Randy, Let me clear. I think that there was thermal gain here. I have said all along that there is gain but it could be less than claimed, because many things do not add up, and the extent of gain is not proved by the thermography… yet.
And a level of real gain does not mean that the calibration should not have
be done. There is no excuse for not doing it. Maybe the gain would have been
as claimed, with calibration – who knows?
The one and only thing which I am sure about is that the Lithium-6 should
not be there. This puts me in a bit of a logical bind, since if there is to
be thermal gain when this is done correctly - then, and as Alain says, does
not the gain itself explain the presence of the isotope?
No! No! No! Even if the thermal gain is proved, I am fully convinced that
the Li6 was added – and is not a product of transmutation. Same with the
Ni62. There can be no doubt of this unless most of nuclear physics goes down
the drain as well.
However – and this is the CAVEAT - it is true that these two expensive and
nearly pure isotopes could have been added by Rossi at the start and not at
the end – which would mean that (Li6 & Ni62) is indeed his “Secret sauce”
and he wanted to make it appear as only a transmutation product.
Either way they were added – not created. That still falls under the
category of deceit, since it means that he submitted a “raw fuel” sample to
test which he knew did not contain the Li6 nor the Ni62.
I hope that is crystal clear because it is a fine-line as to where the
deceit came into play.
Even if we can accept most or all of the heat as valid, then there has been
deceit in the way the isotope analysis was handled. However, Rossi’s many
fans will say that he can be forgiven for that since he was only trying to
protect his secret.
Which would essentially mean that the secret is to start out with Ni62 and
Li6, making this a very expensive 1.5 MWhr of energy.
Since that essentially makes the device of little use to solve the energy
crisis, then the deceit is only there to enrich Andrea Rossi.
_____________________________________________
From: Randy Wuller
I understand that concept. But just a quick glance at the
data seems to question your conclusion. Why didn’t the 30w input decrease
between File1 and File 5 cause a much bigger decrease in temperature being
estimated by the TI camera if your assumption is correct? I would have
expected a much bigger difference if you were correct.
Ransom
_____________________________________________
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2014 11:37 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Determining the transmittance . . . of
semitransparent materials at elevated temperatures
Randy,
No scientist would calibrate for 500 if they knew that the
reaction is going to 1400. And they should have known in advance, based on
the previous results.
The reason for this, which you may not be aware of, is that
changes in temperature at the high end get multiplied by an equation called
the Stefan-Boltzmann Law. Please look at the curve shown on this site
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan%E2%80%93Boltzmann_law
You can see in this curve - that small changes exponentially
increase into huge changes in the power estimate. The technique they are
using does not really measure temperature, it measure photon emission and
plugs that into a formula. However, had they used a platinum thermocouple or
a pyrometer, there would be no problem. They knew this from the previous
criticism but ignored it (or else the idea was vetoes by AR).
The result is that calibration to 500 only means what it
says, the active reactor temperature can be trusted up to this level. Near
1000 however, a small error is multiplied into a huge error.
_____________________________________________
From: Randy Wuller
Jones:
In fairness to this process it also says of
the dummy reactor test that “Rossi gradually brought it to the power level
THEY requested” (emphasis added). It doesn’t say that the test power level
was determined or demanded by Rossi. The fact he turned it off after they
had what they wanted is not the same as saying they didn’t test at a higher
level “ON ORDERS FROM ROSSI”.
I am not saying the test was adequate or
inadequate, I am not qualified. But some of what is happening here is not
objective and may be driven by other motives, i.e the same as the nonsense
you usually see from Krivit.
Ransom
_____________________________________________
From: Jones Beene
[mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2014 10:42 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Determining the
transmittance . . . of semitransparent materials at elevated temperatures
You seem to be saying that it is not found
in the “revised” or edited version? There is an edited version of the
report, in which details like this are removed. Rothwell, no doubt, would
chose to only read the edited version.
From: Blaze Spinnaker
Care to share where you saw this?
The dummy reactor was switched on at 12:20
PM of 24 February 2014 by Andrea Rossi who gradually brought it to the power
level requested by us. Rossi later intervened to switch off the dummy, and
in the following subsequent operations on the E-Cat: charge insertion,
reactor startup, reactor shutdown and powder charge extraction. Throughout
the test, no further intervention or interference on his part occurred;
moreover, all phases of the test were monitored directly by the
collaboration
They did not calibrate above 450 C and this
was not done ON ORDERS FROM ROSSI
JR: It does not say that anywhere.
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
