At 11:52 PM 5/10/2011, you wrote:
The same personality trait which shows up as sloppiness is also what
makes him say low level heat is useless! Forget about anything less
than a kilowatt! He does not want to fool around with
difficult-to-measure reactions that are only of scientific interest.
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Both, yes. I've argued Smaller is Better, but only for exploratory
research. Once you have something that you can reproduce, then making
it bigger and stronger becomes the new goal. You *start* with the
small system and explore the hell out of it, you don't just
Blush.
Some corrections to my overly hasty post below:
I misread the table I found for heat transfer coefficients at
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/overall-heat-transfer-coefficients-d_284.html.
It turns out heat transfer coefficients are not so easy to predict, but
(consistent with
From: Joshua Cude [mailto:joshua.c...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 11:19 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Can Rossi generate steam hotter
than 110 °C ?
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:43 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
Let me add my two cents
In other words, you've got nothin' but vague, unsupported insults.
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 7:59 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
Joshua,
You are free to express your opinion on the Rossi's e-Cat matter, and you
certainly have done that in more than one
From Joshua:
In other words, you've got nothin' but vague,
unsupported insults.
In my view, it doesn't matter if my vague unsupported insults (which I
freely admit were done at your expense) are correct or not.
You seem to believe that you have Rossi's occasionally troubling heat
measurements
From Joshua:
...
Eventually, in a few years Rossi will simply fade away
like Patterson from the 90s, and the CF community will
make excuses like his stock of lucky catalyst ran out
and he found he was unable to make more, and you will
refuse to admit you were wrong.
Thank you for sharing
In an earlier post svj wrote:
As best as I can tell, you appear to be transfixed at ground zero,
seemingly
acting as the last remaining sane skeptic in this sorry gullible world, the
one last intelligent, logical, rational, person left who knows better, who
knows he is absolutely certain Rossi's
Joshua,
In one of my original posts I stated the fact that, in my opinion,
Rossi's current e-Cat configurations are probably not configured in
such a manner as to generate steam that is much above 100 C. I don't
think the water once it's transformed into steam has a chance to hang
around long
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:02 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua,
In one of my original posts I stated the fact that, in my opinion,
Rossi's current e-Cat configurations are probably not configured in
such a manner as to generate steam that is much above
From Joshua
...
But I'm glad in this post you actually said something about
the experiment, and gave me an opportunity to state my
(non-rhetorical) case in another way. I really don't expect
to be able to convince you of anything, but there are other
people who read this who might like the
Wait a minute Steven, I think Rossi has shown adequate but not rock-solid
evidence for a strong energy anomaly. How does that make me a skeptic?
However, if you take all the evidence weighted strongly towards the Swedish
testing and VB, then it looks like it is non-nuclear gain. Does that make
In reply to Joshua Cude's message of Mon, 9 May 2011 23:19:05 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
What makes that private experiment even harder to take seriously is the
claimed 130 kW excursion. Rossi has on occasion mentioned an optimum
operating temperature of about 400C. If this temperature provides the usual
I wrote:
I also agree that Rossi has a habit of getting involved with people he
should not, and making himself look bad. His web pages are a case in point.
Especially the part where he lists an advisor who does not seem to exist.
Now we learn he made a typo in a patent application.
This is
The thing that makes it stranger than fiction is that *IF* there is a
problem, and there may not be then the perpetrators may have originally
been looking only for a Stanley-Meyer type of self-deluded inventor
and
yet lo and behold they stumbled onto a guy who really does have a bona
fide
]
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 7:39 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Can Rossi generate steam hotter than 110 °C ?
I wrote:
I also agree that Rossi has a habit of getting involved with people he should
not, and making
himself look bad. His web pages are a case in point
Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
It wouldn't doubt it if Rossi has been working tirelessly, 16 hour days or
more, for 6 months straight or longer... is there any doubt that he might
tend to make more than the usual number of errors in his recollections, and
mistakes when
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 9:12 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
This is based on the assumption that the actual operating temperature is
indeed
400C @ 15 kW. If it's in fact much less, then 130 kW for a short period may
not
be a problem. Perhaps it only gets up to 400C when the output is really
Copper pipes don't like high pressure.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Pierre Carbonnelle
pierre.carbonne...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
I'm puzzled that Rossi has not answered me yet when I posted the message
below on his journal last week (
Rossi claims they can produce temperatures as high as 500 to 550 C
From: Pierre Carbonnelle pierre.carbonne...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, May 9, 2011 1:01:42 PM
Subject: [Vo]:Can Rossi generate steam hotter than 110 °C ?
Dear all,
I'm
That 550C temperature may only be occurring inside the reaction vessel.
The fast flow of water would cool the containing copper pipe to something
under 110C based on the pressure maintained in the cooling loop.
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:50 PM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.comwrote:
Let me add my two cents:
If Rossi's e-Cat reactor core can regularly sustain temperatures of
500c or higher, water that is in contact with the reactor core's
surface FOR LONG ENOUGH PERIODS will most certainly exceed
temperatures 100.1 C, and by quite a large margin.
However, the tick would be
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:43 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Let me add my two cents:
Sorry, it's not worth even that.
(I've stayed away from this list because its terms of reference clearly
exclude people of my mindset, but this discussion of higher
23 matches
Mail list logo
