[Vo]:Dear Johannes

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

I've been retired now for almost 18 months. I'm happy to report I'm not
bored. My on-going Kepler research project continues to consume much of my
quality time. But alas, summer is just around the corner, and there seems to
be a spate of honey-do projects that are about to consume a good chunk of my
free energy.

 

Dear Johannes,

 

I hope you won't mind it too much if I place our work temporarily on the
bench... perhaps for several months while I go about retouching up the
exterior of the house. I just want you to know that I currently see at least
three additional laws that I would like to document as additions, or
complements, to your original three. I think you'll like the additions. I
see a nice symmetry that enhances the simplicity and beauty of your work.
However, the amount of computer coding and animation that I feel I'll need
to create in order to adequately show all of these additional Keplerian laws
feels a tad overwhelming at the moment. It feels important to me that I
develop my animations in easy-to-understand chewable bites. Creating a new
series of easy to chew cookies is not always an easy recipe to bake.

 

Yours truly

 

Steven Vincent Johnson

orionworks.com

http://www.zazzle.com/orionworks

http://stevenvincentjohnson.bandcamp.com/

[Vo]:Apologize?

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

The following commentary is not an attempt on my part to justify, or endorse
Rossi's recent professional behavior.

 

While some might suggest we need to apologize to Mr. Krivit I feel no desire
to endorse let alone enable investigative reporting tactics that repeatedly
exploit phrases like "convicted fraudster" or "convicted white collar
criminal" to characterize Rossi's prior business activities. Does Rossi's
prior fraud charges prove his current business actions are just as bogus?
Sure, it's tantalizing to assume that might be the case. I can see why one
might think it is a correct assumption to draw. Unfortunately, doing so is
nothing more than playing the game of guilt-by-association. The point being:
What does playing the guilt-by-association game have to do with
investigative reporting of the current evidence? It strikes me more as a
tactic a prosecutor attorney would attempt to exploit to build a case of
damning evidence, assuming the court doesn't bar him from doing so due to
irrelevance to current circumstances. It's my understanding that Mr. Krivit
wants to be perceived as an objective independent investigator/journalist.
If that is the case, why does his investigative reporting on Rossi
repeatedly include phrases like "convicted of fraud" and " convicted
white-collar criminal " over and over, typically near the beginning of
another damming Rossi article? Doing so, strikes me as more the actions that
a prosecuting attorney would exploit to insinuate to the jury that the
defendant on trial is guilty. But what do such insinuations have to do with
judging the contents of the latest experimental evidence under fire between
Rossi and I.H? It strikes me as something an investigative reporter might
feel inclined to include if he lacked confidence in being able to stand
alone in his ability to deconstruct the alleged veracity of Rossi's current
experimental claims. For that suspicion alone, I feel no inclination to
offer apologies.

 

It makes me think Mr. Krivit may have chosen the wrong profession to excel
at. I hope he eventually finds his true calling. Everyone deserves to embark
on his true calling. God only knows it's taken me damned near a life-time to
find a few special callings of my own to slave away at until I die.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

orionworks.com

http://www.zazzle.com/orionworks

http://stevenvincentjohnson.bandcamp.com

[Vo]:Rossi vs I.H.

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

I have rejoined vortex briefly to express a couple of cents. I don't expect
to stay her long. It's too damned addictive.

 

OK... Regarding the latest Rossi vs I.H. saga:

 

Having observed Jed's eclectic contributions to the Vort Collective since
the 1990s it's been my experience that few Vort members have been as
thorough, meticulously so, or as objective, as Mr. Rothwell has been when it
comes to evaluating basic calorimetry. Because I'm not an expert in
calorimetry it behooves me to carefully evaluate the opinions and
assessments of those who, in my opinion, are experienced experts in the
field. Having observed the quality of Mr. Rothwell's posts for more than
three decades I have no problem yielding to most of his extensive experience
(and opinion) on such matters. I should also mention that I'm willing to
listen to Ed Storm's opinions and evaluations as well,. I gather Ed may have
possibly concluded a very different scenario concerning Rossi's alleged
professional proclivities. Evaluating Mr. Rothwell's opinions, combined with
Ed Storms, and perhaps a few others can certainly give me a lot to chew on!

 

I am not in a position to determine whether Rossi is or isn't a fraud.
Meanwhile, Jed has access to crucial I.H. calorimetric data that most of us
in the peanut gallery don't possess. Jed appears to have come to the
conclusion that Rossi's recent actions concerning his dealings with I.H.
indicate strong fraudulent activity. Again, I yield to Jed's extensive
experience (and opinion) concerning calorimetric issues while I also
continue to keep Ed Storm's opinions on the matter in the mixture as well.

 

One can come up with a million different reasons as to why we flawed human
beings occasionally behave in seemingly evasive and dishonest ways. Buyer
beware.

 

While I remain fascinated by this latest Rossi saga, a saga which is still
unfolding, I find myself even more fascinated by the amount of bargaining
(of the Elisabeth Kubler-Ross kind) that I see coming from certain Vort
participants as they go about challenging Mr. Rothwell's, latest Rossi
criticisms. I remain fascinated that some of these posters seem incapable of
entertaining the possibility that Rossi's calorimetric claims might indeed
be worthless, or worse, possibly even fraudulent. Why is it important to
cast so much doubt on Mr. Rothwell's latest Rossi assessments? I can think
of one possibility:

 

As a former member of Dr. Mills SCP Yahoo group I observed a lot of smart
observant posters occasionally asking difficult questions of the good
doctor. Unfortunately, I also observed a lot of hero worshiping of the good
doctor. I suspect certain posts I made concerning observations I made that
seemed to suggest there existed an ardent cheerleading section may have
contributed to me being kicked out by Dr. Mills himself. Lately, I see a
similar kind of hero worshipping occurring within the Vort Collective among
certain posters. I find myself wondering what are the chances are that any
of these worshipers have accumulated anywhere near the amount of
calorimetric experience that Mr. Rothwell has accumulated. Under the
circumstances, what can an ardent worshipper do? One option is to fall back
on a relentless campaign of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross bargaining against Jed's
calorimetric evaluations. 

 

I suspect Jed will eventually tire of participating in this futile tactic
since it seems clear to me that worshipers have no intention of abandoning
their currently chosen idol. I'm astounded that Jed hasn't already given up
on this futile task.

 

At present I lack sufficient evidence to arrive at a conclusion that
suggests ALL of Rossi's experimental devices have never worked. I realize I
could be wrong on this point but I still find it plausible to speculate that
Rossi may have indeed discovered excess heat emanating from some of his
earlier experiments. Jed can correct me on this point but I believe he have
at one time also speculated on that possibility. I leads me to speculate
that after all these years Rossi may still have very little or no control at
all over this illusive beast. He may still have very little clue as to how
to properly control and commercially exploit his discovery. To me, that
might be the real crux of the Rossi enigma. The lack of control continues to
hound Rossi's dreams of striking it rich. I could see how such a scenario
could turn out to be a difficult, messy, unscrupulous affair as Rossi tries
to entice additional investors into funding his dream of eventually riding
this illusive Pegasus into the blue sky while being forced to insinuate
(perhaps even lie) that he has already captured and tamed the mythical
beast. I could see how such a scenario might explain a LOT of Rossi's
unscrupulous behavior. I don't mean to imply that I condone such
evasiveness.

 

Meanwhile, there's always Occam's Razor to keep in mind. Occam suggests
Rossi is simply a fraud. It would seem the best thing I can do for now is to
continue 

Re: [Vo]:Re: Anyone can "steal" IP from a patent

[a.ashfield]

Good question.

Andrea Rossi
May 22, 2016 at 4:31 PM

Oystein Lande:
It’s ok, thanks for your comprehension.
The circuit was complex, but yes, the steam was superheated.
Warm Regards,
A.R.


Andrea Rossi
May 22, 2016 at 1:06 PM

Oystein Lande:
Let me repeat another time: I cannot disclose even parts of the Report 
of the ERV before it is disclosed in Court. All I can say is that the 
measurements have been made by a nuclear engineer expert of nuclear 
power plants, certifications and validations. Do you think we ( or you ) 
have to explain to him how to measure the energy consumed and the energy 
produced by a boiler during one year ?

Warm Regards,
A.R.

Re: [Vo]:there are more doors to LENR

[Peter Gluck]

Yes, dear Harry! for sure, on a daily basis but not between
17.00 and 21.00
peter

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 8:14 PM, H LV  wrote:

> >>Old ways won't open new doors.
>
> Will new ways open old doors?
>
> Harry
>
> On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Peter Gluck 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-22-2016-other-doors-to-lenr.html
>>
>> this simple idea is actually a great step forward you will see...
>>
>> peter
>> --
>> Dr. Peter Gluck
>> Cluj, Romania
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>>
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:there are more doors to LENR

[H LV]

>>Old ways won't open new doors.

Will new ways open old doors?

Harry

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Peter Gluck  wrote:

>
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-22-2016-other-doors-to-lenr.html
>
> this simple idea is actually a great step forward you will see...
>
> peter
> --
> Dr. Peter Gluck
> Cluj, Romania
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>

[Vo]:many historical quotes

[Frank Znidarsic]

For those of you who have not seen this;  I recorded many of the early cold 
fusion scientists and put their quotes on line.




http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter1.html




Frank Znidarsic

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test

[Alan Fletcher]

Lewan reports : 


* The water heated by the MW plant was circulating in a closed loop, and 
since the return temperature was varying, due to different load in the process 
of the customer, Rossi insisted that the energy corresponding to heating the 
inflowing cooled water (at about 60˚C) to boiling temperature would not be 
taken into account for calculating the thermal power produced by the MW plant. 
The ERV accepted. (This was conservative, decreasing the calculated thermal 
power. The main part of the calculated thermal power, however, derives from the 
water being evaporated when boiling). 
* He also insisted that an arbitrary chosen 10 percent should be subtracted 
in the power calculation, with no other reason than to be conservative. The ERV 
accepted. 
* The average flow of water was 36 cubic meters per day. 

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg109919.html 

[Vo]:Re: CMNS: CONTRIBUTION FROM V. VYSOTSKII, NEW DISPUTE GENERATOR LAUNCHED<, 


Daniel Rocha Mon, 16 May 2016 14:56:42 -0700 
The circulating water amounted to 36m^3/day, which gives ~0.41l/s, that's
410g/s. 

I just happen to have a dandy steam calculator handy. 

Let's see what happens if we put 1MW into it. 

Worst case, starting from cold. 
Input water 10C, 5 bars pressure : Wet steam at 151C steam quality 0.863 (ie 
mostly steam, some water droplets) 
http://lenr.qumbu.com/ecatcalc.php?plot=Plot=d=0=0=9=9=1=1=JM+worst+case+10C+inlet+5+bar=0=0=1=0.41=1000=0=1000=1=20=1=10=5=2
 


Nominal, return water 60C, pressure 2 bars : almost dry steam at 121C Quality 
0.993 
Note : a kettle boiler will give about 0.95 quality 

http://lenr.qumbu.com/ecatcalc.php?plot=Plot=d=0=0=9=9=1=1=JM+nominal+60C+inlet+2+bar=0=0=1=0.41=1000=0=1000=1=20=1=60=2=2
 

Best case : inlet 99C 1 bar : Superheated dry steam at 170C 
http://lenr.qumbu.com/ecatcalc.php?plot=Plot=d=0=0=9=9=1=1=JM+best++90C+inlet+1+bar=0=0=1=0.41=1000=0=1000=1=20=1=90=1=2
 

These are all consistent with the described industrial use. 



From: "Jed Rothwell"  
To: "vortex-l"  
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2016 4:53:15 PM 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test 

Patrick Ellul < ellulpatr...@gmail.com > wrote: 




> The temperature was just over 100 deg C according to Rossi. 

Where did you get this quote from Rossi? 


You can compute that from what he told Lewan. See: 

[Vo]:Re: CMNS: CONTRIBUTION FROM V. VYSOTSKII, NEW DISPUTE GENERATOR LAUNCHED 

It is also shown directly in the sample calorimetry data I analyzed. 

- Jed 

[Vo]:there are more doors to LENR

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/05/may-22-2016-other-doors-to-lenr.html

this simple idea is actually a great step forward you will see...

peter
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com