There is no violations here. Experimentation defines the principles that
the theories as based on.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:50 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem with such theories it is that they violate their own
principles.
2013/6/3 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
oops I meant
How about LAFPHER
Lattice Assisted Fleischmann Pons Heat Effect Reactor
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Sent: Sunday, June 2, 2013 7:07:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A Language Upgrade Needed for LENR?
How about LAPFHER
Lattice Assisted Pons Fleischmann Heat Effect Reactor
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
I have a new post up where I explore the issue of the language used to
describe LENR. I would be interested in the views of others here
Then let's get back to your original statement: That's not good. It
violates the 2nd law of thermo. How is that not good? That's like
watching a rock hovering in the sky saying, that violates the law of
gravity. There's nothing good nor bad about it. It's simply an
experimental result.
On
From: Alan Fletcher
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2013 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Caveats to using SPICE for thermal analysis
David has been concentrating on the control aspects, I have been doing RC
modelling similar to that described in your very helpful paper.
I did a detailed mesh model of a
you forget the L...
off topic: anyway It remind me a remarks about innovation:
Fleischmann is born in Czechoslovakia, moved to Netherlands, then England,
then worked as electrologist in US, when having trouble because of his
discoveries,
he get funded by Japanese corp to work in France...
what
Last year the same question was
raisedhttp://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?454-Choosing-the-name-Cold-Fusion-LENR.
My first longitudinal hair cutter opinion was to use LENR (beside being
precise and popular, that term is easy to search in google).
however after discussing with businessmen,
On the search for an affordable geigercounter i came across the following
initiative:
http://www.radiation-watch.org/p/english.html
They sell a variaty of very affordable radiation kits that also sell via a
European site:
http://www.radiation-watch.co.uk http://www.radiation-watch.co.uk/order
I
From: Robert Ellefson vortex-h...@e2ke.com
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:18 AM
I did a detailed mesh model of a heat exchanger ... but gave it up
because it was too sensitive to the parameter for heat transfer
from water to metal.
See http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_oct11_c.php and
Good points Alain. I suppose it may all become a mute point as more
positive results roll in, and if there is a running reactor that the public
can visit.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
Last year the same question was
I wish Abd was here. Would you like to carry this conversation to his nVo?
2013/6/3 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
Then let's get back to your original statement: That's not good. It
violates the 2nd law of thermo. How is that not good? That's like
watching a rock hovering in the sky
No thanks. Why don't you just answer the question? It is pretty
straightforward.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
I wish Abd was here. Would you like to carry this conversation to his nVo?
2013/6/3 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
Then let's
You don't need new physics to explain cold fusion. Nor violate any
statistical physics. You just need to look for ignored solution in
the literature.
2013/6/3 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
No thanks. Why don't you just answer the question? It is pretty
straightforward.
On Mon, Jun
I think I understand now. In your viewpoint, an actual experimental result
which challenges that stance would be something you'd call not good.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:59 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
You don't need new physics to explain cold fusion. Nor violate any
Neologisms-R-us.
What is the take-away message from any designer name? First - it should
point to the most attractive feature, and second it should be fairly unique.
The underlying reaction is almost certainly Quantum Mechanical - as opposed
to thermonuclear. The least we can do is put a Q
I suggest you all read Quantum Weirdness? It's all in your mind In
Scientific American, June 2013, page 47. According to the author, QM
has been made complex and increasingly out of contact with reality.
The success in fitting behavior has been used to justify increasingly
complex
Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that it doesn't matter to us who have looked into the research,
but do you think it would make a difference with the broader population of
scientists, general public, and the patent office?
No, that is a forlorn hope. That is the reason people
No, for me an actual explanation that challenges that stance I'd call 'not
good'.
2013/6/3 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
In your viewpoint, an actual experimental result which challenges that
stance would be something you'd call not good.
--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com
O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
***Then as long as those theories can explain this experimental result,
everything is in good shape. Why would you say That's not good?
This is an experimental finding, not a theory.
It is not good because the laws of thermodynamics are probably right
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Neologisms-R-us…* *
What is the take-away message from any “designer name”? First - it should
point to the most attractive feature, and second it should be fairly
unique.
Or maybe it should simply be kewl:
even if commercially Cold fusion seems the best (brand is known, with good
layman image assumed it works), the fact that it sahre the name with adobe
technology, and with many other sentense like jaz fusion or cold drink is a
problem for tech-watcher like me...
LENR is not shared by any other
But upthread you have already called this actual experimental result not
good.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
No, for me an actual explanation that challenges that stance I'd call 'not
good'.
2013/6/3 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
In your
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
***Then as long as those theories can explain this experimental result,
everything is in good shape. Why would you say That's not good?
This is an experimental finding, not a
I've seen it claimed by a rather emotionally committed skeptic -- with some
background in conducting CF runs with calorimetry -- that an adequate 19th
century technology water-bath style calorimetry of the E-Cat HT would cost
a couple hundred bucks maybe Obviously if this is true then the
A sign of something to come or a sign of something that was missed !?
;-)
Harry
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Craig Brown cr...@overunity.co wrote:
FRENCH
Original Message
Subject: [Vo]:OT: scrabble challenge
From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, June 03,
frigorific!
Harry
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:
Good points Alain. I suppose it may all become a mute point as more
positive results roll in, and if there is a running reactor that the public
can visit.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Alain Sepeda
French and Flench http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/flench are the
longest valid scrabble words.
But I missed the point...
- Brad
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:14 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
With the seven letters LENR CF H make a word.
Harry
I was going to write this post, but you beat me to it. Your post is more
elegant and persuasive than mine would have been.
This common flaw in the reason and logic that most people use, this 2nd law
of thermodynamics hangup, is going to make the experimental revelation
showing BEC activity in
From the get go, when you come to think in more simple terms, isn’t seeing
a glowing pipe pumping out six time more energy than is going in a de facto
violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics?
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
I was going to write this
Axil, you show that you have no understanding of the second law. The
laws of thermodynamics simply define how energy must flow in a system
and how the system must behave as a result of the energy. The laws do
not address the source. In the case of Rossi, he has an obvious source
that
If the device was in the 1 to 5 kW range, then a simple hot tub should work.
A typical 6 foot spa heats at about 1 degree F per hour at 1 kW. That, some
copper tubing coils, and a utility pole meter should be enough. If you really
wanted to be sure no extra wiring/power was going into it,
I don't think a couple hundred bucks would cover the spa-based system you
describe. On the cheap is relative.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:29 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:
If the device was in the 1 to 5 kW range, then a simple hot tub should
work. A typical 6 foot spa heats at
OK, I'll ask the question a different way:
Is there any explanation offered, even if only in an interview, by the
researchers as to why they did not use normal calorimetry?
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:32 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think a couple hundred bucks would cover
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.4827v1.pdf
*Two coupled Jaynes-Cummings cells*
**
We develop a theoretical framework to evaluate the energy spectrum,
stationary states, and dielectric susceptibility of two Jaynes-Cummings
systems coupled together by the overlap of their respective longitudinal
field
Axil, I have no idea what your comment means in the context of the
subject we are discussing here. Please explain.
Ed Storms
On Jun 3, 2013, at 11:44 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1202.4827v1.pdf
Two coupled Jaynes-Cummings cells
We develop a theoretical framework to evaluate
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any explanation offered, even if only in an interview, by the
researchers as to why they did not use normal calorimetry?
They used perfectly normal calorimetry. There is not the slightest chance
output is any less than 3 times input. There is
Dennis,
I don't think it would be quite so easy for Rossi to perform the experiment
that you propose. The recent tests were conducted in the open air and the
thermal resistance that the ECAT works into has a very strong influence upon
its operational parameters.
If Rossi were to place his
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any explanation offered, even if only in an interview, by the
researchers as to why they did not use normal calorimetry?
They used perfectly normal calorimetry. There
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
If Rossi were to place his device into a tank of water much more heat
would be conducted away from the core.
I think the plan by Brian Ahern is to put the device in an air filled box
with a copper pipe wound around the outside or the inside wall, and
I would think that most of the $20K went to airfare, hotels and meals. you
can't expect the scientists to work for free.
-Mark
From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 9:42 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:A Couple Hundred Bucks Maybe...
I've seen it
The atoms in a Bose-Einstein condensate follow the Jaynes-Cummings model.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings_model
Jaynes–Cummings model
More to the point, when a Ni/H system get going after state up, the systems
becomes totally entangled.
This type of system is described
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
There is nothing for them to explain.
That may be the case and if so one would not expect to see an explanation
in the paper itself. On the other hand, given the controversial
environment they might reasonably be expected to say something like the
I see what you are referring to. If the ECAT is allowed to operate in air of
roughly the same local temperature, then it should behave the same. I
understood that Dennis was suggesting a configuration with much tighter
coupling to the coolant.
The ECAT will need adjustment depending upon
A Whack on the Side of the Head:
How to Unlock Your Mind for Innovation
by Roger van Oech
book review
http://www.creating.bz/our-reading-circle/whack.html
Oech identifies ten mental blocks which limit creativity:
The Right Answer
That's Not Logical
Follow the Rules
Be Practical
Play Is
Do the arithmetic, Mark.
Although it is true that a couple hundred bucks is only 1% of $20,000 and
that it is ridiculous think of the other 99% as going into technical
aspects alone, even if 90% of the budget were for overhead that would
still leave a budget of $2,000 for the technical aspects,
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Although it is true that a couple hundred bucks is only 1% of $20,000
and that it is ridiculous think of the other 99% as going into technical
aspects alone, even if 90% of the budget were for overhead . . .
I have significant experience with flow
I found a great paper that might lay all this stuff out. I have not read
it yet but it looks real good after doing a quick scan.
http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~pelster/Theses/nietner.pdf
Quantum Phase Transition of Light in the Jaynes-Cummings Lattice
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 2:13 PM,
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
It is not good because the laws of thermodynamics are probably right and
therefore this experimental result is probably wrong.
***Sounds a lot like the entire field of LENR.
Cold fusion does not challenge the laws of thermodynamics; it challenges
Yes.. [snip] The ECAT will need adjustment depending upon the environment into
which it operates. This is what should be expected.[/snip]
Perhaps it is just me but too little seems to be said about the heat sinking..
It is obviously part of the control loop even if passive in ambient air but
OK, so the take-away messages is:
No, the authors of the paper have not provided any rational for choosing
their form of calorimetry -- not even informally. Moreover, the claim that
adequate flow calorimetry for the E-Cat HT would cost 'a couple hundred
bucks' likely indicates pseudoskepticism.
I did not envision them submersing the cat into the water. More like passing
water/steam through as they did in their earlier tests with a flow system.
It is very difficult to measure air heating.
(note, I have also been able to do flow cal with racing car brake fluid at
higher temps (you
Just being realistic James.
A simple 'couple hundred bucks' calorimeter is NOT going to satisfy the
skeptics; they will pick it apart and another test would have been wasted.
Getting a quality data-acquisition system and multiple thermocouples/RTDs so
there is redundancy in the measurements
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 2:40 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, so the take-away messages is:
No, the authors of the paper have not provided any rational for choosing
their form of calorimetry -- not even informally.
I do not see why they need to provide a rationale. The choice
R. W. Emerson wrote:
Whatever course you decide upon, there is always someone to tell you
that you are wrong. There are always difficulties arising which tempt you
to believe that your critics are right. To map out a course of action and
follow it to an end requires courage..Do not go
I wrote:
It is not precise, but it is reliable, and accurate enough to prove the
point.
The point is, this is a huge effect. It runs at high temperatures and it is
at least three times input. McKubre needed a high precision flow
calorimeter because he was trying to measure an effect that
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Cold fusion does not challenge the laws of thermodynamics;
***Yup. A lot of people have the IMPRESsion that it challenges the 2nd
law, but that isn't the case at all. In fact here, this accusation that
BECs absorb
do not try to take the quote out of the obvious intended context. I was
obviously referring to the pioneering efforts of a new field of understanding.
example just because you make a new path does in no way mean you cannot use
existing shoes... You missed the entire point.
I still think
Notice I did not say flow calorimetry was needed. Just heating a container of
water - pool, spa, teapot You do not need to measure flow rates if the
effect is significant.
It avoids all the % steam questions, the emissivity numbers, the air flow, the
cameras..
It is about the
Even though I'm still wearing my skeptic's hat (that's the one with the
propeller on top) isn't the argument about the need for calorimetry made
irrelevant the amount of energy observed to have been generated? In other
words, even with more precise measurements the exact energy output couldn't
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
How many replications does it take for a rational scientist to accept the
finding? It used to be just 2 or 3, but in this field it seems to be
hundreds or thousands.
I think for most claims it used to be five or 10 good replications. It
depends on
From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 10:29:52 AM
For smaller units (1 to 100W), perhaps heating a tea pot would be
reasonable.
Unfortunately, I think that the person who made the cup of tea bet has passed
on.
(My forgetory will produce his name in about 10
DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:
do not try to take the quote out of the obvious intended context.
Sure, we get that. I was just ragging on extraordinary claims claim,
which I despise.
I still think that a standalone unplugged demo is the best approach - not
high wattage and fancy
Unfortunately, I think that the person who made the cup of tea bet
has passed on.
(My forgetory will produce his name in about 10 minutes while I'm
doing something else)
It wasn't tea .. it was a bet by a professor that would be paid off when a cold
fusion device delivered 1 kWh to the grid,
The reputed gain is so high - Rossi would be wise to forego calorimetry and
go directly to conversion of heat to electricity.
Here is the device that could do that - ORC in a small format. This device
is perfect for the HotCat.
http://www.infinityturbine.com/ORC/IT10_ORC_System.html
yes, calorimetry is not needed IF you believe the claims, methods, and the
effect. As you may know, I don't doubt the reality of CF/LENR in general.
However, if you goal is to convince non-believer then it is best to avoid
systems where you have to know the exact waveforms, cables,
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Even though I'm still wearing my skeptic's hat (that's the one with the
propeller on top) isn't the argument about the need for calorimetry made
irrelevant the amount of energy observed to have been generated?
Yes. But power, not energy. If the difference
From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 1:22:05 PM
And no, I don't think that they were over unity by more than an order
of magnitude- Only a factor of perhaps 6. I need to go back and
check that.
The COP was 6 (Dec) and 3 (March).
The order of magnitude was
bob park
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 13:16:16 -0700
From: a...@well.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A Couple Hundred Bucks Maybe...
Unfortunately, I think that the person who made the cup of tea bet
has passed on.
(My forgetory will produce his name in about 10 minutes while
You do not yet appreciate this yet, but a knew field of science that is
interested in the theory of quantum computers, atomic imaging, and
invisibility clocks are developing the theory that also covers LENR. In
this way, every day a half dozen papers are written advancing LENR theory.
This
DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:
yes, calorimetry is not needed IF you believe the claims, methods, and the
effect. As you may know, I don't doubt the reality of CF/LENR in general.
However, if you goal is to convince non-believer then it is best to avoid
systems where you have to
Having tried to edit something on the wiki E-CAT page and having it
immediately deleted, I ended up writing this on the Topic Talk page.
It probably won't do any good but if enough people do this (anyone can)
They say there are 1000- 7000 hits per day on the E-CAT page.
This discussion
the position of nassim nicholas taleb, is that what prevent innovation is
planning the result.
take good option, with cheap failure and rare huge success, and when it
produce the unexpected, try to adapt to what you have, and not to make it
fit in your plan.
intelligence is not in the
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:31 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:
Having tried to edit something on the wiki E-CAT page and having it
immediately deleted, I ended up writing this on the Topic Talk page. It
probably won't do any good but if enough people do this (anyone can)
They
DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:
Notice I did not say flow calorimetry was needed. Just heating a
container of water - pool, spa, teapot
I have thought about that. During the initial warm up phase you would get
an interesting result. After that, when it reaches a steady state, you
It will take more than just a generator and an extension cord to close the
loop. Some form of energy storage will be required to do the job.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Jun 3, 2013 4:20 pm
Subject: RE:
That is not what I want to hear. that is what I am working toward.
standalone and a cup of tea for NI I doubt I will have it by then just a
small 1:3 if I am lucky. But if I can encourage one person to do experiments,
I will be happy and can crawl back under my rock.
But perhaps
I wrote:
You do not need to measure flow rates if the effect is significant.
You don't need to measure it now. You have to depend on Drs. Stefan and
Boltzmann being right. As for convection, you just gotta look up the
numbers in an HVAC textbook.
I confused the issue a little here.
Berke Durak,
My interest was to get Wiki to correct their entry. Not clear to me how
Reddit can help that.
You may want to refigure that if you want to run for extended times- an Olympic
pool (likely overkill) has a volume of 2.5 million liters and some are indoors
and have covers. ( I would just use bubble wrap) You could easily go long
enough to be an order of mag or two above chemical.
The
DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:
That is not what I want to hear.
You do not want to hear that the cell will go out of control and melt? It
will though, whether you want to hear that or not. It has already melted.
I do not understand what you have in mind here. Nature allows us to
DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:
You may want to refigure that if you want to run for extended times- an
Olympic pool (likely overkill) has a volume of 2.5 million liters and some
are indoors and have covers.
That would be extremely noisy, to say the least. Changes in air
temperature,
Dennis,
The best proof is one that has the least possibility of error. Every
complication that is added to the setup results in many more issues to question
by the skeptics. The technique used by the testers of the ECAT is good enough
for any reasonable scientist to accept and all this non
What if Neutrinos don't really exist?
I've always felt uncomforatble about the discovery of the Neutrino (or rather
the 3 neutrino siblings - as they currently are). The particles seem to fulfil
most (if not all) of the criteria for being products of pathological science.
On one hand they are
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:57 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:
Berke Durak,
My interest was to get Wiki to correct their entry. Not clear to me how
Reddit can help that.
The idea is that pro-LENR people could collaboratively work on a wiki
where they have editorial control, whose
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It will take more than just a generator and an extension cord to close the
loop. Some form of energy storage will be required to do the job.
Correctomundo. This will complicate matters. It probably means they need
batteries and inverters. As sure as
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:22 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:
yes, calorimetry is not needed IF you believe the claims, methods, and the
effect.
The claims are that the device produces significantly over unity, the
methods have been alluded to but Rossi is definitely not public with
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Indeed, making steam and using it to, say, drive a car across Italy
without stopping would be pretty damn convincing.
Not really. The skeptics would come up with a hundred reasons why that was
faked. They would say this was actually two identical electric
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Ah, now we have it ... it's the questions of reproducability and
controlability,
But these questions have no bearing on whether the effect is real or not.
During the Vanguard era of US rocket development in the 1950s, rockets were
extremely difficult to
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
Unfortunately, I think that the person who made the cup of tea bet has
passed on.
Dr. Richard L. Garwin is alive and well and will likely live to have his tea.
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Dr. Richard L. Garwin is alive and well and will likely live to have his
tea.
I'm hoping we can do something more dramatic, on a larger scale. Something
like what the Japanese authorities did to the notorious criminal Ishikawa
Goemon in 1594 would be
Dave,
It would be nice to get Infinity Turbine to donate a few weeks of testing time
on their ORC device which had been modified with a DC generator driving a bank
of Ultracaps.
The caps would be sized so that there is maybe 15 minutes of cushion in the
energy storage – but no
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
It would be nice to get Infinity Turbine to donate a few weeks of testing
time on their ORC device which had been modified with a DC generator
driving a bank of Ultracaps.
This would be nice. It would be a lot of fun. I personally would feel
gratified
From: Jed Rothwell
This would be nice. It would be a lot of fun. I personally would feel
gratified and pleased to see this. However, it would not convince a single
skeptic. They would simply say that all this equipment is fake or there is a
hidden wire or some other trick.
Frankly I
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm hoping we can do something more dramatic, on a larger scale. Something
like what the Japanese authorities did to the notorious criminal Ishikawa
Goemon in 1594 would be ideal, but I guess that's out.
Raising the
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Ah, now we have it ... it's the questions of reproducability and
controlability,
But these questions have no bearing on whether the effect is real or not.
We're talking about
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
If Rossi can make devices that demonstrably and reliably work and don't blow
up, he proves the E-Cat is real. If they reliably blow up, he's in the
armaments business.
LOL! Proving the reaction to be HIGHLY OVER UNITY!
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
. The world has not grown more irrational.
***I have no proof, but on this point I simply beg to differ.
We only need a small number of supporters to win this fight. The thing is,
we need people who have lots of
Mark,
It might take a little time for Rossi to gain total control over his device.
How would you like to have been the pilot of the first plane built by the
Wright brothers? I have little doubt that great progress will be achieved over
the next couple of years with Rossi's device and
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
We're talking about Rossi's device and whether it works, not whether
CF/LENR/LENR+/Pixie-Mediated-Power/Whatever is real.
If it is real it is the most important advance in technology since the
discovery of fire. If the scientific community is convinced it
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
And yes, there is a significant qualitative difference between COP of 6
and COP of 2.5 in terms of market value. The HotCat could be on either end
of that spectrum, based on what the last report indicated.
I am certain that you can have any COP you
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
