- Original Nachricht
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 05.10.2011 20:20
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
The correct number was a 40°C temperature difference which indicates a
nominal 130 kW. See:
- Original Nachricht
Von: peter.heck...@arcor.de
An: jounivalko...@gmail.com
Datum: 06.10.2011 08:48
Betreff: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
Yes without doubt this would be discovered sooner or later.
It was my thought, that nobody had the idea to test
- Original Nachricht
Von: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com
An: Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de
Datum: 06.10.2011 04:15
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo
It is not about evidence of cold fusion. There are plenty of evidence
for anomalous
On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote:
Hello,
To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter.
There is also Raymond Zreick from Focus.it:
http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick
Thing is, though, that we don't know if both him and Passerini will be
allowed to
On 2011-10-06 07:34, Andrea Selva wrote:
Does it mean the universities or just a couple of professors that go in
theirr spare time ? Doesn't it sound like the announcement that the test
have would be in a lab of unviversity of Bologna ?
I think they will be there to see the test, but they
On 2011-10-04 19:18, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Hello group,
More from New Energy Times on this matter:
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/06/nasa-wont-confirm-relationship-with-rossi-2/
Cheers,
S.A.
Hello,
I became aware that I repeatedly sent mails directly to list members.
This was done in error.
When Im at work I can only use a rather poor HTML online mail program.
When I hit Reply on a vortex message then usually the reply is automatically
sent to the list.
In some cases it happened,
Harry
On 2011-10-06 11:59, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
I dont know why this happens, might be there is an error in the reply-adress?
I will try to prevent this.
Make sure that the only e-mail address in the To: header is
vortex-l@eskimo.com and that there are no headers other than that (Cc:,
On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote:
Hello,
To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter.
It appears that Twitter is giving problems to some users at the moment.
This is an alternate link to follow 22passi on it:
http://yfrog.com/user/22passi/profile
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 9:44 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
Wonder what the essence of Jobs will do next.
iBook of Jobs, part deux?
T
You should have used hveeder007. :-)
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:05 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Harry
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2011-10-06 01:11, Michele Comitini wrote:
Hello,
To stay informed follow 22passi (Daniele Passerini thank you) on Twitter.
It appears that Twitter is giving problems to some users at the moment. This
is an
see (listen to) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu_iwdjf1gI
However a good test could be more convincing
i believe in proofs
Peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
From Akira,
Hello group,
More from New Energy Times on this matter:
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/06/nasa-wont-confirm-
relationship-with-rossi-2/
Last comment states:
The E-Cat story has 26 days left to play out.
play out?
Well, Mr. Rossi has his blog, and so does Mr.
Terry,
I guess she is scientific journalist
https://mobile.twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121895218462203904
mic
Il giorno 06/ott/2011 13:25, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com ha
scritto:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2011-10-06 01:11,
I was running on the assumption that she was next door at Rossi Brothers'
Tires, getting new tires for her Alfa Romeo.
A scientific journalist, on the other hand, is an even better back-story.
I'm calling her E-Kitten.
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 14:57:19 +0200
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala +
It seems the young lady is IRENE ZREICK the wife
of the journalist RAYMOND ZREICK from FOCUS.it
Her profile here
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/06/e-cat-cold-fusion
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:44 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
From Terry
Steve Jobs passes:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/us/obit-steve-jobs/index.html?iref=BN1hpt=hp_
t1
Wonder what the essence of Jobs will do next.
http://patentlyapple.com/ is
Rossi is giving a tour of the 1 MW eLion. Obviously it has not shipped yet.
Maybe he has another in the US for the real October Demonstration?
T
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems the young lady is IRENE ZREICK the wife
of the journalist RAYMOND ZREICK from FOCUS.it
Her profile here
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-10/06/e-cat-cold-fusion
Mr. Krivit is quoted.
Final paragraphs:
There is some irony at work here: we apparently have a number of mainstream
scientists backing an outlandish project which investors are putting money
into,
while the most vocal critic
Hello group,
While we're waiting for more information about the E-Cat test currently
being performed in Bologna (it looks like we will have to wait at least
until tomorrow for publicly available detailed information), Daniele
Passerini just posted this previously unpublished report on an
On 2011-10-06 16:11, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/10/test-e-cat-7-luglio-2011.html
According to Passerini (in one of his comments), there were Fat-Cat
modules ready for use back in June, but they haven't been shown to
Krivit during his visit in Bologna for a
The test was done in July, not June.
And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h intead of
kWh.
And that can't do a correct integral (the formula of integral are wrong).
That's italy :(
-Messaggio originale-
From: Akira Shirakawa
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011
This was my number one hypothesis why Rossi did not let Krivit to see
working E-Cat, because he had already perfected the self-sustaining E-Cat
back then. He announced self-sustaining model in June 20th. Therefore there
was not point of showing for Krivit an obsolete model, therefore electricity
That part was written by a Greek not an Italian, LOL. But that is probably a
typo given that it is unusual to write power as kwh/h and that the original
text was in greek.
2011/10/6 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com
The test was done in July, not June.
And we have a university professor that
Stremmenson can speak italian quite good.
The unit of measure “kWh/h” for energy was used only by Rossicompany.
It’s not a typo. Was used many many times by Rossi and you can see that it’s
typed everywhere, from photos to text inside the report.
From: Daniel Rocha
Sent: Thursday, October 06,
Ah, Stremmenson was an professor from University of Bologna, Italy.
From: Daniel Rocha
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 5:32 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: July 7th E-Cat test report
That part was written by a Greek not an Italian, LOL. But that is probably a
typo given that
I've been reading Passerini's tweets, and it looks like this eCat has
been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now.
https://twitter.com/#!/22passi
Craig
Nice one, will start following 22passi
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.comwrote:
I've been reading Passerini's tweets, and it looks like this eCat has
been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now.
https://twitter.com/#!/22passi
Craig
Is there a long report for July 7th?
I've noticed that the times on the graph do not match Bianchini's report at
all. It appears that the graph may have been clipped during its stability
phase. If it had leveled for a long period (during phase change) and then
rose again, that would be
I think that there has not been any serious arguments presented on heat
after death discussion. Frankly it was just silly episode in discussion,
where some who violently are opposing Rossi are just inventing ad hoc
explantions when we are presenting them real data that is in direct
contradiction
At 08:10 AM 10/6/2011, Mattia Rizzi wrote:
And we have a university professor that measure Energy with Kwh/h
intead of kWh.
per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilowatt_hour, that's most likely
kWh/Heat -- but doesn't explain the Kw instead of kW
http://www.google.com/search?num=100hl=ensafe=offbiw=1152bih=746q=%22kwh%2Fh%22oq=%22kwh%2Fh%22aq=faqi=g-v2aql=gs_sm=egs_upl=2926l4028l0l4521l2l2l0l0l0l0l270l443l0.1.1l2l0
2011/10/6 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com
Stremmenson can speak italian quite good.
The unit of measure “kWh/h” for
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
We can only hope and pray that there is more power observed on the secondary
than is supplied to the primary during peak energy application.
If gains are only observed during heat after death, we will be arguing
the results ad infinitum.
http://twitter.com/#%21/22passi[You have to paste the text into the
Google translate box. It will not autotranslate the page from the URL.]
22passi Daniel Passerini
And here she is! Krivit of the infamous coffee
machine! :)) Yfrog.com/nt3upzj
1 hour ago
22passi Daniel Passerini
Radio
At 09:19 AM 10/6/2011, Craig Haynie wrote:
I've been reading Passerini's
tweets, and it looks like this eCat has
been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now.
https://twitter.com/#!/22passi
I make it not quite an HOUR :
22passi Daniele Passerini
the E-Cat goes on in autosustaining
22passi http://twitter.com/#!/22passi Daniele Passerini
The E-Cat module keeps working in self-sustained mode
45 minutes ago http://twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121983529868468224
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
At 09:19 AM 10/6/2011, Craig Haynie wrote:
As I mentioned here some weeks ago several Italian researchers use this
kWh/h notation. It means kilowatts. I think kilowatt hours of heat would
be something with a dot operator, not a slash.
This would upset my sixth-grade math teacher.
There are subtle differences between US and European
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
I make it not quite an HOUR :
22passi http://twitter.com/#!/22passi Daniele Passerini
the E-Cat goes on in autosustaining
51 minutes ago http://twitter.com/#!/22passi/status/121981413682724864
Did you auto-translate that somewhere? The Google version
PLEASE read the report
He siad kilowatt-hour per hour. In images there are Kwh/h.
And talk about ENERGY.
kWh/h is NOT ENERGY.
Here in ITALY, WE USE kWh for ENERGY and kW for POWER.
kWh/h IS NOT AN INTERNATIONAL STANDARD (IS) UNIT OF MEASURE.
By semplification kWh/h equal to kW, which is a measure
Rossi has usually used kWh/h as kilowatts per hour. That is not energy unit,
but power unit. kWh is an energy unit and when it is divided by time unit,
we get power.
However world would be much simpler place to live if they just had used
kilojoules per second to indicate power.
—Jouni
On Oct 6,
The precise calculation of the output ***thermal energy in Kwh per hour***,
which the reactor produces through the exothermal nuclear reaction of
NICKEL-HYDROGEN.
Look at image:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-k4ysf4H8ntA/To2cA6P_50I/Fjs/ERVWCfAKflk/s1600/BOLOGNA+TEST+7-7-11tre.png
15
[You have to paste the text into the Google translate box. It will not
autotranslate the page from the URL.]
If you use the Google Chrome Browser, you can right-click on the page
for a translation.
Craig
Mattia Rizzi wrote:
Here in ITALY, WE USE kWh for ENERGY and kW for POWER.
Not all of you. I know several Italians who use kWh/h, as I mentioned.
Not just Rossi.
kWh/h IS NOT AN INTERNATIONAL STANDARD (IS) UNIT OF MEASURE.
By semplification kWh/h equal to kW, which is a measure of POWER.
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 10:05 -0700, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
At 09:19 AM 10/6/2011, Craig Haynie wrote:
I've been reading Passerini's tweets, and it looks like this eCat
has
been running in self-sustained mode for about 4 hours now.
https://twitter.com/#!/22passi
I make it not quite an
I think that you're misunderstanding me. If-And-Only-If the power at the
secondary is LESS than the peak power input to the primary, there will be
arguments about the heat after death or self-sustaining operation.
If the most energy that you put into the E-Cat is 1 kW, and 2 kW is observed at
At 10:28 AM 10/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Alan J Fletcher
a...@well.com wrote:
I make it not quite an HOUR :
22passi Daniele Passerini
the E-Cat goes on in autosustaining
51
minutes ago
Did you auto-translate that somewhere? The Google version says 4 hours,
as does the original
22passi Daniel Passerini
At 19:00, after 4 hours in continuous self-sustaining mode, the reaction
has been interrupted as planned...
If confirmed, this should remove all doubt.
Woot...
Craig
22passi Daniele Passerini
At 19:00, after 4 hours in continuous self-sustaining mode, the reaction
has been interrupted as planned...
3
minutes ago Favorite
Gee .. I thought they were going for 12+ hours.
22passi Daniele Passerini
...the end of the operations is planned for 00:00.
3
minutes
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
However world would be much simpler place to live if they just had
used kilojoules per second to indicate power.
That would be the same kind of notation as kWh/h; i.e., power energy
expressed as energy over time. It would be much simpler if they would
would use
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
From Chrome : (But I DID turn on auto-translate for 22passi's website
: maybe it's a global setting. I'll unset it.)
http://twitter.com/#!/22passi http://twitter.com/#%21/22passi
--- but I'm getting new posts in English, not Italian ?
I believe he is now
Robert Leguillon wrote:
I think that you're misunderstanding me. If-And-Only-If the power at
the secondary is LESS than the peak power input to the primary, there
will be arguments about the heat after death or self-sustaining
operation.
In most of these test runs the output power from the
Also, obviously, after the reaction is turned off all the stored heat comes
out as the reactor cools down. You can measure it easily. The numbers are
right there. There is no mystery to this. You can do the same thing during a
calibration with a joule heater.
I advised them not to turn off the
This one has more units than others I have seen, and it is easier to use:
http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/units-converter/energy/c/
- Jed
At 11:22 AM 10/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I advised them not to turn off the calorimetry after the cold fusion
reaction is quenched. I suggested they leave the calorimetry running
until the cell reaches room temperature and inlet equals the outlet
temperature. That should take about 20 min. I
At 11:31 AM 10/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
This one has more units than
others I have seen, and it is easier to use:
http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/units-converter/energy/c/
- Jed
That's no good ... it doesn't convert kWh to Hartrees !!!
Convert kilowatt-hour to Hartrees ( kWh to Ha )
At 11:38 AM 10/6/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
That's no good ... it doesn't convert kWh to Hartrees !!!
May bad ... it was scrolled off the bottom of the list!
I wouldn't evn take more output heat as input heat as the sine qua non. In fact
there's nothing going on in the e-cat that can proove cold fusion- its not
about a cold fusion proof, there just isn't one of those contemplated. If you
want CF proof maybe look at the Navy's data.
- Original
I wrote:
As I mentioned yesterday, a calorimeter can measure an endothermic
reaction as easily and as accurately as an exothermic reaction. In
your hypothetical example with 2 kW going into the system for two
hours, you will definitely see 1.98 kW emerge from the system during
the entire two
See the tweets of the other journalist from
Italy.
http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick
It seems the FatCat has worked at
~ 3.5 kW.
Till we will not discover something tricky and
if this experiment can be repeated with many
generators, it seems this day was a Sweet
Thursday for the Rossi
Where did you find that value?
2011/10/6 Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
See the tweets of the other journalist from
Italy.
http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick
It seems the FatCat has worked at
~ 3.5 kW.
Till we will not discover something tricky and
if this experiment can be repeated
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
This one has more units than others I have seen, and it is easier to use:
http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/units-converter/energy/c/
- Jed
That's no good ... it doesn't convert kWh to Hartrees !!!
Yes, it does.
1 kWh = 8.257357615e+23 Hartree energy and
3.5kW is lower value than what I estimated, therefore it must be false. . .
But anyway, perhaps we can take it as absolute minimum. If then E-Cat
produced about 64 kJ excess heat. That would translate into 3kg ethanol need
to fake the results. Therefore, test is not conclusive!!
However, i still
Am 06.10.2011 19:19, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
everyone except Arata. He invents his own notation, symbols and
vocabulary. He and a few others I have seen often put the units in
square brackets:
16 [kW]
This looks strange to me. An editor wanted to do this with a paper
that I wrote in Japanese.
between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of
5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour
According to the husband of the cute brunette. :-)
T
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 19:47, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Chris Tinsley once said to me you Americans use such quaint words
such as gasoline. I told him that British English sounds quaint to
us. In point of fact, most American English is older than British
forms. We are the quaint ones. When people
Well, that means 600,000/3600*5*1W = 833W. That's the old electric
heater hypothesis. Odd coincidence, although there was no input
electricity.
2011/10/6 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of
5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 15:11 -0400, Terry Blanton wrote:
between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of
5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour
According to the husband of the cute brunette. :-)
This is what I get.
0.6 cubic meters / hour = 600 liters /
3000 kcal per hour = 3.49 kW True?
I am very tired after this day of info-hunting
Peter
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of
5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour
Oh, right. That's calories!
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of
5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour
Back of the envelope, that's 50.3 Mjoules.
You must not forget the losses due the conversion between the heat
exchangers. If it was 70%, that means around 5KW for the core.
2011/10/6 Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
3000 kcal per hour = 3.49 kW True?
I am very tired after this day of info-hunting
Peter
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 10:11
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
between 3 p.m. till 7 p.m. the temperature average delta has been of
5°C (water input/output) for 0,6 cubic meters per hour
Back of the envelope,
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
Isn't the primary steam circuit a closed loop? Surely the flow in that
will stop very quickly, so nothing will get to the heat exchanger and
the secondary circuit.
I do not understand what you mean by this. Heat will continue to
transfer from the primary to the
Leguillon seems to have notion that heat originally stored as the water is
warmed up somehow vanishes and is never accounted for. That is not how a
calorimeter works.
Rothwell seems to like putting words into my mouth. If the ENTIRE energy
balance is looked at, it will obviously
Robert Leguillon wrote:
Rothwell seems to like putting words into my mouth. If the ENTIRE
energy balance is looked at, it will obviously balance. ALL of the
warm-up time (from initial power-application to dry steam) needs to be
in the equation just as much as cool down.
Well of course.
Am 06.10.2011 21:25, schrieb Daniel Rocha:
You must not forget the losses due the conversion between the heat
exchangers. If it was 70%, that means around 5KW for the core.
If the heat exchanger is well isolated, it will not loose energy.
It will reduce the temperature, because it has a finite
I do not think this came through. Others have reported this. I ran it
though Google to save readers here the trouble.
From: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick
http://twitter.com/#%21/raymond_zreick
Note that the fifth message down, from 46 minutes ago, says the Delta T
was 5°C for 0.6
From: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick
Note that the fifth message down, from 46 minutes ago, says the Delta T
was 5°C for 0.6 cubic meters of water per hour. That 600 L/h, 10 L/min, 1666
ml/s. It indicates 3.4 kW if I have done my arithmetic right.
Translated by Google:
raymond
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 21:45, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I do not think this came through. Others have reported this. I ran it
though Google to save readers here the trouble.
From: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick
http://twitter.com/#%21/raymond_zreick
Note that the fifth message down, from 46
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 21:30, Jed Rothwell wrote:
From: http://twitter.com/#!/raymond_zreick
http://twitter.com/#%21/raymond_zreick
Note that the fifth message down, from 46 minutes ago, says the Delta
T was 5°C for 0.6 cubic meters of water per hour. That 600 L/h, 10
L/min, 1666 ml/s. It
Am 06.10.2011 20:31, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
This one has more units than others I have seen, and it is easier to use:
http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/units-converter/energy/c/
Thanks.
Another tip:
Wolfram alpha can convert units and does arbitrary calculations too.
It can also solve
Daniel Rocha wrote:
You must not forget the losses due the conversion between the heat
exchangers. If it was 70%, that means around 5KW for the core.
I pulled 70% out of a hat, by the way. I do not know what the overall
efficiency is. I am just guessing, based on large, crude experimental
1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW
This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out
20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment.
And so is the fact that it ran for only 4 hours, which may not
rule out a chemical reaction.
If that is the best Rossi can do I guess
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 22:30, vorl bek wrote:
1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW
This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out
20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment.
Excuse me?
This would result still for 52 eCats in 182 kW !
Kind regards,
MoB
Passerini :
22passi Daniele Passerini
Torno a casa! Bellissima giornata, veramente da incorniciare. Grazie
a tutti e alla prossima
22passi Daniele Passerini
I get home! Beautiful day, very suitable for framing. Thanks to all
and the next
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 22:32, Man on Bridges wrote:
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 22:30, vorl bek wrote:
1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW
This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out
20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment.
Excuse me?
This would result still for 52 eCats
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 22:32, Man on Bridges wrote:
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 22:30, vorl bek wrote:
1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW
This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out
20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment.
Excuse me?
This would result still
.875kw is the power of a coffee machine of Krivitz test!
Am 06.10.2011 22:36, schrieb Man on Bridges:
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 22:32, Man on Bridges wrote:
Hi,
On 6-10-2011 22:30, vorl bek wrote:
1666 ml/s should be 166.7 ml/s but it still results in 3.5 kW
This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out
20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment.
vorl bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out
20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment.
In what universe is that a disappointment? If any other cold fusion test
have produced 50.4 MJ in four hours with no input the researchers would
think they
At 01:42 PM 10/6/2011, vorl bek wrote:
Rossi was touting the ecats as putting out 6kw or more each. Now
we are down to .875kw.
It sounds like this whole ecat OU business is no more than a fantasy.
(.875 + 0) / 0 = ..?
This test was probably limited by the water flow and heat
In reply to Mattia Rizzi's message of Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:31:58 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
The precise calculation of the output ***thermal energy in Kwh per hour***,
which the reactor produces through the exothermal nuclear reaction of
NICKEL-HYDROGEN.
Look at image:
In reply to Mattia Rizzi's message of Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:31:58 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
PS -
Try reading it like this:
9,412 Kwh/h *** ENERGY produced in a hour *** during the
or if it makes it clearer,
9,412 Kwh/h *** ENERGY produced per hour *** during the
(Energy per unit time = power).
phase
vorl bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out
20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment.
In what universe is that a disappointment? If any other cold
fusion test have produced 50.4 MJ in four hours with no input
the researchers would
5 deg rise in water from input to output thermister -- need to
disconfirm the possibility of a small local heater hidden within the
thermister...
Rich Murray [ never a pathological skeptic... -- merely pragmatic ]
At 02:08 PM 10/6/2011, Rich Murray wrote:
5 deg rise in water from input to output thermister -- need to
disconfirm the possibility of a small local heater hidden within the
thermister...
Rich Murray [ never a pathological skeptic... -- merely pragmatic ]
You're right ... but did they make
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
