the only one who asked about firearm bullets. This would be something that would concern a former Col. in NATO, n'est-ce pas? T
[Vo]:AP Journalist Response - Supression Of eCat Coverage
I "Tweeted" PeterSvensson (the AP journalist who attended the 1MW test) to ask why AP what exactly had happened to the news report?The response was "Sorry, there's nothing I can say at this point".Today I recieved some more worrying information from a concerned member of the public. He had emailed Kit Frieden and recieved the following response - "I’m sorry, but the AP doesn’t discuss its coverage plans with people outside the organization."I hate to say suppression, but when it looks like a dog, and barks like a dog, it's a dog.CraigFree Energy Truth
[Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty
The latest system test where 107 individual ECAT modules were connected together was successful but could have been much more convincing. System instabilities forced the power output to be reduced to 470 kW and for it to be run in an open loop mode instead of the 1 MW that we were all expecting. I had hoped to see well behaved output steam temperature and pressure. But what could we realistically expect to see under these conditions? Mr. Rossi did all that was humanly possible as he found himself pressed against a schedule that was not flexible when the real world system issues appeared. I have taken some time to discuss some of the possibilities and problems. It seems logical that a well designed ECAT steam control system would need to monitor the water level and operating temperature. Some form of electronically controlled input valve could ideally regulate the water level to an acceptable degree and the duty cycle of the AC input waveform could be adjusted to regulate the net heating power for the cores. This may sound easy, but it is far from it. Boiling water tends to keep its vaporization temperature constant which attempts to defeat the temperature loop. The control of temperature is further complicated by the large delay that exists between the application of a modified input power duty cycle and its effects upon water temperature. Sluggish control and dangerous overshoots can easily be encountered due to this delay. Determining the idea control algorithm is a complex and demanding task with many tradeoffs needing to be considered. Even if an individual module is working smoothly in isolation, a combination of 107 ECAT devices will complicate the situation immensely. The output pressure and temperature variations caused by system instabilities can modify the loading seen at each ECAT output and make it loose control entirely. I would venture a guess that this is the reason why the test was run in the self sustaining mode instead of the powered mode where the full 1 MW would have been possible provided the system did not go unstable. The self sustaining mode is not without its problems when subjected to the loading of the other 106 ECAT modules. By reviewing the data from the October test I was able to determine some of the characteristics expected to be encountered in this mode. First, the core temperature must be operating at a level that is below maximum output power available under stable drive conditions. Notice that the output level is apparently 470 KWs for this system test instead of the 1 MW available. This is a big sacrifice that the skeptics love to complain about forever. They do not understand that this is necessary if the core is to eventually cool off and cease to generate energy. Second, loading of the brother ECATs will cause the internal water of each unit to oscillate between boiling and non boiling conditions as the pressure on the far side of the check valves varies. A quick review of the output vapor temperature variations during the test demonstrates this condition quite well. It will take an extended effort to eliminate the variation in the self sustaining mode. I am not sure the task will be any easier for the feedback controlled 1 MW system. The great news is that Mr. Rossi has demonstrated a large system that generates plenty of excess energy. This result is pretty much in line with what I projected in my last review of the October test results. It is difficult to understand how the skeptics are unable to realize that the ECAT is a real LENR device that will change the world in time. We owe Mr. Rossi a great deal of gratitude for standing up under such a ridiculous amount of ridicule. Sure, his test procedures were imperfect but I was able to determine that the LENR effect was present with careful observations. Dave
[Vo]:Mats Lewan on Steam Quality
Svar till Nisse1. Only two thermocouples were used - one in the water tank from which the pumps got the water, one at the steam outlet outside the container. 2. I talked a lot with the examiner Fioravanti. He seemed very experienced and he didnt believe a single thing in the discussion on the steam quality. He said that there are three stages in steam systems. 1. Water being heated. 2. Water boiling and steam being produced. Steam temperature is only defined by pressure here. At atmospheric pressure its 100 degrees centigrade. 3. Steam transported away from the water and heated further. This is basically dry steam. The only case when you have low steam quality or droplets or liquid water in this steam is in long or poorly isolated tubes fro steam transport. Steam then condenses and there will be a flow of water together with the steam. This is not the case with the Ecat he said, and he saw no doubt what so ever on the steam quality at atmospheric pressure and 105 degrees. 3. Two common water meters - one for each pump that was running. 4. The generator supplied power also to the pumps and the four fans on the dissipators (nominal 4x5 kW). Mats Lewan, Ny Teknik 29 Oct 2011 23:52 (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Mats Lewan on Steam Quality
Smart man. He is exactly right contrary to many discussions here. T
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report : more tea-leaf reading
At 09:59 AM 10/31/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: a) [00:00 - end] The genset was very loud ... could they really measure the eCat at 56 dB ? b) There were apparently two steam pipes coming out [00:42] , but there was a thermocouple [00:43] (and fluid water collector [00:44]) on only one . Mats Lewan says in the Swedish comments that only the lower steam tube was used. c) The pipe was cool, and the ball-valve handle was barely hot [01:34] d) You can clearly see the exhaust cap on the generator [01:19] ... lets see : we can calculate the exhaust velocity from the angle of the cap and the strength of gravity and/or the restraining spring and from that we can calculate the power being generated. Also [ google translate ] The customer seems väldgt secretive. I have no greater hope of any statement in a long time. I talked a bit with what should have been a customer representative (not the verifier Fioravanti) - a free well-dressed Italian gentleman of more than 50 years who would not tell her name and was pretty quiet. I have no more or less doubt than before, but it is clear that it would be better if the customer could be identified, and it is also clear that an independent test of an established institution is important now. Mats Lewan, New Technology 29 Oct 2011 12:32
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report : more tea-leaf reading
Anyone recognize these men: http://i.imgur.com/hDu4Q.jpg http://i.imgur.com/wXTXn.jpg (MIBs) or this lady in uniform: http://i.imgur.com/fc4o6.jpg ? And how come all the women there were beautiful? T
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report : more tea-leaf reading
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Anyone recognize these men: http://i.imgur.com/hDu4Q.jpg http://i.imgur.com/wXTXn.jpg (MIBs) The sitting men have to be from the US and they all look like the work for the government. None are smiling. We're talking real spook(y)s here. Ah, but it is all hallows eve, eh? T
Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty
Hi all, I'm new. What I find astounding is the knee-jerk reactions of the intelligent lay person, who may even be an engineer or a scientist in a softer discipline (no disrespect intended). I participate in an amateur astronomy forum where, as things go, I'm probably the senior physics person in the Science discussions. When I lately attempted to bring up the exciting news about LENR, there appeared from nowhere a couple of computer types who just practically shouted me down with stupid, derisive comments. When I finally lost my patience with this treatment, I was berated by the MODERATOR and the thread was locked. Now this sort of behavior is just irrational. It's just as irrational as refusing to look through Galileo's telescope because it's blasphemous to do so. So why it is so widespread? At the same time, any topic no matter how unlikely and outlandish may be entertained, if it has, say, been mentioned on one of those execrable TV shows hosted by some like that loon Michio Kaku. It doesn't matter how removed from reality - time travel, wormholes, multiverses, etc. etc. etc. When I attempt to point out that all of this stuff is just mental masturbation with no observable consequences, inevitably another weevil shows up with derisive comments, appeals to authority, mystical ideas about quantum mechanics etc. etc. etc. So on the one hand, perhaps the most interesting thing in physics since the discovery of electromagnetism is not allowed to be discussed, while any sort of nonsense whatsoever is a free-for-all open forum. The net result is, no one learns anything, crazy ideas are reinforced, everyone gets a trophy. It's very depressing. It's not just ridicule of LENR - ask Halton Arp about how he's been treated. His famous comment is - If 90 percent of the universe is not detectable, why bother looking? Something like eternal inflation is an idea so devoid of physical sense that it staggers my imagination that any intelligent person could take it seriously. When Cooperstock demonstrated that Einstein was right and dark matter amounted to a mistaken approximation to a non-linear system, he was attacked by a green graduate student whose argument was easily swatted away by Cooperstock as one might correct a beginner - but it was too late, the most important work in relativity since Einstein himself is just ignored. They are now giving Nobel Prizes for out-and-out mistakes. So once the fact of LENR becomes common knowledge, how will the high priests of pathological physics react - the string theorists and other con-artists? Will we see a rebirth of the culture of science, with a mass ejection of the many posers who feed the pathological skeptics? That is my sincerest hope - my career was over before it began, because my schooling was exactly contemporary with the rise of this pathology, and I could not consider becoming a part of it. I would like to think that someone today who is in the same place as I was 30 years ago could make a better go of it. -drl -- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin --- On Mon, 10/31/11, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com Subject: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 7:01 PM The latest system test where 107 individual ECAT modules were connected together was successful but could have been much more convincing. System instabilities forced the power output to be reduced to 470 kW and for it to be run in an open loop mode instead of the 1 MW that we were all expecting. I had hoped to see well behaved output steam temperature and pressure. But what could we realistically expect to see under these conditions? Mr. Rossi did all that was humanly possible as he found himself pressed against a schedule that was not flexible when the real world system issues appeared. I have taken some time to discuss some of the possibilities and problems. It seems logical that a well designed ECAT steam control system would need to monitor the water level and operating temperature. Some form of electronically controlled input valve could ideally regulate the water level to an acceptable degree and the duty cycle of the AC input waveform could be adjusted to regulate the net heating power for the cores. This may sound easy, but it is far from it. Boiling water tends to keep its vaporization temperature constant which attempts to defeat the temperature loop. The control of temperature is further complicated by the large delay that exists between the application of a modified input power duty cycle and its effects upon water temperature. Sluggish control and dangerous overshoots can easily be encountered due to this delay. Determining the idea control algorithm is a complex and demanding task with many tradeoffs needing to be considered. Even if an individual
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report : more tea-leaf reading
These people look like Scandinavians to me. -drl -- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin --- On Mon, 10/31/11, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report : more tea-leaf reading To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 7:52 PM Anyone recognize these men: http://i.imgur.com/hDu4Q.jpg http://i.imgur.com/wXTXn.jpg (MIBs) or this lady in uniform: http://i.imgur.com/fc4o6.jpg ? And how come all the women there were beautiful? T
Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty
Danny, you have me a bit confused. Does your comment refer to the subject that I posted by this title or are you just using my post as a path into vortex? If you are questioning my knowledge, I am an engineer by trade. Dave -Original Message- From: Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 31, 2011 9:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty Hi all, I'm new. What I find astounding is the knee-jerk reactions of the intelligent lay person, who may even be an engineer or a scientist in a softer discipline (no disrespect intended). I participate in an amateur astronomy forum where, as things go, I'm probably the senior physics person in the Science discussions. When I lately attempted to bring up the exciting news about LENR, there appeared from nowhere a couple of computer types who just practically shouted me down with stupid, derisive comments. When I finally lost my patience with this treatment, I was berated by the MODERATOR and the thread was locked. Now this sort of behavior is just irrational. It's just as irrational as refusing to look through Galileo's telescope because it's blasphemous to do so. So why it is so widespread? At the same time, any topic no matter how unlikely and outlandish may be entertained, if it has, say, been mentioned on one of those execrable TV shows hosted by some like that loon Michio Kaku. It doesn't matter how removed from reality - time travel, wormholes, multiverses, etc. etc. etc. When I attempt to point out that all of this stuff is just mental masturbation with no observable consequences, inevitably another weevil shows up with derisive comments, appeals to authority, mystical ideas about quantum mechanics etc. etc. etc. So on the one hand, perhaps the most interesting thing in physics since the discovery of electromagnetism is not allowed to be discussed, while any sort of nonsense whatsoever is a free-for-all open forum. The net result is, no one learns anything, crazy ideas are reinforced, everyone gets a trophy. It's very depressing. It's not just ridicule of LENR - ask Halton Arp about how he's been treated. His famous comment is - If 90 percent of the universe is not detectable, why bother looking? Something like eternal inflation is an idea so devoid of physical sense that it staggers my imagination that any intelligent person could take it seriously. When Cooperstock demonstrated that Einstein was right and dark matter amounted to a mistaken approximation to a non-linear system, he was attacked by a green graduate student whose argument was easily swatted away by Cooperstock as one might correct a beginner - but it was too late, the most important work in relativity since Einstein himself is just ignored. They are now giving Nobel Prizes for out-and-out mistakes. So once the fact of LENR becomes common knowledge, how will the high priests of pathological physics react - the string theorists and other con-artists? Will we see a rebirth of the culture of science, with a mass ejection of the many posers who feed the pathological skeptics? That is my sincerest hope - my career was over before it began, because my schooling was exactly contemporary with the rise of this pathology, and I could not consider becoming a part of it. I would like to think that someone today who is in the same place as I was 30 years ago could make a better go of it. -drl -- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin --- On Mon, 10/31/11, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com Subject: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 7:01 PM The latest system test where 107 individual ECAT modules were connected together was successful but could have been much more convincing. System instabilities forced the power output to be reduced to 470 kW and for it to be run in an open loop mode instead of the 1 MW that we were all expecting. I had hoped to see well behaved output steam temperature and pressure. But what could we realistically expect to see under these conditions? Mr. Rossi did all that was humanly possible as he found himself pressed against a schedule that was not flexible when the real world system issues appeared. I have taken some time to discuss some of the possibilities and problems. It seems logical that a well designed ECAT steam control system would need to monitor the water level and operating temperature. Some form of electronically controlled input valve could ideally regulate the water level to an acceptable degree and the duty cycle of the AC input waveform could be adjusted to regulate the net heating power for the cores. This may sound easy, but it is far from it. Boiling water tends to keep its vaporization temperature constant which attempts to
Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: I would like to think that someone today who is in the same place as I was 30 years ago could make a better go of it. Welcome, Danny. Let's hope so! T
Re: [Vo]:Video added to NyTeknik report : more tea-leaf reading
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:42 PM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: These people look like Scandinavians to me. Maybe Aryans? ;-) T
Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty
No, I meant that to be a top-level post. I'm not very adept yet at this format for discussions. -drl -- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin
Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty
Welcome to the vortex Danny. I personally enjoy the technical discussions which come up occasionally. My latest post was an attempt to encourage other members to discuss the finer aspects to ECAT control. Dave -Original Message- From: Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Oct 31, 2011 9:52 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty No, I meant that to be a top-level post. I'm not very adept yet at this format for discussions. -drl -- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin
Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty
Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: No, I meant that to be a top-level post. I'm not very adept yet at this format for discussions. Just assign a new thread title in the Subject line and you will create a new top level item. This software sometimes goes bonkers like the sorcerer's apprentice and starts adding Re: Re: Re: . . . to messages creating lots of threads. - Jed
[Vo]:My involvement with Mr. Krivit as a former BoD - Part 3 of 3
SOME FINAL THOUGHTS: Krivit's is asking us to accept, his conclusions as carefully thought out psychological assessments of another person's agenda - specifically that Mr. Rossi's agenda is to scam the financial pants of a couple of gullible businesses. .and then I guess it's off to Rio with the booty, or something like that. Who knows. All I can say is that, based on my own personal correspondence with Mr. Krivit as a former NET BoD, while I continue to admire his tenacious dedication towards ferreting out obscure data, of uncovering information that some would prefer NOT see the light-of-day, I see little reason to accept at face-value Krivit's psychological profile of Rossi, particularly that scammery is involved. I have come to this conclusion based on a collection of what I have now come to perceive as blatant misinterpretations of the perceived agendas of individuals like Mr. Lomax and the so called secret cabal of Cold Fusion researchers that are allegedly out to get Krivit. Insofar as the current alternate energy scene is concerned, IMHO, NONE of us, including Krivit, have become so important that our actions have now come to the attention of some speculated super secret organization charged with the task of dealing with troublemakers originating from the likes of NET, The Vort Collective, and possibly the Democratic party. This includes special requests to secretly and efficiently do away with any of us. In regards to Mr. Rossi. Maybe Mr. Krivit's cynical suspicions are spot on. Maybe we will eventually uncover the heart breaking fact that Rossi WAS a scam artist all along. I suspect not, but that is simply my current opinion on the matter. I freely admit the possibility that I could be wrong. Under the circumstances I feel it would probably be a better use of my personal resources to watch for who might be buying into Rossi's eCats - and I mean that literally. Screw the scientific evidence, or more precisely, the lack of it. As Deep Throat said one dark and nefarious evening in a dimly lit parking garage: Follow the Money I suggest we do just that. Actually I would suggest that Mr. Krivit might want to focus his tenacious investigative resources in the same direction, because that is what he does well. But alas, I suspect Mr. Krivit is not inclined to take direction from me. --- Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:My involvement with Mr. Krivit as a former BoD - Part 1 of 3
Recently, I noticed that some within the Vort Collective have puzzled over the relationship that seems to exist between New Energy Times (NET) and Mr. Krivit. They wondered what NET's agenda might be since it would seem as if Mr. Krivit is doing NET's bidding. It would seem that these individuals have misunderstood a fundamental fact that Mr. Krivit and NET are essentially the same entity. There is no mysterious anonymous group of individuals running NET other than Krivit himself - plus a few helpers or volunteers under Krivit's directorship. I believe NET is a legitimate Tax Exempt entity. To exist as a legal entity, insofar as the IRS is concerned, it must maintain an active Board of Directors (BoD) that regularly meets. They are required to correspond at least by conference calls several times a year. The BoD must also meet in person at least once a year. As a former BoD member I participated in several of these conference calls. I also participated in an in-person meeting held in Milwaukee. Regardless of the alleged functions a BoD is supposed to perform it became clear to me that Mr. Krivit would will not allow himself to be directed by anyone. Advised perhaps, but never directed. More on that later. As best as I can tell the only power anyone might possibly hold over Mr. Krivit's journalistic approach (on behalf of NET) would be his financial backers, or sponsors. While I was still a BoD member the sponsor appeared to be a single business operating in the food industry. It was a company owned and operated by a single owner. Maybe Krivit has managed to find additional sponsors since my departure. For NET's sake, I hope so. * * * Before I begin expressing some of my personal observations in some depth, I need to state that IMHO private correspondence should remain private. To publicly reveal private correspondence would be a breach of a sacred trust one tries to forge with another person. In that capacity I shall not reveal the actual contents of personal correspondence. However, since it is known that Krivit has violated what was presumed to have been private correspondence, such as publicly posting the private comments of a former NET BoD to the Vortex-l group; since Krivit cc'd my own private correspondence to the rest of the NET BoD, correspondence that was specifically meant for his eyes alone because I did not want to publicly criticize him in front of his peers, I now find myself inclined to stretch the meaning of my own rules - just a little. I will stretch those rules by expressing a few personal observations I acquired of Mr. Krivit while on NET's BoD. For the record, I became a NET BoD membership in the fall of 2009. I resigned from the membership on May 5 2010. I recall Krivit's NET sponsor, and by that I mean the owner of that business, got very angry at Mr. Krivit. But I'm getting ahead of my personal recollections. First, a little history. It might have all started when Krivit published (blogged) an unexpected confession of sorts, where he publicly admitted in front of everyone that he no longer believed that cold fusion was occurring. Mr. Krivit's confession was subsequently picked up by a couple of mainstream publications. It was as if a former Cold Fusion enthusiast had finally seen the light of day. It was as if Krivit was now embracing the traditional scientific POV concerning cold fusion, as if the science was actually pseudo science. I don't believe that was what Krivit was actually trying to say, but I wonder how many authors after having read Krivit's confession had really picked up on what had led up to his transformation. What was considered news to many of these popular publications was the fact that Krivit, a former Cold Fusion believer was no longer a Cold Fusion believer. The fact the Krivit went on to state that in his opinion another kind of nuclear reaction was actually occurring in place of cold fusion was, for the most part, glossed over. After all, what did a nuclear reaction mean to most of these authors, particularly if Krivit had openly confessed a belief that cold fusion was not occurring. cold fusion . nuclear reaction ... what's the difference! Needless to say, Krivit's capitulation upset many within the Cold Fusion community. Some feared (in fact, I myself feared) Krivit's confession would only confuse the issue in the eye of the general public. Soon afterwards, Krivit published NET #34, where he dropped another bombshell by openly questioning the validity of certain CF research results published by prominent CF researchers. As a BoD member I felt deeply concerned. I also felt obligated to spend a great deal of time trying to comprehend why Mr. Krivit's had come to such a conclusion. I was aware of the fact that Krivit, earlier in his NET career, had encountered what I would describe as an unexpected confrontation with a prominent CF researcher. I began to wonder if that initial confrontation had sowed the initial seeds of what
[Vo]:My involvement with Mr. Krivit as a former BoD - Part 2 of 3
Since Mr. Krivit would like us to accept his professional capacity both as an objective and competent investigative journalist; since Mr. Krivit hopes that enough of us will accept the conclusions he draws about Mr. Rossi Co's real agenda, I have found myself questioning why Mr. Krivit seems to be so relentless in his efforts to paint Rossi as a clever scam artist. From my perspective Krivits' efforts strike me as having transformed into an exceedingly one-dimensional attack against the reputation of a single individual: Andrea Rossi. In retrospect, I realize that Krivit pursuing such an agenda was not entirely unexpected. In the past Krivit has followed a similar agenda of going after the personal reputations of certain academics such as during the despicable Bubblegate debacle. Back then, I think Krivit garnering a lot of well deserved positive feedback for his tenacious efforts in revealing the dirt. In my mind, Krivit deserved the complements he received. But today we are talking about Andrea Rossi. We are talking about Rossi's professional reputation and why Krivit's agenda seems to be focused on dismantling the reputation of Rossi. As Jed recently pointed out, there seems to be no wiggle room left. What can Krivit do if it turns out that Rossi's controversial work is determined to be authentic? Despite all the scientific flaws currently associated with Rossi's controversial eCats many intelligent, well-informed scientifically literate individuals continue to suspect Rossi's eCats, flawed as they may be within the scientific community, are the genuine article. Under the circumstances I have remained baffled over the fact that Krivit seems to be oblivious to their observations. For Krivit to have essentially cornered himself in the manner that he has chosen raises serious questions in my mind. He is now risking his professional career in an All-for-Nothing gamble based on what is essentially a personal hunch - Krivit's personal hunch. The agenda Krivit currently seems to be pursuing strikes me as having little to do with investigative journalism. It strikes me more as mirroring the classic novel, Moby Dick, of Captain Ahab's relentless pursuit of the white whale. I've personally witnessed this kind of hunt in the past, such as in the dysfunctional behaviors of other investigative reporters I've known. I recall a string of relentless attacks from UFO investigator Kevin Randle that had been launched against his former partner Don Schmitt after Schmitt disgraced himself by lying to Randle over in incredibly petty matter. Nothing good comes of such relentless attacks other than the generation of a lot of juicy UFO tabloid sensation that was of interest only to a small incestuous inner circle of UFO investigators and gawkers. Years of wasted effort that could have been more productively channeled elsewhere. And now, on to some of my personal observations: Two former NET BoD members (prior to me) had been active Vortex-l participants. I could be wrong but I'm under the impression that at present none on the current BoD membership check vortex posts. If some still do, they probably do so only sporadically - perhaps to monitor the posts of certain individuals of passing interest to them. IOW, associations with the Vort Collective appear to have been systematically eliminated from the ability of making any kind of useful contribution to NET's BoD, and to Mr. Krivit. I noticed that any BoD member Mr. Krivit perceived as challenging his authority or his job performance was asked to resign. This in itself is certainly understandable. NET is, after all, Mr. Krivit's baby and he can bring it up anyway he chooses. When Krivit demanded the resignation of a certain vortex participating BoD member I did my best to intercede on BoD's behalf. I suggested that the member's resignation would be unwise, a waste of a valuable resource. I don't know if it was due to my personal efforts or not, but the Vortex participating BoD member remained, at least temporarily. Unfortunately, after I resigned he was soon kicked out. Mr. Krivit appeared to have become terrified of Mr. Lomax. Much of the Lomax/Krivit conflict came to the forefront in the aftermath of NET's infamous Issue #34, where Krivit questioned the conclusions certain prominent cold fusion researchers had arrived at. Krivit concluded that fusion isn't occurring. Krivit claimed that a mysterious nuclear reaction was instead occurring. (I still don't understand the all-too subtle distinctions drawn between a fusion reaction versus a nuclear reaction, even after repeatedly asking Krivit during my capacity as a BoD member.) Be that as it may, what seriously concerned me was the fact that Krivit was claiming that cold fusion evidence had been deliberately manipulated in such a fashion as to indicate fusion had occurred when in Krivit's opinion it really hadn't. The implication was that the professional reputations of certain prominent
[Vo]:My involvement with Mr. Krivit as a former BoD - Part 1 of 3 (resend)
(This is a resend) Recently, I noticed that some within the Vort Collective have puzzled over the relationship that seems to exist between New Energy Times (NET) and Mr. Krivit. They wondered what NET's agenda might be since it would seem as if Mr. Krivit is doing NET's bidding. It would seem that these individuals have misunderstood a fundamental fact that Mr. Krivit and NET are essentially the same entity. There is no mysterious anonymous group of individuals running NET other than Krivit himself - plus a few helpers or volunteers under Krivit's directorship. I believe NET is a legitimate Tax Exempt entity. To exist as a legal entity, insofar as the IRS is concerned, it must maintain an active Board of Directors (BoD) that regularly meets. They are required to correspond at least by conference calls several times a year. The BoD must also meet in person at least once a year. As a former BoD member I participated in several of these conference calls. I also participated in an in-person meeting held in Milwaukee. Regardless of the alleged functions a BoD is supposed to perform it became clear to me that Mr. Krivit would will not allow himself to be directed by anyone. Advised perhaps, but never directed. More on that later. As best as I can tell the only power anyone might possibly hold over Mr. Krivit's journalistic approach (on behalf of NET) would be his financial backers, or sponsors. While I was still a BoD member the sponsor appeared to be a single business operating in the food industry. It was a company owned and operated by a single owner. Maybe Krivit has managed to find additional sponsors since my departure. For NET's sake, I hope so. * * * Before I begin expressing some of my personal observations in some depth, I need to state that IMHO private correspondence should remain private. To publicly reveal private correspondence would be a breach of a sacred trust one tries to forge with another person. In that capacity I shall not reveal the actual contents of personal correspondence. However, since it is known that Krivit has violated what was presumed to have been private correspondence, such as publicly posting the private comments of a former NET BoD to the Vortex-l group; since Krivit cc'd my own private correspondence to the rest of the NET BoD, correspondence that was specifically meant for his eyes alone because I did not want to publicly criticize him in front of his peers, I now find myself inclined to stretch the meaning of my own rules - just a little. I will stretch those rules by expressing a few personal observations I acquired of Mr. Krivit while on NET's BoD. For the record, I became a NET BoD membership in the fall of 2009. I resigned from the membership on May 5 2010. I recall Krivit's NET sponsor, and by that I mean the owner of that business, got very angry at Mr. Krivit. But I'm getting ahead of my personal recollections. First, a little history. It might have all started when Krivit published (blogged) an unexpected confession of sorts, where he publicly admitted in front of everyone that he no longer believed that cold fusion was occurring. Mr. Krivit's confession was subsequently picked up by a couple of mainstream publications. It was as if a former Cold Fusion enthusiast had finally seen the light of day. It was as if Krivit was now embracing the traditional scientific POV concerning cold fusion, as if the science was actually pseudo science. I don't believe that was what Krivit was actually trying to say, but I wonder how many authors after having read Krivit's confession had really picked up on what had led up to his transformation. What was considered news to many of these popular publications was the fact that Krivit, a former Cold Fusion believer was no longer a Cold Fusion believer. The fact the Krivit went on to state that in his opinion another kind of nuclear reaction was actually occurring in place of cold fusion was, for the most part, glossed over. After all, what did a nuclear reaction mean to most of these authors, particularly if Krivit had openly confessed a belief that cold fusion was not occurring. cold fusion . nuclear reaction ... what's the difference! Needless to say, Krivit's capitulation upset many within the Cold Fusion community. Some feared (in fact, I myself feared) Krivit's confession would only confuse the issue in the eye of the general public. Soon afterwards, Krivit published NET #34, where he dropped another bombshell by openly questioning the validity of certain CF research results published by prominent CF researchers. As a BoD member I felt deeply concerned. I also felt obligated to spend a great deal of time trying to comprehend why Mr. Krivit's had come to such a conclusion. I was aware of the fact that Krivit, earlier in his NET career, had encountered what I would describe as an unexpected confrontation with a prominent CF researcher. I began to wonder if that initial confrontation had sowed
[Vo]:OT: an engineer's guide to cats
I think this engineer's guide to cats is the next best thing until an engineer's guide to ecats becomes available. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHXBL6bzAR4 Harry
