- Original Nachricht
Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 07.12.2011 08:36
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:[Rossi] University RD has gone away?
Rossi has said the 1st customer is a US military research contractor and
that the first plant is
This would be the worst scenario possible. It is of vital importance
to create a strong reak competition to Rossi, tens of manufacturers of Ni-H
LENR based energy generators. Actually Chemically Assisted and Transition
Metals based LENR- many technical solutions.
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 9:43 AM,
- Original Nachricht
Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 07.12.2011 08:57
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:[Rossi] University RD has gone away?
It is about which nation controls LENR as it has the capability to
reshape the world. As for living
You have good arguments.
anyway, using the grid, or local grid, to average the production capacity,
might be interesting.
because most of the cost of e-cat/hyperion is not in fuel, or even
refueling, but in building the plant.
so reducing the total capacity, will reduce the cost.
anyway the grid
Technically Rossi and the US has a working LENR reactor. They have a BIG
head start. But you may be right and in 12 months there may be 50,000
scientists and engineers working to bring LENR devices to market. That
is my hope.
On 12/7/2011 6:41 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
-
Axil,
Welcome aboard! To go even one step further consider that this ability to
bend light may actually be more not than just simulating the bending of
space time, that it actually is bending space time! Jan Naudt's paper that
the hydrino is relativistic is a big clue that Casimir effect is the
this is a scam.
this is totally impossible to have superconduction at high temperature.
no cooper pair can survive at that temperature.
I'm sure the scientist that make those experiments either make mistakes or
fraud.
we should look at the video of their experiment.
their ampmeter are tricked.
On 2011-12-07 01:43, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
From NextBigFuture:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/12/brian-ahern-will-not-be-presenting-on.html
This is unexpected. Does anybody know why Dr. Brian Ahern won't be
presenting his findings on LENR tomorrow as originally planned?
The organizer
Dear Friends,
I have just published a most positive possible opinion
paper about Rossi and his E-cat:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/12/e-cat-problem.html
Asking your help for the UAQ list!
Peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Remember that guy who measured a gamma spike while Rossi was adjusting
a reactor in the other room?
I don't. Is there a link or citation? (thanks)
Now there is: see my transcript of the LENR documentary:
Probably Rossi used some duct tape to repair the reactor. This makes Gamma rays
;-)
Honestly, after all was happened, better: NOT happened, such a singular
observation is without worth.
Of course there might be a strange mechanism producing gamma rays, possibly a
welding apparatus or another
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:52 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, dear Berke- can you suggest how it is done, provided that it
does not multiply the cost of Ni. How can Rossi do this enrichment
in practice? Please give some literature.
I'm gonna quote Jones Beene's Nov. 4th message
Francesco Celani is a professor at the Italian National Institute of
Nuclear Physics. He performed measurements on the Rossi device.
Sergio Focardi, emeritus professor physics, confirms what Celani said:
there were gamma emissions during the functioning of the device.
--- 00:23:37 | Focardi
- Original Nachricht
Von: Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 07.12.2011 14:48
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Celani: gamma spike during ignition of Rossi reactor
Francesco Celani is a professor at the Italian National Institute of
Nuclear Physics. He
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Focardi said also not much above environment.
Possibly there was a dentist or internist doctor or a antique colortv in
neighbourhood.
As I reported here, Celani said the burst was so intense both of his meters
went off the scale.
- Jed
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
You cite the temperature as evidence, but the temperature actually
contradicts full vaporization.
All of this has been explained succinctly ad nauseum, so please do not ask
for any details on it
I do not need any details. As I mentioned,
since we don't know the theory of operation of the reactor,
and especially because the absence of gamma in nuclear reaction seems
strange,
we cannot rule out some change of regime, especially when temperature get
abnormal...
eg: if you play with U235 in big pots, sometimes, given enough quantity
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 9:24 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Focardi said also not much above environment.
Possibly there was a dentist or internist doctor or a antique colortv in
neighbourhood.
Possibly there where suneruptions.
Solar flares, really? Read again. I have capitalized the
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
You cite the temperature as evidence, but the temperature actually
contradicts full vaporization.
All of this has been explained succinctly ad nauseum, so please do
Here is another comment from Mats Lewan
Hi Mary (Jed’s in CC again),
What I saw inside the Ecat is more or less what I published and what my
photos from the inside showed – a block covered with flanges of heat
exchanger type, I believe I said approximately 30x30x30 cm. There’s a photo
from above
There’s a fact that somebody don’t get, or don’t want to get.
In January experiemnt, the shielding was cutted (for Villa’s detector). Bianchi
used a gamma detector with 20keV – some MeV range. He placed it close to the
shielding hole.
No gamma radiation was measured over background.
If inside
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Focardi said also not much above environment.
Possibly there was a dentist or internist doctor or a antique colortv in
neighbourhood.
As I reported here, Celani said the burst was so
Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
Aussie FITs require the grid to be fed via a grid connect inverter and
the inverter fed by a Renewable energy source. I doubt LENR would
qualify.
A few years after the introduction of cold fusion, no one will be
talking about renewable energy anymore. All the laws
Mattia Rizzi wrote:
No gamma radiation was measured over background.
If inside the reactor there was a 10kW gamma source, with a hole in
shielding, everybody had died.
All these data is inside the Bianchini report, in January.
I do not think that contradicts Celani's findings. Celani
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote:
THE MINI GEIGER HAD HIT
THE TOP OF THE SCALE,
Means nothing. What scale was it on? Did a hyperthyroid patient (treated
with I-131) walk past? It takes very little to put some meters off-scale.
And yes, some (older)
This fact contradicts those peole that are saying that there is a gamma
activity inside the reactor which is responsable of heat.
There isn’t constant gamma activity, with or without shielding.
From: Jed Rothwell
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 4:03 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re:
As I mentioned, every expert in steam I have consulted with says this is
bullshit.
Yours “experts” are the same that measure dryness fraction with RH probes?
From: Jed Rothwell
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 3:43 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a long paper about and mainly
I support your vision , extending it according to my It experience.
PC were really a great progress for IT in enterprises, but also a hell,
because it was hard to collaborate.
reliability, backup, sharing was very complicated and expensive.
networking start to exist, then be reliable, then easy
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is another comment from Mats Lewan
As for energy storing I believe that has been clearly shown not to be a
possible explanation in itself.You simply would need an additional heat
source inside to have water
God, I hate to address this, but you either:
1) fundamentally misunderstand,
2) are asking the wrong question
3) are willfully ignoring clarification
If you don not understand the arguments, you need to look back to the early
E-Cats, where the question first arose.
The steam experts were
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Robert Leguillon
robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
The steam experts were right in the INITIAL steam discussions. I agree
with you. But they were being asked about steam quality, not water
overflow.
Krivit raised his questions on steam quality which were,
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
I grew up using slide rules, and programming mainframe computers and
minicomputers, but I felt no loyalty toward that technology.
I have a bamboo Post Versalog leather cased slide rule in my office.
Our intern engineers
Am 07.12.2011 16:03, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Mattia Rizzi wrote:
No gamma radiation was measured over background.
If inside the reactor there was a 10kW gamma source, with a hole in
shielding, everybody had died.
All these data is inside the Bianchini report, in January.
I do not think that
Agreed. The picture is an over-simplification; it is dumbed-down to illustrate
the very basic tenet of the argument. I think that it is an exceptional
illustration to get the basic points across (think Neils Bohr).
You're right that it's more than likely gurgling and sputtering, as opposed
We have to agree with the comments that the prior testing clearly indicates
that there is no significant radioactivity detected during operation of
E-Cat.
One unanswered question relates to startup. Not just startup, but a possible
method after startup of attenuation of the decay rate to levels
* ONE HUNDRED AND THREE LECTURES *
You can watch 103 of my lectures (with great demos) on the web, 95 on
OpenCourseWare (OCW) and 7 on MITWorld and 1 given at the Tecnical
University (TU) in Delft, the Netherlands. Most can also be viewed on
YouTube,
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.comwrote:
On 2011-12-07 01:43, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
From NextBigFuture:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/**12/brian-ahern-will-not-be-**
In an experimental series performed by Piantelli, he observed the
production of either heat or gamma radiation but not both at the same time,
if memory serves.
From the demo of the first one liter Rossi reactor during the time at
startup when the lattice was cold, a massive radiation burst
I feel that the description of my analysis of the October 6, 2011 test as the
work of a Rossi fan boy requires that I respond. Mr. Cude, you should read my
analysis before coming to such a conclusion since you seem to think of yourself
as open minded and honest in your assessment of the
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Means nothing. What scale was it on? Did a hyperthyroid patient (treated
with I-131) walk past? It takes very little to put some meters off-scale.
And yes, some (older) welding rods can easily do it. Many old glazed
I wrote:
Despite rapid improvements wind and solar are still cheaper than fossil
fuel, so they will go bankrupt before fossil fuel does.
I mean they are still nominally *more expensive* than fossil fuel, because
we do not take into account the cost of pollution or global warming.
Terry
Jones Beene wrote:
We have to agree with the comments . . .
Who's we? You? As Mark Twain put it: Only kings, presidents, editors,
and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial 'we.'
that the prior testing clearly indicates
that there is no significant radioactivity
Your sense of morality is not to talk about possible gamma radiation that
could kill the observers? All of whom were assured by Rossi that it was
safe?
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote:
Am 07.12.2011 16:03, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Mattia Rizzi wrote:
Robert Leguillon wrote:
This is the same thing that may be happening in the Ottoman E-Cat:
water gurgling out, and some steam. The assumption of complete
vaporization cannot be relied upon, and is actually contradicted by
the measurements. This is why your Method 2 for the October 6th test
*This also will be posted to Vortex
-
Hi Mats,
*In theory I suppose he could have removed the flanges and the shielding to
show the reactors, but that would probably have taken some time.
*Rossi's demos have always emphasized saving time over
Axil Axil wrote:
In an experimental series performed by Piantelli, he observed the
production of either heat or gamma radiation but not both at the same
time, if memory serves.
I do not recall that, but that is a very interesting observation. In
other words, a burst of gamma rays may be
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:38 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Are you convinced that the only way for the system to release 470 kW would
be for LENR action to be taking place? Is that your hang-up? Where are
the skeptics that claim that energy is stored for long enough and intense
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no need to postulate energy storage in the megawatt plant
demonstration. It is only necessary to consider that Rossi's client may be
fictitious and that the engineer may work for Rossi, perhaps for quite a
very large fee or share.
In other
Am 07.12.2011 19:59, schrieb Ahsoka Tano:
Your sense of morality is not to talk about possible gamma radiation that
could kill the observers? All of whom were assured by Rossi that it was
safe?
Of course it is safe. Look at Rossi his coworkers. They look healthy.
Why discuss something that
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no need to postulate energy storage in the megawatt plant
demonstration. It is only necessary to consider that Rossi's client may be
fictitious and that the engineer may
Mary, you are clearly suggesting that this is a scam. Are you that convinced?
Where is the possibility that it might be honest?
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Dec 7, 2011 2:08 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a long paper
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I suspect you will take wild notions like mine more seriously if much more
time passes without any absolutely definitive determination of Rossi's
veracity.
I consider the Oct. 6 test definitive. The chance of fraud is so low I do
not take that seriously.
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I suspect you will take wild notions like mine more seriously if much
more time passes without any absolutely definitive determination of Rossi's
veracity.
I consider the Oct. 6
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:25 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Mary, you are clearly suggesting that this is a scam.
Let me correct the wording -- I am suggesting strongly that it *may be* a
scam. I am cautious to allow for the small probability that it is not one
and simply looks
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I suspect you will take wild notions like mine more seriously if much
more time passes without any absolutely definitive determination of Rossi's
veracity.
I consider the Oct.
I speculate…
When a compound or transition metal has a high degree of quantum
mechanical(QM) proton coherence; large numbers of cooper pairs of protons,
radiation reduction will be observed when this coherence is momentarily
broken by a trigger event.
In a variant of the quantum Zeno effect in
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I have no idea of the probability that Rossi is honest. I hope he is.
He is not, I assure you. He often dissembles about personal matters. If the
truth or falsity of this claim is predicated on his personal honesty, we
must dismiss it.
Fortunately, it is
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I consider the Oct. 6 test definitive.
Many capable scientists and engineers do not agree.
I have not heard from any yet. There has to be a time limit for these
things. As Melich and I wrote regarding cold fusion in general:
. . . [S]keptics have had
The ONLY way that nuclear transactions can proceed smoothly with out producing
radiation is under a condition where the range of the strong nuclear force
exceeds the range of the coulombic.
The static forces are conserved and immutable. The dynamic magnetic
components are not conserved
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
And I always have to remind you that there are probably many potential
methods to cheat we may not have thought of.
You do not have to remind me of that. I have to remind *you* that is a
violation of the scientific method. It is proposition that cannot be
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:38 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I have always maintained that I will follow the evidence and have been
faithful to that end.
That is not consistent with your frequently expressed absolute certainty
that LENR is occurring.
Why should we assume that
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/12/07/bill-gates-to-build-next-gen-nuclear-reactors-with-china/
BEIJING
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates confirmed Wednesday he is in
discussions with
China to
jointly develop a new and safer kind of nuclear reactor.
The idea is to be very low cost, very
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree there may have been some liquid flowing through at times, but
Lewan performed Method 2 after a very large burst of heat, and he found the
flow rate was much lower than the flow rate going into the reactor.
If you remember this from the Kim paper:
*http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/yekim/BECNF-Ni-Hydrogen.pdf*
...local magnetic field is very weak in the surface regions, providing a
suitable environment in which two neighboring protons can couple their
spins anti-parallel to form
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no need to postulate energy storage in the megawatt plant
demonstration. It is only necessary to consider that Rossi's client may be
fictitious and that the engineer may
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I consider the Oct. 6 test definitive.
Many capable scientists and engineers do not agree.
I have not heard from any yet.
You've heard here and elsewhere on the internet.
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
And I always have to remind you that there are probably many potential
methods to cheat we may not have thought of.
You do not have to remind me of that. I have to remind *you*
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Everyday experience with boiling water in poorly insulated pots proves you
are wrong. You should think about the evidence and basic physics and stop
repeating absurdities.
What seems absurd to you is not to other capable people.
A person who thinks it
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/12/07/bill-gates-to-build-next-gen-nuclear-reactors-with-china/
OK .. start with the MS Blue pool of death etc jokes
Q: What is the most common cause of death of laboratory
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Fortunately, it is predicated on immutable laws of physics and first
principle observations made by dozens of people who I know to be honest.
No. The laws of physics and ordinary chemistry can explain all the
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
As I have pointed out before, that is an invalid argument. Rossi can
invalidate the entire line of thought simply by giving an E-cat to a
university,
Your statement applies to Rossi, not your own argument. *Your argument* has
to be falsifiable. It is
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I consider the Oct. 6 test definitive.
Many capable scientists and engineers do not agree.
I have not heard from any yet.
How to break this to you? They don't care about you.
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
As I have pointed out before, that is an invalid argument. Rossi can
invalidate the entire line of thought simply by giving an E-cat to a
university,
Your statement applies to
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
And I always have to remind you that there are probably many potential
methods to cheat we may not have thought of.
You do not have to remind me of that. I have to remind *you*
From Alan,
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/12/07/bill-gates-to-build-next-gen-nuclear-reactors-with-china/
BEIJING – Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates confirmed Wednesday he is in
discussions with China to jointly develop a new and safer kind of nuclear
reactor.
The idea is to be very
Mary Yugo wrote:
My statement has to be falsifiable and it is: simply by Rossi
submitting his device to proper independent verification.
I meant your first statement, which is that there are probably
potential methods of stage magic or faking kilowatt levels of heat.
Probably potential
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
A person who thinks it is possible to keep water at boiling temperatures
for four hours at a poorly insulated vessel is not capable, by definition.
By any method? In a 100 kg
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
As I have pointed out before, that is an invalid argument. Rossi can
invalidate the entire line of thought simply by giving an E-cat to a
university,
Your statement applies to
Dear Josh, at least you are consistent. Always claiming that someone or
something is not as it appears. MY realizes she might be in error and I
respect her for some honesty. Now, do you sincerely think that the large
generator was supplying the heat energy to vaporize the water? If all of
On 11-12-07 04:01 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Dear Josh, at least you are consistent. Always claiming that someone
or something is not as it appears. MY realizes she might be in error
and I respect her for some honesty. Now, do you sincerely think that
the large generator was supplying the
OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe others have made the observation that BG's success has
always revolved around exploiting technologies that have already been
reasonably tested and vetted.
Right. That's what he does. He has never developed an original
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:01 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Now, do you sincerely think that the large generator was supplying the
heat energy to vaporize the water?
I don't have sincere thoughts about anything on this subject. It could be,
and that weakens Rossi's case. Those
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
If by steam engine you mean steam locomotive engine, then they actually
incorporated steam driers specifically to dry the steam after it left the
boiler and, IIRC, before it entered the superheater. That's what at least
some of those funny domes on
Of course you are making a good point that they did use extra equipment to
ensure that the steam was very dry. The question is what is the dryness of the
steam before it entered those devices? Do you have any reference to this
information? Are we talking about only 5% at this point?
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
You are welcome to have the last word if you please.
No, thank you. LOL.
From Jed:
It has been a conservative business strategy that has worked very well for
BG. Nevertheless, I lament the fact that BG appears to have rarely shown
much backbone towards exploring and subsequently exploiting
unproven/cutting edge technologies such as those purported from Rossi. . .
OK, I think I understand your position now. You have a gut feeling that Rossi
is attempting a scam, but you could actually be convinced it is a real system
under the proper circumstances. You will get no argument from me regarding
your statements needed for proof as I am quite unhappy about
A lot of responses have already been kicked up by JC and MY, but I'd like to
continue, if I may, to Jed.
This is a long reply, and was in discussion of using the primary of the October
6th test in any considerations as to test validity.
I completely understand your argument of rising
Axil,
Interesting comment.
Maybe it's worth noting that the Zeno-effect (decay deceleration) and the
anti-Zeno effect (decay acceleration) can coexist and see-saw in some
some systems. See:
Observation of the Quantum Zeno and Anti-Zeno effects in an unstable system
See Railway age gazette, Volume 53, No. 24, 1912, p. 1148. I kid you not.
http://books.google.com/books?id=QrElMAAJpg=PA1148lpg=PA1148
This document says superheating is safe and effective for switching
engines. I read somewhere else they tended to explode, so they stopped
putting
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Of course you are making a good point that they did use extra equipment to
ensure that the steam was very dry. The question is what is the dryness of
the steam before it entered those devices? Do you have any reference
That is an interesting article isn't it? I guess those guys knew how to make
good steam engines in the old days. I noticed that the superheated steam is at
a temperature a bit higher than the direct steam generated in the boiler. The
pressure must be established within the boiler so I guess
Of course you are correct if water is being forced out of the ECAT. I see no
reason to believe that that is the situation since an attempt was made to
measure the water and some was captured. It should also be noted that Rossi
and company had the input power set to 180 kWatts during the
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
We do not have the incoming flow rate, and all we have for the outgoing
rate are the two from Lewan (one while it was running, and one during
purging).
Rossi stated the incoming flow rate was 15 L per hour. I think it was,
because it took
I wrote:
Try placing at thermocouple on a hot pipe, in various spots, under various
covers. You will find the differences are insignificant.
I did this years ago, working at Hydrodynamics. I happen to have a nice
dual input thermocouple, with a T1 - T2 mode, so I will try it again with a
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:50 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
One would think that
Microsoft certainly has the financial resources to explore
pie-in-the-sky matters.
I must admit that I am disappointed to see MS's absence from this customer list:
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 4:38 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The pressure must be established within the boiler so I guess the hotter
steam does not make its way back to the boiler. Is it likely that some
form of check valve is used at the throttle? If that were possible, then
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I hope these steam locomotives are not bombs looking for a chance to
explode!
They often did explode, unfortunately, even in the 1930s, at the pinnacle
of the technology. Maybe a single pipe explosion or an accident was more
common than a boiler failure
Lewis Larsen (Widom-Larsen) just posted a paper entitled:
Are LENRs causing some of the 'UFO' dust observed in the Large Hadron
Collider? Maybe somebody should look.
http://dev2.slideshare.com/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llccould-lenrs-be-producing-ufos-in-large-hadron-colliderdec-7-2011
An
On 7 December 2011 21:51, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.comwrote:
A lot of responses have already been kicked up by JC and MY, but I'd
like to continue, if I may, to Jed.
This is a long reply, and was in discussion of using the primary of the
October 6th test in any
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
