Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
On 01/17/2011 11:24 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Peristaltic pumps are an example of technology that by rights should not work, but they managed to pull it off. They overcame what seemed to be insurmountable problems with plastics. You have a wheel pressing down and squeezing the plastic tube thousands of times an hour for weeks or months. Early plastics quickly became brittle and broke. I don't recall who did this, but I read about it and I got the impression that person really, really, REALLY wanted to make peristaltic pumps work, driven by some inscrutable inner desire. I have the impression that pumps like that are really good for pumping whole blood. Anything with an identifiable impeller also has edges inside, and tends to cause clots. If you can get away with nothing but a smooth tube, you can -- maybe! -- avoid ripping platelets and forming clots inside the pump. But I have no idea where I might have run across that information... - Jed
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
On 01/18/2011 12:03 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: Rossi also says that they have had one reactor that has run continually for two years, providing heat for a factory. Slightly longer quote from the Peswiki page: Rossi also says that they have had one reactor that has run continually for two years, providing heat for a factory. Also, the reactors can self sustain by turning off the input, but they prefer to have an input. So if they need some electricity to control it, why don't they use the output to run a generator, and close the loop? At 10:1, they ought to be able to turn the heat output into enough electricity to drive the thing with a good bit left over. Then they could provide heat /and/ run the lights in the factory. And at that point they'd be off the grid, and they'd be completely shut of the old Well are you /sure/ it's OU? question. And wouldn't /that/ make a whizzy demo! Starting can be done with batteries, of course, just like you start your car with a battery. You need some electricity to run an ICE, but /nobody/ plugs their gasoline car into the mains to get it going in the morning (block heaters excepted). We don't close the loop because we /prefer/ to have an input.That seems strange, to put it mildly. Kind of like saying, I make all the electricity I need with photoelectrics on the roof, but I /prefer/ to buy some from Ontario Hydro as well. The results of last week's demonstration pale in comparison to this claim. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
You are right, Stephen- see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peristaltic_pump (and many leaflets) Have used such pumps mainly for agressive liquids as HCl that corrodes almost all metals. But also for liquid cyanhydric acid (no problems) and for liquefied phosgene - great trouble had to neutralize a lot of this stuff- with gaseous ammonia- very unpleasant. A good choice for the Italian setup, I think. On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote: On 01/17/2011 11:24 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Peristaltic pumps are an example of technology that by rights should not work, but they managed to pull it off. They overcame what seemed to be insurmountable problems with plastics. You have a wheel pressing down and squeezing the plastic tube thousands of times an hour for weeks or months. Early plastics quickly became brittle and broke. I don't recall who did this, but I read about it and I got the impression that person really, really, REALLY wanted to make peristaltic pumps work, driven by some inscrutable inner desire. I have the impression that pumps like that are really good for pumping whole blood. Anything with an identifiable impeller also has edges inside, and tends to cause clots. If you can get away with nothing but a smooth tube, you can -- maybe! -- avoid ripping platelets and forming clots inside the pump. But I have no idea where I might have run across that information... - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
Was the steam exiting the Rossi device transparent or was it an opaque white? (right at the top where it transitions from the aluminum foil covered chimney to the black hose) If it is transparent then that would mean it is water vapor - and truly 12 kW of steam. But if it was white then that would indicate condensed tiny liquid droplets (or ultrasonic fogging) and fraudulent scamming. Water vapor is virtually invisible. On a tea kettle, the steam immediately coming out of the kettle is transparent but roughly 1 or 2 inches away the vapor condenses to tiny droplets which become a white fog. On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 8:49 AM, P.J van Noorden pjvan...@xs4all.nl wrote: I wondered why people had no problems with the 8 liters of watervapour which was released into the room during the Rossi experiment. A simple experiment in which I evaporised 8 liters of water in a room of 100 m3 with a powersource of 9 kW ( 3 heaters of each 3 kW) did produce a very humid atmosphere ( approaching RH 90%) and the temperature rose to more then 30 degr. Why wasn`t this detected during the experiment of Rossi? If the aircon was powerfull enough one would still notice a turbulence of warm and cold airflow in the room. Peter - Original Message - *From:* Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Tuesday, January 18, 2011 4:08 AM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments That meter that was listed can measure Relative Humidity but it can not measure the quality of the steam. As you know, relative humidity just means how saturated the air is for for the given temperature - it says absolutely nothing about the quality (dryness or wetness) of the steam. The quality of the steam (a.k.a. dryness on Vortex) gives you the ratio of the mass of vapor to the total mass of water (liquid and vapor) in a given sample. It takes complicated expensive instruments to measure the quality of steam (one device is called a throttling calorimeter). A common or even expensive Relative Humidity instrument can not do it. If Rossi used an ultrasonic fogger in boiling water, he could get micron sized droplets at 100 C. That's close enough to 101 C with errors due to calibration. They should insulate the black hose and stick it in a barrel of water. 12 kW of steam that is fed into 50 gallons of water (or some number of gallons) will raise the temperature at rate that could be easily measurable. If it can be done, find out exactly what information rules out wet steam. Here is a photo of an ultrasonic fogger using water to produce what looks like steam, but is in fact micron sized water droplets: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/ultrasonic-fogger-how-does-it-work.html Here is a link to a description of a throttling calorimeter which is a device that measures the quality (wetness) of steam. Basically the throttling calorimeter involves letting the pressurized steam expand into a cavity and measuring the temperature of the resulting gas. It only works with pressurized steam such as 30 psia steam or higher so that it can expand down to 15 psia or atmospheric pressure. http://www.plantservices.com/articles/2003/378.html?page=full On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com wrote: How can you use an indoor air quality meter (listed in Jed's email) to measure the dryness of the steam? (you can't) Apparently you can. The person who did this is reportedly an expert in steam. I gather this meter measures RH in steam as well as air. Can it be faked the following way: Use an ultrasonic fogger operating at 1.6 MHz to create micron size droplets. Heat the droplets to 90 C and then send it down the black hose. The temperature of the steam out the outlet is measured with a thermocouple. It is 101 deg C. So it is definitely steam, or a mixture of steam and water. The RH meter ensures that is all dry steam. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: I have the impression that pumps like that are really good for pumping whole blood. Anything with an identifiable impeller also has edges inside, and tends to cause clots. That's a good point. I recall they were developed for medical applications. The other advantage it that the fluid is enclosed in sterile plastic throughout the loop. It never touches metal or any other surface. It never leaves the tube to enter a pump cylinder. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: So if they need some electricity to control it, why don't they use the output to run a generator, and close the loop? At 10:1, they ought to be able to turn the heat output into enough electricity to drive the thing with a good bit left over. Designing or purchasing a heat engine for this would be expensive and time consuming. In the first round of installations it makes more sense to use AC power for the control current And at that point they'd be off the grid, and they'd be completely shut of the old Well are you *sure* it's OU? question. And wouldn't *that* make a whizzy demo! It would make a great demo, and I would love to see it, but anyone not convinced by 0.4 kW in and 12 kW out will not be convinced by anything. At this stage, engineering a heat engine just to close the loop would be a distraction. If the control current were 1000 times smaller than the output, you could use thermoelectric chips which require little engineering and work over a broad range of temperature. The Russians have some for camping and remote villages, which can be used with burning wood. In the U.S. there are some for small yachts which use burning natural gas, I think. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Rossi could keep his black box method and still prove his claims with a 24 hour stress test that would produce far more energy than he could possibly Conceal inside the black box. He has done that. People have told me they witnessed that, albeit not at a national university setting, with professors doing the installation and running of the calorimetry. I think they did some longer runs in the weeks leading up to this demo, but I have not heard how long they were. I asked, but they did not get around to answering. Despite Rossi's odd nature, he has done a good job of revealing his device. I think he has done as much as anyone can do without revealing trade secrets. I am afraid it is futile to try to protect trade secrets, but I understand why he is trying. It is hard to think of a better way to proceed given the patent situation. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
I not sure about whether clotting was a problem, but hemolysis (breaking apart the red blood cells) is. Pumping blood requires very gentle movements in order to avoid damaging the cells. Just modestly squeezing your finger can burst blood cells. When a diabetic is taking a blood sample and squeezes their finger too much, it causes a significant error in the glucose meter's reading, and this is caused by bursting too many blood cells and their intracellular contents diluting the glucose concentration of the plasma... -Mark -Original Message- From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 6:51 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments On 01/17/2011 11:24 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Peristaltic pumps are an example of technology that by rights should not work, but they managed to pull it off. They overcame what seemed to be insurmountable problems with plastics. You have a wheel pressing down and squeezing the plastic tube thousands of times an hour for weeks or months. Early plastics quickly became brittle and broke. I don't recall who did this, but I read about it and I got the impression that person really, really, REALLY wanted to make peristaltic pumps work, driven by some inscrutable inner desire. I have the impression that pumps like that are really good for pumping whole blood. Anything with an identifiable impeller also has edges inside, and tends to cause clots. If you can get away with nothing but a smooth tube, you can -- maybe! -- avoid ripping platelets and forming clots inside the pump. But I have no idea where I might have run across that information... - Jed
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
On 01/18/2011 11:00 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote: So if they need some electricity to control it, why don't they use the output to run a generator, and close the loop? At 10:1, they ought to be able to turn the heat output into enough electricity to drive the thing with a good bit left over. Designing or purchasing a heat engine for this would be expensive and time consuming. In the first round of installations it makes more sense to use AC power for the control current And at that point they'd be off the grid, and they'd be completely shut of the old Well are you /sure/ it's OU? question. And wouldn't /that/ make a whizzy demo! It would make a great demo, and I would love to see it, but anyone not convinced by 0.4 kW in and 12 kW out will not be convinced by anything. At this stage, engineering a heat engine just to close the loop would be a distraction. Sure. But the quote from PW makes it sound like they have had this in place for some time. Seems like it would have been an obvious thing to do back when they were setting up to heat the factory with a reactor -- unless, of course, the factory is one room and the heating is done just by running the generator and letting it warm up its surroundings a bit. (Depending on where they are in Italy, the heat required might be pretty minimal, come to think of it.) And as to not being convinced by anything ... as long as the conclusions are based on precise heat measurements there is room for doubt. Once the loop is closed there is no more room for doubt. This issue has come up time and again with perpetual motion machine claimants, along with rumors of a factory powered by a magic motor. There *is* a good reason for closing the loop, and their assertion that they could run with no electrical input, but just don't want to, sounds absurd. I do not need to take measurements to be sure the furnace in this house really works. All I need to do is step in the front door, and my senses give me a conclusive, albeit qualitative, answer. Here is a truism: /As long as you need calorimetry to determine if a heater works, it doesn't work well enough to be interesting./ Their device works well enough that they could dispense with the calorimetry, just by running it /unplugged/ and showing that it still gets hot. But they prefer not to. Errrm. If the control current were 1000 times smaller than the output, you could use thermoelectric chips which require little engineering and work over a broad range of temperature. The Russians have some for camping and remote villages, which can be used with burning wood. In the U.S. there are some for small yachts which use burning natural gas, I think. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
On 01/18/2011 11:04 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Rossi could keep his black box method and still prove his claims with a 24 hour stress test that would produce far more energy than he could possibly Conceal inside the black box. He has done that. People have told me they witnessed that, albeit not at a national university setting, with professors doing the installation and running of the calorimetry. I think they did some longer runs in the weeks leading up to this demo, but I have not heard how long they were. I asked, but they did not get around to answering. Despite Rossi's odd nature, he has done a good job of revealing his device. I think he has done as much as anyone can do without revealing trade secrets. I am afraid it is futile to try to protect trade secrets, but I understand why he is trying. It is hard to think of a better way to proceed given the patent situation. CLOSE THE LOOP. He says he can run without any electrical input. Ergo he /can/ close the loop, without the expense of a Stirling motor and generator. - Jed
[Vo]: More accurate van der Waals measurement...
Research at Univ of Arizona... They've come up with a way to more accurately measure van der Waals forces... specifically the force between an atom and a surface, which may have some bearing on LENR. Here is the interesting bit... The most significant discovery was that an atom's inner electrons, orbiting the nucleus at a closer range than the atom's outer electrons, influence the way the atom interacts with the surface. 'We show that these core electrons contribute to the atom-surface potential,' Lonij said, 'which was only known in theory until now. This is the first experimental demonstration that core electrons affect atom-surface potentials.' -Mark
[Vo]:Wikipedia's entry on Cold Fusion, unchanged.
As best as I can tell, Wikipedia's entry on Cold Fusion has remained blissfully unaware of the recent weekend events in Italy. I wonder if Mr. Lomax might like to comment. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Richard C Macaulay
Many of you I am sure fondly remember the many fun postings here from the Dime Box Saloon by Richard C Macaulay. I was surprised recently to find this obituary for him: http://obit.memorialoakschapel.com/obitdisplay.html?task=Printid=757483 He died Feb. 19, 2010. He had much expertise in the practical generation and use of vortices, as well as the politics of energy and economics in Texas. His contributions and good humor posted from the Dime Box Saloon, his fictitious hangout, have been missed. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Richard C Macaulay
From Horace, Many of you I am sure fondly remember the many fun postings here from the Dime Box Saloon by Richard C Macaulay. I was surprised recently to find this obituary for him: http://obit.memorialoakschapel.com/obitdisplay.html?task=Printid=757483 He died Feb. 19, 2010. He had much expertise in the practical generation and use of vortices, as well as the politics of energy and economics in Texas. His contributions and good humor posted from the Dime Box Saloon, his fictitious hangout, have been missed. Thanks, Horace. Nice to hear from you. Richard's DBS was a whimsical place to hang out in. He is probably bartending there right now. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Pycno or no?
The Rossi collective seem to be convinced, or at least promoting the hypothesis that the fusion of a proton with nickel, resulting in copper, is the main heat source in this device. There are other options. One possibility is related to dense hydrogen or pycno. This could include Miley's inverse Rydberg hydrogen or the less dense variety. Here is an important Miley paper where he sees clusters of about 100 atoms in a defect . (Casimir cavity ??) http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/244/3/032036/pdf/1742-6596_244_3_032036. pdf Inverse Rydberg states of hydrogen atoms are far denser than 100 atoms, of course, and relatively long-lived. Here is the citation (fee) - if it is confirmed by other experimenters, then it could be one of the most important papers in LENR: Ultrahigh-density deuterium of Rydberg matter clusters for inertial confinement fusion targets L. Holmlid, H. Hora, G. Miley and X. Yang, Laser and Particle Beams 27 (2009) 529-532. Holmlid, Miley and associates, claim that the density seen in their testing works out to the equivalent of ~10^29 atoms/cm^3, which more than enough for the solar variety of proton-proton tunneling reaction (or chain reaction) which is one of the prime fusion reactions by which stars convert hydrogen to energy. The proton-proton chain reaction dominates in stars the size of our Sun or smaller, which are in this range of density. In 1939, Hans Bethe proposed that one of the protons in this reaction will beta+ decay into a neutron via the weak interaction during the fusion, making deuterium as an initial product in the chain that leads to helium - and he won the Nobel Prize, in part for this insight. It adds new meaning to one of the early idioms for cold fusion - sun in a bottle. In reading Ed Storms recent musings, he seems to favor a rare version of this H+H reaction for Rossi - one that does not involve extreme density - known as the P-e-P reaction, which also results in deuterium, as the 'ash'. However, if we add the Holmlid/Miley finding into the mix - extremely dense IRH (inverse Rydberg hydrogen) or even the 100 atom cluster, then we can possibly stay with better known solar reaction, involving beta+ decay. The falsifiability of this hypothesis can be related to the appearance of deuterium and perhaps the gamma signature of the positron, as it either annihilates or goes to positronium with the UV signature (6.8 eV). This kind of fusion is consistent with all we know if the copper is explained as migration or occasional fusion. Furthermore, the 'catalyst' of Rossi could changing gaseous hydrogen via spillover, into dense deuterium, or even IRH. The catalyst is the breakthrough, and my take on it is that it is a spillover catalyst and possibly it is the same NaH which is used by Mills. That would be powerful incentive Jones
RE: [Vo]:Richard C Macaulay
I was afraid of this, back when Richard stopped posting. I had even checked the obits in that area a couple of times when he didn't answer email. ... a true character ... but I'm not so sure the Dime Box was fictitious ? -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner To: Vortex-L Subject: [Vo]:Richard C Macaulay Many of you I am sure fondly remember the many fun postings here from the Dime Box Saloon by Richard C Macaulay. I was surprised recently to find this obituary for him: http://obit.memorialoakschapel.com/obitdisplay.html?task=Printid=757483 He died Feb. 19, 2010. He had much expertise in the practical generation and use of vortices, as well as the politics of energy and economics in Texas. His contributions and good humor posted from the Dime Box Saloon, his fictitious hangout, have been missed. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: And as to not being convinced by anything ... as long as the conclusions are based on precise heat measurements there is room for doubt. These conclusions are based on somewhat imprecise measurements, and you can be just as certain with no measurements at all. Just look at the thing. You see water going in at about a liter every three minutes, steam coming out, and only a thin, ordinary wire going to the power supplies. It would be physically impossible for that wire to supply the electricity needed to vaporize that much water. Impossible by a wide margin; at least a factor of 4. You don't even need to see the power meter or thermometers to be sure of this. Once the loop is closed there is no more room for doubt. As far as I am concerned, this is first principle proof, and it is as convincing as a self sustaining machine, or as Fleischmann's boil-off video. Unless there are camera tricks or hidden wires involved this is massive anomalous heat. I do not think there are tricks or hidden wires because the professors involved would notice that, and they would not stand for it. If it were only the inventor, and everything was under his exclusive control, I might suspect a fake, but I would be just as suspicious of a self-sustaining demo under the control of the inventor. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Richard C Macaulay
Speaking of another old warrior, we have not heard from Mike Carrell in a spell. Actually, for quite some time now. Considering recent events I would have expected something akin to a rebuttal from Mike, particularly in regards to his position, (or defense), of BLP. Mike is up there in years. Several years ago he had what I believe was a minor stroke that slightly impaired his speech. An email I sent to Mike last weekend has not yet been answered. I hope he is vacationing. Can anyone shed any light on the matter? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Celani's report on Rossi January 14 test
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: [Francesco gave me permission to distribute this.] Dear Colleagues, snip After few minutes Eng. Rossi realised that I was trying to identify something secret inside the reactor: I was forced to stop the measurements. Which would indicate that Rossi has a greater understanding of the reaction than his papers and his patents indicate. T
RE: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
This is from Ed Storms in response to the previous post. It is essential to analyze the results in terms of how we know Nature has to behave. By doing this, we can gain increased understanding of what is actually happening in the Rossi apparatus, information that Rossi has not provided. First, we must accept that the excess power is real and ask what characteristics of the energy-producing reaction would produce the observed behavior. If the energy-producing reaction were exothermic with a positive temperature coefficient, the device could not be controlled and the temperature would continue to rise until the device was destroyed. This would be like mixing H2 and O2 gas and then trying to slow the reaction by removing heat at the correct rate to produce a constant rate and temperature as the reaction proceeded. This kind of control is simply not possible. Therefore, the energy-producing reaction must be self-controlling, i.e have a negative feedback mechanism. How is this possible? The energy producing reaction for the Rossi and all CF applications has two components. The nuclear reaction requires a structure to be produced in which the nuclear reaction is initiated and allows the energy to be dissipated. I call this structure the nuclear-active-environment (NAE). Formation of this structure has been observed to be spontaneous, therefore it is exothermic and the rate of formation increases with temperature. If this were the only process, CF and the Rossi device would heat until the apparatus was destroyed, a fact that most theories ignore. Fortunately, as temperature is increased, the concentration of the reactant, hydrogen in Rossi's case and deuterium in the other branch of the effect, is reduced. We all know from basic chemistry that when the concentration of a reactant is reduced, the rate of reaction using that reactant must go down. Consequently, competition between the rate being increased by temperature and decreased by loss of hydrogen or deuterium, results in a temperature at which the energy-producing reaction has a maximum rate. In Rossi's case, this temperature is above but near 101° C. If the temperature attempts to go above this value, the rate of energy production automatically drops and the temperature is prevented from rising higher. This is how all systems containing a negative feed-back mechanism must behave. Suppose we want to remove energy from such a system. Removing energy causes the temperature to drop, which reduces the rate of energy generation. If we want to maximize the rate of energy generation, we must hold the temperature constant at the critical value. This can be done by changing the applied energy and matching it with the energy loss caused by cooling. If this process is done carefully, a source of constant power at constant temperature can be achieved. So far, this is all basic engineering 101. The behavior of the Rossi device demonstrates that he has achieved this stable condition, which is only possible if the two conditions described above are operating in his apparatus. These two conditions will operate in ALL CF cells producing energy. We see how the two conditions interact on a small scale in the flashes of light observed by Szpak et al. when Pd is electrodeposited - energy is produced, temperature rises, D is lost, temperature drops with the cycle repeating as D is taken up by the active region. Rossi has caused the effect on a large scale while under control. Consequently, the Rossi effect is consistent with how all CF devices are expected to behave and provides an insight into how they must be designed. Because the critical temperature might exist only over a small temperature range, failure to cause CF might be partially related to not having entered this critical temperature range. If the temperature is too low, the formation rate of the NAE is too small to produce detectable heat and if the temperature is too high, the concentration of D is too low to allow a rate that produces detectable heat. In other words, some cells might have the ability to produce power if the right temperature were used. Rossi has shown that this insight is important and that his reaction, even though it uses H2 and Ni rather than D2 and Pd, has all the characteristics of what we have identified as cold fusion. I suspect the heat does not result from transmutation but from formation H-H-e fusion to give deuterium. The small amount of transmutation that results gives stable isotopes just like such transmutation found in CF cells. Consequently, we need to examine his results using what we know about the deuterium system. The bottom line is that Rossi is initiating cold fusion and the reactions have all the characteristics observed when deuterium is used. Nature has only one song but with different words. Ed From: Jones Beene The Rossi collective seem to be convinced, or at least promoting the hypothesis that the fusion of a
RE: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
Here are some calculations that imply certain water/humidity effects which should have been observed at the demo. This is from an associate LENR researcher - Jeff Morriss, in response to the other issues on steam/vapor raised by Jeff Driscoll and Peter van Noorden, which so far do not have convincing answers. Nagel states that 150 grams of water are boiled every 30 sec, or 5 cc/sec. Taking the density of steam at 100C as .590 Kg/m**3 and ratio-ing it against the density of liquid water as 1000 kG/m**3 yields a volume increase of 1690. So each 5 cc of water is converted into 8450 cc of steam every second. If we estimate the area of the vent hose at ~1 cm**2, then the steam velocity must be 8450 cm/sec of 84.5 m/sec. This is about 1/4 the speed of sound and should produce quite a jet of steam. Did anyone observe this? Also, the steam would condense and quickly produce a saturated atmosphere and condensation on metal surfaces. Again, did anyone observe this? Here is a second sanity check. The specific heat of dry air at 1 atm is 1.14 kJ/Km**3. If we assume a room volume of 300 m**3 (about the size of an average classroom) then it takes (300 m**3)*(1.14 kJ/Km**3) = 342 kJ to raise the temperature of the room by one degree. The energy required to boil 18 liters of water is 4.7E4 kJ. So if no heat escaped the room and we ignored the additional energy change due to an increase in relative humidity then the ambient temperature should have increased by 4.7e4/342 or about 137 degrees C. Even if the air in the room cycled every 6 minutes (and that would require special ventilation) the ambient would still rise by 13.7C, which would be noticeably hot and muggy. Finally, the 4.7E4 kJ/hour is equivalent to 1.31E4J/sec. As a basis of comparison, it would be equivalent to 240V at 54 Amps, which is the capacity of an electric furnace for a large house. You may want to pass my calculations by someone else for checking, but I believe they are correct. Jeff From: Jeff Driscoll Was the steam exiting the Rossi device transparent or was it an opaque white? (right at the top where it transitions from the aluminum foil covered chimney to the black hose) .If it is transparent then that would mean it is water vapor - and truly 12 kW of steam. But if it was white then that would indicate condensed tiny liquid droplets (or ultrasonic fogging) and fraudulent scamming. Water vapor is virtually invisible.. On a tea kettle, the steam immediately coming out of the kettle is transparent but roughly 1 or 2 inches away the vapor condenses to tiny droplets which become a white fog. On Tue, Jan 18, P.J van Noorden pjvan...@xs4all.nl wrote: I wondered why people had no problems with the 8 liters of watervapour which was released into the room during the Rossi experiment. A simple experiment in which I evaporised 8 liters of water in a room of 100 m3 with a powersource of 9 kW ( 3 heaters of each 3 kW) did produce a very humid atmosphere ( approaching RH 90%) and the temperature rose to more then 30 degr. Why wasn`t this detected during the experiment of Rossi? If the aircon was powerfull enough one would still notice a turbulence of warm and cold airflow in the room. Peter - Original Message - From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 4:08 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments That meter that was listed can measure Relative Humidity but it can not measure the quality of the steam. As you know, relative humidity just means how saturated the air is for for the given temperature - it says absolutely nothing about the quality (dryness or wetness) of the steam. The quality of the steam (a.k.a. dryness on Vortex) gives you the ratio of the mass of vapor to the total mass of water (liquid and vapor) in a given sample. It takes complicated expensive instruments to measure the quality of steam (one device is called a throttling calorimeter). A common or even expensive Relative Humidity instrument can not do it. If Rossi used an ultrasonic fogger in boiling water, he could get micron sized droplets at 100 C. That's close enough to 101 C with errors due to calibration. They should insulate the black hose and stick it in a barrel of water. 12 kW of steam that is fed into 50 gallons of water (or some number of gallons) will raise the temperature at rate that could be easily measurable. If it can be done, find out exactly what information rules out wet steam. Here is a photo of an ultrasonic fogger using water to produce what looks like steam, but is in fact micron sized water droplets: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/ultrasonic-fogger-how-does-it-work.html Here is a link to a description of a throttling calorimeter which is a device that measures the quality (wetness) of steam. Basically the throttling calorimeter involves letting the pressurized steam expand into a cavity and measuring the temperature of the resulting gas.
Re: [Vo]:Celani's report on Rossi January 14 test
Jed, If he did a spectrum measurement for a few minutes, he should have a decent sampling. This depends on the detector, of course, but all handhelds that I've dealt with (which is a limited sample) are designed for rapid detection/spectra collection. NaI isn't the best detector material, but it should be adequate. Usually the detector stores the last spectrum collected. If he wants the spectrum he did get analyzed, I can get this done in several different ways. Chances are the secret may not be a gamma emitter at all, but it's worth a go. Is there any chance he a) still has the spectrum he did collect, and b) would be willing to share it? Debbie On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: [Francesco gave me permission to distribute this.] Dear Colleagues, [...] * It was assembled also a twin gamma ray detector in order to detect e+e- annihilation: this time almost no results. Focardi was confident that they will get large amounts of such signal, as in previous experiment. This time the counts were close to background for coincidences and only some uncorrelated signal were over background. * I bring a gamma detector, battery operated, 1.25 NaI(Tl). Energy range=25keV-2000keV. I measured some increase of counts near the reactor (about 50-100%) during operation, in a erratic (unstable) way, in respect to background. I decided to move the gamma detector from counts to spectra mode. After few minutes Eng. Rossi realised that I was trying to identify something secret inside the reactor: I was forced to stop the measurements. [...] Francesco CELANI
RE: [Vo]:Celani's report on Rossi January 14 test
From: albedo5 . Chances are the secret may not be a gamma emitter at all, but it's worth a go. With a lead-shielded reactor it is doubtful that any radiation other than gammas could be detected.
[Vo]:Uploaded short interview with Levi
I uploaded a short interview with Levi, and the recommendations made by Nagel that I posted here previously. See: Macy, M.,/Specifics of Andrea Rossi's Energy Catalyzer Test, University of Bologna, January 14, 2011/. 2011, LENR-CANR.org. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MacyMspecificso.pdf Nagel, D.J.,/Check List for LENR Validation Experiments/. 2011, LENR-CANR.org. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/NagelDJchecklistf.pdf - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:16:45 -0800: Hi, [snip] The falsifiability of this hypothesis can be related to the appearance of deuterium and perhaps the gamma signature of the positron, as it either annihilates or goes to positronium with the UV signature (6.8 eV). AFAIK positronium has a fairly short life before it too annihilates (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
On 01/18/2011 02:52 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: CLOSE THE LOOP. He [Rossi] says he can run without any electrical input. Ergo he /can/ close the loop, without the expense of a Stirling motor and generator. Actually, that is heat input, from an AC resistance heater. Presumably it would work as well with combustion heating. He said he can run without heat input, but it is dangerous. I do not think he elaborated on that. I gather it means he uses heat to modulate the reaction. The Piantelli Ni experiments required high temperature and external heating. I believe the control factors are heat and pressure. The H2 is at 2 atm, according to Celani. When you depressurize the cell, the reaction soon stops. That's good news. Cold fusion reactions are sometimes nearly as difficult to stop as they are to start. I assume the Rossi device has some internal self-regulation, or what Stan Pons called a memory that keeps electrochemical cells going back to the same power level after you refill the cell, tap on it, or disturb it some other way. I also assume there is something about the Rossi device that acts analogously to a self-quenching CANDU nuclear reactor. I am only speculating; I have no knowledge of this. The mechanism would be something like the metal degassing at very high temperature, cooling down, and then absorbing the gas and reacting again. That would explain why it quickly stops when you degas manually. I suspect the electric heater is in the core, and the cold fusion reaction occurs in the Ni powder surrounding that. I recall some of the Piantelli devices had heaters attached directly to the Ni bar. I think Rossi claimed the internal temperature of this thing is 1500°C. Ed Storms pointed out that cannot be right, because the melting point of Ni is 1,453°C. Perhaps that is a misunderstanding, or a mistranslation. Still, it must be pretty hot in there because the device is small and well insulated. Even with 400 W or 1000 W from the AC heater it must be quite hot internally. I assume (but I do not know) that the heater is the hottest part. That's how I imagine it works. Actually, I'd expect the joule heater to be rather cool relative to the reactive elements once the thing gets rolling. The reaction is contributing 10 kW or more at that point; the joule heater is just plugging along at 400 watts. That, also, makes it seem a little surprising that the joule heater continues to be used *after* ignition. It's contributing just 4% of the total heat; you'd think they could just shut it off after the thing starts up. Of course, the reacting surface area may be large enough that it stays cooler than the heater, and perhaps the intense heat near the heater wire has something to do with the reason they continue to use it after ignition. Incidentally, a 1500 degree internal temperature also makes the use of unpressurized water for a coolant seem to me to be a little iffy. Perhaps that has something to do with the reason they boil it all to steam, rather than running the pump harder and getting out hot water (which, it has been suggested, might have provided a more rock-solid output heat measure). - Jed
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:52:45 -0500: Hi, [snip] They sure do! I wish I knew the name of that factory, and I could see photos or interviews. [snip] It's probably the factory mentioned in the patent:- A practical embodiment of the inventive apparatus, installed on October 16, 2007, is at present perfectly operating 24 hours per day, and provides an amount of heat sufficient to heat the factory of the Company EON of via Carlo Ragazzi 18, at Bondeno (Province of Ferrara) . For better understanding the invention, the main components of the above mentioned apparatus have been schematically shown in Table 2. (See http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=2009125444IA=IT2008000532DISPLAY=DESC) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
RE: [Vo]:Celani's report on Rossi January 14 test
Well, neutrons may be out, since the patent mentions lots of boron and few neuts would escape anyway, and there are almost no secondaries from the boron ash: lithium and alpha (as we know from BNCT). Celani's comment are indeed a bit puzzling, given the shielding - and the already admitted failure to see anything at 511 keV. That makes a lot of sense. . however . I have suggested in a previous post that Rossi - like BLP, could be using sodium hydride as the (spillover) catalyst, giving him a strong reason to hide this (Mills' IP portfolio). Yikes! it is a very strong reason, come to think of it. If so, and if there are energetic protons, then the Na(p,gamma) reaction is the culprit. Especially since this one is very important in cosmology, thus well studied, and with a characteristic 1.275 MeV signature. Aha. This little detail does make NaH an even better candidate. Jones From: albedo5 You could probably see neutrons, if any were emitted - if the detector has a neutron capability, of course. Even if you see them, you now know a neutron emitter is present, nothing else. So the chances of seeing anything useful other than high-energy gammas is really pretty low. The algorithms that identify components within a spectrum are rather sophisticated, though. Hope springs eternalas always. . Chances are the secret may not be a gamma emitter at all, but it's worth a go. With a lead-shielded reactor it is doubtful that any radiation other than gammas could be detected.
Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
This point has come up over and over, and I don't recall seeing an answer. Just exactly what did happen to the steam? Does anyone know? Was it vented outside, vented into the room, or recondensed? If it was condensed, what happened to the coolant? I.e., was there a stream of cooling water running down a drain somewhere, or what? (Have I just not been paying enough attention? (Something new and different -- not!)) (I've seen one off-hand reference to the condenser but it wasn't in a description of the apparatus; it was, IRRC, in a remark by Terry and seemed to be more of an assumption than anything else.) On 01/18/2011 03:35 PM, Jones Beene wrote: Here are some calculations that imply certain water/humidity effects which should have been observed at the demo. This is from an associate LENR researcher - Jeff Morriss, in response to the other issues on steam/vapor raised by Jeff Driscoll and Peter van Noorden, which so far do not have convincing answers. Nagel states that 150 grams of water are boiled every 30 sec, or 5 cc/sec. Taking the density of steam at 100C as .590 Kg/m**3 and ratio-ing it against the density of liquid water as 1000 kG/m**3 yields a volume increase of 1690. So each 5 cc of water is converted into 8450 cc of steam every second. If we estimate the area of the vent hose at ~1 cm**2, then the steam velocity must be 8450 cm/sec of 84.5 m/sec. This is about 1/4 the speed of sound and should produce quite a jet of steam. Did anyone observe this? Also, the steam would condense and quickly produce a saturated atmosphere and condensation on metal surfaces. Again, did anyone observe this? Here is a second sanity check. The specific heat of dry air at 1 atm is 1.14 kJ/Km**3. If we assume a room volume of 300 m**3 (about the size of an average classroom) then it takes (300 m**3)*(1.14 kJ/Km**3) = 342 kJ to raise the temperature of the room by one degree. The energy required to boil 18 liters of water is 4.7E4 kJ. So if no heat escaped the room and we ignored the additional energy change due to an increase in relative humidity then the ambient temperature should have increased by 4.7e4/342 or about 137 degrees C. Even if the air in the room cycled every 6 minutes (and that would require special ventilation) the ambient would still rise by 13.7C, which would be noticeably hot and muggy. Finally, the 4.7E4 kJ/hour is equivalent to 1.31E4J/sec. As a basis of comparison, it would be equivalent to 240V at 54 Amps, which is the capacity of an electric furnace for a large house. You may want to pass my calculations by someone else for checking, but I believe they are correct. Jeff From: Jeff Driscoll Was the steam exiting the Rossi device transparent or was it an opaque white? (right at the top where it transitions from the aluminum foil covered chimney to the black hose) ...If it is transparent then that would mean it is water vapor - and truly 12 kW of steam... But if it was white then that would indicate condensed tiny liquid droplets (or ultrasonic fogging) and fraudulent scamming. Water vapor is virtually invisible On a tea kettle, the steam immediately coming out of the kettle is transparent but roughly 1 or 2 inches away the vapor condenses to tiny droplets which become a white fog. On Tue, Jan 18, P.J van Noorden pjvan...@xs4all.nl wrote: I wondered why people had no problems with the 8 liters of watervapour which was released into the room during the Rossi experiment. A simple experiment in which I evaporised 8 liters of water in a room of 100 m3 with a powersource of 9 kW ( 3 heaters of each 3 kW) did produce a very humid atmosphere ( approaching RH 90%) and the temperature rose to more then 30 degr. Why wasn`t this detected during the experiment of Rossi? If the aircon was powerfull enough one would still notice a turbulence of warm and cold airflow in the room. Peter - Original Message - From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 4:08 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments That meter that was listed can measure Relative Humidity but it can not measure the quality of the steam. As you know, relative humidity just means how saturated the air is for for the given temperature - it says absolutely nothing about the quality (dryness or wetness) of the steam. The quality of the steam (a.k.a. dryness on Vortex) gives you the ratio of the mass of vapor to the total mass of water (liquid and vapor) in a given sample. It takes complicated expensive instruments to measure the quality of steam (one device is called a throttling calorimeter). A common or even expensive Relative Humidity instrument can not do it. If Rossi used an ultrasonic fogger in boiling water, he could get micron sized droplets at 100 C. That's close enough to 101 C with errors due to calibration. They
Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: That, also, makes it seem a little surprising that the joule heater continues to be used *after* ignition. It's contributing just 4% of the total heat; you'd think they could just shut it off after the thing starts up. Of course, the reacting surface area may be large enough that it stays cooler than the heater, and perhaps the intense heat near the heater wire has something to do with the reason they continue to use it after ignition. That is my guess. I think the AC heater wire is hotter than the active material. As I said, it is my understanding that heat and hydrogen pressure are the two control factors. I do not know how they work. I don't know which knob you twist to make the thing go. Rossi said that removing the AC heat completely is dangerous. That give me the willies. If the external electricity cuts off, will the machine overheat? Or if it is built in a self sustaining device and the generator fails, will it overheat or go out of control? It would be nice if the heat triggered the reaction, and removing the heat simply quenched it, but based on Rossi's comment that is is dangerous to run without the auxiliary heat, that is not the case. Who knows what to make of it! Rossi is hiding many details. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
- Original Message From: mix...@bigpond.com mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, January 18, 2011 4:52:48 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:52:45 -0500: Hi, [snip] They sure do! I wish I knew the name of that factory, and I could see photos or interviews. [snip] It's probably the factory mentioned in the patent:- A practical embodiment of the inventive apparatus, installed on October 16, 2007, is at present perfectly operating 24 hours per day, and provides an amount of heat sufficient to heat the factory of the Company EON of via Carlo Ragazzi 18, at Bondeno (Province of Ferrara) . For better understanding the invention, the main components of the above mentioned apparatus have been schematically shown in Table 2. (See http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=2009125444IA=IT2008000532DISPLAY=DESC) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html great work Robin. I used google maps and input: via Carlo Ragazzi 18 Bondeno Ferrara. The satellite view shows something like a factory at that location. harry
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Rossi believes the temperature at the core is 1500°C. As I mentioned here, Ed thinks that is impossible because it is above the melting point of nickel. I think Rossi is operating near the edge of a runaway reaction. He uses the resistive heating device to ensure runaway does not happen. If he tried to self-sustain, he gets runaway. With the added 400 W of resistive heating, he can operate the cell just below the runaway temperature. This is why he mysteriously says that it will self-sustain; but, he does not do it. Or not. T
Re: [Vo]:Celani's report on Rossi January 14 test
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 3:51 PM, albedo5 albe...@gmail.com wrote: If he wants the spectrum he did get analyzed, I can get this done in several different ways. Oh, so now you are a nuclear scientist. I'll have to change your moniker. (N)T
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote: great work Robin. I used google maps and input: via Carlo Ragazzi 18 Bondeno Ferrara. The satellite view shows something like a factory at that location. Oh brave new world! Now, if you could only zoom in and see inside the building, we'd have it. See: The Googling http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPgV6-gnQaE - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: (I've seen one off-hand reference to the condenser but it wasn't in a description of the apparatus; it was, IRRC, in a remark by Terry and seemed to be more of an assumption than anything else.) Ackshully, not an assumption. I read, somewhere, that the steam was condensed (damned if I can remember where). If you look as some of the piccys in Jed's post, the black hose is extended as though it is connected to something. If the first piccy, it is lying on the floor and spraying steam onto the H cannister. The cannister is black at the base and there is a circle of black stain on the floor; but, the center is clean. I surmise that the hose has been disconnected from the condenser to measure the humidity of the steam and left lying on the floor for a period of time. The hose as seen at the top of the device is no longer extended during this photo. But who the f knows? T
RE: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
This is not surprising. My guess is that there is strong temperature inversion, and a prohibitive trigger temperature with instant quench. The trigger could be say at 800 C, and the inversion 1000 C, giving some room for error. There are zones and only one of them is externally heated. This is the insurance. This amplification of input is why he has named it the way he has. You cannot EVER let normal fluctuations in the fuel temperature go below the trigger, or else the whole thing will instantly quench. You spread out the active material so that once you get over the trigger in one zone, it can then go over everywhere, and continues up, since the inversion pushes it up to the limit of heat transfer. The heater will be placed to heat one a small area in the reactor only - the failsafe zone, so to speak. Jones -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: That, also, makes it seem a little surprising that the joule heater continues to be used *after* ignition. It's contributing just 4% of the total heat; you'd think they could just shut it off after the thing starts up. Of course, the reacting surface area may be large enough that it stays cooler than the heater, and perhaps the intense heat near the heater wire has something to do with the reason they continue to use it after ignition. That is my guess. I think the AC heater wire is hotter than the active material. As I said, it is my understanding that heat and hydrogen pressure are the two control factors. I do not know how they work. I don't know which knob you twist to make the thing go. Rossi said that removing the AC heat completely is dangerous. That give me the willies. If the external electricity cuts off, will the machine overheat? Or if it is built in a self sustaining device and the generator fails, will it overheat or go out of control? It would be nice if the heat triggered the reaction, and removing the heat simply quenched it, but based on Rossi's comment that is is dangerous to run without the auxiliary heat, that is not the case. Who knows what to make of it! Rossi is hiding many details. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: I think Rossi is operating near the edge of a runaway reaction. He uses the resistive heating device to ensure runaway does not happen. If he tried to self-sustain, he gets runaway. With the added 400 W of resistive heating, he can operate the cell just below the runaway temperature. Let's see. Using 400 W to maintain his window of stability on a 12,000 W reactor implies that he is a far cry from a safe reactor. It implies that, if he pushes it to 13,000 W, he gets runaway. Based on this (gross) assumption, some really good feedback controls are going to be required on a commercial product. T
Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: This amplification of input is why he has named it the way he has. Although, it would not really be amplification, would it? The reaction has a known instability and he uses the 400 W stable source to mask that instability. Real time measurements of the core would tell the truth. T
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:38:25 -0500: Hi, [snip] On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: I think Rossi is operating near the edge of a runaway reaction. He uses the resistive heating device to ensure runaway does not happen. If he tried to self-sustain, he gets runaway. With the added 400 W of resistive heating, he can operate the cell just below the runaway temperature. Let's see. Using 400 W to maintain his window of stability on a 12,000 W reactor implies that he is a far cry from a safe reactor. It implies that, if he pushes it to 13,000 W, he gets runaway. Based on this (gross) assumption, some really good feedback controls are going to be required on a commercial product. T He also says that he has run with a COP up to 400+. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
Terry Blanton wrote: Based on this (gross) assumption, some really good feedback controls are going to be required on a commercial product. Whether that is true or not, one thing seems certain to me: it would lunacy to install thousands of these machines without regulations, and without first spending billions of dollars to ensure safety. Our modern, high-tech industrial civilization simply will not allow people to install these things on their own, without oversight, approval by Underwriter's Laboratory, regulations covering the disposal of the tritium and other radioactive byproducts, and so on, and so forth. The red tape is onerous, but I doubt anyone would want to go back to life as it was before we had all this red tape, and people could do what they wanted. Libertarians wax nostalgic about the past, but I doubt they would want people in their neighborhood installing nuclear fusion reactors that work for unknown reasons, and that the inventor (Rossi) says can be dangerous. Rossi's plan is to start selling these things and make a lot of money. I just don't see that happening. After he sells a few hundred, regulators are bound to take notice, and they will step in. I do not know if this falls in the bailiwick of the NRC or Consumer Product Safety Commission or what. I expect the regulators themselves will not know, and they will end up fighting over who gets to regulate it. He deserves any amount of money, but I fear he will not get it by won't get it by this method. He'll be stopped by the regulators, and then swindled by the big industrial corporations. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: Based on what I've read so far, I know I'd prefer the full protection and experience of a major utility company managing the reactor . . . Me too! I would think that only after a considerable amount of experience combined with a good track record has been built up, plus a theory that everyone can agree on, would consumer products even be considered. I think so too. But here's what I predict: the calendar time it takes to generate that considerable track record will be more compressed than any industrial development in history, including the development of nuclear power and bombs during WWII. Once it becomes generally known that this is a real nuclear effect that is likely to lower the cost of energy by a factor of 10 at first, and thousands more later, every industrial corporation on earth will pile onto it. Hundreds of thousands of researchers will work frantically to understand it, control it, and bring it to market. So even though it will take billions and probably an act of Congress, I am sanguine. It will happen swiftly. Someone who is talking to investors about Rossi asked me what I thought the projected cost per thermal kWh would be. I told him that Rossi described the consumables and 6-month maintenance, and estimates about $0.01/kWh. But my guess is that first generation machine of that nature are far more expensive than anyone anticipates. Then I wrote: Frankly, I do not think that a conventional analysis such as the cost of thermal kWh in the initial implementation does this justice. We are talking about the most revolutionary technology in history. Making the decision to invest or not based on the initial performance would resemble the decisions made by DEC and Data General not to go into the personal computer business because the first PCs had lower performance per dollar than minicomputers. That was true, but not for long. In 1980, any computer company that decided not to pursue the PC market was signing its own death warrant. If Rossi is not mistaken, and this thing is real, and if even ONE company, anywhere decides to develop it, then every other major industrial company will either follow suit and invest billions in the technology, or it will go bankrupt in a few decades. GE, Toyota or Mitsubishi -- it makes no difference how big or powerful they are now. They will either develop this or they will vanish like the Pennsylvania Railroad, General Motors, DEC and all the other great corporations that went out of business in the 20th century. Cold fusion will be the core technology to as many different products as integrated circuits are today. Can you imagine how long GE would last today if they had no expertise in integrated circuits or computers? That's what I would tell investors . . . - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
The calculations of the steam velocity below translates to a 188 mph jet of steam coming out of a hose having an area of 1 cm^2 (equates to a 1.13 cm inner diameter hose or .44 inner diamter) Double the area of the hose and the velocity will drop by a factor of 2 to 94 mph. The steam should be transparent for many inches beyond the end of the hose if sprayed into the room - did it? How do people describe the velocity and volume of the steam? On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Here are some calculations that imply certain water/humidity effects which should have been observed at the demo. This is from an associate LENR researcher - Jeff Morriss, in response to the other issues on steam/vapor raised by Jeff Driscoll and Peter van Noorden, which so far do not have convincing answers. Nagel states that 150 grams of water are boiled every 30 sec, or 5 cc/sec. Taking the density of steam at 100C as .590 Kg/m**3 and ratio-ing it against the density of liquid water as 1000 kG/m**3 yields a volume increase of 1690. So each 5 cc of water is converted into 8450 cc of steam every second. If we estimate the area of the vent hose at ~1 cm**2, then the steam velocity must be 8450 cm/sec of 84.5 m/sec. This is about 1/4 the speed of sound and should produce quite a jet of steam. Did anyone observe this? Also, the steam would condense and quickly produce a saturated atmosphere and condensation on metal surfaces. Again, did anyone observe this? Here is a second sanity check. The specific heat of dry air at 1 atm is 1.14 kJ/Km**3. If we assume a room volume of 300 m**3 (about the size of an average classroom) then it takes (300 m**3)*(1.14 kJ/Km**3) = 342 kJ to raise the temperature of the room by one degree. The energy required to boil 18 liters of water is 4.7E4 kJ. So if no heat escaped the room and we ignored the additional energy change due to an increase in relative humidity then the ambient temperature should have increased by 4.7e4/342 or about 137 degrees C. Even if the air in the room cycled every 6 minutes (and that would require special ventilation) the ambient would still rise by 13.7C, which would be noticeably hot and muggy. Finally, the 4.7E4 kJ/hour is equivalent to 1.31E4J/sec. As a basis of com parison, it would be equivalent to 240V at 54 Amps, which is the capacity of an electric furnace for a large house. You may want to pass my calculations by someone else for checking, but I believe they are correct. Jeff From: Jeff Driscoll Was the steam exiting the Rossi device transparent or was it an opaque white? (right at the top where it transitions from the aluminum foil covered chimney to the black hose) …If it is transparent then that would mean it is water vapor - and truly 12 kW of steam… But if it was white then that would indicate condensed tiny liquid droplets (or ultrasonic fogging) and fraudulent scamming. Water vapor is virtually invisible…. On a tea kettle, the steam immediately coming out of the kettle is transparent but roughly 1 or 2 inches away the vapor condenses to tiny droplets which become a white fog. On Tue, Jan 18, P.J van Noorden pjvan...@xs4all.nl wrote: I wondered why people had no problems with the 8 liters of watervapour which was released into the room during the Rossi experiment. A simple experiment in which I evaporised 8 liters of water in a room of 100 m3 with a powersource of 9 kW ( 3 heaters of each 3 kW) did produce a very humid atmosphere ( approaching RH 90%) and the temperature rose to more then 30 degr. Why wasn`t this detected during the experiment of Rossi? If the aircon was powerfull enough one would still notice a turbulence of warm and cold airflow in the room. Peter - Original Message - From: Jeff Driscoll To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 4:08 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments That meter that was listed can measure Relative Humidity but it can not measure the quality of the steam. As you know, relative humidity just means how saturated the air is for for the given temperature - it says absolutely nothing about the quality (dryness or wetness) of the steam. The quality of the steam (a.k.a. dryness on Vortex) gives you the ratio of the mass of vapor to the total mass of water (liquid and vapor) in a given sample. It takes complicated expensive instruments to measure the quality of steam (one device is called a throttling calorimeter). A common or even expensive Relative Humidity instrument can not do it. If Rossi used an ultrasonic fogger in boiling water, he could get micron sized droplets at 100 C. That's close enough to 101 C with errors due to calibration. They should insulate the black hose and stick it in a barrel of water. 12 kW of steam that is fed into 50 gallons of water (or some number of gallons) will raise the temperature
Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
All Catalysts are normally considered accelerators of standard reactions and skeletal catalysts are based on Casimir geometry / suppression of energy density which is known to lead To relativistic effects on the half lives of radioactive gas. Perhaps Rossi is using sodium or other very slightly radioactive material to make an accelerator into an amplifier? My premise is that Both the radioactive gas and the hydrogen reactions are aging relative to us at a rate related to the Casimir force/geometry turning relatively innocuous materials into radiation emitters from our perspective but unchanged from their own local perspective. I don't know how such seemingly sparse radiation would be translated back to our frames - a single emission an hour might appear a thousand fold faster from our perspective but the radiation leaves the particle normally from a local perspective . I guess my question is would time dilation concentrate or dilute radiation during a space time translation? Could the dimension of time be acting like a radiation shield? Fran Terry Blanton Tue, 18 Jan 2011 14:46:12 -0800 On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: This amplification of input is why he has named it the way he has. Although, it would not really be amplification, would it? The reaction has a known instability and he uses the 400 W stable source to mask that instability. Real time measurements of the core would tell the truth. T
RE: [Vo]:Richard C Macaulay
--- On Tue, 1/18/11, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: ... a true character ... but I'm not so sure the Dime Box was fictitious ? The romantic in me likes to think it was real. Maybe not in this plane of reality, whatever it is, but *somewhere*. I liked R.C. We talked quite a bit off-list about many things. All sorts of topics, scientific or otherwise. When he stopped responding, I had hoped it was just due to being busy or perhaps only a transient illness. R.C., wherever you are, take care my friend. And give 'em hell the next time two guys play an ace of diamonds at the same time. And save me a stool at the bar, life's only a few days and full of trouble. I'll walk in the door one day, in the course of time. --Kyle
Re: [Vo]:My inquiry to Society for Classical Physics Yahoo group rejected
Apparently, my original query back in November to R. Mills' Society for Classical Physics group regarding a possible demonstration of the CIHT process in 2011 got lost. The moderator asked me to resubmit my query. I did. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.orionworks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 6:26 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: Late in December of last year I sent an inquiry to the officially recognized Society for Classical Physics Yahoo group. I asked Dr. Mills if BLP was planning on assembling kind of a demonstration since certain news feeds I'd received earlier in the month seemed to imply that something would be demonstrated later in 2011. I sent the following inquiry: ** Hello Dr. Mills, I noticed in one or two of my recent Google News Feeds keyed to BlackLight Power that an interesting claim is being made. For example, from PBT Consulting, Strategic Marketing, Business Planning, Research, Venture Capital and Financing, one can read the following excerpt: - BLACKLIGHT POWER IS BACK IN THE NEWS, SAYS IT CAN GENERATE ELECTRICITY FOR $25 A KILOWATT, A PUBLIC DEMO IS SLATED FOR 2011 See: http://tommytoy.typepad.com/tommy-toy-pbt-consultin/2010/11/blacklight-power-is-back-in-the-news-says-it-can-generate-electricity-for-25-a-kilowatt-a-public-dem.html http://tinyurl.com/2awqfsm - According to this link I have found myself speculating that a possible public POC (proof-of-concept) demonstration of the CIHT (Catalyst Induced Hydrino Transition) process may in the works for next year, 2011. Can you confirm this, or at least clarify BLP's position on the matter? I thought it might be useful to go to the source for clarification. Thanks for your input. As always, wishing you and BLP the best of success in the coming years. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com ** I never heard back. I assumed my email might have gotten lost in all the holiday static. Well... Apparently not. I just received the following rejection letter: Hello, Your message to the SocietyforClassicalPhysics group was not approved. The owner of the group controls the content posted to it and has the right to approve or reject messages accordingly Hmmm. Was it something I said Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks -- Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Celani's report on Rossi January 14 test
It seems I spend most of my waking hours lately analysing spectra, with handheld detector characterisation a close second. It's a good thing I have such great toys to do it with. I recently dreamed about daughter isotopes prancing around a lovely neutron waterfall, with Bremsstrahlung providing the background music. Now THAT is scary. Interestingly enough, one of the detector materials I've had to delve into lately is NaI. I suspect I have the detector definition used in at least one application, so if there's anything to be found, I can dig it out (with some serious help). I'm writing a white paper right now describing a numerical method I created to match detector resolution parameters with Gaussian broadening parameters, with NaI being one of the materials. It keeps me off the streets, and it also pays well. :) I'd love to finally contribute something here! Debbie On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 3:51 PM, albedo5 albe...@gmail.com wrote: If he wants the spectrum he did get analyzed, I can get this done in several different ways. Oh, so now you are a nuclear scientist. I'll have to change your moniker. (N)T
Re: [Vo]:Miles Mathis
On 14 Jan 2011, at 10:04, Mauro Lacy ma...@lacy.com.ar wrote: A demolishing criticism of Miles Mathis, particularly on his paper about Pi being 4 (among many other things, Miles shows that Pi equals four, with an elegant(and wrong) proof, which basically boils down to this) That was a fun read. Thanks :) Joe
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
A hidden factor of 4 increase in electric power input to a resistive heater is possible: Rich Murray 2011.01.18 1. Use four power input wires, one hidden from the floor up through the inside of each of the four table legs -- in fact table legs could conceal as many as 4 -- 9 wires each -- has anyone tried moving the table? 2. A single thin wire can supply power at lower current and higher voltage, as a thin layer of insulating plastic can insulate 880 AC volts, 4 X 220 volts, and 1/4 the current at 220 volts, as Er = V**2 X I = 4**2 X 1/4 = 16 X 1/4 = 4 ...,ie, 4X more energy. Such an additional thin wire, 1/2 the diameter (1/4 the area) of a 220 volt wire, could be easily hidden within a regular 3 wire extension cord, for instance by being disguised as the third ground wire -- or such extra wires may be in power cables made for special purposes, where some device needs a high voltage feed in addition to 240 volt AC. 3. Gold wires carry much more power than Cu wires... Strict testing might necessitate bringing in a standard propane gas motor electric generator, or a special power input box to monitor the actual power outputs from the 3-prong plug, with attention to capability to detect current flows from hidden wires of metal or conducting plastic, glass, films, or paint. Also, H2 gas and other gas or liquid fluids could be fed into the device via tubes hidden in the H2 and H20 input and exit tubes. The reported gamma rays are, however, possibly definite evidence of nuclear reactions. So, there are many feasible ways for fraud to elude the usual scrutiny of academic scientists -- and these are ideas from an unskilled layman... Rich Murray 505-819-7388 rmfor...@gmail.com On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: And as to not being convinced by anything ... as long as the conclusions are based on precise heat measurements there is room for doubt. These conclusions are based on somewhat imprecise measurements, and you can be just as certain with no measurements at all. Just look at the thing. You see water going in at about a liter every three minutes, steam coming out, and only a thin, ordinary wire going to the power supplies. It would be physically impossible for that wire to supply the electricity needed to vaporize that much water. Impossible by a wide margin; at least a factor of 4. You don't even need to see the power meter or thermometers to be sure of this. Once the loop is closed there is no more room for doubt. As far as I am concerned, this is first principle proof, and it is as convincing as a self sustaining machine, or as Fleischmann's boil-off video. Unless there are camera tricks or hidden wires involved this is massive anomalous heat. I do not think there are tricks or hidden wires because the professors involved would notice that, and they would not stand for it. If it were only the inventor, and everything was under his exclusive control, I might suspect a fake, but I would be just as suspicious of a self-sustaining demo under the control of the inventor. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
On 01/18/2011 05:56 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:38:25 -0500: Hi, [snip] On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: I think Rossi is operating near the edge of a runaway reaction. He uses the resistive heating device to ensure runaway does not happen. If he tried to self-sustain, he gets runaway. With the added 400 W of resistive heating, he can operate the cell just below the runaway temperature. Let's see. Using 400 W to maintain his window of stability on a 12,000 W reactor implies that he is a far cry from a safe reactor. It implies that, if he pushes it to 13,000 W, he gets runaway. Based on this (gross) assumption, some really good feedback controls are going to be required on a commercial product. T He also says that he has run with a COP up to 400+. If he's run with the input shut off, as other statements of his imply, then he's run with a COP of infinity. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Miles Mathis
On 01/14/2011 05:04 AM, Mauro Lacy wrote: A demolishing criticism http://scientopia.org/blogs/goodmath/2010/11/16/grandiose-crackpottery-proves-pi4/ of Miles Mathis, particularly on his paper about Pi being 4 http://milesmathis.com/pi.html (among many other things, Miles shows that Pi equals four, with an elegant(and wrong) proof, which basically boils down to this http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lbxrvcK4pk1qbylvso1_400.png) Nice, and that last link's a very cute proof, and nice illustration of what arc-length /doesn't/ mean, as well as being an example of an unexpected encounter with a fractal. Here's another, vaguely related one-page-puzzle (uses the same goofy grinning head, otherwise unrelated): http://i.imgur.com/IKFiu.jpg It's so totally crude, so silly, and yet ... so hard to see why it won't work...
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
Jed wrote: Rossi believes the temperature at the core is 1500°C. As I mentioned here, Ed thinks that is impossible because it is above the melting point of nickel. Does it have to be pure nickel or can it be an alloy of nickel which would have a higher melting point? Harry
Re: [Vo]:Nagel: Check List for LENR Validation Experiments
But who the f knows? T The elusive Dr. f Harry
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
But, Rich, the input power was measured -- /not/ by Rossi -- and the setup was apparently done by the other profs, /not/ by Rossi himself. The power supply and the other paraphernalia (aside from the reactor) were apparently provided by various other profs, /not/ by Rossi. So unless you're assuming a conspiracy of at least two or three of the presenters, scenarios which require hollow legs in the table, special wiring to the outlet, phony power supply leads, and so forth just will not fly. On 01/18/2011 10:25 PM, Rich Murray wrote: A hidden factor of 4 increase in electric power input to a resistive heater is possible: Rich Murray 2011.01.18 1. Use four power input wires, one hidden from the floor up through the inside of each of the four table legs -- in fact table legs could conceal as many as 4 -- 9 wires each -- has anyone tried moving the table? 2. A single thin wire can supply power at lower current and higher voltage, as a thin layer of insulating plastic can insulate 880 AC volts, 4 X 220 volts, and 1/4 the current at 220 volts, as Er = V**2 X I = 4**2 X 1/4 = 16 X 1/4 = 4 ...,ie, 4X more energy. Such an additional thin wire, 1/2 the diameter (1/4 the area) of a 220 volt wire, could be easily hidden within a regular 3 wire extension cord, for instance by being disguised as the third ground wire -- or such extra wires may be in power cables made for special purposes, where some device needs a high voltage feed in addition to 240 volt AC. 3. Gold wires carry much more power than Cu wires... Strict testing might necessitate bringing in a standard propane gas motor electric generator, or a special power input box to monitor the actual power outputs from the 3-prong plug, with attention to capability to detect current flows from hidden wires of metal or conducting plastic, glass, films, or paint. Also, H2 gas and other gas or liquid fluids could be fed into the device via tubes hidden in the H2 and H20 input and exit tubes. The reported gamma rays are, however, possibly definite evidence of nuclear reactions. So, there are many feasible ways for fraud to elude the usual scrutiny of academic scientists -- and these are ideas from an unskilled layman... Rich Murray 505-819-7388 rmfor...@gmail.com On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: And as to not being convinced by anything ... as long as the conclusions are based on precise heat measurements there is room for doubt. These conclusions are based on somewhat imprecise measurements, and you can be just as certain with no measurements at all. Just look at the thing. You see water going in at about a liter every three minutes, steam coming out, and only a thin, ordinary wire going to the power supplies. It would be physically impossible for that wire to supply the electricity needed to vaporize that much water. Impossible by a wide margin; at least a factor of 4. You don't even need to see the power meter or thermometers to be sure of this. Once the loop is closed there is no more room for doubt. As far as I am concerned, this is first principle proof, and it is as convincing as a self sustaining machine, or as Fleischmann's boil-off video. Unless there are camera tricks or hidden wires involved this is massive anomalous heat. I do not think there are tricks or hidden wires because the professors involved would notice that, and they would not stand for it. If it were only the inventor, and everything was under his exclusive control, I might suspect a fake, but I would be just as suspicious of a self-sustaining demo under the control of the inventor. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote: A hidden factor of 4 increase in electric power input to a resistive heater is possible: Rich Murray 2011.01.18 It would have to be a factor of 30, not 4. The power meter shows 400 W, and the output is 12 kW. 1. Use four power input wires, one hidden from the floor up through the inside of each of the four table legs -- in fact table legs could conceal as many as 4 -- 9 wires each -- has anyone tried moving the table? That's preposterous. You can see that the machine is sitting on a board with rubber feet and has been moved around from one photo to the next. You know that the researchers who verified it inserted the temperature probes and tubes, insulation and blue tape all over it. Do you really, seriously think they would not notice wires going into it? This is real life, not a pulp thriller novel or James Bond. 2. A single thin wire can supply power at lower current and higher voltage, as a thin layer of insulating plastic can insulate 880 AC volts, 4 X 220 volts, and 1/4 the current at 220 volts, as Er = V**2 X I = 4**2 X 1/4 = 16 X 1/4 = 4 ...,ie, 4X more energy. Have you ever seen the size of the wires going into a 10 kW electric motor or heater? It is enormous! - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Miles Mathis
The philosophical foundations of geometry interests me. Thanks for this link. Harry From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, January 18, 2011 11:11:04 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miles Mathis On 01/14/2011 05:04 AM, Mauro Lacy wrote: A demolishingcriticism of Miles Mathis, particularly on his paper about Pi being 4 (among many other things, Miles shows that Pi equals four, with an elegant(and wrong) proof, which basically boils down to this) Nice, and that last link's a very cute proof, and nice illustration of what arc-length doesn't mean, as well as being an example of an unexpected encounter with a fractal. Here's another, vaguely related one-page-puzzle (uses the same goofy grinning head, otherwise unrelated): http://i.imgur.com/IKFiu.jpg It's so totally crude, so silly, and yet ... so hard to see why it won't work...
[Vo]:Thousands of Birds and Fish Dropping Dead
See: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=196881.240 See posts in the above URL in Re: Thousands of Birds and Fish Dropping Dead Across Multiple States Also note URL list of events in the above, and quoted below. If this is real then it seems to be highly anomalous. Quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - BIRDS Arkansas – 5000 + http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/01/03/arkansas.falling.birds/index.html? hpt=T2 Louisiana – 500 + http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/112843019.html Kentucky – dozens http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Woman-reports-dozens-of-dead- birds-in-her-yard-112830524.html New Zealand http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/4490315/Weather-patterns-lead-to- mass-bird-deaths Japan and Hong Kong, (H1N1 blamed) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/health/04global.html?_r=4 Germany http://www.presseportal.de/polizeipresse/pm/8/1742717/polizei_dueren UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/norfolk/hi/people_and_places/nature/ newsid_9309000/9309398.stm North Carolina - hundreds of Pelicans (autopsy have ruled out humans killing birds) http://www.carteretnewstimes.com/articles/2010/12/28/topsail_voice/ news/doc4d120c21c2083603738750.txt Italy - 300 doves http://www.geapress.org/ambiente/faenza-piovono-tortore-morte-foto/10282 Bats in Arizona: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/12/28/20101228tucson-70- dead-bats-found.html Bats in New Hampshire http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Newsroom/News_2010/News_2010_Q2/ NG_Bats_041210.html FISH SEA LIFE Arkansas http://www.todaysthv.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=136401catid=2 Fish in Maryland http://www.wbaltv.com/r/26357581/detail.html Florida http://www.wftv.com/news/26367953/detail.html More Florida http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news/2010/december/183768/Dead-fish- turn-up-in-Cocoa Texas http://www.ksat.com/news/26316464/detail.html Indiana http://www.wndu.com/localnews/headlines/ Dead_fish_wash_up_on_Washington_Park_beach_112105654.html Brazil, 100 tons of dead fish was ashore in the last week. http://www.parana-online.com.br/editoria/cidades/news/502434/? noticia=MORTANDADE+MISTERIOSA+DE+PEIXES+NO+LITORAL New Zealand http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1objectid=10697906 http://www.3news.co.nz/Dead-fish-as-far-as-the-eye-can-see-PHOTOS/ tabid/1160/articleID/193199/Default.aspx New Zealand (perhaps interesting when you look at the more recent events not related to nets) http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/rodney-times/4477740/ Enlisted-to-help-with-deadly-haul Canada http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/01/04/16757321.html Australia http://www.themorningbulletin.com.au/story/2010/12/13/barramundi- found-dead-after-flood/ More Australia http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water-issues/fish-dying-in- blackwater-20101214-18wtn.html UK http://www.bymnews.com/news/newsDetails.php?id=79520 More in UK http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/environment/ concern_as_fish_die_in_beauty_spot_brook_1_2224957 More in UK http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/12/24/ hundreds-of-fish-killed-in-greenbank-park-lake-after-water-freezes- over-100252-27879505/ 100,000 fish in Italy http://www.bymnews.com/news/newsDetails.php?id=79520 Viet Nam (150 Tons) http://business.asiaone.com/Business/News/Story/ A1Story20101231-255737.html Philippines http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/news/view/ 20101218-309667/Residents-gather-eat-dead-fish-floating-in-barangay-Ibo Haiti http://www.france24.com/en/20101227-authorities-probe-dead-fish- haitian-lake Florida Manatee deaths http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/fl-treasure-coast- manatees-20110104,0,7714948.story Starfish, jellyfish http://www.abcnews4.com/Global/story.asp?S=13735801 Whales http://www.mysailing.com.au/news/dead-whale-found-floating-off-ballina http://www.beachconnection.net/news/smellwh010310_729.php http://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/no-explanation-on-east- hampton-beached-whale-1.2550130 http://www.northernadvocate.co.nz/local/news/tropical-whale-long-way- from-home/3935650/ http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/28/3102597.htm? site=illawarrasection=newsdate=(none) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - end quote Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:a challenge for skeptics -- hidden H2 source would have to supply 36--216 kg H2 to make Rossi heat: Rich Murray 2011.01.18
Correctio -- I should say, 36 -- 216 kg/hour H2... On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote: a challenge for skeptics -- hidden H2 source would have to supply 36--216 kg H2 to make Rossi heat: Rich Murray 2011.01.18 [ Rich Murray: 100 to 600 more than the sensitivity of the scale, which may be 0.1 gm, gives 10 -- 60 gm/second ranges of H2 used -- 36,000 -- 216,000 gm = 36 -- 216 kg H2 -- that would be a lot to deliver from a hidden source... ] The first measurements Levi described were energy measurements to determine the input of energy inside the reactor and the output of energy of the reactor. “I don't have conclusive data on radiation but absolutely we have measured ~12 kW (at steady state) of energy produced with an input of about just 400 watts. I would say this is the main result. We have seen also this energy was not of chemical origin, by checking the consumption of hydrogen. There was no measurable hydrogen consumption, at least with our mass 2 measurement.” By measuring with a very sensitive scale, within a precision of a 10 th of a gram, Levi measured the weight of the hydrogen bottle before and after the experiment “If the energy was of chemical origin you would have expected to consume about 100 to 600 more than the sensitivity of the scale. You measure the bottle before and after and then you see in your measurements there was almost no hydrogen consumed.” http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MacyMspecificso.pdf Macy, M., Specifics of Andrea Rossi's Energy Catalyzer Test, University of Bologna, January 14, 2011. 2011, LENR-CANR.org. Specifics of Andrea Rossi’s “Energy Catalyzer” Test, University of Bologna, 1/14/2001 Marianne Macy On January 14, 2011, Andrea Rossi submitted his “Energy Catalyzer” reactor, which burns hydrogen in a nickel catalyst, for examination by scientists at the University of Bologna and The INFN (Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics). The test was organized by Dr. Giuseppe Levi of INFN and the University of Bologna and was assisted by other members of the physics and chemistry faculties. This result was achieved without the production of any measurable nuclear radiation. The magnitude of this result suggests that there is a viable energy technology that uses commonly available materials, that does not produce carbon dioxide, and that does not produce radioactive waste and will be economical to build. The reactor used less than 1 gram of hydrogen, less than 1,000 W of electricity to convert 292 grams of water per minute at ~20°C into dry steam at ~101°C. The unit was turned ON and began producing some steam in a few minutes, and once it reached steady state continued producing steam until it was turned OFF. The amount of power required to heat water 80°C and convert it to steam is approximately 12,000 watts. Dr. Levi and his team will be producing a technical report detailing the design and execution of their evaluation. A representative of the investment group stated that they were looking to produce a 20 kW unit and that within two months they would make a public announcement. He declared that their completed studies revealed a “huge, favorable difference in numbers” between the cost to produce the Rossi Catalyzer and other green technologies. “We had a similar demonstration six months ago with the same success we’ve had today. We are almost ready with the industrialized product, which we think is going to be a revolution. It is a totally green energy.” The representative offered that the company was called Defkalion Energy, named for the father of the Greco Roman empire, and was based in Athens. Giuseppe Levi, PhD in nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and who works at INFN, offers exclusive comments on the test, which he deemed “an open experiment for physicists. The idea was like a conference: to tell everybody what was going on and eventually to start new research programs on that topic.” The first measurements Levi described were energy measurements to determine the input of energy inside the reactor and the output of energy of the reactor. “I don't have conclusive data on radiation but absolutely we have measured ~12 kW (at steady state) of energy produced with an input of about just 400 watts. I would say this is the main result. We have seen also this energy was not of chemical origin, by checking the consumption of hydrogen. There was no measurable hydrogen consumption, at least with our mass 2 measurement.” By measuring with a very sensitive scale, within a precision of a 10 th of a gram, Levi measured the weight of the hydrogen bottle before and after the experiment “If the energy was of chemical origin you would have expected to consume about 100 to 600 more than the sensitivity of the scale. You measure the bottle before and after and then you see in your measurements there was almost no
RE: [Vo]:Thousands of Birds and Fish Dropping Dead
Welcome back to the fray, Horace! Its been about 9 months since your last postings... Glad you didn't decide to join Richard for a drink yet... Wow, your extensive compilation is overwhelming! Are all of those incidents within the last few weeks? A few days ago I read an article that stated it was Newcastle disease that killed hundreds of blackbirds... Doubt fish get that. Cold fusion in Italy... Dead birds all over the place. Just our luck We figure out the secret to cheap, clean energy, and it ends up killing all other life on earth! Don't sell your BP stock just yet! :-) -Mark -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 9:29 PM To: Vortex-L Subject: [Vo]:Thousands of Birds and Fish Dropping Dead See: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=196881.240 See posts in the above URL in Re: Thousands of Birds and Fish Dropping Dead Across Multiple States Also note URL list of events in the above, and quoted below. If this is real then it seems to be highly anomalous. Quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - BIRDS Arkansas - 5000 + http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/01/03/arkansas.falling.birds/index.html? hpt=T2 Louisiana - 500 + http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/112843019.html Kentucky - dozens http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Woman-reports-dozens-of-dead- birds-in-her-yard-112830524.html New Zealand http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/4490315/Weather-patterns-lead-to- mass-bird-deaths Japan and Hong Kong, (H1N1 blamed) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/health/04global.html?_r=4 Germany http://www.presseportal.de/polizeipresse/pm/8/1742717/polizei_dueren UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/norfolk/hi/people_and_places/nature/ newsid_9309000/9309398.stm North Carolina - hundreds of Pelicans (autopsy have ruled out humans killing birds) http://www.carteretnewstimes.com/articles/2010/12/28/topsail_voice/ news/doc4d120c21c2083603738750.txt Italy - 300 doves http://www.geapress.org/ambiente/faenza-piovono-tortore-morte-foto/10282 Bats in Arizona: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/12/28/20101228tucson-70- dead-bats-found.html Bats in New Hampshire http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Newsroom/News_2010/News_2010_Q2/ NG_Bats_041210.html FISH SEA LIFE Arkansas http://www.todaysthv.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=136401catid=2 Fish in Maryland http://www.wbaltv.com/r/26357581/detail.html Florida http://www.wftv.com/news/26367953/detail.html More Florida http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news/2010/december/183768/Dead-fish- turn-up-in-Cocoa Texas http://www.ksat.com/news/26316464/detail.html Indiana http://www.wndu.com/localnews/headlines/ Dead_fish_wash_up_on_Washington_Park_beach_112105654.html Brazil, 100 tons of dead fish was ashore in the last week. http://www.parana-online.com.br/editoria/cidades/news/502434/? noticia=MORTANDADE+MISTERIOSA+DE+PEIXES+NO+LITORAL New Zealand http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1objectid=10697906 http://www.3news.co.nz/Dead-fish-as-far-as-the-eye-can-see-PHOTOS/ tabid/1160/articleID/193199/Default.aspx New Zealand (perhaps interesting when you look at the more recent events not related to nets) http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/rodney-times/4477740/ Enlisted-to-help-with-deadly-haul Canada http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/01/04/16757321.html Australia http://www.themorningbulletin.com.au/story/2010/12/13/barramundi- found-dead-after-flood/ More Australia http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water-issues/fish-dying-in- blackwater-20101214-18wtn.html UK http://www.bymnews.com/news/newsDetails.php?id=79520 More in UK http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/environment/ concern_as_fish_die_in_beauty_spot_brook_1_2224957 More in UK http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/12/24/ hundreds-of-fish-killed-in-greenbank-park-lake-after-water-freezes- over-100252-27879505/ 100,000 fish in Italy http://www.bymnews.com/news/newsDetails.php?id=79520 Viet Nam (150 Tons) http://business.asiaone.com/Business/News/Story/ A1Story20101231-255737.html Philippines http://globalnation.inquirer.net/cebudailynews/news/view/ 20101218-309667/Residents-gather-eat-dead-fish-floating-in-barangay-Ibo Haiti http://www.france24.com/en/20101227-authorities-probe-dead-fish- haitian-lake Florida Manatee deaths http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/fl-treasure-coast- manatees-20110104,0,7714948.story Starfish, jellyfish http://www.abcnews4.com/Global/story.asp?S=13735801 Whales http://www.mysailing.com.au/news/dead-whale-found-floating-off-ballina http://www.beachconnection.net/news/smellwh010310_729.php http://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/no-explanation-on-east- hampton-beached-whale-1.2550130 http://www.northernadvocate.co.nz/local/news/tropical-whale-long-way- from-home/3935650/ http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/28/3102597.htm?
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
Thanks for the lively counter-arguments! Say, was or was not the demo on the same table in the same corner in the same room in the same huge industrial building within which tests have been run over and over in recent months?... High voltages allow much thinner wires to carry the same energy with smaller currents... I suggest skeptical ideas, so they can hopefully be decisively dispatched. I was impressed by Ed Storms' explanation that steady input energy can serve to stabilize a positive feedback energy generation process just under the level of high output beyond which meltdown or explosion occurs... So, also, it seems that a undercover operator could use hidden portable gamma and neutron intensity and spectral analyzers to accurately and quickly garner critical information while hanging around near a operating unit, wearing a tweed jacket, if not a trench coat or a white lab coat? I'd like to know more about NiH as a spillover catalyst -- can someone explain in detail and give sources? Thanks, Rich On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote: A hidden factor of 4 increase in electric power input to a resistive heater is possible: Rich Murray 2011.01.18 It would have to be a factor of 30, not 4. The power meter shows 400 W, and the output is 12 kW. 1. Use four power input wires, one hidden from the floor up through the inside of each of the four table legs -- in fact table legs could conceal as many as 4 -- 9 wires each -- has anyone tried moving the table? That's preposterous. You can see that the machine is sitting on a board with rubber feet and has been moved around from one photo to the next. You know that the researchers who verified it inserted the temperature probes and tubes, insulation and blue tape all over it. Do you really, seriously think they would not notice wires going into it? This is real life, not a pulp thriller novel or James Bond. 2. A single thin wire can supply power at lower current and higher voltage, as a thin layer of insulating plastic can insulate 880 AC volts, 4 X 220 volts, and 1/4 the current at 220 volts, as Er = V**2 X I = 4**2 X 1/4 = 16 X 1/4 = 4 ...,ie, 4X more energy. Have you ever seen the size of the wires going into a 10 kW electric motor or heater? It is enormous! - Jed
Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure
When used for heating in homes, the device delivers very probably hot water. In the case of the experiment, the flow of the water was seemingly limited by the pump (we don't know its performance characteristics), the connection tube, the cooling space. Cooling water moves in pipe with maximum 2-3 meters/second Please do not forget- the temperature inside the generator is tipically 400 C so it is easy to deliver steam- and that's in some way more convincing than hot water Peter On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote: On 01/18/2011 02:52 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: CLOSE THE LOOP. He [Rossi] says he can run without any electrical input. Ergo he *can* close the loop, without the expense of a Stirling motor and generator. Actually, that is heat input, from an AC resistance heater. Presumably it would work as well with combustion heating. He said he can run without heat input, but it is dangerous. I do not think he elaborated on that. I gather it means he uses heat to modulate the reaction. The Piantelli Ni experiments required high temperature and external heating. I believe the control factors are heat and pressure. The H2 is at 2 atm, according to Celani. When you depressurize the cell, the reaction soon stops. That's good news. Cold fusion reactions are sometimes nearly as difficult to stop as they are to start. I assume the Rossi device has some internal self-regulation, or what Stan Pons called a memory that keeps electrochemical cells going back to the same power level after you refill the cell, tap on it, or disturb it some other way. I also assume there is something about the Rossi device that acts analogously to a self-quenching CANDU nuclear reactor. I am only speculating; I have no knowledge of this. The mechanism would be something like the metal degassing at very high temperature, cooling down, and then absorbing the gas and reacting again. That would explain why it quickly stops when you degas manually. I suspect the electric heater is in the core, and the cold fusion reaction occurs in the Ni powder surrounding that. I recall some of the Piantelli devices had heaters attached directly to the Ni bar. I think Rossi claimed the internal temperature of this thing is 1500°C. Ed Storms pointed out that cannot be right, because the melting point of Ni is 1,453°C. Perhaps that is a misunderstanding, or a mistranslation. Still, it must be pretty hot in there because the device is small and well insulated. Even with 400 W or 1000 W from the AC heater it must be quite hot internally. I assume (but I do not know) that the heater is the hottest part. That's how I imagine it works. Actually, I'd expect the joule heater to be rather cool relative to the reactive elements once the thing gets rolling. The reaction is contributing 10 kW or more at that point; the joule heater is just plugging along at 400 watts. That, also, makes it seem a little surprising that the joule heater continues to be used *after* ignition. It's contributing just 4% of the total heat; you'd think they could just shut it off after the thing starts up. Of course, the reacting surface area may be large enough that it stays cooler than the heater, and perhaps the intense heat near the heater wire has something to do with the reason they continue to use it after ignition. Incidentally, a 1500 degree internal temperature also makes the use of unpressurized water for a coolant seem to me to be a little iffy. Perhaps that has something to do with the reason they boil it all to steam, rather than running the pump harder and getting out hot water (which, it has been suggested, might have provided a more rock-solid output heat measure). - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:13:24 -0800 (PST): Hi, [snip] Jed wrote: Rossi believes the temperature at the core is 1500°C. As I mentioned here, Ed thinks that is impossible because it is above the melting point of nickel. Where does Rossi actually say it's 1500 ºC? ( I have seen a value of 400 ºC). Does it have to be pure nickel or can it be an alloy of nickel which would have a higher melting point? Harry Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Pycno or no?
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 22:30:47 -0500: Hi, [snip] He also says that he has run with a COP up to 400+. If he's run with the input shut off, as other statements of his imply, then he's run with a COP of infinity. [snip] He still needs some power to operate the cooling pump and vary the gas pressure. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]: how to stop runaway condition... I must be missing something!
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:18:11 -0800: Hi, [snip] I am finally caught up with reading all the postings, and I fully expected someone to have pointed out the obvious way to stop a runaway condition... Shut off the hydrogen!! Has it not been said NUMEROUS times that the thing stops very quickly after the hydrogen supply is shut off?? I MUST be missing something here... That's too simple, and I'm the slow one of the bunch! If that won't reverse the runaway condition fast enough, inject a contaminating gas... Perhaps, of all things, steam? Probably not a good idea. Hot finely divided Ni and steam = NiO + H2. In short one would be adding Hydrogen. ;) BTW perhaps this is what happened to all the water?? ;^) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
In reply to Rich Murray's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:25:31 -0700: Hi, [snip] 3. Gold wires carry much more power than Cu wires... Gold is not as good a conductor as copper. Silver is slightly better. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Miles Mathis
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 23:11:04 -0500: Hi, [snip] On 01/14/2011 05:04 AM, Mauro Lacy wrote: A demolishing criticism http://scientopia.org/blogs/goodmath/2010/11/16/grandiose-crackpottery-proves-pi4/ of Miles Mathis, particularly on his paper about Pi being 4 http://milesmathis.com/pi.html (among many other things, Miles shows that Pi equals four, with an elegant(and wrong) proof, which basically boils down to this http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lbxrvcK4pk1qbylvso1_400.png) Nice, and that last link's a very cute proof, and nice illustration of what arc-length /doesn't/ mean, as well as being an example of an unexpected encounter with a fractal. Here's another, vaguely related one-page-puzzle (uses the same goofy grinning head, otherwise unrelated): http://i.imgur.com/IKFiu.jpg It's so totally crude, so silly, and yet ... so hard to see why it won't work... Look at the energy required to force open the valve on the air side as a ball enters the water (at depth against the water pressure). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
