Re: [Vo]:Rossi Nickel enrichment : is a liquid-phase Calutron possible?
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The ion diffusion speed in an electrolyte is only some centimeters per minute at best, while the speed in a Calutron is probably some 100 to some 1000 kilometres per second. Therefore the mass inertia of the nucleus at this low speed has no effect. The electrolyte vessel must be some 1000 km long for this to work. Yes, but can't the liquid be accelerated to a sufficient velocity using pumps? A quick search reveals that the radius of the circular path described by a charged particle subject to a transverse magnetic field is R = mv/qB where m is the mass, v is the velocity, q is the charge and B is the field in tesla. Assume we want to separate two isotopes of masses m1 and m2, we'll want R1 - R2 d for some sufficiently large d. Take d = 1cm, m1 = 58 amu and m2 = 64 amu, and q = 2 x 1.6e-19 C (for Ni 2+), then we need v = qB/(m1 - m2) = 32e6 m/s/T. For a 100 nano tesla field, this gives 3.2 m/s and R1 = 9.6 m and R2 = 10.6 m. I suppose 3.2 m/s is a reasonable velocity. If we pump the solution so that the Ni2+ ions reach a velocity of 3.2 m/s while keeping the magnetic field around 100 nanotesla, we might be able to separate them. By properly orienting the setup with respect to the Earth's magnetic field, some mu-metal shielding or using some active cancellation technique, it might be possible to obtain a 100 nT field. The problem might be that you will also have whatever cations are present swirling in the opposite direction. I don't know how that would affect the Ni2+ ions. Any physicists / electrochemists in the room? -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Mats Lewan on Steam Quality
Mattia Rizzi wrote: The point 2 is CRITICAL when the measuremnt is done with point 1, because without using a demister you made a mesuremnt error that *over-extimate* the real energy produced. Over-estimate by how much? 470 kW? I doubt it. The exact power level does not matter. An hour after you turn off input power, the pipe coming out out would be at room temperature. It would be obvious there is no heat. You do not need high precision to prove the thing is producing anomalous heat. The colonel's methods are standard HVAC techniques, and they are fine. Anyone can always think of a more precise way, to make a measurement. The question is: Will the extra precision add to the confidence of the result? Or will it only add meaningless extra digits of precision while confusing the issue with extra layers of complexity? The suggestions made here by skeptics will have the latter effect. - Jed
[Vo]:Valve to condensate bucket was closed
Someone pointed out to me that when Lewan made the video, the valve leading to the condensate bucket was closed. It must have been open before that, because there was condensate in the bucket. Based on how toy steam engines work, I suppose that pipe had a great deal of water and condensate in it at first, before the entire machine heated up. I suppose they drained the line. When it cleared and only steam came out, they closed the valve. That is the usual method. The notion that you could have water at these temperatures and pressures is ridiculous. It was steam - Jed
[Vo]:Re: Mats Lewan on Steam Quality
Jed, how can you made such measurements without even a water trap? Why you can't realize that? It's a 2 million trade. The expert didn't add even a simple water trap. It's amazing! -Messaggio originale- From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 2:45 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mats Lewan on Steam Quality Mattia Rizzi wrote: The point 2 is CRITICAL when the measuremnt is done with point 1, because without using a demister you made a mesuremnt error that *over-extimate* the real energy produced. Over-estimate by how much? 470 kW? I doubt it. The exact power level does not matter. An hour after you turn off input power, the pipe coming out out would be at room temperature. It would be obvious there is no heat. You do not need high precision to prove the thing is producing anomalous heat. The colonel's methods are standard HVAC techniques, and they are fine. Anyone can always think of a more precise way, to make a measurement. The question is: Will the extra precision add to the confidence of the result? Or will it only add meaningless extra digits of precision while confusing the issue with extra layers of complexity? The suggestions made here by skeptics will have the latter effect. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Mats Lewan on Steam Quality
Mattia Rizzi wrote: Jed, how can you made such measurements without even a water trap? That was a water trap. You can see it trapped water and condensate. Presumably when steam began coming out, they closed it. That's how people operate steam engines, as I mentioned. Why you can't realize that? It's a 2 million trade. The expert didn't add even a simple water trap. It's amazing! No, it isn't. I suggest you watch someone test a boiler sometime, or run an old fashioned steam engine. Once the pipes fill with steam and the temperature goes over 100°C and stays there, the pipes do not later magically fill with water or condensate again. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: Mats Lewan on Steam Quality
That was a water trap. You can see it trapped water and condensate. This isn't a water trap. A water trap is a U shaped tube. It physically force water to go down. See it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_%28plumbing%29 What they made is a small hole inside the tube, like a T. Not U-shaped tube. This not constrain water to go down, especially when there is a high wind made by the steam. -Messaggio originale- From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 3:01 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Mats Lewan on Steam Quality Mattia Rizzi wrote: Jed, how can you made such measurements without even a water trap? That was a water trap. You can see it trapped water and condensate. Presumably when steam began coming out, they closed it. That's how people operate steam engines, as I mentioned. Why you can't realize that? It's a 2 million trade. The expert didn't add even a simple water trap. It's amazing! No, it isn't. I suggest you watch someone test a boiler sometime, or run an old fashioned steam engine. Once the pipes fill with steam and the temperature goes over 100°C and stays there, the pipes do not later magically fill with water or condensate again. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Mats Lewan on Steam Quality
I think the thing that is missing from this discussion is that, assuming Domenico Fioravanti is really working for The Customer (who is seeming like a missing player from the Matrix series, similar to The Engineer, The Architect, etc), Col. Fioravanti has been present for a while. He is documented to have been present in the October 6th demonstration and has likely been hanging around the eCat plant for a good while. Everyone seems to want to believe that what we are witnessing is Andrea Rossi's attemptimg to convince the world that his reaction is real and, thusly, he needs to be running experiments with proper controls and measuring devices. Well folks, that is NOT AR's goal in all this fanfare. His goal is to become rich and, oh, by the way, save the world and go down in history. If you wish to see proper science conducted on the Rossi Reactor, you're gonna have to ante up and go buy yourself an eCat. That is likely what someone has just done right before our eyes. And Andrea Rossi is grinning from ear to ear because, it appears, someone gave him some money . . . lots of money. Now he gets to keep that beautiful wife and buy that nice Villa in Miami with hot and cold running maids. Oh, and did I mention, he might just have saved the world? Meanwhile, elsewhere in the nascent world, someone queried DGT about who invented their reactor core. Their response was not what I expected: All resonable questions raised in this forum will be answered in due time. This includes your question also . Thank you http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=374 T T
[Vo]:Defkalion Responds to Questions
Defkalion responds to a reader re: the possibility of DGT's Hyperions replacing the Fukishima reactors: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=431p=3617#p3617 ___ Could the steam temperature be safely raised to 600 degrees C or higher for more efficient large scale energy production? The 414C output (from the external heat exchangers) is the upper limit for safe operation of Hyperions at the moment (ie according to the present generation of technology of the reactor and the product design). Any future development raising this upper limit will require further careful redesign and testing of all product's architecture designs, materials in use etc to guarantee the highest safety levels required by law and regulations for any energy production product. What would be the minimum temperature required to make such power plants cost effective? 245-260C, based on the existing steam turbine technologies. Obviously, for such large power plants natural gas would be the preferred start-up heat source, right? Yes, this is one solution out of several available. We can not say yet if it is preferred on no. Comments? Using LENR technologies in large scale as a base source of energy , is obviously a huge challenge as far as this will reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous or environmental non-friendly row materials such as radioactive, coal of hydrocarbons. According to our understanding the exploitation of technologies such as Hyperions, meets a second challenge of the same importance: the preparation of the gradual transition to the next generation of power networks, moving away from their present hierarchical topologies -that require plants like Fukushima and insufficient distribution networks (in terms of economics, energy loses and monstrous sized supporting organizations). Maybe the future energy (heat and electricity) networks topologies will look more like the Internet topology (as described also by Jerremy Rifkin in The Hydrogen Economy http://www.foet.org/books/hydrogen-economy.html ). We envision and hope Hyperions to play a certain role in such transition in analogy to the PC role in the mean we use in our communication right now. Thank you for your question PS The server hosting this forum or the searching machine you use every day are not not based on a main-frame any more. Arrays of hundreds of PC work perfectly and efficiently. Maybe we have to skip the mainframe stage of evolution this time, don't you think? To view all of Defkalion's responses since site inception: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/search.php?keywords=terms=allauthor=Defkalion+GTsc=1sf=allsk=tsd=dsr=postsst=0ch=300t=0submit=Search
RE: [Vo]:Rossi Nickel enrichment : is a liquid-phase Calutron possible?
It seems you are conflating two processes when only one will suffice. And one of them is absurd from the start. Why pump the liquid at all? Why use a magnetic field with pumping, when a simpler route exists? Calutrons were a gigantic waste of money in the Manhattan project and were only used for a few years as an expedient. Centrifugal acceleration (even the common lab centrifuge) should give similar or better results, if what you want is enrichment by density gradient in a NiCl solution. In fact the chloride is ready-made for this since by varying the water content and temperature (solubility) - the heavier fraction can be solidified by chilling - while the light fraction remains a liquid and is more easily removed at the early stages (to automate the process). If you are going for enriching an isotope that is 10% denser, it will take at least seven stages for every doubling (not counting losses). This is the rule of seventy (similar to formula used in compound interest). Therefore, to increase a 1% isotope to 16% might require a minimum of 28 stages of progressive enrichment, but when losses are included, it is probably closer to 50 stages. Automation makes a big difference with this many stages. For the NiCl solution (hexa-hydrate) the solubility is 254 g/100 mL at 20 °C - and 600 g/100 mL at 100 °C. That difference could help a lot in automating the processing, so that even 50 stages in a continuous centrifuging would not be a insurmountable problem to get 64Ni enriched to a level in the mid-teens at an affordable cost. At least this is doable, but - as for final cost - that is another question based on many issues. But if the enrichment percentage can be kept to a low level, it need not be too expensive for the numbers Rossi is throwing around. This is because with NiCl - the rejected isotopes are of the same value as the feedstock, and this makes the processing simply a matter of overhead, efficiency and labor. The bulk nickel is no less useful in industry - with the 64Ni removed as with it there. In effect, you only rent the feedstock, removing very little. That is a huge difference compared to what we look to as the model for isotope enrichment. With uranium enrichment - in contrast, the feedstock cost must be 100% absorbed in the cost of the enrichment (since the depleted U has almost no value) so that factor alone grossly inflates the net cost by several orders of magnitude (compared to nickel). Enrichment cost alone, for even the heavy metals - is not outrageous so long as there is a large market for the depleted feedstock. That is key. There seldom is a market, but since nickel has that as its major feature, then an enriched isotope on a mass production scale, for a NiH energy system, is not out of the question. -Original Message- From: Berke Durak On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The ion diffusion speed in an electrolyte is only some centimeters per minute at best, while the speed in a Calutron is probably some 100 to some 1000 kilometres per second. Therefore the mass inertia of the nucleus at this low speed has no effect. The electrolyte vessel must be some 1000 km long for this to work. Yes, but can't the liquid be accelerated to a sufficient velocity using pumps? A quick search reveals that the radius of the circular path described by a charged particle subject to a transverse magnetic field is R = mv/qB where m is the mass, v is the velocity, q is the charge and B is the field in tesla. Assume we want to separate two isotopes of masses m1 and m2, we'll want R1 - R2 d for some sufficiently large d. Take d = 1cm, m1 = 58 amu and m2 = 64 amu, and q = 2 x 1.6e-19 C (for Ni 2+), then we need v = qB/(m1 - m2) = 32e6 m/s/T. For a 100 nano tesla field, this gives 3.2 m/s and R1 = 9.6 m and R2 = 10.6 m. I suppose 3.2 m/s is a reasonable velocity. If we pump the solution so that the Ni2+ ions reach a velocity of 3.2 m/s while keeping the magnetic field around 100 nanotesla, we might be able to separate them. By properly orienting the setup with respect to the Earth's magnetic field, some mu-metal shielding or using some active cancellation technique, it might be possible to obtain a 100 nT field. The problem might be that you will also have whatever cations are present swirling in the opposite direction. I don't know how that would affect the Ni2+ ions. Any physicists / electrochemists in the room? -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Thermophotovoltaic systems - Another way to use heat from an ECat
As someone reminded on me on facebook all bodies radiate and the radiation spectrum depends on the temperature of body as per the blackbody model. However, I guess what I really had in mind was some sort of nanoengineered material ( metamaterial) which would glow in the visible sprectrum at cooler temperatures instead of at 5000k. It would be similar to phosphorescence. harry On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Thermophotovoltaic systems could provide another way of converting the heat from ECat into electricity. Or if you just want light then there is no need to make electricity. Imagine a flashlight powered by a minature eCat. http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=16945ch=nanotech I posted this link on Rossi's blog. Harry
[Vo]:OT: Celestial Dreaming
Cold star http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/Cold_star Location: The Dream Lord's dream world Appearances: DW: Amy's Choice A cold star was a celestial object that existed in a dream shared by Rory Williams, Amy Pond, and the Eleventh Doctor, created by psychic pollen that had become lodged in the inner workings of the TARDIS. Unlike a normal star, the cold star burned cold. Whereas other stars emitted warming radiation, this apparently endothermic star caused temperatures to plummet approaching the star itself. The Doctor claimed he had never encountered a cold star prior to the psychic pollen episode, and he, Amy, and Rory were sceptical such a thing could exist. After the resolution of the dream states, ending the apparent threat of the cold star, it remained unclear to the Doctor and his companions whether such an object could exist in reality.
Re: [Vo]:Daily Mail reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo.
On 2011-11-03 22:21, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: www.msnbc.msn.com reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo. Hagelstein is quoted. All in all, seems to be a fairly positive report. No blatant misinformation or stupid misrepresentations that I could spot. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2057611/Italian-scientist-claims-achieved-cold-fusion--problem-physicists-think-impossible.html Here's an article on the same test, on Daily Mail. Can't get more mainstream than this! Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:New article / Rossi quotes
Am 04.11.2011 06:59, schrieb Peter Gluck: Very well written paper. Bravissimo, Haiko! If you understand german read my comment: http://www.heise.de/tp/foren/S-Einfache-Erklaerung/forum-214972/msg-21021826/read/changeview-c/ Peter Peter On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Haiko Lietz h...@haikolietz.de mailto:h...@haikolietz.de wrote: Dear all, I've published part 10 of my CF column in German online magazine Telepolis. Of course it's about Rossi again: http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/35/35803/1.html People quoted: - Andrea Rossi - Jed Rothwell - Giseppe Levi - Horace Heffner - Terry Blanton Quotes from Andrea Rossi (Oct 9 2011) not used in the article: What was the purpose of the October 6 experiment? SEE BELOW Did you use the secondary water circuit to measure output energy to avoid the wet steam criticism? YES Why does output power momentarily rise when input power is cut? Do Pout (power out) and the Eout (Energy out) describe the net excess, not the total? THE REASON OF THIS IS CONFIDENTIAL Why was the experiment stopped after 7.5h instead of 12h? Is it because the reaction became unstable? THE TEST TIME HAS BEEN 12 HOURA, DURING WHICH WE HAD TO MAKE ALSO WEIGHT, COOLING TO ALLOW TO DISASSEMBLE ALL THE PARTS TO PUT IN EVIDENCE ALL THE INSTRUMENTATION, TO DISASSEMBLE THE INSULATION TO ALLOW TO SEE EVERYTHING POSSIBLE. THE 12 HOURA WERE FOR ALL OF THIS, AND ALL HAS BEEN MADE AS SCHEDULED, FROM 9,30 A.M. TO 11,30 P.M. What does the device „producing frequencies“ do? CONFIDENTIAL -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Daily Mail reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo.
Daily Mail wrote: »Several high-profile demonstrations of 'cold fusion' have been proven to be hoaxes in the past» I would gladly see any examples of »high-profile» or even low profile cold fusion demonstrations that ended up been a hoax. It is unbelievable how little fact based information people require for writing. Is it that people do not have ability to separate facts from assumptions? However we have few high profile hot fusion demonstrations presented that were hoaxes. Such as ITER, that is known to be a hoax a priori. –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Daily Mail reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo.
Have you ever met a journalist? They are a lower form of life. -- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin --- On Fri, 11/4/11, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: From: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Daily Mail reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo. To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Friday, November 4, 2011, 12:19 PM Daily Mail wrote: »Several high-profile demonstrations of 'cold fusion' have been proven to be hoaxes in the past» I would gladly see any examples of »high-profile» or even low profile cold fusion demonstrations that ended up been a hoax. It is unbelievable how little fact based information people require for writing. Is it that people do not have ability to separate facts from assumptions? However we have few high profile hot fusion demonstrations presented that were hoaxes. Such as ITER, that is known to be a hoax a priori. –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Daily Mail reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo.
At 09:57 AM 11/4/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: On 2011-11-03 22:21, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2057611/Italian-scientist-claims-achieved-cold-fusion--problem-physicists-think-impossible.html Here's an article on the same test, on Daily Mail. Can't get more mainstream than this! Has some of the same quotes as the Fox article ... ? http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/11/04/article-2057611-0EAB31D40578-330_468x286.jpg Key: Rossi says he has produced a pattern of triple track atoms, pictured, which is at the heart of the cold fusion theory That's a new one for me? I don't recall Rossi claiming that. (and google doesn't give any clear hits before Oct 28). The links I DID look at quote Pamela Mosier-Boss, not Rossi, as an EXAMPLE of LENR/CF.
Re: [Vo]:Daily Mail reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo.
Robinson also covered this back in April. He's not a specialized science reporter. Italian scientist claims he has achieved 'cold fusion' - the only problem is that most physicists think it is impossible http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2057611/Italian-scientist-Andrea-Rossi-claims-achieved-cold-fusion.html
Re: [Vo]:New article / Rossi quotes
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote: Am 04.11.2011 06:59, schrieb Peter Gluck: Very well written paper. Bravissimo, Haiko! If you understand german read my comment: http://www.heise.de/tp/foren/S-Einfache-Erklaerung/forum-214972/msg-21021826/read/changeview-c/http://www.heise.de/tp/foren/S-Einfache-Erklaerung/forum-214972/msg-21021826/read/changeview-c/ Or, ask Mr. Google! See below. You have a remarkable imagination. If you believe half of what you wrote here you are a true believer indeed. - Jed Simple explanation (Edited by the author on 04:11:11 18:03) *Peter Heckert, Peter Heckert* (1 post since 16:01:08) The previous demos are easily explainable. He has a wireless switch for the heater. Whenever no one looks at the power meter, he will turn the tide. This was not recorded. For hardship cases, it has a vacuum pump to the steam hose in the wall disappears. There he can suck the water and, if the reactor has an outlet to create a little bubble, so that one believes that all cooks. He has the visitors never inside the shown evaporator which was always sealed tightly. He could clean pump via a cable and compressed air. A phase change thermal buffer instead of the lead shielding can buffer the abrupt temperature changes. When he these procedures in some cases combined and more tricks has, then it can also lead gullible physics professors on the ice. He also invites so only one hand-picked people who are easily deceived. The critic Eckström he has, although in his forum was promised, probably not invited. Also, Brian Josephson, he has not invited, although officially he has said. In the blog of one of his close associates, Passi, is then read, Brian Josephson had not come around because he fears his scientific reputation. Ridiculous, if you know which ideas and theories he represents. He is a unique Beführworter LENR. Perhaps the editors can search times, which people were invited. he has invited a reporter Peter Svensson, AP News, which is not at all concerned with such things on iPhones and vorewiegend writing and computer technology. He even gave him a right of priority granted. Mr. Svensson has it but probably have preferred not to publish report, and now, of course, hawked, the truth would be censored. Rossi Had there can find nobody else, such as National Geographic or Scientific American? His claims Rossi could so easily proved, in his skills. Because he does not have to do is accept that his skills used to deceive. suspicions aroused, that the E-Cat just then had a leak and not to repair was when NASA scientists were present. These were then egebnislos move away again. As Rossi has probably a problem for such emergency cases built ;-). 1MW demonstration when the course was not so easy. Because the customer but was anonymous, it is doubtful that there ever was a real customer. Interestingly, however, is that nobody on the development of heat was interested in the 4-way ventilated cooler, which produced 470 kW has dissipated. That is about 4 cubic meter of air, the hot 100 ° is, per second. It could be used to heat a cathedral, and this energy was focused on a Grundfäche of about 25 m ^ 2! But none of the observers in the videos has a high remarks made heat. Are these people for all deaf and blind, drugged and hypnotized , or 150% of ignorant people, including the present physicist Levi? Peter
Re: [Vo]:New article / Rossi quotes
Am 04.11.2011 19:19, schrieb Jed Rothwell: On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: Am 04.11.2011 06:59, schrieb Peter Gluck: Very well written paper. Bravissimo, Haiko! If you understand german read my comment: http://www.heise.de/tp/foren/S-Einfache-Erklaerung/forum-214972/msg-21021826/read/changeview-c/ Or, ask Mr. Google! See below. You have a remarkable imagination. If you believe half of what you wrote here you are a true believer indeed. Yes indeed. But I firmly believe, Rossi has even more imagination and phantasy and creativity . ;-) Thanks for the translation. It is a little bit strange, but mostly understandable, if you know what the subject is. I had some typos in the original german text and google did not translate these. Peter - Jed Simple explanation (Edited by the author on 04:11:11 18:03) /Peter Heckert, Peter Heckert/ (1 post since 16:01:08) The previous demos are easily explainable. He has a wireless switch for the heater. Whenever no one looks at the power meter, he will turn the tide. This was not recorded. For hardship cases, it has a vacuum pump to the steam hose in the wall disappears. There he can suck the water and, if the reactor has an outlet to create a little bubble, so that one believes that all cooks. He has the visitors never inside the shown evaporator which was always sealed tightly. He could clean pump via a cable and compressed air. A phase change thermal buffer instead of the lead shielding can buffer the abrupt temperature changes. When he these procedures in some cases combined and more tricks has, then it can also lead gullible physics professors on the ice. He also invites so only one hand-picked people who are easily deceived. The critic Eckström he has, although in his forum was promised, probably not invited. Also, Brian Josephson, he has not invited, although officially he has said. In the blog of one of his close associates, Passi, is then read, Brian Josephson had not come around because he fears his scientific reputation. Ridiculous, if you know which ideas and theories he represents. He is a unique Beführworter LENR. Perhaps the editors can search times, which people were invited. he has invited a reporter Peter Svensson, AP News, which is not at all concerned with such things on iPhones and vorewiegend writing and computer technology. He even gave him a right of priority granted. Mr. Svensson has it but probably have preferred not to publish report, and now, of course, hawked, the truth would be censored. Rossi Had there can find nobody else, such as National Geographic or Scientific American? His claims Rossi could so easily proved, in his skills. Because he does not have to do is accept that his skills used to deceive. suspicions aroused, that the E-Cat just then had a leak and not to repair was when NASA scientists were present. These were then egebnislos move away again. As Rossi has probably a problem for such emergency cases built ;-). 1MW demonstration when the course was not so easy. Because the customer but was anonymous, it is doubtful that there ever was a real customer. Interestingly, however, is that nobody on the development of heat was interested in the 4-way ventilated cooler, which produced 470 kW has dissipated. That is about 4 cubic meter of air, the hot 100 ° is, per second. It could be used to heat a cathedral, and this energy was focused on a Grundfäche of about 25 m ^ 2! But none of the observers in the videos has a high remarks made heat. Are these people for all deaf and blind, drugged and hypnotized , or 150% of ignorant people, including the present physicist Levi? Peter
Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg
Dave, I think you have an underlying misconception. It isn't thermal energy that is being exploited, catalytic energy is related to Casimir geometry which in the case of nanotubes only occurs at openings and defects in the nanotube as recently discovered by Peng Chen at Cornell using an AFM. This establishes a relationship between catalytic action and change in Casimir force - geometry. It is a difference in vacuum energy density not temperature that feeds the reaction so you are not exhausting a thermal reservoir. IMHO this is why gas is a necessary part of the equation since relative motion of gas to the Casimir geometry is maintained by HUP. This is the same source of energy that keeps gas from becoming solid at absolute zero.. hence can be referred to as Zero Point Energy. The similarity between skeletal catalysts and the Casimir geometry of nano powders also supports this relationship. Within the context of the above relationship there can be no hydrino without Casimir geometry, as the hydrino or IRH diffuses out of the catalyst or nano powder it simply translates back to normal hydrogen. There would therefore be no hydrinos floating freely in the atmosphere and it remains an open question if di-hydrinos are even possible much less if their covalent bond could hold the hydrino in this catalyzed state outside of the catalyst. If Jan Naudts is correct about the hydrino / IRH being relativistic then one could say the hydrino only exists from a relativistic perspective and locally appears just like normal hydrogen. Most would say this kind of time dilation or equivalent acceleration is impossible in the confines of a bulk material sitting in a lab but we are conditioned to think in terms of a Pythagorean relationship with C to solve for gamma and I think suppression side steps this issue. Suppression reduces energy density instead of increasing it and instead of equivalent acceleration it affords equivalent de-acceleration. Regards Fran From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 4:37 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg Thank you for the response. The hydrino cycle that I am describing, aka heat pump of some unusual type, would allow energy contained within the thermal surroundings to do work. I can imagine some of that work being used to generate radiant energy that could then escape the system. This escaping energy would cause the local system to cool off. This technique sounds a lot like a violation of the laws of thermodynamics. I guess that a similar process occurs when a dust cloud cools down by radiating heat energy. Is there any way that we can verify that a process exists which will enable the hydrinos to absorb the hypothetical energy you discussed and emerge as hydrogen again? Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Nov 2, 2011 3:35 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg In reply to David Roberson's message of Wed, 2 Nov 2011 09:12:47 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] That is the question that I would like to have answered. Would the hydrino be able to acquire the needed energy from the thermal energy available of the atmosphere? If not, why have not all of the hydrogen atoms in existence (on earth) been catalyzed during the eons of time that has been available? Because in order to be catalyzed, they need to exist as individual atoms, whereas all the Hydrogen on Earth exists bound in chemical compounds. Furthermore even when present as an atom, it still needs to come across a catalyst atom too. My main purpose for asking the question is to determine if some type of heat pump could be used where hydrogen is turned into hydrinos releasing heat and then released. Then I was hoping that they would reacquire the energy from the thermal environment to be recycled. This sounds like a breech of the second law, but why not give it a try. :-) Dave I don't think so, though perhaps solar x-rays in the upper atmosphere might reconstitute them. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Valve to condensate bucket was closed
Am 04.11.2011 14:56, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Someone pointed out to me that when Lewan made the video, the valve leading to the condensate bucket was closed. It must have been open before that, because there was condensate in the bucket. Based on how toy steam engines work, I suppose that pipe had a great deal of water and condensate in it at first, before the entire machine heated up. I suppose they drained the line. When it cleared and only steam came out, they closed the valve. That is the usual method. Rossi, when asked, explained in his forum the valve was left open always according to an agreement with the customer. He said the video was made after the test was stopped. So you must be misinformed ;-) Nonsense of course. If it is left open steam leaks out and the condensate cannot been measured. Your method is reasonable. Rossi is overworked and unable to explain the simplest facts correctly.
Re: [Vo]:New article / Rossi quotes
Peter I was born in Temeswar many years ago, this town was then penta-national and tetra-linguistic; I have learned German from childhood. Later I have forgotten Serbian but have learned English, Russian French Italian- all very useful when you are a researcher. For my best German friend please search for Kaltwasaser doctrine if you have time. Peter On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote: Am 04.11.2011 19:19, schrieb Jed Rothwell: On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote: Am 04.11.2011 06:59, schrieb Peter Gluck: Very well written paper. Bravissimo, Haiko! If you understand german read my comment: http://www.heise.de/tp/foren/S-Einfache-Erklaerung/forum-214972/msg-21021826/read/changeview-c/http://www.heise.de/tp/foren/S-Einfache-Erklaerung/forum-214972/msg-21021826/read/changeview-c/ Or, ask Mr. Google! See below. You have a remarkable imagination. If you believe half of what you wrote here you are a true believer indeed. Yes indeed. But I firmly believe, Rossi has even more imagination and phantasy and creativity . ;-) Thanks for the translation. It is a little bit strange, but mostly understandable, if you know what the subject is. I had some typos in the original german text and google did not translate these. Peter - Jed Simple explanation (Edited by the author on 04:11:11 18:03) *Peter Heckert, Peter Heckert* (1 post since 16:01:08) The previous demos are easily explainable. He has a wireless switch for the heater. Whenever no one looks at the power meter, he will turn the tide. This was not recorded. For hardship cases, it has a vacuum pump to the steam hose in the wall disappears. There he can suck the water and, if the reactor has an outlet to create a little bubble, so that one believes that all cooks. He has the visitors never inside the shown evaporator which was always sealed tightly. He could clean pump via a cable and compressed air. A phase change thermal buffer instead of the lead shielding can buffer the abrupt temperature changes. When he these procedures in some cases combined and more tricks has, then it can also lead gullible physics professors on the ice. He also invites so only one hand-picked people who are easily deceived. The critic Eckström he has, although in his forum was promised, probably not invited. Also, Brian Josephson, he has not invited, although officially he has said. In the blog of one of his close associates, Passi, is then read, Brian Josephson had not come around because he fears his scientific reputation. Ridiculous, if you know which ideas and theories he represents. He is a unique Beführworter LENR. Perhaps the editors can search times, which people were invited. he has invited a reporter Peter Svensson, AP News, which is not at all concerned with such things on iPhones and vorewiegend writing and computer technology. He even gave him a right of priority granted. Mr. Svensson has it but probably have preferred not to publish report, and now, of course, hawked, the truth would be censored. Rossi Had there can find nobody else, such as National Geographic or Scientific American? His claims Rossi could so easily proved, in his skills. Because he does not have to do is accept that his skills used to deceive. suspicions aroused, that the E-Cat just then had a leak and not to repair was when NASA scientists were present. These were then egebnislos move away again. As Rossi has probably a problem for such emergency cases built ;-). 1MW demonstration when the course was not so easy. Because the customer but was anonymous, it is doubtful that there ever was a real customer. Interestingly, however, is that nobody on the development of heat was interested in the 4-way ventilated cooler, which produced 470 kW has dissipated. That is about 4 cubic meter of air, the hot 100 ° is, per second. It could be used to heat a cathedral, and this energy was focused on a Grundfäche of about 25 m ^ 2! But none of the observers in the videos has a high remarks made heat. Are these people for all deaf and blind, drugged and hypnotized , or 150% of ignorant people, including the present physicist Levi? Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Daily Mail reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo.
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/11/04/article-2057611-0EAB31D40578-330_468x286.jpg Key: Rossi says he has produced a pattern of triple track atoms, pictured, which is at the heart of the cold fusion theory That's a new one for me? I don't recall Rossi claiming that. ROFL! He hasn't. Looks like the dailymail has a problem with the English language! Did you try running it through translate.google.com? :-) T
[Vo]:Some thoughts about Rossi's personality
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: Rossi is overworked and unable to explain the simplest facts correctly. In all seriousness, that is true. It is important aspect of his personality. I do not think it is because he is overworked. I think he is just not good at explaining things. That is no reflection on his intellect. It does not detract from his achievements. Many famous inventive people have had great difficulty explaining themselves, such as Harrison and Arata. Rossi is also careless and he gets facts wrong. He does not care about details. He REALLY does not care about details, to an extent that most of us find pathological. Take his webpage. He has a board of advisors listed including a professor who does not exist and probably never did. I told him the guy does not exist then he said something like: Well the name is something like that. I don't recall. What difference does it make? He said the same thing with regard to his fake PhD from the diploma mill. He said: someone gave me that; I don't know anything about it. As if we were talking about a vase on the shelf. He really, truly, sincerely does not give a fart about public relations or the fact that his web site features absurd statements. I suggested he take that stuff off his website because it gives a bad impression. He said he doesn't care about impressions and he does not want to bother to clean up the website. Not worth the trouble. It isn't as if he is lazy. He works 14 hours a day and only eats one meal a day in order to have more time to work and think. He lives in his own world, doing things his own way. People think he is lying when he's just describing what is in his imagination, which I believe is as real to him as the so-called real world. I would not call it lying because he makes no attempt to deceive anyone. He knows that anyone can check the fake PhD. It is what you might call a hypothetical PhD, one proposed for the sake of argument. Scientists and programmers often talk about hypotheticals and the future as if it were the present, already accomplished. Some of them live in a dream world. Ordinary people would say they are lying. It is said that Steve Jobs had a reality distortion field. When people worked with him or talked with him they began to believe his crazy notions, in some cases converting those notions into reality. Rossi also has a reality distortion field but it only works on him. The rest of us do not see what he sees. He too sometimes converts crazy notions into reality, but he does it by inventing things. His inventions are infinitely more important than those of Steve Jobs, so we should cut him some slack. One of the many ironic things about Rossi is how often people ascribe to him personality qualities which are the opposite of the way he is. He is said to be a master manipulator of people and a superb confidence man. Where does anyone get that idea?!? I have never met someone who inspires less confidence! He makes legitimate businessman sweat in fear while they look for an excuse to bolt for the door. Krivit calls him strategic, articulate, charming. Good grief! What strategy?!? It looks like chaos to me, shifting from a deal with Defkalion one month to selling reactors the next. Articulate? He cannot express a simple, conventional technical concept without inducing confusion. Charming? He is one of the least charming people I have encountered. He is sweet at times, but he aggravates everyone I know -- especially his friends. The ability to constantly shift your plans and change your mind is vital to the kind of intuitive, hands-on experimental work that Rossi does, or to an artist or fiction writer, but it makes interacting with other people awkward. Rossi has many outstanding qualities, and many faults too, but he does not have a single one of the qualities ascribed to him by Krivit or Heckert. Perhaps Rossi is in some sense a mirror to us. He is so confusing and so unexpected, we project our own fears and hopes in him. We end up seeing and him whenever we want to see, or whatever we fear. Whatever else he is, he is like the fellow in the beer commercial: the most interesting man in the world. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg
You are correct Fran, I am confused about the hydrino theory. I think I understand that you imply that the hydrino can not exist outside of the nanotube structure. If this is true then it would not be possible to extract energy from the beast. Whatever you borrowed must be returned very soon. At least that is the way I understand thermodynamics. Does that theory actually allow energy to be taken from the vacuum? If so, I would like to understand that a lot better. Also, has anyone been able to extract energy this way and then do it again with the same hydrogen atom? I have a difficult time understanding that principle. Dave -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Nov 4, 2011 3:22 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg Dave, I think you have an underlying misconception. It isn’t thermal energy that is being exploited, catalytic energy is related to Casimir geometry which in the case of nanotubes only occurs at openings and defects in the nanotube as recently discovered by Peng Chen at Cornell using an AFM. This establishes a relationship between catalytic action and change in Casimir force – geometry. It is a difference in vacuum energy density not temperature that feeds the reaction so you are not exhausting a thermal reservoir. IMHO this is why gas is a necessary part of the equation since relative mot ion of gas to the Casimir geometry is maintained by HUP. This is the same source of energy that keeps gas from becoming solid at absolute zero.. hence can be referred to as Zero Point Energy. The similarity between skeletal catalysts and the Casimir geometry of nano powders also supports this relationship. Within the context of the above relationship there can be no hydrino without Casimir geometry, as the hydrino or IRH diffuses out of the catalyst or nano powder it simply translates back to normal hydrogen. There would therefore be no hydrinos floating freely in the atmosphere and it remains an open question if di-hydrinos are even possible much less if their covalent bond could hold the hydrino in this catalyzed state outside of the catalyst. If Jan Naudts is correct about the hydrino / IRH being relativistic then one could say the hydrino only exists from a relativistic perspective and locally appears just like normal hydrogen. Most would say this kind of time dilation or equivalent acceleration is impossible in the confines of a bulk material sitting in a lab but we are conditioned to think in terms of a Pythagorean relationship with C to solve for gamma and I think suppression side steps this issue. Suppression reduces energy density instead of increasing it and instead of equivalent acceleration it affords equivalent de-acceleration. Regards Fran From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 4:37 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg Thank you for the response. The hydrino cycle that I am describing, aka heat pump of some unusual type, would allow energy contained within the thermaln bsp;surroundings to do work. I can imagine some of that work being used to generate radiant energy that could then escape the system. This escaping energy would cause the local system to cool off. This technique sounds a lot like a violation of the laws of thermodynamics. I guess that a similar process occurs when a dust cloud cools down by radiating heat energy. Is there any way that we can verify that a process exists which will enable the hydrinos to absorb the hypothetical energy you discussed and emerge as hydrogen again? Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Nov 2, 2011 3:35 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg In reply to David Roberson's message of Wed, 2 Nov 2011 09:12:47 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] That is the question that I would like to have answered. Would the hydrino be able to acquire the needed energy from the thermal energy available of the atmosphere? If not, why have not all of the hydrogen atoms in existence (on earth) been catalyzed during the eons of time that has been available? Because in order to be catalyzed, they need to exist as individual atoms, whereas all the Hydrogen on Earth exists bound in chemical compounds. Furthermore even when present as an atom, it still needs to c me across a catalyst atom too. My main purpose for asking the question is to determine if some type of heat pump could be used where hydrogen is turned into hydrinos releasing heat and then released. Then I was hoping that they would reacquire the energy from the thermal environment to be recycled. This sounds like a breech of the
Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about Rossi's personality
Is that really a fake PhD? I thought it was an honorary doctorate for his biofuel powerplant. For example, the former president of my country, Lula, got and has been getting these titles even though he just studied until the 4th grade (that is below junior high). He couldn't study since he had to work early and later he was involved in politics. He compensated that by being extremely smart. 2011/11/4 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: Rossi is overworked and unable to explain the simplest facts correctly. In all seriousness, that is true. It is important aspect of his personality. I do not think it is because he is overworked. I think he is just not good at explaining things. That is no reflection on his intellect. It does not detract from his achievements. Many famous inventive people have had great difficulty explaining themselves, such as Harrison and Arata. Rossi is also careless and he gets facts wrong. He does not care about details. He REALLY does not care about details, to an extent that most of us find pathological. Take his webpage. He has a board of advisors listed including a professor who does not exist and probably never did. I told him the guy does not exist then he said something like: Well the name is something like that. I don't recall. What difference does it make? He said the same thing with regard to his fake PhD from the diploma mill. He said: someone gave me that; I don't know anything about it. As if we were talking about a vase on the shelf. He really, truly, sincerely does not give a fart about public relations or the fact that his web site features absurd statements. I suggested he take that stuff off his website because it gives a bad impression. He said he doesn't care about impressions and he does not want to bother to clean up the website. Not worth the trouble. It isn't as if he is lazy. He works 14 hours a day and only eats one meal a day in order to have more time to work and think. He lives in his own world, doing things his own way. People think he is lying when he's just describing what is in his imagination, which I believe is as real to him as the so-called real world. I would not call it lying because he makes no attempt to deceive anyone. He knows that anyone can check the fake PhD. It is what you might call a hypothetical PhD, one proposed for the sake of argument. Scientists and programmers often talk about hypotheticals and the future as if it were the present, already accomplished. Some of them live in a dream world. Ordinary people would say they are lying. It is said that Steve Jobs had a reality distortion field. When people worked with him or talked with him they began to believe his crazy notions, in some cases converting those notions into reality. Rossi also has a reality distortion field but it only works on him. The rest of us do not see what he sees. He too sometimes converts crazy notions into reality, but he does it by inventing things. His inventions are infinitely more important than those of Steve Jobs, so we should cut him some slack. One of the many ironic things about Rossi is how often people ascribe to him personality qualities which are the opposite of the way he is. He is said to be a master manipulator of people and a superb confidence man. Where does anyone get that idea?!? I have never met someone who inspires less confidence! He makes legitimate businessman sweat in fear while they look for an excuse to bolt for the door. Krivit calls him strategic, articulate, charming. Good grief! What strategy?!? It looks like chaos to me, shifting from a deal with Defkalion one month to selling reactors the next. Articulate? He cannot express a simple, conventional technical concept without inducing confusion. Charming? He is one of the least charming people I have encountered. He is sweet at times, but he aggravates everyone I know -- especially his friends. The ability to constantly shift your plans and change your mind is vital to the kind of intuitive, hands-on experimental work that Rossi does, or to an artist or fiction writer, but it makes interacting with other people awkward. Rossi has many outstanding qualities, and many faults too, but he does not have a single one of the qualities ascribed to him by Krivit or Heckert. Perhaps Rossi is in some sense a mirror to us. He is so confusing and so unexpected, we project our own fears and hopes in him. We end up seeing and him whenever we want to see, or whatever we fear. Whatever else he is, he is like the fellow in the beer commercial: the most interesting man in the world. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about Rossi's personality
Am 04.11.2011 21:46, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Rossi is also careless and he gets facts wrong. He does not care about details. He REALLY does not care about details, to an extent that most of us find pathological. This explains why the e-cat leaks and fails when really serious customers and NASA scientists are present. I think he will care about details when he counts the money. Would not buy a used car from him. Peter
Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about Rossi's personality
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Is that really a fake PhD? I thought it was an honorary doctorate for his biofuel powerplant. Ah, that may explain it. Perhaps he has two honorary PhDs, one for the biofuel, and one from the diploma mill. Perhaps he thought I was talking about the other one. I do not know why he lists the California diploma mill degree. There is probably a reason. My point is that it is probably not a nefarious reason; it is probably weird. He reminds me of a person living deep in the countryside in a cabin. You find some peculiar arrangement of rocks piled around the well, or some inexplicable 80-year-old farm machine. You ask what's that for? or why do you do it that way? With all the goodwill in the world, they explain and explain. The more you hear the more confused you become. This is even more the case when they speak English as a second language, or -- as has happened to me -- they are speaking a back-country 200-year-old dialect of Japanese and I would have difficulty following the discussion in standard Japanese. Don't forget that Rossi speaks English as a second language. That probably explains much of the confusion engendered by his blog. I can just imagine how it would look if I posted dozens of messages in Japanese without bothering to edit them or have a native speaker vet them. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:msnbc reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo. Hagelstein is quoted.
Then came CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57318762/cold-fusion-debate-heats-up-after-latest-demo/ viewable in IE9, Chrome no like. T
Re: [Vo]:msnbc reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo. Hagelstein is quoted.
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Then came CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57318762/cold-fusion-debate-heats-up-after-latest-demo/ viewable in IE9, Chrome no like. Chrome works on reload. T
Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about Rossi's personality
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: This explains why the e-cat leaks and fails when really serious customers and NASA scientists are present. In all seriousness, I expect it does. It also explains why he ran the October 6 demonstration without bothering to put an SD card into the thermocouple meter. He just does not sweat the details. It is not as if he was trying to hide the temperature data. He asked Lewan to please write down the numbers. I gather he dragooned Lewan into doing it. He assigned the job to him. It does not matter to Rossi that the data was collected every 10 or 15 min. that way, whereas the meter would have recorded it automatically several times a minute. Either method is fine with Rossi. I think he will care about details when he counts the money. He cares for the details when they matter. When they have a technical impact. He cares a great deal about things that matter, and not at all about anything else. The thing is, objectively speaking, collecting the temperature data every 10 or 15 min. really is as good as recording it on the SD card. If your goal is to prove the reaction is real, either method is fine. The people here who are obsessed with the temperature readings and the finer points of where the thermocouples are placed are missing the point. As I have said, you can throw away all instrument readings, and look at the physical arrangement of equpment and first principles only, and the test is 100% irrefutable. If you were tell physicists back in 1880 that this test is inadequate because the instrument readings are questionable, they would think you are crazy. Even back when I was in grade school, physics experiments proved things by the arrangement and action of the objects, such as an egg being sucked into a milk bottle by a vacuum. Nowadays people would demand some sort of digital instrument proving there is a vacuum, and they would look at the damn numbers instead of the egg in the bottle. From Rossi's point of view quibbling about minor details such as the thermocouple temperature readings is silly. I'm sure he would say go ahead and ignore that if you like; just look at the physical facts. If you want to impress modern scientists and engineers with your professional technique and the care you bring to the experiment, you will do it carefully and record lots of useless extra digits of precision and thousands of extraneous data points that prove nothing. It has to be on a computer, even though an old-fashioned paper pencil log is just as good. Rossi is old school -- as am I. The difference is, he doesn't get where the modern whippersnappers are coming from and why they want all that digital data, whereas I get it. I know what they are thinking. I cannot explain this to Rossi. The Lord knows I have tried. Would not buy a used car from him. I would not buy a fingernail clipper from him. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about Rossi's personality
Am 04.11.2011 22:42, schrieb Jed Rothwell: From Rossi's point of view quibbling about minor details such as the thermocouple temperature readings is silly. I'm sure he would say go ahead and ignore that if you like; just look at the physical facts. If he does it this way, then he cannot know the difference between a random effect, a systematic measurement error or a real physical fact. How can he know, if he doesnt care about repeatable and predictable precision? He will fall victim to parasitic and random errors and instead developing energy he will develop a method for systematic false measurements. He will develop pipe dreams, will measure them and will believe these are real, because he is fooled by himself. Just for fun, have a look to this video at 4:00 and later. http://youtu.be/wegvf39IeTU You see an absolutely chaotic workbench. This man doesnt care about detail Some seconds later, you see a careful optimized breadboard circuit and he starts to explain the most miniscule details in an oscillogram. This is a guy who cares about details. (It is Jim Williams, a leading first hour development engineer from Linear technology, a genius developer. He died this year from parkinson and this is already visible in this video.) He has no titles at all, especially no false titles did never study engineering, is autodidact.
[Vo]:wiki entry survived a deletion request
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Energy_Catalyzer Basically came down to: if it's a scam it's still notable . (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about Rossi's personality
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: I'm sure he would say go ahead and ignore that if you like; just look at the physical facts. If he does it this way, then he cannot know the difference between a random effect, a systematic measurement error or a real physical fact. How can he know, if he doesnt care about repeatable and predictable precision? That does not follow at all. You are ignoring the whole history of technology up to the late 19th century. For the last 30,000 years, craftsmen and technicians have depended entirely on observations and physical tests of materials. A Japanese swordsman makes a superb blade using entirely what he sees and smells, such as the incandescent color of the workpiece. These craftsmen were as systematic as any modern scientist or engineer. That is why they were able to do superb metallurgy and build cathedrals without any knowledge of modern physics or chemistry. The people who made Damascus steel and Japanese swords had no knowledge that oxygen exists and absolutely no grasp of physics but they were able to do things that modern metallurgists still do not fully understand. Any metallurgist stands in awe of these ancient people. I have seen videos of Japanese sword makers at work and I assure you they are as methodical as anyone can be. They use no numbers at all. They have no modern instruments. They deal entirely in real physical effects, not measurements in the modern sense. They have tremendous knowledge, and it is accurate and true, but it is not in same form as modern scientific knowledge. Rossi's methods more resemble those of ancient craftsmen more than modern scientists'. That makes it all the more astounding -- and admirable -- that he has succeeded. Your notion that people cannot be scientific without number crunching is typical of the ahistorical view of modern people. You should learn how people did things 100 years ago, or 500 years ago. Your ancestors knew far more than you give them credit for and they were much more methodical and scientific than people appreciate. Look at the buildings and objects and works of art they left us, and you see proof of that. He will fall victim to parasitic and random errors and instead developing energy he will develop a method for systematic false measurements. You cannot have false measurements when you do not use instruments to measure things. Sword makers, cooks, soldiers, farmers, artists, potters working with glazes, and many others people understood temperatures by various direct means such as color, the consistency of materials, or melting minerals (the sort of thing a modern potter uses in a kiln). They did that for thousands of years before thermometers were invented. Modern science began in 1600, but people have been using scientific, logical methods informed by facts about nature for thousands of years. If you showed Rossi's device to an ancient craftsmen, he would instantly grasp the significance of it. It would be obvious to him. Ancient people understood that you cannot keep something hot without fire, and fire consumes fuel at fixed ratio to the heat. That why they they celebrated the Hanukkah miracle (the festival of lights). They understood perfectly well that a candle cannot burn for many days without exhausting the fuel. In fact, they understood better than many modern physicists. I am sure the Hanukkah miracle did not actually occur. it must have been been an exaggeration or a misunderstanding. The point is, people thought it occurred, and they recognized it would be a miracle. Nowadays, modern physicists and the people here wave their hands and make up excuses to explain away Rossi's 4 hours of heat after death. That is like trying to to explain away oil candles burning for eight days with a 1 day supply of fuel. It is grotesque that people do not instantly see this must be an anomaly. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about Rossi's personality
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: They understood perfectly well that a candle cannot burn for many days True, but a latke can! Ask my stomach! T
[Vo]:Could undetected nuclear isomers explain any LENR?
Since nuclear isomers (i.e., metastable atoms with excited nuclei) can store energies far exceeding chemical energies, could any LENR results be due to undetected isomers decaying to nuclear ground state? Some are extremely long-lived, and some may still be undiscovered. (e.g., Discovery of a Nuclear Isomer in 65Fe... http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v100/i13/e132501) Extremely low contamination would suffice. I'm not sure, but I believe that detection would be difficult. Unlikely, but I would welcome opinions. Thanks, Lou Pagnucco
Re: [Vo]:msnbc reports on Rossi's Oct 28 demo. Hagelstein is quoted.
This one is pretty good too. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57318762/cold-fusion-debate-heats-up-after-latest-demo/ I told someone who is looking for funding that venture capitalists will not touch this field as long as we have mass media publishing articles with titles like Cold Fusion Experiment: Major Success or Complex Hoax? Then again . . . I suppose if CBS and many others publish reasonable articles, people might invest. They might invest even if Fox and Scientific American continue to publish nonsense. I predict that Scientific American and Nature will be the last to publish a real article. They will say nothing about Rossi, even if he sells 10 more reactors to known customers. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:wiki entry survived a deletion request
Here is an interesting comment in the Wikipedia discussion from someone who claims he or she was present at the Oct. 6 test. Does anyone know what kettle stone means? Deposits from evaporated water? Keep, Been present at the oct6 testing of the device, I confirm a 100% certain that the average outflowing water was about 8-10°C warmer than the inflowing water on a 600l/h basis, and this for several hours. There were indeed some errors, but from a technical point of view (and having quadruple checked the thermometers after the test in the full range of the measured temperatures: they measured equal and within a precision range of 0,1 °C), all corrections that have to be made are in favor of the device. One simple item everyone can check on the pictures from NyTeknik (1 and 7): the thermometer on the inflow side was connected to the release-ring of the hose, so it did not make contact with a metal part that made contact with the flow, so basically it was influenced by environmental temperature. (28-29°C). There is not much variation of the tap water temperature in Italy, and the water measured 23,8 degrees before the test. The electricity that went into the device(s) was not measured very precisely, but I also confirm that other simple physical test proved 100% certain that the input power did not exceeded 2500 Watts, and in self sustaining mode there was indeed no significant energy consumption for almost four hours. No other electric cables were in use. Besides that, multiple disciplines of scientists were present, and observed their items, and also confirmed a successful evidence of controllable and stable nuclear reactions that were happening inside the reactor, by measuring . I cannot talk about that. The amount of kettle stone that was formed, also on the nuts and bolt that closed the inner-core of the e-cat, proves that this same device had been used for longer periods before this test and without being opened in between.In fact the effort of those that are trying to hide or deny the device, is near a criminal act against humanity. I believe Wikipedia cannot support such behavior. With a match and a trunk of a live oak, you can scientifically prove that wood cannot burn, and by doing so, sending whole populations to die from cold. In fact, lots of people even have difficulties igniting their BBQ and therefore they use all sorts of auxiliary materials to start a fire. E-cat is about auxiliary stuff to improve the efficiency. You can only deny a phenomenon if you have done all possible and thinkable effort to prove it exists and never have found even a glimpse of a positive result. The world is very far past the point of denial of effects happening in solid state metals. So the guys that did not try to observe nor explain nor reproduce the phenomenon with enough effort, even have no reason to speak at all. I recommend them to speak open and clear about their own business in which they are the real experts. More information about their work would be valuable too for Wikipedia. Almost every musician, painter or sportsman has his own place in wikipedia. Even fictional personages from comics and movies have their pages. And now the e-cat should be hidden as fast as possible ? --Kv1970
Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg
From: francis [mailto:froarty...@comcast.net] Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 9:36 PM To: 'dlrober...@aol.com' Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg Dave, You are getting to the heart of it quickly. First there is definitely energy present even at absolute zero gas will not become solid - and no one will dispute that gas motion is powered by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle BUT. we have always been taught that the energy is too chaotic and on too tiny of a scale for us to organize it. Mechanization is already at the macro scale and nature will always seek balance through the path of least resistance which is why stiction forces are so problematic in nano construction. nature wants the spectrum of virtual particle sizes to be uniform such that when conductive materials are thrown together in bulk the pieces self attract trying to close the gap between and return the spectrum to a uniform value [vacuum energy density]. If a gap does form the energy density is suppressed and gas atoms migrating through the gap transform from our perspective to different fractional values- And yes you are correct that if this proposal by Naudts is correct then it will exactly reverse upon exiting the gap with no change in energy level. This is where the conditions in these experiments must cause an asymmetry for there to be a net gain or loss. Haisch and Moddel suggest a Lamb Pinch while I propose that the IRH and Hydrino are actually normal hydrogen based on Naudts 2005 paper and therefore CAN take on the molecular form and that it is this choice of atomic and molecular bonding that provides us the opportunity to arrange an asymmetrical path. It is my posit that h1 translates to different fractional values freely while h2 has a covalent bond that opposes this translation. From our perspective the orbital appears smaller and perhaps is seen as a nearby electron while the proton appears much smaller and displaced like the rubber nose of a badminton birdie stretched ever more distant as the fractional value becomes smaller. When fractional h2 forms these nearby electrons form a hinge opposing the motive force of virtual particles on the paired protons. If I am correct this would form a natural self assembled HUP trap in that gas law motion is organized to discount the energy needed to disassociate the molecule. I think the signal generators and other forms of agitation described in this research are also necessary to synchronize the rectification or the force will simply push the molecules back in a direction that alleviates the discount. See http://psiphen.colorado.edu/Pubs/VacEnergyExtrac_Jan10.pdf Fran David Roberson Fri, 04 Nov 2011 13:47:03 -0700 You are correct Fran, I am confused about the hydrino theory. I think I understand that you imply that the hydrino can not exist outside of the nanotube structure. If this is true then it would not be possible to extract energy from the beast. Whatever you borrowed must be returned very soon. At least that is the way I understand thermodynamics. Does that theory actually allow energy to be taken from the vacuum? If so, I would like to understand that a lot better. Also, has anyone been able to extract energy this way and then do it again with the same hydrogen atom? I have a difficult time understanding that principle. Dave -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Nov 4, 2011 3:22 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg Dave, I think you have an underlying misconception. It isn't thermal energy that is being exploited, catalytic energy is related to Casimir geometry which in the case of nanotubes only occurs at openings and defects in the nanotube as recently discovered by Peng Chen at Cornell using an AFM. This establishes a relationship between catalytic action and change in Casimir force - geometry. It is a difference in vacuum energy density not temperature that feeds the reaction so you are not exhausting a thermal reservoir. IMHO this is why gas is a necessary part of the equation since relative mot ion of gas to the Casimir geometry is maintained by HUP. This is the same source of energy that keeps gas from becoming solid at absolute zero.. hence can be referred to as Zero Point Energy. The similarity between skeletal catalysts and the Casimir geometry of nano powders also supports this relationship. Within the context of the above relationship there can be no hydrino without Casimir geometry, as the hydrino or IRH diffuses out of the catalyst or nano powder it simply translates back to normal hydrogen. There would therefore be no hydrinos floating freely in the atmosphere and it remains an open question if di-hydrinos are even possible much less if their
Re: [Vo]:wiki entry survived a deletion request
That's hilarious. What is it with these people? I do not understand why they are so anxious to keep people from finding out about things they oppose. They hate the idea that people will discuss the issue, or learn something about it. I don't like creationism, and I hate these people opposed to vaccinations, but I am not campaigning to have their point of view erased from Wikipedia or banned from the mass media. If they could have, these skeptics would have erased the Wikipedia article on cold fusion long ago. I wish they would. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:wiki entry survived a deletion request
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Here is an interesting comment in the Wikipedia discussion from someone who claims he or she was present at the Oct. 6 test. Does anyone know what kettle stone means? Deposits from evaporated water? Yes, also called boiler scale: http://www.magnumarchive.com/c/iconographic-encyclopedia-volume-5/Storage-Water-Its-Purification.html T
Re: [Vo]:wiki entry survived a deletion request
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Here is an interesting comment in the Wikipedia discussion from someone who claims he or she was present at the Oct. 6 test. Does anyone know what kettle stone means? Deposits from evaporated water? Yes, also called boiler scale: http://www.magnumarchive.com/c/iconographic-encyclopedia-volume-5/Storage-Water-Its-Purification.html http://www.eutechinst.com/techtips/tech-tips45.htm T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Nickel enrichment : is a liquid-phase Calutron possible?
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: It seems you are conflating two processes when only one will suffice. And one of them is absurd from the start. Why pump the liquid at all? Why use a magnetic field with pumping, when a simpler route exists? Calutrons were a gigantic waste of money in the Manhattan project and were only used for a few years as an expedient. Because you need to have v d * q * B/(m1 - m2) where v is the speed, d the desired separation distance, q the charge, B the magnetic field and m1 and m2 the respective masses, and if you don't pump, you'll have to rely on the acceleration provided by the electrical field, which may be too low. Centrifugal acceleration (even the common lab centrifuge) should give similar or better results, if what you want is enrichment by density gradient in a NiCl solution. In fact the chloride is ready-made for this since by varying the water content and temperature (solubility) - the heavier fraction can be solidified by chilling - while the light fraction remains a liquid and is more easily removed at the early stages (to automate the process). If you are going for enriching an isotope that is 10% denser, it will take at least seven stages for every doubling (not counting losses). This is the rule of seventy (similar to formula used in compound interest). Therefore, to increase a 1% isotope to 16% might require a minimum of 28 stages of progressive enrichment, but when losses are included, it is probably closer to 50 stages. Automation makes a big difference with this many stages. For the NiCl solution (hexa-hydrate) the solubility is 254 g/100 mL at 20 °C - and 600 g/100 mL at 100 °C. That difference could help a lot in automating the processing, so that even 50 stages in a continuous centrifuging would not be a insurmountable problem to get 64Ni enriched to a level in the mid-teens at an affordable cost. At least this is doable, but - as for final cost - that is another question based on many issues. But if the enrichment percentage can be kept to a low level, it need not be too expensive for the numbers Rossi is throwing around. This is because with NiCl - the rejected isotopes are of the same value as the feedstock, and this makes the processing simply a matter of overhead, efficiency and labor. The bulk nickel is no less useful in industry - with the 64Ni removed as with it there. In effect, you only rent the feedstock, removing very little. That is a huge difference compared to what we look to as the model for isotope enrichment. With uranium enrichment - in contrast, the feedstock cost must be 100% absorbed in the cost of the enrichment (since the depleted U has almost no value) so that factor alone grossly inflates the net cost by several orders of magnitude (compared to nickel). Enrichment cost alone, for even the heavy metals - is not outrageous so long as there is a large market for the depleted feedstock. That is key. There seldom is a market, but since nickel has that as its major feature, then an enriched isotope on a mass production scale, for a NiH energy system, is not out of the question. -Original Message- From: Berke Durak On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The ion diffusion speed in an electrolyte is only some centimeters per minute at best, while the speed in a Calutron is probably some 100 to some 1000 kilometres per second. Therefore the mass inertia of the nucleus at this low speed has no effect. The electrolyte vessel must be some 1000 km long for this to work. Yes, but can't the liquid be accelerated to a sufficient velocity using pumps? A quick search reveals that the radius of the circular path described by a charged particle subject to a transverse magnetic field is R = mv/qB where m is the mass, v is the velocity, q is the charge and B is the field in tesla. Assume we want to separate two isotopes of masses m1 and m2, we'll want R1 - R2 d for some sufficiently large d. Take d = 1cm, m1 = 58 amu and m2 = 64 amu, and q = 2 x 1.6e-19 C (for Ni 2+), then we need v = qB/(m1 - m2) = 32e6 m/s/T. For a 100 nano tesla field, this gives 3.2 m/s and R1 = 9.6 m and R2 = 10.6 m. I suppose 3.2 m/s is a reasonable velocity. If we pump the solution so that the Ni2+ ions reach a velocity of 3.2 m/s while keeping the magnetic field around 100 nanotesla, we might be able to separate them. By properly orienting the setup with respect to the Earth's magnetic field, some mu-metal shielding or using some active cancellation technique, it might be possible to obtain a 100 nT field. The problem might be that you will also have whatever cations are present swirling in the opposite direction. I don't know how that would affect the Ni2+ ions. Any physicists / electrochemists in the room? -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:wiki entry survived a deletion request
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Here is an interesting comment in the Wikipedia discussion from someone who claims he or she was present at the Oct. 6 test. Does anyone know what kettle stone means? Deposits from evaporated water? Yes, also called boiler scale: http://www.magnumarchive.com/c/iconographic-encyclopedia-volume-5/Storage-Water-Its-Purification.html http://www.eutechinst.com/techtips/tech-tips45.htm I'm sure you can't read all my posts, nor would you want to; but, I commented earlier on the corrosive deposits resulting from the October 6th test and how it would eventually cause a failure in the Rossi Reactor. Now Rossi is looking into using diathermic oil. Dennis Cravens sent me a private email commenting on the dangers of the combustion of these oils at the operating temperature of the Rossi Reactor. Beene recommended Therminol. http://www.therminol.com/pages/ T
Re: [Vo]:wiki entry survived a deletion request
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, also called boiler scale: http://www.magnumarchive.com/c/iconographic-encyclopedia-volume-5/Storage-Water-Its-Purification.html http://www.eutechinst.com/techtips/tech-tips45.htm I'm sure you can't read all my posts, nor would you want to; but, I commented earlier on the corrosive deposits resulting from the October 6th test and how it would eventually cause a failure in the Rossi Reactor. I recall you did say that. This is a problem with conventional boilers too. Is there a reason this is more of a problem with Rossi's reactor? Because of the convoluted cell in the latest reactor. I can see why using a closed loop of some other fluid is better. That's how Defkalion does it. I suppose they filter the fluid or replace it periodically. One of the sales points of the Hydrodynamics boilers is that they eliminate boiler scale. You can use factory waste water as feed water. This reduces the need for water at the factory, and reduces the water you have to treat for pollution. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:wiki entry survived a deletion request
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a reason this is more of a problem with Rossi's reactor? No, I think AR's problem with using water is the fact that his heat source is so very small. With a focused thermal reaction, the resulting scale will also be so concentrated. I think the ultimate answer will likely be molten salts. But, you can't let the salts solidify within the heat exchanger! T
Re: [Vo]:Could undetected nuclear isomers explain any LENR?
This is sort of what seems most natural to me. Something is happening on either side of NI62, and it gets into a cyclic state - once in a while by the magic of QM it overshoots and you get copper, or undershoots and you get iron. But most of the time it bounces back and forth. Some oscillatory state of the nucleus is being excited and it doesn't know which side of the binding-energy-per-nucleon to be on. -- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin --- On Fri, 11/4/11, pagnu...@htdconnect.com pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com pagnu...@htdconnect.com Subject: [Vo]:Could undetected nuclear isomers explain any LENR? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Friday, November 4, 2011, 7:36 PM Since nuclear isomers (i.e., metastable atoms with excited nuclei) can store energies far exceeding chemical energies, could any LENR results be due to undetected isomers decaying to nuclear ground state? Some are extremely long-lived, and some may still be undiscovered. (e.g., Discovery of a Nuclear Isomer in 65Fe... http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v100/i13/e132501) Extremely low contamination would suffice. I'm not sure, but I believe that detection would be difficult. Unlikely, but I would welcome opinions. Thanks, Lou Pagnucco
