Jeff Driscoll wrote:
Mark Iverson wrote:
If the instrument is reading 10g/m^3, then ALL the inlet water is being
converted to vapor, and the
This is wrong.
I wrote in a another thread that the Relative Humidity detector is
pegged at 100% for any saturated steam with a quality
On Jun 25, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Mark Iverson wrote:
Still no denial Horace!
Now you're messin' with us...
:-)
I hope you got some stock in Rossi's company, cuz the parr-teee is
gonna be at your house, and it
ain't gonna be cheap! :-)
-Mark
Good for yet another chuckle! 8^)
When I read
Jeff,
thermometer was calibrated and unlike common belief, boiling point was not
100 degrees, but 99.7°C ± 0.1.
The fact is that steam must be dry if it's temperature is above 100.1 °C ±
0.1 at atmospheric pressure.
—Jouni
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
First, here is my conclusion based on the methodology and resoning below:
If certain conditions are present, one can reduce this to a mass-in, mass
out problem, and you
don't need to measure the volume of steam
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 1:50 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Jeff,
thermometer was calibrated and unlike common belief, boiling point was not
100 degrees, but 99.7°C ± 0.1.
The fact is that steam must be dry if it's temperature is above 100.1 °C ±
0.1 at atmospheric
E-Cat can be fabricated on all possible levels, because we do not know very
little relevant details about the setup. However waterflow is not probable
because Mats Lewan collected condensated steam into blue bucket. He would
probably have seen if there had flown some 12 liters of water into small
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 8:58 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Joshua Cude's message of Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:20:48 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
I was talking about running it above boiling, but way below the level
Horace wrote:
When I read vortex I often have to wonder who is messing with whom! 8^)
Yep, that's half the fun!!
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net]
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 11:16 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cat
My dear Friends,
First of all, it is my great pleasure to announce
you that I have published the complete list of
Problem Solving Rules on my Blog Ego Out.
The most important Super Rule- only for the
most advanced problem solvers is also included.
Please use the Rules first of all for LENR
and
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/6/25 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com
wrote:
2011/6/25 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com:
Well it might be if the reactor
Josh:
First, thanks for at least looking at the methodology and then trying to
critique it w/o resorting
to personal attacks...
part of this exercise was to see who can at least think out of the box and
consider some PROPOSED
line of reasoning.
Second, and this really irks the hell out of me
Frank X. Roarty
Original Message
Subject: Vortex-l@Eskimo.com
From: Frank Roarty froarty...@comcast.net
To: kbar42...@mypacks.net
CC:
Mill's theory remains badly presented to the public - Jan Naudts gave him the
right answer in 2005 and the right way to present the hydrino
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
You stated:
But steam at 100C and 1 atmosphere pressure has a density of 0.6 kg /
m^3. It can't be 10 g/m^3.
I thought it would have been clear by how I worded it, but apparently not,
so let me be perfectly
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:09 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
The perfect regulation is a much more reliable indication that the fluid is
at the boiling point than any evidence you can get from a probe that
measures temperature and pressure.
Since the probe is what indicates the
Jeff,
thermometer was calibrated and unlike common belief, boiling point was not
100 degrees, but 99.7°C ± 0.1.
So then you are relying on Rossi's calibration being accurate to
within +/- .5 C and believing Rossi who comes across as a fraud
(hiding the evidence down the drain, terrible
I worked in a power plant for 20 years and have seen a lot of steam. I agree
with Jed it looks like low temperature steam to me. It is hard to see as it
comes out of the line and it does condense into the slight mist that you see
against the black background.
I am not surprised to see some
Hi
This is a mail in the same series as before: stresses in gas.
Admit that it is not obvious what is B and what is N in this case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenet-Serret_formulas
Imagine the animated spring on the right to be longer and curved so that the
end is attached to the beginning.
If visible, it is no longer steam -- the H2O vapor has given up its
heat of vaporization and become nano to micro droplets.
So, we have no evidence about how much steam exits directly from the
Rossi device into the hose.
The fact that the outflow is always 100 C indicates presence of water
mist
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 8:58 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Joshua Cude's message of Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:20:48 -0500:
Hi,
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
I hope you got some stock in Rossi's company, cuz the parr-teee is gonna be
at your house, and it
ain't gonna be cheap! :-)
You like Alaska in the winter?
T
From Daniel:
My wife is a kind of medium. I don't believe that.
But, anyway, she doesn't know English and cannot read what I am
writing here, so, just ask Witch Doctor to tell her his true
name and I will email it to you
Steven, as a confirmation.
Let me repeat.
The purpose of the Witch
On Jun 26, 2011 5:55 PM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote:
So, we have no evidence about how much steam exits directly from the
Rossi device into the hose.
Actually i heard that Mats Lewan crudely estimated that about half of the
water was evaporated. Remaining half was overflowed or
He's gonna have his 1GigaWatt Rossi-Heffner prototype fired up and not only
heating the house, but
the local lake! Bring your bathing suits!
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2011 8:06 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject:
If that's the case, then it might explain why Galantini specifies 100.1
(99.7+0.4 C).
Last time I looked, the specs on the combined Testo temp-hum probe were:
accuracy: +-0.4C
resolution:+-0.1C
So he was taking into consideration the worst case scenario when making his
measurements...
Mark, thanks for providing error margins. I think that this means that the
accuracy when measuring delta-T, is ±0.1°C, but it's accuracy without
calibration is ±0.4°C. Therefore thermometer was calibrated that boiling
point was 99.7°C. Henceforth thermometer measures accurately.
To add one
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com wrote:
Why would you divide the energy to vaporize 1 g of water (starting at
10 C) by the energy to heat it from 10 C to 100 C (liquid)? Seems
random to me.
Because those are the two extremes of a situation that results in
I don't know what to make of this -- I think I'll wait 'til someones report
back:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Frequently_Asked_Questions:_PlasmERG%27s_Plasmi
c_Transition_Process_Engine
I assume all of the demos/tests that we've seen since Jan have been at Rossi's
building/office and
not at the University of Bologna? What's the elevation/altitude at that
location?
-Mark
Josh:
Your off by a factor of 1000 on the saturation mass of water vapor at 100.1 and
1 atm...
So I'll assume that your calc was in kg/m^3, and you forgot to convert to
grams...
NIST has a really nice website for calculating physical properties here:
http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/fluid/
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Josh:
Your off by a factor of 1000 on the saturation mass of water vapor at 100.1
and 1 atm...
So I'll assume that your calc was in kg/m^3, and you forgot to convert to
grams...
NIST has a really nice website for
From the Defkalion press conference.
Rossi answers the question why in Greece? in english
http://www.youtube.com/user/jum401#p/a/u/2/wa4Q2XnlznU
Harry
Yep, I couldn't find it either! You're number of 0.6kg was correct.
When you wrote it as 0.6kg I just assumed it was in the g/m^3 as I had used...
I didn't see the
'k'... my apologies!
I did read your post completely, and I'll reread it more carefully...
Are we in agreement with this
Frank X. Roarty
Original Message
Subject: Inert gas engine
From: Frank Roarty froarty...@comcast.net
To: hoyt.stea...@gmail.com
CC:
Hoyt,
The inert gas engine was developed from the Papp engine. For those such as
myself that believe all these anomalies from Black Light
It is more efficient since there is no energy loss in heating on rotational
energies as there are with diatomic gases. The only problem is ofcourse to
heat the gas. More of the heating energy goes into gas expansion in noble
gases compared to diatomic gases. I assume that good Sterling engines use
I found this sequence of illustrations videos for a liquid at only 5C,
showing the characteristic 2 phase fluid vapor/liquid with different
qualities. Notice that while the pressure is low, the expected mist
just happen for higher pressure and higher steam quality.
*higher speed and higher steam quality
More at chapter 12:
http://www.wlv.com/products/databook/db3/data/db3ch12.pdf
The content table is here:
http://www.wlv.com/products/databook/db3/DataBookIII.pdf
But I cannot open the chapter from there, I found them either by
google or changing the number manually.
Joshua wtote on Saturday, June 25, 2011 11:49 PM:
You've lost me here. Say the device is calibrated to measure this. How do you
deduce that from 10
g/m^3 that all the water is converted to vapor? If the device measures 10
g/m^3, but the steam is
coming out at 0.1 m^3/s, then clearly, the steam
Fascinating stuff ... and more evidence that amateurs shouldn't diddle with
steam!
Ch 1 has photos from videos
Ch 17 has equations and charts
I loved the names for some of the evaporator flow regions (inside the eCat) :
Single-phase liquid | Bubbly | Plug | Slug | Wavy | Annular
Different
Air affects steam quality too!
What I am not sure about is how this affects the heat of vapourisation.
If the amount of air mixed in with the steam is not known, could this lead to
an over estimate or an under estimate of the heat of vapourisation?
Anyway, don't you think a humidity probe would
Actually, advanced Stirling engines tend to use highly pressurized Helium,
which is the lightest monatomic element. GM spent $200 million on developing a
really well-performing Stirling engine that could potentially burn anything
combustible, and with great efficiency, but they wanted more
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Joshua wtote on Saturday, June 25, 2011 11:49 PM:
Okay, due to my randomly selecting an unrealisticly low flow-rate of
10g/sec, I can see where it
could be confusing. Let me try to clear things up...
10 g/s is
42 matches
Mail list logo
