On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 11:57 PM, Mauro Lacy ma...@lacy.com.ar wrote:
On 11/06/2011 05:07 PM, Peter Heckert wrote:
Am 06.11.2011 18:36, schrieb Peter Gluck:
What I wrote is connected to a subject more popular here these days.
The future is unknown, but perhaps it could be useful to )re)
- Original Nachricht
Von: Andrea Selva andreagiuseppe.se...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 07.11.2011 07:40
Betreff: Re: [Vo]: October 28 Established ECAT System Facts
2). There is no pump within the output path between the ECAT?s and the
large water storage
I wrote on my blog two papers about Piantelli's methods. Have you read
them?He is a very serious scientist. Actually all heat measurments were made
at Siena U by Piantelli, Bologna U's contribution was to analyses.
The system to put the authors in alphabetical order is anti-meritocratic. I
have
Axil,
I agree both forms of Rydberg matter could be involved in this
anomaly but IMHO they both derive from normal hydrogen. When you stated [snip]
D(-1) is the excited state of D(1) where protons and electrons chance places
when sufficient kinetic energy is added to the D(1)
You are proposing a theory where a slug of hot iron releases its stored
energy.
The e-Cats have enough internal volume to store the reported amount of energy
produced in very hot iron, and it is theoretically possible to insulate them
using aerogel so that they'll keep their heat for a few hours.
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:
Somehow as I have new iPad I have found it hard to concentrate on
paper book. Feels so primitive and outdated user interface.
You are not alone:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APE8M9MeOWA
T
On 11-11-06 10:10 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
Earlier, I asked if AR would fulfill his promise to send money to
fight childhood cancer. Well, it seems someone else also wonders.
klaatu
November 6th, 2011 at 12:30 PM
Dear Dr. Rossi
Thank you again for the considerate answer to the previous
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
Eh? This will make it impossible to verify that the anything was given to
anybody, and we'll just have to take Rossi's word for it, right?
Or we can not take his word, and put this subject aside. This has no
bearing at all on cold fusion. What Rossi
Yes Peter, I agree that a pump in the output path would completely change the
situation. Your response is the type that we need. It is my understanding
that everyone who witnessed the test believed that there was no pump in that
position. Do you think otherwise? I would like to know as
Jed sez:
Eh? This will make it impossible to verify that the anything was given to
anybody, and we'll just have to take Rossi's word for it, right?
Or we can not take his word, and put this subject aside. This has no bearing
at all on cold fusion. What Rossi does with his money is nobody's
On 11-11-07 09:12 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
Eh? This will make it impossible to verify that the anything was
given to anybody, and we'll just have to take Rossi's word for it,
right?
Or we can not take his word, and
Quick question, Horace: Are you going for the 470kW which was claimed,
or are you working with a reduced number?
The 470 value seems to have been predicated, once again, on total
vaporization of the input water. If that didn't take place then the
generated power may have been substantially
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
I continue to plod along on a simulation of prospective E-cat designs to
fit the 6 Oct 2011 Rossi test results. I have simulated various
combinations of materials for thermal storage and have found that a couple
slabs of ordinary Portland cement
I think Jed's response is entirely appropriate. Also, I hope that Rossi would
keep a lot of the funds generated by his early sales to reinvest in the
production and engineering of better products.
There will be plenty of time remaining for him to give to charity. Seems like
I recall Bill
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:22 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
However, it should be obvious to most that a favorite form of
entertainment for the Vort Collective is to poke its collective noses
into everyone else's personal business. ;-)
Firstly, when you
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
That is true up to the moment when he makes public commitments as to what
he's doing with it.
As he has done.
What commitments? Has he signed a contract? Did he give a check to some
charitable organization, and did this check bounce? I'm not aware
Unfortunately there's very little we can do. We just wait and hope Dr.
Rossi will begin soon the promised tests with universities labs.
2011/11/7 David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
Of course you are correct with your statement that we only have his word
and the consultants data to operate
Jed sez:
...
I see no point in speculating about people's private lives.
Oh, Jed!
You're such a fuddi-duddy! ;-)
Sometimes I suspect that half of our nation's economy is powered by
the generated methane of speculation and innuendo, as revealed at the
checkout counter of every grocery store.
Facebook is worth how much?!?
On 11-11-07 09:35 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
That is true up to the moment when he makes public commitments as
to what he's doing with it.
As he has done.
What commitments? Has he signed a contract?
Excuse me -- I
I have to side with Stephen and Terry on this point. Rossi has mad
these statements publically so he bears some responsiblity for the
expectations he generates. He may not yet be legally accountably, but
he is morally accountable at this time, regardless of his
personality
issues.
Harry
On Mon,
If Obama announced publically that he formulates his best policy just
after sex, we would all speculate about his love life.
Harry
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:54 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed sez:
...
I see no point in speculating about people's private
Goodness gracious me! It would seem that we are scraping the bottom of
the barrel to find anything to argue about. Guess there isn't any NEW
news on the Rossi/eCat front. This yes, you did! - No, I didn't
tit-for-tat scenario would seem from my perspective to be degenerating
into another grocery
With that said, I think it would be a lot more interesting if we could
just follow the money trail.
Ah hah! That is the point of my ramblings.
I tend to attack a point from all directions at once. Kinda like the
implosion of a Fat Man like nuke.
Where IS the money. I want to SEE the money.
Tery sez:
Where IS the money. I want to SEE the money. Did Rossi get paid?
I bet Rossi hasn't been paid... not yet.
I just betcha!
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Didn't Rossi say he was going to reveal his theory around this time?
Harry
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:51 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Goodness gracious me! It would seem that we are scraping the bottom of
the barrel to find anything to argue about. Guess
From Harry:
Didn't Rossi say he was going to reveal his theory around this time?
What Rossi sez he's going to do...
What Rossi sez he's going to sez...
What Rossi sez he didn't sez...
I think I' just wrote a badly written poem.
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
At 07:04 PM 11/6/2011, Terry Blanton wrote:
Is it any wonder why Boeing will allow manufacturing of all parts of
their airplanes in other countries except the wings? After all, it's
the wing IP which makes the planes really reliable.
(Without googling) -- I thought Boeing gave away the wing
At 06:43 PM 11/6/2011, kulintsov wrote:
Hello, I'm new here and my
English is not very well. Sorry for any mistakes.
Hi no problem!
Andrea Rossi
November 6th, 2011 at 3:53 AM
WARNING TO THE READERS:
I HAVE RECEIVED IN MY EMAIL MANY MESSAGES OF PEOPLE ASKING INSTRUCTIONS
TO MAKE IN THEIR
Please, give him a break :) Just blame his broken english if you understood
so
2011/11/7 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com
From Harry:
Didn't Rossi say he was going to reveal his theory around this time?
What Rossi sez he's going to do...
What Rossi sez he's
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
1. As I said before, I have never seen Rossi lie about engineering
technical claims.
Granted that's not a blanket defense but it certainly can be applied to
lots of specific details.
Oh come now. I said very specifically that I HAVE seen him lie
At 09:10 AM 5/18/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
Andrea Rossi
May 18th, 2011 at 11:12 AM
Dear Dr Pietro Cambi:
We will not make any other validation test after the ones we already did.
>From November our products will be on the market. As for the RD we
already made an agreement with other
An essential requirement to tell credible lies is to have a very good
memory ...
or at least to keep well up to date record of old claims and check it
before writing ...
Who do recall Pinocchio and his wodden nose getting longer and longer ?
2011/11/7 Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com
At 09:10
Susan Gipp wrote:
An essential requirement to tell credible lies is to have a very good
memory ...
Which indicates that Rossi is not lying, but rather changing his mind
repeatedly. I know that he does that about all kinds of things. It is a
useful trait in a hands-on experimentalist.
-
From Susan,
An essential requirement to tell credible lies is to have a very good memory
...
or at least to keep well up to date record of old claims and check it before
writing ...
Who do recall Pinocchio and his wodden nose getting longer and longer ?
credible lies ?
Where are you going
At 09:14 PM 11/6/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Yet another article. This time I
think that there will be some complaints from cold fusion community. Mark
did not get everything correctly, but understanding the subtleties
scientific method is difficult. Science is very easy and simple on paper,
but
On 11-11-07 01:42 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
1. As I said before, I have never seen Rossi lie about
engineering technical claims.
Granted that's not a blanket defense but it certainly can be
applied to lots of
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Isotope shifts!?! I must have said a hundred times these shifts make
no sense and I suppose they are errors.
Sorry! I thought you had defended that one. (It was, after all, one
of Rossi's technical claims, as I recall -- the 'created' copper has
non-natural
On 11-11-07 02:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Isotope shifts!?! I must have said a hundred times these shifts make
no sense and I suppose they are errors.
Sorry! I thought you had defended that one. (It was, after all, one
of Rossi's technical claims, as I recall
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
(Without googling) -- I thought Boeing gave away the wing design to Japan.
They did on the 787; but, IIRC, they split it among several companies.
The weak point of the comet was the corners of the square windows.
(And btw,
On Nov 7, 2011, at 12:31 AM, John Bresnahan wrote:
Dear Mr. (Dr.?) Heffner,
I've been eagerly following your posting on the Vortex mailing
list, and wish to thank you for the thoughtful analysis you are
providing.
Regarding the small valve in your model of Rossi's E-Cat device
from
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:27 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
I continue to plod along on a simulation of prospective E-cat
designs to fit the 6 Oct 2011 Rossi test results. I have simulated
various combinations of materials for thermal storage and have
Rossi wrote:
3 - big problem: the patent I have not been recognized outside Italy and
the theory would reveal much.
This confirms what I have suspected for a long time. Rossi's biggest
problem is that he does not have viable intellectual property protection.
He is floundering around trying
Ah -- Sorry, Horace, disregard my question. I overlooked the fact that
you're ignoring the Oct 28 test, which was the (alleged) 470kW run.
(In any case, you obviously are well aware of the heat-of-vaporization
issues.)
On 11-11-07 09:25 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Quick question,
On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:25 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Quick question, Horace: Are you going for the 470kW which was
claimed, or are you working with a reduced number?
The 470 value seems to have been predicated, once again, on total
vaporization of the input water. If that didn't take
Hi,
some time ago I predicted:
1) I predicted It will be impossible to go over customs with this system.
This was correct, the test was made in Bologna.
2) I predicted, it will be too hot inside for a control panel.
This was correct, the control system was outside and the doors where
left
On Nov 7, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Ah -- Sorry, Horace, disregard my question. I overlooked the fact
that you're ignoring the Oct 28 test, which was the (alleged) 470kW
run.
(In any case, you obviously are well aware of the heat-of-
vaporization issues.)
Yes. I
Some thoughts:
It is rather clear, when there are leaks on a brandnew prototype system,
that is operated under 50% load and under eased conditions (open doors),
then the leaks could be repaired but under real full load conditions the
problems can (and probably will) occur again.
This problem
Jed sez:
Rossi wrote:
3 - big problem: the patent I have not been
recognized outside Italy and the theory would
reveal much.
This confirms what I have suspected for a long time. Rossi's biggest
problem is that he does not have viable intellectual property protection.
He is floundering
Peter Heckert wrote:
Under industrial conditions and full load it would overheat, leak
again, or the electric would fail after the first leak and steam
inside. No normal customer would want to buy this.
You are correct that this is a prototype, not a finished industrial
product. That is
OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
This confirms what I have suspected for a long time. Rossi's biggest
problem is that he does not have viable intellectual property protection.
He is floundering around trying to find a way to sell his product, while
protecting it with trade secrets rather
Am 07.11.2011 23:19, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Granted, you might want to install it at an actual site to observe
performance under real-world conditions. You would use extensive
instrumentation. The real purpose would be to find out how to
mass-produce similar machines.
If the self
Btw, here is an image of the 850 kW heating system for the
Frauenkirche (a big cathedral) in Dresden:
http://www.ib-breiden.de/wp-content/myfotos/frauenkirche-dresden/14_Dresden_04.jpg
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
If the self destruction mechanism is inside, they cannot do this.
I doubt there is a self-destruct mechanism. However, if there is one, the
company that bought the 1 MW reactor now has over 100 individual cells to
work with. After experts open up to
The Viewzone article on detecting lying is nonsense, because:
1) with regard to the upper right movement of the eyes, it confuses
creating an image in one's mind with lying, and
2) with regard to blushing, it fails to take into account that a person
may experience several states at any given
The main reason any customer at this stage is buying the E-Cat 1MW
plant is to reverse engineer it and/or determine its viability.
However, each initial sale (13 now?) probably includes some strict
non-disclosure or anti-reverse engineering clauses. So Rossi is
probably selling a number to
The real purpose would be to find out how to
mass-produce similar machines.
It's interesting how you an write something like this quoted sentence and
still writing how Rossi is a genius and a great business man.
A great business man that sold his secrets for 2M$ USD, with a technology
valued
Jed is right on this one. Rossi cannot do much besides that and must be
paranoid. What would you do in Rossi's place?
2011/11/7 Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com
The real purpose would be to find out how to
mass-produce similar machines.
It's interesting how you an write something like
This exercise has me confused. Are you making an attempt to demonstrate that
it is possible to make a scam ECAT? That would of course be instructive since
Rossi has never run an ECAT for an extended period of time as a single unit. I
suspect that we should consider that he is telling the
Jed is right on this one. Rossi cannot do much besides that and must be
paranoid. What would you do in Rossi's place?
Maybe filing a *true* patent request, instead of one that is bullshit. Contact
DoD/DoE (Rossi did it and they refused to finance) or well know American
corporation like General
There seems to be a lot of question about the actual heat released by Rossi's 1
MW system. Can we assume that it releases at least the minimum power
calculated at approximately 60 kilowatts? Even this relatively small amount of
heat would be quite noticeable by the standards that are being
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe filing a *true* patent request, instead of one that is bullshit.
I suspect he is not capable of doing that.
Contact DoD/DoE (Rossi did it and they refused to finance) . . .
The DoD and DoE cannot finance something like this. DARPA might
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
If you spent an hour or so looking at what I actually provided instead of
generating arm waving non quantitative babble then you might gain some
understanding.
It is not arm waving to point out that THERE IS NO CONCRETE in the reactor.
None. You
I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER said that he is a great businessman!!! Why do people
keep putting these absurd statements into my mouth? I said the opposite many
times.
Okay, you wrote that he was an “experienced businessman”. Change nothing in
yours and mines sentences.
From: Jed Rothwell
Sent:
Hi Horace,
I was wondering if it's possible to do this with lead rather than another
material as long as you have sufficient insulation to reduce the heat flow
from the lead to the water. I did a simple simulation and it looked like
about 25kg of lead with about 12W/C heat flow would do the
Cement has more specific heat capacity per mass, but not
per volume.
One cubic meter of iron can hold something like 3.5 MJ per
kelvin, while the same volume of cement can hold something
like 2.33 MJ per kelvin.
In addition I'm not sure cement can go above 800
degrees Celsius, while iron melts
Or 25kg per module if we just bring the water to 105C and make very little
steam
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Cement has more specific heat capacity per mass, but not
per volume.
One cubic meter of iron can hold something like 3.5 MJ per
kelvin,
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Colin Hercus colinher...@gmail.com wrote:
Or 25kg per module if we just bring the water to 105C and make very little
steam
But that assumes that the numbers are falsified. In the customer's
public report, it says :
Water vaporized : 3716 l.
So if that figure
On Nov 7, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
If you spent an hour or so looking at what I actually provided
instead of generating arm waving non quantitative babble then you
might gain some understanding.
It is not arm waving to point out
On Nov 7, 2011, at 4:18 PM, Berke Durak wrote:
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Colin Hercus
colinher...@gmail.com wrote:
Or 25kg per module if we just bring the water to 105C and make
very little
steam
But that assumes that the numbers are falsified. In the customer's
public report, it
http://img.ound.com/static-data/assets/
6/3a86f663d804b2877e9dcb0e1f003e699da87b26_m.gif
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
The issue of complete vaporization has plagued the E-Cat from the beginning. In
the early E-Cats, water was able to run straight out of the E-Cat and down a
drain, without ever being collected or sparged. In the 1MW demo, the steam is
condensed and fed back in, there is no way of knowing how
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Mon, 7 Nov 2011 02:44:15 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
*D(-1) is the excited state of D(1) where protons and electrons chance
places when sufficient kinetic energy is added to the D(1) species to form
D(-1).*
The reduction in potential energy should more than compensate
I did try lead in various combinations with other materials. It does
not have very good characteristics. I am working to duplicate the
output power wave form, given the input power vs time, not just
explain the energy balances. I'll have more to say when I finish.
Horace
On Nov 7,
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote:
I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER said that he is a great businessman!!! Why do
people keep putting these absurd statements into my mouth? I said the
opposite many times.
Okay, you wrote that he was an “experienced businessman”. Change nothing
in yours and
/snip/ If I were to call him ax murderer I suppose you would say I admire his
dexterity with tools. /snip/
Brilliant!
On Nov 7, 2011, at 3:15 PM, David Roberson wrote:
This exercise has me confused. Are you making an attempt to
demonstrate that it is possible to make a scam ECAT? That would of
course be instructive since Rossi has never run an ECAT for an
extended period of time as a single unit. I
In reply to Mauro Lacy's message of Sun, 06 Nov 2011 12:09:05 -0300:
Hi,
[snip]
Now, assuming that the hypothesis is true, and proceeding in reverse
order, we could(I want to clarify that I would NOT do it):
- search for the geatest Internal Conversion Coefficients for a given
element.
- search
Andy Findlay mentioned at one time that if you heat the end of a
metal rod with a blowtorch it takes time for the heat to reach the
other end, and that it continues coming after the heat is removed.
The following is a demonstration run showing this using a firebrick
rod and the input
Horace, indeed 2 megaeuros would be good investment to check the validity
of Rossi's claim. If it works, then we are hundreds of modules to play
around. And if it does not work in means of cold fusion processes then just
return the device and get full monetary compensation. Rossi has promised
life
I've already done most of these steps. :P
Not so amateurish stuff indeed.
Best regards,
Pasha
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:42 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
At 06:43 PM 11/6/2011, kulintsov wrote:
Hello, I'm new here and my English is not very well. Sorry for any mistakes.
Hi
It always works out the way you desire when you cherry pick the data. Throw
away data that does not match your needs, keep all that does. This is the
common way that some science operates.
If you want to be truly honest in your effort, you must explain all of the
experimental evidence.
I agree with Berke. Rossi is have a good laugh at our expense. If the public
report is falsified, then it is a scam, pure and simple. Otherwise, it is real
as many expect.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
I will be surprised if you are not able to simulate the 1 core self sustaining
ECAT with a good selection of material. The single core would just behave as a
high capacity energy storage unit since the heat generated within tails off
with time in that mode. Three core simulation in the
Poor Jed, you are destined to be labeled as a Rossi supporter because you see
through the mist into the forest. You try to take an objective look at his
ECAT and this is your reward. You will be proven correct.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
To:
Look at your own calculations:
c). If only liquid water is ejected by the ECATs, the minimum system power
output is 187.667 grams/second * (440.27 joules/gram liquid at 105 C –75.544
joules/gram liquid at 18 C) = 68.45 Kilowatts.
d). If vapor is the only output then the maximum system power
OK Horace, now I see your reason for the simulation and it makes sense. I am
afraid that you, I and a lot of others have been manipulated by Rossi. If you
read my latest document, you will see that I reached the conclusion that the
power actually generated during the October 6 test was far
Post any finding you have on the vortex for all of us to see. ;-)
Dave
-Original Message-
From: kulintsov kulint...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Nov 7, 2011 11:38 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about preparation of nickel powder
I've already done most of
I plan to duplicate the 1998 Focardi Ni-H cell as per
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FocardiSlargeexces.pdf except for the
water jacket and confirm or not his reported results.
I have a really nicely fitted out workshop with toys like lathes, mills,
pulse welders, medium and high vacuum
Rossi's largest contribution to improving on the Piantelli-Focardi work, may
have been his suggestion at using nano-nickel. The increased surface area, and
available crystalline lattice has been garnering a lot of attention. Variations
in particle size and, possibly more importantly, surface
I guess my calculations have come home to bite me. Indeed, the worst case (68
kW) clearly is not acceptable and I would be happy to point that out as well.
It is my intention to uncover the truth if this is possible and I am not
obligated to anyone to support them or their cause if they are
Yes I have read that. But first I plan to try to duplicate the 1998
Focardi cell as closely as I can. I have emailed Focardi and asked for
the dimensions of the cell and construction material and informed him I
plan to replicate. I'm just a power system engineer and not a
physicists, so I do
The vortex group can really put on the heat on occasions. I salute you for
planning to actually do a test, but you must realize that Focardi heat treated
his nickel in some manner before it worked if I recall. Do not be too surprised
if you are not successful at first as that has always been
I have read Focardi did heat treat the Ni rod, which I also intend to
do. I also understand there can be problems with the Ni rod becoming H
loaded and producing heat when there is no external heating applied. I
do note Focardi does show a vacuum supply that can be applied to the
cell and with
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:03 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Horace, indeed 2 megaeuros would be good investment to check the
validity of Rossi's claim. If it works, then we are hundreds of
modules to play around. And if it does not work in means of cold
fusion processes then just return the device
Dear Aussie Guy,
Have you studied thoroughly the two Piantelli patents- from 1995
and 2010? Have you read what I wrote about Piantelli on my blog? (adress in
signature) He has built the cells.
You will need vacuum of 10 exp minus 5-6 Torrs, i.e a tandem of
a diffusion and a turbomolecular vacuum
Focardi has disclosed some data on how the Ni rods were prepared which
seems doable:
In order to compare samples having the same surface but different
bulks, the metal
rods used in the experiments described here (stainless steel for cell A
and nickel for cell
B) were coated with a thick (
- Original Nachricht
Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 08.11.2011 07:28
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication
I have read Focardi did heat treat the Ni rod, which I also intend to
do. I also understand there can be
On Nov 7, 2011, at 7:52 PM, David Roberson wrote:
It always works out the way you desire when you cherry pick the
data. Throw away data that does not match your needs, keep all
that does. This is the common way that some science operates.
OK Dave, please supply the input power and flow
Thanks for the link and references. I can see I have a lot of reading to
do. I it seems my replication efforts are for a Piantelli cell
(according to his patent application) and not a Focardi cell?
I should be able to borrow the high vacuum and other pumps needed. My
patent attorney, who is
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
