2015-01-09 0:00 GMT+01:00 David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com:
Many of the cold fusion skeptics conclude that LENR is not possible
because there is no theory to support it.
An article describe that
I haven't read Mizuno's report - so I might be mistaken in my comments
but if Mizuno is at steady state with the pump on for many many hours, then
when he turns on the LENR experiment, he will only see a delta T that is
due to the LENR experiment and the pump heat doesn't matter at all.
On
Mixuno would see a temperature differential as you say, however what fraction
of energy introduced by the reaction is above the input energy of the
electrical pump and or other electrical inputs?To get a COP you need the
steady state in-put energy to determine this.
Thus, the problem
Dear Gigi,
I look forward to seeing the results of the new test with 10 mm pipe. Could
you include some form of drawing that shows the location of the relative pump
pipe input and output locations. I am confident that you realize that my
calculations are based upon a system where the pipe
Nicely done Dave! A skeptic has unwittingly provided positive evidence and
reproduced Jed's results in one fell swoop!
From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 6:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Report on Mizuno's Adiabatic
*Kinetic energy of the water carries the power into the storage
medium so it can
be calculated by the reliable formula E=1/2*M*V^2.*
This is completely wrong: the pump power is not transformed into
kinetic enegy of the water, otherwise you will get after a while an
infinite velocity, not only for
Sorry Dave but I do not agree at all with your DIY physics about pumps.
1) We actually don't know the actual power flow: you assumed 9 l/m : who
told you? any flow meter around?
2) The physics of pumps is well known, there is no need to re-invent it
see for example the first equation in the box
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
This is completely wrong: the pump power is not transformed into kinetic
enegy of the water, otherwise you will get after a while an infinite
velocity, not only for the water inside the tube but for cars on motorways as
well.
Let me point out
Dear Friends,
I advice you to skip the introduction but read the rest of:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/01/lenr-news-january-8-2015.html
Thank you,
Peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Actually you are mistaken. Most of the kinetic energy imparted to the water
will be deposited into the storage tank. This is due to the fact that the
water is not immediately redirected into the return pipe. The only way that
what you say could be close to correct is if the pipe is a
Jed, as you have pointed out, Mizuno calibrated out the heat due to the pump
operation. That should be enough to end the skeptical responses unless they
contend that it is not possible to calibrate in that manner.
I have shown quite simply that the original measurements of yours as well as
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I have shown quite simply that the original measurements of yours as well
as theirs are close to what should be expected. It is left to the
skeptics to explain where that kinetic energy ends up if not within the
holding tank.
More to the point,
Gigi,
While Jed is locating that information for you may I request that you make a
calculation of the kinetic energy contained within the moving water exiting the
pump? Then, do the same thing for the kinetic energy of water that is about to
enter the intake pipe of the pump. Do you agree
Eta Carina (aka ate a car) is arguably the greatest intergalactic threat
to life Earth, considering that it could already be responsible for known
solar phenomena in our sun (including possibly the 11/5.5 year) cycle going
back billions of years, and it has a mysterious connection to our sun. It
*Mizuno measured the heat added to the system by the pump. There is no
point to appealing to a theory or hypothesis about how much heat there may
be when it has actually been measured for 18 hours by running the pump
only.*
dear Jed,
I could not find anymore the excel file of this 18 hour
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
I could not find anymore the excel file of this 18 hour measurement [it
used to be http://LENR-CANR.org/Mizuno/Mizuno2014-11-20.xlsx]
. . .
Could you post the file again?
I had to remove this for complicated reasons beyond the scope of the
The flow rate is going to be reasonably close to the 9 liters per minute
specification from the manufacturer. I have a graph from Iwaki America that
shows the expected rate as a function of the lift head facing the pump. At
zero meters of head which corresponds to atmospheric pressure the
Dear Chino,
The author DAVID HAMBURG (Science) cannot be found
You have to write to David Rowan (editor) at
in...@wired.co.uk and/or
da...@davidrowan.com
please let me know it it is a solved problem
Warm greetings,
Peter
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
Dear Dave,
I do not think we need so much calculation; better to perform a new
measurement on a 10 mm pipe to test you hypotesis. I hate to say that we
did it and the power dissipation increases a little bit, as any engineer
would have expected: you will find soon the results here
Gigi DiMarco gdmgdms...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we have to wait for the excel file from Jed; there we can find the
way to solve our problem.
I cannot provide that today, but there is a graph from it in the paper, on
p. 25. It shows the first 2.8 hours. As I said, the pump is usually left on
20 matches
Mail list logo
