And? On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Giovanni, just to check my memory- aren't you a known transhumanism > author too, or it is only a coincidence of names? > peter > > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > gsantost...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Please check my thread "customer warehouse". I show different types of >> calculations to demonstrate how nonsensical Rossi's claims are. Somebody >> should check my calculations are correct but I will share later the MatLab >> code I used. One could do these calculations also as Fermi problems in >> their head given that are order of magnitude estimates. >> >> Bottom line: any chemical process that you can conceive of (I looked at >> warming up water, melting ice and salts, the most endothermic reactions I >> could find) would require processing of tons of material every few days to >> use the energy involved in this situation. >> >> For example if you use electrolysis that is pretty demanding >> physical-chemistry process (that will require to transform the heat of the >> eCat in electrical energy, not efficient but this is just to demonstrate >> energy and mass involved) we are talking about 30 tons of water coming in >> and 30 tons of hydrogen and oxygen coming out of that 6000 sq feet >> warehouse every single week. You get similar numbers when you use reactions >> with large enthalpies that could use the heat more directly. >> >> Please take a look at my thread where I show pics of the building and the >> address. Google map it. Go at the street level. You can see it is a >> commercial area but not at all an industrial zoned area. There is >> absolutely no way to have swimming pools worth of water outside to exchange >> it with, there is no way to bring in 30 tons of chemical material every few >> days, process it, packing it in such a small warehouse in particular >> without causing huge problems with the other businesses around (that are >> all retailers), the owners of the building or the authorities. >> >> How much personnel does it take to process these quantities of material? >> >> The warehouse also needs to host the 1 MW plant and so on. >> >> I'm still doing calculations for venting the place but I bet you will >> need hurricane winds strength ventilation to remove the heat. >> >> But if you use water that is much more efficient way to exchange heat you >> will need to move 1 ton of hot water every second outside the building (and >> bring in an equivalent cold water amount). That is almost 90,000 tons of >> water every day. >> Talk about the water bill or even what it will take to get that water >> from the faucet or down a sink. >> >> As I said there is no way to recycle this amount of water without having >> enormous quantities of pipes (we can do the calculations how big the piping >> system needs to be) or swimming pools of steaming water outside the >> building. Where in the parking lot? >> >> Please use common sense and some basic physics and you will see how >> absurd the situation is. >> >> Giovanni >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Jack Cole <jcol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Adrian, >>> >>> Actually, people asked AR if the process was endothermic and he said >>> "Yes." When later asked if the heat that was not used was collected in >>> water, he responded "Yes." >>> >>> People should consider that they are engaging in crowd sourced excuse >>> making for him. He just has to sit back and wait for someone to suggest a >>> possible explanation. >>> >>> Imagine how the response (or non-response) may have been different if an >>> open ended question had been asked (e.g., what took place in the customer >>> side with the heat?). >>> >>> In the case of the actual questions that were asked, a "Yes" can lend >>> itself to future contradiction. For example, "Oh, I must have >>> misunderstood the question. Language differences. he, he, he" >>> >>> Jack >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 10:10 PM a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry, you should read what Rossi actually said before making a >>>> statement like that. Rossi said that the customer's process was >>>> endothermic and the excess heat beyond that was vented. He didn't add how >>>> much was by air or radiation and how much through cooling water going to >>>> the drain. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8/14/2016 8:34 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: >>>> >>>> Daniel, >>>> The main discussion we had in the last few days was about where the >>>> heat is dumped. This is basic thermodynamics not sophisticated arguments >>>> about Coulomb barrier shielding and so on. >>>> Rossi claiming that the energy was used by chemical reactions and >>>> therefore this why it didn't leave a thermal signature is bs. >>>> Plain bs. No field of expertise needed. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> What field of expertise? This kind of argument is also used to "show" >>>>> that cold fusion is bullshit. >>>>> >>>>> 2016-08-14 19:35 GMT-03:00 Giovanni Santostasi <gsantost...@gmail.com> >>>>> : >>>>> >>>>>> I have a PhD in Physics so I understand the basics of energy, >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
