Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

As you have not heard from the Chinese that is proof positive of fraud. Really? AA On 9/5/2016 1:13 AM, Terry Blanton wrote: This whole discussion is freakin' ridiculous. If AR really had a reactor with a COP of 6.0, the Chinese would already be scrambling to build thousands of such

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

This whole discussion is freakin' ridiculous. If AR really had a reactor with a COP of 6.0, the Chinese would already be scrambling to build thousands of such reactors. Rossi is clearly a fraud.

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

On 09/03/2016 01:35 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence > wrote: And more important, how could the dirt /circulate?/ It wouldn't make it past the boil/vaporize/recondense stage. If there really was steam, the dirt could be coming

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > And more important, how could the dirt *circulate?* It wouldn't make it > past the boil/vaporize/recondense stage. > If there really was steam, the dirt could be coming from the condenser. > As if we needed more proof -- but the brown water

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Hey, speaking of dirty water, there was a really worthwhile observation on that thread: "Could be anything. Rust, dirt, bacteria. If Rossi wouldn't just let it circulate with a mild 20 kW heating once per circle, *it'd all clog up in whatever part is supposed to turn that filth into steam.*"

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Jed, You said the pipe was DN40. There is no way one would put a DN80 flowmeter on a pipe that small. I assume it was mounted on a DM80 pipe and that was why it was as large as it was. I depended on memory because I didn't want to take the time to look it up. Without the piping drawing it

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Jed, I wanted specifically information about people to whom (as you say) IH has complained in 2015 about the 1MW plant. What has Rossi do with this. The strange thing is that NOBODY has confirmed what you say, e.g. on forums where LENRists write. You use the oppressors logic "I say you must

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

As the water is continuously distilled I see no reason why it should be "seriously dirty." AA On 9/2/2016 11:56 PM, Eric Walker wrote: On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence > wrote: And obvious point ... if the water in the

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

a.ashfield wrote: >From memory the flowmeter was DN80, but that was just hearsay. > Why do you depend on memory? It is right there in Exhibit 5. The flowmeter was an Apator PoWoGaz, model number MWN130-80-NC. That is not "hearsay." It is a statement filed with the court

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: And obvious point ... if the water in the reservoir was seriously > dirty, as you mentioned in an earlier note, then it wasn't pure water, > which in turn implies it very probably had a higher boiling point than

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

From memory the flowmeter was DN80, but that was just hearsay. A dimensioned drwg of the pipework is what's required. What no comment on Rossi's reply to IH's motion to dismiss? ( Re: [Vo]: Rossi's answer to IH) AA On 9/2/2016 8:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: a.ashfield

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

a.ashfield wrote: If the steam is condensed it would form a vacuum. DN40 sounds small to > me. Is that another Murray quote? > Yes, I said it was from Murray. Your knee jerk rejection of this is irrational. You can easily confirm the size of the pipe by looking up the

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Peter Gluck wrote: > You have not answered some of my questions but can do it now, e.g. to whom > except you have complained IH re the plant in 2015? you can answer in > private. > I will tell you nothing that has not been revealed by Rossi or by I.H. Ask as many times

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

On 09/02/2016 11:07 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Also, because an earlier version of the report supposedly had higher numbers, which were replaced with 0.0 bar in the later version. Thanks for that nugget. It made the time spent following this whole thread worthwhile. :-) (When people do

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

If the steam is condensed it would form a vacuum. DN40 sounds small to me. Is that another Murray quote? AA On 9/2/2016 11:07 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: a.ashfield > wrote: Why do you say the pressure was higher than 0.0 bar when

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

I guess the main purpose of recirculating the water is not to save its cost but to reduced the dissolved salts that would fur up the reactors over time. AA On 9/2/2016 11:00 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Peter Gluck > wrote: Jed, you also do

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Water is deposited there , a part of it goes to the pump, then the flowmeter to the ECats. The pipe used for this full with water, the flowmeter was working properly. The half full legend was created by Murray- if not can you ask a photo of the plant and of the open flowmeter he says he has seen

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

a.ashfield wrote: Why do you say the pressure was higher than 0.0 bar when that is what is > reported? > Because you could not get this volume of steam or water to flow through the heat exchanger if the pressure were 0.0 barG (1 atm). The pumps have to push the water (or

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Peter Gluck wrote: Jed, you also do not understand the function of the reservoir. > I do understand it. It eliminates the need for a constant flow of tapwater. The reservoir holds a large volume of water. Rather dirty water, as it happens. The temperature of the water in

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Why do you say the pressure was higher than 0.0 bar when that is what is reported? At 102.8C it would be dry steam. AA On 9/2/2016 10:26 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Peter Gluck > wrote: From the reservoir a pump sends water to the

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Jed, you also do not understand the function of the reservoir. peter On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 5:27 PM, a.ashfield wrote: > Yes it would be ludicrous to place the flow meter on the return line from > the third party's equipment rather than measuring the flow directly going

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Yes it would be ludicrous to place the flow meter on the return line from the third party's equipment rather than measuring the flow directly going into the reactors. AA On 9/2/2016 10:18 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: a.ashfield > wrote:

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Peter Gluck wrote: >From the reservoir a pump sends water to the generators where it is > converted in steam and goes to the customer. > Yes, but it is a closed loop. All of the water is condensed and returned. The reservoir water level does not change much from day to

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

As to what I think of IH see the new thread about Rossi's answer to IH's response. As I've said several times, a piping drawing would clear up the matter but this is still secret. AA On 9/2/2016 10:12 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: a.ashfield >

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

a.ashfield wrote: > The flow meter would be on the output pipe from the reservoir (near the > bottom of it), either before or after the pump feeding the reactors. > It is ludicrous to suggest it would be on the condensate return pipe from > the customer. > Actually,

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

a.ashfield wrote: True. That is why I think the pipe was full, not half full. Your trust in > Murray is touching. > Do you seriously believe that I.H. would jeopardize this case and risk losing $267 million by lying about this? You think they are crazy? Do you think

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

>From the reservoir a pump sends water to the generators where it is converted in steam and goes to the customer. I hve explained you why and how the heat is measured. Do you cannot understand this? You have a certainty of that half(?) empty pipe snd you rehect elementary logic. You manifest a

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

True. That is why I think the pipe was full, not half full. Your trust in Murray is touching. AA On 9/2/2016 9:51 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: a.ashfield > wrote: The flow meter would be on the output pipe from the reservoir (near

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

a.ashfield wrote: > The flow meter would be on the output pipe from the reservoir (near the > bottom of it), either before or after the pump feeding the reactors. > If it were there, the pipe would be full, so it cannot be there. > It is ludicrous to suggest it would

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Jed, The flow meter would be on the output pipe from the reservoir (near the bottom of it), either before or after the pump feeding the reactors. It is ludicrous to suggest it would be on the condensate return pipe from the customer. If IH have supplied a piping drawing it is not in the

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

a.ashfield wrote: That seems HIGHLY unlikely. Why? Where else would you put a flowmeter intended for liquid? It would not work in the steam. (Assuming there is actually steam.) Can you prove the flow meter was not downstream of the reservoir? > I do not know what

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

That seems HIGHLY unlikely. Can you prove the flow meter was not downstream of the reservoir? Murray;s say so is not proof. If IH had a case I think they would have shown a piping drawing by now. AA On 9/1/2016 8:32 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: To summarize: I think the flow meter is installed

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

To summarize: I think the flow meter is installed downstream from the heat exchanger, where there is liquid water at ~68°C. From there, the water flows downhill (by gravity only) back to the reservoir. Since the pipe is larger than it needs to be for this volume of water, it is half full. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Peter Gluck wrote: excuse me, is this a serious answer? What has the hose to do with the Plant? > The pipe in Rossi's plant was half empty. That's the whole point. (Note that the second photo I pointed shows a half-empty pipe, not a hose.) I cannot understand what you

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

excuse me, is this a serious answer? What has the hose to do with the Plant? Anyway thank you, it was enough I fear your "logic" is contagious so I apologize to anybody who will read your messages. Rational discussion with you is impossible. peter On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Jed Rothwell

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Peter Gluck wrote: But starting from the diagram, you can imagine how to make the pipes haf > full. Can you, independently from this affair? > I do not need a diagram for that. I can do it easily, with an open hose. Put the hose on the ground. Turn the water a little

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

But starting from the diagram, you can imagine how to make the pipes haf full. Can you, independently from this affair? Is Rossi the inventor of this scheme any plumber can use? You are not aware of what terrible ies you say? peter On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 8:48 PM, Jed Rothwell

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Peter Gluck wrote: please take the image of the flowmeter and show how can you see inside it > when in function. > Of course you cannot see inside it when it is functioning. Why would you need to do that? The rust is still there when it stops. > And how do myou open

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

please take the image of the flowmeter and show how can you see inside it when in function. And how do myou open it when ot working?OK? Have you ever seen the scheme of the plant? Let Rossi in peace, and tell NOW where was that damned flowmeter placed; if you don't know ask IH take please this

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Peter Gluck wrote: Can you give details, facts, iit was sealed and Penon has rfemoved the > seals, has he asked Murray, "come Joe, take a look to it"? > What the heck does "sealed" mean? Where were these "seals"? In front of the orifice? The water has to freely flow

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Can you give details, facts, iit was sealed and Penon has rfemoved the seals, has he asked Murray, "come Joe, take a look to it"? Has Murray a photo of those stains? If the pipes are working half-empty then the how does water flow in the vertical segements? Have you idea about the absurdity of

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Peter Gluck wrote: > . . . there was no trace of excess heat, this being obvious because there > are rust stains on the static vanes of a flowmeter that was not opened but > Murray had seen them . . . > That is preposterous. Of course it was opened! When you remove a

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

Dear Alain, I am just writing an editorial about progress blindness e.g. Jed Rothwell is unable or unwilling to see any progress in what Rossi did achieved starting from 2011 and accusing Rossi of possible amnesia- in the best times he was able to get excess heat but later not, aat the 1year 1MW

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

On the opposite, maybe not specifically in Italy, but results get more and more reliable. for ICCF15 ENEA reported results where success evolved from unreliable to more than 60% success because of cristallography surface choice. as I read the litterature of PdD, it seems more and more reliable

Re: [Vo]:History of cold fusion in Italy. Retrograde performance: maybe the Coyote rules?

I am struck by a curious parallel between many investigational endeavors in science, the 'soft sciences', near science, and maybe-science (cold fusion may or may not be in this last category). All are troubled by a sequence comprising initial success, followed by a long irregular slope down