Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Jed Rothwell]

Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:


> Penon wasn't in line to receive the 89 mil, nor any significant fraction
> of it, so why would he care?
>

Perhaps Rossi offered him a share. He could afford to be generous with $89
million.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: Where did the heat go?

[Jed Rothwell]

Bob Higgins  wrote:

If the room was filled with water that began at 25C and was heated to 60C
> over the course of a year, with good insulation and no heat leakage . . .
>

There is no such thing as "good insulation with no heat leakage." As the
water gets hot, it leaks more and more heat, until the heat leak equals
input. At that point it is radiating 1 MW. You would reach this point long
before the test ends. Probably in a week or so, depending on the size of
the container and the quality of the insulation.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]: Where did the heat go?

[Jones Beene]

Bob Higgins wrote:  I saw the picture of the inside of the customer's facility 
with its big black box.  It caused me to consider the possibility that the heat 
was stored.  Imagine an immense store of water …

Rossi was fond of storing hot water in his old demos. If you can view this 
video, go to about 0:30 
http://tinyurl.com/j5b99ac  

Re: [Vo]: Where did the heat go?

[Bob Higgins]

First of all, if enough heat could be stored, it would be an excellent
proof that the heat was actually created.  Also, because there was no sign
of venting, and there was no huge thermal signature for the building, there
was (and is) no clear indication of where that heat (if created) would have
gone.  It is possible that it all went down the sewer with fresh city water
being taken in at low temperature.

It was an exercise to determine if storage would have been possible.

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Che  wrote:

> Why would the heat be stored? In especially such a way?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Bob Higgins 
> wrote:
>
>> I saw the picture of the inside of the customer's facility with its big
>> black box.  It caused me to consider the possibility that the heat was
>> stored.  Imagine an immense store of water as big as the entire black box.
>> If Rossi produced 1 MW of heat continuously, what would the numbers look
>> like?.
>>
>> OK, with 1MW of heat, that would be 8.64E10 joules/day and over the
>> course of the 350 day test, that would be a total of 3E13 joules.  If the
>> room was filled with water that began at 25C and was heated to 60C over the
>> course of a year, with good insulation and no heat leakage, that would be
>> 35C of heating and would require 1.47E5 joules/liter.  To absorb all of
>> that heat, would take a total of 2.1E8 liters of water or 7.2E6 ft^3.  So
>> how big was the black box?  Visually I would guess it was it was 100' x 50'
>> x 8' which is a volume of 4E4 ft^3.  This is more than 2 orders of
>> magnitude smaller volume than would have been required to store all of that
>> heat in water up to 60C.  If this water in the black box were heated to
>> 95C, it wouldn't change much of anything (only a factor of 2).
>>
>> Conclusion would have to be that there was change of state of some large
>> mass of something to store the heat, or the heat was discharged to outside
>> the building.
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

My two cents  I would suspect Penon knew it was all fraudulent, and 
in fact was hired by Rossi preciesely to produce fake data to sustain 
the fraud.  But Penon wasn't getting anything out of it except what 
Rossi was paying him, and seriously didn't give a damn about Rossi 
beyond his pay.  And he knew the whole thing was bogus anyway, so he 
just totally slobbed the numbers, and did the minimum he could get away 
with.


When you put someone in a position where they can have zero pride in 
their work they're likely to produce work that nobody could take pride in.


Penon wasn't in line to receive the 89 mil, nor any significant fraction 
of it, so why would he care?



On 08/12/2016 05:03 PM, David Roberson wrote:
I agree that it would be better to improve the fraud. You have to 
wonder why he did not at least go to that level of expertise by using 
fractional data?


It would be far more believable to suspect that he used the average 
instead of making an effort to track the true data if he did not think 
anyone would care.  Could Penon be so convinced of the 1 MW and 
extreme COP calculations that he did not believe that anyone would 
become too demanding?  I do not know.


Of course, I probably would assume that now it is too late to retract 
the data as reported since it will do great harm to the court case to 
do so.  How could you explain to the judge that your data was known by 
you to be inaccurate?


Penon is acting in a strange manner, the only way it makes sense is to 
think that he did not expect a problem to develop with IH.  Perhaps he 
really believes that the COP was great and the power met the requirements.


I am still attempting to understand how the flow meter may have been 
faked out by being less than full of water.  The manual describing how 
to use this device does mention that it needs to be kept free of 
negative pressure and cavitation conditions.  My current theory is 
that a restriction of some type is located ahead of the meter which 
limits the amount of liquid that can be pumped through the meter.  
This problem is common in hydraulic systems where a clogged filter 
starves the hydraulic pump.


When starved, the pump lowers the input port pressure which might 
cause the incoming liquid to vaporize.  The life expectancy of a 
hydraulic pump is greatly reduced when cavitation of this type exists.


So, I am suspecting that the return water is vaporized to some degree 
by this process thus leading to a large meter error. To be sure, we 
need a diagram of the compete system which includes the location of 
all the pumps, meters, and holding tanks, etc.  We also need to know 
the power being drawn be these pumps and tables of their operational 
parameters as a function of power input.


Dave




-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Aug 12, 2016 4:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

David Roberson > wrote:

So, it would not surprise me too greatly to find that Penon became
extremely bored making the same readings day in and out until he
placed data into the log that assumed everything continued as it
had for many long previous periods of time.


That might be true of the temperatures, which vary, then start 
repeating, and then vary again. But the flow rate and pressure was the 
same for every single day of the test, as noted by Murray. Penon did 
not start off off recording actual values with variations, and then 
later repeating values. He stuffed 36,000 kg into every day, for the 
entire test.


By the way, as Rossi noted in the Lewan interview, Penon arbitrarily 
reduced the flow by 10% down to 32,400 kg. Both numbers are shown. I 
think 32,400 kg is used to compute heat. If a 10% reduction is valid, 
why not 20% or 90%?


It was sloppy of Penon to record positive flow rates, elevated 
temperatures and 1 MW heat production on days when Rossi in his blog 
said the reactor was turned off. Eyewitnesses confirm that it was 
actually off. If you are going to commit fraud, you should at least 
try to make it look convincing. These people were just phoning it in!


- Jed

Re: [Vo]: Where did the heat go?

[Che]

Why would the heat be stored? In especially such a way?



On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

> I saw the picture of the inside of the customer's facility with its big
> black box.  It caused me to consider the possibility that the heat was
> stored.  Imagine an immense store of water as big as the entire black box.
> If Rossi produced 1 MW of heat continuously, what would the numbers look
> like?.
>
> OK, with 1MW of heat, that would be 8.64E10 joules/day and over the course
> of the 350 day test, that would be a total of 3E13 joules.  If the room was
> filled with water that began at 25C and was heated to 60C over the course
> of a year, with good insulation and no heat leakage, that would be 35C of
> heating and would require 1.47E5 joules/liter.  To absorb all of that heat,
> would take a total of 2.1E8 liters of water or 7.2E6 ft^3.  So how big was
> the black box?  Visually I would guess it was it was 100' x 50' x 8' which
> is a volume of 4E4 ft^3.  This is more than 2 orders of magnitude smaller
> volume than would have been required to store all of that heat in water up
> to 60C.  If this water in the black box were heated to 95C, it wouldn't
> change much of anything (only a factor of 2).
>
> Conclusion would have to be that there was change of state of some large
> mass of something to store the heat, or the heat was discharged to outside
> the building.
>

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Che]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Giovanni Santostasi <
> gsantost...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What I don't understand is why there are not ongoing criminal
>> investigations for Rossi, Fabian and Penon, the fraudulent gang, instead of
>> only civil law implications.
>>
>
> This is something I've been wondering myself.  I would not be surprised if
> there is an FBI investigation under way, and they're still looking into the
> situation.  I think they like to keep things under wraps for as long as
> possible.
>
> I'm having trouble tracking down the amount of money involved, but I got
> the impression somewhere that there was less money involved when the FBI
> raided Inteligentry.
>
> Eric
>


A trending Rossi 'perp walk' video -- and accompanying sensational story --
will do wonders for LENR.

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Eric Walker]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 5:31 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:

More idle speculation.  Wait until Penon's report surfaces and let's see
> what he really said.
>

Hardly idle speculation!  Just pointing out the obvious.  It does not
appear to be obvious to you.  Once the report comes out, I suppose it will
be one of those three cases I just identified.

Presumably the flow meter goes on reading the running total and the average
> flow rate mentioned is simply the total divided by the number of days -
> less 10% that Rossi persuaded Penon to reduce the number by in order to be
> conservative.
>

Which would be totally ridiculous if it were being read off by hand, and
not collected with a data acquisition system.  It's also pretty silly that
there was a 10 percent discount.  What would be needed would be the
accurate raw data.

Eric

[Vo]: Where did the heat go?

[Bob Higgins]

I saw the picture of the inside of the customer's facility with its big
black box.  It caused me to consider the possibility that the heat was
stored.  Imagine an immense store of water as big as the entire black box.
If Rossi produced 1 MW of heat continuously, what would the numbers look
like?.

OK, with 1MW of heat, that would be 8.64E10 joules/day and over the course
of the 350 day test, that would be a total of 3E13 joules.  If the room was
filled with water that began at 25C and was heated to 60C over the course
of a year, with good insulation and no heat leakage, that would be 35C of
heating and would require 1.47E5 joules/liter.  To absorb all of that heat,
would take a total of 2.1E8 liters of water or 7.2E6 ft^3.  So how big was
the black box?  Visually I would guess it was it was 100' x 50' x 8' which
is a volume of 4E4 ft^3.  This is more than 2 orders of magnitude smaller
volume than would have been required to store all of that heat in water up
to 60C.  If this water in the black box were heated to 95C, it wouldn't
change much of anything (only a factor of 2).

Conclusion would have to be that there was change of state of some large
mass of something to store the heat, or the heat was discharged to outside
the building.

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[a.ashfield]

More idle speculation.  Wait until Penon's report surfaces and let's see 
what he really said.
Presumably the flow meter goes on reading the running total and the 
average flow rate mentioned is simply the total divided by the number of 
days - less 10% that Rossi persuaded Penon to reduce the number by in 
order to be conservative.



On 8/12/2016 6:04 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:59 PM, David Roberson > wrote:


So, it would not surprise me too greatly to find that Penon became
extremely bored making the same readings day in and out until he
placed data into the log that assumed everything continued as it
had for many long previous periods of time.


I do not dispute your accounting of the bored meter reading 
technician.  But this is 2016, and Rossi had 11.5 million dollars at 
his disposal.  There's zero reason that there wasn't a fully automated 
data collection system in place, collecting data from all data sources 
at a frequency of 1 sample per second or more.  I see three 
possibilities: (1) there was such a system in place, and IH were given 
some strange and inaccurate summary, provided for reasons that only 
Rossi knows; (2) there was no such system in place, because Penon was 
not the right person for the job; or (3) there was no such system in 
place, because Rossi interfered and prevented Penon from setting up 
such a system.


In all three cases, things look quite bad.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Eric Walker]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:59 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

So, it would not surprise me too greatly to find that Penon became
> extremely bored making the same readings day in and out until he placed
> data into the log that assumed everything continued as it had for many long
> previous periods of time.


I do not dispute your accounting of the bored meter reading technician.
But this is 2016, and Rossi had 11.5 million dollars at his disposal.
There's zero reason that there wasn't a fully automated data collection
system in place, collecting data from all data sources at a frequency of 1
sample per second or more.  I see three possibilities: (1) there was such a
system in place, and IH were given some strange and inaccurate summary,
provided for reasons that only Rossi knows; (2) there was no such system in
place, because Penon was not the right person for the job; or (3) there was
no such system in place, because Rossi interfered and prevented Penon from
setting up such a system.

In all three cases, things look quite bad.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[David Roberson]

I agree that it would be better to improve the fraud.  You have to wonder why 
he did not at least go to that level of expertise by using fractional data?

It would be far more believable to suspect that he used the average instead of 
making an effort to track the true data if he did not think anyone would care.  
Could Penon be so convinced of the 1 MW and extreme COP calculations that he 
did not believe that anyone would become too demanding?  I do not know.

Of course, I probably would assume that now it is too late to retract the data 
as reported since it will do great harm to the court case to do so.  How could 
you explain to the judge that your data was known by you to be inaccurate?

Penon is acting in a strange manner, the only way it makes sense is to think 
that he did not expect a problem to develop with IH.  Perhaps he really 
believes that the COP was great and the power met the requirements.

I am still attempting to understand how the flow meter may have been faked out 
by being less than full of water.  The manual describing how to use this device 
does mention that it needs to be kept free of negative pressure and cavitation 
conditions.  My current theory is that a restriction of some type is located 
ahead of the meter which limits the amount of liquid that can be pumped through 
the meter.  This problem is common in hydraulic systems where a clogged filter 
starves the hydraulic pump.

When starved, the pump lowers the input port pressure which might cause the 
incoming liquid to vaporize.  The life expectancy of a hydraulic pump is 
greatly reduced when cavitation of this type exists.

So, I am suspecting that the return water is vaporized to some degree by this 
process thus leading to a large meter error.  To be sure, we need a diagram of 
the compete system which includes the location of all the pumps, meters, and 
holding tanks, etc.  We also need to know the power being drawn be these pumps 
and tables of their operational parameters as a function of power input.

Dave



 

 

-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Aug 12, 2016 4:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!




David Roberson  wrote:



So, it would not surprise me too greatly to find that Penon became extremely 
bored making the same readings day in and out until he placed data into the log 
that assumed everything continued as it had for many long previous periods of 
time.


That might be true of the temperatures, which vary, then start repeating, and 
then vary again. But the flow rate and pressure was the same for every single 
day of the test, as noted by Murray. Penon did not start off off recording 
actual values with variations, and then later repeating values. He stuffed 
36,000 kg into every day, for the entire test.


By the way, as Rossi noted in the Lewan interview, Penon arbitrarily reduced 
the flow by 10% down to 32,400 kg. Both numbers are shown. I think 32,400 kg is 
used to compute heat. If a 10% reduction is valid, why not 20% or 90%?


It was sloppy of Penon to record positive flow rates, elevated temperatures and 
1 MW heat production on days when Rossi in his blog said the reactor was turned 
off. Eyewitnesses confirm that it was actually off. If you are going to commit 
fraud, you should at least try to make it look convincing. These people were 
just phoning it in!


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Jed Rothwell]

David Roberson  wrote:

So, it would not surprise me too greatly to find that Penon became
> extremely bored making the same readings day in and out until he placed
> data into the log that assumed everything continued as it had for many long
> previous periods of time.


That might be true of the temperatures, which vary, then start repeating,
and then vary again. But the flow rate and pressure was the same for every
single day of the test, as noted by Murray. Penon did not start off off
recording actual values with variations, and then later repeating values.
He stuffed 36,000 kg into every day, for the entire test.

By the way, as Rossi noted in the Lewan interview, Penon arbitrarily
reduced the flow by 10% down to 32,400 kg. Both numbers are shown. I think
32,400 kg is used to compute heat. If a 10% reduction is valid, why not 20%
or 90%?

It was sloppy of Penon to record positive flow rates, elevated temperatures
and 1 MW heat production on days when Rossi in his blog said the reactor
was turned off. Eyewitnesses confirm that it was actually off. If you are
going to commit fraud, you should at least try to make it look convincing.
These people were just phoning it in!

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[David Roberson]

Let me mention a real life occurance that I have witnessed.  The FCC requires 
AM and FM transmitters to maintain their RF input powers at a certain level.  
Many years ago I noticed that the technicians would take a glance at the 
voltage and current meters every so often to enter that information into the 
station log.  A properly operating transmiter system hardly varies at all, so 
some guys would just copy the previous data into the log assuming that it 
remained the same throughout the period.

I think of this behavior as the bored meter reading technician.  It appears to 
be a form of complacency that typically takes place in many similar situations 
in life.  Another is the guy that is on guard duty at a location that never 
experiences problems.  Of course, most of the time all of these guys are going 
to be fine.  But, on rare occasions, big problems can creep up and bite them in 
the behind.

So, it would not surprise me too greatly to find that Penon became extremely 
bored making the same readings day in and out until he placed data into the log 
that assumed everything continued as it had for many long previous periods of 
time.  I am not saying this would be a good policy for him to follow, but one 
that might actually occur.  He likely gets bored just like everyone else.

I suspect that most folks would tend to perform in the manner described after 
months of extreme boredom.  All the experimental data should not be dismissed 
just because small portions might be in question.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Aug 12, 2016 3:18 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!




a.ashfield  wrote:


  
It is fairly simple why.  The only unbiased observer, the paidexpert 
ERV Penon, says the plant worked. 




He also said the flow was exactly 36,000 kg per day, and the reactor produced 
heat on days when Rossi informed the world it was turned off. How on earth can 
you call that "unbiased"?!? On what planet is that not brazen, in-your-face, 
outrageous fraud?


Quoting the Answer again:




"Penon further knowingly relied on flawed or fabricated data collections in his 
supposed evaluation of the Plant’s performance. For example, Leonardo and Rossi 
have admitted (on their internet blog postings) that there were days when 
portions of the Plant were not operating, but Penon in his final report does 
not report any material decrease in output of the Plant on those days. Rather, 
he makes the (inexplicable) claim in his final report that on these days the 
Plant’s performance either did not change or somehow even increased."




- Jed

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Giovanni Santostasi]

There are 3 logical possibilities:
1) a.ashfield is a troll, he is doing this just for fun,
2) a.shfield is a shrill paid by Rossi
3) a.shfield is  a self-deluded believer of Rossi crackpottery at any cost.

Possible combinations of 1 to 3 are also possible.


On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:36 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:

> It is fairly simple why.  The only unbiased observer, the paid expert ERV
> Penon, says the plant worked.
> Rossi took IH to court, where the facts will be made known, because IH
> failed to pay him what they had agreed on.  It wasn't IH taking Rossi to
> court.  You have it backwards.
>
>
> On 8/12/2016 10:44 AM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote:
>
> What I don't understand is why there are not ongoing criminal
> investigations for Rossi, Fabian and Penon, the fraudulent gang, instead of
> only civil law implications.
> It is likely that Rossi and company activities were criminal and not just
> bad business practices.
> It saddens me to say this about my Italian compatriots but all the
> evidence points to the fact that Rossi did it again: another criminal scam.
>
> Giovanni
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:13 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> Craig Haynie  wrote:
>>
>>
>>> But this is the point: You can't prove that we live in an Objective
>>> Universe. You can't prove that you're not in some computer simulation . . .
>>>
>>
>> True. But you don't have to prove it. You just have to show it is very
>> likely, with the fewest entities (Ockham's razor). Science is not about
>> absolutes, or perfect assurance.
>>
>> Some philosophers of science go so far as to say that whether something
>> is objectively true in the real world does not even matter, as long as it
>> is true as far as you can tell, or more true than any rival hypothesis. You
>> can't tell if it is "really" true, and it doesn't matter. True enough is
>> good enough.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:

It is fairly simple why.  The only unbiased observer, the paid expert ERV
> Penon, says the plant worked.
>

He also said the flow was exactly 36,000 kg per day, and the reactor
produced heat on days when Rossi informed the world it was turned off. How
on earth can you call that "unbiased"?!? On what planet is that not brazen,
in-your-face, outrageous fraud?

Quoting the Answer again:

"Penon further knowingly relied on flawed or fabricated data collections in
his supposed evaluation of the Plant’s performance. For example, Leonardo
and Rossi have admitted (on their internet blog postings) that there were
days when portions of the Plant were not operating, but Penon in his final
report does not report any material decrease in output of the Plant on
those days. Rather, he makes the (inexplicable) claim in his final report
that on these days the Plant’s performance either did not change or somehow
even increased."


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[a.ashfield]

It is fairly simple why.  The only unbiased observer, the paid expert 
ERV Penon, says the plant worked.
Rossi took IH to court, where the facts will be made known, because IH 
failed to pay him what they had agreed on.  It wasn't IH taking Rossi to 
court.  You have it backwards.



On 8/12/2016 10:44 AM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote:
What I don't understand is why there are not ongoing criminal 
investigations for Rossi, Fabian and Penon, the fraudulent gang, 
instead of only civil law implications.
It is likely that Rossi and company activities were criminal and not 
just bad business practices.
It saddens me to say this about my Italian compatriots but all the 
evidence points to the fact that Rossi did it again: another criminal 
scam.


Giovanni


On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:13 PM, Jed Rothwell > wrote:


Craig Haynie > wrote:

But this is the point: You can't prove that we live in an
Objective Universe. You can't prove that you're not in some
computer simulation . . .


True. But you don't have to prove it. You just have to show it is
very likely, with the fewest entities (Ockham's razor). Science is
not about absolutes, or perfect assurance.

Some philosophers of science go so far as to say that whether
something is objectively true in the real world does not even
matter, as long as it is true as far as you can tell, or more true
than any rival hypothesis. You can't tell if it is "really" true,
and it doesn't matter. True enough is good enough.

- Jed

[Vo]:LENR learns about toxicology and venom

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/08/aug-12-2016-lenr-learns-about.html

we need anti-venom...

peter
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Another slant on hole superconductivity

[Bob Cook]

Regarding Axil's comment, I consider that SPP,s would be a better bet for 
creation of high energy electrons and Brem


The collapse would also create energetic electrons and Brem...


The light speed at the surface of the medium supporting the SPP's would 
important in the creation of Brem...   The higher the refractive index the more 
Brem... one should expect.


Bob Cook


PS:  This is more like a traditional Vortex blog subject.


FRC


From: Jones Beene 
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 6:39 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Another slant on hole superconductivity


One of the leading experts on HTSC is the controversial hands-on theorist Joe 
Eck. In his latest installment, Eck adds to his emerging theory – called the 
Periodic Compression Theory…

http://www.superconductors.org/AEOHTSC.htm

Eck’s theory asserts that metals of disparate weights but identical oxidation 
states will produce superconductivity when positioned on opposite sides of an 
oxygen atom. Periodic compression from lattice vibrations causes the balance of 
valence to shift, creating a HOLE at the oxygen site. The positively-charged 
ion then facilitates the pairing of electrons in the hole, producing 
superconductivity via the Cooper pair.

END

Comment: Ironically, it can be observed that heat causes the vibration which 
causes the hole which causes the electron pairing – so heat actually causes the 
superconductivity, in a way. The implication is that temperature control will 
always be needed in HTSC. Hopefully it can be as simple as fans.

PRIOR post on HTSC: It may be worth noting that “hole superconductivity” may 
end up being broader than Hirsch’s theory. For instance, Hirsch mentions “ring 
current” several times in his many papers, which is somewhat of a middle ground 
between electron and hole superconductivity. In fact, he tries to explain 
everything under one banner, but I have yet to find a coherently worded 
explanation which placates all the possibilities. [Eck’s theory could do that]

These views on room temperature superconductivity come together in LENR, at 
least at the low end of the temperature scale – and when aromatic catalysts are 
involved. They are probably not relevant to Parkhomov or high temperatures.

This is particularly interesting to me since phenanthrene has been mentioned by 
Hirsch and others in the context of both ring current and hole 
superconductivity. However, I agree with Mark that Bremsstrahlung is unlikely 
from either type and would be self-quenching. Nevertheless, moderately fast 
electrons are possible so long as high temperature is avoided.

Moreover, the advent and maintenance of RTSC (localized as ring current) would 
serve to explain why some types of LENR are difficult to pull off at the low 
end of the temperature scale (such as in Craven’s NI-Week demo). The experiment 
must find the narrow region of temperature where a localized Meissner effect 
can coexist with optimized proton exchange and H3+ formation. This range 
probably peaks about 100° but finding it could be more meaningful than the high 
temperatures of the Parkhomov experiment, since self-sustaining heat is 
possible.

From: Mark Jurich

The radiation extends above 0.511 MeV in Trace #7 and this doesn't seem to fit 
with Hirsch's Theory (i.e., Hole Superconductivity as described in DOI: 
10.1088/0953-8984/19/12/125217 ).  Perhaps if the electrons were heavy 
(dressed) it could be valid.  I would need to take a closer look.

Also, I don't see Hirsch justifying Brems during creation of HSC, but a peak @ 
0.511 MeV.

... I'm just glancing over things right now, so I may chime back.

- Mark Jurich

-- Original Message --

From: "Axil Axil"

The x-radiation seen in the MFMP experiment called the "seventh segment signal" 
may have been caused by the initiation of "hole superconductivity" when the 
meissner effect expels electrons from the center of the superconducting 
material thereby producing x-rays through Bremsstrahlung. Also when the Hole 
superconductor is quenched, the same process produces electron collapse into 
the center of the dying superconductor also producing Bremsstrahlung.

RE: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Russ George]

Define senior citizen. senior citizen synonyms, senior citizen pronunciation, 
... curmudgeon - a crusty irascible cantankerous old person full of stubborn 
ideas. hmmm

 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:25 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

 

a.ashfield  > wrote:

 

I have maintained from the beginning it was too early to tell the performance 
of the plant until more FACTS were available

 

The facts are now available.

 

 

Saying that you know but it is secret doesn't wash.

 

All of my important secrets were revealed by Exhibit 5. There are only a few 
minor details left. You may doubt that the assertions in Exhibit 5 are correct, 
but I know that they are. If you will assume for the sake of argument this 
document tells the truth, you will see why I say Rossi is lying and his claims 
are nonsense.

 

 

  You were wrong about Vaughn not being emp;poyed by Cherokee.

 

That is not a technical issue. It has no bearing on calorimetry, data, or the 
instruments. I do not know why you are hung up on it, but I suggest you ignore 
it. I suggest you concentrate on facts such the fact that Rossi and Penon 
stuffed their data tables with identical & impossible numbers, and they showed 
excess power on days when Rossi in his blog said the machine was turned off. 
Think about the fact that no heat was detected coming from the pretend customer 
site. If you cannot explain these facts, and they seems to indicate fraud to 
you, that is because it is fraud.

 

Do not tell me these things are lies, or misunderstandings or not true. I 
expect you believe that, but it is not a valid argument to dissuade me. I know 
these things to be true. I have seen proof of various types. There is no point 
to telling me I have not. At best you should say that you are still not 
convinced Rossi actually wrote 36,000 kg in every day, including days when the 
reactor was turned off. You don't believe it. Fine, but don't tell me I should 
not believe it, because I have seen proof.

 

 

  The so called secret things that came out with Exhibit 5 all seem to have 
faded except the half full pipe.

 

Nothing has faded. Every claim is confirmed by Rossi's own data and by other 
eyewitness observers. The fact that Rossi & Penon never responded, even though 
valid answers would have brought them $89 million, proves beyond doubt that the 
claims are real. If there was any way to disprove them, Rossi would have.

 

 

  As I've said before only a diagram of the piping will allow an engineer to 
judge the lightly hood of problems.

 

Nonsense. Half full pipes are common. Anyone can tell a pipe is half full by 
watching the water fall from it, and by various other means.

 

 

  Your second hand info from Murray means nothing.  

 

How do you know it is second hand? Rossi's own data confirms most of it. What 
better source could there be?

 

 

Why should I believe an electronics guy employed by IH over a qualified 
independent expert like Dr. Penon?

 

Because it physically impossible for a flow rate to be EXACTLY 36,000 kg a day 
for months; because the flow meter was obviously unsuited to the task and an 
idiotic choice; because the pipe was half-full; because ambient temperature in 
a Florida warehouse are never EXACTLY the same for days on end . . . and for 
many other reasons. This is not Murray versus Penon, to be judged on their 
professional qualifications. This is case of blatantly fake data and a 
ridiculous travesty of a test. You don't need Murray. You, I, or anyone else 
looking at the data and the facts presented in Exhibit 5 could instantly see it 
was bullshit. I saw that in a few minutes. If you cannot see that, you are not 
a good judge of experiments or engineering.

 

- Jed

 

[Vo]:Global Warming Strikes Again

[Chris Zell]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-11/expert-says-rising-rapes-sweden-due-global-warming-not-soaring-muslim-immigation

Apparently, Sweden is experiencing an epidemic of sexual assault because of 
global warming.   Good to know the elites fully understand this situation.

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> You left out most of what I wrote, cherry picking like Murray does.
>

I will not respond in detail because you apparently think I am a liar.
There is nothing I can say in response to that accusation. Any fact I bring
to light you will disregard, claiming it is also a lie.



> You claim to know what I WILL think.  What you write is not believable.
>

There: you just said it. "Not believable." What I said, for example, is
that the flow rate is listed as 36,000 kg every day. It is not possible
that Murray I made a mistake reading that. Therefore "not believable" can
only mean we are lying. It is logically impossible for me to dispute that
accusation. You will dismiss anything more I say as just another lie.

If I upload a sample of data, you will say I fabricated it. There is no
method I can use to prove I am not lying, because everyone knows that I
could fabricate a table, quite easily.

So, as I said, the conversation is at an end. There is nothing more I can
say.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Giovanni Santostasi]

How somebody can read the following email of Rossi and still not "get it"?
He has a conniving mind, zero loyalty and it is evident he is capable of
manipulating experiments, "making up discussions" whatever that means,
taking advantage of people and situations.
Given his already tattered past, it is more than clear he should not be
trusted under any circumstances. Yes, he "did a masterpiece" as he claimed,
a masterpiece of fraud and manipulation having so many people believing in
him and his bullshit.

Rossi's lies, manipulations and scheming:

"With this company Hydrofusion we [meaning Leonardo and Rossi] had agreed
upon a draft to sell them IP, know how and manufacturing license for Europe
but Germany, France and Italy. By our law, if you send a proposal you are
engaged to accept if the proposee accepts all the conditions of the
proposal. After receiving your last text at the end of August I decided to
go ahead with you, therefore I had to get rid of this engagement. The only
way out was to invite them to a test, ask them to bring with them their
consultant. I made the test abort, maintaining the temperatures below the
starting limit. Then I made up some discussions, I said they made a wrong
test, they escaped, I am free. We did not have damages of image, because,
knowing what was on the road, I had made before their test a disclaimer,
saying that the Hot temperature E-Cat was just a prototype, still under
test and validation and subject to modification, thing that I am repeating
everywhere. Now I am publishing that I am surprised of all this ado for
nothing, since I already said that for the Hot Cat we needed more tests
before saying it is a product ready for the market. At this point we can
organize with Cherokee a world strategy, since all the other licensees are
just commercial: for example in Africa we will have just to pay a royalty
to the local agent upon our sale price, but they all are very good and they
can sell either energy or plants. Nobody has rights upon the IP, know how,
manufacturing and so on. Warmest Regards, Andrea"

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:02 AM, a.ashfield  wrote:

> Jed,
> You left out most of what I wrote, cherry picking like Murray does.
> You claim to know what I WILL think.  What you write is not believable.
> You are wrong about that too.
>
>
>
> On 8/12/2016 9:56 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> a.ashfield  wrote:
>
>
>> Jed  Rossi and Penon stuffed their data tables with identical &
>> impossible numbers, and they showed excess power on days when Rossi in his
>> blog said the machine was turned off.
>> AA How can one tell that without seeing Penon's report?  Second hand info
>> from Murray is not proof.
>>
>
> You have second hand info from me and from Murray. If that is not proof
> enough, you will not believe Penon's report either. You will say it is fake.
>
> What you are saying here is that Murray and I are liars. There is no
> response I can make to that which will change your mind. The conversation
> is at an end.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Jed Rothwell]

Giovanni Santostasi  wrote:


> What I don't understand is why there are not ongoing criminal
> investigations for Rossi, Fabian and Penon, the fraudulent gang, instead of
> only civil law implications.
>

If there were such investigations, I doubt we would hear about them.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Amended Answer from I.H. in lawsuit

[Jed Rothwell]

I converted both documents to Microsoft Word format using the program Power
PDF. I then did a file compare within Microsoft Word. This flagged a large
number of changes. It is tedious looking through them. Here are paragraph
numbers that have been changed, as numbered in the amended version. Most of
the changes are minor. Some may be only formatting, which Microsoft Word
flags as a change.

ANSWER paragraphs
8
10 (I listed the changes in this paragraph, above)

(Un-numbered paragraph. Revised version:)

COUNTERCLAIMS AND THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS Industrial Heat and IPH (collectively
“Counter-Plaintiffs”) bring this action against Leonardo; Rossi; J.M.
Products, Inc. (“JMP”); Henry Johnson (“Johnson”); Penon; United States
Quantum Leap, LLC (“USQL”); and Fabiani.; and “JOHN DOE” a/k/a James A.
Bass (“Bass”). In support, Counter-Plaintiffs allege as follows:

INTRODUCTION paragraphs
1
4
22
28
30

35

41 (many changes)
52
55
61

66
67
69

72 (combined paragraphs)

74 (many changes)

78 (new, I think)

82 (much more about Murray, Exhibit 26)

83

89
96
103
106
110

121 (extensive, but it could be just formatting)
152 (extensive, but it could be just formatting)

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[a.ashfield]

Jed,
You left out most of what I wrote, cherry picking like Murray does.
You claim to know what I WILL think.  What you write is not believable.
You are wrong about that too.


On 8/12/2016 9:56 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

a.ashfield > wrote:

Jed Rossi and Penon stuffed their data tables with identical &
impossible numbers, and they showed excess power on days when
Rossi in his blog said the machine was turned off.
AA How can one tell that without seeing Penon's report? Second
hand info from Murray is not proof.


You have second hand info from me and from Murray. If that is not 
proof enough, you will not believe Penon's report either. You will say 
it is fake.


What you are saying here is that Murray and I are liars. There is no 
response I can make to that which will change your mind. The 
conversation is at an end.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Eric Walker]

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Giovanni Santostasi 
wrote:

What I don't understand is why there are not ongoing criminal
> investigations for Rossi, Fabian and Penon, the fraudulent gang, instead of
> only civil law implications.
>

This is something I've been wondering myself.  I would not be surprised if
there is an FBI investigation under way, and they're still looking into the
situation.  I think they like to keep things under wraps for as long as
possible.

I'm having trouble tracking down the amount of money involved, but I got
the impression somewhere that there was less money involved when the FBI
raided Inteligentry.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Giovanni Santostasi]

What I don't understand is why there are not ongoing criminal
investigations for Rossi, Fabian and Penon, the fraudulent gang, instead of
only civil law implications.
It is likely that Rossi and company activities were criminal and not just
bad business practices.
It saddens me to say this about my Italian compatriots but all the evidence
points to the fact that Rossi did it again: another criminal scam.

Giovanni


On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 8:13 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Craig Haynie  wrote:
>
>
>> But this is the point: You can't prove that we live in an Objective
>> Universe. You can't prove that you're not in some computer simulation . . .
>>
>
> True. But you don't have to prove it. You just have to show it is very
> likely, with the fewest entities (Ockham's razor). Science is not about
> absolutes, or perfect assurance.
>
> Some philosophers of science go so far as to say that whether something is
> objectively true in the real world does not even matter, as long as it is
> true as far as you can tell, or more true than any rival hypothesis. You
> can't tell if it is "really" true, and it doesn't matter. True enough is
> good enough.
>
> - Jed
>
>

[Vo]:Amended Answer from I.H. in lawsuit

[Jed Rothwell]

I.H. has filed an amended Answer to the Rossi lawsuit. It can be found in
these locations:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B5ZV0oKQafY4bHhOZHlBZFZ4MG8

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/newvortex/files/Rossi_v_Darden/
(requires registration)

This includes a new photo in Exhibit 26. I do not know what to make of it.
There are also exhibits 27 - 30. They have not been copied to the second
site as of this moment.

This document clears up some confusion and an issue that bothered
a.ashfield.

Old version:

10. Defendants deny that Vaughn is a Manager at Cherokee. Defendants admit
the remaining allegations in Paragraph 10.


New version:

10. Defendants deny that Vaughn is a “Manager” at Cherokee, as “Manager” of
a LLC is defined in 6 Delaware Code §§ 18-101(10), 18-401, and 18-402.
Defendants admit the remaining allegations in Paragraph 10.


- Jed

[Vo]:The H3+ hydrogen cation and HTSC

[Jones Beene]

Speaking of a potential cross-over area between localized HTSC (high
temperature superconductivity) and LENR, consider an important but
overlooked ion.

The species known as the “trihydrogen cation” or “protonated molecular
hydrogen” and denoted here as H3+, is actually the most abundant ion in the
physical universe, and possibly the key to one kind of non-nuclear gain in
LENR. It is likely to be a formative self-catalyst for hydrogen “shrinkage”
or densification as described by Mills and then by Holmlid.

The hydrogen cation is actually more stable than molecular H2 in
interstellar space, where net charge can be an advantage… but the lifetime
in condensed matter could also be greatly extended and sequential, giving
the appearance of stability - especially in a situation where Cooper pairs
of electrons are also formed. It is reasonable to assume that a formative
electron pair would immediately attract 3 protons from certain mobile
hydrogenated compounds which have exposed positive charge. Water is one such
compound. Mills latest effort involves passing massive electrical currents
through water-based gels, so he could be achieving temporary
electron-pairing by brute force.

But in less intensive situations at low temperature, a Cooper pair of
electrons could form and immediately bind to 3 adjacent water molecules in
such a way the H3+ cation is surrounded by three hydroxyl radicals with
“musical chairs” valence, with the entire ensemble being neutral but
fragile. Following the brief lifetime of such an ensemble, one hydrogen atom
emerges as deeply densified in the sense of the Inverted Rydberg state of
Miley. 

In this case the H3+ structure could appear as a Copper pair core with 3
protons in Efimov states around the pair. H3+ can thus be the mystery vector
for energy gain in certain situations in condensed matter - which heretofore
were thought of as LENR, but are non-nuclear and yet gainful. One does not
need to fully subscribe to Mills theory either, as there are similar
versions with differing parameters which are more accurate.

Mills is apparently having great difficulty taming large electrical current
arcing, which in the end (and to his chagrin) -- may be completely
unnecessary, if the above described situation with Cooper pairs is accurate.
In fact, operating temperatures will probably need to be held in a low and
steady range for Cooper pairing but possibly this can be achieved near
100°C. 

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> Jed  Rossi and Penon stuffed their data tables with identical & impossible
> numbers, and they showed excess power on days when Rossi in his blog said
> the machine was turned off.
> AA How can one tell that without seeing Penon's report?  Second hand info
> from Murray is not proof.
>

You have second hand info from me and from Murray. If that is not proof
enough, you will not believe Penon's report either. You will say it is fake.

What you are saying here is that Murray and I are liars. There is no
response I can make to that which will change your mind. The conversation
is at an end.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too!

[a.ashfield]

Jed,
AA ,I have maintained from the beginning it was too early to tell the 
performance of the plant until more FACTS were available

Jed  The facts are now available.
AA.  Oh Yes?  Where can I see Penon's report or a piping diagram?

AA  You were wrong about Vaughn not being emp;poyed by Cherokee.
Jed  I do not know why you are hung up on it, but I suggest you ignore it.
AA  Because you said I made it up and I then showed you proof the IH had 
lied about it and you were wrong.


Jed  Rossi and Penon stuffed their data tables with identical & 
impossible numbers, and they showed excess power on days when Rossi in 
his blog said the machine was turned off.
AA How can one tell that without seeing Penon's report?  Second hand 
info from Murray is not proof.


AA  As I've said before only a diagram of the piping will allow an 
engineer to judge the lightly hood of problems.
Jed  Nonsense. Half full pipes are common. Anyone can tell a pipe is 
half full by watching the water fall from it, and by various other means.
AA  Watching the water fall from a pipe in a closed system? That's even 
weaker than the stains.


AA  Why should I believe an electronics guy employed by IH over a 
qualified independent expert like Dr. Penon?
Jed  Because it physically impossible for a flow rate to be EXACTLY 
36,000 kg a day for months; because the flow meter was obviously 
unsuited to the task and an idiotic choice; because the pipe was half-full;
AA  I don't know that without seeing Penon's report and a piping 
diagram.  Why was the flow meter unsuitable when it has been shown to be 
accurate at those flow rates?

[Vo]:Another slant on hole superconductivity

[Jones Beene]

One of the leading experts on HTSC is the controversial hands-on theorist
Joe Eck. In his latest installment, Eck adds to his emerging theory – called
the Periodic Compression Theory…

http://www.superconductors.org/AEOHTSC.htm 

Eck’s theory asserts that metals of disparate weights but identical
oxidation states will produce superconductivity when positioned on opposite
sides of an oxygen atom. Periodic compression from lattice vibrations causes
the balance of valence to shift, creating a HOLE at the oxygen site. The
positively-charged ion then facilitates the pairing of electrons in the
hole, producing superconductivity via the Cooper pair. 
END

Comment: Ironically, it can be observed that heat causes the vibration which
causes the hole which causes the electron pairing – so heat actually causes
the superconductivity, in a way. The implication is that temperature control
will always be needed in HTSC. Hopefully it can be as simple as fans.

PRIOR post on HTSC: It may be worth noting that “hole superconductivity” may
end up being broader than Hirsch’s theory. For instance, Hirsch mentions
“ring current” several times in his many papers, which is somewhat of a
middle ground between electron and hole superconductivity. In fact, he tries
to explain everything under one banner, but I have yet to find a coherently
worded explanation which placates all the possibilities. [Eck’s theory could
do that]

These views on room temperature superconductivity come together in LENR, at
least at the low end of the temperature scale – and when aromatic catalysts
are involved. They are probably not relevant to Parkhomov or high
temperatures.

This is particularly interesting to me since phenanthrene has been mentioned
by Hirsch and others in the context of both ring current and hole
superconductivity. However, I agree with Mark that Bremsstrahlung is
unlikely from either type and would be self-quenching. Nevertheless,
moderately fast electrons are possible so long as high temperature is
avoided. 

Moreover, the advent and maintenance of RTSC (localized as ring current)
would serve to explain why some types of LENR are difficult to pull off at
the low end of the temperature scale (such as in Craven’s NI-Week demo). The
experiment must find the narrow region of temperature where a localized
Meissner effect can coexist with optimized proton exchange and H3+
formation. This range probably peaks about 100° but finding it could be more
meaningful than the high temperatures of the Parkhomov experiment, since
self-sustaining heat is possible. 

From: Mark Jurich 

The radiation extends above 0.511 MeV in Trace #7 and this doesn't seem to
fit with Hirsch's Theory (i.e., Hole Superconductivity as described in DOI:
10.1088/0953-8984/19/12/125217 ).  Perhaps if the electrons were heavy
(dressed) it could be valid.  I would need to take a closer look.

Also, I don't see Hirsch justifying Brems during creation of HSC, but a peak
@ 0.511 MeV.

... I'm just glancing over things right now, so I may chime back.

- Mark Jurich

-- Original Message --
From: "Axil Axil" 

The x-radiation seen in the MFMP experiment called the "seventh segment
signal" may have been caused by the initiation of "hole superconductivity"
when the meissner effect expels electrons from the center of the
superconducting material thereby producing x-rays through Bremsstrahlung.
Also when the Hole superconductor is quenched, the same process produces
electron collapse into the center of the dying superconductor also producing
Bremsstrahlung.