Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
The question is, how did they measure the energy input? This is not documented. This colonel engineer confuses kg and g. He measures a hydrogen consumtion of 1.7000 kg and dont write down all significant digits. Then he subtracts this from a value that means gramm. but is mistakenly labeled as kg. How can we win a war where precise decisions must be made in seconds? ;-) He makes many handwritten corrections and erasures to ensure he can read his own writing. He has two different ways to write a one: 1 and | in one and the same document. He uses decimal point and decimal , alternating in one and the same document. How can we believe he measured or calculated the electrical energy or the diesel consumption correctly? Possibly he has confused more than that? This is not a Nato colonel engineer with 30 year of experience in a multi-language military organisation. Peter Am 26.11.2011 13:51, schrieb Berke Durak: On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Mary Yugomaryyu...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't originate this. I reprint it with minor changes from ecatnews.com. ... Interesting! Let's run the figures for the 1 MW demo. Energy input : 66 kWh - 238 MJ Water claimed to be vaporized : 3716 l Average output temperature : 104.5 C Average input temperature : 18.3 C Energy required to heat 3716 kg of water from 18.3 C to 104.5 C : (104.5 - 18.3) * 4.181e3 * 3716 = 1.34 GJ So: COP = 1.34 GJ / 238 MJ = 5.63 So if he and Fioravanti mistook very wet steam for steam, he only has a cold fusion reactor with a COP of only 5.63, instead of a COP of 9.49 GJ / 238 MJ = 39.9. What a scammer I mean, when I pay $2,000,000 for a cold fusion reactor with a COP of 40, I don't expect to be given a cold fusion reactor with a COP of 5.63. Jeeez!!! That's what you get when you go for cheap Italian knock-off University of Baloney cold fusion reactors.
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
crisply summarizes a lot of the critical evaluation by Cude, Heffner, and Murray... elementary over estimation of excess heat by Rossi in all his demos... thanks to Mary Yugo and the original source 123star -- https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=nm#inbox/133dbc70ac37ba45 123star November 23, 2011 - 7:24 pm | Permalink References: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_capacity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_heat From: http://ecatnews.com/?p=1392cpage=1#comment-9761 123star November 23, 2011 - 7:24 pm | Permalink On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The question is, how did they measure the energy input? This is not documented. This colonel engineer confuses kg and g. He measures a hydrogen consumtion of 1.7000 kg and dont write down all significant digits. Then he subtracts this from a value that means gramm. but is mistakenly labeled as kg. How can we win a war where precise decisions must be made in seconds? ;-) He makes many handwritten corrections and erasures to ensure he can read his own writing. He has two different ways to write a one: 1 and | in one and the same document. He uses decimal point and decimal , alternating in one and the same document. How can we believe he measured or calculated the electrical energy or the diesel consumption correctly? Possibly he has confused more than that? This is not a Nato colonel engineer with 30 year of experience in a multi-language military organisation. Peter Am 26.11.2011 13:51, schrieb Berke Durak: On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Mary Yugomaryyu...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't originate this. I reprint it with minor changes from ecatnews.com. ... Interesting! Let's run the figures for the 1 MW demo. Energy input : 66 kWh - 238 MJ Water claimed to be vaporized : 3716 l Average output temperature : 104.5 C Average input temperature : 18.3 C Energy required to heat 3716 kg of water from 18.3 C to 104.5 C : (104.5 - 18.3) * 4.181e3 * 3716 = 1.34 GJ So: COP = 1.34 GJ / 238 MJ = 5.63 So if he and Fioravanti mistook very wet steam for steam, he only has a cold fusion reactor with a COP of only 5.63, instead of a COP of 9.49 GJ / 238 MJ = 39.9. What a scammer I mean, when I pay $2,000,000 for a cold fusion reactor with a COP of 40, I don't expect to be given a cold fusion reactor with a COP of 5.63. Jeeez!!! That's what you get when you go for cheap Italian knock-off University of Baloney cold fusion reactors.
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
I do not doubt that Rossi's device works, but I have a lot of doubts over his power output because his demos are so useless. He is claiming 100kW/kg output levels, while Miley appears to be closer to 10kW/kg levels (IIRC 30g 200W). But given the 8:1 steam to water ratio enthalpy ratio it is quite conceivable that Rossi is much lower than he states and so closer to what Miley (and other researchers?) are getting. It would be nice to have reliable results to resolve this. But I suspect we are still some time off from having accurate assessments publically released. Power output will have a significant impact on economics of different applications - for example 100kW/kg means Concorde like aircraft that use 6 times the power of conventional commercial jets and can get you anywhere on the planet cheaply in 8 hours at 30% of current costs, Miley like results mean re-engined conventional jet aircraft that still take 24 hours and cost 70% of current prices. On 26 November 2011 12:51, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't originate this. I reprint it with minor changes from ecatnews.com. ... Interesting! Let's run the figures for the 1 MW demo. Energy input : 66 kWh - 238 MJ Water claimed to be vaporized : 3716 l Average output temperature : 104.5 C Average input temperature : 18.3 C Energy required to heat 3716 kg of water from 18.3 C to 104.5 C : (104.5 - 18.3) * 4.181e3 * 3716 = 1.34 GJ So: COP = 1.34 GJ / 238 MJ = 5.63 So if he and Fioravanti mistook very wet steam for steam, he only has a cold fusion reactor with a COP of only 5.63, instead of a COP of 9.49 GJ / 238 MJ = 39.9. What a scammer I mean, when I pay $2,000,000 for a cold fusion reactor with a COP of 40, I don't expect to be given a cold fusion reactor with a COP of 5.63. Jeeez!!! That's what you get when you go for cheap Italian knock-off University of Baloney cold fusion reactors. -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I do not doubt that Rossi's device works, but I have a lot of doubts over his power output because his demos are so useless. He is claiming 100kW/kg output levels, while Miley appears to be closer to 10kW/kg levels (IIRC 30g 200W). But given the 8:1 steam to water ratio enthalpy ratio it is quite conceivable that Rossi is much lower than he states and so closer to what Miley (and other researchers?) are getting. I doubt that is true, but even if it is, it makes no difference. These are crude prototypes. With commercially manufactured devices I am sure they will be able to achieve any input:output ratio they want, such as 1:100. This is not an issue now and it never has been. No one has ever tried to optimize this ratio, because that is just a matter of engineering. The hard part has been to control the reaction. Once you do that, you can achieve any ratio and any temperature you want, up to the limits of the materials. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The question is, how did they measure the energy input? This is not documented. Were you being sarcastic? I'll assume you weren't. To answer your first question, it is not documented but it seems quite obvious. The power was entirely supplied by a diesel generator. The diesel generator had a fuel level meter or an electricity meter built-in, or maybe they connected an electricity meter between the diesel generator and the equipment. They obviously took readings before and after and wrote down the difference. What else? Do you imagine that Fioravanti took a hard look at the genset, then said, Well I guess that's about 66 kWh and wrote that down? This colonel engineer confuses kg and g. False. The correct sentence would be : This coloned engineer CONFUSED kg and g. That is, he made a mistake in the report. You can't claim with a straight face that he doesn't know a gram from a kilogram. He measures a hydrogen consumtion of 1.7000 kg and dont write down all significant digits. That's part of the same fuck-up. Then he subtracts this from a value that means gramm. but is mistakenly labeled as kg. That's part of the same fuck-up. How can we win a war where precise decisions must be made in seconds? ;-) What? He makes many handwritten corrections and erasures to ensure he can read his own writing. Is this sarcasm? He has two different ways to write a one: 1 and | in one and the same document. That remark is completely silly. Or are you one of these people who believe in graphology? He uses decimal point and decimal , alternating in one and the same document. That would tend to indicate that we was often reading or writing technical documents in different languages with different conventions. How can we believe he measured or calculated the electrical energy or the diesel consumption correctly? How can we take what you say seriously when you come up with arguments like this instead of discussing the core issue? Possibly he has confused more than that? Yeah, maybe he was just some random drunken hobo off the streets of Bologna calling himself colonel. This is not a Nato colonel engineer with 30 year of experience in a multi-language military organisation. You must be joking. Maybe Fioravanti is one of these rare engineers who is not an obsessive-compulsive robot with Asperger syndrome? Anyway, let me resume the content of this topic. (a) MY gratuitously asserts that the reason for the guaranteed COP of 7 statement is that Rossi, in her belief, thinks that he can get away claiming that he sells million-dollar devices that vaporize water completely where, in fact, they barely vaporize it. (b) I reply by showing that, even if Rossi's device didn't vaporize a gram of water during the 1 MW demo, it would still have a COP of 40 because it takes more than a fucking gigajoule to heat 4 tons of water by 90 degrees, and the energy input was less than 250 MJ. (c) PH finds it appropriate to cast a baseless doubt on the measurement of the input energy and then goes on a completely wild tangent by nit picking on Fioravanti's handwriting. But it's so comical (NATO colonels don't make mistakes) that I have probablly missed some sarcasm. I'd be happier when you guys come up with real arguments and not silly I don't like his handwriting! arguments. -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: The power was entirely supplied by a diesel generator. The diesel generator had a fuel level meter or an electricity meter built-in . . . They used the built in meters in the generator (genset). He uses decimal point and decimal , alternating in one and the same document. That would tend to indicate that we was often reading or writing technical documents in different languages with different conventions. I have heard they wrote the document in Italian and then translated it. People often make mistakes like this. In the document by Brattain you can see he made a correction on the second page and then crossed it out, where it says 5.4 x 10^-7 Watts: http://www.porticus.org/bell/pdf/brattain_lab_notebook.pdf There are several other words crossed out. By the logic of the skeptics here, this proves that transistors do not exist. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: I'd be happier when you guys come up with real arguments and not silly I don't like his handwriting! arguments. Sure. The argument against the October 28 test is that the customer is anonymous and who Fioravanti works for is also unknown. If the customer is, as I suspect, a fabrication, then Fioravanti works for Rossi as a part of a scam. Or, it's possible that Fioravanti has no idea about the potential errors involved in measuring enthalpy by using only the heat of vaporization of water. Frankly, I find that unlikely but it is possible that if Rossi could scam Kullander, Essen and Lewans, he could also scam Fioravanti with the same ruse. Of course, that would assume there is a customer which I find very doubtful, admittedly, so far, on subjective information mainly. Nobody who was able to report about it saw the meter readings. When you cite energy in and energy out, you are simply quoting Rossi and Fioravanti. For those who think this was a legitimate demonstration, I'd like to ask you why the invited guests, consisting of reporters and scientists, were never shown any of the measurements? You don't suppose a remote display of all relevant data, including the generator output during the test, could have been shown to them? Exactly why were they there other than to lend some wobbly credibility to Rossi's claim?
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
Am 26.11.2011 19:49, schrieb Jed Rothwell: I have heard they wrote the document in Italian and then translated it. People often make mistakes like this. In the document by Brattain you can see he made a correction on the second page and then crossed it out, where it says 5.4 x 10^-7 Watts: http://www.porticus.org/bell/pdf/brattain_lab_notebook.pdf There are several other words crossed out. By the logic of the skeptics here, this proves that transistors do not exist. No. I know the difference between a notepad and an undersigned document. BTW, this is why I make my own notes with a pencil and use an eraser. I use it quite often ;-) Peter
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: There are several other words crossed out. By the logic of the skeptics here, this proves that transistors do not exist. No. I know the difference between a notepad and an undersigned document. That was not a notepad. It was the experiment log. It was an important document, signed by the researchers, and referenced in patent applications and elsewhere to establish priority. As a document it was a lot more important than the Oct. 28 test report. The thing is, even important, history-making documents are often informal, with spelling errors and crossed out words. See, for example, Grant's draft of the surrender terms at Appomattox: http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/civil_war_series/6/sec6.htm (scroll down) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
Berke, they do not have anything else to come up with in their effort to discredit Rossi and his system. It is sad to see them resort to this level of criticism. Dave -Original Message- From: Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Nov 26, 2011 1:01 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6 On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The question is, how did they measure the energy input? This is not documented. Were you being sarcastic? I'll assume you weren't. To answer your first question, it is not documented but it seems quite bvious. The power was entirely supplied by a diesel generator. The diesel enerator had a fuel level meter or an electricity meter built-in, or aybe they connected an electricity meter between the diesel generator nd the equipment. They obviously took readings before and after and wrote down the ifference. What else? Do you imagine that Fioravanti took a hard ook at the genset, then said, Well I guess that's about 66 kWh and rote that down? This colonel engineer confuses kg and g. False. The correct sentence would be : This coloned engineer CONFUSED kg and g. That is, he made a mistake in the report. You can't claim with straight face that he doesn't know a gram from a kilogram. He measures a hydrogen consumtion of 1.7000 kg and dont write down all significant digits. That's part of the same fuck-up. Then he subtracts this from a value that means gramm. but is mistakenly labeled as kg. That's part of the same fuck-up. How can we win a war where precise decisions must be made in seconds? ;-) What? He makes many handwritten corrections and erasures to ensure he can read his own writing. Is this sarcasm? He has two different ways to write a one: 1 and | in one and the same document. That remark is completely silly. Or are you one of these people who elieve in graphology? He uses decimal point and decimal , alternating in one and the same document. That would tend to indicate that we was often reading or writing echnical documents in different languages with different conventions. How can we believe he measured or calculated the electrical energy or the diesel consumption correctly? How can we take what you say seriously when you come up with arguments ike this instead of discussing the core issue? Possibly he has confused more than that? Yeah, maybe he was just some random drunken hobo off the streets of ologna calling himself colonel. This is not a Nato colonel engineer with 30 year of experience in a multi-language military organisation. You must be joking. Maybe Fioravanti is one of these rare engineers who is not an bsessive-compulsive robot with Asperger syndrome? Anyway, let me resume the content of this topic. (a) MY gratuitously asserts that the reason for the guaranteed COP of statement is that Rossi, in her belief, thinks that he can get away laiming that he sells million-dollar devices that vaporize water ompletely where, in fact, they barely vaporize it. (b) I reply by showing that, even if Rossi's device didn't vaporize a ram of water during the 1 MW demo, it would still have a COP of 40 ecause it takes more than a fucking gigajoule to heat 4 tons of water y 90 degrees, and the energy input was less than 250 MJ. (c) PH finds it appropriate to cast a baseless doubt on the measurement of the nput energy and then goes on a completely wild tangent by nit picking on ioravanti's handwriting. But it's so comical (NATO colonels don't make istakes) that I have probablly missed some sarcasm. I'd be happier when you guys come up with real arguments and not silly I don't ike his handwriting! arguments. - erke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: This colonel engineer confuses kg and g. False. The correct sentence would be : This coloned engineer CONFUSED kg and g. That is, he made a mistake in the report. You can't claim with a straight face that he doesn't know a gram from a kilogram. I expect Heckert does have a straight face. You can tell that he and the others have run out of legitimate arguments when they resort to this kind of nonsense. They have nothing more to say. They have lost the argument. This reminds of an incident in the 2008 election campaign. Obama was exhausted and he accidentally referred to visiting the 57 states. This may have been a random slip of the tongue. Maybe not. I believe Democratic primaries include the 50 states plus the District of Columbia, Americans Overseas, Puerto Rico and four others, so Obama probably had strategy sessions to deal with all 57. Anyway, this led to accusations by opponents that Obama does not know how many states are in the U.S., because he is ignorant. That is absurd; he has many faults but ignorance is not among them. It was clear that these opponents were scrambling to find a reason to attack him, and they were scraping the bottom of the barrel. Those opponents are still harping about Obama's 57-state mistake. You can find references to it all over the Internet. Cold fusion opponents still talk about FP's mistake measuring neutrons in 1989, plus they natter on about many imaginary mistakes they think they have detected over the years. I am sure they will continue to assert that Fioravanti does not know the difference between grams and kilograms for as long as this dispute lasts, until Rossi is either accepted by the mass media, or forgotten. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I am sure they will continue to assert that Fioravanti does not know the difference between grams and kilograms for as long as this dispute lasts, until Rossi is either accepted by the mass media, or forgotten. Perhaps. But I am much concerned to know who Fioravanti works for. I suspect (but of course can't prove) it's Rossi. That issue also may go on until Rossi is accepted or blown out of the water. I don't think he will ever be forgotten. Real or scam, he'll be rembered at least as an interesting illustration of all the things not to do when claiming to have a revolutionary source of energy.
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: That's part of the same fuck-up. Then he subtracts this from a value that means gramm. but is mistakenly labeled as kg. That's part of the same fuck-up. In the 15 or some odd years, I have never seen anyone use this word on this forum. If English is not your first language, you might understand that this in inappropriate for this forum. I invite you to seek a more appropriate phrase: http://thesaurus.com/ After all, sir, there are ladies present. I have copied the list owner so that this might be brought to his attention. And, on behalf of Vortex-l, I apologize to Mary Yugo and any other ladies who might be participating or lurking. T
RE: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
-Original Message- From: Terry Blanton And, on behalf of Vortex-l, I apologize to Mary Yugo and any other ladies who might be participating or lurking. Well, cough-cough ... before yugo overboard g don't forget that screen names are essentially genderless. For years on the hydrino group - a well-known scientist and University Professor - Dr. John Connet used the screen name Nora Barron, for whatever reason. As a skeptic, maybe he thought it would insulate him from fan-boy insults, to some small degree. In the end, the attempted cross-dressing, so-to-speak, did not seem to convince the likes of Mike Carroll (where is he these days) - although Nora/John did make some of the more intelligent comments, as a general rule.
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: For years on the hydrino group - a well-known scientist and University Professor - Dr. John Connet used the screen name Nora Barron, for whatever reason. Yes, I was following the group at that time. And I do remember when his (p)alias was exposed, so to speak. But, as you are aware, this list has degraded significantly and we need to draw the line somewhere. Oh, and I might have used the term lady with a bit of TIC. Also, note the BillB's address. e Ackshully, I really think Mary really is a lady. I have known a few in my time and, as Christoph Waltz pointed out, if the shoe fits . . . which, in this case, it does not. T
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: In the 15 or some odd years, I have never seen anyone use this word on this forum. If English is not your first language, you might understand that this in inappropriate for this forum. I invite you to seek a more appropriate phrase: English is not my first language. I'm sorry that I offended the Victorian virtue police. I understand that there might be a desire to keep the discussions on this list formal so I'll avoid such words from now. After all, sir, there are ladies present. I have copied the list owner so that this might be brought to his attention. However I don't see why being a lady would make someone more or less susceptible to be offended by the f-word. Actually, some women will find your statement offensive - are ladies precious flowers unable to speak up for themselves and that should be protected from vulgar language? PS. How about a ban on ad hominem attacks and unsusbtantiated accusations or insinuations of scam or incompetence? -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: PS. How about a ban on ad hominem attacks and unsusbtantiated accusations or insinuations of scam or incompetence? The possibility of Rossi's E-cat being a scam has been widely discussed all over the internet and is a valid issue when considering everything Rossi has said and done and in consideration of his past criminal record. Discussing it should not be banned any more than claiming Rossi has invented cold fusion should be banned even though there is a lot less evidence for that, IMO, than there is for the other possibility.
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Nov 26, 2011, at 19:52, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: . Actually, some women will find your statement offensive - are ladies precious flowers unable to speak up for themselves and that should be protected from vulgar language? Absolutely. And American ladies never, ever use foul language. We maintain them as creatures of proper breeding and pleasant temperament. You really must try one some time. They're the envy of all the world.
Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 9:25 PM, Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote: Absolutely. And American ladies never, ever use foul language. We maintain them as creatures of proper breeding and pleasant temperament. You really must try one some time. They're the envy of all the world. :-) Especially the Southern Belles! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_belle Frankly my dear . . . T
