Thank you, dear Rob!
Peter
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Man on Bridges manonbrid...@aim.com
wrote:
Peter,
It's a pitty I can't thumbs up your article a.la Facebook ;-)
Great introduction.
Kind regards,
Rob
Peter Gluck schreef op 8-1-2015 om 17:38:
Dear Friends,
I advice you
it move to an accusation of having hidden an excel file...
conspiracy...
now my tactic is to force the people denying LENR to be clear out the
conspiracy theory they support so witness see it is huge and impossible.
conspiracy is the easy answer to things one cannot accept...
not only in science
Alain,
I'm not accusing anyone of having hidden an excel file; I'm just saying
that Jed removed that file from his archives where I found it several weeks
ago. I don't know why he removed it, maybe he could explain...
Jed says it is of no importance to the present discussion; I find it of
removing evidence of artifact is fraud.
don't feign to be kind.
nobody with a brain ignore that rejection of cold fusion is based on a
conspiracy theory involving thousands of actors, mostly frauding, some just
incompetent. this is the 10 ton gorilla in LENR critics.
people observing the usual
I wrote:
My office Internet connection has not been working so I cannot upload or
download much. It should be fixed on Tuesday.
I hope.
I am getting a new ISP. This one has been slow. Now it has been dropping
completely for hours a day. It is peaceful having no phone calls or e-mail,
but
Alain,
I must confess that I've some problems to follow your statements. You
should stick to the facts not to general theories or books.
I, normally, run a company and at the end of the month I provide the food
for a few dozens families, including mine. I've no time for cospiracies.
I,
Jed,
I'm sorry but if you take the 18 hour experiment file and draw the water
temperature against the room temperature you will find a temperature rise
at the equilibrium higher than 2.5 °C. This is a huge amount which, is
incompatible with what you and Mizuno say.
Your mistake is to think to
May I inject an idea into this discussion? To activate the normal Mizuno LENR
reaction it is necessary to apply 20 watts for a short period of time. One
would certainly expect the rate of the reaction to drop if much less
instantaneous power is applied. So, why not apply the average amount
Jed,
just as an example, in the missing file, in the row 989 which corresponds
to 24131.191 seconds the room temperature is 18.78 °C and the water
temperature is 21.90. Doing some mathematics we get that the temperature
difference is 3.13 °C that appears to be higher than what you say.
Why did
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
May I inject an idea into this discussion? To activate the normal Mizuno
LENR reaction it is necessary to apply 20 watts for a short period of
time. One would certainly expect the rate of the reaction to drop if much
less instantaneous power is
Dear Dave,
while I'm preparing the English version of the new measurement with plenty
of photos and diagrams [where, as I anticipated, we found even more power
going from the pump to the water], I will try to explain you why your
simple mathematics does not convince me.
Let's derive further
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not accusing anyone of having hidden an excel file; I'm just saying
that Jed removed that file from his archives where I found it several weeks
ago. I don't know why he removed it, maybe he could explain...
I will put it back, soon. My office
We most be open that there are mistakes in pro cold fusion results, but
also make sure that they are put into contexts, are the mistakes of a few
outliers, or are they the main part.
That is the question we need to answer. Typically to validate or disprove
cold fusion you make sure to draw a
I wrote:
Where do you see that? At what hour? At hour 2.2 it reaches the peak. The
water temperature is 23.3°C and ambient is 22.8°C.
I meant to say: At hour 1.4 it reaches the peak. Taking the value at 2.2
hours, the water temperature is 23.3°C and ambient is 22.8°C.
At 2.2 hours the
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
Coming back to Mizuno we think that in the reported experiment there is no
excess heat. It is written in the Mizuno's data, our demo is only a further
proof. If you take a look of the data when the pump fails you will see that
immediately both water
Stefan,
Please correct me if I am mistaken but I assume you are the same stefan who
has posted similar complaints out at the SCP discussion group.
As has frequently been stated out in the Vort Collective...
Experimental evidence always trumps theory.
I must confess the fact that
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm sorry but if you take the 18 hour experiment file and draw the water
temperature against the room temperature you will find a temperature rise
at the equilibrium higher than 2.5 °C. This is a huge amount which, is
incompatible with what you and
Did you ever run the heating power at the average of the 20 watt pulses over
time? For example if the duty cycle were 10 %, a 2 watt continuous signal
would achieve that goal. The amount of heat energy deposited inside the
calorimeter after a long time would then be exactly the same as for a
So you demand that all science is explained or you would not accept a
theory. Is that fair, wouldn't it be prudent to accept that Mills is spot
on in so many theoretical question, where it outperforms what we do in
quantum mechanics, that we simple must put scientific effort into
explaining the
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
just as an example, in the missing file, in the row 989 which corresponds
to 24131.191 seconds the room temperature is 18.78 °C and the water
temperature is 21.90. Doing some mathematics we get that the temperature
difference is 3.13 °C that appears
I wrote this:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/01/lenr-in-csikszentmihalyian-flow.html
with a special pleasure but I know it is not contagious.
BTW, due to freezing rain I must stay at home.
Wish you all a fine weekend!
Peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
It can be fun to tease out responses, here is a rant, take it for what it
is:
All science history shows that if you can express things a magnitude of
order more elegantly and easily and less convoluted you have a better
theory, this is what Mills theory does compared to quantum mechanics. That
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
. . . for example what about the heat transferred from the motor to the
water? Jed says it is negligible: we'll show that this is not true, you
will see a photo of the pump gear and you will decide yourself.
I did not *say* it is negligible; Mizuno
The existence of hydrinos are open to conjecture, but I am concerned with
the question of their place in the ordering of things; are they fundamental
or emergent, and how are they related to the other fractional bits of
matter and energy that might be more basic in their nature?
When the
Jed, looking at figure 6, the Oct 21 data I calculate that the average power is
1.3888 watts. That is 20 watts * 500 seconds / 7200 seconds = 1.3888 watts.
If Mizuno applies that amount of power continuously what would you expect the
temperature to do? It is obvious that no internally
Thanks Jed.
If the water alone recovers 1.3 watts with average drive drive, and more
resides within the vessel, then you are in great shape.
If you have the chance, I would greatly appreciate it if you could ask Dr.
Mizuno about the measured flow rate. My earlier calculation using 9 liters
Greetings Vortex-L,
Could this effect be linked to Electrogravitics??
https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/ballooning-spiders-use-electrostatic-forces-to-generate-lift-98345796bba4
Careful thought is needed.
Ad Astra,
Ron Kita. Chiralex
Doylestown PA 21F
Orionworks,
Yes experiments is all good, i'm more concerned why we don't get any
replication / debunks and from more independent sources. Is'n there
enough to verify the evidences? Also what if it's too difficult to create
hydrinos, and Mills theory would be better suited to explain for example
The design-of-test story is coming out.
Good,
Bop
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2015 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Report on Mizuno's Adiabatic Calorimetry revised
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Greetings Vortex-L:
Another side of Entanglement:
https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/entanglement-makes-quantum-particles-measurably-heavier-says-quantum-theorist-6fbd1e1e3eee
Ad Astra,
Ron Kita, Chiralex
Doylestown, PA 19F
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
Two of us measured and discovered the Defkalion trick in the water flow
measurement (or do you think it was really Gamberale?); if you like I can
send you the proofs privately.
Hi Giancarlo,
Thank you for the careful
Dear Dave,
you still insist on your calculation neglecting what I wrote to you in an
earlier message regarding the fact that increasing the pipe the power goes
to zero when calculated according to your mathematics.
We have just published the new experiment with the theory and diagrams
behind it.
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
*Basically, after 2.4 hours you should either ignore the rest of the data,
or use a much more complex modeling method which takes into account the
lag.*
This is exactly what we have already done. You will read it soon.
In your comments here, you
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Jed, looking at figure 6, the Oct 21 data I calculate that the average
power is 1.3888 watts. That is 20 watts * 500 seconds / 7200 seconds =
1.3888 watts.
Yes, that is the answer I got, in Table 1. However, bear in mind that is
for the water alone.
Caro Giigi,
Because you refered to me as some last faithful of Defkalion, if you have
discovered the Defkalion flowmeter trick( define it exactly please!) can
you explain how can be obtained results as in the demos of July 22 and 23
by
manipulating two valves? Can you reoeat the trick and in
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
The process is not manageable in this way, it is completely chaotic.
Correct. It was chaotic. The Defkalion results shown at ICCF were chaotic,
especially the flow rate, which should not have been chaotic, since the
water was flowing from a sink.
*Basically, after 2.4 hours you should either ignore the rest of the data,
or use a much more complex modeling method which takes into account the
lag.*
This is exactly what we have already done. You will read it soon. So please
publish the original file so that Dave and other can check our
Jed should identify the actual time the reaction stopped hours before that
event failure of the pump.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2015 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Report on Mizuno's Adiabatic Calorimetry
I would like to see a grants and target institution targeted to answer your
questions. Also it is good to remember that the standard model was fitted
to high energy
particle data, typically advanced theories degenerates at limits to a
limited set of possible solutions, the standard model QED etc
The process is not manageable in this way, it is completely chaotic.
At the demo Mats Lewan has helped at the testing of the flowmeter.
The Gamberale report was accepted immediately by you and many of our
colleagues- do you think it cn be really used such a trick to obtain
consistent results as
*What did Hoistadt say in response to your letter regarding this question? *
That they do not have time to discuss on the blogsphere about their paper
that has appeared only in the blogsphere.
So I asked him to whistle to me when they get the paper published on Nature
or Science.
Giancarlo
PS
Gigi, Dave and Alain--
You, Gigi, wrote to Alain:
I, personally, do not think that LENR are real but we are speaking about some
specific experiments: it took 15 minute to me to understand that electrical
power measurements were wrong in the TPR2. It's my job, I design and build
power
Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:
Jed should identify the actual time the reaction stopped hours before
that event failure of the pump.
You can see it in the graph. The reaction peters out around hour 6 where
the blue line starts to fall, and the pump fails at hour 8.
The end of the
Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:
It is written in the Mizuno's data, our demo is only a further proof. If
you take a look of the data when the pump fails you will see that
immediately both water and reactor wall temperatures start to decrease: in
the presence of a reaction the wall
Dear Eric,
I was not present at the Defkalion test, but at GSVIT we are four people [?]
Gamberale was present, of course. He did repeat later the measurement
(after a few weeks), alone.
In the Lugano report they perform a dummy measurement: it is enough to
calculate the resistances in the load.
I would like to see Mills rewrite the dirac equations for the electron to
reflect his hydrino theory. This includes the experimental verification of
a fractionally charged positron. There should be gamma rays produced to
account for hydrino anti-hydrino annihilation. How does the anti-hydrino
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
Because you refered to me as some last faithful of Defkalion, if you have
discovered the Defkalion flowmeter trick( define it exactly please!) can
you explain how can be obtained results as in the demos of July 22 and 23
by
manipulating two
Peter,
I fully agree with you: the time will tell the truth. The cause was a water
wave bouncing forth and back so that to provide extra pulses in the
flowmeter. There is an oscilloscope photo taken by connecting it to the
flowmeter.
What you simply miss is that it was very simple to obtain a
Dear Gigi,
You must remember that I am only speaking of the kinetic energy transported
power and not that due to friction or other means. It is obvious that as the
velocity of a mass approaches zero that the kinetic energy of that mass goes
toward zero as the square of the velocity ratio.
2015-01-10 15:01 GMT+01:00 Stefan Israelsson Tampe stefan.ita...@gmail.com
:
That is the question we need to answer. Typically to validate or disprove
cold fusion you make sure to draw a representative sample of the old
results and do a serious examination to evaluate the evidences
cold
Hi,
I have calculated the binding energy of the tetrahedral anion of LiHy4- for all
possible Hydrinohydride sizes and presented it here:-
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/LiHy4-.pdf
(In this case, binding energy is taken to mean the energy that is released
when the anion is formed. I.e. it is the
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
2015-01-10 15:01 GMT+01:00 Stefan Israelsson Tampe stefan.ita...@gmail.com
:
That is the question we need to answer. Typically to validate or disprove
cold fusion you make sure to draw a representative sample of the old
results and do a serious
Bob Cook made two large mistakes here. I wish he -- and others -- would
The Iwaik pump, if running, would have added heat at about 29 watts per
the pump specification.
In my report, p. 24, I list the pump specifications. Mizuno measured the
pump input power with the watt meter. It is 10.8 W,
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
please don't say you predicted the problem of DGT demo.
I was observing the critic and as I say, all was criticized as all
fraud... electricity, water, thermocouple,
Good point.
... as i say deniers are a dead clock totally useless to find
Dear Gigi,
I do not read Italian as you suspected so I will need a good translation of
what you have written in order to comment properly. I reviewed the link in
Italian and it appears that you have run a test with the 5 mm pipe feed
directly into a storage sink. Further within the report it
Dave and Gigi--
The pump used in the Mizuno test was a Iwaki Co. Magnet Pump, MD-6K-N. This
reflects the information provided by Jed on page 20 of his report.
I was not able to find that specific pump model on the Iwaki web page, but did
find a similar one, MD-6 8l/11l which indicates the
please don't say you predicted the problem of DGT demo.
I was observing the critic and as I say, all was criticized as all fraud...
electricity, water, thermocouple, ... as i say deniers are a dead clock
totally useless to find reality.
Electricity and thermal measurement were OK as Luca Gamberale
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Du_Temple_Monoplane
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Pierpont_Langley
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Whitehead#1901
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozhaysky%27s_airplane (probable)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ader_%C3%89ole
2015-01-10 23:19 GMT-02:00 Jed
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Du_Temple_Monoplane
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Pierpont_Langley
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Whitehead#1901
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozhaysky%27s_airplane (probable)
I wrote:
An ordinary person unschooled in aviation science looking at flights by Du
Temple, Langley and Maxim would have great difficulty distinguishing these
flights from those of the Wright brothers. . . .
Langley's successful flights in 1896 were with a large model. They were
unmanned.
Most pumps do quite well at converting electrical energy into mechanical
energy. When they do only 35% or 40% conversion they are called inefficient.
I have not measured the efficiency of the Mizuno pump but only looked at the
specifications issued by the Vendor for a similar pump of the
61 matches
Mail list logo
