I think Catania needs to be banned..
Talking about Horace he wrote You just don't have the patience, are
incompetent or are plain ignorant and You're nuts .
Pay attention to this, Catania. Both Horace and Jed, in different ways, are
mental giants. You are a midget and a very rude incorrigible
Brad, all your questions have a very simple and straight answer
www.santaclaushouse.com http://www.santaclaushouse.com/about.asp [?]
2011/8/29 ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com
With October fast approaching, I have some easy questions:
Where is Rossi right now?
Where is his lab/factory
Joe:
Water flow is most certainly pertinent to any energy calculations concerning
the E-Cat. Your statement that we aren't discussing water flow seems to
indicate that either we are talking about two completely different
calculations or you have no idea what you're talking about. All
Hi Joe,
I found an error in my calculation of the critical temperature, the
temperature at which all energy merely goes into heating the water to
100°C, with none left to produce steam. You will probably like the
improvements. I have reposted:
2011/8/30 Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net:
Note especially in RossiThermal2.pdf, in Mode 2, that a mass of between 5
and 10 kg, at initial Mass Temp. of 300*C, provides a 15 minute thermal
decline curve with no nuclear energy involved.
Good thinking, expect that the total metal weight of
The thermal model data for Rossi's device:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiThermal.pdf
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiThermal2.pdf
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/DecayCurve1.pdf
suggests strategies for managing the stability of Rossi's device,
provided the instability
On Aug 30, 2011, at 4:52 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
2011/8/30 Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net:
Note especially in RossiThermal2.pdf, in Mode 2, that a mass of
between 5
and 10 kg, at initial Mass Temp. of 300*C, provides a 15 minute
thermal
decline curve with no nuclear energy
I concur, Nick. These are violations of forum rules.
Amazing how we can go for years on Vortex with no bannings; then, a
controversial issue comes along and we have to ban those children who
cannot act like human beings.
I think Catania will be the third Rossi fatality. :)
T
On Tue, Aug 30,
Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:
Compare the heat capacity of any metal with water and you will see
that water can store 100 to 1000 times more heat per mass than any metal.
It is a factor of 10 for most metals, per unit of mass. Not 100 or 1000.
The eCat is mostly steel which is 0.49 kJ/kg
Horace wrote: «If you provide numbers for Mass, Thermal Power (before
shutoff), Inlet Temp., Mass Temp., and Inlet Flow then I will then be happy
to provide the corresponding data.»
Perhaps 500 grams was too small value. I re-estimated that if the outer
volume of core chamber is 50cc, then
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Ps. I do not know what model of E-Cat we are talking about. Does we
have pictures? Or is it just some mythical test what was seen by nobody.
The 15 minute heat-after-death event was with the large eCat used in the
January and February tests. This produces 12 kW to 16
You have no idea what I'm talking about. If I say water flow is not what you
need to get on square one with this then its true. Your posts are completely of
topic and show a total lack of competence. I never said there was no water
flow. I said it is not relevant. One does grasp therma inertia
Water flow is irrelevant to what I'm discussing. It is not a certainty that
Levi keeps the flow on during his power out. Clearly your grasp of physics is
limited. Insulting mother nature won't clinch proof of CF. If the best you have
is a dream you may as well join the rational thinkers.
Terry Blanton wrote:
I concur, Nick. These are violations of forum rules.
Perhaps, but let us not be too thin-skinned. Or politically correct.
Let's not ban anyone. If someone irritates you, just add the name to
your own auto-delete list.
- Jed
Until we know whether Levi turned the flow off along with the heater we will
not know how to calculate this for sure. I also have suspicion that the metal
may get hotter than 550C according to several staments by Rossi and I believe
Defkalion. If the flow is turned off or is only 1g/s it looks
Yes, Jed, thanks for pointing that out, but, I was incorporating into my
figures (and didn't write it down) the additional energy going into the heat
of vaporization that would be necessary for the E-Cat to continue to produce
steam as Joe is claiming. after the power is turned off.
-M
From:
I belive you are saying the heating mantle alone is 500g. Also the water
never exceeds 100C so why should the insulation? I assume Rossi construction
does not allow metal potentially hot enough to destroy insulation to contact
insulation. If he saw that happen he would rework the insulation.
Oops! I assumed that there actually was outflow water at this stage but
there does not seem to be evidence of that. Perhaps the water is retained in
the E-Cat and the temperaure is monitored. In any case it seems the E-Cat is
not producing steam yet. There would also be heat stored in E-Cat
Perhaps someone can provide specific reference to a statement by one of the
participants in the E-Cat demos that the water flow was maintained during
the heat-after-death tests.
Joe Catania:
Your post below is what you should have started with:
1) It contains a detailed explanation of
Its not my reasoning but the nature of the beast which I assumed everyone was
familiar with and rightly so. Not only have I been the subject of ad hominems
for a presentaion that is obvious by the very nature of what is being
discussed, there have been false allegations and insults to nature.
Cyber sabotage is now very sophisticated and effective. Even secret US
government projects have been penetrated to the point where the penitrated
projects are rendered useless; they require redesign or sometimes even
cancellation.
The type of information that has been asked for in this post is
Hey Axil,
Yes, I want inside information.. but purely out of curiosity. My
financial interest is about $2000 in replication attempt costs, and
the hundreds of hours I've spent learning about the E-Cat. A few
people on this list know my true occupation (software developer) and
that I'm not a
Joe Catania wrote:
Oops! I assumed that there actually was outflow water at this stage
but there does not seem to be evidence of that.
You have an extraordinary imagination, thinking that people run flow
calorimeters without a flow.
- Jed
On Aug 30, 2011, at 6:18 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
As far as I know, this is the only eCat that Levi et al. tested in
December, which is when the event occurred. The flow rate was
typically ~300 ml/min I believe.
Are you sure about that flow rate being present in the heat after
death
The imagination is all yours. If you read KE they essentially seem to imply
it, which I found rather disturbing. I can't make heads or tails of their
report as written.
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011
On Aug 30, 2011, at 6:02 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Horace wrote: «If you provide numbers for Mass, Thermal Power
(before shutoff), Inlet Temp., Mass Temp., and Inlet Flow then I
will then be happy to provide the corresponding data.»
Perhaps 500 grams was too small value. I re-estimated
Horace Heffner wrote:
As far as I know, this is the only eCat that Levi et al. tested in
December, which is when the event occurred. The flow rate was
typically ~300 ml/min I believe.
Are you sure about that flow rate being present in the heat after
death observation?
How else could it
Horace Heffner wrote:
You are providing the input data so you should know which test you are
talking about. Jed says the first test.
No, I said it was the device used in the first public test. The large
eCat, shown in many photos. As far as I know this was the only eCat they
used in
Until I see the data you refer to all I can say is its seems like more of a
guess. Why dosen't Rossi verify syeam quality. A simple steam velocity would
verify steam quality yet I see no attemp being made to do so. An error in
flow rate has already been noted and there is no way the steam could
Joe Catania wrote:
Until I see the data you refer to all I can say is its seems like more
of a guess.
Okay. Ask Krivit to show it to you again. It was there before.
It seems like a pretty good guess to me, since they told me they worked
with the gadget for a month before demonstrating it.
On Aug 30, 2011, at 12:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
As far as I know, this is the only eCat that Levi et al. tested
in December, which is when the event occurred. The flow rate was
typically ~300 ml/min I believe.
Are you sure about that flow rate being present in
Again your the only one who is imagining flow calorimetry without a flow. I
can assure you I'm imagining no such thing. But of course you would not be
able to tell me if there was or wasn't flow in any case you say you knew
about. That's whats unique about you Jed. Your science is completely
Horace Heffner wrote:
How else could it work? It would run out of water. Very little fits
into the cell. You cannot do flow calorimetry without a flow. It
would be like trying to do it without measuring the temperature.
Obviously my question is are you sure that *precise magnitude* of flow
Jed its more a violation of the 1st law to have steam production without
extraction from the metal. No the temperature would not drop to zero. Sounds
like you're admitting defeat.
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday,
Hi,
On 31-8-2011 0:01, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Aug 30, 2011, at 12:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
If the only source of heat was electricity, two things are certain:
1. It could not be 12 kW in the first place. The wire would melt. You
can't possibly conduct that much electricity over an
On Aug 30, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Man on Bridges wrote:
Hi,
On 31-8-2011 0:01, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Aug 30, 2011, at 12:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
If the only source of heat was electricity, two things are certain:
1. It could not be 12 kW in the first place. The wire would melt.
You
See the remarkable progress in fake artificial intelligence at Cornell (yes,
that's what I meant):
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2011/08/29/two_chatbots_walk_into_a_room_video_.html
This chatbot, seen here in an illuminating debate with itself, should join
the discussion here and also
I think that your grudge against wikipædia is personal and
unjustified. You demand far too much from it as it already exceeds the
reliability standards set by Encyclopædia Britannica by factor of ten,
Or something similar, but it is still growing at huge pace.
–Jouni
2011/8/31 Jed Rothwell
2011/8/30 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com:
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Ps. I do not know what model of E-Cat we are talking about. Does we have
pictures? Or is it just some mythical test what was seen by nobody.
The 15 minute heat-after-death event was with the large eCat used in the
January
Small addition, this 6kW figure is minimum possible heating power. We
have also empirical way for calculating total enthalphy, that gives
higher value than 6 kW. If it is assumed that E-Cat was full of water
when 1.2kW heating element was turned on, then 1.2kW was enough to
cause ΔT to be 20°C in
Actually I took still another look for the graph:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_852Sj2_TNC4/TTwDi8cYrtI/E1E/TT603dSfpzs/s1600/report3.jpg
It is really difficult to try to estimate temperatures from this graph.
However it looks that my estimations were somewhat inaccurate. But it
looks that
41 matches
Mail list logo
