Greetings Vortex-L,
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2Sect2=HITOFFu=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htmlr=1p=1f=Gl=50d=PG01S1=20140326711.PGNR.OS=DN%2F20140326711RS=DN%2F20140326711
Ad Astra,
Ron Kita, Chiralex
Doylestown PA
Since the publication of the Rossi independent third party report on
the ecat, I have noticed a distinct change in the attacks on Rossi
and in more to the point, LENR in general. There has been a continual
flood of ideas and papers regarding various aspects of LENR (and its
various
Looks like there are three related patents filed last year in May. I
wonder when we'll seem them pop up. Also, why did this patent show up
already? It was only filed in april of this year.
*Application Number**Filing Date**Patent Number*61818553May 2, 201361819058May
3, 201361821914May 10,
Maybe Industrial Heat is using the USPTO's fast track service for this one:
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Track_One.jsp
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
wrote:
Looks like there are three related patents filed last year in May. I
wonder when
Blaze,
interesting this was filed in April and Rossi was already describing the
shadows cast by the coils far ahead of the controversy after the released
report..and to give Rossi credit his explanation does have the ring of truth.
The reacting material was much hotter than the heating coils
Robert, yes I agree, especially some of the recent citations by Axil from
Physic.org - even string theory is getting involved in this last push toward
acceptance.
Fran
-Original Message-
From: Robert Dorr [mailto:rod...@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 7:30 AM
To:
Tomorrow, and next week's friday.
2014-11-06 11:37 GMT-02:00 Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com:
Looks like there are three related patents filed last year in May. I
wonder when we'll seem them pop up. Also, why did this patent show up
already? It was only filed in april of this
From: John Berry
Also, if you seek a transient effect, does heat exist in a moment?
Heat is a chaotic form of random microscopic changes in kinetic energy, if so
there should be windows where there is no change in momentum which could be
argued to be as localized moments of zero heat?
John,
Frank, I wonder if that means they're confident they have something and
want to get patent rights sewn up ASAP.
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 6:01 AM, Frank Acland ecatwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe Industrial Heat is using the USPTO's fast track service for this
one:
The USPTO has an 18 month embargo on publication, which is optional and not
required - and they chose not to avail themselves of the delayed publication.
That is a strategy choice. You can find this stature online: (35 U.S.C. 122
Confidential status of applications)
The implication is that
Jones, that's mostly true. It depends on what they're specifically
claiming though. with patents the devil is in the details.
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
The USPTO has an 18 month embargo on publication, which is* optional* and
not required - and
I think the 18 months, which are optional pretty much anywhere in the
world, has ran out for the 1st application. So, the others will be
published in due time.
--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com
For example, look at the first indie claim:
1. A reactor device comprising: a sealed vessel defining an interior; a
fuel material within the interior of the vessel; and a heating element
proximal the vessel, wherein the fuel material comprises a solid including
nickel and hydrogen, and further
Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
. . . interior of the sealed vessel is not preloaded with a pressurized gas
when in an initial state before activation of the heating element.
I am sure a POSITA could replicate that.
PHOSITA (person having ordinary skill in the art)
- Jed
yeah, i'm a huge source of typos
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
. . . interior of the sealed vessel is not preloaded with a pressurized
gas when in an initial state before activation of the heating
Quick read : most of it describes the physical structure and results of the
first (2013) independent test. It says nothing about what the reaction is,
other than it contains nickel and produces hydrogen.
Banding/shadows : for the melted/banding run it gives the dimensions and
positions of the
Note that the inventor is Rossi, working for IH ... but the ASSIGNEE is still
Leonardo Corporation, Miami.
So apparently IH didn't get ALL the IP rights
You say potato, I say potato…
But the main implications which stands out on first read – if we try to
interpret what is being claimed in this disclosure relative to what we already
know…
1)Non-nuclear
2)Requires substantial electrical input and elevate temperature
Jones you need to look at the claims. The abstract / background / etc are
just context.
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
You say potato, I say potato…
But the main implications which stands out on first read – if we try to
interpret what is being
From: Alan Fletcher a...@well.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2014 10:03:38 AM
They can make plenty of money from a COP=6 thermal system, even with an
electric drive.
Reported elsewhere, but just for the record here. The new patent describes an
18-reactor hotcat system [600], generating
Notice that the system including a number of reactors working together is
similar to what I was describing in a posting yesterday. Perhaps that is why
they decided to publish that information today.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Alan Fletcher a...@well.com
To: vortex-l
From: Alan Fletcher a...@well.com
Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2014 8:41:48 AM
600 is new - describing an assemblage of 18 reactors
This is used to generate STEAM --- the COP is reported as *** 11.07 ***
No mention (that I can see) of steam quality or anything to measure it.
[0196]
Seeing that the publication date was set by the USPTO, I doubt it =8-)
- Original Message -
From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2014 9:19:15 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Rossi Patent Appln..publishes Today
Notice that the system
Are you not amazed that a patent is issued for a device of this type and not
for one that claims cold fusion as the source of energy? What are the chances
that the inventors actually brought one of these systems to the patent office
to prove that it works?
It is very sad that our field is
The quality of the steam is not that important provided a method to accurately
measure the amount of heat it contains is used. A COP of 11.07 is important
and represents a significant improvement above the earlier specification of
greater than 6. If you are concerned about the accuracy of
From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2014 9:39:11 AM
The q uality of the steam is not that important provided a method to
accurately measure the amount of heat it contains is used. A COP of 11.07 is
important and represents a significant improvement above the
Alan:
I don’t think that means that at all. At best you need to see the various
agreements between the parties to make such a statement.
Ransom
From: Alan Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 10:47 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Rossi
That is a good point Alan. It is an interesting coincidence that the thought
came into my mind just before it was published. That concept will become of
much importance as applications for the CATs begin to appear. I can imagine
that complex systems of these types of devices will be
My browser couldn't translate. Synopses please?
Ol' Bab
On 11/4/2014 8:24 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
See:
http://amenities-news.com/wp/?p=8345
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
I was referring to the evidence supporting the claimed COP and not the
usefulness of the steam itself. Accurate measurement of the heat power is the
important issue at hand. Of course the guys calculating the COP must know how
much heat the steam contains. That seems obvious and not needing
From: David Roberson
* Are you not amazed that a patent is issued for a device of this type
and not for one that claims cold fusion as the source of energy?
Not really – this is the dividing line between mainstream and fringe – and it
is a narrow line.
I’m assuming you are talking
From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:09:13 AM
I was referr ing to the evidence supporting the claimed COP and not the
usefulness of the steam itself. Accurate measurement of the heat power is the
important issue at hand. Of course the guys calculating
David L. Babcock olb...@gmail.com wrote:
My browser couldn't translate. Synopses please?
You can run the text through:
https://translate.google.com/
Anyway, the gist of it is that this is a photograph from the wildlife
photographer of the year contest at the natural history Museum in London,
Alan,
The report notes that they ignored the energy needed to heat the steam
beyond 100C and also underestimated the flow by 10% to be conservative.
Does this affect your analysis?
Jack
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
*From: *David Roberson
The COP etc is meaningless without replication or at the very worst - third
party verification.
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:
Alan,
The report notes that they ignored the energy needed to heat the steam
beyond 100C and also underestimated the flow by
From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2014 12:24:13 PM
The report notes that they ignored the energy needed to heat the steam beyond
100C and also underestimated the flow by 10% to be conservative. Does this
affect your analysis?
With my engineering hat on, the
To take this part of the thread (re: a putative DCE connection to the Rossi
patent application) - to its natural conclusion, there is one big … no huge …
advance made by Rossi - over the Haisch/Moddel disclosure.
That would be assuming that Rossi has actually seen the level of gain which is
OK ... I re-read the paper more carefully.
They only recorded data when the steam temperature was above 101C at
atmospheric pressure, with actual steam temperatures rising from 121.3C to
139.7C
So it MUST have been 100% dry, and super-heated -- no need to measure the
quality.
(OK : I could
Good grief! 3 years on, and I've just noticed a bug in my calculator.
I calculate COP = output/input (AND say so on the output).
It's actually COP = (input+output)/input
The values will be even higher than I reported!
Great photo Jed,
BTW, when we were still living in Taiwan I had a pet monkey steal my glasses. I
was about five or six years old at the time. I watched him chew on the frames.
I think he was trying to determine whether it was edible or not. My mother saw
the swipe as it happened. She freaked
Also further down there is a video of a cell phone playing a video of
worms, many frogs come up and try to eat the videoed worms.
Quite impressive.
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
Great photo Jed,
BTW, when we were still
From John,
Also further down there is a video of a cell phone playing a video of
worms, many frogs come up and try to eat the videoed worms.
Quite impressive.
This reminds me of yet another animal intelligence story.
If you have ever seen the PBS NATURE program titled A Murder of Crows get
My new calculations are :
Nominal 12.08 (1 more than their result)
Start: 14.2
End 13.7
Calculator :
Nominal
I forgot to subtract the generator power at the start of the run : My VERY new
calculations are :
Nominal 12.8
Start: 15.1
End 14.6
44 matches
Mail list logo
