I expect this report is exaggerated or confused. NASA is not charged with
authority to devise a program to make cold fusion the main energy source
for the world. That is far beyond their mandate. Heck, they don't even have
rockets anymore.
I wonder if it was Rossi who claimed that NASA is doing
From Harry:
From the top of the Ny Teknik feb. 23rd article: ”You just have
to embrace a new technology that might solve the energy problems
of mankind, at least until it can be rejected,” Swedish professor
Sven Kullander said in a scientific discussion on the Italian
‘energy catalyzer’.
Damon, Nasa wants a cheap power source in order to deliver cargo to the
orbit. And power for ion engines that enable fast deep space missions to the
asteroids, Mars and beyond.
E-Cat is perfect power source for aeroplane, but it can be applied also for
launch vehicle.
On Jul 13, 2011 2:14 PM,
I was not judging Rossi's current claims against his past misdeeds. However, I
am sorry to say this, but Rossi's current conduct is another matter. His
aggressive responses to unfavorable criticism, his growing list of inconsistent
statements and his highly dubious demonstrations have
This is all conjecture, but I thought that it may be a fun exercise.
IF Defkalion's statements are true (that's a big IF):
Defkalion is running ahead of Rossi on this. In one of the
post-press-announcement interviews, Defkalion's rep is asked if Rossi is
building e-Cats for their 1 MW plant.
Everything would be OK, if and when Defkalion would show us a small army of
Hyperions, working at their site. They told me on the forum that they have
already tested combinations of max 6 devices in the kW range and of 115
devices in the MW range. Xanthi is not so far from my house (Cluj) but
Just consider this sentence...
After the initial meeting with NASA, Defkalion GT and Ampenergo will sit
down and develop a joint program for the introduction of the E-Cat as a main
energy source to the world.
and break it down...
After the initial meeting with NASA,
Defkalion GT and
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2011-07-12 22:21, Jones Beene wrote:
Akira - yes this conversation did happen; but it is/was NOT supposed to be
public. The subject line is also misleading.
Celani (via Passerini) should not have posted it.
... or at least to get their speech in synch :)
2011/7/13 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
I...I think Rossi and the people at Defkalion should *sit down and review
the designs*, and they should publish accurate information in agreement
from both sides.
- Jed
On 2011-07-13 17:44, Michele Comitini wrote:
Interesting... the page has been removed from 22passi!
From other comments in that website it looks like there has been a
misunderstanding between Passerini and Celani regarding the permission
to publicly post that email, so the blogpost got
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
What the heck are you talking about?!? Of course it delivers more than you
put into it. This is a peculiar thing to say.
What a pecular thing so say. I've read closely the Levi, Kullander and
Essen, and Levan reports
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
[KRIVIT] Professors Sven Kullander, retired from Uppsala University, and
Hanno Essen, with the Royal Institute of Technology, endorsed Rossi's
claimed technology in a news story on Feb. 23,
Hold on boys. Essen and Kullander didn't do any testing. They were passive
observers. They brought no equipment. They also reported a lot of things
told to them by Rossi as fact, of which they had no direct evidence.
Check out their report. They report the power input as 500 Watts in their
energy
I think these old boy were given to believe they were among critically
objective scientists giving a warm welcome with nothing to hide. I think
they all had a little to much trust in each other's obvectivity and the
whole think snowballed into what we have today. I don't disclude myself from
the
Carl fixed the problem with the Ultra5 server which runs this list but
he offered the following:
[EskimoNorthUsers] Bad news
From: Carl c...@eskimo.net
To: eskimonorthus...@yahoogroups.com
More bad news... someone levied all of Eskimo's bank accounts dry, in
fact it even over
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/26943/
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1106.5301: Optimizing And Controlling Functions Of
Complex Networks By Manipulating Rich-Club Connections
:-)
Regards,
Mauro
Jed,
NASA previously looked at Black Light Power as a possible
propulsion source and I think it is this possibility that still has them
interested in these hydrogen plasmas.
I remain of the opinion that there is an initial ZPE reaction that occurs when
hydrogen reactions are
Damon Craig wrote:
Check out their report. They report the power input as 500 Watts in
their energy calculations. Why?
That is incorrect. The report says:
The electric heater was switched on at 10:25, and the meter reading was
1.5
amperes corresponding to 330 watts for the heating including
From Harry:
I was not judging Rossi's current claims against his past misdeeds.
However, I am sorry to say this, but Rossi's current conduct is another
matter. His aggressive responses to unfavorable criticism, his growing
list of inconsistent statements and his highly dubious demonstrations
At 04:01 AM 7/13/2011, Harry Veeder wrote:
If we apply the logic of the block box to the eCat then it is
possible to argue it is a hoax even if the output is only dry steam.
This is based on the assumption that it is theoretically possible to
use a 600-700 watt resistance heater to
Hmm, I wonder if Krivit was really telling the truth and he played
tricks on Rossi. On his website, Rossi said that there wasn't an
output of 4KW:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=497cpage=9#comment-47686
Dear Marcia Pires:
***4000 kW is a power we never reached. The speed in
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
In many discussions of this, it was assumed that the only issue was steam
quality. If we were to assume very wet steam, say 20% by weight, we would
then be able to infer excess heat, assuming complete boiling
With the stop/go mailing, I'm not sure if this is old news : Krivit
has added a link from his main blog page to
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/AndreaRossiAndHisEnergy-Catalyzer.shtml
(Latest entry July 5) where he seems to be collecting all the
Rossi-specific stuff.
Technically speaking I don't believe there is such a thing as too much trust.
We are born to trust, although depending on our personal life experiences we
may lose our capacity to trust in different areas of our lives. On the other
hand, vanity and ambition may blind us to the abuse of our
Trust but verify.
T
Terry sez:
Trust but verify.
The phrase, of course, has a tendency to contradict its original
intent. However, I appreciate the meaning (and spirit) in which it is
given.
The phrase was one of the few things Ronald Reagan sed while he was in
office that made any sense to me.
Humans are often
The 15 seconds when Rossi waved the misty end of the black hose
against the black sweater were the Waterloo of this mistaken claim...
Any signs that his associates are starting to face this unwelcome reality?
http://pesn.com/2011/07/14/9501869_EV-World_Interviews_Andrea_Rossi/
Terry Blanton wrote:
Trust but verify.
I don't get that. If you have verified, you don't need to trust. It
makes more sense to say:
Don't trust; verify.
OR
Why bother trusting if you can verify?
This was with regard to weapons reductions in the Reagan era. By that
time, both sides had
From Rich:
The 15 seconds when Rossi waved the misty end of the black hose
against the black sweater were the Waterloo of this mistaken claim...
Any signs that his associates are starting to face this unwelcome reality?
The waterloo of [Rossi's] mistaken claim? Heavens, Rich, how many
more
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Nevertheless, this report from Kullander and Essen could be interpreted
quite in line with what Krivit is claiming:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Terry Blanton wrote:
Trust but verify.
I don't get that. If you have verified, you don't need to trust.
Yes, well, I think Reagan was being amusing. At least, that's how *I*
intended it.
T
I examined the video frame by frame for the 15 frames that were part
of the 15 seconds that showed the end of the black hose -- several
frames clearly show the water mist expanding as a cone directly from
the end of the hose -- thus no proof that invisible steam made it to
the end of the 3 m hose.
Looks like there's a good chance the Webb telescope will be scratched:
http://www.futura-sciences.com/fr/news/t/astronautique/d/le-futur-telescope-spatial-james-webb-pourrait-etre-abandonne_31339/#xtor=RSS-19
Headline: The future James Webb space telescope could be abandoned.
The rest of the
From Richard:
I examined the video frame by frame for the 15 frames
that were part of the 15 seconds that showed the end
of the black hose -- several frames clearly show the
water mist expanding as a cone directly from the end
of the hose -- thus no proof that invisible steam made
it to the
Steven wrote:
For now, I think I'll reserve a definitive conclusion on the Rossi matter.
As Richard Feynman said, there are some who are very uncomfortable not making a
decision...
Some individuals tend to operate in a binary mode, and are constantly changing
their 'decision' as
new data comes
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
As Richard Feynman said, there are some who are very uncomfortable not making
a decision...
Some individuals tend to operate in a binary mode, and are constantly
changing their 'decision' as
new data comes in. I,
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Wed, 13 Jul 2011 07:24:19 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Another tidbit, but from part 1 of 2...
The post-reaction analysis shows a copper isotope ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 1.6,
while the natural
occurrence show a ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 2.24 which is a statistically
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Wed, 13 Jul 2011 07:33:15 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
The tubercles are essential in order for the reaction rate to reach levels
high enough for the
implied total power output per volume or mass to reach orders of magnitude
kW/kg - this level of
power density is
Hi
Can someone help me to derive the spring constant between water molecules
based on the bulk modulus of water? It seems simple but i just
can't figure it out.
How does spring constant between water molecules in
F = - k x
relate to the bulk modulus
K = - V dp / dV
k = spring constant
F = force
But Robin, how about the 2nd half of that excerpt, where the optimal grain-size
is more than a
micrometer, not nanometers... I would think that a 'tubercle', which is likely
composed of numerous
'grains', would be larger than its constituent parts (i.e. a grain)!
Rossi tells that he worked
At 12:50 PM 7/14/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
In many discussions of this, it was assumed that the only issue was
steam quality. If we were to assume very wet steam, say 20% by
weight,
I don't know what it is about this, but Jed seems to have lost his
ability to read and understand Of course, it could be me, I
suppose. Aren't we always the last to know?
At 02:45 PM 7/14/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Nevertheless, this report from Kullander and
At 02:49 PM 7/14/2011, Rich Murray wrote:
The 15 seconds when Rossi waved the misty end of the black hose
against the black sweater were the Waterloo of this mistaken claim...
Any signs that his associates are starting to face this unwelcome reality?
Rich, you are making an assumption, that a
People,
I had an idea. Any nuclear process releases neutrinos. In LENR, even
in small experiments, it seems there is a neutrino flux comparable or
bigger the Sun irradiates the Earth. (200billion neutrinos/cm^2). So,
why not making an LENR experiment close to a big neutrino detector,
like the
In reply to mix...@bigpond.com's message of Fri, 15 Jul 2011 08:22:30 +1000:
Hi,
Oops! Having never heard of tubercles, I just assumed it was a language problem!
It was - mine! :(
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Wed, 13 Jul 2011 07:33:15 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
The tubercles are essential in
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:08:15 +0300:
Hi,
[snip]
Everything would be OK, if and when Defkalion would show us a small army of
Hyperions, working at their site. They told me on the forum that they have
already tested combinations of max 6 devices in the kW range and
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:02:26 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
But Robin, how about the 2nd half of that excerpt, where the optimal
grain-size is more than a
micrometer, not nanometers... I would think that a 'tubercle', which is likely
composed of numerous
'grains', would be
No, because I cannot travel from reasons of health, more precisely lack of
it
Peter
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 7:20 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:08:15 +0300:
Hi,
[snip]
Everything would be OK, if and when Defkalion would show us a small
Abd, you are correct of course. It was 3am when I wrote that post in a vain
effort to persuade myself that Rossi demonstrations are too ambiguous arrive at
any sort of conclusion. However, unlike you, I do think the evidence is
sufficient to make a judgement about the veracity of Rossi claims.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
Semantics. Yes, steam can be much wetter than 20%, particularly after
condenstation, under marginal conditions it could approach 100%. This,
however, wouldn't be called steam. It would be called hot water.
Yes,
51 matches
Mail list logo
