RE: [Vo]:Lewan and other observers unable to confirm claims
At least the thermocouples were placed by the company’s engineer and not Rossi... -mark
[Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Here is the temperature graphs with more accurate time stamps: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28230378/oct28demo.png And some simple calculations: Water flow rate: 675.6 l/h Temperature above 100°C: 12:34 End of dataset: 18:24 Total time: 350 min (5h 50 min) Heating period: Started: 11:00 / Ended: 12:34 Total: 94 min Energy for heating metal mass: 400 MJ Energy for heating 1060 kg water: 375 MJ Total: 775 MJ / 137 kW Here we see that most of the electric input that was allegedly supplied to the device went for initial heating. Total water volume of 107 E-Cats was 2700 liters. If they can give proof that non vaporized water was just 5 kg, then test should be valid. Simple proof would be that if they measured the water flow rate from the heat dissipator. This would be valid indicator, because there was still plenty of empty water storage capacity inside E-Cats when water started boiling. Therefore only steam escaped. However, if they did not measure the flow rate, then it is difficult to establish with certainty that all steam was really vaporized. However I would think that used water trap was sufficient to collect non-vaporized water. At least within one order of magnitude. Therefore I would think that test appears to be valid and indeed E-Cat was producing at least 7 GJ energy with average power of 340 kW. This is the lower limit. Maximum power output was 12 GJ and 550 kW power. Min and max possible power levels were determined how much water was remaining stored inside E-Cats and pipes after the demo ended. As input was used almost fully for initial heating of the E-Cat array, total COP was 400:(1/∞). I do not know the total imported heating energy, but I assume here that it was below 770 MJ. And also I do not know how much input was remaining in alleged 350 min self-sustaining period. I assumed that it was zero. However, this test was by no means made by independed scientists. Therefore I do not see how this could be a proof for successful validation, because there is no way that hidden power sources are excluded. Therefore, I do not expect mass media attention. This is extremely sad situation, because I am tired of listening skepstics' assertions considering the validity of the technology. However, contract that was signed stands that the energy was produced by the means of cold fusion reactions. Therefore if this is a hoax, then it could be considered as a breach of contract, therefore Customer has right to demand compensation if they have paid anything for the Dr. Rossi. Therefore, it seems to be valid technology. However we need some further information from Bologna University considering long term performance. –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Lewan and other observers unable to confirm claims
... ROSSI SAID ... (as usual) 2011/10/29 Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net At least the thermocouples were placed by the company’s engineer and not Rossi... -mark
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Yes, this is the big question. If it worked, why didnt it blow up? I have calculated elsewhere in this forum that it is technical possible to dissipate the heat with a big ventilated air heatexchanger. This is believable to me. But the big unsolved question for me is: Steam temperature was 105°C. So the absolute pressure of steam is 1.2 bar or less. (respective 0.2 bar above air pressure) It was calculated before that the steam must reach a speed of some 100km/h with those pipes that where seen before. This speed seems to be impossible at this low pressure. So this must be explained. Possibly Rossi should publish basic and raw technical data about the water and steam path, pipe diameters and lengths and heat exchangers and so on. This can impossibly been kept as a proprietary secret, there is nothing secret about this. And please note: I dont doubt it in order to destroy it. I doubt it to find the truth. Doubting the truth is the best way find and to to harden it. This is the scientific way. It is slow, but produces hard results. Of course I would be happy to find it to be true, but with this open question I cannot say that I can understand and believe it. Peter Am 29.10.2011 04:37, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Also, this was not a colossal disappointment to me because, hey, it did not blow up. As readers here know, I was seriously worried the damn thing might explode or irradiate the audience. I am relieved that nothing like that happened. It seemed to work at 1/2 of nameplate power. For a reactor they just finished building, that's fantastic. That is as good as 1 MW. Rossi is much braver than I am, or much more foolhardy, or both. As you hear in this video, I am not the only one who is worried about radiation and other dangers. So are the Italian authorities, as well they should be: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLAdGduQ50A Rossi says here that they issued some sort of conditional permit, with restrictions. That is the sort of thing you would expect for an experimental device. That sounds plausible. It is what I would expect a responsible government official to issue. I still think it was much too big a reactor, and I still think the test schedule was too fast. But evidently Rossi and the Italian officials share some of my concerns about safety and that's good. I predicted that a major company such as GE or Mitsubishi would want to get involved in such risky tests. Perhaps I was wrong and this was a big company. But if it was an up-and-coming profitable, risk-taking place such as Manutencoop, that may be the kind of thing they would get into. Back in the go-go late 1960s, companies such as Data General used to get involved in risky start-up technology. According to Soul of a New Machine there were rumors that Data General was involved in some actual physical risk and possibly criminal behavior such as burning down the buildings of rival companies. - Jed
[Vo]:NyTeknik Report
http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece 5.5 hours of self sustain mode after just 2 hours of startup time. Champaign anyone? Brad
Re: [Vo]:NyTeknik Report
2011/10/29 Ecat Builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com: 5.5 hours of self sustain mode after just 2 hours of startup time. Champaign anyone? Not yet. There was nothing new to October test presented expect that instead of one E-Cat, there was 107 of them. But measurements are extremely unreliable and we need to make assumption to trust Rossi's word. However, when the Customer comes out of the closet and gives us all the details of the contract, then it may be time for campaign. But I still think that it is highly improbable that the Customer is not someone close associate to Dr. Rossi. Perhaps I reward myself with pizza anyway! It looks that we need to wait for the Bologna University and Uppsala University for further information. –Jouni Ps. It is interesting to see what kind of article Peter Swensson will write. It hard for him to write anything, because there is not much to write.
[Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours!
Is there any reason why there was a 500kW generator running AND hooked up to the E-Cat through the WHOLE test, despite the E-Cat being switched into self-sustain mode? I gave it a tiny percent chance of being possible before, but now there's nothing but a clear scam left of it. Power for start-up (resistive coils that provided heat to the reaction chambers) was provided by the large and loud genset (was making all the noise) you see that is nearly as large as the small shipping container in which the 1 MW E-Cat plant was arranged. Once the reaction chambers got up to temperature, they were maintained by the heat produced by the reaction. I'm not sure why they kept the generator running after that, but I would guess it was for back-up or safety. I'm sure the engineers testing the system made sure what the power levels were at all times. Probably the biggest opening for skeptics will be the continually running genset that is probably rated for 500 kW (my guess), and appears to have been connected by cables to the E-Cat. Source: http://pesn.com/2011/10/28/9501940_1_MW_E-Cat_Test_Successful/ Anyone have an explanation? Thanks. Also, my first post here. -Larry
[Vo]:Martini and Rossi Vodka Martini - not on the rocks
Greetings Vortex, While is that aire of uncertainty about the generator and some otre issues, I will have a Martini Rossi Vodka Martini. I think that everything ...when told...will be fine. IF I were Rossi..I would only be concerned about my customer...and the AP. Which seems to be the case Respectfully, Ron Kita Doylestown, PA OhhhVodka Martini.note: not on the rocks.
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote: Jed, in your opinion, why does Rossi bother with these demoes, if they don't impress fence sitters, and he doesn't need new investors? It seems to clear to me why he did these demos. Different reasons: Oct. 6 was a demonstration. It proved beyond any question the device is real. Anyone who doubts that is a scientific illiterate, in my opinion. The proof is in the physical shape, configuration and the temperatures you can feel even without instruments. People who do not understand basic physics, and who look only at instrument readings instead of the experiment itself may convince themselves it proved nothing. That is because Rossi is sloppy with instruments. If he had included another K-type thermocouple and an SD card, he would have convinced most of these people as well. Oct. 28 was a customer acceptance trial. It sure looked like that to me. An engineer came and measured everything, and then noted it was fine except there are some leaking gaskets. Rossi allowed some of his friends to attend. He wined them and dined them, just for the fun of it. He said beforehand that the test would be closed and he meant it. By the way, he blamed *me*for that. Me personally, in a e-mail. That was after I told him he is sloppy and rude to his audience. He took offence and said 'just for that I will make the Oct. 28 test closed. No more demonstrations!' (Something like that.) I think he was looking around for an excuse to close the test, and he decided to blame me. I copied my message to him here, and it is pretty much what I wrote here: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3295498.ece/BINARY/Conclusion+Ecat+Oct+6+by+Jed+Rothwell+%28pdf%29 What it boils down to is that Rossi hates to reveal information. He likes to micromanage things. He wants you look over his shoulder at a computer and trust whatever he says. He really, really hates it when people criticize him. He pretends to be oh-so-tough I don't care what anyone thinks, but in fact he is a thin-skinned as a teenage kid. Also he is sloppy and he does not understand how to do a proper, convincing demonstration. Those attitudes are not productive for a scientist or engineer. We all have our limitations. What he is trying to do now is to make money selling individual reactors, and getting a contract with what I suspect is a mid-level, go-go Italian company, Manutencoop. That is actually a pretty good choice. But he could do a lot better. Some people I know have offered him huge sums of money. He ignores them or blows them away because they insist that he must allow real testing, he must hand over all of his secrets, and he must let them make the business decisions. Rossi resembles Patterson and many others in that he would take this technology to the grave with him, so that no one gets it, rather than lose control or do what other people want him to do. Regarding Manutencoop, someone should check the earlier spreadsheets to see where they came from. I don't think I have that software on this computer. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Rossi says here that they issued some sort of conditional permit, with restrictions. That is the sort of thing you would expect for an experimental device. That sounds plausible. It is what I would expect a responsible government official to issue. Jed, please. How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don’t know in bangladesh or in afrika, but here in Italy even a dentist with his ultra-low-power X-Ray device, he must have a “Nuclear Warning” panel. And Rossi said that his machine generate heat by gamma thermalization. Which mean MEGAWATTS of gamma. From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 4:37 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. I wrote: This test has been a colossal disappointment. I know Rossi pretty well by now, so I was expecting something like this. Given who Rossi is and how he thinks, this wasn't a colossal disappointment. Also, this was not a colossal disappointment to me because, hey, it did not blow up. As readers here know, I was seriously worried the damn thing might explode or irradiate the audience. I am relieved that nothing like that happened. It seemed to work at 1/2 of nameplate power. For a reactor they just finished building, that's fantastic. That is as good as 1 MW. Rossi is much braver than I am, or much more foolhardy, or both. As you hear in this video, I am not the only one who is worried about radiation and other dangers. So are the Italian authorities, as well they should be: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLAdGduQ50A Rossi says here that they issued some sort of conditional permit, with restrictions. That is the sort of thing you would expect for an experimental device. That sounds plausible. It is what I would expect a responsible government official to issue. I still think it was much too big a reactor, and I still think the test schedule was too fast. But evidently Rossi and the Italian officials share some of my concerns about safety and that's good. I predicted that a major company such as GE or Mitsubishi would want to get involved in such risky tests. Perhaps I was wrong and this was a big company. But if it was an up-and-coming profitable, risk-taking place such as Manutencoop, that may be the kind of thing they would get into. Back in the go-go late 1960s, companies such as Data General used to get involved in risky start-up technology. According to Soul of a New Machine there were rumors that Data General was involved in some actual physical risk and possibly criminal behavior such as burning down the buildings of rival companies. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours!
In the report they reported Noise: 50 dBA, which is below normal room loudness. How could they measure this, when the generator was running all time? Am 29.10.2011 13:01, schrieb Larry Ectsnte: Is there any reason why there was a 500kW generator running AND hooked up to the E-Cat through the WHOLE test, despite the E-Cat being switched into self-sustain mode? I gave it a tiny percent chance of being possible before, but now there's nothing but a clear scam left of it. Power for start-up (resistive coils that provided heat to the reaction chambers) was provided by the large and loud genset (was making all the noise) you see that is nearly as large as the small shipping container in which the 1 MW E-Cat plant was arranged. Once the reaction chambers got up to temperature, they were maintained by the heat produced by the reaction. I'm not sure why they kept the generator running after that, but I would guess it was for back-up or safety. I'm sure the engineers testing the system made sure what the power levels were at all times. Probably the biggest opening for skeptics will be the continually running genset that is probably rated for 500 kW (my guess), and appears to have been connected by cables to the E-Cat. Source: http://pesn.com/2011/10/28/9501940_1_MW_E-Cat_Test_Successful/ Anyone have an explanation? Thanks. Also, my first post here. -Larry
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
On Sat, 2011-10-29 at 15:20 +0200, Mattia Rizzi wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? Nuclear Warning Panel? This is still an unknown phenomenon, and the idea that it's nuclear is still speculation. It is not known to be a nuclear reactor. It might very well be some sort of zero-point energy device. The only explanations out there are just hypothesis -- not even theories. The only thing a government might be interested in are the regulations which would apply to creating steam in a large device. Craig
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
I take some words back. Rossi's calorimetry was not calibrated. Therefore we do not have any proper evidence for the performance. I guess that there was some excess heat, but nothing more accurate can be said. Right now we need to wait for the miracle that the mystery company steps forward or the confirmation from Unibo that they have E-Cat in lab. I think that that the failure with the test might tell that Rossi was concerned about the safety. But did not push E-Cats to the full power of 27 kW. —Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Can we make the assumption that since the temperature is well above 100 C inside the output piping heading toward the condensers that the steam must be of very high quality? It seems to me that the condensers are capable of totally condensing the vapor so that the pressure within this pipe must be very near atmospheric. I suspect that there is enough information hidden within the data to determine that the test was a major success. I direct these questions toward our resident experts in steam systems as they would know this immediately. Dave -Original Message- From: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 4:29 am Subject: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph Here is the temperature graphs with more accurate time stamps: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28230378/oct28demo.png And some simple calculations: Water flow rate: 675.6 l/h Temperature above 100°C: 12:34 nd of dataset: 18:24 Total time: 350 min (5h 50 min) Heating period: Started: 11:00 / Ended: 12:34 otal: 94 min Energy for heating metal mass: 400 MJ nergy for heating 1060 kg water: 375 MJ otal: 775 MJ / 137 kW Here we see that most of the electric input that was allegedly upplied to the device went for initial heating. Total water volume of 107 E-Cats was 2700 liters. If they can give proof that non vaporized water was just 5 kg, then est should be valid. Simple proof would be that if they measured the ater flow rate from the heat dissipator. This would be valid ndicator, because there was still plenty of empty water storage apacity inside E-Cats when water started boiling. Therefore only team escaped. However, if they did not measure the flow rate, then it is difficult o establish with certainty that all steam was really vaporized. owever I would think that used water trap was sufficient to collect on-vaporized water. At least within one order of magnitude. Therefore I would think that test appears to be valid and indeed E-Cat as producing at least 7 GJ energy with average power of 340 kW. This is the lower limit. Maximum power output was 12 GJ and 550 kW ower. Min and max possible power levels were determined how much ater was remaining stored inside E-Cats and pipes after the demo nded. As input was used almost fully for initial heating of the E-Cat array, otal COP was 400:(1/∞). I do not know the total imported heating nergy, but I assume here that it was below 770 MJ. And also I do not now how much input was remaining in alleged 350 min self-sustaining eriod. I assumed that it was zero. However, this test was by no means made by independed scientists. herefore I do not see how this could be a proof for successful alidation, because there is no way that hidden power sources are xcluded. Therefore, I do not expect mass media attention. This is xtremely sad situation, because I am tired of listening skepstics' ssertions considering the validity of the technology. However, contract that was signed stands that the energy was produced y the means of cold fusion reactions. Therefore if this is a hoax, hen it could be considered as a breach of contract, therefore ustomer has right to demand compensation if they have paid anything or the Dr. Rossi. Therefore, it seems to be valid technology. However we need some urther information from Bologna University considering long term erformance. –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:NyTeknik Report
I drank mine last evening. I would be willing to share another round with you and the others in the celebratory mood. Cheers! Dave -Original Message- From: Ecat Builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 6:39 am Subject: [Vo]:NyTeknik Report http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece 5.5 hours of self sustain mode after just 2 hours of startup time. Champaign nyone? Brad
[Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
If you declare to run a 1MW reactor and if you declare that generate heat with gamma radiation, then it's nuclear. **No matter what it is the true nature of the reaction**, but if you declare these things, then you cannot get an authorization without installing nuclear warinig panels. -Messaggio originale- From: Craig Haynie Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 3:45 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. On Sat, 2011-10-29 at 15:20 +0200, Mattia Rizzi wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? Nuclear Warning Panel? This is still an unknown phenomenon, and the idea that it's nuclear is still speculation. It is not known to be a nuclear reactor. It might very well be some sort of zero-point energy device. The only explanations out there are just hypothesis -- not even theories. The only thing a government might be interested in are the regulations which would apply to creating steam in a large device. Craig
Re: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours!
It is prudent to have the generator running for safety reasons as well as to supply the control system regulating the ECATs. I would find it strange if they deactivated the generator. Also, the net fuel used during the test is a direct indication of the amount of energy from that source. This should be easy to determine. Dave -Original Message- From: Larry Ectsnte ecat0...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 8:00 am Subject: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours! Is there any reason why there was a 500kW generator running AND hooked up to the E-Cat through the WHOLE test, despite the E-Cat being switched into self-sustain mode? I gave it a tiny percent chance of being possible before, but now there's nothing but a clear scam left of it. Power for start-up (resistive coils that provided heat to the reaction chambers) was provided by the large and loud genset (was making all the noise) you see that is nearly as large as the small shipping container in which the 1 MW E-Cat plant was arranged. Once the reaction chambers got up to temperature, they were maintained by the heat produced by the reaction. I'm not sure why they kept the generator running after that, but I would guess it was for back-up or safety. I'm sure the engineers testing the system made sure what the power levels were at all times. Probably the biggest opening for skeptics will be the continually running genset that is probably rated for 500 kW (my guess), and appears to have been connected by cables to the E-Cat. Source: http://pesn.com/2011/10/28/9501940_1_MW_E-Cat_Test_Successful/ Anyone have an explanation? Thanks. Also, my first post here. -Larry
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours!
It must make a big difference in noise and in heat production and in fuel consumption if the generator is running without load. It cannot go unnoticed if this was watched. Am 29.10.2011 16:22, schrieb David Roberson: It is prudent to have the generator running for safety reasons as well as to supply the control system regulating the ECATs. I would find it strange if they deactivated the generator. Also, the net fuel used during the test is a direct indication of the amount of energy from that source. This should be easy to determine. Dave -Original Message- From: Larry Ectsnte ecat0...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 8:00 am Subject: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours! Is there any reason why there was a 500kW generator running AND hooked up to the E-Cat through the WHOLE test, despite the E-Cat being switched into self-sustain mode? I gave it a tiny percent chance of being possible before, but now there's nothing but a clear scam left of it. Power for start-up (resistive coils that provided heat to the reaction chambers) was provided by the large and loud genset (was making all the noise) you see that is nearly as large as the small shipping container in which the 1 MW E-Cat plant was arranged. Once the reaction chambers got up to temperature, they were maintained by the heat produced by the reaction. I'm not sure why they kept the generator running after that, but I would guess it was for back-up or safety. I'm sure the engineers testing the system made sure what the power levels were at all times. Probably the biggest opening for skeptics will be the continually running genset that is probably rated for 500 kW (my guess), and appears to have been connected by cables to the E-Cat. Source: http://pesn.com/2011/10/28/9501940_1_MW_E-Cat_Test_Successful/ Anyone have an explanation? Thanks. Also, my first post here. -Larry
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com mailto:mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Unless you know the temperature and the pressure you can make no sensible statements as to whether it was steam or water, and again you are left with a roughly 1:7 possible range of power output (70kW if water, 490kW if steam). Forget analysis and go on faith (or lack of faith) in Rossi and the secret engineers, there is absolutely no useful data that can be derived from this demo without a lot more information being released. Sadly I suspect we have seen and end to public tests/demos or other useful info until late 2012 On 29 October 2011 15:15, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Can we make the assumption that since the temperature is well above 100 C inside the output piping heading toward the condensers that the steam must be of very high quality? It seems to me that the condensers are capable of totally condensing the vapor so that the pressure within this pipe must be very near atmospheric. I suspect that there is enough information hidden within the data to determine that the test was a major success. I direct these questions toward our resident experts in steam systems as they would know this immediately. Dave -Original Message- From: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 4:29 am Subject: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph Here is the temperature graphs with more accurate time stamps: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28230378/oct28demo.png And some simple calculations: Water flow rate: 675.6 l/h Temperature above 100°C: 12:34 End of dataset: 18:24 Total time: 350 min (5h 50 min) Heating period: Started: 11:00 / Ended: 12:34 Total: 94 min Energy for heating metal mass: 400 MJ Energy for heating 1060 kg water: 375 MJ Total: 775 MJ / 137 kW Here we see that most of the electric input that was allegedly supplied to the device went for initial heating. Total water volume of 107 E-Cats was 2700 liters. If they can give proof that non vaporized water was just 5 kg, then test should be valid. Simple proof would be that if they measured the water flow rate from the heat dissipator. This would be valid indicator, because there was still plenty of empty water storage capacity inside E-Cats when water started boiling. Therefore only steam escaped. However, if they did not measure the flow rate, then it is difficult to establish with certainty that all steam was really vaporized. However I would think that used water trap was sufficient to collect non-vaporized water. At least within one order of magnitude. Therefore I would think that test appears to be valid and indeed E-Cat was producing at least 7 GJ energy with average power of 340 kW. This is the lower limit. Maximum power output was 12 GJ and 550 kW power. Min and max possible power levels were determined how much water was remaining stored inside E-Cats and pipes after the demo ended. As input was used almost fully for initial heating of the E-Cat array, total COP was 400:(1/∞). I do not know the total imported heating energy, but I assume here that it was below 770 MJ. And also I do not know how much input was remaining in alleged 350 min self-sustaining period. I assumed that it was zero. However, this test was by no means made by independed scientists. Therefore I do not see how this could be a proof for successful validation, because there is no way that hidden power sources are excluded. Therefore, I do not expect mass media attention. This is extremely sad situation, because I am tired of listening skepstics' assertions considering the validity of the technology. However, contract that was signed stands that the energy was produced by the means of cold fusion reactions. Therefore if this is a hoax, then it could be considered as a breach of contract, therefore Customer has right to demand compensation if they have paid anything for the Dr. Rossi. Therefore, it seems to be valid technology. However we need some further information from Bologna University considering long term performance. –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: However, this test was by no means made by independed scientists. Well, supposedly it was. Rossi claims that was an independent engineer. We have only his word for that. I take some words back. Rossi's calorimetry was not calibrated. Therefore we do not have any proper evidence for the performance. I guess that there was some excess heat, but nothing more accurate can be said. In a test on this scale, with this kind of equipment, HVAC engineers never calibrate. That is not part of their standard operating procedure. Do you expect them to bring in another 1 MW reactor? This is a little like expecting a bridge inspector to build another bridge next to the one being certified. HVAC engineers use industrial equipment that has been certified accurate by a testing agency. They have to, or they will lose their licenses. They assume the equipment gives the right answer, and it does. Assuming the report TESTS TO PROOF THE LEONARDO 1 MW REACTOR . . . is not a fraudulent, and it was written by a genuine, licensed HVAC engineer, there is not the slightest doubt the machine produce massive amounts of anomalous energy. It is not even one tiny bit debatable. And you can rule out a hidden wire that was not monitored, or gasoline. This was an enclosed area. They would have been asphyxiated with carbon monoxide. If that is a licensed engineer, perhaps we can look up the name in some on-line registry. If he wrote a fraudulent report he can easily lose his license and his livelihood. I really doubt it is fraudulent. By the way, that title is ungrammatical. So are many other parts of the document. I preserved them in the voice input transcription. The document was not written by a native speaker of English. The mistakes make me think it is a genuine document, written by an Italian HVAC engineer. Many American HVAC engineers I have met are not good at writing documents either. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No matter of what his going on inside the reactor. Rossi made spectacular claims. He said that he generate heat by gamma emission. If you go to the NRC asking for an autohrization for a test with potential gamma emission, nobody release you authorization without installing some precautions, and Nuclear Warning panels. Here, in Italy too. 2011/10/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. - Jed
[Vo]:Fw: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours!
If I where running the test I would only want one point of power input and that from the genset - this means that the generator must remain running to power the condensor fans, pumps and control electrics. If the gen set where stopped but there was a sizable extension cord run out from the building there would still be questions. Its a no win situation but I think the most practical and easiest to monitor solution is the gen set supplying all the power for a stand alone test. John - Original Message - From: Larry Ectsnte To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 7:01 PM Subject: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours! Is there any reason why there was a 500kW generator running AND hooked up to the E-Cat through the WHOLE test, despite the E-Cat being switched into self-sustain mode? I gave it a tiny percent chance of being possible before, but now there's nothing but a clear scam left of it. Power for start-up (resistive coils that provided heat to the reaction chambers) was provided by the large and loud genset (was making all the noise) you see that is nearly as large as the small shipping container in which the 1 MW E-Cat plant was arranged. Once the reaction chambers got up to temperature, they were maintained by the heat produced by the reaction. I'm not sure why they kept the generator running after that, but I would guess it was for back-up or safety. I'm sure the engineers testing the system made sure what the power levels were at all times. Probably the biggest opening for skeptics will be the continually running genset that is probably rated for 500 kW (my guess), and appears to have been connected by cables to the E-Cat. Source: http://pesn.com/2011/10/28/9501940_1_MW_E-Cat_Test_Successful/ Anyone have an explanation? Thanks. Also, my first post here. -Larry
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: If you declare to run a 1MW reactor and if you declare that generate heat with gamma radiation, then it's nuclear. Is that what Rossi declared in his application for a permit? Did you read the application or the permit? If you did not, you do not know what he told the government, or what they told him. We have only his word for this. I have never caught him lying about technical engineering claims. I cannot evaluate his statements about gamma radiation and theory, but experts tell me they make no sense. His statements about his business are full of holes. So I am not confident that he really does have a permit. I doubt there is gamma radiation, but you never know. If he does have a permit, I suppose it would be the kind he described, for an experimental device. It sounds plausible. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Gamma rays may have a subjective definition.You can say that Gamma Rays are photons emitted by state transitions of the nucleus and X-Rays are photons that comes from electrons. X-Ray machines emits what would be otherwise consider gamma rays, around 140KeV. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium-99m The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-229m If you consider a gamma ray as photons originated by decays of excited decays of the nucleus, you can have wave lengths near the visible spectrum, 2011/10/29 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: No matter of what his going on inside the reactor. Rossi made spectacular claims. He said that he generate heat by gamma emission. Yes, he did. Experts think that is unlikely, but he did say that. But did he tell that to the government when he applied for a permit? Does he still believe that? I do not know. If you have read the application or the permit please tell us. Perhaps you can find it on-line in an Italian government web site. I would love to see that permit -- assuming it exists. If you go to the NRC asking for an autohrization for a test with potential gamma emission, nobody release you authorization without installing some precautions, and Nuclear Warning panels. That does seem likely. Perhaps that means he did not tell them there is potential gamma emissions. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
That does seem likely. Perhaps that means he did not tell them there is potential gamma emissions. And what you think Rossi said? “Well, we want an authorization for running a 1MW electric heater?” No comment. From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:02 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: No matter of what his going on inside the reactor. Rossi made spectacular claims. He said that he generate heat by gamma emission. Yes, he did. Experts think that is unlikely, but he did say that. But did he tell that to the government when he applied for a permit? Does he still believe that? I do not know. If you have read the application or the permit please tell us. Perhaps you can find it on-line in an Italian government web site. I would love to see that permit -- assuming it exists. If you go to the NRC asking for an autohrization for a test with potential gamma emission, nobody release you authorization without installing some precautions, and Nuclear Warning panels. That does seem likely. Perhaps that means he did not tell them there is potential gamma emissions. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light I think you need to read some physics books. Gamma rays have smaller wavelength then X-Rays and visible light. And a re more powerful and hazards. From: Daniel Rocha Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Gamma rays may have a subjective definition.You can say that Gamma Rays are photons emitted by state transitions of the nucleus and X-Rays are photons that comes from electrons. X-Ray machines emits what would be otherwise consider gamma rays, around 140KeV. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium-99m The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-229m If you consider a gamma ray as photons originated by decays of excited decays of the nucleus, you can have wave lengths near the visible spectrum, 2011/10/29 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
[Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Fw: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours!
And those kinds of gensets have watt-hour meters as well… -m From: John Harris [mailto:jfhar...@dodo.com.au] Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 7:33 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Fw: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours! If I where running the test I would only want one point of power input and that from the genset - this means that the generator must remain running to power the condensor fans, pumps and control electrics. If the gen set where stopped but there was a sizable extension cord run out from the building there would still be questions. Its a no win situation but I think the most practical and easiest to monitor solution is the gen set supplying all the power for a stand alone test. John
[Vo]:Rossi Re:Wired
A follow up article by Wired (UK) Mag: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/29/rossi-success They speculate it's DARPA. More likely SPAWAR. T
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
I just provided you with examples which are not the case. For example, the isomer 180m1 Ta is very stable, but when it decays, it emits at an energy of 75KeV, which is within the range of x-rays, that is, below 120KeV. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light I think you need to read some physics books. Gamma rays have smaller wavelength then X-Rays and visible light. And a re more powerful and hazards. *From:* Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:00 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Gamma rays may have a subjective definition.You can say that Gamma Rays are photons emitted by state transitions of the nucleus and X-Rays are photons that comes from electrons. X-Ray machines emits what would be otherwise consider gamma rays, around 140KeV. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium-99m The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-229m If you consider a gamma ray as photons originated by decays of excited decays of the nucleus, you can have wave lengths near the visible spectrum, 2011/10/29 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: That does seem likely. Perhaps that means he did not tell them there is potential gamma emissions. And what you think Rossi said? “Well, we want an authorization for running a 1MW electric heater?” I have no idea what he said. You are Italian. Why don't you try to find out? They have FOI laws in Italy, although the laws do not sound strong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_legislation#Italy - Jed
[Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
What are you talking about? You said that gamma rays had longest wavelength then visibile light (“The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light”, quoted). That’s absurd. Yeah, you can say that a 75keV is gamma as you can say that a 2Mhz Radiofrequncy is HIGH FREQUENCY, but truely it’s near the “medium-to-high” frequency limit (actually is medium frequency). If you say that a common visible light source it’s a gamma ray source, you are crazy. From: Daniel Rocha Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:17 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. I just provided you with examples which are not the case. For example, the isomer 180m1 Ta is very stable, but when it decays, it emits at an energy of 75KeV, which is within the range of x-rays, that is, below 120KeV. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light I think you need to read some physics books. Gamma rays have smaller wavelength then X-Rays and visible light. And a re more powerful and hazards. From: Daniel Rocha Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Gamma rays may have a subjective definition.You can say that Gamma Rays are photons emitted by state transitions of the nucleus and X-Rays are photons that comes from electrons. X-Ray machines emits what would be otherwise consider gamma rays, around 140KeV. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium-99m The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-229m If you consider a gamma ray as photons originated by decays of excited decays of the nucleus, you can have wave lengths near the visible spectrum, 2011/10/29 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Re:Wired
A photo of Col. Ing. Domenico Fioravanti: http://theeestory.com/posts/215391 T
[Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
You need to get a lawsuit against Rossi before asking it. From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:24 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: That does seem likely. Perhaps that means he did not tell them there is potential gamma emissions. And what you think Rossi said? “Well, we want an authorization for running a 1MW electric heater?” I have no idea what he said. You are Italian. Why don't you try to find out? They have FOI laws in Italy, although the laws do not sound strong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_information_legislation#Italy - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
You are picking up on small things. Just exchange wavelength to energy in the quoted part and all is right, I was only talking about photon energy, anyway. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com What are you talking about? You said that gamma rays had longest wavelength then visibile light (“The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light”, quoted). That’s absurd. Yeah, you can say that a 75keV is gamma as you can say that a 2Mhz Radiofrequncy is HIGH FREQUENCY, but truely it’s near the “medium-to-high” frequency limit (actually is medium frequency). If you say that a common visible light source it’s a gamma ray source, you are crazy. *From:* Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:17 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. I just provided you with examples which are not the case. For example, the isomer 180m1 Ta is very stable, but when it decays, it emits at an energy of 75KeV, which is within the range of x-rays, that is, below 120KeV. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light I think you need to read some physics books. Gamma rays have smaller wavelength then X-Rays and visible light. And a re more powerful and hazards. *From:* Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:00 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Gamma rays may have a subjective definition.You can say that Gamma Rays are photons emitted by state transitions of the nucleus and X-Rays are photons that comes from electrons. X-Ray machines emits what would be otherwise consider gamma rays, around 140KeV. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium-99m The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-229m If you consider a gamma ray as photons originated by decays of excited decays of the nucleus, you can have wave lengths near the visible spectrum, 2011/10/29 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
[Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
As noted, there is a photo of Fioravanti and some comments about him by Lewan here: http://theeestory.com/posts/215391 I asked Lewan: Do you know anything about this person? Do you think it is possible he is a fake who actually works for Rossi? He looks a little old for that. I do not seriously think this is fake. But if we had some proof that he really is an independent licensed engineer, that pretty much proves it is real. A licensed engineer would never take part in a fraud. He would lose his license and his livelihood. This is a widely publicized event and the authorities would find out about it. . . . Is there an on-line registry of licensed engineers in Italy? Can someone look this guy up? Someone who speaks Italian, please? Here is a registry in California, License Lookup (Verification) for California-Licensed Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, Geologists, and Geophysicists: http://www.pels.ca.gov/consumers/lic_lookup.shtml Here is one for Georgia: http://sos.georgia.gov/plb/ I found a registry in Georgia for people who are *not* registered HVAC engineers, that is, people convicted of practicing without a license, or who had their licenses revoked. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Oh, only a small error you think? Energy =~ 1/wavelength You said Energy =~ wavelength From: Daniel Rocha Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:36 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. You are picking up on small things. Just exchange wavelength to energy in the quoted part and all is right, I was only talking about photon energy, anyway. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com What are you talking about? You said that gamma rays had longest wavelength then visibile light (“The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light”, quoted). That’s absurd. Yeah, you can say that a 75keV is gamma as you can say that a 2Mhz Radiofrequncy is HIGH FREQUENCY, but truely it’s near the “medium-to-high” frequency limit (actually is medium frequency). If you say that a common visible light source it’s a gamma ray source, you are crazy. From: Daniel Rocha Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:17 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. I just provided you with examples which are not the case. For example, the isomer 180m1 Ta is very stable, but when it decays, it emits at an energy of 75KeV, which is within the range of x-rays, that is, below 120KeV. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light I think you need to read some physics books. Gamma rays have smaller wavelength then X-Rays and visible light. And a re more powerful and hazards. From: Daniel Rocha Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Gamma rays may have a subjective definition.You can say that Gamma Rays are photons emitted by state transitions of the nucleus and X-Rays are photons that comes from electrons. X-Ray machines emits what would be otherwise consider gamma rays, around 140KeV. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium-99m The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-229m If you consider a gamma ray as photons originated by decays of excited decays of the nucleus, you can have wave lengths near the visible spectrum, 2011/10/29 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Yes, a typo kind of error. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com Oh, only a small error you think? Energy =~ 1/wavelength You said Energy =~ wavelength *From:* Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:36 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. You are picking up on small things. Just exchange wavelength to energy in the quoted part and all is right, I was only talking about photon energy, anyway. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com What are you talking about? You said that gamma rays had longest wavelength then visibile light (“The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light”, quoted). That’s absurd. Yeah, you can say that a 75keV is gamma as you can say that a 2Mhz Radiofrequncy is HIGH FREQUENCY, but truely it’s near the “medium-to-high” frequency limit (actually is medium frequency). If you say that a common visible light source it’s a gamma ray source, you are crazy. *From:* Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:17 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. I just provided you with examples which are not the case. For example, the isomer 180m1 Ta is very stable, but when it decays, it emits at an energy of 75KeV, which is within the range of x-rays, that is, below 120KeV. 2011/10/29 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light I think you need to read some physics books. Gamma rays have smaller wavelength then X-Rays and visible light. And a re more powerful and hazards. *From:* Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:00 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Gamma rays may have a subjective definition.You can say that Gamma Rays are photons emitted by state transitions of the nucleus and X-Rays are photons that comes from electrons. X-Ray machines emits what would be otherwise consider gamma rays, around 140KeV. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium-99m The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-229m If you consider a gamma ray as photons originated by decays of excited decays of the nucleus, you can have wave lengths near the visible spectrum, 2011/10/29 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchini set up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: You need to get a lawsuit against Rossi before asking it. That's a shame. Okay, maybe you can find out if the people who signed the report are registered as licensed engineers. See the thread I just posted about Domenico Fioravanti. The U.S. now has on-line registries of licensed engineers. Maybe Italy also has them? If these people are licensed it is unlikely they would take part in a fraud. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: As noted, there is a photo of Fioravanti and some comments about him by Lewan here: http://theeestory.com/posts/215391 His picture here: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303681.ece will enlarge. Interesting cap. Is that a logo on the top? T
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
If it is his real name?! It is a Domenico Fioravanti hero sprtsman- kind of Mark Spitz or Michael Phelps of Italy. I will make a people search for the US. But very probably not the real name. On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: As noted, there is a photo of Fioravanti and some comments about him by Lewan here: http://theeestory.com/posts/215391 I asked Lewan: Do you know anything about this person? Do you think it is possible he is a fake who actually works for Rossi? He looks a little old for that. I do not seriously think this is fake. But if we had some proof that he really is an independent licensed engineer, that pretty much proves it is real. A licensed engineer would never take part in a fraud. He would lose his license and his livelihood. This is a widely publicized event and the authorities would find out about it. . . . Is there an on-line registry of licensed engineers in Italy? Can someone look this guy up? Someone who speaks Italian, please? Here is a registry in California, License Lookup (Verification) for California-Licensed Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, Geologists, and Geophysicists: http://www.pels.ca.gov/consumers/lic_lookup.shtml Here is one for Georgia: http://sos.georgia.gov/plb/ I found a registry in Georgia for people who are *not* registered HVAC engineers, that is, people convicted of practicing without a license, or who had their licenses revoked. - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: If it is his real name?! It is a Domenico Fioravanti hero sprtsman- kind of Mark Spitz or Michael Phelps of Italy. I will make a people search for the US. But very probably not the real name. Fioravanti.it are famous coach builders in Torino. Maybe he's Leonardo Fioravanti's brother? T
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I will make a people search for the US. He appears to be Italian. Why would he be registered in the U.S? I can look in a Japanese registry but he probably isn't there either. But very probably not the real name. What on earth makes you think that is not his real name?!? This is not a James Bond movie. Why would he use a fake name? I am sure that signing a technical document with a fake name, or claiming you are a registered engineer with a fake name, would also be serious violations of the laws. People do not seem to appreciate this, but as Samuel Florman points out, professional engineers are very careful not to violate laws and regulations. Not because they are highly moral people. Because they will lose their license if they are caught, and then they will have no way to make a living. They would throw away all that training and years of experience. I expect they would have difficulty finding any kind of job. A middle aged guy like Fioravanti would spend the rest of his working life sweeping floors or flipping burgers. Rossi would have to pay a huge bribe to get him to do that. A university scientist could fake a report more easily. He would just say he made a mistake. People don't read scientific papers anyway. I read 'em, and I find many real mistakes. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Re:Wired
I donÄt think Rossi will cooperate with the military. He said about Defkalion: Defkalion will manufacture units up to 20KW for different*non-military*applications within 2011 and Defkalion intends to use this technology in a*socially*responsible manner (http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg42068.html) But I may be wrong Haiko On 29.10.2011 17:14, Terry Blanton wrote: A follow up article by Wired (UK) Mag: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/29/rossi-success They speculate it's DARPA. More likely SPAWAR. T
[Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
I recall an old phrase attributed to Sherlock Holmes along the lines of “Once all of the probable answers have been proven wrong, then it must be the improbable”. Someone among the vortex will correct my phrase and that is a good thing. My wording is incorrect, but that is not the important issue. I have come up with a hypothesis as to what might be occurring within the ECAT core region design. Our resident experts in nuclear radiation have convinced me that there is a limit placed upon the energy of any gammas which are generated within the process due to shielding restraints. So I will take their advice and assume that they have an excellent point. Since we know that the ECAT really does generate excess energy, then this follows from that assumption. First, gammas are not directly generated by the energy mechanism within the core. Instead, beta particles are the product along with some inadvertent heat. Mr. Rossi has suggested this process earlier in his paper describing the initial work he shared with Dr. Focardi, http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Rossi-Focardi_paper.pdf. Now, these beta particles have a great deal of energy and can penetrate into the shield material where they deposit most of that energy as heat due to collisions with the shield. After they have slowed down somewhat, they are annihilated by combining with electrons within the shield. This process is the one that generates the gamma radiation. My understanding is that two gammas are the result of this action, each with an energy of 511 KeV. It so happens that Wikipedia’s article on shielding claims that 2.2 cm of lead is required to attenuate these to a safe level. That would make a lot of sense since Mr. Rossi originally uses 2 cm but later has decided to use 5 cm for his shield. The resulting gammas are converted to heat within the shield. This suggested process relieves us from the original concern about the dangerous levels of gamma radiation. Here we allow a low penetration particle to carry the dangerous high levels of heat and yet we still have a moderate flux of gammas to shield, explaining the need for the awkward lead anchor. I am not very familiar with beta decay so I request that someone within the vortex assist me in figuring out the required beta flux and then whether or not this solution will safely absorb the gamma rays released. Consider the following concept and comment as you will. I am not a nuclear physicist and am immune to being told that I am entirely out line with my unusual ideas. I do not have tenure and will not lose my position because I do not tow the proper path of well known processes. Does anyone know of what I will call a “Beta Battery”? This is a new idea to me although it seems simple and I would assume that it is already well understood within the world of physics. Here is how I presume it would function. First, you need a source of high energy beta particles which the ECAT seems to produce in large numbers. I would suggest one is emitted per nuclear reaction. Next, an electrical insulator is placed around the reaction chamber. This material needs to have a very large breakdown voltage yet passes the betas freely. The betas penetrate through the insulator and then slam into the shield material. After they slow down due to collisions within the shield, they become annihilated by a nearby electron. We find that a negative charge is left behind within the core region and an equal positive charge is stored within the shield. This charge distribution will continue to build up until the electric field is allowed to do one of the following. It can either become large enough to break down the insulator or we can supply a conductive path through our desired load and allow the charges to equalize. Herein lays the beauty of the process. I would assume that the effective open circuit voltage source would be approximately at the breakdown voltage of the insulator. The short circuit current available is defined by the number of nuclear reactions per second at one electron charge per reaction. I am planning to calculate this value as soon as I get the opportunity but was hoping that one of our group will save me the difficulty. We may have the conversion process that converts a portion of the ECAT output directly into DC power. It is time to determine exactly how much DC power is available for us to use. An additional concept arises as I explore the implications of the Beta Battery concept. Might this mechanism have another function associated with the operation of the ECAT core itself? I am confident that a significant DC current is generated by the beta decay-metal absorption process which I will quantify as time allows. This large current must return to the nickel-hydrogen mix even if there is no insulator available. It should appear as an electron current leaving the active beta generation regions
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
In the Piantelli-Focardi experiments they had either gamma radiation or thermal energy. They did never observe both together. This is what I have read in a paper, written by Focardi himself. They can however not have had some ten watts of gamma radiation, because they are still alive. ;-) Also Rossi said, the lead shield was calculated by Focardi. Also he said, they have a thicker shield in the fat cat and he explained the weight increase by this. The truth behind might be this: Focardi /thinks/ there could be dangerous gamma radiation under circumstances, but they never measured this and dont know. If so, then he has lied all time to us. If not so, then he has lied to the authorities to get the permissions. Peter Am 29.10.2011 17:08, schrieb Mattia Rizzi: The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light I think you need to read some physics books. Gamma rays have smaller wavelength then X-Rays and visible light. And a re more powerful and hazards. *From:* Daniel Rocha mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com *Sent:* Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:00 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit. Gamma rays may have a subjective definition.You can say that Gamma Rays are photons emitted by state transitions of the nucleus and X-Rays are photons that comes from electrons. X-Ray machines emits what would be otherwise consider gamma rays, around 140KeV. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technetium-99m The gamma ray can have a small wavelength such that it could almost fit in the range of visible light, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_thorium#Thorium-229m If you consider a gamma ray as photons originated by decays of excited decays of the nucleus, you can have wave lengths near the visible spectrum, 2011/10/29 Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de Am 29.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com mailto:mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: How can rossi had a permit if inside the nuclear site there isn’t even a SINGLE “Nuclear Warning” panel? I don't know. I have not seen his application or permit. You have a good point. It might be prudent to set up some signs. I am not sure where you would put them, or how far away people should stay. Bianchiniset up detectors and found nothing, so they did pay some attention to this issue. Still, as far as anyone knows, cold fusion never generates dangerous radiation. In contradiction to this, Rossi says the heat is made from soft gamma rays. Some 100 kW of gamma rays are dangerous. So it is a little silly to apply the safety standards of fission or plasma fusion to it. This is like saying that hydrogen airships can explode, so we should take extreme precautions when working with helium balloons. No it is like saying a helium Zeppelin is dangerous, because the inventor says, it is filled with hydrogen ;-) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: The truth behind might be this: Focardi /thinks/ there could be dangerous gamma radiation under circumstances, but they never measured this and dont know. If so, then he has lied all time to us. If not so, then he has lied to the authorities to get the permissions. Or they changed their minds and no longer believe there is gamma radiation. Or they have confirmed (somehow) that the gamma radiation is never dangerous. Or the Italian authorities decided for some reason not to worry about gamma rays, and did not order them to put up signs. Or there might be some other explanation that has not occurred to me. There are many possibilities here. Unless you have some inside information from Rossi and the Italian government, you have no reason to think anyone lied about anything. The truth might be this, or that, or an onion. Unless you have hard information I think you should not accuse people of lying. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Am 29.10.2011 18:25, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Or the Italian authorities decided for some reason not to worry about gamma rays, and did not order them to put up signs. This some reason could be some Euros or something like that. Mafia is everywhere ;-)
Re: [Vo]:Re: Hey, it didn't blow up! And by the way, there does seem to be a permit.
Am 29.10.2011 18:25, schrieb Jed Rothwell: I think you should not accuse people of lying. So dont do this too. And dont say it is ridiculous to think about radiation.
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
It seems that the information about registered professional italian engineers can be found here: http://www.tuttoingegnere.it/web/ITA/Registro-U/ricerca.asp_cvt.asp I do not speak italian, but I can read a little. It seems to me that not every italian engineer is registered there, it depends wheter the regional engineer offices makes the information available. I have searched for FIORAVANTI, and there is no Domenico Fioravanti registered. But he could be registered to one of those regional offices that do not provide the information. I also searched for Andrea Rossi. There are several registered engineers called Andrea Rossi. 2011/10/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I will make a people search for the US. He appears to be Italian. Why would he be registered in the U.S? I can look in a Japanese registry but he probably isn't there either. But very probably not the real name. What on earth makes you think that is not his real name?!? This is not a James Bond movie. Why would he use a fake name? I am sure that signing a technical document with a fake name, or claiming you are a registered engineer with a fake name, would also be serious violations of the laws. People do not seem to appreciate this, but as Samuel Florman points out, professional engineers are very careful not to violate laws and regulations. Not because they are highly moral people. Because they will lose their license if they are caught, and then they will have no way to make a living. They would throw away all that training and years of experience. I expect they would have difficulty finding any kind of job. A middle aged guy like Fioravanti would spend the rest of his working life sweeping floors or flipping burgers. Rossi would have to pay a huge bribe to get him to do that. A university scientist could fake a report more easily. He would just say he made a mistake. People don't read scientific papers anyway. I read 'em, and I find many real mistakes. - Jed
[Vo]:New Energy Times..hmmmmmmmm
Greetings Vortex: I went to http://www.newenergytimes.com no insight...did some one kick the pluggg. Grins, Ron Kita
Re: [Vo]:New Energy Times..hmmmmmmmm
What do you mean? Did something change there? I see nothing different... 2011/10/29 Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com Greetings Vortex: I went to http://www.newenergytimes.com no insight...did some one kick the pluggg. Grins, Ron Kita
Re: [Vo]:New Energy Times..hmmmmmmmm
You have to check his web log: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/ T
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
Rossi no-comments : Andrea Rossi October 29th, 2011 at 12:14 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516cpage=5#comment-105875 Dear Max: The Customer is of a category that usually maintains secret all they do. I do not know if and when they will want to make public statements and I am bound to a strict non disclosure agreement. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Rossi no-comments : Andrea Rossi October 29th, 2011 at 12:14 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516cpage=5#comment-105875 Dear Max: The Customer is of a category that usually maintains secret all they do. I do not know if and when they will want to make public statements and I am bound to a strict non disclosure agreement. A skeptic forum member elsewhere predicted those words almost verbatim. T
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
That register is incomplete cannot be trusted. It is stated on the search page and its the truth: i put many names of registered engineers I know and no one shows. I trust my friends much more than that database. Si precisa pertanto che il presente elenco non comprende necessariamente tutti gli ingegneri iscritti agli Ordini i.e. It should be noted, therefore, that this list does not necessarily include all engineers registered to Orders Also if the customer does not need a certification of the plant with legal value, for instance because Fioravanti works for the customer, there is no need for him to be on the register to do an internal report. An independent certification is usually paid by the producer (ie leonardo corp). Fioravanti was on behalf of the customer not on Rossi's, at least that was what was said. mic 2011/10/29 Bruno Santos besantos1...@gmail.com: It seems that the information about registered professional italian engineers can be found here: http://www.tuttoingegnere.it/web/ITA/Registro-U/ricerca.asp_cvt.asp I do not speak italian, but I can read a little. It seems to me that not every italian engineer is registered there, it depends wheter the regional engineer offices makes the information available. I have searched for FIORAVANTI, and there is no Domenico Fioravanti registered. But he could be registered to one of those regional offices that do not provide the information. I also searched for Andrea Rossi. There are several registered engineers called Andrea Rossi. 2011/10/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I will make a people search for the US. He appears to be Italian. Why would he be registered in the U.S? I can look in a Japanese registry but he probably isn't there either. But very probably not the real name. What on earth makes you think that is not his real name?!? This is not a James Bond movie. Why would he use a fake name? I am sure that signing a technical document with a fake name, or claiming you are a registered engineer with a fake name, would also be serious violations of the laws. People do not seem to appreciate this, but as Samuel Florman points out, professional engineers are very careful not to violate laws and regulations. Not because they are highly moral people. Because they will lose their license if they are caught, and then they will have no way to make a living. They would throw away all that training and years of experience. I expect they would have difficulty finding any kind of job. A middle aged guy like Fioravanti would spend the rest of his working life sweeping floors or flipping burgers. Rossi would have to pay a huge bribe to get him to do that. A university scientist could fake a report more easily. He would just say he made a mistake. People don't read scientific papers anyway. I read 'em, and I find many real mistakes. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
Area 51? 2011/10/29 Alan Fletcher a...@well.com Rossi no-comments : Andrea Rossi October 29th, 2011 at 12:14 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516cpage=5#comment-105875 Dear Max: The Customer is of a category that usually maintains secret all they do. I do not know if and when they will want to make public statements and I am bound to a strict non disclosure agreement. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
Am 29.10.2011 19:55, schrieb Daniel Rocha: Area 51? Cosa Nostra? Mafia! ;-) 2011/10/29 Alan Fletcher a...@well.com mailto:a...@well.com Rossi no-comments : Andrea Rossi October 29th, 2011 at 12:14 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516cpage=5#comment-105875 http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516cpage=5#comment-105875 Dear Max: The Customer is of a category that usually maintains secret all they do. I do not know if and when they will want to make public statements and I am bound to a strict non disclosure agreement. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
Exxon
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
I don't think the Mafia has written non-disclosure agreements. But when things go wrong, they are known for putting out contracts Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: Am 29.10.2011 19:55, schrieb Daniel Rocha: Area 51? Cosa Nostra? Mafia! ;-) 2011/10/29 Alan Fletcher a...@well.com mailto:a...@well.com Rossi no-comments : Andrea Rossi October 29th, 2011 at 12:14 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516cpage=5#comment-105875 http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=516cpage=5#comment-105875 Dear Max: The Customer is of a category that usually maintains secret all they do. I do not know if and when they will want to make public statements and I am bound to a strict non disclosure agreement. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: The Customer is of a category that usually maintains secret all they do. . . . A skeptic forum member elsewhere predicted those words almost verbatim. Not hard to predict. Rossi said that before the test. It may not be true, but that is what he claimed all along. - Jed
[Vo]:Oct 6 Heat Exchanger Secondary INPUT thermocouple placement
Extract of a conversation with an anonymous source : - Original Message - By the way, You guys have not even begun to look at the issues with the thermocouple measuring the secondary input temperature. That error works against Rossi. (Hint: The connector on the end of the hose is a quick connect.) - http://lenr.qumbu.com/111010_pics/111010_3_crop.jpg (crop of your photo) Hmmm ... I don't see a problem with that. Even if it's not thermally connected to the eCat it's just a short piece of copper tube. On the inner side it's in direct contact with 25C (or whatever) water at 600 L/hour. On the outer side it's connected to ambient air at 30C. I don't see much scope for error. --- The thermal-couple was attached to the the part of the connector you slide back to unlock the quick connect. That part of the connector does not come in direct contact with the water. at best, it touches a part that touches a part that comes in contact with the water. In other words, the INPUT thermocouple reads a temperature 25C, which is SOMEWHERE between the actual water temperature and ambient (30 C). If the reading is too HIGH it will give a SMALLER delta-T than the actual, and will under-estimate the power.
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
On 11-10-29 12:06 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I will make a people search for the US. He appears to be Italian. Why would he be registered in the U.S? Registered as what? I've worked as an engineer in the U.S. and I never was registered and certainly wasn't licensed. I never met a licensed engineer in the States. (Canada's different that way, as are lots of countries, including, I suppose, Italy.) I can look in a Japanese registry but he probably isn't there either. But very probably not the real name. What on earth makes you think that is not his real name?!? This is not a James Bond movie. Why would he use a fake name? I am sure that signing a technical document with a fake name, or claiming you are a registered engineer with a fake name, would also be serious violations of the laws. People do not seem to appreciate this, but as Samuel Florman points out, professional engineers are very careful not to violate laws and regulations. Not because they are highly moral people. Because they will lose their license if they are caught, and then they will have no way to make a living. They would throw away all that training and years of experience. I expect they would have difficulty finding any kind of job. A middle aged guy like Fioravanti would spend the rest of his working life sweeping floors or flipping burgers. Rossi would have to pay a huge bribe to get him to do that. A university scientist could fake a report more easily. He would just say he made a mistake. People don't read scientific papers anyway. I read 'em, and I find many real mistakes. - Jed
[Vo]:- no blank run without hydrogen to test the instruments and heat losses: Mary Yugo: Rich Murray 2011.10.29
- no blank run without hydrogen to test the instruments and heat losses: Mary Yugo: Rich Murray 2011.10.29 er, I'm still a pragmatic skeptic re 470 KW Rossi claim... Rich Murray - no blank run without hydrogen to test the instruments and heat losses Other things to investigate: whether only a small amount of water is vaporized whether still hot water returns to the input of the reactor buildup of corrosion (boiler scale) in reactor amount of high T heat stored within the cores and shielding amount and effectiveness of heat insulation around cores accuracy of electric energy input measures role of water leaks role of electric leaks (shorts) in creating hot spots in cores accurate recorded measures of each of all of the cores air temperature in the metal shipping container changes of electric power input changes in water flow rate possible vapor blocks, bubble masses, and separated water slugs possible preheating of cores from known and unknown previous runs possible inadvertent combination of many effects that somehow create apparent excess heat anomaly failure of thermisters to give accurate measures of temperature (water, steam, water-steam mixtures) higher than measured high pressure zones within the complex plumbing many microphones to record vibrations and sounds at many locations very hot mineral-water complexes like gels that pass through the heat exchanger without losing much heat, so the water is not smoothly mixed and homogenous gamma and beta sensors that monitor many cores via small straight pipes to the outside elements placed securely in cores that would reveal gamma and beta emissions by easily measured transmutations, measured after extraction from the cores, via the small straight pipes while a little smoke is probably proof of fire, sometimes a lot of smoke is proof of smoke http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/28/energy-catalzyer-extraordinary-scams-require-extraordinary-claims/#comments maryyugo says: October 28, 2011 at 21:53 I think Rossi, so far, is a “jolly good show”. Thirteen experiments reported, most open to selected scientists and reporters, and so far, absolutely nothing conclusive either way! That is quite an accomplishment. The latest weirdness is a totally unnecessary increase in both electrical input and supposed power output to, supposedly, as of a few hours ago, 470 kW. Still: - no proper calibration of instruments - no blank run without hydrogen to test the instruments and heat losses - no independent testing done entirely apart from Rossi and his colleagues - no run long enough to exclude all possible sources of stored and externally supplied energy So thus far, nobody know whether or not Rossi has a technology or just some bizarre combination of showmanship and sleight of hand of some sort. And of course, a perfectly excellent and determinative test could have been done with a 10 kW or even a 1 kW machine had it run long enough and had the test been independent of Rossi and his associates. The megawatt power level of the current test only adds to difficulties in measurement and calibration and provides further opportunities for Rossi to mislead and bamboozle the observers. After all, you can hide almost anything in a shipping container-sized device. And then, the experiment only ran a few hours -- as usual with Rossi. Here we have a nuclear powered device and it can only run a few hours? Or is it so important for everyone to rush home, get some sleep, have dinner, WHAT? What could be more important than a very long test? I am shocked that all the reporters and scientists who have seen Rossi’s demos so far, except Mr. Krivit, have not asked a single difficult or critical question of Rossi. It’s unconscionable and incompetent. The other current mystery is the identity of Rossi’s client. If it’s a large and famous company or government lab and it approves the test, that would be encouraging. If it’s not or if it’s an organization related to Rossi, then anything it says is suspect. What fun! Reply
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Jed, I meant with calibration, that there was not measured the amount of steam. Amount of steam correlates with temperature, but this correlation was not established. Therefore we do not have any means to know, how much steam is 104.5°C. However I take back that I took back my words. I was considered that because we have very high velocity steam, liquid water may not enter to the water trap. However, I forgot that if we have very high velocity steam, then we cannot have much liquid water. And if we have slow velocity steam, then we have much more liquid water entering into water trap than 5 kg. Therefore I would think that at least 300 kW was produced. Probably more than 400 kW. Therefore Test was success. I hope that we get some additional information from the Customer soon. And more importantly, I want to hear from Ferrari and Levi, that they have got money from Rossi and they have access to the E-Cat. I also expect soon demonstration in Uppsala. —Jouni PS. Jed, perhaps Rossi listened your criticism considering the safety and he doubled the amount of E-Cats in order to go into 1 MW safely. 10 kW per E-Cat is much more safe than 30 kW per E-Cat.
[Vo]:Document: Tests to proof the Leonardo 1 MW reactor
Document downloaded from here: http://db.tt/wu4OLbgk Corrected version. A few confusing spelling errors have been corrected from the original. TESTS TO PROOF THE LEONARDO 1 MW REACTOR WORKING BY MEANS OF LOW-ENERGY NUCLEAR REACTIONS – PROTOCOL PREPARED BY THE PARTIES The test has been performed by the parties: For the customer (omitted – confidential): colonel Engineer Domenico Fioravanti For the Seller: Leonardo Corporation: Dr. Andrea Rossi Expert Scientist for the measurement of radiations outside the reactors: Dr. David Bianchini (University of Bologna) Date of the test: October 28, 2011 Time of the test from 9.00 through 23.00 TEST PROTOCOL The test has the goal of comparing the Energy output of the reactor made as in the description of the patent n. WO 2009/ 125444 A1 against the energy consumption of the same. To reach this goal we have measured the energy inputs the reactor by means of the following instrumentation: [Blank] Such instrumentation has been certified as follows: [Blank] The energy output, or production has been measured by means of the integral of the delta T of the water coolant of the reactor in function of the water flow plus the vaporization heat of the water turned into steam. To be conservative, all the water which arrived liquid at the output of the reactor has been collected and its weight has been subtracted from the amount of water that has been considered vaporized. The water flow rate has been measured by a scaled reservoir and a chronograph all the times that the Customer’s consultant has deemed opportune. This system has been chosen by the Customer. The temperatures of the water before and after the reactor have been measured by means of the following instrumentation, previously tested by the Customer: Testo data logger #177 – T3 Testo thermocouples # Testo Alta Temperatura 0613 1212 – AG 1st The positioning of the thermocouples has been chosen by the customer As for the radiations we have measured: THE RADIATIONS EMITTED INTO THE ENVIRONMENT FROM THE REACTOR The results are reported in attachment 1: no radiation above the background have been registered The hydrogen tank is been weighed by means of the scale before and after the loading of the hydrogen in the reactor. Before the loading the weight measured is: 13,604.5 kg After the loading the weight measured is: 13,602.8 kg The hydrogen tank pressure has been measured before and after the load: Hydrogen pressure before the load: 55 bar Hydrogen pressure after the load: 55 bar Average temperature of the water at the input 18.3°C Average temperature of the steam: 104.5°C (The diagrams of the temperatures is in the attachment 2) Energy consumed from 12.30 (when the reactor has been turned on) and 18.00 (when the reactor has been turned off: wh 66 kWh (sixty six) Total energy production from 12.30 through 18.00: 2,635.033 kWh. Water flow rate: l/h 675.6 Water not vaporize total: 5 Water vaporized: total 3716 Total energy produced: (steam kg × 625.5) plus (100 - input water T) × kg of water heated × 1.16 = kWh 2635 Ratio between energy producing energy consumed (COP): 2635:0 Description of test installation: The 1 MW energy catalyzer (E-Cat) is an assembly of 170 modules of 10 kW each, connected in parallel. Each module is made by three submodules of 3.3 kW each, put in parallel. All modules are set in a container made by steel. The assemblies commanded by a control panel supplied with the necessary software and all the necessary electronic components, whose description has been detailed in the sale agreement. All the components result to be set as guaranteed from a pulmonary check. The dimensions of the container are: Length 5 m Width 2.6 m Height 2.6 m Weight declared from the manufacturer 10 tonns Noise emissions below 50 dB(A) at 5 m from the plant Waste emissions: none Gas or smoke emissions: none Liquid emissions: none The water is supplied by the reactors by means of 2 pumps with a flow rate capacity of 3,000 l/h regulated by valve at the do flow rate of ~350 L per hour Type of pumps: DAB jet 82 M The reactors have been served by a RFG, whose data are reported in the sale agreement description. The energy consumed by the RFG system has been calculated in the calculation of the COP. The heat made by the reactor has been dissipated in a steam condenser and the water came from the condensation of the heat has been recycled to the reactor. Additional water has been added from the grid to compensate the water evaporated from the reservoir, by means of floating valves, to maintain constant the water level of the reservoir. The modules have been divided into rows each with an independent pump, so that each pump has a flow rate of 750 kg per hour, for a total of 1,500 kg per hour. The dissipators have been designed by Leonardo Corporation, and are made by 2 air-water heat
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
I am of the contrarian opinion; for an American, this is the very best of news. If the customer is a military organization (the US Navy), the security apparatus of the associated country (the US) is now available in all its varied and potent forms both known and clandestine to protect the Rossi technology. Recall from the recent past how the United States Air Force protected the F-117 Stealth Fighter and B-2 Stealth Bomber technology with a cunning decade’s long campaign of disinformation and obfuscation: Spy and stealth planes--many with bizarre, bat-shaped wings, others with triangular silhouettes that inspire otherworldly designs in the minds of the general public--have long been cultivated by the military: the defense intelligence agency and the CIA. UFO sightings and lore and their official denials, feed rumors that the government isn't telling us about alien ships. The CIA estimates that over half of the UFOs reported from the '50s through the '60s were U-2 and SR-71 spy planes. At the time, the Air Force misled the public and the media to protect these Cold War programs; it's possible the government's responses to current sightings of classified craft--whether manned or remotely operated--are equally evasive. The result is an ongoing source of UFO reports and conspiracy theories. The armadas of secret Earth-built Air Force craft that have likely have lit up 911 switchboards over the years remain largely unknown in the minds and lives of the general public. Cold fusion is the ideal framework for a similar campaign of disinformation as a cover for advance Ni-H powered weapons systems. Rossi will quietly fade from the scene; while the US government paints anyone that believes that cold fusion is real as a kook, not only to protect defense secrets but to maintain the economic continuity of the fossil fuel economy that has served the US so well from disruptive turbulence. In a few decades, when the oil is much depleted and the natural gas from US shale deposits are petered out, cold fusion will emerge from the shadows of the skunk-works defense labs to continue the hegemony of the US and its oil producing allies. For all of us who own substantial holdings of oil and gas stocks, this is good news…the best. We can anticipate continued lucrative distributions of dividends into the indeterminate future with no prospect of disruptions or diminishment. On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: The Customer is of a category that usually maintains secret all they do. . . . A skeptic forum member elsewhere predicted those words almost verbatim. Not hard to predict. Rossi said that before the test. It may not be true, but that is what he claimed all along. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: I never met a licensed engineer in the States. You have online. (waving) T
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: Jed, I meant with calibration, that there was not measured the amount of steam. Amount of steam correlates with temperature, but this correlation was not established. Therefore we do not have any means to know, how much steam is 104.5°C. However I take back that I took back my words. I was considered that because we have very high velocity steam, liquid water may not enter to the water trap. . . . I see what you mean. However, even if there were only hot pressurized water at 104.5°C, input energy was only 66 kWh so there must have been massive anomalous heat. I wish we had much more technical information, and I wish we had proof this was steam and not steam and hot water, but honestly, these issues are not important. The only thing we must establish to be sure this is real are bona fides of Ing. Fioravanti. As long as he is not some friend of Rossi's pretending to be an engineer, then I am sure the test was legitimate. I doubt that he is. Michele Comitini pointed out that Fioravanti does not have to be registered: Also if the customer does not need a certification of the plant with legal value, for instance because Fioravanti works for the customer, there is no need for him to be on the register to do an internal report. I am not sure what you mean. Perhaps you mean that Fioravanti would not need a license as long as he is not working to install or certify a boiler for a customer. I assume he is licensed because he is referred to in the document as Engineer and Ing. I assume that is similar to the English P.E. (professional engineer) which people append to the name. That means you have a license. It is like MD (medical doctor). You would get into legal trouble if you say you are PE or MD but you are not. Assuming he is a PE then he would get into trouble for signing a fraudulent report under any circumstances, for any purpose, whether it is internal for his own company or for a customer. In the U.S. he would get in trouble. Just because you are a PE, I do not know if that means you are registered anywhere, in Italy. I do not know how that works. I believe all U.S. PE and MDs are registered, and probably they are all on line these days. Retired MDs are not. Their license to practice is lapsed. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Document: Tests to proof the Leonardo 1 MW reactor
What is an RFG? As in: The reactors have been served by a RFG . . . There are some minor corrections to this report coming from Rossi. I will upload a new version later. They are: 1. The weight of the hydrogen bottle is in grams, not kilograms. 2. The indicated flow rate of the pumps at the end of the report should be 350 kg/h, not 750 kg/h, giving a total of 700 kg/h, not 1,500 kg/h, for the two pumps. (The flow rate of 675.6 l/h in the first part of the report is correct.) - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
I would suggest that someone over at Rossi's blog ask Rossi for information on Domenico Fiorvanati. State the request simply and politely. Mention the fact that many sincere individuals are looking information, documentation, links... anything that would help verify the professional credentials of Fiorvanati. It probably wouldn't hurt to mention to Rossi the fact that by allowing the pubic to at least verify the professional credentials of Fiorvanati, it ought to go a long way in vindicating Rossi's CF claims. But then, perhaps Rossi could care less what the general public thinks of his credentials. Actually, I wouldn't stop with Rossi. I'd widen the circle. Ask ANYONE who has had close ties to Rossi if they know who Fiorvanati is. And if they don't know ask them if they might know the name of someone who might know. It might be worth it to contact Manutencoop's personnel department - ask them if they have employed an engineer (or at least an employee) who goes by the name of Fiorvanati, and does he work for them. And if he doesn't work for their company, ask them if they might know who Fiovanati is and who he might work for. Branch out! This is how networking works. It works splendidly well in sales profession. ;-) Eventually, I suspect we will ascertain Fiovanati's professional status. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:- no blank run without hydrogen to test the instruments and heat losses: Mary Yugo: Rich Murray 2011.10.29
From Mr. Murray, ... er, I'm still a pragmatic skeptic re 470 KW Rossi claim... Hello Rich, Lately, I've noticed that you have repeatedly prefaced your posts with claims that not only are you a skeptic, but that you are a pragmatic skeptic. I keep wondering who you really are trying to convince of this claim. Is it really for our benefit? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Registration requirements are governed by the state in the US. Generally, if you are registered in one state, you can obtain comity in another by application with that state. Georgia also offers comity with other countries. I work for Atkins North America, a division of the UK firm ( atkinsglobal.com ). We do have engineers who come from the UK and enjoy comity here in GA. Which designs and certifications require the stamp and seal of a PE also varies from state to state. Generally, if the design involves the safety of the public, it must be sealed by a PE. In some states, all projects funded by state funds require the oversight of a PE. I'm sure that registration requirements are quite different in other countries since there is such a variance between states here. T
Re: [Vo]:Document: Tests to proof the Leonardo 1 MW reactor
I was assuming RFG was the Radio Frequency Generator Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: What is an RFG? As in: The reactors have been served by a RFG . . . There are some minor corrections to this report coming from Rossi. I will upload a new version later. They are: 1. The weight of the hydrogen bottle is in grams, not kilograms. 2. The indicated flow rate of the pumps at the end of the report should be 350 kg/h, not 750 kg/h, giving a total of 700 kg/h, not 1,500 kg/h, for the two pumps. (The flow rate of 675.6 l/h in the first part of the report is correct.) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: I'm sure that registration requirements are quite different in other countries since there is such a variance between states here. To summarize, even if we find no trace of Fioravanti on line, he may well be a P.E. If we can track him down, that proves it is a legit test. If we cannot track him down, it is still probably legit. He sure looks like an engineer. Lewan says he talks like one. This is just my gut feeling, but here is why I think he must be an engineer: The report ends with a remark that there are some leaks in gaskets. Here we have one of the most momentous tests in the history of technology, right up there with Volta's first test of an electric battery or the first flight at Kitty Hawk, and this guy is talking about leaking gaskets. Only an engineer would write that! In case you are wondering, the first recorded words of the Wright brothers after the momentous flights of Dec. 17, 1903 were: 1. Telling a local 16-year-old kid that a bucket of eggs in their shack were all laid by one scrawny chicken. He went off to see the chicken. The boys loved a practical joke. 2. Debating whether to burn the airplane in a bonfire, or go to the trouble and expense of packing it up and shipping it back to Dayton. (It had been smashed to pieces and could not be used for more tests, and they often burned aircraft at the end of the season.) Hey, they were engineers. What did you expect? - Jed
[Vo]:Amazon Alien Filmed?
And now for something entirely different: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/22/alien-video-claims-to-be-_n_1025849.html Whadya think? Grey pumpkin? T
RE: [Vo]:Amazon Alien Filmed?
Terry sez: And now for something entirely different: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/22/alien-video-claims-to-be- _n_1025849.html Whadya think? Grey pumpkin? Yup! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:- no blank run without hydrogen to test the instruments and heat losses: Mary Yugo: Rich Murray 2011.10.29
Regarding the title of this thread, it is ridiculous. HVAC engineers do not do blank runs when they certify 1 MW boiler performance. That's not how they work. As I said, that is like expecting a bridge inspector to construct another bridge next to the one he is inspecting, in order to compare the two. Do you think an aircraft inspector drags in a blank Boeing 747 to compare it? When they inspect an airplane and find a problem, do you think they deliberately crash it to confirm it really is a problem? Scientists do blanks. Industrial engineers do not. The do not need to prove the thing does not work under some circumstances, but only that it is working now. This is not skeptical thinking. It is ignorant. Learn something about how people do things in industry. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:- no blank run without hydrogen to test the instruments and heat losses: Mary Yugo: Rich Murray 2011.10.29
Hi Steven Vincent Johnson, Yes, I use pragmatic skepticism to define my role in my own mind, namely, common sense applied to details that can be comprehended by a scientific layman, which since December, 1996 has been a successful strategy for finding flaws in CF research -- pathological skeptic does not apply to me, who wants CF to be real via evidence, and who is hardly hidebound by dogmas of any kind on any level, heartily convinced by experience that reality is immediately infinitely creative and subtle... I am content to let my Achilles take over the fight: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/28/energy-catalzyer-extraordinary-scams-require-extraordinary-claims/#comments Joshua Cude says: October 29, 2011 at 22:39 In addition to Maryyugo’s reservations about this show, I can add that even if the data, as presented, is accepted, it does not constitute evidence for excess heat, let alone heat from nuclear reactions: 1. No evidence is presented that the water is all converted to steam. Rossi says he collects the unconverted water, but gives no explanation how. The steam is at 105 C or so, but the internal pressure is almost certain to be significantly elevated by even a small amount of steam formation. Moreover, given the size of the pipes, a full conversion to steam is at 650 kg/hour is not plausible. The only thing the data show definitively is that the water is heated to 105 C, and that corresponds to a total output heat of about 370 kWh instead of the 2635 kWh claimed. 2. The total input heat is not given. The input heat from 12:30 to 18:00 is given as 66 kWh (during the “self-sustained” period). But according to the spreadsheet, the heat was turned on at 10:30. The report does not indicate the power level, but it would only have to be about 150 kW (for 2 hours) to account for the total output energy as calculated in (1). Since there was a 500 kW diesel generator on site, this seems perfectly feasible, and it is also consistent with the power level Rossi said would be used to ignite the reaction. Finally, we don’t know if the device was still retaining heat from earlier runs. After all, the water was heated from 15 to 30 degrees at time zero.
[Vo]:Rossi Rides into Sunset
Andrea Rossi October 29th, 2011 at 12:07 PM Dear Devis, Of course I will remember always all the friends who have encouraged the efforts of my team and mine. I thank all with all my heart, and this is dedicated also to all the Friends who have sent all these comments, so heart warming, to which I can’t answer, being again under pressure. A big, big hug to all. Andrea Rossi So, what did he gain? Did he get the big bucks? What did he sell? The future of mankind? To whom did he sell it? Big oil? Military? Sounds like a good bye. I guess he rides away with his satchel full of gold. Will he give the funds to childhood cancer like he promised? Or was that all a shill? And what of the rest of the world? Will Defkalion rise like the Phoenix with a variation on the Rossi Reactor? Stay tuned. T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Rides into Sunset : answered a few questions from the saddle
James Bowery October 29th, 2011 at 11:40 AM What was the pressure at the output thermocouple? Why the electric power generator (genset) has not been turned off during the self sustained mode? Andrea Rossi October 29th, 2011 at 11:46 AM Dear James Bowery: max 20 mm in water column was the pressure at the output of the thermocouple. The genset has been not turned off because we had to give energy to all the auxiliary motors: water pumps and electric fans of the heat dissipators. Of course the energy consumed from these utilities has not to be put in the energy balance of the reactors, because in an industrial application the energy is not dissipated, is utilized, and the pumps to move the water are necessary in this particular kind of test. In any case, all this is described in the draft report on http://db.tt/wu4OLbgk Warm Regards, A.R. - - - - - - Either he's lying, or 104 C steam was superheated -- and 100% Dry. Probably a few of the eCats were under-powered, so their input water overflowed --- giving the liquid water that was collected at the outlet.
Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sat, 29 Oct 2011 12:10:37 -0400 (EDT): Hi David, [snip] I suggest you take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betavoltaics Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
Thanks Robin, I took a look at that link and see that such a battery does in fact exist. I may have used a term that is not common in the industry when I referred to beta + decay as just beta decay, but I think most people understood what I intended. My reference was the Wikipedia article on beta decay where the positron version is clearly mentioned. I guess I would have invented that darn battery if it had not already been done before. I am not surprised because as I said, it was very simple. I am trying to get a handle on the amount of power available from this source and my preliminary estimate is a few watts. This figure should be determined more accurately as I verify the calculations. The positron battery technique may result in a simple way to obtain charging power for a larger battery startup system using an ECAT that runs self sustaining. That would allow a remote application of a space heater type of ECAT if the power output/power input ratio can be significantly improved. I will be surprised if this ratio does not improve dramatically with research. The possibilities are endless. There are additional reasons for having a moderate insulator between the active core-heater combination and the heat sink. If the energy is in fact emitted as energetic positrons as Rossi and group claim then this will allow for better output/input control and gain. I wish we had a good proven theory as to how this beast functions. It would make life much simpler. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 10:07 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag? In reply to David Roberson's message of Sat, 29 Oct 2011 12:10:37 -0400 (EDT): i David, snip] suggest you take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betavoltaics egards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours!
That the E-Cat operates without much noise is good news, and expected considering only a muffled boiling noise is expected. Maybe they took a sound reading from inside the reactor using a noise canceling mic and/or closed the container doors. Maybe it was just an educated guess of little importance, compared to the other aspects of the test they were evaluating. - Brad In the report they reported Noise: 50 dBA, which is below normal room loudness. How could they measure this, when the generator was running all time?
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:500kW generator was also running during the 5 hours!
Maybe the generator was just idle, this is why it wasn`t making too much noise. One of these days, I went near the electric generator of my office`s new building and it was extremely noisy when it was on full power. Most of the time it is inaudible... 2011/10/30 ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com That the E-Cat operates without much noise is good news, and expected considering only a muffled boiling noise is expected. Maybe they took a sound reading from inside the reactor using a noise canceling mic and/or closed the container doors. Maybe it was just an educated guess of little importance, compared to the other aspects of the test they were evaluating. - Brad In the report they reported Noise: 50 dBA, which is below normal room loudness. How could they measure this, when the generator was running all time?
[Vo]:Video: validation of New Energy Source from nickel -hydrogen reaction by Rowan University in 2008.
Validation of New Energy Source from nickel -hydrogen reaction by Rowan University in 2008. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfjOIoPwolg
