Re: [Vo]:A person claim successful replication of e-cat
My opinion is that this has to be taken quite seriously, the guy has bought ready made nanoNickel and perhaps has found an additive similar to that used by Rossi. Let's see what will Chan say in the following weeks. Peter On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Marcello Vitale mvit...@ucsbalum.netwrote: The word scam implies that somebody got cheated: it requires a perpetrator and at least one victim. Money or some other good must be exchanged fraudulently. If Chan is knowingly making something look like something else, as with various feats of bravery videos on youtube, it would be called an hoax. That requires the absence of profit motives, except for the gain of personal satisfaction one would gain from fooling somebody else If, instead, he is doing something that he thinks is meaningful but, because of a factor such as what pointed out by Horace he is actually doing something altogether different and much less interesting, it would be a simple mistake, which would become a self delusion if one keeps insisting in the face of evidence. The parallels with the lives and deeds of Andrea Rossi, but even of MY, really, if one thinks about it, are left to anybody to ponder as they see fit. On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: He is not asking for money. He is even asked for reproduction. You could do it. 2011/11/21 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com A scam inside a scam. Marvellous. -Messaggio originale- From: David ledin Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:07 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:A person claim successful replication of e-cat A person named Chan has posted a descriptive method of replicating a version of the ecat on www.buildecat.com and claim reached self sustained fusion at 200 C for days. http://www.buildecat.com/blog_**detail/the-chan-formula-4.htmlhttp://www.buildecat.com/blog_detail/the-chan-formula-4.html -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
Am 22.11.2011 08:43, schrieb Peter Gluck: The Energy market being insatiable, the lack of a patent can be compensted in part and temporary by speed, a commercial Blitzkrieg can help - for a while. 2 million dollars per plant. 20 millions for a license, if this works for a while, I would be happy ;-) I think he is above sixty now. Oh, he must divide this by 2 because 50% goes to cancer victims
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's interview with Tom and Doug
From what we recently learned, I suggest the prime funder for the E-Cat purchases is one branch of the US military or government that has engaged a civilian contractor to do the actual purchasing, do long term testing of the E-Cats and to produce a report. Why? Rossi has revealed the first install site is in the US and the purchaser of the first and the next 13 E-Cats is the same and is engaged in military research. Clear paper trail. US taxpayer dollars are purchasing $28 million worth of E-Cats. Maybe less if Rossi gave them a discount for bulk purchase. That should kick start his manufacturing operations into high gear. From his many comments that his prime focus is to create jobs, you can be assured US election politics are at work in the back room. Imagine the US exporting E-Cat plants to all the other countries on the planet!! Container ships and US ports full of US manufactured E-Cat plants heading to all points of the compass. Just might have an effect on the US balance of trade and allow them to escape the next GFC with Chinese, Indian and Japanese ports full of container ships, full of US manufactured E-Cats heading to Chinese, Indian and Japanese customers. Of course the Chinese and others will throw 50.000 engineer and unlimited funding to stop that happening. Gonna be interesting. By bet is Rossi's E-Cat can easily run at a COP many times higher than 6 and do so very reliably. What we currently have is a throttled down product, which when any real competition comes along, can simply have the throttle opened up a bit and a new higher performance product quickly released to the market. Mainframe companies were good at this, charging millions to change a jumper on the master clock card to increase the clock rate. AG On 11/22/2011 5:49 PM, Drowning Trout wrote: Could the secret N company, be National Instruments? They are already designing the electronics and control systems. Could they have been TC? They also have deep military work connections. Pure Speculation! On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com mailto:robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: /purely rumor-mongering/ The military customer that starts with an N is NATO. The 14 plants will be distributed among half of the NATO membership; the U.S. was just first-in-line. /purely rumor-mongering/ Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: I hope so too. We have laid down a pathway that progressively builds trust in the product and it's reliability. Still talking. We do now know the secret location for the first E-Cat plant is in the US and that the customer is military or does military research and intends to use the first E-Cat to heat a building. Is that a location in the show belt of the US with 14 buildings to heat? Bugger you Yanks always getting first blood. Will ask Rossi what type of Jazz he likes playing his drums with. His parents must have had an interesting growing up relationship, with initially badly played drums echoing off the walls of the probably solid stone / brick house. Went through that with a Guitar player. Pity his drums if he takes out this frustration on them. AG On 11/22/2011 3:11 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Rossi said the customer for the 13 x 1 MW plants was the same as the first customer: Yikes. That means the next 13 plants will also go to secret locations of the secret customer. I hope he sells one to you. - Jed
[Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 * Andrea Rossi November 21st, 2011 at 11:25 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 Dear Felipe From Chile: You are right, we are organizing this. BY THE WAY: WE COLLECT FROM NOW THE NAMES OF ALL THE PERSONS OR ENITITES INTERESTED TO BUY AN E-CAT OF 10 KW. IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE LIST, THE PERSONS IN THE WAITING LIST WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONFIRM OR NOT THEIR ORDER AT 400 EURO/THERMAL KW. DO NOT SEND MONEY, WE WILL ACCEPT THE ORDERS ONLY IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE WAITING LIST, COMBINING OUR LIST WITH THE WAITING LIST ORGANIZED BY OUR BROTHERS OF HYDROFUSION . WARM REGARDS, ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORP. (PRESIDENT) EUR4,000 (USD5,400) for a 10 kW heat / hot water plant
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
Just placed my order for 10 x 10 kW plants. Will install them, at no cost in my, by children and by friends homes. Rossi said in the radio interview that they had cleared the certification issues and they expected the 10 kW plants to be available in less than 12 months. With a price of $5,400 for a 10 kW thermal plant, this will really upset the market. That is $0.54 / Watt of heat. Assuming the 20 year life Rossi claimed in the interview, the simple LCOE is so small as to make the energy almost free at $0.003 / kWh. At 30% efficiency heat kW to Ac kW with 3 Ac kW output, the electricity price rises to $0.01 / kWh. Good bye grid. It all changes. AG On 11/22/2011 7:20 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 * Andrea Rossi November 21st, 2011 at 11:25 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 Dear Felipe From Chile: You are right, we are organizing this. BY THE WAY: WE COLLECT FROM NOW THE NAMES OF ALL THE PERSONS OR ENITITES INTERESTED TO BUY AN E-CAT OF 10 KW. IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE LIST, THE PERSONS IN THE WAITING LIST WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONFIRM OR NOT THEIR ORDER AT 400 EURO/THERMAL KW. DO NOT SEND MONEY, WE WILL ACCEPT THE ORDERS ONLY IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE WAITING LIST, COMBINING OUR LIST WITH THE WAITING LIST ORGANIZED BY OUR BROTHERS OF HYDROFUSION . WARM REGARDS, ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORP. (PRESIDENT) EUR4,000 (USD5,400) for a 10 kW heat / hot water plant
Re: [Vo]:Published today in the UK
On Nov 21, 2011, at 12:33 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Can you reference this Horace? The only one to follow up that I know of is Dr. Stiffler. I am still looking. I found a note on nano-particle thermal propagation speed being alpha*c. See equation (2) of http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0611248 Still haven't found the article I was thinking of where experimental result in thin metal wire (several toms diameter) was about 2x10^6 m/s. I found some theoretical values near 2x10^6 m/s in Table 1. Material Properties, of: http://home.arcor.de/kostrykin/spie.pdf The following paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0610267 in equation (2.3) gives v = alpha_i * c, but the coupling constant alpha_i is 1/137 for electromagnetic interaction, and, most interesting, 0.16 for strong interactions. -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Nov 21, 2011 11:17 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Published today in the UK There is a typo. I meant to say: Regarding your equation (6), it is noteworthy that the speed of thermal pulses in fine metal wiskers, which are propagated purely by conduction electron interaction, is about 2 Vt = alpha*c. On Nov 21, 2011, at 12:07 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: On Nov 21, 2011, at 11:30 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_Z_theory_of_everything.php it a nice article Frank Znidarsic It is indeed a nice article. Congratulations! Regarding your equation (6), it is noteworthy that the speed of thermal pulses in fine metal wiskers, which are propagated purely by conduction electron interaction, is about 2 Vt = alpha/c. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Stremmenos comments on Rossi and Deflakion
On 2011-11-22 03:13, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516cpage=14#comment-125963 I posted a clearer version here: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg56332.html Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: (7) So Fioravanti had good reasons to believe that the steam was dry. He is obviously assuming dry steam. But if we're (or his company is) simply supposed to accept that he had good reasons to believe that, then why bother with the report at all? He could simply have said: The megacat works. It produced 470 kW for 5.5 hours without input. I have good reason to believe that. I suppose he might have added details about size and absence of emissions etc. But there would be no point in giving flow rates and temperatures. And there would have been no point in inviting the press to an event to show them anything at all. After all, if Fioravanti says Rossi has demonstrated a cold fusion device producing .5 MW, then it must be so, and they could go and publish their articles. Because otherwise Fioravanti would have to be a fake or senile or conspiring with Rossi. Since the report *does* give observations that are intended to support his conclusions, he is apparently not expecting the reader to simply accept that he had good reasons to believe something, but is actually trying to provide the reasons. We still have to trust that his report is honest, but at least we can check it to see if the claimed observations support the conclusion. The evidence he presents for dry steam are that water is not collected in the trap, and that the temperature is above 100C, the latter in conversation with Lewan, as reported in the comments in Lewan's column. But that trap would be useless for a mist entrained in fast-moving steam, and in any case, from Lewan's video, the valve to it was closed at 3:00. When asked about that, Rossi said it was closed after the run, but Lewan clearly states the time in the video. And since the pressure is not measured, the temperature at 105C could have been, and probably was, at the boiling point inside the pipe. Therefore the evidence he supplies in the report is insufficient to support the assumption that the steam is dry. Which indicates he didn't do his job very well. I find your rate of change of power transfer too high vs thermal inertia argument intriguing, but it would be nice if you could explain it logically and numerically. Currently, your explanations are entangled with a multitude of hypotheses and suppositions. I assure you, I didn't try to explain it illogically and innumerately, and I'm hurt that you find it thus. I don't think I can do better than I have already done. I don't have the luxury of temperature measurements of the ecat core or the heating element inside the ecat, or the actual mass or heating capacity of the heating element and its infrastructure, all of which has to be heated up in order to pass thermal energy to the water. I used all the numbers that are available to us, and as much logic as I could summon. I think it's pretty clear that an 8-fold power transfer increase can't happen in a minute or two. Here's another go at explaining it. I'll make it longer, but if you don't find it more logical, or more numerate, my apologies. To transfer thermal energy (heat) to the water as it passes through the ecat, the heating elements (hereafter, simply the ecat) have to be hotter than the water. And the rate of transfer (the power transfer) is proportional to this temperature difference. (This is a bit of over-simplification, because there will be a temperature gradient in the ecat elements from the core to the place where the water makes contact, and of course the water is changing temperature, but one could identify an effective temperature as some average, which would be proportional to the power transfer.) In the pre-heat phase, the temperature of the ecat is raised by electric heating to the point at which it transfers just enough power to bring the water to the boiling point at the given flow rate. That's the sensible heat or power, because it results in a change in temperature of the water. We don't know the effective temperature of the ecat or the core when this happens, but it is clear the core must be considerably hotter than the water, or the heat transfer wouldn't be fast enough. To reach that stage, the thermal mass of the ecat has to be heated up. With a power input of about 160 kW, it took 2 hours to bring the ecat to the necessary temperature. That represents considerable thermal mass. Now to vaporize the water at the rate it is flowing in, requires about 8 times as much power transfer, because in addition to the sensible heat, you have to provide the latent heat (that does not result in a temperature change). That means that the (average) difference between the effective temperature of the ecat and the water would have to increase by a factor of 8 or so. In the most favorable case, the ecat turns on to 470 kW just when the boiling starts (a coincidence in itself). So, the heating of the infrastructure would happen about 3 times as fast. But it has about 8 times as
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
Great! Excuse me, Aussie, how did you place such order? Did you write to the usual i...@leonardocorp1996.com, did you write as a comment JONP or how? Thanks On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Just placed my order for 10 x 10 kW plants. Will install them, at no cost in my, by children and by friends homes. Rossi said in the radio interview that they had cleared the certification issues and they expected the 10 kW plants to be available in less than 12 months. With a price of $5,400 for a 10 kW thermal plant, this will really upset the market. That is $0.54 / Watt of heat. Assuming the 20 year life Rossi claimed in the interview, the simple LCOE is so small as to make the energy almost free at $0.003 / kWh. At 30% efficiency heat kW to Ac kW with 3 Ac kW output, the electricity price rises to $0.01 / kWh. Good bye grid. It all changes. AG On 11/22/2011 7:20 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-**physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#** comment-126867http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 * Andrea Rossi November 21st, 2011 at 11:25 PM http://www.journal-of-**nuclear-physics.com/?p=510** cpage=34#comment-126867http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 Dear Felipe From Chile: You are right, we are organizing this. BY THE WAY: WE COLLECT FROM NOW THE NAMES OF ALL THE PERSONS OR ENITITES INTERESTED TO BUY AN E-CAT OF 10 KW. IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE LIST, THE PERSONS IN THE WAITING LIST WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONFIRM OR NOT THEIR ORDER AT 400 EURO/THERMAL KW. DO NOT SEND MONEY, WE WILL ACCEPT THE ORDERS ONLY IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE WAITING LIST, COMBINING OUR LIST WITH THE WAITING LIST ORGANIZED BY OUR BROTHERS OF HYDROFUSION . WARM REGARDS, ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORP. (PRESIDENT) EUR4,000 (USD5,400) for a 10 kW heat / hot water plant
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
Used the usual email. AG On 11/22/2011 8:54 PM, Marcello Vitale wrote: Great! Excuse me, Aussie, how did you place such order? Did you write to the usual i...@leonardocorp1996.com mailto:i...@leonardocorp1996.com, did you write as a comment JONP or how? Thanks On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Just placed my order for 10 x 10 kW plants. Will install them, at no cost in my, by children and by friends homes. Rossi said in the radio interview that they had cleared the certification issues and they expected the 10 kW plants to be available in less than 12 months. With a price of $5,400 for a 10 kW thermal plant, this will really upset the market. That is $0.54 / Watt of heat. Assuming the 20 year life Rossi claimed in the interview, the simple LCOE is so small as to make the energy almost free at $0.003 / kWh. At 30% efficiency heat kW to Ac kW with 3 Ac kW output, the electricity price rises to $0.01 / kWh. Good bye grid. It all changes. AG On 11/22/2011 7:20 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 * Andrea Rossi November 21st, 2011 at 11:25 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 Dear Felipe From Chile: You are right, we are organizing this. BY THE WAY: WE COLLECT FROM NOW THE NAMES OF ALL THE PERSONS OR ENITITES INTERESTED TO BUY AN E-CAT OF 10 KW. IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE LIST, THE PERSONS IN THE WAITING LIST WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONFIRM OR NOT THEIR ORDER AT 400 EURO/THERMAL KW. DO NOT SEND MONEY, WE WILL ACCEPT THE ORDERS ONLY IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE WAITING LIST, COMBINING OUR LIST WITH THE WAITING LIST ORGANIZED BY OUR BROTHERS OF HYDROFUSION . WARM REGARDS, ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORP. (PRESIDENT) EUR4,000 (USD5,400) for a 10 kW heat / hot water plant
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
Wouldn't it be better to buy only 1 of 10kw? Smaller and much better to take measurements. Anyway, you'll only be able to buy it in 2012... 2011/11/22 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com http://www.journal-of-nuclear-**physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#** comment-126867http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 * Andrea Rossi November 21st, 2011 at 11:25 PM http://www.journal-of-**nuclear-physics.com/?p=510** cpage=34#comment-126867http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 Dear Felipe From Chile: You are right, we are organizing this. BY THE WAY: WE COLLECT FROM NOW THE NAMES OF ALL THE PERSONS OR ENITITES INTERESTED TO BUY AN E-CAT OF 10 KW. IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE LIST, THE PERSONS IN THE WAITING LIST WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONFIRM OR NOT THEIR ORDER AT 400 EURO/THERMAL KW. DO NOT SEND MONEY, WE WILL ACCEPT THE ORDERS ONLY IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE WAITING LIST, COMBINING OUR LIST WITH THE WAITING LIST ORGANIZED BY OUR BROTHERS OF HYDROFUSION . WARM REGARDS, ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORP. (PRESIDENT) EUR4,000 (USD5,400) for a 10 kW heat / hot water plant -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
Sorry, 2013 2011/11/22 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com Wouldn't it be better to buy only 1 of 10kw? Smaller and much better to take measurements. Anyway, you'll only be able to buy it in 2012... 2011/11/22 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com http://www.journal-of-nuclear-**physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#** comment-126867http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 * Andrea Rossi November 21st, 2011 at 11:25 PM http://www.journal-of-**nuclear-physics.com/?p=510** cpage=34#comment-126867http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 Dear Felipe From Chile: You are right, we are organizing this. BY THE WAY: WE COLLECT FROM NOW THE NAMES OF ALL THE PERSONS OR ENITITES INTERESTED TO BUY AN E-CAT OF 10 KW. IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE LIST, THE PERSONS IN THE WAITING LIST WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONFIRM OR NOT THEIR ORDER AT 400 EURO/THERMAL KW. DO NOT SEND MONEY, WE WILL ACCEPT THE ORDERS ONLY IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE WAITING LIST, COMBINING OUR LIST WITH THE WAITING LIST ORGANIZED BY OUR BROTHERS OF HYDROFUSION . WARM REGARDS, ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORP. (PRESIDENT) EUR4,000 (USD5,400) for a 10 kW heat / hot water plant -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
Joshua, I do not think that you have any means to tell what was the power output profile of ecat during the test, because detailed data was ommitted from the report. Therefore your argument about mysterious eight fold instant power increase is nonsense. On average ecat array's total power output was something between 300-550 kW and peak power was perhaps as high as 1000 kW. Here is the temperature graph of the test and that is pretty much all the data we have: http://db.tt/0rOwuGle —Jouni
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 5:09 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote: Joshua, I do not think that you have any means to tell what was the power output profile of ecat during the test, because detailed data was ommitted from the report. Therefore your argument about mysterious eight fold instant power increase is nonsense. This is the point. We can't tell what the real power output profile is from the data provided. It could simply increase to 70 kW and then remain stable there. It is Rossi that is *claiming* an 8-fold (actually closer to 7) instant power increase. When the temperature is 99.9 degrees, if we accept Rossi's flow rate, then the output power is about 66 kW. When the temperature is 105 degrees or so, *Rossi* (not me) claims the power output is 470 kW. Since there are only a few minutes between 99.9 C and 105 Celsius, Rossi's claim requires that the power output increase from below 70 kW to 470 kW in a few minutes. *I* claim it is not plausible, and therefore Rossi's claimed power output is probably wrong, and in any case, definitely not proven (accepting the data).
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
Peter Heckert wrote: »There are 4 possibilities. 1) Rossi=false, Defkalion=false 2) Rossi=false, Defkalion=true 3) Rossi=true, Defkalion=false 4) Rossi=true, Defkalion=true» My vote goes for 3). But even if Defkalion would make better ecats, there is still the problem that markets are not saturated for years, therefore all producers can sell everything that they can produce almost in arbitrary price. So the fear of competition is not that fearsome. When the full scale industrial research and development begins, Defkalion's claimed technological edge is eliminated in weeks. If Rossi cannot claim patent protection, then he must invest heavily on expansion. And I think that this is his strategy. —Jouni Ps. Quantum logic is more rich than classical logic, because it offers the possibilities that are something fuzzy between integer numbers.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
Am 22.11.2011 12:42, schrieb Jouni Valkonen: Peter Heckert wrote: »There are 4 possibilities. 1) Rossi=false, Defkalion=false 2) Rossi=false, Defkalion=true 3) Rossi=true, Defkalion=false 4) Rossi=true, Defkalion=true» My vote goes for 3). But even if Defkalion would make better ecats, there is still the problem that markets are not saturated for years, therefore all producers can sell everything that they can produce almost in arbitrary price. So the fear of competition is not that fearsome. When the full scale industrial research and development begins, Defkalion's claimed technological edge is eliminated in weeks. If Rossi cannot claim patent protection, then he must invest heavily on expansion. And I think that this is his strategy. —Jouni Ps. Quantum logic is more rich than classical logic, because it offers the possibilities that are something fuzzy between integer numbers. Quantum logic cannot been used here. Nobody will accept a heater, that works with 80% probability in winter. If the waterpipes in the house freeze this will be very expensive. I had a car that worked with 80% probability but these times are over, fortunately ;-)
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote: It is Rossi that is *claiming* an 8-fold (actually closer to 7) instant power increase. When the temperature is 99.9 degrees, if we accept Rossi's flow rate, then the output power is about 66 kW. When the temperature is 105 degrees or so, *Rossi* (not me) claims the power output is 470 kW. I still don't understand what the hell you're talking about, but you'll have to excuse me, I'm not very familiar with thermodynamics. Meanwhile, while browsing a book on heat transfer, I came across this paragraph: The behaviour of the fluid during boiling is highly dependent upon the excess temperature, delta T = T_s - T_sat, measured from the boiling point of the fluid. Figure 9-1 indicates six different regimes for typical pool boiling; the heat flux curve is commonly called the boiling curve. Here is that figure : http://i.imgur.com/1LQwK.png T_s is the temperature of the heating surface. It seems that a couple of degrees of increase for T_s translates to a couple of orders of magnitude increase in power transfer. That, plus the fact that power transfer is proportional to the area of contact. If you pump in water, you may cover more of the heating element if it has vertical surfaces, and thus arbitrarily increase the power transfer. Sincerely, -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
While it is almost certainly the case that by the time you take delivery in or about 2013, the most critical questions surrounding the E-Cat will have been answered, it is also almost certainly the case that Rossi will reach the 10,000 customer waiting list before those questions have been answered. That is his threshold for the requiring money. I don't see how Rossi can provide a customer-controlled pre-sale test for each of 10,000 customers. Therefore, he will be accepting money in advance of the most critical questions about the E-Cat being answered. How are you going to deal with this risk, Aussie Guy? On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: Just placed my order for 10 x 10 kW plants. Will install them, at no cost in my, by children and by friends homes. Rossi said in the radio interview that they had cleared the certification issues and they expected the 10 kW plants to be available in less than 12 months. With a price of $5,400 for a 10 kW thermal plant, this will really upset the market. That is $0.54 / Watt of heat. Assuming the 20 year life Rossi claimed in the interview, the simple LCOE is so small as to make the energy almost free at $0.003 / kWh. At 30% efficiency heat kW to Ac kW with 3 Ac kW output, the electricity price rises to $0.01 / kWh. Good bye grid. It all changes. AG On 11/22/2011 7:20 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-**physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#** comment-126867http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 * Andrea Rossi November 21st, 2011 at 11:25 PM http://www.journal-of-**nuclear-physics.com/?p=510** cpage=34#comment-126867http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 Dear Felipe From Chile: You are right, we are organizing this. BY THE WAY: WE COLLECT FROM NOW THE NAMES OF ALL THE PERSONS OR ENITITES INTERESTED TO BUY AN E-CAT OF 10 KW. IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE LIST, THE PERSONS IN THE WAITING LIST WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONFIRM OR NOT THEIR ORDER AT 400 EURO/THERMAL KW. DO NOT SEND MONEY, WE WILL ACCEPT THE ORDERS ONLY IF WE WILL REACH 10,000 NAMES IN THE WAITING LIST, COMBINING OUR LIST WITH THE WAITING LIST ORGANIZED BY OUR BROTHERS OF HYDROFUSION . WARM REGARDS, ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORP. (PRESIDENT) EUR4,000 (USD5,400) for a 10 kW heat / hot water plant
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Just placed my order for 10 x 10 kW plants. Have you received any acknowledgement of your order? Or in what order your order is in? What number in line you have? I would highly recommend you await Defkalion's announcement before sending any money to Andrea Rossi. T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: There are 4 possibilities. 1) Rossi=false, Defkalion=false 2) Rossi=false, Defkalion=true 3) Rossi=true, Defkalion=false 4) Rossi=true, Defkalion=true There are only two possibilities, #1 and #4. I say that because when Defkalion held a press conference in June 2011, Rossi was there on the stage with them. He agreed with everything they said. After the press conference he spoke with Marianne Macy and others. He seemed jovial. He did not express any reservations. During the conference, Defkalion claimed that his technology is real, and that he had transferred it to them, and they had tested it extensively. There is no doubt that is what they said and what they meant. The documents at their website also say things. Therefore, if they were lying, Rossi also lying -- by omission. By sitting there nodding and agreeing. Later Rossi claimed that Defkalion did not have the technology, but a few weeks later he retracted and said they did have the technology, and his only disagreements with them were financial. Rossi's affairs often resemble a three-ring circus. There is no question about this. There is no middle ground. Either they were both telling the truth in June or they were both lying. Stremmenos says the technology was never transferred. I do not know if he was present at the press conference. If he was, he seems a little crazy to me. Why didn't he say something then? I get a feeling he does not know what is happening at Defkalion, but since I do not know either, I cannot judge. The one thing that Rossi may not know anything about is the tests supposedly being performed by the Ministry of Energy and one other agency. During the press conference, Defkalion claimed that the Ministry was testing the devices, and the Ministry would release reports in a few months. That never happened. Defkalion never explained why. Perhaps they were lying, but I think it is more likely the tests were delayed for some reason. I'm only speculating here but perhaps it is because Defkalion does not have enough money. Most government agencies charge a ton of money for tests of this nature. Perhaps Defkalion cannot pay. Start-up companies often run out of money. Whatever the reason is, I think it was a bad decision on Defkalion's part not to inform the public. When you make an announcement that something important will happen by a given date, and then nothing happens and three months pass, that hurts your credibility. As far as I know, government agencies do not perform tests of this nature in secret. If the tests took place, this is a matter of public record. The results will also be fully public. I do not know about Greece, but in the US any interested citizen can find out about things like this, so it makes no sense to try to hide them. There are FOIA laws in Greece, according to Wikipedia. I do not know the details. I assume some sort of test was either underway or planned, because the Minister of Energy himself was at the press conference, and he was also smiling and acting agreeable. If the Ministry had no knowledge of any tests and no arrangements had been made, I assume he would have said so to reporters after the press conference. It is hard for me to believe that a professional politician would fail to do that. But you never know. - Jed
[Vo]:Excess neutron shell model of Nuclei - new paper on JNP
Peer reviewed: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=563 -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
[Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
[Someone here found Mr. Cage's e-mail address, and suggested I contact him about the memo. I just sent him this message.] Subject: Do you recall the intent of this memo? Dear Mr. Cage, I run an online library of scientific papers about cold fusion. We have a bibliography of 3000 papers and 1200 full text papers. Our sources include: * Roughly 1300 peer-reviewed journal papers copied from the library at Los Alamos * 2000 other papers from conference proceedings, and various organizations such as EPRI, the NSF, the Indian Atomic Energy Commission, the U.S. Navy and so on. Most of the documents in the bibliography are scientific papers, but we also list a few dozen newspaper articles, some memos from the Department of Energy, and one memo written by you. I recently uploaded it here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CageKmemorandum.pdf This memo is a little mystifying. You instruct Patent Office employees to gather together applications relating to cold fusion. You do not say what they were supposed to do with these applications. It has been a long time since you wrote this, but do you recall your intent? Since 1989, the /de facto/ policy of the patent office has been to reject all applications related cold fusion without review. I know many researchers who have applied for patents, including Fleischmann and Pons. They have all been sent a form letter claiming that cold fusion does not exist, citing the New York Times articles from 1989 and other mass media sources to back up this claim. So I assume the purpose of this memo was to gather the applications in one place so they could be conveniently rejected. However, I do not know this. As far as I know the Patent Office has never publicly stated it is their policy to reject cold fusion applications. On the other hand, they only accepted one, from Patterson. That was apparently accepted by accident, because Patterson did not mention cold fusion. If you have any comments about this memo or you would like to explain something to our readers about it, please feel free to send me some text. I will add this text to the document verbatim. This website attracts many serious readers. Since we began, people have visited 2.6 million times and have downloaded just over 2 million papers. Lately, people have been downloading 6,000 to 8,000 papers a week. Most of our readers are professional scientist. The papers are technical and members of the general public have no interest in them. Readers communicate with me from time to time asking for additional information and sending corrections and additional material, so I know that our readers come from universities and national laboratories worldwide. I expect there will be lively interest in your memo. So if you would like to clarify things or set the record straight please feel free to send me some additional text for the file. Sincerely, Jed Rothwell
[Vo]:Invitation to connect on LinkedIn
LinkedIn Cédric Mannu requested to add you as a connection on LinkedIn: -- michael, I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn. - Cédric Accept invitation from Cédric Mannu http://www.linkedin.com/e/-iyihpo-gvb390bo-3u/A-Q0T4hW2iZcEBvQY-RW02FWyHZXZBR/blk/I3250821419_2/1BpC5vrmRLoRZcjkkZt5YCpnlOt3RApnhMpmdzgmhxrSNBszYOnPANd34Oe30Rczd9bSl6l4FIkDhObPwNejgRczoMe34LrCBxbOYWrSlI/EML_comm_afe/?hs=falsetok=2cdsGC_WAZcB01 View invitation from Cédric Mannu http://www.linkedin.com/e/-iyihpo-gvb390bo-3u/A-Q0T4hW2iZcEBvQY-RW02FWyHZXZBR/blk/I3250821419_2/39vej4Qcj8Uc3kOcQALqnpPbOYWrSlI/svi/?hs=falsetok=3_H9NynAoZcB01 -- DID YOU KNOW you can use your LinkedIn profile as your website? Select a vanity URL and then promote this address on your business cards, email signatures, website, etc http://www.linkedin.com/e/-iyihpo-gvb390bo-3u/ewp/inv-21/?hs=falsetok=0jv4N_cFsZcB01 -- (c) 2011, LinkedIn Corporation
Re: [Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: [Someone here found Mr. Cage's e-mail address, and suggested I contact him about the memo. I just sent him this message.] Subject: Do you recall the intent of this memo? Dear Mr. Cage, I gather this is a personal email address? After all, I wouldn't expect him to be working in that job still after almost 23 years. T
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: The behaviour of the fluid during boiling is highly dependent upon the excess temperature, delta T = T_s - T_sat, measured from the boiling point of the fluid. Figure 9-1 indicates six different regimes for typical pool boiling; the heat flux curve is commonly called the boiling curve. It seems that a couple of degrees of increase for T_s translates to a couple of orders of magnitude increase in power transfer. This is true, but the surface temperature depends on the rate that heat is removed by the vaporization, and the rate that it can be restored from the hotter thermal mass behind it. That's why I mentioned an effective heat differential. When water changes phase, it absorbs a lot of heat, and that heat comes from the surface. The temperature of the surface would then decrease if heat didn't flow from the core heater to replace it. The rate of that heat flow is proportional to the temperature gradient in the ecat. At the onset of boiling, the heat is moving into the water at the total rate of 70 kW, and that's how fast the heat at the surface needs to be replenished from the core. If the rate of vaporization is 675 kg/h (the input flow rate), then the heat is moving into the water at a rate 7 times higher (470 kW), and it has to be replenished from the core at a rate 7 times higher. Heat flow depends on temperature differentials, so the gradient in temperature between the surface and the core would have to be 7 times steeper. To produce that change requires a lot of energy and time for the energy to flow into the thermal mass. Rossi claims the transition from 70 kW (boiling onset) to 470 kW (full vaporization) occurs over the period of a few minutes (or instantaneously), but that is not plausible, given that the transition from 0 kW to 70 kW took 2 hours. The fact that the temperature is constant throughout the second transition is deceiving. Rossi makes use of the latent heat of deception to claim much higher output than the data supports. If he monitored some variable that actually depended on the power transfer, like the output volume flow rate (or steam velocity), or the enthalpy (in a heat exchanger), we would have some idea of the power out as a function of time. But he doesn't, and that allows him to claim that the power out changes discontinuously by a factor of 7, right when boiling begins. Note, that if you look at the heat exchanger data from the Oct 6 demo, there is no discontinuous change in the power output that occurs at the onset of boiling. Those temperatures are not reliable for determining absolute power, but they should give some indication of the time dependence of the output power; certainly a 7-fold change in power out in 3 minutes would give an obvious step in the power output. It's not clear where the onset of boiling occurs in that test, but the apparent power out increases gradually over a period of 3 hours. That, plus the fact that power transfer is proportional to the area of contact. If you pump in water, you may cover more of the heating element if it has vertical surfaces, and thus arbitrarily increase the power transfer. You would need to cover 7 times the area in a matter of minutes, also not plausible, and it would still require 7 times the heat transport rate from the core, which doesn't depend as simply on the area of contact.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote: 1) Rossi cannot know if Defkalions claims are true, but he has nothing to offer. - Rossi will continue to sell fake 1MW plants as fast as possible. I don't think so. If the plants are fake *and* Rossi sells them, he will be found out after the first sale. Nobody is too stupid to read their electric bill. If Rossi's plants are fake, it's most likely that he is not selling them. So how does he make (or attempt to make) money from this? As I've said before -- most likely from defrauding secret investors who have signed tight non disclosure agreements and comprehensive disclaimers in order to be first to get in on the E-cat bandwagon.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
Wow, I never thought about that! 2011/11/22 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com If Rossi's plants are fake, it's most likely that he is not selling them. So how does he make (or attempt to make) money from this? As I've said before -- most likely from defrauding secret investors who have signed tight non disclosure agreements and comprehensive disclaimers in order to be first to get in on the E-cat bandwagon.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I assume some sort of test was either underway or planned, because the Minister of Energy himself was at the press conference, and he was also smiling and acting agreeable. If the Ministry had no knowledge of any tests and no arrangements had been made, I assume he would have said so to reporters after the press conference. It is hard for me to believe that a professional politician would fail to do that. But you never know This was discussed earlier on this email list and you were kind enough to post it. At the time I was not a member of the list. http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg51036.htmlhttp://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg51036.html It seems the member of the Greek Parliament, representing Xanthi, asked various ministries about applications from Defkalion and was told none had been filed. The original article is from September 1 and appears here: http://www.xanthipress.gr/eidiseis/politiki/9154-xynidis-kontos-aitisi-ergostasio-syntixi-defkalion-.htmlhttp://www.xanthipress.gr/eidiseis/politiki/9154-xynidis-kontos-aitisi-ergostasio-syntixi-defkalion-.html BTW, I wonder what happened to anti-Rossi poster, Susan Gipp? It will be fascinating to see what Defkalion provides in their big reveal claimed to happen around the 28th of this month. If it fizzles, they are probably frauds.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
It will be fascinating to see what Defkalion provides in their big reveal claimed to happen around the 28th of this month. If it fizzles, they are probably frauds. If it's fizzling, it means it's probably hot! Oh, you mean, if they don't show the products on the 28th they are frauds? You've never been on a project that was delayed at the last minute? T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Oh, you mean, if they don't show the products on the 28th they are frauds? You've never been on a project that was delayed at the last minute? It's not remotely the last minute. Defkalion has been saying they have a whole variety of reactors under test with various coolants and they've been saying it on their blog at least since July (June IIRC). By now, I expected that they would have a megawatt plant running in that factory they never show anyone and heating the Police Academy in Xanthi with their excess thermal energy. They said that and it was for Q4 2011 IIRC. How quickly people forget. If they can't show a production device, they need to show a proof of concept device with proper independent third party testing exactly as they promise. I am betting all they will show (if they even have the press conference or news release) will be plans -- perhaps with a mockup device -- maybe with one running like Rossi does -- without any independent measurement. If they do show independent verification on the 28th. it will change the world. I don't think that will happen.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
Where did you get that 28th date? Defkalion just said something like in the next few weeks. 2011/11/22 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Oh, you mean, if they don't show the products on the 28th they are frauds? You've never been on a project that was delayed at the last minute? It's not remotely the last minute. Defkalion has been saying they have a whole variety of reactors under test with various coolants and they've been saying it on their blog at least since July (June IIRC). By now, I expected that they would have a megawatt plant running in that factory they never show anyone and heating the Police Academy in Xanthi with their excess thermal energy. They said that and it was for Q4 2011 IIRC. How quickly people forget. If they can't show a production device, they need to show a proof of concept device with proper independent third party testing exactly as they promise. I am betting all they will show (if they even have the press conference or news release) will be plans -- perhaps with a mockup device -- maybe with one running like Rossi does -- without any independent measurement. If they do show independent verification on the 28th. it will change the world. I don't think that will happen. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Where did you get that 28th date? Defkalion just said something like in the next few weeks. We will release a complete outline of our developments wthin the next two weeks. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/files/DGT_PRESS%20RELEASE_2011-11-14.pdf A full specs sheet as well as product's basic design and their scheduled third party testing will be released as per our announcement of November 14th. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=477 Like I said, I don't expect anything except hot gas of the originating-from-the-speaker's-lungs variety. It's all that's come out from Defkalion ever -- except for the recent images which, may we say, are open to different interpretations.
Re: [Vo]:Stremmenos comments on Rossi and Deflakion
The poor's lamb can't become a ram. What could that mean? (Sorry if I'm especially dense this morning)
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
I guess it goes until Sat, Dec 3rd... 2011/11/22 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: Where did you get that 28th date? Defkalion just said something like in the next few weeks. We will release a complete outline of our developments wthin the next two weeks. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/files/DGT_PRESS%20RELEASE_2011-11-14.pdf A full specs sheet as well as product's basic design and their scheduled third party testing will be released as per our announcement of November 14th. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=477 Like I said, I don't expect anything except hot gas of the originating-from-the-speaker's-lungs variety. It's all that's come out from Defkalion ever -- except for the recent images which, may we say, are open to different interpretations. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: I guess it goes until Sat, Dec 3rd... The original newsrelease is dated 14 November so I make the date to be 28 November. Don't hold your breath!
Re: [Vo]:Stremmenos comments on Rossi and Deflakion
On 2011-11-22 18:43, Mary Yugo wrote: The poor's lamb can't become a ram. What could that mean? (Sorry if I'm especially dense this morning) Probably that, according to Stremmenos, Defkalion GT don't have the resources (not necessarily economic) to develop an idea into something big and workable as Rossi is supposedly doing. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
Yeah, but the second week ends in Dec3rd 2011/11/22 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: I guess it goes until Sat, Dec 3rd... The original newsrelease is dated 14 November so I make the date to be 28 November. Don't hold your breath! -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Defkalion 4 possibilities
What was Stremmenos implying when he sed: The poor's lamb can't become a ram. From Akira: ... Probably that, according to Stremmenos, Defkalion GT don't have the resources (not necessarily economic) to develop an idea into something big and workable as Rossi is supposedly doing. IMO: Stremmenos' comment strikes me as posturing. It's just another way of saying: Accept no other brand but our own! It's basic marketing posturing. Everybody in the business does it. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: I gather this is a personal email address? After all, I wouldn't expect him to be working in that job still after almost 23 years. Correct. He is an impressive person: http://www.mwe.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/bios.detail/object_id/5d0d6832-8ef7-4c07-a4fc-3cdc7af64f90.cfm Apart from this incident, I expect he has had an exemplary career. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
The memo is from 1989. That was when PF's cold fusion was popular and the patent office probably got many thousands of applications in a huge flood. They would have had to organize a method of segregating them out and assigning them to specialists who had familiarized themselves with patent issues in the field. I suspect that's what the memo was about rather than some nefarious plot by some unknown entity to suppress cold fusion patents. I further suspect that there are few cold fusion patents because the applications did not meet the patent's office requirements to award a patent. I doubt very much that there is some conspiracy against cold fusion. The patent office decisions can be appealed and if the appeal fails, I'm pretty sure that they can be sued. In any case, there's the press and the internet. If there was merit to a lucrative cold fusion patent the patent office refused to grant, I would guess some deep pockets could be found to fund a popular appeal as well as a law suit.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's interview with Tom and Doug
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Oh well . . . the first reliable historical report of airplane flight was published in Gleanings in Bee Culture by Amos Root, in 1905. Still published: http://www.beeculture.com/ Now only in archive.com: http://web.archive.org/web/20110715203128/http://www.rootcandles.com/index.cfm/Wright-brothers-story
Re: [Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: They would have had to organize a method of segregating them out and assigning them to specialists who had familiarized themselves with patent issues in the field. I suspect that's what the memo was about rather than some nefarious plot by some unknown entity to suppress cold fusion patents. The Patent Office did, in fact, suppress cold fusion applications in 1989. They still do. This is not debatable. All applications are summarily rejected with a form letter that cites mass media reports from 1989 as proof the effect does not exist. Whether this is done by a nefarious plot or whether this open policy within the Patent Office I cannot say. I don't see why it matters. If it is an open policy I cannot find it on their website. I wrote a Cage to see whether he can shed any light on the subject, not to have him confirm or deny the policy. The *de facto* policy is there for everyone to see. It would be ridiculous to deny it exists. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: The Patent Office did, in fact, suppress cold fusion applications in 1989. They still do. This is not debatable. All applications are summarily rejected with a form letter that cites mass media reports from 1989 as proof the effect does not exist. Whether this is done by a nefarious plot or whether this open policy within the Patent Office I cannot say. I don't see why it matters. It is not in the interest of the US Patent Office or the US government to suppress cold fusion devices -- to the contrary, discovery of a robust energy generator that worked with cold fusion would be spectacular for the economy of the US and would reduce or eliminate dependence on foreign oil, one of the Obama administration's most pressing issues. I'd like to see that form letter they send out. Anyone have a copy or a link?
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
At 12:50 AM 11/22/2011, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=34#comment-126867 Dear Felipe From Chile: You are right, we are organizing this. BY THE WAY: WE COLLECT FROM NOW THE NAMES OF ALL THE PERSONS ANDREA ROSSI, LEONARDO CORP. (PRESIDENT) I pre-ordered one unit : I hereby place a pre-order for Quantity 1 (ONE) 10kW Ecat, for delivery in California, USA. The installation will be in a residence in Lucerne, Lake County, CA 95458, USA ... copy of Rossi statement Conditions : Price : Not to Exceed 400 EURO/THERMAL KW Total Price including shipping and installation not to exceed $6,000, plus taxes. Total (thermal) power of at least 10 kW, with a COP of at least 6. Unit to conform to all USA, State and Local regulations Unit to conform to USA domestic insurance regulations (Tower Insurance) /s/ Alan J. Fletcher Fletcher Automation Research 80 Gilman Ave, Suite 2, Campbell, CA 95008, USA Phone : 408 871 7296 Fax : 506 692 1768
[Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
Hello group, This is again via 22passi: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/11/domani-rossi-alla-state-house-del.html According to Sen. Bruce Tarr, Andrea Rossi, the Italian scientist who claims to have developed the world's first nuclear cold fusion reactor is coming to the State House tomorrow to explore the prospects of developing the device and producing it in Massachusetts. Tarr's office says Rossi plans to visit Tuesday morning for two days of meeting with government officials and representatives of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Massachusetts and Northeastern University. Mr. Rossi's reactor, if successfully proven and developed, has the potential to change the way the world deals with energy, Tarr said in a statement. Source: http://www.statehousenews.com/skedtuesday.htm Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
This cannot be a scam! Even MY must be convinced now! 2011/11/22 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com Hello group, This is again via 22passi: http://22passi.blogspot.com/**2011/11/domani-rossi-alla-** state-house-del.htmlhttp://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/11/domani-rossi-alla-state-house-del.html According to Sen. Bruce Tarr, Andrea Rossi, the Italian scientist who claims to have developed the world's first nuclear cold fusion reactor is coming to the State House tomorrow to explore the prospects of developing the device and producing it in Massachusetts. Tarr's office says Rossi plans to visit Tuesday morning for two days of meeting with government officials and representatives of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Massachusetts and Northeastern University. Mr. Rossi's reactor, if successfully proven and developed, has the potential to change the way the world deals with energy, Tarr said in a statement. Source: http://www.statehousenews.com/**skedtuesday.htmhttp://www.statehousenews.com/skedtuesday.htm Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Tovima: Defkalion says the catalyst formula is not Rossi's
At 02:31 PM 11/21/2011, Mary Yugo wrote: Just out of curiosity, is there anything written about nuclear catalysts other than related to LENR/cold fusion energy generation? I never heard of a nuclear catalyst before Rossi. I've always thought of a catalyst as a substance which changes the rate of a chemical reaction without being consumed and without changing the equilibrium constant of the underlying reaction. Look up Muon-Catalyzed Fusion. (Recently discussed with Joshua Crude). http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg56320.html
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
Wow! First Rossi is on the Tom and Doug show. Now he is at the Massachusetts State House. Where will he turn up next? He makes the Energizer Bunny look lackadaisical. Seriously, I admire his tenacity. Before the Oct. 28 demo, he wrote to me something like: if it does not work, we will try again, and if it still does not work, we will try again. We will never give up. I have tremendous respect for that attitude. People like that move mountains and change history. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: This cannot be a scam! Even MY must be convinced now! Of course it can be a scam. And the announcement can be wrong. Let's wait and see if it happens, what Rossi says, and what evidence he presents.
Re: [Vo]:Tovima: Defkalion says the catalyst formula is not Rossi's
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Look up Muon-Catalyzed Fusion. (Recently discussed with Joshua Crude). http://www.mail-archive.com/**vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg56320.**htmlhttp://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg56320.html Thanks. Will do.
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
If this appeared here before, my apology but I don't think I saw it. Rossi had this to say in his blog: Andrea Rossi November 21st, 2011 at 2:39 PM Dear “XY”: I did not approve your comment, because contains very big stupidities, and I want not to expose you and your name to a bad portrait. But I want to answer to the acceptable questions you have posed, because I think the answers can be interesting for our Readers: 1- In the test of October 28th the water flow has been measured by the two flowmeters that the Consultant of the Customer has put just minutes before the test. He always checked the water flow, and the water trap that collected the non condensed water exiting form the output pipe 2- The Consultant is a 60 years person, who has 30 years of experience as engineer of military organizations; he is specialized in thermodynamics 3- As you can see from the reports, the temperature in the output pipe has always been more than 110 Celsius degrees during the self sustaining mode at room pressure. A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
At 11:30 AM 11/22/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote: This cannot be a scam! Even MY must be convinced now! Of course it's a scam. It's just a bigger scam. Or not ... I pre-ordered mine.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.comwrote: Rossi plans to visit Tuesday morning for two days of meeting with government officials and representatives of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT? How is that possible. MIT is the epicenter of the anti-cold fusion conspiracy...
[Vo]:Martin Ford requests claque support
This is somewhat off topic, but we have discussed it here. Martin Ford, the author of The Lights in the Tunnel sent me this message. I am drafting a thoughtful, amusing yet hard-hitting review for Amazon. If I do say so myself. People who have not read the book should probably refrain from uploading a review. I'm talkin' to you, Mary Yugo. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hello, I'm sending this out to those of you who have written to me with positive/supportive comments about my book The Lights in the Tunnel. Recently, the book has received a number of of very negative (one- or two-star) reviews on Amazon. This is dragging down the overall rating. Most of these seem to be from people who are ideologically opposed to the type of solutions proposed in the book. If you have a moment to write a positive review, I would greatly appreciate it. A very brief review with just a couple of sentences would be fine; the main point is to add some positive reviews (hopefully 5-stars!) to raise the overall rating average. This is important because in the near future I hope to approach some publishers about writing a second book on this issue. I published The Lights in the Tunnel independently and used mostly guerrilla marketing techniques, but I would like to try to do something with a mainstream publisher, since that might get a lot more attention from the media and hopefully get the issue of automation and its impact on the job market and economy in front of many more readers. So it's important that my first book look as positive as possible. The Amazon listing is here; you can see the more recent, negative reviews in the right-hand column: http://www.amazon.com/Lights-Tunnel-Automation-Accelerating-Technology/dp/1448659817 Any help would be greatly appreciated!! Thank you, Martin
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Quoting Rossi: 1- In the test of October 28th the water flow has been measured by the two flowmeters that the Consultant of the Customer has put just minutes before the test. He always checked the water flow, and the water trap that collected the non condensed water exiting form the output pipe It's a shame he didn't check to make sure the valve was open, and to test whether the trap captured mist entrained in the steam. 2- The Consultant is a 60 years person, who has 30 years of experience as engineer of military organizations; he is specialized in thermodynamics Presumably steam was not part of his experience. 3- As you can see from the reports, the temperature in the output pipe has always been more than 110 Celsius degrees during the self sustaining mode at room pressure. A.R. There is no record of a pressure measurement inside the pipe. The temperature was almost always below 110 C, more like 105 on average. He appears to be claiming dry steam based on the temperature above atmospheric boiling point. This would mean that the heating elements must be partly exposed, and therefore the sort of regulation by steam production rate wouldn't work, and therefore the relative temperature stability represents unrealistic power stability (to within +/- .5%). Also, this claim requires a magical, discontinuous 7-fold increase in the output power, and a magical, simultaneous ignition of 107 ecats, all within a few minutes of the onset of boiling. Rossi uses the latent heat of deception to make a 30-year thermodynamics veteran look bad, and to get an audience with archenemies of cold fusion at MIT.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
I can't help but recall that the president of Ireland, Mary McAleese, actually visited Steorn's offices and looked at the stuff as a part of some technology outreach sort of thing. That was after most of the scientific community realized and had said they were most likely to be a fraud. Of course, in Ireland, president is a largely ceremonial position but still ... If that meeting takes place, it could be very interesting -- but only if anyone is able to talk about it and if they manage to ask Rossi the right questions and make the right requests instead of just soft balling him. People tend to be way too polite when addressing Rossi at interviews and public meetings. He needs his nose rubbed *hard* in the necessity of independent testing and verification.
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
This is like saying that because a theatre gradually filled with people over two hours it is implausible to believe the same theatre emptied of people in minutes after a fire alarm. However it is only implausible based on the assumption there is only one entrance/exit or the entrance/exit is small. Harry On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: The behaviour of the fluid during boiling is highly dependent upon the excess temperature, delta T = T_s - T_sat, measured from the boiling point of the fluid. Figure 9-1 indicates six different regimes for typical pool boiling; the heat flux curve is commonly called the boiling curve. It seems that a couple of degrees of increase for T_s translates to a couple of orders of magnitude increase in power transfer. This is true, but the surface temperature depends on the rate that heat is removed by the vaporization, and the rate that it can be restored from the hotter thermal mass behind it. That's why I mentioned an effective heat differential. When water changes phase, it absorbs a lot of heat, and that heat comes from the surface. The temperature of the surface would then decrease if heat didn't flow from the core heater to replace it. The rate of that heat flow is proportional to the temperature gradient in the ecat. At the onset of boiling, the heat is moving into the water at the total rate of 70 kW, and that's how fast the heat at the surface needs to be replenished from the core. If the rate of vaporization is 675 kg/h (the input flow rate), then the heat is moving into the water at a rate 7 times higher (470 kW), and it has to be replenished from the core at a rate 7 times higher. Heat flow depends on temperature differentials, so the gradient in temperature between the surface and the core would have to be 7 times steeper. To produce that change requires a lot of energy and time for the energy to flow into the thermal mass. Rossi claims the transition from 70 kW (boiling onset) to 470 kW (full vaporization) occurs over the period of a few minutes (or instantaneously), but that is not plausible, given that the transition from 0 kW to 70 kW took 2 hours. The fact that the temperature is constant throughout the second transition is deceiving. Rossi makes use of the latent heat of deception to claim much higher output than the data supports. If he monitored some variable that actually depended on the power transfer, like the output volume flow rate (or steam velocity), or the enthalpy (in a heat exchanger), we would have some idea of the power out as a function of time. But he doesn't, and that allows him to claim that the power out changes discontinuously by a factor of 7, right when boiling begins. Note, that if you look at the heat exchanger data from the Oct 6 demo, there is no discontinuous change in the power output that occurs at the onset of boiling. Those temperatures are not reliable for determining absolute power, but they should give some indication of the time dependence of the output power; certainly a 7-fold change in power out in 3 minutes would give an obvious step in the power output. It's not clear where the onset of boiling occurs in that test, but the apparent power out increases gradually over a period of 3 hours. That, plus the fact that power transfer is proportional to the area of contact. If you pump in water, you may cover more of the heating element if it has vertical surfaces, and thus arbitrarily increase the power transfer. You would need to cover 7 times the area in a matter of minutes, also not plausible, and it would still require 7 times the heat transport rate from the core, which doesn't depend as simply on the area of contact.
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
Rossi uses the latent heat of deception to make a 30-year thermodynamics veteran look bad, and to get an audience with archenemies of cold fusion at MIT. Heh! Love that latent heat of deception. But I don't quite get how a meeting with some really smart people from MIT would help Rossi (if that's what happens). Unless he won't give them any information, they reject him, and he claims it was because of their prejudice. But I don't like to try to predict what may happen. It's more fun to watch it unfold. What I like about this whole story is the twists and turns. This should be a fund next few weeks if Rossi actually meets with MIT people and if Defkalion actually issues some real information!
Re: [Vo]:Martin Ford requests claque support
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: myself. People who have not read the book should probably refrain from uploading a review. I'm talkin' to you, Mary Yugo. Why talk to me? I don't often write Amazon book reviews. And the guy has a 4 star out of 5 rating so I have no idea what he's moaning about.
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: This is like saying that because a theatre gradually filled with people over two hours it is implausible to believe the same theatre emptied of people in minutes after a fire alarm. However it is only implausible based on the assumption there is only one entrance/exit or the entrance/exit is small. It's not really like that at all. In the Rossi scenario, the rate of input powers are known. The input power is 160 kW or so during pre-heat. And it heats up to the level required to transfer 70 kW to the water in 2 hours. During the self-sustain, Rossi claims the input power (from the ecat core) is 470 kW, and it heats up to the level required to transfer the full 470 kW to the water in a few minutes. So, it's more analogous to the theatre filling up gradually over 2 hours with people coming in on average at 10 persons per minute. Then it empties out in 2 minutes with people leaving at 30 persons per minute. It doesn't compute. (If you take account of heat leaving as during the heating process, it becomes even more implausible.)
Re: [Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
It is not in the interest of the US Patent Office or the US government to suppress cold fusion devices -- to the contrary, discovery of a robust energy generator that worked with cold fusion would be spectacular for the economy of the US and would reduce or eliminate dependence on foreign oil, one of the Obama administration's most pressing issues. I'd like to see that form letter they send out. Anyone have a copy or a link? Does anyone remember this? In 2002, (or thereabouts), Randell Mills applied for a patent for his method of creating heat with a device in a similar fashion to the method that Rossi is using, and his patent was accepted to the point that they were going to issue it, until Robert Park pointed out that it was a type of cold fusion device. At that point, Mills, who had been out happily showing others how to replicate his work, canceled all demonstrations and assistance, and stopped revealing trade secrets. Craig
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote: MIT? How is that possible. MIT is the epicenter of the anti-cold fusion conspiracy... Now THAT's hilarious! With one hand MIT was trashing Fleischmann and Pons and with the other hand they were simultaneously bolting out of the gate running a scatter-shot patent mill for Hagelstein. Now, far be it from me to accuse MIT of a CONSPIRACYhttp://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2011/07/institutional-incompetence-conspiracy.htmlto pack the patent files with bogus broad claims defensible only with a mid-Atlantic elite law department, while everyone else was being suppressed -- but it DOES look rather uh hypocritical.
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
Mary Yugo wrote: But I don't like to try to predict what may happen. Oh come now. You have incessantly predicted what would happen! Again, and again you have predicted that Rossi is a scammer who will be caught. You have reached the point where I and others are on the verge of blocking you. You do like to play both sides. You wrote: It is not in the interest of the US Patent Office or the US government to suppress cold fusion devices -- to the contrary, discovery of a robust energy generator that worked with cold fusion . . . What is that supposed to mean? The Patent Office agrees with you. They say that cold fusion does not exist. They say it is a scam and a delusion. They are upholding the views and policies that you yourself advocate. Now all of a sudden you say they should not do what _you and other skeptics have urged them to do_ since March 1989. Ditto the DoE; they uphold your point of view: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LENRCANRthedoelies.pdf The Patent Office also resembles you and Robert Park in as much as they know nothing about cold fusion and they refuse to read anything. Your hypocrisy is unbecoming. I prefer opponents such as Robert Park who are proud of the fact that they have helped suppress this field, and who brag about the lives they have disrupted and destroyed. That is despotism . . . taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy as Lincoln put it. You go around attacking people and spreading toxic falsehoods that honest scientists are engaged in fraud, and then you pretend to be shocked when people believe you and act on your beliefs. It is sickening. - Jed
[Vo]:Randi Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BemTGkjl6U What a surprise ! (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
James Bowery wrote: With one hand MIT was trashing Fleischmann and Pons and with the other hand they were simultaneously bolting out of the gate running a scatter-shot patent mill for Hagelstein. Well, seriously, MIT is a large organization with many different people who have different points of view. A university is nothing like a corporation or the White House, with one person in charge and one set of policies. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I prefer opponents such as Robert Park who are proud of the fact that they have helped suppress this field, and who brag about the lives they have disrupted and destroyed. Are you making stuff up again, or do you have some examples of Park bragging about destroying lives?
[Vo]:Re: Randi Video
At 12:25 PM 11/22/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BemTGkjl6U What a surprise ! Gee .. they even made the University of Baloney joke.
Re: [Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: Does anyone remember this? In 2002, (or thereabouts), Randell Mills applied for a patent for his method of creating heat with a device in a similar fashion to the method that Rossi is using, and his patent was accepted to the point that they were going to issue it, until Robert Park pointed out that it was a type of cold fusion device. At that point, Mills, who had been out happily showing others how to replicate his work, canceled all demonstrations and assistance, and stopped revealing trade secrets. It's worth noting that Mills has not shown any working device since and there has been no independent replication of his work. Mills asked Rowan U to measure the energy output of his magic sauce which turned out to be considerable, if one believes them. However, I know of no experiment to restore that sauce. For all that can be confirmed, even if Rowan U's information is correct, all that has been shown is a method of maybe storing energy-- not producing it from hydrinos. It's the same story as with free energy claims: want respect? CLOSE THE LOOP. Eventually, that applies to Rossi's claims as well. He could feed output heat back to the input through a flow controller and run without any electrical heat input energy indefinitely after the initial startup. He has never explained why he doesn't do that.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: James Bowery wrote: With one hand MIT was trashing Fleischmann and Pons and with the other hand they were simultaneously bolting out of the gate running a scatter-shot patent mill for Hagelstein. Well, seriously, MIT is a large organization with many different people who have different points of view. A university is nothing like a corporation or the White House, with one person in charge and one set of policies. But the claim is that those beneficiaries of government largess at the MIT have been able to squelch cold fusion research on the entire planet. They are the reason it hasn't borne fruit. Now you're saying they can't control their own institution. That kind of takes the wind of the cold fusion's favorite excuse.
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
Mary Yugo wrote: But I don't like to try to predict what may happen. Oh come now. You have incessantly predicted what would happen! Again, and again you have predicted that Rossi is a scammer who will be caught. My recollection is that she has always said that he *acts* like a scammer. Which is what anyone who is not a True Believer would say, in my humble opinion, given the way he acts.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Randi Video
This is unadulterated ignorance. Randi has not learned a thing since I last heard from him. His description of cold fusion and this machine are wrong in every detail. This is what we have to expect. If Rossi hits the mass media there will dozens and then hundreds of people as ignorant as he is saying these same things. Rossi knows that as well as I do. It is a shame he will not do a proper test. I expect he prefers things as they are, with people attacking him and no serious competition from major corporations. As long as people such as Randi and Park dominate the mass media there is no chance this technology will be developed by people with billions of dollars and top notch laboratories. I am pretty sure that is the case, because he and others refuse to let me upload photos of his heater that ran for years, or the independent tests conducted on the machines in that lab. They do not _want_ people to believe them. Rossi does not want that because he has no patent. The scientists involved do not want it because they want exclusive access to the discovery for as long as possible. Academics often do this. The ones who had access to the Dead Sea Scrolls managed to keep the rest of academia and the public away from the original sources for decades. The top people running the Hubble telescope made certain the data would not get out to junior astronomers who might discover something before they did. See the book, Hubble Wars. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Oh come now. You have incessantly predicted what would happen! Again, and again you have predicted that Rossi is a scammer who will be caught. If you quote me, please do it accurately. I have said Rossi *behaves* in manner indistiguishable from that of a scammer and if he is, he will *likely* be caught. The words between asterisks are essential qualifiers which you left out. I also said I strongly think he's a scammer based entirely on his past history and his current behavior. My thoughts about Rossi have absolutely nothing to do with cold fusion. I have never given an opinion about the likelihood that cold fusion is real because I don't have one. I simply don't know and I admit it. That's not based on not looking for evidence. It's based on not finding any which I think is simple and clear enough. That view is shared by far more than Park, haters of cold fusion and pseusoskeptics (whatever those are). I've also said I am not certain and I have no proof about Rossi scamming and I won't say I am certain until I do. Next time you cite what I said, please include the qualifiers because not to do so changes the meaning. You're welcome to block anyone you want. I try to be polite and follow the rules and I've cut down on frequency of posting. I respond to issues that are addressed me directly or are of interest. If you find my posts disturbing, it may be that they shake your confidence.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Randi Video
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: This is what we have to expect. If Rossi hits the mass media there will dozens and then hundreds of people as ignorant as he is saying these same things. Rossi knows that as well as I do. It is a shame he will not do a proper test. Yup. He could stop the whole negative press mess in a heartbeat with one simple, cheap, comparatively quick and easy to perform test that would not involve his equipment and methods.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Randi Video
On 2011-11-22 21:49, Jed Rothwell wrote: [...] because he and others refuse to let me upload photos of his heater that ran for years, Would the photos you mention by any chance be those that can be seen in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGmgTo2Kw1U At minute 2:11, 3:16, 4:03 ? If yes, as they are already public, it wouldn't harm asking their owners to release higher quality versions of them. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]: ECAT 1 MW Test Discrepancy
vorl bek wrote: My recollection is that she has always said that he *acts* like a scammer. Which is what anyone who is not a True Believer would say, in my humble opinion, given the way he acts. In that case there are no true believers here, since we all agree he acts like a scammer. I have said that countless times. However, your recollection is wrong. She has predicted time after time that he will be caught Any Day Now. Perhaps she has predicted this in other forums and not so often here. I do not keep track. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Message sent to Kenneth Cage
Craig, I think it was earlier than that, and you could be referring to Dr. Peter Zimmerman, not Park. Robin may remember this incident, as it was reported on HSG forum some years ago. If memory serves, at the time this person (either Park of PZ or someone else) protested vehemently - not only to the patent office --- but also to a number of political connections, including Maddy (cojones) Albright - since he may have had some appointed position with State - but ... AT THE SAME TIME, the complainer in question had a young relative (possibly a son ??) recently hired to a generous position in one of the hot fusion-related programs. (no indication that it was a political hire, and maybe it wasn't). Needless to say, protecting cushy family jobs was not disclosed, in the interest of fairness. However, this seems to be a typical motivation for Ivy League techno-hegemonists with connections to hot fusion ... Excuse me if I have identified the wrong whiner ... there are a large number of candidates besides these two ... -Original Message- From: Craig Haynie Does anyone remember this? In 2002, (or thereabouts), Randell Mills applied for a patent for his method of creating heat with a device in a similar fashion to the method that Rossi is using, and his patent was accepted to the point that they were going to issue it, until Robert Park pointed out that it was a type of cold fusion device. At that point, Mills, who had been out happily showing others how to replicate his work, canceled all demonstrations and assistance, and stopped revealing trade secrets. Craig
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's interview with Tom and Doug
This was a patent maneuver. They needed to have the fact that they had a flight published in order to head off anyone else who tried to patent on the basis of prior art if it came to a legal wrangle (which it did). This is down to the concept of the 'diligent researcher' who could find things out everything that had ever happened or been made public if only they were diligent enough - even if (in this case) it was deliberately put in the most obscure publication that could be found. Basically designed so that the Wrights knew about it and nobody else (in the avieation field) ever would. On 22 November 2011 18:36, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Oh well . . . the first reliable historical report of airplane flight was published in Gleanings in Bee Culture by Amos Root, in 1905. Still published: http://www.beeculture.com/ Now only in archive.com: http://web.archive.org/web/20110715203128/http://www.rootcandles.com/index.cfm/Wright-brothers-story
Re: [Vo]:Re: Randi Video
Mary Yugo wrote: Yup. He could stop the whole negative press mess in a heartbeat with one simple, cheap, comparatively quick and easy to perform test that would not involve his equipment and methods. Since he is not a fool, I am sure he knows that. He has known it for years. He has never said to me outright, I do not want people to believe this, since I have no patent but I suppose that must be his business strategy. Patterson _did_ have a patent yet he said that. Many inventors researchers in cold fusion and other fields have said that. They want negative press and opposition, because they have the development money they need and they have enough customers. They want to keep competing scientists from getting funded by ensuring the press will be full of attacks. They want to keep big corporations from getting interested. It is a shame, but there is nothing anyone can do to sway him. He is a stubborn guy. That's why he succeeded. You have to take the good with the bad in people. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Randi Video
Akira Shirakawa wrote: Would the photos you mention by any chance be those that can be seen in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGmgTo2Kw1U At minute 2:11, 3:16, 4:03 ? Nope, not the same one. That's a gorblimey gadget isn't it? - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: James Bowery wrote: With one hand MIT was trashing Fleischmann and Pons and with the other hand they were simultaneously bolting out of the gate running a scatter-shot patent mill for Hagelstein. Well, seriously, MIT is a large organization with many different people who have different points of view. A university is nothing like a corporation or the White House, with one person in charge and one set of policies. But the claim is that those beneficiaries of government largess at the MIT have been able to squelch cold fusion research on the entire planet. They are the reason it hasn't borne fruit. Now you're saying they can't control their own institution. That kind of takes the wind of the cold fusion's favorite excuse. What is being protected is the establishment. If an establishment institution overcomes the horrible crime against humanity committed by PF when they conducted science by press conference, and despite the horrible incompetence of PF in measuring neutrons, etc., blah-de woof woof -- then the damage is largely contained. No conspiracy is required. Just a self-organizing system of incentives spiced with incompetence.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's interview with Tom and Doug
Robert Lynn wrote: This was a patent maneuver. They needed to have the fact that they had a flight published in order to head off anyone else who tried to patent on the basis of prior art if it came to a legal wrangle (which it did). I do not think so. Amos Root showed up out of the blue one day, driving an automobile, which marked him as a wealthy lover of high technology. The Wrights treated him cordially, as they treated all visitors. They went ahead with their flight tests. That was the first day they ever flew in a circle. Root described it in his magazine. I do not think they needed to have a publication because they had affidavits from leading citizens such as the bank president, and copious other documentation, plus Wilbur had given a lecture and published two scientific papers in one of the top U.S. engineering journals, Some aeronautical experiments, J. Western Soc. of Engineers 6, (1901) 489-510, and Experiments and observations in soaring flight, J. Western Soc. of Engineers, (1903). They also published in The Aeronautical Journal in 1901, and various letters elsewhere. They had clear priority. The patent was issued in 1906. As I recall, their patent lawyer was telling them to shut up, stop being so cordial with visitors and agents from the French and British governments, and stop flying next to a trolley line. Patent lawyers take the fun out of inventing. Here is a good bibliography: http://history.nasa.gov/monograph27.pdf Here is the patent. Notice it has no engine. They were patenting flight controls, not the engine: http://invention.psychology.msstate.edu/i/Wrights/WrightUSPatent/WrightPatent.html - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
Joshua Cude, whose messages I deep-six, apparently wrote: But the claim is that those beneficiaries of government largess at the MIT have been able to squelch cold fusion research on the entire planet. They would if they could. They did their best to squelch it. Working on their own they could not have accomplished this. They had help from many colleagues throughout the world, and ignorant nitwits such as James Randi. As James Bowery explained: No conspiracy is required. . . . Just a self-organizing system of incentives spiced with incompetence. Well put. As I've often said, it is not a conspiracy because a conspiracy is organized and surreptitious whereas these people are unorganized and bold. Eugene Mallove documented their shenanigans here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MalloveEmitspecial.pdf - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
We have started a process to build trust and prove reliability. I suggest that by the time Rossi is asking for money, there will be more than ample proof. AG On 11/23/2011 1:07 AM, James Bowery wrote: How are you going to deal with this risk, Aussie Guy?
[Vo]:Cold Fusion and the USPTO
Some interesting articles: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/secret_projects/project143.htm http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2000/08/more_on_cold_fusion_and_the_patent_office.html http://haroldaspden.com/essays/09.htm http://coldfusionnow.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/review-of-cold-fusion-patents-widom-and-larsen/ T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
My intent to order has been acknowledged. No number in the queue was given. I have more doubts about Defkalion than Rossi. AG On 11/23/2011 1:38 AM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: Just placed my order for 10 x 10 kW plants. Have you received any acknowledgement of your order? Or in what order your order is in? What number in line you have? I would highly recommend you await Defkalion's announcement before sending any money to Andrea Rossi. T
RE: [Vo]:Published today in the UK
Frank, I am starting to see things from your perspective, if you are correct about propagation speed inside a nucleus being faster than C and if this holds true for super atoms of condensed matter then you have a potential force converter where energy supplied by normal propagation limit of C now has an alternate path through a BEC that is several times faster than C. I think you are implying this superluminal propagation leads to what the British author was describing as a translation between magnetic and gravatic energy - he actually used the analogy of a tsunami below. The theory doesn't by itself explain excess heat or gravity anomalies but I think you may have defined the key metrics that make this possible. Supplying the other leg of an oscillator tank and energy of some sort to operate the tank could take many forms but the superluminal portion of the tank would provide the anomalous conversions required to exploit the energy source whether you think it is ZPE, LENR or whatever. [snip]Znidaric suggests that the BEC in the superconducting disc somehow locally amplifies the magnetic components of the forces. An increased magnetic field is required to carry the same amount of energy at a lower velocity. The process is similar to that of a tsunami, as the tidal wave slows, its height piles up in an amount necessary to carry its energy. This increased gravitomagnteic field gives apparent antigravity effects. In other words, the weak and strong forces and gravity balance out via their amplified magnetic components. Znidarsic emphasizes that this does not violate any law of conservation, as it is known that magnetic, as well as electric permittivity can be modified locally. The BEC therefore, acts like a soft iron core, only much more so, as the magnetic component of mass (gravitomagnetic force) is only 10-39 that of the ordinary electromagnetic field When asked how that amplification could be achieved, Znidarsic says he does not exactly know, but suspects it involves an increase in the magnetic component of the fields that compensates for the reduced velocity of the fields; just as water flows in a river bed through a valley electrons transit between states through channels of matching impedance. Could this be the zero-point energy that has been the holy grail of Haisch and Puthoff and their followers, including Podkletnov and Znidaric [/snip] From: fznidar...@aol.com [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 3:31 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; acgrav...@gmail.com; jbarro...@hotmail.com; ajo...@tribdem.com; andy_buc...@cfc.com; leola2...@gmail.com; bob.isenb...@power.alstom.com; bobp...@umd.edu; coo...@ctc.com; mldais...@yahoo.com; dzu...@crownamerican.com; edit...@kurzweilai.net; edit...@sciam.com; ew...@heathkit.com; earfu...@verizon.net; cefo...@windstream.net; frederick.e.la...@power.alstom.com; g...@ias-spes.org; debroger...@roadrunner.com; hheff...@mtaonline.net; threes...@aol.com; iass...@ias-spes.org; i...@erols.com; isenb...@aol.com; jack.d.wal...@power.alstom.com; jedrothw...@gmail.com; jmar...@aol.com; jmar...@aol.de; ajo...@tribdem.com; khug...@ameriservfinancial.com; larryleeg...@hotmail.com; lars.o.blomb...@power.alstom.com; frederick.e.la...@power.alstom.com; mcgyver28...@yahoo.com; mk...@aol.com; mm...@joy.com; mrkn...@hotmail.com; nickgjur...@atlanticbb.net; pam.b...@navy.mil; paul.fos...@power.alstom.com; puth...@aol.com; mike1...@atlanticbb.net; rvargo1...@yahoo.com; sbarro...@hotmail.com; s...@scalettacpa.com; spectrumradionetw...@gmail.com; st...@infinite-energy.com; ste...@newenergytimes.com; tcvfr...@aol.com; diaterl...@yahoo.com; klthoma...@gmail.com; howard...@gmail.com; ntho...@usa.redcross.org; tkep...@yahoo.com; tocbutter...@yahoo.com; william.ba...@meppi.com; williamla...@bellsouth.net; wkep...@genion.com; wkep...@rrienergy.com; john..dudeck@genon.com; joseph.zambo...@gmail.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Published today in the UK http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_Z_theory_of_everything.php it a nice article Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:Tovima: Defkalion says the catalyst formula is not Rossi's
At 02:31 PM 11/21/2011, Mary Yugo wrote: Just out of curiosity, is there anything written about nuclear catalysts other than related to LENR/cold fusion energy generation? I never heard of a nuclear catalyst before Rossi. I've always thought of a catalyst as a substance which changes the rate of a chemical reaction without being consumed and without changing the equilibrium constant of the underlying reaction. I will also give this one a shot. A number of prominent commenters on the subject of cold fusion: Dr. Miley and Kim, think that quantum entanglement is central to the reaction that transmutes elements. I also hold to this speculation to be true. In explanation as background, the alkali metals are a series of chemical elements in the periodic table. In the modern IUPAC nomenclature, the alkali metals comprise the group 1 elements, along with hydrogen. The alkali metals are lithium (Li), sodium (Na), potassium (K), rubidium (Rb), cesium (Cs), and francium (Fr), Hydrogen (H), although nominally also a member of Group 1. The Rossi catalyst could be a compound of one of these elements. It has been observed that in certain processes involving cold dusty plasmas including thermal-electric processes, that alkali metals will form quantum mechanical(QM) entangled ensembles of atoms that will tend to produce coherent entanglements of exotic hydrogen species of dust or crystals which hold promise to drive unanticipated nuclear processes like cold fusion. (QM) entanglement was rejected by Albert Einstein as totally unbelievable and contrary to his theory of relativity but after many years of experimentation (QM) entanglement was observed to defy the rules of the Einsteinian Universe thereby defying its rules for both space and time. The question becomes what happens when an entangled sub-atomic particle enters a nuclear reaction when it finds its way into an atomic nucleus and participates in that nuclear reaction. How do the strong force and/or the weak force affect a proton and/or an electron that is entangled with some 100 other protons and electrons outside and far away from that nucleus? Is the entanglement of the tunneling particle broken or does it still remain uncertain (stays entangled)? It has been shown that QM blockade caused by a nuclear catalyst will affect material over very long distances (centimeters) by inducing that exposed material (hydrogen and/or nickel) into an entangled state. This is a possible QM mechanism that underlies how the Rossi catalyst might work. On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Look up Muon-Catalyzed Fusion. (Recently discussed with Joshua Crude). http://www.mail-archive.com/**vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg56320.**htmlhttp://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg56320.html Thanks. Will do.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
Maybe because it works as claimed and MIT wants to gain the academic high ground by verifying Rossi and then asking the US gov for LOTS of research money to study and improve the reaction? Think about thousands of container ships full of US made E-Cats sailing to all points of the compass. With MIT backing the US will attempt to control the LENR world. AG On 11/23/2011 6:14 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com mailto:shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: Rossi plans to visit Tuesday morning for two days of meeting with government officials and representatives of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT? How is that possible. MIT is the epicenter of the anti-cold fusion conspiracy...
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
What do you think the 1 MW test was? It was independent testing and verification. You think the same US military research contractor that bought the first reactor ordered 13 more 1 MW reactors because they were not satisfied with the results of their tests? We have NO idea of what is really happening behind the scene, who has visited Rossi and done verifications that have never been published. This technology is world changing. You expect the powers that be to openly tell everyone their plans to change the way the world generates power and to use that to alter who is in control of this technology? Mary you are so involved in looking for spin / scam / fraud that you can't see the forest for the trees. It is real. It works. The world has changed and the US is in the drivers seat. AG On 11/23/2011 6:32 AM, Mary Yugo wrote: I can't help but recall that the president of Ireland, Mary McAleese, actually visited Steorn's offices and looked at the stuff as a part of some technology outreach sort of thing. That was after most of the scientific community realized and had said they were most likely to be a fraud. Of course, in Ireland, president is a largely ceremonial position but still ... If that meeting takes place, it could be very interesting -- but only if anyone is able to talk about it and if they manage to ask Rossi the right questions and make the right requests instead of just soft balling him. People tend to be way too polite when addressing Rossi at interviews and public meetings. He needs his nose rubbed *hard* in the necessity of independent testing and verification.
[Vo]:Tachyonic Neutrinos and the eCat
From another forum : I want to corral some faster-than-light neutrinos to do my stock picks for me. My reply : The financial quants are already laying a dedicated transatlantic fiber cable so they get the news quicker. I'll bet they're talking to folks about how to send messages with neutrinos. Hmmm in the Widom-Larsen theory of cold fusion, one of the outputs is neutrinos! (Positron+Electron=Neutron+Neutrino) Maybe the domestic eCat can be your tachyonic stock ticker, too. (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: Maybe because it works as claimed and MIT wants to gain the academic high ground by verifying Rossi and then asking the US gov for LOTS of research money to study and improve the reaction? But that doesn't fit with the excuse usually put forward. MIT opposed CF because it endangered their precious research grants, not because it didn't work. In fact, it would be *because* it worked that it needed to be suppressed. Now, you're saying that they think it works, so they're jumping on board. It kind of suggests that before they thought it didn't work, which would be a good reason for them to argue it doesn't work.
Re: [Vo]:Published today in the UK
I am starting to see things from your perspective, if you are correct about propagation speed inside a nucleus being faster than C and if this holds true for super atoms of condensed matter then you have a potential force converter where energy supplied by normal propagation limit of C now has an alternate path through a BEC that is several times faster than C. The teleportation of entangled quantum mechanical properties has been seen to exceed 10,000 times the speed of light at a minimum. See: Quantum weirdness wins again: Entanglement clocks in at 10,000+ times faster than light http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=quantum-weirdnes-wins-again-entangl-2008-08-13 On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Frank, I am starting to see things from your perspective, if you are correct about propagation speed inside a nucleus being faster than C and if this holds true for super atoms of condensed matter then you have a potential force converter where energy supplied by normal propagation limit of C now has an alternate path through a BEC that is several times faster than C. I think you are implying this superluminal propagation leads to what the British author was describing as a translation between magnetic and gravatic energy – he actually used the analogy of a tsunami below. The theory doesn #8217;t by itself explain excess heat or gravity anomalies but I think you may have defined the key metrics that make this possible. Supplying the other leg of an oscillator tank and energy of some sort to operate the tank could take many forms but the superluminal portion of the tank would provide the anomalous conversions required to exploit the energy source whether you think it is ZPE, LENR or whatever. [snip]Znidaric suggests that the BEC in the superconducting disc somehow locally amplifies the magnetic components of the forces. An increased magnetic field is required to carry the same amount of energy at a lower velocity. The process is similar to that of a tsunami, as the tidal wave slows, its height piles up in an amount necessary to carry its energy. This increased gravitomagnteic field gives apparent antigravity effects. In other words, the weak and strong forces and gravity balance out via their amplified magnetic components. Znidarsic emphasizes that this does not violate any law of conservation, as it is known that magnetic, as well as electric permittivity can be modified locally. The BEC therefore, acts like a soft iron core, only much more so, as the magnetic component of mass (gravitomagnetic force) is only 10-39 that of the ordinary electromagnetic field When asked how that amplification could be achieved, Znidarsic says he does not exactly know, but suspects it involves an increase in the magnetic component of the fields that compensates for the reduced velocity of the fields; “just as water flows in a river bed through a valley electrons transit between states through channels of matching impedance.” Could this be the “zero-point energy” that has been the holy grail of Haisch and Puthoff and their followers, including Podkletnov and Znidaric [/snip] *** * ** ** ** ** *From:* fznidar...@aol.com [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com] *Sent:* Monday, November 21, 2011 3:31 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com; acgrav...@gmail.com; jbarro...@hotmail.com; ajo...@tribdem.com; andy_buc...@cfc.com; leola2...@gmail.com; bob.isenb...@power.alstom.com; bobp...@umd.edu; coo...@ctc.com; mldais...@yahoo.com; dzu...@crownamerican.com; edit...@kurzweilai.net; edit...@sciam.com; ew...@heathkit.com; earfu...@verizon.net; cefo...@windstream.net; frederick.e.la...@power.alstom.com; g...@ias-spes.org; debroger...@roadrunner.com; h heff...@mtaonline.net; threes...@aol.com; iass...@ias-spes.org; i...@erols.com; isenb...@aol.com; jack.d.wal...@power.alstom.com; jedrothw...@gmail.com; jmar...@aol.com; jmar...@aol.de; ajo...@tribdem.com; khug...@ameriservfinancial.com; larryleeg...@hotmail.com; lars.o.blomb...@power.alstom.com; frederick.e.la...@power.alstom.com; mcgyver28...@yahoo.com; mk...@aol.com; mm...@joy.com; mrkn...@hotmail.com; nickgjur...@atlanticbb.net; pam.b...@navy.mil; paul.fos...@power.alstom.com; puth...@aol.com; mike1...@atlanticbb.net; rvargo1...@yahoo.com; sbarro...@hotmail.com; s...@scalettacpa.com; spectrumradionetw...@gmail.com; st...@infinite-energy.com; ste...@newenergytimes.com; tcvfr...@aol.com; diaterl...@yahoo.com; klthoma...@gmail.com; howard...@gmail.com; ntho...@usa.redcross.org; tkep...@yahoo.com; tocbutter...@yahoo.com; william.ba...@meppi.com; williamla...@bellsouth.net; wkep...@genion.com; wkep...@rrienergy.com; john..dudeck@genon.com; joseph.zambo...@gmail.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: [Vo]: Published today in the UK ** ** http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_Z_theory_of_everything.php ** ** it a nice article ** ** Frank
[Vo]:Sven Kullader's cold fusion talk is upon us.
Will anyone go there? It's today (11/23). -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi to come to the Massachusetts State House tomorrow
On 2011-11-22 20:18, Akira Shirakawa wrote: According to Sen. Bruce Tarr [...] This is Sen. Bruce Tarr's blog where probably the story originated: http://www.tarrtalk.com/2011/11/cold-fusion-inventor-comes-to-boston.html According to him, Rossi's already arrived in Boston this morning. It might be worth keeping an eye on this site for a couple of days in case new information on this matter arises. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:A U.S.P.O. policy regarding cold fusion
Someone was kind enough to dig up this document: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/2100_2107_01.htm QUOTE: Situations where an invention is found to be inoperative and therefore lacking in utility are rare, and rejections maintained solely on this ground by a Federal court even rarer. In many of these cases, the utility asserted by the applicant was thought to be incredible in the light of the knowledge of the art, or factually misleading when initially considered by the Office. In re Citron, 325 F.2d 248, 253, 139 USPQ 516, 520 (CCPA 1963). Other cases suggest that on initial evaluation, the Office considered the asserted utility to be inconsistent with known scientific principles or speculative at best as to whether attributes of the invention necessary to impart the asserted utility were actually present in the invention. In re Sichert, 566 F.2d 1154, 196 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1977). However cast, the underlying finding by the court in these cases was that, *based on the factual record of the case*, it was clear that the invention could not and did not work as the inventor claimed it did. Indeed, the use of many labels to describe a single problem (e.g., a false assertion regarding utility) has led to some of the confusion that exists today with regard to a rejection based on the utility requirement. Examples of such cases include: an invention asserted to change the taste of food using a magnetic field (Fregeau v.Mossinghoff, 776 F.2d 1034, 227 USPQ 848 (Fed. Cir. 1985)), a perpetual motion machine (Newmanv. Quigg, 877 F.2d 1575, 11 USPQ2d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 1989)), a flying machine operating on flapping or flutter function (In re Houghton, 433 F.2d 820, 167 USPQ 687 (CCPA 1970)), a cold fusion process for producing energy (In re Swartz, 232 F.3d 862, 56 USPQ2d 1703, (Fed. Cir. 2000)) . . . END QUOTE I know nothing about Swartz's machine, and I have no idea what the factual record of the case includes. I suppose it does work, but it is conceivable that the Patent Office is right and this particular device does not work. I have seen some cold fusion claims that struck me as unproven. However, many other cold fusion devices do work. There is more proof of that than you will find for many other nascent technologies. Before Rossi there were no practical, commercially useful cold fusion reactors. But the P.O. rules do not disqualify a device on the grounds that it is not practical. The problem may be that the people trying to get patents for the other devices -- the ones which definitely do work -- ran out of money, time or gumption, or they died. Anyway, it is clear from this document and others that the management at the Patent Office, the DoE and at some other leading institutions in the United States do not believe that cold fusion exists. Secretary Chu is a good example. I have encountered countless others. They are determined to prevent any cold fusion research from being funded, because they think it is fraud, or impossible, or they think it was never replicated. That is what they say. I have every reason to believe they mean what they say. They do not hide this opinion. They do not consider it controversial. Moreover, they do not know anything about cold fusion, and they *absolutely refuse*to learn anything or glance at LENR-CANR.org. They say I will not waste my time looking at such garbage. I have heard that a million times. I tell them the papers are published by EPRI, the Navy, the NSF and BARC. They do not believe me, and they never bother to check. Again, that is what they tell me, and I have no reason to doubt them. A few of these opponents claim to be experts in some related field, yet they say they cannot understand the papers. Mary Yugo is a prime example. She claim to be an expert in calorimetry yet she says she cannot make head or tail of McKubre's paper. Those two statements cannot be reconciled; if you are an expert in calorimetry, McKubre's paper is baby food for you. It is what you do every day. It is not possible that Yugo has made calorimeters yet she cannot follow this paper. I have no idea whether she actually knows anything about calorimeters since she has not made any technical assertions about calorimetry. I have no way of judging whether she has actually tried to read this paper and failed to understand it, since she has made no comments about it. But I am sure that no genuine expert in calorimetery will have difficulty with this paper. I am equally sure that no expert in calorimetry who reads the paper will find an error in it. There are no errors in this, or in any other major cold fusion paper. If there were errors, some opponent would have found them years ago. McKubre's papers has been downloaded and by tens of thousands of people. It isn't as if no one has checked them. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:A U.S.P.O. policy regarding cold fusion
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Anyway, it is clear from this document and others that the management at the Patent Office, the DoE and at some other leading institutions in the United States do not believe that cold fusion exists. That's called over-interpretation, something cold fusion advocates are experts in. That document says nothing about the DOE and other leading institutions, and it does not give the patent office's general opinion of cold fusion. It gives one example of a cf patent deemed inoperative. Secretary Chu is a good example. I have encountered countless others. They are determined to prevent any cold fusion research from being funded, because they think it is fraud, or impossible, or they think it was never replicated. That is what they say. Show us where they say it. I think you're making it up. I am equally sure that no expert in calorimetry who reads the paper will find an error in it. There are no errors in this, or in any other major cold fusion paper. All that cold fusion literature was available to the DOE panel of 18 experts, and they judged that the occurrence of low energy nuclear reactions is not conclusively demonstrated by the evidence presented.
RE: [Vo]:Published today in the UK
OOPS - got that backwards... Frank's Speed of sound in nucleus is many times times SLOWER than C! [snip] Light or electromagnetic radiation in vacuum has a much higher velocity, c = 299,792,458 metres per second, nearly 300 times as large as the velocity of sound in the nucleus of atoms identified by Znidarsic. In order for light in the electronic structure to match the velocity sound in the nucleus, it must be slowed down nearly 300-fold. Light does indeed propagate at reduced velocity through dense media; the refraction of light in water is an everyday example. In the laboratory, scientists have managed to slow light down even to a standstill in a BSC of atoms [21, 22] (see [23] Trapping Lighthttp://www.i-sis.org.uk/trappingLight.php, SiS 22). From: Roarty, Francis X Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 5:04 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Published today in the UK Frank, I am starting to see things from your perspective, if you are correct about propagation speed inside a nucleus being faster than C and if this holds true for super atoms of condensed matter then you have a potential force converter where energy supplied by normal propagation limit of C now has an alternate path through a BEC that is several times faster than C. I think you are implying this superluminal propagation leads to what the British author was describing as a translation between magnetic and gravatic energy - he actually used the analogy of a tsunami below. The theory doesn #8217;t by itself explain excess heat or gravity anomalies but I think you may have defined the key metrics that make this possible. Supplying the other leg of an oscillator tank and energy of some sort to operate the tank could take many forms but the superluminal portion of the tank would provide the anomalous conversions required to exploit the energy source whether you think it is ZPE, LENR or whatever. [snip]Znidaric suggests that the BEC in the superconducting disc somehow locally amplifies the magnetic components of the forces. An increased magnetic field is required to carry the same amount of energy at a lower velocity. The process is similar to that of a tsunami, as the tidal wave slows, its height piles up in an amount necessary to carry its energy. This increased gravitomagnteic field gives apparent antigravity effects. In other words, the weak and strong forces and gravity balance out via their amplified magnetic components. Znidarsic emphasizes that this does not violate any law of conservation, as it is known that magnetic, as well as electric permittivity can be modified locally. The BEC therefore, acts like a soft iron core, only much more so, as the magnetic component of mass (gravitomagnetic force) is only 10-39 that of the ordinary electromagnetic field When asked how that amplification could be achieved, Znidarsic says he does not exactly know, but suspects it involves an increase in the magnetic component of the fields that compensates for the reduced velocity of the fields; just as water flows in a river bed through a valley electrons transit between states through channels of matching impedance. Could this be the zero-point energy that has been the holy grail of Haisch and Puthoff and their followers, including Podkletnov and Znidaric [/snip] From: fznidar...@aol.com [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 3:31 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; acgrav...@gmail.com; jbarro...@hotmail.com; ajo...@tribdem.com; andy_buc...@cfc.com; leola2...@gmail.com; bob.isenb...@power.alstom.com; bobp...@umd.edu; coo...@ctc.com; mldais...@yahoo.com; dzu...@crownamerican.com; edit...@kurzweilai.net; edit...@sciam.com; ew...@heathkit.com; earfu...@verizon.net; cefo...@windstream.net; frederick.e.la...@power.alstom.com; g...@ias-spes.org; debroger...@roadrunner.com; h heff...@mtaonline.net; threes...@aol.com; iass...@ias-spes.org; i...@erols.com; isenb...@aol.com; jack.d.wal...@power.alstom.com; jedrothw...@gmail.com; jmar...@aol.com; jmar...@aol.de; ajo...@tribdem.com; khug...@ameriservfinancial.com; larryleeg...@hotmail.com; lars.o.blomb...@power.alstom.com; frederick.e.la...@power.alstom.com; mcgyver28...@yahoo.com; mk...@aol.com; mm...@joy.com; mrkn...@hotmail.com; nickgjur...@atlanticbb.net; pam.b...@navy.mil; paul.fos...@power.alstom.com; puth...@aol.com; mike1...@atlanticbb.net; rvargo1...@yahoo.com; sbarro...@hotmail.com; s...@scalettacpa.com; spectrumradionetw...@gmail.com; st...@infinite-energy.com; ste...@newenergytimes.com; tcvfr...@aol.com; diaterl...@yahoo.com; klthoma...@gmail.com; howard...@gmail.com; ntho...@usa.redcross.org; tkep...@yahoo.com; tocbutter...@yahoo.com; william.ba...@meppi.com; williamla...@bellsouth.net; wkep...@genion.com; wkep...@rrienergy.com; john..dudeck@genon.com; joseph.zambo...@gmail.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]: Published today in the UK http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_Z_theory_of_everything.php
Re: [Vo]:A U.S.P.O. policy regarding cold fusion
It has been said it is difficult for a man to believe what his paycheck demands he not believe. AG On 11/23/2011 9:54 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: All that cold fusion literature was available to the DOE panel of 18 experts, and they judged that the occurrence of low energy nuclear reactions is not conclusively demonstrated by the evidence presented.
Re: [Vo]:A U.S.P.O. policy regarding cold fusion
Joshua, when did the DOE panel you refer to take place? Lawrence On Nov 22, 2011, at 6:24 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Anyway, it is clear from this document and others that the management at the Patent Office, the DoE and at some other leading institutions in the United States do not believe that cold fusion exists. That's called over-interpretation, something cold fusion advocates are experts in. That document says nothing about the DOE and other leading institutions, and it does not give the patent office's general opinion of cold fusion. It gives one example of a cf patent deemed inoperative. Secretary Chu is a good example. I have encountered countless others. They are determined to prevent any cold fusion research from being funded, because they think it is fraud, or impossible, or they think it was never replicated. That is what they say. Show us where they say it. I think you're making it up. I am equally sure that no expert in calorimetry who reads the paper will find an error in it. There are no errors in this, or in any other major cold fusion paper. All that cold fusion literature was available to the DOE panel of 18 experts, and they judged that the occurrence of low energy nuclear reactions is not conclusively demonstrated by the evidence presented.
Re: [Vo]:A U.S.P.O. policy regarding cold fusion
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 5:55 PM, de Bivort Lawrence ldebiv...@gmail.comwrote: Joshua, when did the DOE panel you refer to take place? 2004. I think the McKubre papers Rothwell is referring to predate that. There has not been much (if anything) published under peer-review about excess heat from electrolysis since then. Less than a dozen experimental claims of positive results in cold fusion by my count. Mostly some papers on CR-39 from Mosier-Boss et al, and some sub-watt papers on gas-loading.
