Re: [Vo]:Leonardo Corporation is a Paper Company
The fact Rossi is telling the truth is clear and obvious at this point. Your irrational skepticism is what is mysterious. When the E-Cat technology is powering the world I hope you will reveal your true identity, and admit to the fact you trolled forums across the net trying to attack it. Of course you won't, because your not decent enough to do that. From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 2:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Leonardo Corporation is a Paper Company On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: You don't know and I don't know. I hope we agree that you don't know and I don't know is not support for the idea that Rossi is telling the truth. Otherwise, I will have to bring back my unicorn example again.
Re: [Vo]:Lattice Energy LLC comments on Rossi
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: How dare he. Internet, my foot. Just in case you were serious, the archives here: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/ are most certainly on the internet.
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
Dear Bastiaan, It is better, however facts are are facts and truth is truth, and priority is... you can guess it...priority! FYI- BRIEF HISTORY CHRONOLOGY OF Ni-H LENR - 16 August 1989. Francesco Piantelli at the Department of Physics of the University of Siena, accidentally discovers the phenomenon of Ni-H while working on a project of Biophysics;the effect of hydrogen on gangliosides on a support of Ni lamina - From December 1989 and January 1990. In the Physics dep. the phenomenon is replicated with the construction of the first cell; - Between January and June 1990. The phenomenon is repeated for two times; - October 1990. Meeting of Piantelli with R. Habel and S.Focardi at the S.I.F.National Congress of Physics held in Trento; start of collaboration, - 1991-1992 First experiment from the collaboration with the two Italian physicists; - 1993 At the Fisiocritici Academy in Siena is made of the first publication about the work of 1990 under the sole name of Piantelli; The paper is: F. Piantelli -Anornalous Energy Production in Experirnents with H and D Isotopes adsorbed in particular metallic Lattice, Atti Acc. Fis. Serie XV-Tomo XII -(1993) - 1994 Completions of the Piantelli-Habel-Focardi experiment published at Nuovo Cimento; - 1994 R. Habel stops the collaboration; etc., etc. Please take in account that almost all experiments for anomalous heat were done at Siena U. Bologna was focused on the analytical side. As an aside, please let me know how do you interpret Focardi's declaration that he does not know what Rossi's catayst is. Best wishes, Peter On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Bastiaan Bergman bastiaan.berg...@gmail.com wrote: All, Thanks for your input, I updated the paper to incorporate most of your comments. @Aussie Thanks; @Peter I maintain that Rossi forced the current big breakthrough, whether it is just an additive or not. I agree with you that it is fair to mention Piantelli and Focardi as founders and completely revised that section to include it. @Rich I believe I did pay a fair amount of attention to the critics. I summarized all point is the paragraph What the critics say and more in the paragraph about Rossi. I think the critique you summarize is equally valid for super-conduction. Any paper in professional literature can be found to lack of common sense on some points and short of some additional measurement that could have been done on others, once scrutinized by an army of skeptics. However, the sum of the work done by many independent laboratories using a variety of different approaches shows, without doubt, a pattern that is difficult to reject as pathological science. Small government funding for further investigation is well warranted. No point to criticize something that doesn't exist, if you don't like it, ignore it. But I do like your contributions Rich:-) @Alain I feel as if I missed something, about CF or about humanity - Exactly! What is going on? I feel like Truman in one of your human systems experiments ;-) @Robin I was a bit overly optimistic with the energy density, corrected it. 3 cubic mile oil - equivalents is our energy consumption, this includes coal and uranium (and renewables). 1 CMO is oil alone. I corrected it anyway, no point overstating that. Thanks for pointing this out, it's not worth getting caught on. Some (early version of?) H-bombs use multiple fission bombs, not all, and maybe none of the modern ones. It doesn't really matter, I feel like I have to underline the dirtiness of this business anyway. Intriguing in this regard I find the new studies that point out that there is very little evidence of the fusion part of these bombs contributing significantly to the power. Intriguing because the inventor of the H-bomb is a prominent cold-fusion skeptic, citing the lack of evidence... Hydrogen atoms do not repel each other. Naked protons repel each other. That's why hot fusion is so difficult - they insist on using naked protons. - I agree. For sake of simplicity I skipped over it. And technically it isn't wrong. Atoms attract at some length scales, but not at all. That's why hydrogen does form molecules but doesn't fuse just like that. I don't like the emphasis some people put on the stripping off of electrons, as if that's a big deal in the fusion process, as if that's hard, as if that gets you close to fusion itself. The sentence no one claims to know,... is wrong in itself, obviously. Of course there are many people claiming all sorts of stuff. The next sentence basically says so too. That cold fusion actually isn't fusion is a small step, I think. After one accepts that something happens that we don't understand why it's a small step to accept that something happens that is unknown all together. I still have to learn more about the Hydrino theory, a simple introduction to Hydrino's would be appreciated ;-). Thanks for all the style corrections.
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
In my opinion, Piantelli's work is meaningless. He was not able to do anything with Ni-H fusion. Piantelli is like a person who discovers heavy crude oil. Andrea Rossi is the person who was able to refine it into high grade jet fuel, and use it to power an aircraft. Anyone who thinks that Piantelli owns the rights to Rossi's technology, must also believe that the individuals who discovered the transistor back in 1947 now own the rights to all high end personal computers. It is simply insane. From: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 4:32 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion Dear Bastiaan, It is better, however facts are are facts and truth is truth, and priority is... you can guess it...priority! FYI- BRIEF HISTORY CHRONOLOGY OF Ni-H LENR - 16 August 1989. Francesco Piantelli at the Department of Physics of the Universityof Siena, accidentally discovers the phenomenon of Ni-H while working on a project of Biophysics;the effect of hydrogen on gangliosides on a support of Ni lamina - From December 1989 and January 1990. In the Physics dep. the phenomenon is replicated with the construction of the first cell; - Between January and June 1990. The phenomenon is repeated for two times; - October 1990. Meeting of Piantelli with R. Habel and S.Focardi at the S.I.F.National Congress of Physics held in Trento; start of collaboration, - 1991-1992 First experiment from the collaboration with the two Italian physicists; - 1993 At the FisiocriticiAcademyin Sienais made of the first publication about the work of 1990 under the sole name of Piantelli; The paper is: F. Piantelli -Anornalous Energy Production in Experirnents with H and D Isotopes adsorbed in particular metallic Lattice, Atti Acc. Fis. Serie XV-Tomo XII -(1993) - 1994 Completions of the Piantelli-Habel-Focardi experiment published at Nuovo Cimento; - 1994 R. Habel stops the collaboration; etc., etc. Please take in account that almost all experiments for anomalous heat were done at Siena U. Bologna was focused on the analytical side. As an aside, please let me know how do you interpret Focardi's declaration that he does not know what Rossi's catayst is. Best wishes, Peter On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Bastiaan Bergman bastiaan.berg...@gmail.com wrote: All, Thanks for your input, I updated the paper to incorporate most of your comments. @Aussie Thanks; @Peter I maintain that Rossi forced the current big breakthrough, whether it is just an additive or not. I agree with you that it is fair to mention Piantelli and Focardi as founders and completely revised that section to include it. @Rich I believe I did pay a fair amount of attention to the critics. I summarized all point is the paragraph What the critics say and more in the paragraph about Rossi. I think the critique you summarize is equally valid for super-conduction. Any paper in professional literature can be found to lack of common sense on some points and short of some additional measurement that could have been done on others, once scrutinized by an army of skeptics. However, the sum of the work done by many independent laboratories using a variety of different approaches shows, without doubt, a pattern that is difficult to reject as pathological science. Small government funding for further investigation is well warranted. No point to criticize something that doesn't exist, if you don't like it, ignore it. But I do like your contributions Rich:-) @Alain I feel as if I missed something, about CF or about humanity - Exactly! What is going on? I feel like Truman in one of your human systems experiments ;-) @Robin I was a bit overly optimistic with the energy density, corrected it. 3 cubic mile oil - equivalents is our energy consumption, this includes coal and uranium (and renewables). 1 CMO is oil alone. I corrected it anyway, no point overstating that. Thanks for pointing this out, it's not worth getting caught on. Some (early version of?) H-bombs use multiple fission bombs, not all, and maybe none of the modern ones. It doesn't really matter, I feel like I have to underline the dirtiness of this business anyway. Intriguing in this regard I find the new studies that point out that there is very little evidence of the fusion part of these bombs contributing significantly to the power. Intriguing because the inventor of the H-bomb is a prominent cold-fusion skeptic, citing the lack of evidence... Hydrogen atoms do not repel each other. Naked protons repel each other. That's why hot fusion is so difficult - they insist on using naked protons. - I agree. For sake of simplicity I skipped over it. And technically it isn't wrong. Atoms attract at some length scales, but not at all. That's why hydrogen does form molecules but doesn't fuse just like that. I don't like the emphasis some people put on the stripping off of electrons, as if that's a big deal in the
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
5 months after the 23 March 1989 P and F announcement which may have helped Piantelli to understand he was seeing a Cold Fusion, as it was called back then, effect. I suspect Rossi's burnt finger tip happened when it touched a piece of Nickel in his bio fuel converter system that should not be hot. I find it interesting that Larsen believes there may be LENR reactions happening in automotive catalytic converters and elsewhere in natural systems. He may be right. Starts at page 39: http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-len-rs-in-catalytic-convertersjune-25-2010 AG On 11/27/2011 8:02 PM, Peter Gluck wrote: - 16 August 1989. Francesco Piantelli at the Department of Physics of the Universityof Siena, accidentally discovers the phenomenon of Ni-H while working on a project of Biophysics;the effect of hydrogen on gangliosides on a support of Ni lamina
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi refuse to answer about the publication of calorimetry test that will be done in Universities
Useless. If negative, the Rossi camp could safely claim that the Bologna guys still did not know how to get the process started correctly - that does seem to be something touchy even for Rossi. And if positive, the anti-Rossi camp could safely claim (just as now) that at least someone in group running the tests was in on the Rossi scam, and had fooled the others. Single experimental points(or points coming all from the same source) are not sufficient to test a new device for much. On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 4:06 AM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.comwrote: Ah, ask if results will be made available BEFORE patent protection. *From:* Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com *Sent:* Sunday, November 27, 2011 4:04 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Rossi refuse to answer about the publication of calorimetry test that will be done in Universities Many and many times Rossi said that RD is confidential and that no more information will be made available until patent protection. Well, i and others guys have asked to Rossi about the publication of caolorimetry test results from Universities, and if Bologna and Uppsala will be free to publish the results, whatever the results will be. Rossi didn’t publish the questions. Since it’s not confidential data, PLEASE, go to Rossi’s website and ask it. We deserve an answer. Thank you for the attention.
[Vo]:INFORMAVORE's SUNDAY No 483
Dear Colleagues, I am very busy to solve the puzzle of Ni-H LENR, however it is is Sunday my best working day so I am offering you the newest issue of INFORMAVORE's SUNDAY: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/11/informavores-sunday-no-483.html I would be very happy if you will discover interesting things there. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi refuse to answer about the publication of calorimetry test that will be done in Universities
Am 27.11.2011 12:05, schrieb Marcello Vitale: Useless. If negative, the Rossi camp could safely claim that the Bologna guys still did not know how to get the process started correctly - that does seem to be something touchy even for Rossi. And if positive, the anti-Rossi camp could safely claim (just as now) that at least someone in group running the tests was in on the Rossi scam, and had fooled the others. If university researchers cannot startup the device, then a customer cannot do it. Then it doesnt work as advertised and might be ready for RD, but not ready for market. Rossi himself could support them in this case. A test can be set up in such a way that the output heat cannot been faked. E.g. , if they succeed to heat some big radiators and measure this, errors are impossible. Of course still then, some silly guy can assume fraud, and can say, the energy was faked. In this case however, they have faked a room-heater. This fake, however would be a true scientific miracle and sensation and worth reseach by itself ;-) If it heats my room or boils my lunch then I dont care about faked energy, I happily use it. ;-) Best regards, Peter
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
Yes, the Widom-Larsen network is sharing many reasonable, evidence driven lines of new research, including water tree corrosion in high density polyethylene insulation in high voltage AC power cables: reactive gas micro and nano bubbles complicate Widom-Larsen theory re electrolytic cells -- metal isotope anomalies in 'water tree' corrosion of power cable polyethylene insulation, T Kumazawa et al 2005 -- 2008 Japan: Rich Murray 2011.06.02 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2011/06/reactive-gas-micro-and-nano-bubbles.html http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/85 within mutual service, Rich Murray On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: 5 months after the 23 March 1989 P and F announcement which may have helped Piantelli to understand he was seeing a Cold Fusion, as it was called back then, effect. I suspect Rossi's burnt finger tip happened when it touched a piece of Nickel in his bio fuel converter system that should not be hot. I find it interesting that Larsen believes there may be LENR reactions happening in automotive catalytic converters and elsewhere in natural systems. He may be right. Starts at page 39: http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-len-rs-in-catalytic-convertersjune-25-2010 AG On 11/27/2011 8:02 PM, Peter Gluck wrote: - 16 August 1989. Francesco Piantelli at the Department of Physics of the Universityof Siena, accidentally discovers the phenomenon of Ni-H while working on a project of Biophysics;the effect of hydrogen on gangliosides on a support of Ni lamina
Re: [Vo]:Leonardo Corporation is a Paper Company
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Otherwise, I will have to bring back my unicorn example again. Adjacent to an alien anal probe thread, this triggers imagry of equine agony. Arrgh! T
[Vo]:Atmospheric Vortex Engine Critical Questions
Chapter 5 (page 107) of the 2011 doctoral thesis Numerical Simulation of Tornado-like Vorticeshttp://vortexengine.ca/cfd/Diwakar_Natarajan_Full_thesis.pdf by Diwakar Natarajan concludes that cross-winds do not affect the power generation capacity of the AVE, but it appears that this is only with respect to ambient temperature. He specifically calls for further research into the significance of temperature gradients with altitude. Is there any further work that discounts the possible cross-wind induced loss of vortex integrity at the altitudes required to achieve lower exhaust temperatures required for higher Carnot efficiency? The AVE CFD page http://vortexengine.ca/cfd.shtml presents a disagreement with Natarajan's use of turbulent mode simulation. This disagreement is based on behavior of physical models showing laminar flow, one of which was water-spouts and the other being a laboratory scale model. The implication is that the adjoining photograph of a laboratory scale modelhttp://www.vortexengine.ca/Physical_Models_LM-3.shtml demonstrates a vortex that is in disagreement with Natarajan's application of turbulent mode simulation at high Rayleigh numbers. Is anyone aware of further resolution of this point of disagreement?
RE: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
From: Peter Gluck * Dear Bastiaan, * It is better, however facts are facts and truth is truth, and priority is... you can guess it...priority! * FYI- BRIEF HISTORY CHRONOLOGY OF Ni-H LENR Peter, I am surprised that you overlooked Randell Mill's earlier priority dates and publications for Ni-H, since you have followed this story closely from the beginning. Officially his WIPO application is still pending AFAIK ... (# WO 92/10838) and the priority date is December 1990. He had already published the first addition of his CQM Theory by this time. He beat Piantelli and Focardi both to the patent office and to the publisher. Can you really say that they preceded him? Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
Please do not be surprised, Randy considers that his process has nothing to do with Rossi's or Paintelli's. And the BLP technology (I still hope to see it working more or less publicly this year) is hyperchemistry while Ni-H LENR is nuclear. other leagues no competition. In case you are interested in details please write me privately. Peter On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: Peter Gluck * Dear Bastiaan, * It is better, however facts are facts and truth is truth, and priority is... you can guess it...priority! * FYI- BRIEF HISTORY CHRONOLOGY OF Ni-H LENR Peter, I am surprised that you overlooked Randell Mill's earlier priority dates and publications for Ni-H, since you have followed this story closely from the beginning. Officially his WIPO application is still pending AFAIK ... (# WO 92/10838) and the priority date is December 1990. He had already published the first addition of his CQM Theory by this time. He beat Piantelli and Focardi both to the patent office and to the publisher. Can you really say that they preceded him? Jones -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Rossi - Limiting temperature
A friend of mine who was working on LENR in the past noted that Stainless Steel containers become quite porous to Hydrogen at around 800 C. This being the case, would this not limit Rossi's temperature gradient from reactor, through its container, lead, and then surrounding water. As in all(?) public tests he shuts the Hydrogen supply valve, so no new Hydrogen is supplied, any leakage would tend to limit the reaction. Thoughts?
Re: [Vo]:E-Cats and 450 deg C steam
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 12:42 AM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.comwrote: The big cost difference between E-Cat technology and conventional technologies will of course be the fuel cost. The fuel cost for a one megawatt cold fusion planet will probably be at least 1/1000 times less than one powered by coal or natural gas. At $5/W, clean coal's levelized capital cost plus the process costs to clean up the effluent and sequester the CO2, exceeds its fuel cost.
Re: [Vo]:E-Cats and 450 deg C steam
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:01 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 12:42 AM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.comwrote: The big cost difference between E-Cat technology and conventional technologies will of course be the fuel cost. The fuel cost for a one megawatt cold fusion planet will probably be at least 1/1000 times less than one powered by coal or natural gas. At $5/W, clean coal's levelized capital cost plus the process costs to clean up the effluent and sequester the CO2, exceeds its fuel cost. Actually, this applies to conventional coal as well, although that is increasingly irrelevant given that conventional coal plants aren't being built anymore except in Asia. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#US_Department_of_Energy_estimates
Re: [Vo]:Rossi - Limiting temperature
Am 27.11.2011 17:24, schrieb Jeff Sutton: A friend of mine who was working on LENR in the past noted that Stainless Steel containers become quite porous to Hydrogen at around 800 C. This being the case, would this not limit Rossi's temperature gradient from reactor, through its container, lead, and then surrounding water. As in all(?) public tests he shuts the Hydrogen supply valve, so no new Hydrogen is supplied, any leakage would tend to limit the reaction. Thoughts? http://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=1175 Look to chapter structural stability. There are many different types of stainless steel and those with low carbon content are stable only below 400°. 870° is the highest temperature they mention in this article for H grade steels and so this should indeed be a theoretical upper limit, independent from hydrogen diffusion. Diffusion rates are commonly quite low, these are measured in µg per squaremeter. If there is more diffusion, the material is possibly cracked. The losses could be compensateted by a constant pressure hydrogen supply. So I dont think, diffusion rate is a limit. Remember, for hydrogen purification they have use µm thick foils. If thicker and cheaper material worked at 800°, they would use this. Peter
RE: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
From Jed: What would be the advantage to Rossi if he provided a conclusive test? The advantage would be that people would believe him. If he did not want to be believed, why has he gone through all the demonstrations he has done thus far with invited guests including press and scientists? Look, this really is not complicated. He wants to be believed a little, by some groups of people, so that he can sell them reactors. He does not want to be believed by everyone at this time. Many other inventors such as Edison and Patterson did the same thing for the same reasons. FWIW it appears that Saddam Hussein followed a similar strategy of misdirection in regards to weapons of mass destruction. This is based on hindsight analysis - when we tried to figure out why we got it so wrong and ended up invading Iraq at the needless cost of thousands of lives. However, a major difference between Saddam and Rossi was that in Saddam's case he was trying to convince neighboring adversaries of the fact that he HAD them (so that they would continue to fear him and not invade), while simultaneously trying to convince everyone else of the act that he didn't possess any. I guess one could say that in Saddam's case he got mixed results. I guess one could say the same about Rossi, but then, the jury is still out on that one. ;-) Be that as it may, it is clear that tactics of misdirection and disinformation are used all the time both in covert warfare and in matters of covert business strategy. It would appear that any corporation that wants to remain in business had better be prepared to play the game. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Dealing with the noise box
Although the kill file approach doesn't work due to responses, one can use email filters such as gmail's to filter not only on the from field but on words that occur in the body of the message. The increase in signal to noise ratio is a pleasure.
Re: [Vo]:Dealing with the noise box
Oh, I almost forgot: For gmail, the action to take upon filter match is delete. Others won't get rid of the noise. On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 12:32 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Although the kill file approach doesn't work due to responses, one can use email filters such as gmail's to filter not only on the from field but on words that occur in the body of the message. The increase in signal to noise ratio is a pleasure.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
I got no reply from my Nov 22 submission. so I resent it (with a different email). Accepted : I'm officially on the 9,998-to-go list. (Me and Aussie Guy ... are you on both the 10K and the 110K list?)
[Vo]:OT: Google obeys the law the gravity
Google falls down http://mrdoob.com/projects/chromeexperiments/google_gravity/ (no naked protons here) Harry
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Sun, 27 Nov 2011 18:21:47 +0200: Hi Peter, Please do not be surprised, Randy considers that his process has nothing to do with Rossi's or Paintelli's. And the BLP technology (I still hope to see it working more or less publicly this year) is hyperchemistry while Ni-H LENR is nuclear. LENR may be both. Hyperchemistry providing much of the energy, with some of the shrunken Hydrogen occasionally undergoing a fusion reaction responsible for the low level ionizing radiation. Note that when Deuterium is used, the amount of actual fusion taking place may be much higher due to the fact that no weak force reactions are required, hence the fusion cross section is much higher. other leagues no competition. In case you are interested in details please write me privately. Peter [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
That's fine, but then Rossi and his believers need to quit complaining or expressing alarm when folks see this misdirection and reasonably interpret it as evidence of a scam. They should admit that fraud is a rational conclusion. On Nov 27, 2011, at 13:05, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: From Jed: What would be the advantage to Rossi if he provided a conclusive test? The advantage would be that people would believe him. If he did not want to be believed, why has he gone through all the demonstrations he has done thus far with invited guests including press and scientists? Look, this really is not complicated. He wants to be believed a little, by some groups of people, so that he can sell them reactors. He does not want to be believed by everyone at this time. Many other inventors such as Edison and Patterson did the same thing for the same reasons. FWIW it appears that Saddam Hussein followed a similar strategy of misdirection in regards to weapons of mass destruction. This is based on hindsight analysis - when we tried to figure out why we got it so wrong and ended up invading Iraq at the needless cost of thousands of lives. However, a major difference between Saddam and Rossi was that in Saddam's case he was trying to convince neighboring adversaries of the fact that he HAD them (so that they would continue to fear him and not invade), while simultaneously trying to convince everyone else of the act that he didn't possess any. I guess one could say that in Saddam's case he got mixed results. I guess one could say the same about Rossi, but then, the jury is still out on that one. ;-) Be that as it may, it is clear that tactics of misdirection and disinformation are used all the time both in covert warfare and in matters of covert business strategy. It would appear that any corporation that wants to remain in business had better be prepared to play the game. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
Dear Robin. I told mainly what Randy thinks- he has nothing to do with what Rossi (or Piantelli) has As regarding Transition Metals-H LENR (not only Ni works) I think that Piantellis' theory is the most realistic, logically consistent, and confirmed by experiment from the many theories I have seen in the realm of CF. It is predictive. On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 10:37 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Sun, 27 Nov 2011 18:21:47 +0200: Hi Peter, Please do not be surprised, Randy considers that his process has nothing to do with Rossi's or Paintelli's. And the BLP technology (I still hope to see it working more or less publicly this year) is hyperchemistry while Ni-H LENR is nuclear. LENR may be both. Hyperchemistry providing much of the energy, with some of the shrunken Hydrogen occasionally undergoing a fusion reaction responsible for the low level ionizing radiation. Note that when Deuterium is used, the amount of actual fusion taking place may be much higher due to the fact that no weak force reactions are required, hence the fusion cross section is much higher. other leagues no competition. In case you are interested in details please write me privately. Peter [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
On 2011-11-27 21:52, Peter Gluck wrote: [...] As regarding Transition Metals-H LENR (not only Ni works)... It's interesting to know that not only Ni (in addition to Pd) works. I assume that Fe-H LENRs could be possible, at least in theory; I wonder at what efficiency, compared to Nickel. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I told mainly what Randy thinks- he has nothing to do with what Rossi (or Piantelli) has As McKubre says, the violates conservation of miracles. This is just a feeling but it seems unlikely there are many different previously undiscovered ways to get anomalous heat from hydrides. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Sun, 27 Nov 2011 22:52:13 +0200: Hi Peter, [snip] Dear Robin. I told mainly what Randy thinks- he has nothing to do with what Rossi (or Piantelli) has I'm well aware that Randy doesn't want to have anything to do with CF. As regarding Transition Metals-H LENR (not only Ni works) I think that Piantellis' theory is the most realistic, logically consistent, and confirmed by experiment from the many theories I have seen in the realm of CF. It is predictive. As I understand it Piantelli relies on shrinking Hydride. How does he explain the lack of LENR in most circumstances where Hydride is ordinarily produced? IOW there doesn't appear to be any evidence from Chemistry that the negative hydrogen ion can shrink. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:This is a test -- this is only a test
I've switched my web-mailer to send text, rather than html. With a bit of luck my posts won't lose their line feeds. If this were a real post - Original Message - I got no reply from my Nov 22 submission. so I resent it (with a different email). Accepted : I'm officially on the 9,998-to-go list. (Me and Aussie Guy ... are you on both the 10K and the 110K list?)
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
In reply to Akira Shirakawa's message of Sun, 27 Nov 2011 21:58:43 +0100: Hi, [snip] On 2011-11-27 21:52, Peter Gluck wrote: [...] As regarding Transition Metals-H LENR (not only Ni works)... It's interesting to know that not only Ni (in addition to Pd) works. I assume that Fe-H LENRs could be possible, at least in theory; I wonder at what efficiency, compared to Nickel. Rossi claims to have experimented with many materials. Why not ask him how effective Fe was relative to Ni? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote: That's fine, but then Rossi and his believers need to quit complaining or expressing alarm when folks see this misdirection and reasonably interpret it as evidence of a scam. Misdirection is routinely practiced by most businesses. IBM was famous for it back in the 1970s. For example, they would announce an initiative which they never intended to follow through on, in order to stop a competitor. This is mean spirited, and perhaps unfair, but it is not unethical, and it certainly not a scam. Unless you hold that most corporations are engaged in scams. I do not think this is evidence. This is your opinion, or your gut feeling of distrust. I do not trust Rossi myself (not to do business with him), but I would never glorify this feeling of mine by calling it evidence of anything. It is intuition. I think evidence should mean a body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. That is, objectively verifiable facts in the real world, such as reports that someone has been scammed (or claims to be), or that Rossi has investors who have not performed independent tests of his equipment. Not your feeling that he might have such investors -- or by gosh wouldn't it be just him to have such investors -- but actual names of investors and a credible report about them. Feelings should not be ignored. Intuition is often valuable when making a business decision. But intuition and facts are two very different things. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi Interview Questions
In reply to Alan J Fletcher's message of Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:23:40 -0800: Hi, [snip] Need 500C steam for electrical. At 120C steam the inside temperature is too high .. not a very stable situation. This just means that the thermal conductivity needs to be improved. A design and materials issue. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
Thanks for the interesting read: http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2011/06/reactive-gas-micro-and-nano-bubbles.html Amazing the amount of transmutation products found in Water Trees. Will talk to a few friends in the local power utility to see what they know of from first hand experience. AG On 11/28/2011 12:55 AM, Rich Murray wrote: Yes, the Widom-Larsen network is sharing many reasonable, evidence driven lines of new research, including water tree corrosion in high density polyethylene insulation in high voltage AC power cables: reactive gas micro and nano bubbles complicate Widom-Larsen theory re electrolytic cells -- metal isotope anomalies in 'water tree' corrosion of power cable polyethylene insulation, T Kumazawa et al 2005 -- 2008 Japan: Rich Murray 2011.06.02 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2011/06/reactive-gas-micro-and-nano-bubbles.html http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/85 within mutual service, Rich Murray On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 2:02 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: 5 months after the 23 March 1989 P and F announcement which may have helped Piantelli to understand he was seeing a Cold Fusion, as it was called back then, effect. I suspect Rossi's burnt finger tip happened when it touched a piece of Nickel in his bio fuel converter system that should not be hot. I find it interesting that Larsen believes there may be LENR reactions happening in automotive catalytic converters and elsewhere in natural systems. He may be right. Starts at page 39: http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-len-rs-in-catalytic-convertersjune-25-2010 AG On 11/27/2011 8:02 PM, Peter Gluck wrote: - 16 August 1989. Francesco Piantelli at the Department of Physics of the Universityof Siena, accidentally discovers the phenomenon of Ni-H while working on a project of Biophysics;the effect of hydrogen on gangliosides on a support of Ni lamina
RE: [Vo]:E-Cats and 450 deg C steam
So, Rossi is claiming series E-Cats again? What is the sense of this? The purpose of the coolant is to transfer heat away from the core. A continuous flow through four series E-Cats will remove different amounts of heat from each series Cat. The increasing input temperature of each Cat will result in a smaller temperature differential between core and coolant, and less heat transfer. It's a control nightmare. On the other hand, four parallel E-Cats can have their individual flow rates decreased to approach the required 450C. For increased steam quantity, just add more legs. Can the Vort collective come up with any logic for his series claims? Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:07:33 -0600 Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cats and 450 deg C steam From: jabow...@gmail.com To: thesteornpa...@yahoo.com CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:01 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 12:42 AM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.com wrote: The big cost difference between E-Cat technology and conventional technologies will of course be the fuel cost. The fuel cost for a one megawatt cold fusion planet will probably be at least 1/1000 times less than one powered by coal or natural gas. At $5/W, clean coal's levelized capital cost plus the process costs to clean up the effluent and sequester the CO2, exceeds its fuel cost. Actually, this applies to conventional coal as well, although that is increasingly irrelevant given that conventional coal plants aren't being built anymore except in Asia. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#US_Department_of_Energy_estimates
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
Ok, replace evidence with reasonable indication, but I believe the original point remains. On Nov 27, 2011, at 16:16, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote: That's fine, but then Rossi and his believers need to quit complaining or expressing alarm when folks see this misdirection and reasonably interpret it as evidence of a scam. Misdirection is routinely practiced by most businesses. IBM was famous for it back in the 1970s. For example, they would announce an initiative which they never intended to follow through on, in order to stop a competitor. This is mean spirited, and perhaps unfair, but it is not unethical, and it certainly not a scam. Unless you hold that most corporations are engaged in scams. I do not think this is evidence. This is your opinion, or your gut feeling of distrust. I do not trust Rossi myself (not to do business with him), but I would never glorify this feeling of mine by calling it evidence of anything. It is intuition. I think evidence should mean a body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. That is, objectively verifiable facts in the real world, such as reports that someone has been scammed (or claims to be), or that Rossi has investors who have not performed independent tests of his equipment. Not your feeling that he might have such investors -- or by gosh wouldn't it be just him to have such investors -- but actual names of investors and a credible report about them. Feelings should not be ignored. Intuition is often valuable when making a business decision. But intuition and facts are two very different things. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion
Rossi claims to have experimented with many materials. ISTR he said he tried one formula which gave a higher output than his current catalyst ... but it was too difficult to control.
Re: [Vo]:Lattice Energy LLC comments on Rossi
On Nov 26, 2011, at 23:25, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: This is an outrage! I object! Larsen called me the textually prolific Internet poster-commenter Mr. Jed Rothwell. Textual, yes. Prolific, sure. But I do not post on the Internet. This is a mailing list, not the Internet. Joking, yes?
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote: That's fine, but then Rossi and his believers need to quit complaining or expressing alarm when folks see this misdirection and reasonably interpret it as evidence of a scam. Misdirection is routinely practiced by most businesses. IBM was famous for it back in the 1970s. For example, they would announce an initiative which they never intended to follow through on, in order to stop a competitor. This is mean spirited, and perhaps unfair, but it is not unethical, and it certainly not a scam. Unless you hold that most corporations are engaged in scams. IBM's vaporware gambit was a scam and the DOJ took IBM to court for it and also Kodak for similar maneuvers. I do not think this is evidence. This is your opinion, or your gut feeling of distrust. I do not trust Rossi myself (not to do business with him), but I would never glorify this feeling of mine by calling it evidence of anything. It is intuition. I think evidence should mean a body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. That is, objectively verifiable facts in the real world, such as reports that someone has been scammed (or claims to be), or that Rossi has investors who have not performed independent tests of his equipment. Interestingly, Steorn's investors have never made a public statement or taken the company or its officers to court and they are most certainly and obviously a scam. Perhaps they're embarrassed. Lack of investor complaints is not necessarily counter evidence for a scam, especially fairly early in its development.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi Interview Questions
In reply to mix...@bigpond.com's message of Mon, 28 Nov 2011 08:20:47 +1100: Hi, [snip] In reply to Alan J Fletcher's message of Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:23:40 -0800: Hi, [snip] Need 500C steam for electrical. At 120C steam the inside This got stuffed up during composition. It should be: Fission reactors run at 300-350 C. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:OT: Google obeys the law the gravity
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Google falls down http://mrdoob.com/projects/chromeexperiments/google_gravity/ Google has a million of them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google's_hoaxes I particularly like the barrell roll search. T
[Vo]:Dealing with the noise box
With GMail, it is better to reduce noise by searching unvanted people and keywords and mark them automatically as read. Then it is simple to to keep inbox clean, but still the filtering is not final solution, but they can be always unfiltered, if needed. Brief instruction to filter noise: 1) From: jounivalkonen OR jabowery OR etc. (all the uninteresting people, separate email addresses with 'OR' to create filter for several people) 2) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 3) select 'Create filter with this search' 4) tick 'mark as read' 5) tick 'Also apply filter to 500 matching conversations.' 6) select 'Create filter' This filters emails that come directly from unwanted people. Then create second filter to search message body from unwanted key words. 1) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 2) includes the words: jounivalkonen OR jabowery OR bowery OR Jouni OR Valkonen OR etc. (all the uninteresting words associated to unwanted messages, separate words with 'OR' to apply it several people simultaneously. Of course, be careful with common names, such as James) 3) select 'Create filter with this search' 4) tick 'mark as read' 5) tick 'Also apply filter to 900 matching conversations.' 6) select 'Create filter' This way it is good to filter unwanted noise, but it is not too harsh, because noise is not diverted into trash bin or bypassed inbox. Although messages are not usually read using this filter, at least they are noted. So it makes possible to return them occasionally if necessary. –Jouni On Nov 27, 2011 8:33 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Oh, I almost forgot: For gmail, the action to take upon filter match is delete. Others won't get rid of the noise. On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 12:32 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Although the kill file approach doesn't work due to responses, one can use email filters such as gmail's to filter not only on the from field but on words that occur in the body of the message. The increase in signal to noise ratio is a pleasure.
Re: [Vo]:Dealing with the noise box
Actually 'includes the words' searches also the 'subject' and 'from' fields in GMail (this is google's product after all). Therefore there is only one filter (the latter) required if email addresses are included in key words. –Jouni On 28 November 2011 01:18, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: With GMail, it is better to reduce noise by searching unvanted people and keywords and mark them automatically as read. Then it is simple to to keep inbox clean, but still the filtering is not final solution, but they can be always unfiltered, if needed. Brief instruction to filter noise: 1) From: jounivalkonen OR jabowery OR etc. (all the uninteresting people, separate email addresses with 'OR' to create filter for several people) 2) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 3) select 'Create filter with this search' 4) tick 'mark as read' 5) tick 'Also apply filter to 500 matching conversations.' 6) select 'Create filter' This filters emails that come directly from unwanted people. Then create second filter to search message body from unwanted key words. 1) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 2) includes the words: jounivalkonen OR jabowery OR bowery OR Jouni OR Valkonen OR etc. (all the uninteresting words associated to unwanted messages, separate words with 'OR' to apply it several people simultaneously. Of course, be careful with common names, such as James) 3) select 'Create filter with this search' 4) tick 'mark as read' 5) tick 'Also apply filter to 900 matching conversations.' 6) select 'Create filter' This way it is good to filter unwanted noise, but it is not too harsh, because noise is not diverted into trash bin or bypassed inbox. Although messages are not usually read using this filter, at least they are noted. So it makes possible to return them occasionally if necessary. –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Lattice Energy LLC comments on Rossi
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote: Joking, yes? No, I believe Larsen is serious. It is hard to judge. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Interestingly, Steorn's investors have never made a public statement or taken the company or its officers to court and they are most certainly and obviously a scam. Getting back to my definition, do you have any evidence for that, where evidence is objectively verifiable facts in the real world? Or is that just your opinion? I do not mean evidence that the Steorn claim is questionable. No one disputes that. I mean evidence that it is not a mistake, and the Steorn people know the device is fake, and someone has been swindled by them. I do not mean your impression or your opinion, I mean a written statement, a confession by someone at Steorn, or a formal complaint. Perhaps they're embarrassed. Or perhaps they still believe. That may be because they are foolish, or -- conceivably -- because it is real and they know it is. Lack of investor complaints is not necessarily counter evidence for a scam, especially fairly early in its development. Are we still early in the Steorn incident? How long does it take? If lack of complaints is not evidence there is nothing wrong, then how can there be any indication there is nothing wrong? If there are complaints, it is a scam. If there are no complaints, it is a scam. As Bill Beaty wrote: Don't trust researchers who study parapsychology. They constantly cheat and lie in order to support their strange worldviews. Very few of them have been caught at it, but it's not necessary to do so, since any fool can see that the positive evidence for psi can only be created by people who are either disturbed or dishonest. http://amasci.com/pathsk2.txt - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: IBM's vaporware gambit was a scam and the DOJ took IBM to court for it and also Kodak for similar maneuvers. As far as I know, the DOJ lost these cases. It would be difficult to prevent this practice. It is widespread in every industry, as are many other forms of misdirection. It would be difficult to prove this crime because you cannot know whether IBM really does intend to develop a product by a certain date. Product RD often runs late, and products are often abandoned. - Jed
[Vo]: Physicists find charge separation in molecule consisting of two identical atoms
Just an FYI. -mark http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-physicists-molecule-identical-atoms.html
[Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
Found this paper referenced on the web: Journal of Electroanalytic Chemistry.JEC 319 (1991) 161-175 Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system, by Liaw, Tao, and Liebert. Couldn't find it in the lenr-canr archives. It does seem to be a significant peer reviewed result. Claimed this was first high power LENR system with 1500% power gain at 460 C temperature. Anybody have the paper or a link? AG
RE: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
Mary, you must be real naïve about the business environment You claim that, Ripoffs are far from inevitable and in fact rarely happen from big companies when dealing with established inventions and inventors. And when it does happen, the companies often end up losing in court-- losing big. See for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns Well, I went to the Kearns webpage and it took him 12 YEARS to get a judgment in the first case, which was appealed, but Ford lost, so even though he finally won, and got paid a good amount, IT WAS VERY EXPENSIVE AND TOOK OVER A DECADE TO GET ANYTHING. This is very typical the big companies will drain you of every penny here are the 2 paragraphs from that website about the lawsuits = RE: Robert Kearns He sued Ford Motor Company in 1978 and Chrysler Corporation in 1982 for patent infringement. The Ford case went to trial in 1990. Ford lost, though the court held that Ford's infringement was not willful (meaning that damages for infringement would not be enhanced). Ford agreed to settle with Kearns for US$ 10.1 million with an agreement of no further appeals. After the settlement with Ford, Kearns mostly acted as his own attorney in the subsequent suit against Chrysler, even questioning witnesses on the stand. The Chrysler verdict was decided in 1992, and was a victory for Kearns. Chrysler was ordered to pay Kearns US$ 18.7 million with interest.[7] Chrysler appealed the court decision, but the Federal Circuit let the judgment stand.[8] The Supreme Court declined to hear the case.[9] By 1995, after spending over US$ 10 million in legal fees,[10] Kearns received approximately US$ 30 million in compensation for Chrysler's patent infringement.[7] == Im not a real networking kind of guy, so my network of scientific/techy people is not all that large. Despite that, I know one inventor that started to get royalties from a small chemical company for an inexpensive way to manufacture isoflavones. The royalty checks stopped after just three months because the small chemical company was bought by ADM, and ADM refused to honor the royalty contract. My inventor friend eventually won his case, but it was very time consuming and expensive. I also know a guy who has spent $7M on a lawsuit against Chevron up at Lake Tahoe, and he still is barely hanging on by his fingertips. And all the evidence clearly shows that the Chevron station in Incline Vlg (long since closed) has leaking gasoline storage tanks and caused serious underground pollution youd think it would be a clear-cut case, but they can drag it out for YEARS and make you spend millions and bury you in paperwork and court filings. And finally, my own personal experiences on the Boards of several small startups has been a real eye-opener as to what the legal environment is like should disputes arise. Avoid any litigation if at all possible Im afraid most of your business suggestions (more like assertions) show a clear lack of real-world experience -Mark
Re: [Vo]:Lattice Energy LLC comments on Rossi
I mean, you're joking that vortex isn't the Internet. On Nov 27, 2011, at 18:42, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote: Joking, yes? No, I believe Larsen is serious. It is hard to judge. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
Liebert's still around : http://www.me.hawaii.edu/faculty/liebert.htm You've probably googled these already, but here's some related stuff http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2doc=GetTRDoc.pdfAD=ADA282335 CHARGING HYDROGEN INTO Ni IN HYDRIDE-CONTAINING MOLTEN SALTS http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/F/F199010.PDF 1990 : EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN-SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL By Professors Liaw, Tao, Turner, Liebert - Original Message - Found this paper referenced on the web: Journal of Electroanalytic Chemistry.JEC 319 (1991) 161-175 Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system, by Liaw, Tao, and Liebert.
Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
It was in the 1990 paper : - Original Message - Liebert's still around : http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/F/F199010.PDF 1990 : EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN-SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL By Professors Liaw, Tao, Turner, Liebert As an example shown in the last entry in TABLE I, the power to the heating tape was maintained at about 69.25 W, the cell potential was typically in the range of 2.45 V, and the electrochemical input power was about 1.68 W at 692 mA/cm2 for a total input power of about 70.9W. We would expect 1.68 Wof joule heating to result in a 5.1 °C increase in temperature; however, the temperature increased by 82.4° C, which corresponds to a gain of about 27.1 W, according to the calibration curve. Therefore, a net gain of 25.4Wwas in excess, which results in an excess power gain of 1512 percent, in the range of 627 W/cm3 Pd.
Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
How in H**L was that result ignored? But then again if 300 Ktons / y of Rossi's Nickel fuel (at 2.3 tons / TWh) will reduce the amount of fossil fuel used for energy production to zero, well there could be a reason. AG On 11/28/2011 11:31 AM, Alan Fletcher wrote: It was in the 1990 paper : - Original Message - Liebert's still around : http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/F/F199010.PDF 1990 : EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN-SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL By Professors Liaw, Tao, Turner, Liebert As an example shown in the last entry in TABLE I, the power to the heating tape was maintained at about 69.25 W, the cell potential was typically in the range of 2.45 V, and the electrochemical input power was about 1.68 W at 692 mA/cm2 for a total input power of about 70.9W. We would expect 1.68 Wof joule heating to result in a 5.1 °C increase in temperature; however, the temperature increased by 82.4° C, which corresponds to a gain of about 27.1 W, according to the calibration curve. Therefore, a net gain of 25.4Wwas in excess, which results in an excess power gain of 1512 percent, in the range of 627 W/cm3 Pd.
Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
From: http://faq.ecat.com/112449/how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six-months/ it will take 18 kg H and 10 kg Ni fuel to generate 4.4 GWh of heat = 0.44 GWh / kg of Ni fuel, 2.3 kg of Ni fuel / GWh, 2.3 tons of Ni fuel / TWh 300 kTon of Ni fuel to replace all usage of fossil fuels for energy. AG On 11/28/2011 11:54 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: How in H**L was that result ignored? But then again if 300 Ktons / y of Rossi's Nickel fuel (at 2.3 tons / TWh) will reduce the amount of fossil fuel used for energy production to zero, well there could be a reason. AG On 11/28/2011 11:31 AM, Alan Fletcher wrote: It was in the 1990 paper : - Original Message - Liebert's still around : http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/F/F199010.PDF 1990 : EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN-SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL By Professors Liaw, Tao, Turner, Liebert As an example shown in the last entry in TABLE I, the power to the heating tape was maintained at about 69.25 W, the cell potential was typically in the range of 2.45 V, and the electrochemical input power was about 1.68 W at 692 mA/cm2 for a total input power of about 70.9W. We would expect 1.68 Wof joule heating to result in a 5.1 °C increase in temperature; however, the temperature increased by 82.4° C, which corresponds to a gain of about 27.1 W, according to the calibration curve. Therefore, a net gain of 25.4Wwas in excess, which results in an excess power gain of 1512 percent, in the range of 627 W/cm3 Pd.
Re: [Vo]:got permission to send
Therefore it also most probably falsifies Znidarsic's theory, if it is truly classical/deterministic theory. . I compute the probability of transition which is not deterministic. The probability is based on the electron emerging at the transitional condition. The transitional condition then is deterministic. Frank Z
Re: [Vo]:E-Cats and 450 deg C steam
The only thing I can think of off the top of my head is he wants to keep the power output of each core the same by running each at a different temperature. On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: So, Rossi is claiming series E-Cats again? What is the sense of this? The purpose of the coolant is to transfer heat away from the core. A continuous flow through four series E-Cats will remove different amounts of heat from each series Cat. The increasing input temperature of each Cat will result in a smaller temperature differential between core and coolant, and less heat transfer. It's a control nightmare. On the other hand, four parallel E-Cats can have their individual flow rates decreased to approach the required 450C. For increased steam quantity, just add more legs. Can the Vort collective come up with any logic for his series claims? -- Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:07:33 -0600 Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cats and 450 deg C steam From: jabow...@gmail.com To: thesteornpa...@yahoo.com CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:01 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 12:42 AM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.comwrote: The big cost difference between E-Cat technology and conventional technologies will of course be the fuel cost. The fuel cost for a one megawatt cold fusion planet will probably be at least 1/1000 times less than one powered by coal or natural gas. At $5/W, clean coal's levelized capital cost plus the process costs to clean up the effluent and sequester the CO2, exceeds its fuel cost. Actually, this applies to conventional coal as well, although that is increasingly irrelevant given that conventional coal plants aren't being built anymore except in Asia. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#US_Department_of_Energy_estimates
Re: [Vo]:Dealing with the noise box
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote: With GMail, it is better to reduce noise by searching unvanted people and keywords and mark them automatically as read. I tried that, but Gmail organizes things in conversations that includes read messages in the stream so you still end up with a bunch of noise in a conversation. I had to delete.
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: IBM's vaporware gambit was a scam and the DOJ took IBM to court for it and also Kodak for similar maneuvers. As far as I know, the DOJ lost these cases. It would be difficult to prevent this practice. It is widespread in every industry, as are many other forms of misdirection. It would be difficult to prove this crime because you cannot know whether IBM really does intend to develop a product by a certain date. Product RD often runs late, and products are often abandoned. Not exactly but rather than argue about it, here is a legal web site discussing the whole issue of vaporware. http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/claw/Vaporware.htm The threat of law suits and anti-trust prosecution is quite effective in stopping premature announcements which adversely affect someone else's products. Talking about vapor, it'd be nice if Rossi made more of the real kind and less of the ware variety.
[Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
The URL: http://www.sumobrain.com/patents/wipo/Amplification-energetic-reactions/WO2011123338.html links to Brian Ahern's USPTO Application published Sept 29, 2011, entitled - AMPLIFICATION OF ENERGETIC REACTIONS The provisional title had been Amplification of Nuclear Reactions in Metal Nanoparticles. Vibronic Energy Technologies' upcoming presentation on Dec-7 may include results using various approaches outlined in the patent application. Comments? Lou Pagnucco A portion of the patent application follow: Title: AMPLIFICATION OF ENERGETIC REACTIONS Document Type and Number: WIPO Patent Application WO/2011/123338 Kind Code:A1 Abstract: Methods and apparatus for energy production through the amplification of energetic reactions. A method includes amplifying an energy release from a dispersion of nanoparticles containing a concentration of hydrogen/deuterium nuclei, the nanoparticles suspended in a dielectric medium in a presence of hydrogen/deuterium gas, wherein an energy input is provided by high voltage pulses between two electrodes embedded in the dispersion of nanoparticles. [...] [0021 ] Nanoscale metal particles that dissolve hydrogen isotopes can promote nuclear reactions under near equilibrium conditions. The reaction rates are greatly enhanced by the addition of localized energy input, which can include, for example, dielectric discharges, terahertz electromagnetic radiation or ultrasonic energy beyond a specific threshold. [0022] Useful energy production can be obtained when deuterated/hydrated nanoparticles suspended in a dielectric medium are positioned interior to collapsing bubbles or dielectric discharges and their attendant shock waves. Highly self- focused shock waves have a sufficiently high energy density to induce a range of energetic reactions. [0023] Certain nanopowders of metal or metal alloys are incipiently active sites for energy release. Adding nanoparticles to the water greatly increases energetic reaction rates as the nanoparticles focus ultrasonic shock wave energy onto particles that are incipiently prepared to react. The focusing of shock energy is maximized by having very small particles inside the collapsing shock wave at millions of locations in a liquefied reaction zone. [0024] Ultrasonic amplification may have usefulness, but it is inferior to arc discharges through nanocomposite solids due to a process called the inverse skin effect. In ordinary metals, a rapid pulse of current remains close to an outer surface in a process referred to as the skin effect. Typically, the electric current pulses flow on the outer surface of a conductor. Discharges through a dielectric embedded with metallic particles behave very differently. The nanoparticles act as a series of short circuit elements that confine the breakdown currents to very, very small internal discharge pathways. This inverse skin effect can have great implications for energy densification in composite materials. Energetic reactions described fully herein are amplified by an inverse skin effect. These very small discharge pathways are so narrow that the magnetic fields close to them are amplified to magnitudes unachievable by other methods. [0025] Distributing nanoparticles in a dielectric (ceramic) matrix between two high voltage electrodes is a method according to the principles of the present invention for amplifying an energy output from the hydrated/deuterated metal nanoparticles in the dielectric matrix. High voltage pulses cause arc formations. The arc formations focus energy and the arc formations are channeled from one macroscopic grain to another macroscopic grain. Once a discharge is interior to a macroscopic grain the pulse is further focused into nanoparticles along the lowest impedance pathway. The arcs interior to the grains are where the energetic reactions are maximized. [0026] The nanoparticles provide a constellation of short circuiting elements for each current pulse. Each succeeding pulse finds a different pathway that minimizes the impedance between two electrodes. An overpressure of hydrogen is needed to prevent discharges from sliding over a surface of the macroscopic grains rather than through the grains and thereby through the hydrated nanoparticles. Low pressure hydrogen gas favors surface discharging. [...]
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Interestingly, Steorn's investors have never made a public statement or taken the company or its officers to court and they are most certainly and obviously a scam. Getting back to my definition, do you have any evidence for that, where evidence is objectively verifiable facts in the real world? Or is that just your opinion? I do not mean evidence that the Steorn claim is questionable. No one disputes that. I mean evidence that it is not a mistake, and the Steorn people know the device is fake, and someone has been swindled by them. I do not mean your impression or your opinion, I mean a written statement, a confession by someone at Steorn, or a formal complaint. There is lots of evidence that Steorn is a scam and it doesn't involve written statements (by whom were you thinking such statements would be made?), a confession or a formal complaint, none of which by the way would prove a scam. Steorn was scamming because they lied repeatedly and consistently about what the equipment could do well beyond any possibility that it could be an honest mistake. Or do you think if Rossi's machine doesn't work, it will be an honest mistake? Perhaps they're embarrassed. Or perhaps they still believe. That may be because they are foolish, or -- conceivably -- because it is real and they know it is. There not the slightest chance that anything Steorn claimed for Orbo is in the slightest real. With Rossi there is not yet a smoking gun. With Steorn there are maybe a dozen. If you have not followed the Steorn saga, you won't recognize these by name and I have no interest in educating you about them by doing more in the way of work. However a brief off the top of the head list includes (but not limited to): African pump, Kinetica demo, Minato wheel, bearings burned by lights, 550 watt motor under the stairs, 0.5 W/cc power density measured, works all the time, we'll let Dr. Mike take a screwdriver to it, Waterways demo, Ansmann battery and Tachoman, calorimetry non-result, 6 universities tested it but won't go on record, the Steorn jury decision, the never delivered solid state Orbo kits, ClaNZer's tests on his builds, and there's more. You'd have to have followed it to see what a ridiculously transparent scam it was once it developed. Lack of investor complaints is not necessarily counter evidence for a scam, especially fairly early in its development. Are we still early in the Steorn incident? How long does it take? No, we're not early in Steorn's scam. The amount of time it takes to develop complaints depends on the scam. Some never do. If lack of complaints is not evidence there is nothing wrong, then how can there be any indication there is nothing wrong? Are you asking a real question or just talking to hear yourself? That's an absurd question. The obvious indication that there is nothing wrong is if the proponents and participants tell the truth and back up with proper independent testing! That needs me to say it? Are we playing little word games now? If there are complaints, it is a scam. If there are no complaints, it is a scam. You deliberately twist the issue -- not quite sure why bother but it can be a scam with or without complaints. Complaints are simply not determinative of a scam. You can also have the real deal and have complaints. I mean what? You didn't know that? Don't trust researchers who study parapsychology. They constantly cheat and lie in order to support their strange worldviews. Very few of them have been caught at it, but it's not necessary to do so, since any fool can see that the positive evidence for psi can only be created by people who are either disturbed or dishonest. http://amasci.com/pathsk2.txt You have any more straw men? - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Mary, you must be real naïve about the business environment… ** ** You claim that, “Ripoffs are far from inevitable and in fact rarely happen from big companies when dealing with established inventions and inventors. And when it does happen, the companies often end up losing in court-- losing big. See for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kearns” The part you chose to miss is that Kearns was a precedent -- not only was it difficult for Kearns, it was hard on the money and reputation of the big companies and they are not eager to repeat the experience. Nowadays, when someone has a legitimate contract and/or effective patent, they are pretty well protected. If Rossi were worried about patent protection, he would have shown absolutely nothing until he had filed a properly written patent application -- something which, as far as we know, he has not yet done to this day.
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
The next 12 months will not be boring. AG On 11/28/2011 12:56 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: The URL: http://www.sumobrain.com/patents/wipo/Amplification-energetic-reactions/WO2011123338.html links to Brian Ahern's USPTO Application published Sept 29, 2011, entitled - AMPLIFICATION OF ENERGETIC REACTIONS The provisional title had been Amplification of Nuclear Reactions in Metal Nanoparticles. Vibronic Energy Technologies' upcoming presentation on Dec-7 may include results using various approaches outlined in the patent application. Comments? Lou Pagnucco
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
This a submarine patent if I ever saw it. I put the vibration of nano-particles in the public domain years ago with my lectures and posts http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_12.html
RE: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
Mary, As is typical with your MO, you're shooting from the hip. You just make up stuff so it appears you have rebutted a person's points, and in this case, you've really f*cked up. The part you chose to miss is that Kearns was a precedent. You missed the whole meaning of the statement you claim I chose to miss. You are referring to the following statement: Kearns' position found unequivocal support in precedent from the U.S. Court of Appeals and from the Supreme Court of the United States. See, e.g., Reiner v. I. Leon Co., 285 F.2d 501, 503 (2d Cir. 1960) This is NOT, I REPEAT, NOT saying that Kearns' case established precedent! Infringement lawsuits have been going on for at least 200 years! WHAT IT IS SAYING is that he had unequivocal support from cases out of the U.S. Court of Appeals and the SupCt!!! One of the cases which Kearns relied on (as precedent) was even cited for you!!! See, e.g., Reiner v. I. Leon Co., 285 F.2d 501, 503 (2d Cir. 1960) I.e., he ended up winning his cases because he was able to cite several PREVIOUS cases similar to his AS PRECEDENT. Don't quit your day job because you'd make a horrible lawyer. Finally, I did NOT choose to miss anything. Your statement implies that I intentionally left that out. I did NOT. Before hitting 'Send', I suggest you scrub your postings of all negative implications when they pertain to people other than you. -Mark
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
I would agree. I believe 2012 will see the start of the LENR worldwide patent wars that will rage on for years and years. Injunctions will be sought against all who are claimed to be patent violators. The LENR business worldwide just might grind to a halt under the weight of the patent wars and legal moves to stop others gaining a commercial high ground. It will not be nice. I would suggest that as is claimed to have happened in the AGW debate, big fossil fuel suppliers just might help those who wish to pay this game. If the world's energy demands could be met by just 300k tons of Nickel every year (based on first generation E-Cat fuel to energy delivery), well that will sure have an effect on the price and demand for oil, coal, gas, uranium, wind, solar, tidal, wave, etc energy generators and on their fuel suppliers. AG On 11/28/2011 1:41 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: This a submarine patent if I ever saw it. I put the vibration of nano-particles in the public domain years ago with my lectures and posts http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_12.html
RE: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
World demand for nickel peaked in 2006 at 1.4 million tonnes; it is now down to about 1M tonnes. 300K tons is not going to be that hard to supply... and the transition from petroleum-based energy to CF/LENR (if it happens, and is not delayed for decades by legal battles) will ramp up over several years, so there shouldn't be any problem with supplying the basic fuel (Ni and H). Of course, the price of Ni is going to see a pretty drastic increase, so Rossi's estimates of costs are probably not realistic except for the very short term. -mark -Original Message- From: Aussie Guy E-Cat [mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 5:35 PM 300 kTon of Ni fuel to replace all usage of fossil fuels for energy. AG
Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
From an Australian point of view and seeing we have the world's largest Nickel deposits, I suspect that as demand increases there are a few Nickel mines and refineries that will spring back into life. I expect the E-Cats that are rolling off the assembly line in 2 years will use less Ni per GWh produced. Probably not a big increase in the price of Ni but blood all over the fossil fuel futures market trading floor. Maybe a good time to go long on Nickel and short on fossil fuels. AG On 11/28/2011 2:59 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: World demand for nickel peaked in 2006 at 1.4 million tonnes; it is now down to about 1M tonnes. 300K tons is not going to be that hard to supply... and the transition from petroleum-based energy to CF/LENR (if it happens, and is not delayed for decades by legal battles) will ramp up over several years, so there shouldn't be any problem with supplying the basic fuel (Ni and H). Of course, the price of Ni is going to see a pretty drastic increase, so Rossi's estimates of costs are probably not realistic except for the very short term. -mark -Original Message- From: Aussie Guy E-Cat [mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 5:35 PM 300 kTon of Ni fuel to replace all usage of fossil fuels for energy. AG
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
Of all of this patent goings on, no one has applied for a patent to produce electrical power directly from a LENR reaction. The don't know enough. They are just making thermal energy to spin a turbine. I wanted to wait until I had a working model but I may as well put my name in the hat and apply for a provisional patent now. I hope to get it going soon. Frank -Original Message- From: fznidarsic fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Nov 27, 2011 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application This a submarine patent if I ever saw it. I put the vibration of nano-particles in the public domain years ago with my lectures and posts http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_12.html
Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
I hope you get it working too. All the best mate. AG On 11/28/2011 3:17 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Of all of this patent goings on, no one has applied for a patent to produce electrical power directly from a LENR reaction. The don't know enough. They are just making thermal energy to spin a turbine. I wanted to wait until I had a working model but I may as well put my name in the hat and apply for a provisional patent now. I hope to get it going soon. Frank -Original Message- From: fznidarsic fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Nov 27, 2011 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application This a submarine patent if I ever saw it. I put the vibration of nano-particles in the public domain years ago with my lectures and posts http://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_5_11_12.html
Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
I spoke with Liaw at ICCF-2 Como 1991. The system had very great problems of corrosion. Rule No. 6 of problem solving says: NOT the main desired positive effect, but those secondary negative and/or undesired effects decide in most cases if a solution is implemented. It seems corrosion was so severe that this way was abandoned.. Peter *(* http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/06/super-rule-included-complete-list-of.html * * * * On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: It was in the 1990 paper : - Original Message - Liebert's still around : http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/F/F199010.PDF 1990 : EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN-SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL By Professors Liaw, Tao, Turner, Liebert As an example shown in the last entry in TABLE I, the power to the heating tape was maintained at about 69.25 W, the cell potential was typically in the range of 2.45 V, and the electrochemical input power was about 1.68 W at 692 mA/cm2 for a total input power of about 70.9W. We would expect 1.68 Wof joule heating to result in a 5.1 °C increase in temperature; however, the temperature increased by 82.4° C, which corresponds to a gain of about 27.1 W, according to the calibration curve. Therefore, a net gain of 25.4Wwas in excess, which results in an excess power gain of 1512 percent, in the range of 627 W/cm3 Pd. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Article about trip of andrea rossi to massachusetts from boston globe
Article about trip of andrea rossi to massachusetts from boston globe http://bostonglobe.com/business/2011/11/28/cold-fusion-project-looks-for-home-massachusetts/w7FgGyI9Zx432chxuD5BEL/story.html
Re: [Vo]:Article about trip of andrea rossi to massachusetts from boston globe
Rossi has interesting glasses in this picture. Anybody knows what they are? Never saw anything like that. Are they his own invention? If so he could always try to sell them if the catalyst thing doesn't turn out for the best. G On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:40 PM, David ledin mathematic.analy...@gmail.com wrote: Article about trip of andrea rossi to massachusetts from boston globe http://bostonglobe.com/business/2011/11/28/cold-fusion-project-looks-for-home-massachusetts/w7FgGyI9Zx432chxuD5BEL/story.html
Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
The usual black pot witch's brew -- ah, yes, severe corrosion -- would Heffner or Cude like to give this one a close shave -- more details than Rossi -- be fun to practice on something new -- any followup research by anyone? within mutual service, Rich Murray http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/F/F199010.PDF 1990 October ISSN 1051-8738 VOLUME 2 NUMBER 4 FUSION FACTS OCTOBER 1990 SPECIAL ISSUE FOR ATTENDEES AT ANOMALOUS NUCLEAR EFFECTS IN DEUTERIUM/SOLID SYSTEMS CONFERENCE Brigham Young University - OCT 22-24, 1990 EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL A. EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN-SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL By Professors Liaw, Tao, Turner, Liebert THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE is published complete with TABLES AND FIGURES. B.Y. Liaw, P.L. Tao (Hawaii Natural Energy Inst), P. Turner B.E. Liebert (Dept. of Mech. Engr., U of Hawaii), Elevated Temperature Excess Heat Production Using Molten-Salt Electrochemical Techniques, Being published in the Proceedings of the Special Symposiumon Cold Fusion,World Hydrogen Energy Conference #8, Honolulu, HI, July 22-27, 1990. Note: We are grateful to the authors and to the University of Hawaii for permission to print this important technical paper in full in this issue of Fusion Facts. Given the very large energy yields and the potential application to amuch wider group of alloys, the editors believe this to be one of the most important papers to be given at a cold fusion symposiumsince the initial announcement by Fleischmann and Pons of the discovery of cold fusion (March 23, 1989). ABSTRACT An investigation of elevated-temperature excess heat production in the Ti-D and Pd-D systems is presented here. A eutectic LiCl- KCl molten salt saturated with LiD is used as the electrolyte in a Pd/Al or Ti/Al electrochemical cell. Typical operating temperatures are around 370°C, which results in faster kinetics compared to room temperature operation. If this system can be developed for utility applications, high-grade heat and high thermodynamic efficiencies can be expected. Since the electrolyte provides a very reducing environment, metal surface oxides are readily removed; thus, this unique system offers the possibility ofusing less expensive materials than Pd. Amodified isoperibol calorimeter was built for the excess power measurements. Preliminary results show high levels of excess power output, especially in the Pd-D system, although the effect remains sporadic. On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I spoke with Liaw at ICCF-2 Como 1991. The system had very great problems of corrosion. Rule No. 6 of problem solving says: NOT the main desired positive effect, but those secondary negative and/or undesired effects decide in most cases if a solution is implemented. It seems corrosion was so severe that this way was abandoned.. Peter ( http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/06/super-rule-included-complete-list-of.html On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: It was in the 1990 paper : - Original Message - Liebert's still around : http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/F/F199010.PDF 1990 : EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN-SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL By Professors Liaw, Tao, Turner, Liebert As an example shown in the last entry in TABLE I, the power to the heating tape was maintained at about 69.25 W, the cell potential was typically in the range of 2.45 V, and the electrochemical input power was about 1.68 W at 692 mA/cm2 for a total input power of about 70.9W. We would expect 1.68 Wof joule heating to result in a 5.1 °C increase in temperature; however, the temperature increased by 82.4° C, which corresponds to a gain of about 27.1 W, according to the calibration curve. Therefore, a net gain of 25.4Wwas in excess, which results in an excess power gain of 1512 percent, in the range of 627 W/cm3 Pd. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Article about trip of andrea rossi to massachusetts from boston globe
As I pointed out before Tamarin said the meeting was mostly used to discuss the possibility of setting up manufacturing, rather than the validity of the science A statehouse would be a funny place to talk about the validity of the science One goes there to talk about tax breaks. Moreover “Rossi said he was not ready for a full academic investigation of his technology because he doesn’t yet have full patent protection,’’ Tamarin said. “That’s consistent with it not working, but it’s also consistent with it working very well.’’ Well put, Prof. Tamarin. Giovanni, You can buy those glasses anywhere. Of course, they are only useful if you need them only to read, not you you are as blind as a mole like me. On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.comwrote: Rossi has interesting glasses in this picture. Anybody knows what they are? Never saw anything like that. Are they his own invention? If so he could always try to sell them if the catalyst thing doesn't turn out for the best. G On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 11:40 PM, David ledin mathematic.analy...@gmail.com wrote: Article about trip of andrea rossi to massachusetts from boston globe http://bostonglobe.com/business/2011/11/28/cold-fusion-project-looks-for-home-massachusetts/w7FgGyI9Zx432chxuD5BEL/story.html
Re: [Vo]:Krivit provides details of deal Celani offered Rossi and Rossi's rejection of it
by the way, we observe the situation from far away, without good legal tools. abour Rossi's company, Defkalion and so on, the only reasonable possibility of scam, is that Defkalion is a fake company, partner of the scam, the secret client(s) too... does anybody have access to the legal registrar of company in greece, to see if Defkalion is real, if it already have a business. are there uncriticable report par third party of the physical/legal reality of various partners. for me the scam is only possible if we have a fake image of the reality form internet. on internet nobody knows if you are a dog. and maybe it is a network of dog that scam us. if not, there is something real to care about. no intermediate possible.
Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991
- Original Nachricht Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 28.11.2011 06:19 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Elevated-temperature excess heat production in a Pd D system in 1991 I spoke with Liaw at ICCF-2 Como 1991. The system had very great problems of corrosion. Rule No. 6 of problem solving says: NOT the main desired positive effect, but those secondary negative and/or undesired effects decide in most cases if a solution is implemented. It seems corrosion was so severe that this way was abandoned.. Technical problems are not important, these are almost ever solvable if the reward is high. History has shown this. We are on moon now, and everybody has a mobile phone and we have GPS and Laser. Impossible? So, why dont they publish their findings? Possibly others find a solution. It would be important to have a key experiment that is repeatable and that works. There is an unfortunate mechanism: First they publish success. This is is euphorical accepted by the LENR community and makes the way into their collection of papers. Then they continue their research and find unexpected problems or find errors. They give up. Of course this is not published. This is why there are so many positive results. This is also the mechanism why there are so many positive results about UFO's and unicorns. ;-) It seems most documented LENR successes are of this type: Unfinished stories about an anticipated success that never was tested and confirmed beyond all doubts. Peter Peter *(* http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/06/super-rule-included-complete-list-o f.html * * * * On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: It was in the 1990 paper : - Original Message - Liebert's still around : http://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/fic/F/F199010.PDF 1990 : EXCESS HEAT USING MOLTEN-SALT ELECTROCHEMICAL CELL By Professors Liaw, Tao, Turner, Liebert As an example shown in the last entry in TABLE I, the power to the heating tape was maintained at about 69.25 W, the cell potential was typically in the range of 2.45 V, and the electrochemical input power was about 1.68 W at 692 mA/cm2 for a total input power of about 70.9W. We would expect 1.68 Wof joule heating to result in a 5.1 °C increase in temperature; however, the temperature increased by 82.4° C, which corresponds to a gain of about 27.1 W, according to the calibration curve. Therefore, a net gain of 25.4Wwas in excess, which results in an excess power gain of 1512 percent, in the range of 627 W/cm3 Pd. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
