These communications by Rossi are taking a bizarre turn. All this paranoid
talk about reporters acting for competitors and telling everyone to just
wait for the big demonstration a few months away is making me very
suspicious of Rossi's claims of inventing a new energy producing device. I
was
Suffice it to say that E-Cat won't save Greece in time
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A worldwide conspiracy against the Rossi effect
From: Rock_nj rockn...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, June 20, 2011 9:18 am
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
These communications by Rossi are taking a
Axil,
Good idea, The geometry of the powder to tungsten interface
might be a concern because of the high melting point of tungsten but as far
as material selection the anomalous behavior of tungsten and atomic hydrogen
goes all the way back to Langmuir. My question is regarding the
t...@wonksmedia.com wrote:
Suffice it to say that E-Cat won't save Greece in time
How do you know that?
How bad is Greece? The problem is largely a matter of confidence.
How much time will it take? It could start to have an effect in months,
since people tend to discount the present in
Rock_nj wrote:
These communications by Rossi are taking a bizarre turn. All this
paranoid talk about reporters acting for competitors and telling
everyone to just wait for the big demonstration a few months away is
making me very suspicious of Rossi's claims of inventing a new energy
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Complex explanations have been proposed, ranging from insensitive
equipment to bizarre multibody fusion theories. Yet, a very simple
explanation covers the result very well: Rossi lies.
That is not a very simple explanation. It would be a very complicated
one,
It is more about the personality of the generator. Even if the elementary
conditions of intensity and continuity are fulfilled
there are serious doubts regarding its complex *reliability -* day to day,
E-cat to E-cat, batch to batch reproducibility, adjustability, constancy.
Rossi speaks about
Failure to Disclose
From the the way I read his post on the 22passi blog, Daniel is
catching hell for not disclosing that he went to high school with Dr.
Levi.
Or am I reading it wrong?
T
I responded to linked in after several requests came in to join from a friend.
Now it is bugging everyone on my email list to join. I cant seem to stop it.
I may only have written to you once only years ago. Do not responded to
requests to joined Linkedin on my behalf
Sorry
Frank
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
There is a classic demonstration, used to be common in high school
physics labs: you boil water in a paper cup, over a flame, as I recall.
A paper cup!?
Please, folks, don't stick your hand in that invisible steam. It may
only be at 100 degrees, but it's
That's an error- I have read the blog starting Jan 15 and Daniele Passerini
has told from the very start that he is a good friend of Levi and this was
the reason he made the report of the Bologna conference. I consider this
absolutely not relevant, he writes well, understands many technical
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
No it didn't because it wasn't public and details weren't documented.
Lost performative here. That's why Stephen and Jed are talking past
each other. Jed means confirmed for Levi and Rossi, Stephen means
didn't confirm for the rest of us. Basically, confirmed is
Eh? ALL those people have observed non-natural isotope ratios?
That was what I was talking about there.
On 11-06-20 09:51 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Complex explanations have been proposed, ranging from insensitive
equipment to bizarre multibody fusion theories.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
That's an error- I have read the blog starting Jan 15 and Daniele Passerini
has told from the very start that he is a good friend of Levi and this was
the reason he made the report of the Bologna conference. I consider
On 2011-06-20 18:50, Terry Blanton wrote:
. . .but at present the elements that tell me I smell like
something else, and poison ...
[...] After the last email he wrote me (of which I reserve the right
to disclose to the public or not), I got annoyed probably more than
Levi. I would like
At 06:44 PM 6/19/2011, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
If one were trying to reach the operating temperature of the device,
wouldn't it
make sense to have no water flowing until it was reached (or at least close)?
Consider the complications. For a reminder, there are two chambers in
the device, a
Another way to look at it is that due to the barometer equation, the pressure
on the bottom is higher than the pressure on the top so there's always an
upward force.
Hoyt Stearns
Scottsdale, Arizona US
-Original Message-
From: Michele Comitini [mailto:michele.comit...@gmail.com]
What he says simply- I want to believe that this was an error of Krivit, but
it seems to be bad intent.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:50 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
wrote:
That's an error- I have read the blog
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
What he says simply- I want to believe that this was an error of Krivit, but
it seems to be bad intent.
Ahh. Thanks to you and Akira!
T
I wrote:
Lost performative here. That's why Stephen and Jed are talking past
each other. Jed means confirmed for Levi and Rossi, . . .
That's exactly what I meant. Obviously if you don't take Levi's word
for it, this is not proof for you.
I should have said: this is not CONFIRMATION for
At 10:19 PM 6/19/2011, Axil Axil wrote:
Rossi could use tungsten as a
replacement for stainless steel (SS) as the shell of his reaction vessel.
The nano-powder has a higher melting temperature then SS. Tungsten is
also opaque to x-rays/gamma-rays can replace lead shielding; and very
Did any attendees that are on this list see Dr. Duncan there?
Also, is he aware of the e-Cat?
I can't imagine that he isn't, but I don't think I've read any posts that
indicate he is...
Same question as to Dr. Bushnell from NASA... Was he there?
Garwin was probably there, but in drag... :-)
Peter Gluck wrote:
What he [22Passi] says simply- I want to believe that this was an
error of Krivit, but it seems to be bad intent.
To address Passi's comment:
I doubt there is any bad intent. I would say it was bad timing (Krivit
should have waited), a bad attitude, and Krivit's
Mark Iverson wrote:
Did any attendees that are on this list see Dr. Duncan there?
Also, is he aware of the e-Cat?
I can't imagine that he isn't, but I don't think I've read any posts that
indicate he is...
I do not know whether Duncan was present but he is aware of Rossi. I
have discussed
Phone Interview with Sven Kullander
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/06/20/phone-interview-with-sven-kullander/
a) Kullander not sure, but thinks steam measurement was by volume
b) Rossi paid their expenses
Where does the Vort consensus stand on the bulk powder vs the interface layer
to the reactor walls? For a long time I thought the heated powder just sat in
the reactor while pressurized hydrogen permeated the geometry of the powder to
produce anomalous heat. It wasn't till I understood the
For a cold fusion reactor like any other reactor type, the guiding design
goal is to produce a large, cost effective, passively self-limiting, reactor
design that is intrinsically safe rather than a design that has 1000’s of
inefficient hard to control and resource intensive units. Electric
I hear the all we can do is wait until October a lot. If just a few people
were working on replication, we could get details a lot sooner than
October/November...
Rossi is very kind to answer questions on his blog. I've asked a number of
questions trying to learn about what is going on and
From Jed:
...
Another factor is that I have some unpublished information about this test,
and about some other private tests. I do not have a huge amount of
information, but enough to give me more confidence in the results. Stephen
Lawrence does not have this information so naturally he is
At 04:02 PM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I've asserted recently that it was obvious to
me that the steam was wet, and I've said,
several times, that it would take too long to
explain why. I've got a few minutes, so I'll
see if I can fit in a coherent explanation.
I think you have
Axil Axil wrote:
For a cold fusion reactor like any other reactor type, the guiding
design goal is to produce a large, cost effective, passively
self-limiting, reactor design that is intrinsically safe rather than a
design that has 1000’s of inefficient hard to control and resource
intensive
On 11-06-20 03:35 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 04:02 PM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I've asserted recently that it was obvious to me that the steam was
wet, and I've said, several times, that it would take too long to
explain why. I've got a few minutes, so I'll see if I can
Hello group,
The following Google-translated link pointing to the latest Blog post by
Daniele Passerini (22passi) and containing, among other things, a
statement from dr. Galantini (the thermodynamicist in charge during
earlier E-Cat measurements), will probably be able to shed some light on
OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
Can you elaborate a little more about such unpublished information.
Nope. Sorry. Over the past year I mentioned several times that I heard
about private tests of the eCats. Some worked, others did not. Some of
the people doing these tests shared a few
OK, Galantini named a probe. (We've had probe part numbers before,
FWIW; Levi mentioned one, IIRC.)
And Galantini told us that he measured temperatures in excess of 100.1
C. (That's lower than numbers given by Levi, BTW, and certainly *far*
too low to indicate the steam was dry without some
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Aw, these reports drive me nuts. I'd not read this one, I think. They
have a pump for cooling water, it seems. So when they start up, they
are pumping an estimated 6.47 kg per hour of water. They assume that
this flow rate remains the same. Why?
It's a constant
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
And of course the word significantly is a value judgement, unless he
cares to hang some numbers on it.
I believe he means mathematically significant, not value-judgement
significant.
It is frustrating that these people do not publish data, and a
I received this message a few minutes ago. Take it FWIW.
Original Message
Subject:Re: [Vo]:Something more on the steam
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:21:54 -0400
From: LEGUILLON Robert robert.leguil...@us.thalesgroup.com
To: sa...@pobox.com sa...@pobox.com
At 04:59 PM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-06-19 04:38 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 11:57 AM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I won't argue this with you again, Jed, I had enough trouble
getting you to admit that it's possible to have steam at higher
than 100 C at 1
At 05:32 PM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Also think about how you find yourself responding to my comment. Do
you find yourself imagining that I have a motive,
You must have a motive but I can't imagine what it is.
(It never, in a million years, would have occurred to me that you
On 11-06-20 05:01 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
And of course the word significantly is a value judgement,
unless he cares to hang some numbers on it.
I believe he means mathematically significant, not value-judgement
At 10:52 AM 6/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
There is a classic demonstration, used to be
common in high school physics labs: you boil
water in a paper cup, over a flame, as I recall.
A paper cup!?
Yeah. I think one of my high school science
teachers, the
At 01:19 PM 6/20/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
On 2011-06-20 18:50, Terry Blanton wrote:
. . .but at present the elements that tell me I smell like
something else, and poison ...
[...] After the last email he wrote me (of which I reserve the
right to disclose to the public or not), I got
We all know a humidity probe was use to estimated the steam quality. The probe
tells you the density of water in the air. This can be used with the
temperature
to calculate the steam quality by mass OR volume. Since the steam quality was
not measured directly by volume or mass so I don't
Ah yes. It is right there in the testo.com brochure, isn't it?
I vaguely recall that I checked this months ago for the instrument used in
the first test: the Delta Ohm model HD37AB1347 IAQ with a high temperature
HP474AC SICRAM sensor. I listed that in the news item with a link to the
brochure
Hello group,
Sorry for cluttering the mailing list by creating yet another new thread
(please do tell me if it's starting to be an annoyance), but I wasn't
unsure of where to post this and I thought it probably deserved a
discussion of its own.
It's a freshly uploaded Youtube video from
An excellent video. The best yet. The sound quality is good.
Unfortunately it cuts off after 18 minutes.
You have to hand it to Krivit: he knows how to use a video camera to
good effect. That's harder than it seems. If it were me behind the
camera, you would only see the person from the neck
Hah! Someone said there were no magnets involved. But, I heard the
distinctive click of magnets as Rossi put the halves of his glasses
together to read the gamma meter.
:-)
T
PS Post as many threads as you please, Akira.
Unless liquid water is traveling up the chimney to the hose, the only
way for the water to exit the reactor is to first be converted to a
gas.
T
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Mon, 20 Jun 2011 01:19:48 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
Rossi could use tungsten as a replacement for stainless steel (SS) as the
shell of his reaction vessel. The nano-powder has a higher melting
temperature then SS. Tungsten is also opaque to x-rays/gamma-rays can
replace
At 02:42 PM 6/20/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
2011 - Andrea Rossi Explains His Energy Catalyzer
(duration: 13m 24s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-8QdVwY98E
A very clear explanation ... but NOT an EXPERIMENT =8-)
And, of course, it doesn't exclude a Tarallo Water Diversion Fake !
He beams the water out with a teleporter. ;)
Haary
- Original Message
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, June 20, 2011 6:46:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Video] Andrea Rossi Explains His Energy Catalyzer (NET -
June 14, 2011)
Unless liquid
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
And, of course, it doesn't exclude a Tarallo Water Diversion Fake !
It doesn't require a diversion. If the water level reaches the hose,
liquid water will flow. If the water level never reaches the hose, it
must be
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
He beams the water out with a teleporter. ;)
Haary
Krishna?
:-)
T
Terry wrote:
How the hell do they know for
sure that liquid water is not flowing out the hose?
Terry speak for how the hell do I know for sure that liquid water is not
flowing into the hose?
If you agree that steam is passing through the hose, then if water is also
flowing in the
On 2011-06-20 23:42, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-8QdVwY98E
It appears from this video that the data logger used during Krivit's
visit was a Testo 177 T3 model which can only log temperatures. Please
somebody correct me if I'm wrong:
http://i.imgur.com/QBsJT.jpg
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
They need a watch glass or an external water level indicator to prove
that liquid water never reaches the level of the hose. Then they have
proved their point by simply measuring the amount of water that is
pumped into the reactor.
I don't
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
If you agree that steam is passing through the hose, then if water is also
flowing in the hose, it would tend to back up and make a sputtering noise near
where the hose ends in the drain in the wall.
So will condensed
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
As I said, you would see it, wouldn't you?
Watch it. AR lifted up the hose to drain the water into the wall
before showing the steam.
Look, I'm not accusing anyone of anything. I'm just presenting a
fact. Water
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
All the arguments about wet steam or dry steam are bullshit. Water
cannot leave the reaction vessel without directly flowing out. If no
water reaches the hose, it can only escape as steam.
Water changing state is always
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Watch it. AR lifted up the hose to drain the water into the wall
before showing the steam.
Ah. I see what you mean. At around 10:50 he lifts up the hose.
If AR is right, steam condenses inside the hose. That will happen.
Yes, with such a long
At 05:42 PM 6/20/2011, you wrote:
2011 - Andrea Rossi Explains His Energy Catalyzer
(duration: 13m 24s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-8QdVwY98E
Remarkable. In this video, at about 10:40, Rossi acknowledges that
there is a little water that, he claims, condenses in the hose.
very small
On 11-06-20 08:47 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Terry Blantonhohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
All the arguments about wet steam or dry steam are bullshit. Water
cannot leave the reaction vessel without directly flowing out. If no
water reaches the hose, it can only
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
So you're saying the chimney would act like a steam dryer on an old
locomotive?
Interesting...
Either that or Rossi has discovered antifuggingravity. Come on!
Water is heavier than air.
T
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
All the arguments about wet steam or dry steam are bullshit. Water
cannot leave the reaction vessel without directly flowing out. If no
water reaches the hose, it can only escape as steam.
Well, as you said, it might be filling up the chimney and
Here is an estimative of the power output of the steam based on the
video. What do you people think? Is it OK? It gives only 16Wats as the
output.
http://disq.us/2bl5a3
*
We, who've actually boiled water on a stove, we who've actually done
any thermodynamics in
At 02:19 PM 6/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Another factor is that I have some unpublished information about
this test, and about some other private tests. I do not have a huge
amount of information, but enough to give me more confidence in the
results. Stephen Lawrence does not have this
At 02:24 PM 6/20/2011, Mark Iverson wrote:
Did any attendees that are on this list see Dr. Duncan there?
Also, is he aware of the e-Cat?
I can't imagine that he isn't, but I don't think I've read any posts
that indicate he is...
Same question as to Dr. Bushnell from NASA... Was he there?
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Rossi says the hose is short but it seems long to me. Enough to radiate a
lot of heat.
Yeah, in the video, he knew better than to grab the hose with his
hand. He paused to grab something to hold the hose. The hose is
sorry to say:
in that video I hear a stroke frequency of 20/min, perhaps a bit more. That
means flow 3 kg/hr. For 7 kg/hr you would need 60 strokes/min.
Mains tension in Italy is 230 V and not 220 V, see Wikipedia.
A bit shocked, Angela
--
NEU: FreePhone - kostenlos mobil telefonieren!
Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote:
in that video I hear a stroke frequency of 20/min, perhaps a bit more. That
means flow 3 kg/hr. For 7 kg/hr you would need 60 strokes/min.
Well, he says they weigh the reservoir before and after. Other people who
have observed the tests told me
I just looked up testo 176 H2.
I found:
testo 176 H2 Temperatur, Feuchte-Datenlogger, Messschreiber, 2 Mio Messwerte,
-20 bis +70 °C
That means in English: logger for temperature and rel. humidity, 2 mill. data
points, -20 to +70 C
This means, you can't use it for temperatures over 70 C !
Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote:
That means in English: logger for temperature and rel. humidity, 2 mill.
data points, -20 to +70 C
This means, you can't use it for temperatures over 70 C !
Well, it shows 101 deg C on the screen so evidently it does go over 70. I
think it would
Well, he says they weigh the reservoir before and after. Other people who
have observed the tests told me they weighed it. If the video was long
enough we would see them do that. So I do not think you need to worry
about
the flow rate being incorrect.
- Jed
But then tell us please, why
Goat Guy did not account for the heat loss over the length of the tube.
Harry
- Original Message
From: Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, June 20, 2011 9:08:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Video] Andrea Rossi Explains His Energy Catalyzer (NET -
June
But that would mean an almost complete loss...
Daniel
I agree the gas flow out the end of the black hose seems to be visible
right at the end -- whereas steam would be invisible for a short
distance.
Trained as a dishwasher since age 10, 80 miles E of Houston, Texas, I
am sure that hot water gives off mist in low altitude, warm, humid
climates.
On 11-06-20 08:52 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 05:42 PM 6/20/2011, you wrote:
2011 - Andrea Rossi Explains His Energy Catalyzer
(duration: 13m 24s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-8QdVwY98E
Remarkable. In this video, at about 10:40, Rossi acknowledges that
there is a little water
On 11-06-20 08:54 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Stephen A. Lawrencesa...@pobox.com wrote:
So you're saying the chimney would act like a steam dryer on an old
locomotive?
Interesting...
Either that or Rossi has discovered antifuggingravity. Come on!
Water is
At 04:10 PM 6/20/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Aw, these reports drive me nuts. I'd not read
this one, I think. They have a pump for cooling
water, it seems. So when they start up, they
are pumping an estimated 6.47 kg per hour of
water. They assume that this flow rate remains the same.
Ho! I had forgotten about this one -- one of the early issues raised was
that 14 kW of steam coming out the end of a hose should be a little like
a rocket engine, and it would have been nice if some witness had
mentioned that.
Trouble was, there was no video, and witnesses didn't comment on
- Original Message
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, June 20, 2011 8:34:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Video] Andrea Rossi Explains His Energy Catalyzer (NET -
June 14, 2011)
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com
At 04:38 PM 6/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The fact that Rossi has done what he claims is equally self-evident
to me. The speculation about wet and dry steam is bunk. The second
test proved that beyond any doubt. It is a waste of time even discussing it.
Jed might be right. However, in the
On 11-06-20 10:11 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 04:10 PM 6/20/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Aw, these reports drive me nuts. I'd not read this one, I think.
They have a pump for cooling water, it seems. So when they start up,
they are pumping an estimated 6.47 kg per hour of water.
At 05:37 PM 6/20/2011, Harry Veeder wrote:
We all know a humidity probe was use to estimated the steam quality.
The probe
tells you the density of water in the air. This can be used with the
temperature
to calculate the steam quality by mass OR volume. Since the steam quality was
not measured
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
The fact that Rossi has done what he claims is equally self-evident to me.
The speculation about wet and dry steam is bunk. The second test proved that
beyond any doubt. It is a waste of time even discussing it.
Jed might be right. However,
The Testo 650 is used for measuring *humidity*, Jed, for, like, food
manufacturing and storage, etc.
Read that HP literature. The device measures up to 100% humidity, it
claims. Wet steam is above 100% humidity. The literature claims that
the device measures: CO2, CO, temperature, and
At 06:40 PM 6/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Maybe I should update the LENR-CANR.org news item to point that out.
I should make it explicit, since this wet/dry steam controversy
has dragged on. I am sure the reason I linked to the brochure in the
first place was to address this. I would have
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
The Testo 650 is used for measuring *humidity*, Jed, for, like, food
manufacturing and storage, etc.
Read that HP literature. The device measures up to 100% humidity, it
claims. Wet steam is above 100% humidity. The literature claims that the
At 06:46 PM 6/20/2011, Terry Blanton wrote:
Unless liquid water is traveling up the chimney to the hose, the only
way for the water to exit the reactor is to first be converted to a
gas.
There are two ways, dependent on design.
The first way is, yes, liquid water travels up the chimney, being
At 08:13 PM 6/20/2011, Harry Veeder wrote:
Terry wrote:
How the hell do they know for
sure that liquid water is not flowing out the hose?
Terry speak for how the hell do I know for sure that liquid water
is not flowing into the hose?
If you agree that steam is passing through the
At 08:33 PM 6/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Terry Blanton mailto:hohlr...@gmail.comhohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
They need a watch glass or an external water level indicator to prove
that liquid water never reaches the level of the hose. Then they have
proved their point by simply measuring the
At 08:47 PM 6/20/2011, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
All the arguments about wet steam or dry steam are bullshit. Water
cannot leave the reaction vessel without directly flowing out. If no
water reaches the hose, it can only
In the Essen paper, they were apparently able to examine steam coming
out of an open valve in the top of the chimney, a separate exit from
the hose. That would be why they were able to say that it was dry
steam, it's easy to tell if you can see it.
More accurately, if you can't see it until
At 08:54 PM 6/20/2011, Terry Blanton wrote:
Either that or Rossi has discovered antifuggingravity. Come on!
Water is heavier than air.
Sure it is, but water droplets can be airborne for a long time.
Witness any cloud.
At 09:00 PM 6/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Rossi says the hose is short but it seems long to me. Enough to
radiate a lot of heat. About as much as a 1 or 2 kW electric heater,
which means the steam has lost a lot of its umph by the time it
reaches the end, to address Abd's concern.
Great
At 10:01 PM 6/20/2011, Rich Murray wrote:
My guess is that the Rossi team actually don't have a clue about what
is happening between the device outlet and the far end of the hose.
We do know that the whole length of that hose was hot
To me, the video means little except to show how little
At 10:02 PM 6/20/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Rossi's explanation is not sound, that the steam isn't so visible
because it's so hot. It's at normal temperature for steam!!!
Measured at between 100 and 102C, in fact, according to what I've read.
So, no, it's not superheated steam.
At 10:38 PM 6/20/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-06-20 10:11 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 04:10 PM 6/20/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Aw, these reports drive me nuts. I'd not read this one, I think.
They have a pump for cooling water, it seems. So when they start
up, they are
At 11:06 PM 6/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
The fact that Rossi has done what he claims is equally self-evident
to me. The speculation about wet and dry steam is bunk. The second
test proved that beyond any doubt. It is
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
