Re: [Vo]:Brian Ahern's 2011 USPTO patent application
On Nov 28, 2011, at 10:34 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: There are two forces at work in the nucleus. The strong and the electromagnetic. In ordinary hot fusion only the static electrostatic repulsion and the static strong nuclear attraction are considered. There are other induced forces the electromagnetic and the dynamic strong nuclear spin orbit magnetic. These are never considered and may be mutable. An increase in the magnitude of the spin orbit would tend to flip nucleons and lead to beta decay. Magnetism is not conserved and is mutable. I am at work however nothing yet. Its not easy. I don't like Aherns patent application, he tries to patent everything from grain size to ultrasonic stimulation. What about the people who have pioneered and have been working with these techniques years ago? He needs to make an original contribution and patent that. Frank Magnetic orbitals involving electrons with either deuterons, protons, or positive quarks, are the *essence* of Deflation Fusion concepts. See: http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/DeflationFusion2.pdf http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/FusionSpreadDualRel.pdf http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/DeflateP1.pdf http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/FusionUpQuark.pdf The magnetic force due to spin coupling is a 1/r^4 force, while the Coulomb force is a 1/r^2 force. At close radii, the magnetic binding between electron and nucleating particle greatly exceeds the Coulomb force, though magnetically bound orbitals are intrinsically unstable, due to their 1/r^4 nature. The hydrogen electron is momentarily bound to its nucleus in a very small magnetic orbital periodically, but briefly, on the order of an attosecond. This is the deflated state. This magnetically bound small state, being neutral, but having a very large magnetic moment for a nucleus, has a significant probability of tunneling to any adjacent nucleus that has a magnetic moment. The magnetic gradients provide the net energy for tunneling of the neutral deflated state hydrogen to the adjacent nucleus. Heavy lattice nuclei magnetic moments are periodically enhanced by electrons which enter the nucleus in their ordinary orbital states. That orbital electrons enter nuclei is evidenced by the facts that (1) they are point particles in valid QM treatments, with non-zero nucleus residence probabilites, and (2) evidenced by the existence of electron capture. The magnetic moment of an electron is 3 orders of magnitude larger than typical nuclei. Some nuclei have no magnetic moment at all. Orbital electrons, when in a heavy nucleus, have the ability to form momentary small deflated state nuclear components, and thus provide extremely large nuclear magnetic moments to the heavy nuclei. When in the nucleus, the electrons can momentarily magnetically bind to nuclear particles, such as protons or quarks, including strange quarks, sometimes resulting in weak reactions between an electron and strange quark, and thereby leaving behind unpaired strange matter. Strange quark pairs are produced from the vacuum in nuclei. If one strange quark is weakly transmuted, or catalytically extracted, then the paired strange quark remains behind in a potentially long term stable form. By my theory, nuclear electrons have the ability to catalyze strange particle production from the vacuum and separate them, as well as produce low energy state and thus stable product particles. See: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf This strange matter catalysis process, which is primarily magnetic force based, has the potential to produce and store antimatter, and to dwarf the capacity and energy density of all other methods of energy storage and production. The momentary extremely low energy state of deflated nuclei in a heavy nucleus reaction has the potential to produce stable and separated matter and antimatter strange particles, hyperons, and hyper nuclei. That is perhaps the most significant part of deflation fusion theory. The formation of the deflated state in bare hydrogen nuclei, e.g. lattice absorbed nuclei, is feasible in an electron flux provided the flux density is high enough. I theorized this some years ago. What is new, and related to Brian Ahern's work, is the significance of magnetic vortices, i.e. electron vortices. These vortices produce a dense electron flux in the vicinity of absorbed hydrogen nuclei, and thus can be expected to greatly enhance the probability of the deflated state hydrogen nuclei in their presence. Non-magnetic material can be made magnetic within nanopores, by creation of rings of free electrons at the nanopore metal boundary. Nickel itself can be magnetic or not, depending on the chemical loading processes and chemical nature of the nanopores in which it is embedded, and depending on the presence
[Vo]:Invitation to connect on LinkedIn
LinkedIn Cédric Mannu requested to add you as a connection on LinkedIn: -- michael, I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn. - Cédric Accept invitation from Cédric Mannu http://www.linkedin.com/e/-iyihpo-gvkmu5gr-3/A-Q0T4hW2iZcEBvQY-RW02FWyHZXZBR/blk/I3260629270_2/1BpC5vrmRLoRZcjkkZt5YCpnlOt3RApnhMpmdzgmhxrSNBszYOnP0TczAOdz0Sczd9bSl6l4FIkDhObPwNejgRczoMe34LrCBxbOYWrSlI/EML_comm_afe/?hs=falsetok=2YBzHESGzflR01 View invitation from Cédric Mannu http://www.linkedin.com/e/-iyihpo-gvkmu5gr-3/A-Q0T4hW2iZcEBvQY-RW02FWyHZXZBR/blk/I3260629270_2/39vc3sOej8Sc3oOcQALqnpPbOYWrSlI/svi/?hs=falsetok=18O-ly0G3flR01 -- DID YOU KNOW your LinkedIn profile helps you control your public image when people search for you? Setting your profile as public means your LinkedIn profile will come up when people enter your name in leading search engines. Take control of your image! http://www.linkedin.com/e/-iyihpo-gvkmu5gr-3/ewp/inv-22/?hs=falsetok=3haducicHflR01 -- (c) 2011, LinkedIn Corporation
Re: [Vo]:Put your money where your mouth is - for charity
Fair enough Mary Yugo. But surely someone else in this forum is willing to bet $200 that will go to charity, on the E-Cat not working. Anyone?? Or has the E-Cat already been accepted by the wide majority already? :) Regards, Patrick On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: To hide behind the veil of anonymity on a discussion group such as this is cowardly. I have followed vortex-l since the 90s, and can’t remember any dispute between contributors which might have caused one to be fearful of ‘retaliation’ This has nothing to do with Vortex of cold fusion issues. I have been involved in issues in which a lot of money was involved and the unscrupulous sociopaths responsible for the scams would never think twice before using violence if it could be done without their being detected and prosecuted. -- Patrick www.tRacePerfect.com The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect! The quickest puzzle ever!
Re: [Vo]:Put your money where your mouth is - for charity
My bet is: at 30 nov 2013 at least 5 companies other than Rossi's will manufacture commercial energy generators based on Transition Metals-H LENR. Peter On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Patrick Ellul ellulpatr...@gmail.comwrote: Fair enough Mary Yugo. But surely someone else in this forum is willing to bet $200 that will go to charity, on the E-Cat not working. Anyone?? Or has the E-Cat already been accepted by the wide majority already? :) Regards, Patrick On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:14 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: To hide behind the veil of anonymity on a discussion group such as this is cowardly. I have followed vortex-l since the 90s, and can’t remember any dispute between contributors which might have caused one to be fearful of ‘retaliation’ This has nothing to do with Vortex of cold fusion issues. I have been involved in issues in which a lot of money was involved and the unscrupulous sociopaths responsible for the scams would never think twice before using violence if it could be done without their being detected and prosecuted. -- Patrick www.tRacePerfect.com The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect! The quickest puzzle ever! -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill
Just to conclude my question, from various sources it seems that the pessimistic version of the consumption of e-cat is the good one, http://faq.ecat.com/112449/how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six-months/ 10kg Ni+16kgH for 1MW*6month (4,4GW.h) other numbers were daily consumption. my estimate of world consumption, is that 300kTons of nickel could produces one year of energy for the world, and it represent 25% of world production. it is strange that H is much more consumed than Ni, especially in term of atoms, but H have a tendency to leak. maybe also the reaction is not the one I think about (H+Ni-Cu+E) and the ratio H/Ni are very big. something strange is that my FAQ put on ecat site is not answered, and on journal of nuclear physic CF article my question/comment have been blocked... any correction/comment/critic/advice welcome 2011/11/25 Alain dit le Cycliste alain.sep...@gmail.com FYI i've found this FAQ http://faq.ecat.com/113090/i-was-wondering-if-you-may-inform-us-as-to-the-amount-of-hydrogen-that-will-be-required-to-run-an-ecatfor/ say that for 24h the 10kW e-cat use 0.2g of H... it is hard to interpret about Ni... the 0.2g might be just the fixed value to fill the Ni for 6 month... in that case, it can fill 12g of nickel at loading factor 1/1... but what about the volume used to fill the pipes? maybe is it 0.1g of Ni, 0.0016g of H loaded, and the 0.198 rest to fill the pipes and chambers. it can also be just the leaks for one day, telling nothing about the quantity stored in the Ni, and thus, the Ni quantity... and implying that it consume 3.6kg of H for a 1MW on 6month... but what about Ni? it can be a mix... so, missing data to estimate Ni quantity, nor H consumption and cause of the consumption (loading, leaks, reactions)... not yet answer to my FAQ http://faq.ecat.com/113004/in-faq-how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six/ on the site, but he seems to copy FAQ and answer from another source ... if someone know where to deposit question, so they ane answered clearly. if someone find a better analysis... 2011/11/24 Alain dit le Cycliste alain.sep...@gmail.com so two article of the same FAQ are not coherent. http://faq.ecat.com/112273/how-much-ni-is-in-the-cell/ http://faq.ecat.com/112449/how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six-months/ is'nt there a known issue with an error of unit that rossi admit. I remember some comment about that mistake. 10g instead of 10kg... ??? note that the cost estimated of the powder is about 1 euro/MW.6month http://faq.ecat.com/112602/if-selling-price-is-planned-for-500-euros-per-1-kw-of-output-capability-this-is-5000-euros-for-10-kw/ and that 1kG of raw nickel is 13Eur/kg on the market... incoherences... To clear the doubt, I put the question on the FAQ. http://faq.ecat.com/113004/in-faq-how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six/ maybe the different base numbers we have explain the disagreement.
[Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece A short excerpt: “Let’s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I’m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months.” That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion’s owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. “I know what he’s got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did,” he continued. It's quite interesting, to say the least, that the University of Siena was involved in this, assuming what Xanthoulis said is true. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
So, it is likely that Piantelli is involved in this, after all: *Piantelli* is working with the *University of Siena* on his Ni-H cell http://ecatnews.com/?p=581 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/**nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/**article3353181.ecehttp://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece A short excerpt: “Let’s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I’m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months.” That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion’s owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. “I know what he’s got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did,” he continued. It's quite interesting, to say the least, that the University of Siena was involved in this, assuming what Xanthoulis said is true. Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
If this is true they are gangsters and Rossi has my full support. And also at University of Siena they have gangsters, if this is true. This doesnt shed a good light on their previous work for Piantelli. Possibly they are all gangsters, and this all is a horrible soap opera. Could be, nothing is true and nothing works and they want to spread rumours. I wonder what they really will announce tomorrow. My prediction is, they announce a revolutianry product that will be presented soon. Or they announce they got the process now running with a stable COP, what Miley announced 1996 and announced it 2011 again. ;-) All serious cold fusion companies do this from time to time, some do it succesful for 20 years now. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 12:14 Betreff: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece A short excerpt: ?Let?s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I?m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months.? That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion?s owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. ?I know what he?s got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did,? he continued. It's quite interesting, to say the least, that the University of Siena was involved in this, assuming what Xanthoulis said is true. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
Others have openly admitted in trying to get a spectrum. And joked about it how Rossi got angry at them for trying it on. Like it had no value. Almost suggesting Rossi had no right to withhold it from science. If true I do hope he sues the University and all involved for everything they have. If proven it may well be the biggest theft in the history of science, at least as far as I know. Most academics I know of have no real sense of commercial value or commercial confidentiality. They live in a world where you publish or perish. That is my personal experience. AG On 11/29/2011 10:31 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If this is true they are gangsters and Rossi has my full support. And also at University of Siena they have gangsters, if this is true. This doesnt shed a good light on their previous work for Piantelli. Possibly they are all gangsters, and this all is a horrible soap opera. Could be, nothing is true and nothing works and they want to spread rumours. I wonder what they really will announce tomorrow. My prediction is, they announce a revolutianry product that will be presented soon. Or they announce they got the process now running with a stable COP, what Miley announced 1996 and announced it 2011 again. ;-) All serious cold fusion companies do this from time to time, some do it succesful for 20 years now. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Akira Shirakawashirakawa.ak...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 12:14 Betreff: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece A short excerpt: ?Let?s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I?m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months.? That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion?s owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. ?I know what he?s got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did,? he continued. It's quite interesting, to say the least, that the University of Siena was involved in this, assuming what Xanthoulis said is true. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
The moment you fill the patent, you get the rights to the vindicated novelties, you don't need to wait until it is granted. Of course, if you are denied the patent or the inventive points, you lose the rights accordingly. So, if everything proven and the patent is well written, Rossi does not need to fear. But, given that the ecat, if true, is the biggest invention of the history of mankind, along with writting, perhaps even more, I couldn't care less with Rossi being copied or not. That is not an issue, that's actually good, given that the knowledge will certainly spread faster. 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com Others have openly admitted in trying to get a spectrum. And joked about it how Rossi got angry at them for trying it on. Like it had no value. Almost suggesting Rossi had no right to withhold it from science. If true I do hope he sues the University and all involved for everything they have. If proven it may well be the biggest theft in the history of science, at least as far as I know. Most academics I know of have no real sense of commercial value or commercial confidentiality. They live in a world where you publish or perish. That is my personal experience. AG On 11/29/2011 10:31 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If this is true they are gangsters and Rossi has my full support. And also at University of Siena they have gangsters, if this is true. This doesnt shed a good light on their previous work for Piantelli. Possibly they are all gangsters, and this all is a horrible soap opera. Could be, nothing is true and nothing works and they want to spread rumours. I wonder what they really will announce tomorrow. My prediction is, they announce a revolutianry product that will be presented soon. Or they announce they got the process now running with a stable COP, what Miley announced 1996 and announced it 2011 again. ;-) All serious cold fusion companies do this from time to time, some do it succesful for 20 years now. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Akira Shirakawashirakawa.akira@**gmail.comshirakawa.ak...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 12:14 Betreff: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/**nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/** article3353181.ecehttp://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece A short excerpt: ?Let?s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I?m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months.? That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion?s owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. ?I know what he?s got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did,? he continued. It's quite interesting, to say the least, that the University of Siena was involved in this, assuming what Xanthoulis said is true. Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, For what it's worth, Daniele Passerini on a recent comment in his Blog [1] is saying that when Roy Virgilio denied any relationship between Piantelli and DGT, he answered him privately that according to his sources both do have an agreement, but he (Daniele) wouldn't comment publicly about it before this matter got clearer. Today's NyTeknik article according to him gives credit to the information he was given. [1] http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/11/ma-facciamola-finita.html Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
On 2011-11-29 13:01, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If this is true they are gangsters and Rossi has my full support. And also at University of Siena they have gangsters, if this is true. I guess if this turns out to be true, Rossi was not wrong about snakes and competitors lurking everywhere, trying to steal his secrets whenever possible. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
If it is true, then it is a case of scientific fraud and industrial spionage. If its untrue and they all collaborate behind the scenes, then ist is a gigantic staged investment fraud. In both cases it is a case for Interpol. For now I think they are all gangsters working together behind the scenes until something else is proven. This case could have been avoided. Rossi could easily claim priority if he had done a conclusive irrefutable calorimetry test, e.g. a realworld heating application that was measured by scientists and trustable witnesses. He had serious proposals and offers enough. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 13:22 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? Others have openly admitted in trying to get a spectrum. And joked about it how Rossi got angry at them for trying it on. Like it had no value. Almost suggesting Rossi had no right to withhold it from science. If true I do hope he sues the University and all involved for everything they have. If proven it may well be the biggest theft in the history of science, at least as far as I know. Most academics I know of have no real sense of commercial value or commercial confidentiality. They live in a world where you publish or perish. That is my personal experience. AG On 11/29/2011 10:31 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If this is true they are gangsters and Rossi has my full support. And also at University of Siena they have gangsters, if this is true. This doesnt shed a good light on their previous work for Piantelli. Possibly they are all gangsters, and this all is a horrible soap opera. Could be, nothing is true and nothing works and they want to spread rumours. I wonder what they really will announce tomorrow. My prediction is, they announce a revolutianry product that will be presented soon. Or they announce they got the process now running with a stable COP, what Miley announced 1996 and announced it 2011 again. ;-) All serious cold fusion companies do this from time to time, some do it succesful for 20 years now. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Akira Shirakawashirakawa.ak...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 12:14 Betreff: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece A short excerpt: ?Let?s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I?m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months.? That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion?s owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. ?I know what he?s got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did,? he continued. It's quite interesting, to say the least, that the University of Siena was involved in this, assuming what Xanthoulis said is true. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
So, if that is confirmed, we can put Piantelli also as a scammer, from the point of view of the hardest skeptics. 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, For what it's worth, Daniele Passerini on a recent comment in his Blog [1] is saying that when Roy Virgilio denied any relationship between Piantelli and DGT, he answered him privately that according to his sources both do have an agreement, but he (Daniele) wouldn't comment publicly about it before this matter got clearer. Today's NyTeknik article according to him gives credit to the information he was given. [1] http://22passi.blogspot.com/**2011/11/ma-facciamola-finita.**htmlhttp://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/11/ma-facciamola-finita.html Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
Are you saying you support IP theft? This is not Vulcan where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa6c3OTr6yA This is business and this is, if proven, theft. If I was Rossi, I would be talking to the police and asking for charges to be filled against the University, Defkalion and any person involved. I would also seek a court injunction against Defkalion to stop them from advertising and / or selling their product. There is no way this sort of action can be condoned. I trust Rossi will use the full extent of the law to effect action against those involved. AG On 11/29/2011 11:01 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: The moment you fill the patent, you get the rights to the vindicated novelties, you don't need to wait until it is granted. Of course, if you are denied the patent or the inventive points, you lose the rights accordingly. So, if everything proven and the patent is well written, Rossi does not need to fear. But, given that the ecat, if true, is the biggest invention of the history of mankind, along with writting, perhaps even more, I couldn't care less with Rossi being copied or not. That is not an issue, that's actually good, given that the knowledge will certainly spread faster.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
I have no problems with the test the 2 Swedish physicists, Levi. Focardi and a hand full of other academics did. AG On 11/29/2011 11:12 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If it is true, then it is a case of scientific fraud and industrial spionage. If its untrue and they all collaborate behind the scenes, then ist is a gigantic staged investment fraud. In both cases it is a case for Interpol. For now I think they are all gangsters working together behind the scenes until something else is proven. This case could have been avoided. Rossi could easily claim priority if he had done a conclusive irrefutable calorimetry test, e.g. a realworld heating application that was measured by scientists and trustable witnesses. He had serious proposals and offers enough. Peter
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
Only in this case. This invention, if true, is too precious to be kept private. 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com Are you saying you support IP theft? This is not Vulcan where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few: http://www.youtube.com/watch?* *v=Xa6c3OTr6yA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa6c3OTr6yA
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
More like just another snake who needed the spectrum to work out Rossi's key IP. If proven, all involved are just common thieves. AG On 11/29/2011 11:12 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: So, if that is confirmed, we can put Piantelli also as a scammer, from the point of view of the hardest skeptics. 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com mailto:shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, For what it's worth, Daniele Passerini on a recent comment in his Blog [1] is saying that when Roy Virgilio denied any relationship between Piantelli and DGT, he answered him privately that according to his sources both do have an agreement, but he (Daniele) wouldn't comment publicly about it before this matter got clearer. Today's NyTeknik article according to him gives credit to the information he was given. [1] http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/11/ma-facciamola-finita.html
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
Technically, Rossi still has to prove the I part of the IP, besides, he must show that it is not based on prior art from Piantelli. 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com More like just another snake who needed the spectrum to work out Rossi's key IP. If proven, all involved are just common thieves. AG On 11/29/2011 11:12 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: So, if that is confirmed, we can put Piantelli also as a scammer, from the point of view of the hardest skeptics. 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com mailto: shirakawa.akira@gmail.**com shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, For what it's worth, Daniele Passerini on a recent comment in his Blog [1] is saying that when Roy Virgilio denied any relationship between Piantelli and DGT, he answered him privately that according to his sources both do have an agreement, but he (Daniele) wouldn't comment publicly about it before this matter got clearer. Today's NyTeknik article according to him gives credit to the information he was given. [1] http://22passi.blogspot.com/**2011/11/ma-facciamola-finita.**htmlhttp://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/11/ma-facciamola-finita.html -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
I have no problems with that was done. I have problems with additional tests that where not done. Kullander Essen's trip was payed by Rossi and they where friendly treated by the italian scientists. So they dont believe or say there was fraud and this is understandable. But they do admit, they did not got enough evidency to exclude fraud by measured facts. This is Rossi's fault. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 13:55 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? I have no problems with the test the 2 Swedish physicists, Levi. Focardi and a hand full of other academics did. AG On 11/29/2011 11:12 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If it is true, then it is a case of scientific fraud and industrial spionage. If its untrue and they all collaborate behind the scenes, then ist is a gigantic staged investment fraud. In both cases it is a case for Interpol. For now I think they are all gangsters working together behind the scenes until something else is proven. This case could have been avoided. Rossi could easily claim priority if he had done a conclusive irrefutable calorimetry test, e.g. a realworld heating application that was measured by scientists and trustable witnesses. He had serious proposals and offers enough. Peter
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
If proven it is planned IP theft. Clear and simple. Those involved should go to jail and the University, if involved, should be forced to pay a very large amount of money. The courts do not consider the Needs of the Many justify theft of the IP of the one. And neither should you. Theft is theft. AG On 11/29/2011 11:28 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Only in this case. This invention, if true, is too precious to be kept private. 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com Are you saying you support IP theft? This is not Vulcan where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa6c3OTr6yA
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
We don't know how much of Piantelli's patents Rossi used anyway. Send both to jail? :) 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com If proven it is planned IP theft. Clear and simple. Those involved should go to jail and the University, if involved, should be forced to pay a very large amount of money. The courts do not consider the Needs of the Many justify theft of the IP of the one. And neither should you. Theft is theft. AG On 11/29/2011 11:28 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Only in this case. This invention, if true, is too precious to be kept private. 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto: aussieguy.ecat@gmail.**com aussieguy.e...@gmail.com Are you saying you support IP theft? This is not Vulcan where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few: http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=Xa6c3OTr6yAhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa6c3OTr6yA -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
They acted like scientists do. We are not certain. We need to do more tests, which you can pay us for. Oh and by the way we need to do those tests in private so we can get the radiation spectrum and figure out that you have inside. I'm like Rossi, an engineer and I don't give a C**P what is inside or how it works as long as it works, which I'm 100% sure it does. AG On 11/29/2011 11:37 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: I have no problems with that was done. I have problems with additional tests that where not done. Kullander Essen's trip was payed by Rossi and they where friendly treated by the italian scientists. So they dont believe or say there was fraud and this is understandable. But they do admit, they did not got enough evidency to exclude fraud by measured facts. This is Rossi's fault. Peter
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill
It won't use nearly that much hydrogen as a reactant - if it really is using that much hydrogen then most of it will be lost through leakage, or possibly to remove unwanted gaseous contaminants and products. On 29 November 2011 10:17, Alain dit le Cycliste alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: Just to conclude my question, from various sources it seems that the pessimistic version of the consumption of e-cat is the good one, http://faq.ecat.com/112449/how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six-months/ 10kg Ni+16kgH for 1MW*6month (4,4GW.h) other numbers were daily consumption. my estimate of world consumption, is that 300kTons of nickel could produces one year of energy for the world, and it represent 25% of world production. it is strange that H is much more consumed than Ni, especially in term of atoms, but H have a tendency to leak. maybe also the reaction is not the one I think about (H+Ni-Cu+E) and the ratio H/Ni are very big. something strange is that my FAQ put on ecat site is not answered, and on journal of nuclear physic CF article my question/comment have been blocked... any correction/comment/critic/advice welcome 2011/11/25 Alain dit le Cycliste alain.sep...@gmail.com FYI i've found this FAQ http://faq.ecat.com/113090/i-was-wondering-if-you-may-inform-us-as-to-the-amount-of-hydrogen-that-will-be-required-to-run-an-ecatfor/ say that for 24h the 10kW e-cat use 0.2g of H... it is hard to interpret about Ni... the 0.2g might be just the fixed value to fill the Ni for 6 month... in that case, it can fill 12g of nickel at loading factor 1/1... but what about the volume used to fill the pipes? maybe is it 0.1g of Ni, 0.0016g of H loaded, and the 0.198 rest to fill the pipes and chambers. it can also be just the leaks for one day, telling nothing about the quantity stored in the Ni, and thus, the Ni quantity... and implying that it consume 3.6kg of H for a 1MW on 6month... but what about Ni? it can be a mix... so, missing data to estimate Ni quantity, nor H consumption and cause of the consumption (loading, leaks, reactions)... not yet answer to my FAQ http://faq.ecat.com/113004/in-faq-how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six/ on the site, but he seems to copy FAQ and answer from another source ... if someone know where to deposit question, so they ane answered clearly. if someone find a better analysis... 2011/11/24 Alain dit le Cycliste alain.sep...@gmail.com so two article of the same FAQ are not coherent. http://faq.ecat.com/112273/how-much-ni-is-in-the-cell/ http://faq.ecat.com/112449/how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six-months/ is'nt there a known issue with an error of unit that rossi admit. I remember some comment about that mistake. 10g instead of 10kg... ??? note that the cost estimated of the powder is about 1 euro/MW.6month http://faq.ecat.com/112602/if-selling-price-is-planned-for-500-euros-per-1-kw-of-output-capability-this-is-5000-euros-for-10-kw/ and that 1kG of raw nickel is 13Eur/kg on the market... incoherences... To clear the doubt, I put the question on the FAQ. http://faq.ecat.com/113004/in-faq-how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six/ maybe the different base numbers we have explain the disagreement.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
BTW, Krivit really supports Piantelli. So, what now? Is he also supporting Rossi indirectly??? LOL! 2011/11/29 peter.heck...@arcor.de If it is true, then it is a case of scientific fraud and industrial spionage. If its untrue and they all collaborate behind the scenes, then ist is a gigantic staged investment fraud. In both cases it is a case for Interpol. For now I think they are all gangsters working together behind the scenes until something else is proven. This case could have been avoided. Rossi could easily claim priority if he had done a conclusive irrefutable calorimetry test, e.g. a realworld heating application that was measured by scientists and trustable witnesses. He had serious proposals and offers enough. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 13:22 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? Others have openly admitted in trying to get a spectrum. And joked about it how Rossi got angry at them for trying it on. Like it had no value. Almost suggesting Rossi had no right to withhold it from science. If true I do hope he sues the University and all involved for everything they have. If proven it may well be the biggest theft in the history of science, at least as far as I know. Most academics I know of have no real sense of commercial value or commercial confidentiality. They live in a world where you publish or perish. That is my personal experience. AG On 11/29/2011 10:31 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: If this is true they are gangsters and Rossi has my full support. And also at University of Siena they have gangsters, if this is true. This doesnt shed a good light on their previous work for Piantelli. Possibly they are all gangsters, and this all is a horrible soap opera. Could be, nothing is true and nothing works and they want to spread rumours. I wonder what they really will announce tomorrow. My prediction is, they announce a revolutianry product that will be presented soon. Or they announce they got the process now running with a stable COP, what Miley announced 1996 and announced it 2011 again. ;-) All serious cold fusion companies do this from time to time, some do it succesful for 20 years now. Peter - Original Nachricht Von: Akira Shirakawashirakawa.ak...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 12:14 Betreff: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece A short excerpt: ?Let?s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I?m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months.? That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion?s owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. ?I know what he?s got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did,? he continued. It's quite interesting, to say the least, that the University of Siena was involved in this, assuming what Xanthoulis said is true. Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
If Rossi used some Piantelli IP then Rossi will need to pay Piantelli a royalty. However that does not excuse outright IP theft, especially when the theft was arranged in advance. AG On 11/29/2011 11:41 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: We don't know how much of Piantelli's patents Rossi used anyway. Send both to jail? :) 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com If proven it is planned IP theft. Clear and simple. Those involved should go to jail and the University, if involved, should be forced to pay a very large amount of money. The courts do not consider the Needs of the Many justify theft of the IP of the one. And neither should you. Theft is theft. AG On 11/29/2011 11:28 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Only in this case. This invention, if true, is too precious to be kept private. 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com Are you saying you support IP theft? This is not Vulcan where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa6c3OTr6yA -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
maybe is it still legal to build a similar reactor, with a pattented, or in process of patent, technology, but you have to obtain the allowance of the inventor/owner... and not steal it. normally rossi before applying for patent, should have put a document in a third-party file, that proove that he know the technology before. (in france, you store a closed letter at INPI, as proof of priority in case of debate) I hope also that once the patent application start, it should also block posterious similar patent to be applied if Defkalion simply have retro-engineered, or reinvented from rumors, the same device... and then have simply worked hard to make it industrial, efficient, stable... then they just have to say, hey andrea, what is your price? or howmuch you pay for our engineering job ? with careful respect of course... they simply cannot force the patent owner to sell or buy... they will need good diplomacy (maybe Professor Chris Stremmenos could make it ?) 2011/11/29 peter.heck...@arcor.de If it is true, then it is a case of scientific fraud and industrial spionage. If its untrue and they all collaborate behind the scenes, then ist is a gigantic staged investment fraud. In both cases it is a case for Interpol. For now I think they are all gangsters working together behind the scenes until something else is proven. This case could have been avoided. Rossi could easily claim priority if he had done a conclusive irrefutable calorimetry test, e.g. a realworld heating application that was measured by scientists and trustable witnesses. He had serious proposals and offers enough. Peter
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
That people conspired together to steal the IP / trade secrets says it is not prior knowledge. AG On 11/29/2011 11:33 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Technically, Rossi still has to prove the I part of the IP, besides, he must show that it is not based on prior art from Piantelli. 2011/11/29 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com More like just another snake who needed the spectrum to work out Rossi's key IP. If proven, all involved are just common thieves. AG On 11/29/2011 11:12 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: So, if that is confirmed, we can put Piantelli also as a scammer, from the point of view of the hardest skeptics. 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com mailto:shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com mailto:shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com mailto:shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2011-11-29 12:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, For what it's worth, Daniele Passerini on a recent comment in his Blog [1] is saying that when Roy Virgilio denied any relationship between Piantelli and DGT, he answered him privately that according to his sources both do have an agreement, but he (Daniele) wouldn't comment publicly about it before this matter got clearer. Today's NyTeknik article according to him gives credit to the information he was given. [1] http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/11/ma-facciamola-finita.html -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
- Original Nachricht Von: Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 14:11 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? We don't know how much of Piantelli's patents Rossi used anyway. Send both to jail? :) As long as he doesnt sell unlicensed products he can use as much patents as he wants. Mike Bradys satisfied secret customers where never revealed because he protected them, and so are Rossi's. Proof is impossible. ;-)
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
Rossi has said his IP / trade secrets are in Escrow and if anything should happen to him they will be released, I guess to him estate. So he has dated and recorded his priority. AG On 11/29/2011 11:50 PM, Alain dit le Cycliste wrote: maybe is it still legal to build a similar reactor, with a pattented, or in process of patent, technology, but you have to obtain the allowance of the inventor/owner... and not steal it. normally rossi before applying for patent, should have put a document in a third-party file, that proove that he know the technology before. (in france, you store a closed letter at INPI, as proof of priority in case of debate) I hope also that once the patent application start, it should also block posterious similar patent to be applied if Defkalion simply have retro-engineered, or reinvented from rumors, the same device... and then have simply worked hard to make it industrial, efficient, stable... then they just have to say, hey andrea, what is your price? or howmuch you pay for our engineering job ? with careful respect of course... they simply cannot force the patent owner to sell or buy... they will need good diplomacy (maybe Professor Chris Stremmenos could make it ?) 2011/11/29 peter.heck...@arcor.de mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de If it is true, then it is a case of scientific fraud and industrial spionage. If its untrue and they all collaborate behind the scenes, then ist is a gigantic staged investment fraud. In both cases it is a case for Interpol. For now I think they are all gangsters working together behind the scenes until something else is proven. This case could have been avoided. Rossi could easily claim priority if he had done a conclusive irrefutable calorimetry test, e.g. a realworld heating application that was measured by scientists and trustable witnesses. He had serious proposals and offers enough. Peter
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
I suspect there was bad blood there for some time and Rossi used Krivit. Have you listened to the way Krivit asked questions? HE showed no respect at all and basically / indirectly accused most who he interviewed of lying. I know and have many good Italian friends. They would not stand to be treated like Krivit treated them. Watch Levi when Krivit interviewed him. Krivit needed to be put in his place but the Italians were too civil and polite to do that. Rossi fixed Krivit good and proper. Krivit's reputation is now, IMHO, destroyed. AG On 11/29/2011 11:19 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: BTW, Krivit really supports Piantelli. So, what now? Is he also supporting Rossi indirectly??? LOL!
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
I am rather sure there is no radiation to measure and so there is no spectrum to measure and there is nothing to steal. They play a collaborative soap opera behind the scenes, where they all win investors. Everybody who has money invested in Piantelli, Defkalion or Rossi's business should go to police. A calorimetry test with a connected heater radiator can be done in Rossis lab. The input power can be measured in Rossis lab. Only heat measurements, no radioactive radiation must be measured. Or even simpler, Rossi could release the steam out of the window and not into a wall outlet. Its so simple, why havent they done it? - Original Nachricht Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 29.11.2011 14:15 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula? They acted like scientists do. We are not certain. We need to do more tests, which you can pay us for. Oh and by the way we need to do those tests in private so we can get the radiation spectrum and figure out that you have inside. I'm like Rossi, an engineer and I don't give a C**P what is inside or how it works as long as it works, which I'm 100% sure it does. AG On 11/29/2011 11:37 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: I have no problems with that was done. I have problems with additional tests that where not done. Kullander Essen's trip was payed by Rossi and they where friendly treated by the italian scientists. So they dont believe or say there was fraud and this is understandable. But they do admit, they did not got enough evidency to exclude fraud by measured facts. This is Rossi's fault. Peter
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill
One problem with this statement by Rossi that 18 kg hydrogen and 10 kg nickel is required for a 180 day charge for 1 MW, is that it is inconsistent with the gammas observed (i.e. not observed.) See: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg53616.html The non-transmuted Ni could of course be recycled in a fully developed E-cat economy, and the hydrogen cost is inconsequential because it can be made from water using E-cat generated electrical power. The main problem is the inconsistency between statements and observations. The 1 MW (or less) test produced no gammas. This would be impossible, given Rossi's statements with regards to the reactions involved, even if he used 5 cm lead shielding. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ On Nov 29, 2011, at 1:17 AM, Alain dit le Cycliste wrote: Just to conclude my question, from various sources it seems that the pessimistic version of the consumption of e-cat is the good one, http://faq.ecat.com/112449/how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it- take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six-months/ 10kg Ni+16kgH for 1MW*6month (4,4GW.h) other numbers were daily consumption. my estimate of world consumption, is that 300kTons of nickel could produces one year of energy for the world, and it represent 25% of world production. it is strange that H is much more consumed than Ni, especially in term of atoms, but H have a tendency to leak. maybe also the reaction is not the one I think about (H+Ni-Cu+E) and the ratio H/Ni are very big. something strange is that my FAQ put on ecat site is not answered, and on journal of nuclear physic CF article my question/comment have been blocked... any correction/comment/critic/advice welcome 2011/11/25 Alain dit le Cycliste alain.sep...@gmail.com FYI i've found this FAQ http://faq.ecat.com/113090/i-was-wondering-if-you-may-inform-us-as- to-the-amount-of-hydrogen-that-will-be-required-to-run-an-ecatfor/ say that for 24h the 10kW e-cat use 0.2g of H... it is hard to interpret about Ni... the 0.2g might be just the fixed value to fill the Ni for 6 month... in that case, it can fill 12g of nickel at loading factor 1/1... but what about the volume used to fill the pipes? maybe is it 0.1g of Ni, 0.0016g of H loaded, and the 0.198 rest to fill the pipes and chambers. it can also be just the leaks for one day, telling nothing about the quantity stored in the Ni, and thus, the Ni quantity... and implying that it consume 3.6kg of H for a 1MW on 6month... but what about Ni? it can be a mix... so, missing data to estimate Ni quantity, nor H consumption and cause of the consumption (loading, leaks, reactions)... not yet answer to my FAQ http://faq.ecat.com/113004/in-faq-how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will- it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six/ on the site, but he seems to copy FAQ and answer from another source ... if someone know where to deposit question, so they ane answered clearly. if someone find a better analysis... 2011/11/24 Alain dit le Cycliste alain.sep...@gmail.com so two article of the same FAQ are not coherent. http://faq.ecat.com/112273/how-much-ni-is-in-the-cell/ http://faq.ecat.com/112449/how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will-it- take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six-months/ is'nt there a known issue with an error of unit that rossi admit. I remember some comment about that mistake. 10g instead of 10kg... ??? note that the cost estimated of the powder is about 1 euro/MW.6month http://faq.ecat.com/112602/if-selling-price-is-planned-for-500- euros-per-1-kw-of-output-capability-this-is-5000-euros-for-10-kw/ and that 1kG of raw nickel is 13Eur/kg on the market... incoherences... To clear the doubt, I put the question on the FAQ. http://faq.ecat.com/113004/in-faq-how-much-nickel-and-hydrogen-will- it-take-to-generate-one-megawatt-of-heat-continuously-for-six/ maybe the different base numbers we have explain the disagreement.
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill
One problem with this statement by Rossi that 18 kg hydrogen and 10 kg nickel is required for a 180 day charge for 1 MW, is that it is inconsistent with the gammas observed (i.e. not observed.) See: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg53616.html The non-transmuted Ni could of course be recycled in a fully developed E-cat economy, and the hydrogen cost is inconsequential because it can be made from water using E-cat generated electrical power. The main problem is the inconsistency between statements and observations. The 1 MW (or less) test produced no gammas. This would be impossible, given Rossi's statements with regards to the reactions involved, even if he used 5 cm lead shielding. Other questions arise as to the radiation hazard, or lack thereof: From: http://www.rossilivecat.com/ Charlie Zimmerman November 28th, 2011 at 9:32 AM Dear Mr. Rossi, I was interested in your comments regarding intentionally causing explosions of the device during safety testing. I had previously understood that short half lived radioactive isotopes of Copper and Nickel were rapidly decaying within the device and that this radioactivity was shielded. But, during an explosive event, the radioactive isotopes would be exposed to the environment without shielding before they would have a chance to decay. 1) Are there short lived radioactive isotopes as in your patent and paper published here? 2) Do those radioactive isotopes escape during an explosion? 3) Are you taking proper precautions yourself against such dangers? A concerned fan, Charlie Zimmerman Andrea Rossi November 28th, 2011 at 7:01 PM Dear Charlie Zimmerman: I confirm that no radiations above the background in relevant measure have been found in the controlled explosive tests. I cannot enter in particulars, because I cannot give information regarding what happens in the reactors. Warm Regards, A.R. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
RE: [Vo]:Next customer -- public, NE USA
On Mon, 2011-11-28 at 20:35 -0800, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: Wouldn't that be a hoot if it was good ol Dr. Mills. I hear BLP had to cut back on space heating to save money, and their technology is a little behind schedule, and over budget! :-) -Mark What is their technology? Are they developing any products for commercial or private use? They have been promising things for years... Craig
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
what is more sensible for me is that in the article they pretend that the e-cat cannot be stable for more of 24hour because of the design that create hot-sport in the middle(explanation is credible)... the second most sensible point is that they pretend to have solved the problem, meaning that it can be protected by a different patent... CF cannot be patent, but any new and useful recipe can be... if true Rossi's patent is turned around, or dependent of defkalion's... it looks like what I say about patent race... hard to keep an IP from creative competitors... I just hope that each of them will get reward for their competences, despite their respective weakness... would be a pity if only one survive the battle. but history is not fair. this story, true or scam, is already a fantastic scenario, of the quality of DSK affair. and the characters playing inside are already dign of Shakespeare theater... we are seeing the history of the 21th century being written. 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/**nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/**article3353181.ecehttp://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
On one test occasion Rossi had provided 2 holes through the 2 cm thick lead shielding. The scientists present at that test tried to switch the radiation detector from count mode to spectrum mode, despite Rossi telling them they were not allowed to record a spectrum. Rossi saw what they were trying to do and told them to stop. The guy who tried to do it reported the incident in one of the interview videos. As for radiation, what Rossi has said is there is nothing above normal background outside the lead shielding. AG On 11/30/2011 12:06 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: I am rather sure there is no radiation to measure and so there is no spectrum to measure and there is nothing to steal. They play a collaborative soap opera behind the scenes, where they all win investors. Everybody who has money invested in Piantelli, Defkalion or Rossi's business should go to police. A calorimetry test with a connected heater radiator can be done in Rossis lab. The input power can be measured in Rossis lab. Only heat measurements, no radioactive radiation must be measured. Or even simpler, Rossi could release the steam out of the window and not into a wall outlet. Its so simple, why havent they done it?
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
It is still theft. No way to spin it any other way. AG On 11/30/2011 12:29 AM, Alain dit le Cycliste wrote: it looks like what I say about patent race... hard to keep an IP from creative competitors...
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill
As I read it, this is not fusion, as it was understood to happen. So not much use looking for the products expected from conventional fusion. May have seem transmutations but no gammas. So why stress out over missing gammas? The old understand is not happening here. I'm just an engineer but maybe for the scientific types here it is time to think outside the square and to create theory that fits what we are seeing happening instead of saying it can't be real as it does not fit our current theory of what should be happening. AG On 11/30/2011 12:20 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: One problem with this statement by Rossi that 18 kg hydrogen and 10 kg nickel is required for a 180 day charge for 1 MW, is that it is inconsistent with the gammas observed (i.e. not observed.) See: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg53616.html The non-transmuted Ni could of course be recycled in a fully developed E-cat economy, and the hydrogen cost is inconsequential because it can be made from water using E-cat generated electrical power. The main problem is the inconsistency between statements and observations. The 1 MW (or less) test produced no gammas. This would be impossible, given Rossi's statements with regards to the reactions involved, even if he used 5 cm lead shielding. Other questions arise as to the radiation hazard, or lack thereof: From: http://www.rossilivecat.com/ Charlie Zimmerman November 28th, 2011 at 9:32 AM Dear Mr. Rossi, I was interested in your comments regarding intentionally causing explosions of the device during safety testing. I had previously understood that short half lived radioactive isotopes of Copper and Nickel were rapidly decaying within the device and that this radioactivity was shielded. But, during an explosive event, the radioactive isotopes would be exposed to the environment without shielding before they would have a chance to decay. 1) Are there short lived radioactive isotopes as in your patent and paper published here? 2) Do those radioactive isotopes escape during an explosion? 3) Are you taking proper precautions yourself against such dangers? A concerned fan, Charlie Zimmerman Andrea Rossi November 28th, 2011 at 7:01 PM Dear Charlie Zimmerman: I confirm that no radiations above the background in relevant measure have been found in the controlled explosive tests. I cannot enter in particulars, because I cannot give information regarding what happens in the reactors. Warm Regards, A.R. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Only in this case. This invention, if true, is too precious to be kept private. Wasn't that the defense used by Julius and Ethel Rosenberg? T
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen refill
On Nov 29, 2011, at 5:18 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: As I read it, this is not fusion, as it was understood to happen. So not much use looking for the products expected from conventional fusion. May have seem transmutations but no gammas. So why stress out over missing gammas? The old understand is not happening here. I'm just an engineer but maybe for the scientific types here it is time to think outside the square and to create theory that fits what we are seeing happening instead of saying it can't be real as it does not fit our current theory of what should be happening. AG It is not my theory that gammas produce the heat from Ni+H nuclear reactions. It is Rossi's. Scan the archives. This was discussed much here. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
That's the problem with IP protection through security, leaks are not necessarily theft in a legal sense (the only one that matters commercially). Even if there may be individuals who have signed non-disclosure agreements etc and then leaked info, it is only them and the organisations they work for who are liable, unless the recipient paid them and knew they were breaking such an agreement - inducing breach of contract may be hard to prove if it was cash in brown envelopes. If dekaflion were really crafty then as soon as they knew details they would have published in some obscure bee-keeping newsletter, to prevent Rossi getting any patent filed after that point. Besides which if defkalion know the formula then they can just sell it on to less scrupulous types. Being realistic there is simply no way that Rossi could keep the Genie in the bottle after the world knew it worked - going through his drains or garbage from his work places, collecting dust samples, other surveillance, bugs, examining who his suppliers were, insecure computers and documentation etc. No doubt a number of governments (guess US, Chinese, Russian) and organisations (OPEC?) have already done this. It will be very interesting to see what patents emerge from unexpected sources in the next year. Any one of these govts can also manufacture evidence that they knew about it ages ago, or legislate away any IP issues. Seems to me that unless Rossi has a valid patent filed some time ago (or even if he did) he is almost certainly going to get screwed - which is why his only sensible play was to get a big powerful partner early on. On 29 November 2011 14:09, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: It is still theft. No way to spin it any other way. AG On 11/30/2011 12:29 AM, Alain dit le Cycliste wrote: it looks like what I say about patent race... hard to keep an IP from creative competitors...
[Vo]:Uploaded McKubre slides and YouTube links
A copy of the slides in Acrobat format and a convenient list of the YouTube links are here: http://lenr-canr.org/News.htm - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
Here's an extremely interesting item from the linked Nyteknik article: According to Xanthoulis, *Rossi could not run the reaction more than 24 hours*, and when Defkalion required a 48 hour test it supposedly led to a conflict with Rossi. Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor for *two years*, heating a factory? Does this sound to anyone else that somebody's lying, or will we all agree that Judas hanged himself from a tree, but the branch he hung the rope from broke, he fell on the ground, and his guts burst out, thus dying two different ways simultaneously? On 11-11-29 06:14 AM, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Have a read at this article posted today on NyTeknik. It's about the backstage of tomorrow's Defkalion Announcement: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece A short excerpt: “Let’s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I’m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months.” That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion’s owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. “I know what he’s got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did,” he continued. It's quite interesting, to say the least, that the University of Siena was involved in this, assuming what Xanthoulis said is true. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:New Energy Times - A Conversation With Thomas Blakeslee
Many of us have given Steven the same sound advice but you can't make him drink.
Re: [Vo]:Uploaded McKubre slides and YouTube links
On 2011-11-29 16:43, Jed Rothwell wrote: A copy of the slides in Acrobat format and a convenient list of the YouTube links are here: http://lenr-canr.org/News.htm Thanks for the slides, I was wondering if they were available somewhere. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
On 2011-11-29 16:46, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor for *two years*, heating a factory? Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode? Just guessing. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
Or perhaps in very low power. Like, for example, an input of 10W, output of 150W. 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2011-11-29 16:46, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor for *two years*, heating a factory? Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode? Just guessing. Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
Akira Shirakawa wrote: Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor for *two years*, heating a factory? Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode? I believe that's what it means. Obviously they know a reactor ran for 18 hours in one test. I think they are referring to the problem of overheating and thermal run-away. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
On 11-11-29 10:55 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Or perhaps in very low power. Like, for example, an input of 10W, output of 150W. That doesn't seem to me to make a lot of sense for a space heater adequate to heat an entire factory. But I suppose you can assume that, if you like, and justify Rossi's claims that way. 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com mailto:shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2011-11-29 16:46, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor for *two years*, heating a factory? Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode? Just guessing. It's certainly not what the quote said, but sure, you can assume the branch broke and they just didn't mention it in the story, if you want to. Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
On 11-11-29 11:03 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Akira Shirakawa wrote: Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor for *two years*, heating a factory? Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode? I believe that's what it means. Obviously they know a reactor ran for 18 hours in one test. And, obviously, 18 24. I think they are referring to the problem of overheating and thermal run-away. Maybe. It would have been nice if he'd actually said that, but maybe it's what he meant. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
Did he ever say entire factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only his room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below 400W, if that was the state of the art back then. 2011/11/29 Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com ** On 11-11-29 10:55 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Or perhaps in very low power. Like, for example, an input of 10W, output of 150W. That doesn't seem to me to make a lot of sense for a space heater adequate to heat an entire factory. But I suppose you can assume that, if you like, and justify Rossi's claims that way. 2011/11/29 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2011-11-29 16:46, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Exactly how do we square this with Rossi's claim that he ran a reactor for *two years*, heating a factory? Perhaps they meant that in self-sustaining mode? Just guessing. It's certainly not what the quote said, but sure, you can assume the branch broke and they just didn't mention it in the story, if you want to. Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
/snip/ Did he ever say entire factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only his room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below 400W, if that was the state of the art back then. /snip/ In his patent application, he states: [0060] A practical embodiment of the inventive apparatus, installed on Oct. 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). United States Patent Application Publication Pub. No.: US 201110005506 Al Pub. Date: Jan. 13,2011
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: ?We have Rossi?s formula?
All this discussion based on an August phone call to someone at Ny Teknik back in August is just unwarranted drama, I predict Xanthoulis will deny this version of the story and leave it to Rossi to make a case if there is one. If DK did get a hint from Sienna then they have had plenty of time to digest the working principle and engineer a solution using a different catalyst not mentioned in any patent or existing products already delivered by Rossi - a pseudo clean room is all DK needs to claim they reinvented this wheel. My guess is that Rossi will be many years pursuing his intellectual property and that DK will just be one of a laundry list full of copycats. At some point Rossi and Piantelli may even have to pool their IP to make their claims enforceable. Of course the repercussions are so staggering that national governments may step in and simply throw unimaginable wealth at the players to release their secrets. Fran A short excerpt: Let's say I have the formula of Rossi, but I'm not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months. That is what Alexandros Xanthoulis, representative of Defkalion's owners, told Ny Teknik in a telephone conversation on August 5, 2011. I know what he's got in the reactor, I know everything. It was a spectroscopy made by the University of Siena. (...) They tried his reactor without him understanding what they did, he continued.
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
He didn't say how much that was heated! But it's weird that he mentions that. It's like he is inviting the patent analyzers to test his device, LOL! 2011/11/29 Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com /snip/ Did he ever say entire factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only his room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below 400W, if that was the state of the art back then. /snip/ In his patent application, he states: [0060] A practical embodiment of the inventive apparatus, installed on Oct. 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). United States Patent Application Publication Pub. No.: US 201110005506 Al Pub. Date: Jan. 13,2011 -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
[Vo]:A bit of humor at Rossi's expense
If you're easily offended, just skip it. http://www.moletrap.co.uk/wiki/index.php/Rossicaptions
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
I think the only device that did not somehow impress the people who attended demonstrations, according to these, was the one shown to Krivit. 2011/11/29 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com 2011/11/29 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com He didn't say how much that was heated! But it's weird that he mentions that. It's like he is inviting the patent analyzers to test his device, LOL! Nothing we know about this device suggests it was ever shown to the press. Krivit wanted to see it but he wrote that by the time he was ready to ask about it, he was already so disappointed and tired that he didn't bother. Rossi once said, IIRC, that the output was 35 kW. Yet he's always shown much weaker devices except of course the half megawatt demo which really wasn't a demo because nobody saw the data being taken except the engineer who supposedly worked for the perhaps mythical client. It's *all* very puzzling. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:A bit of humor at Rossi's expense
Hahahahahausauiahsiudhadhfahdahiaasihafaofihasi!!11! KK! :D VERY FUNNY! Actually creative. The annoying thing is being repetitive, not just disagreeing. 2011/11/29 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com If you're easily offended, just skip it. http://www.moletrap.co.uk/wiki/index.php/Rossicaptions -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]: Defkalion: We have Rossi's formula
Key statement by DGT in the Ny Teknik article is the following: It's very simple but they didn't think about it. (...) We solved the problem. Because the problem is that he cannot spread the reaction all over the pipe, and all the heating is concentrated in the middle, Xanthoulis told Ny Teknik. Three points come out of that statement: 1) The cylindrical cores had a problem with dissipation of the heat, and were thus unstable. 2) That is why Rossi's latest cores are rectangular and flat, only 1cm thick. 3) That is why DGT has accused Rossi of using DGT IP in the latest E-Cats. The unstable cores had a good chance of a run-away condition, with subsequent melting of the Ni powder and self-extinguishing. I know there was some discussion and questions raised by the Collective about this issue: how to get the heat to the reactor walls and out to the water, so at least #1 makes a lot of sense. Also, such a simple solution doesn't speak well of the 'problem-solving' skills of Rossi or his crew! If it's all a hoax, gotta ask yourself, why would Rossi go to all the trouble of completely changing the reactor? If the thing is NOT producing any excess power, and if the Ni powder is NOT melting, WHY go to all this trouble to change reactor design? Oh well, 1+1 still doesn't = 2. -Mark
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]: Defkalion: We have Rossi's formula
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: ** ** If it’s all a hoax, gotta ask yourself, why would Rossi go to all the trouble of completely changing the reactor? If the thing is NOT producing any excess power, and if the Ni powder is NOT melting, WHY go to all this trouble to change reactor design? Another good question is to ask what the design of the 35 kW heater in Rossi's factory was. It was said to have run (the duration varies with which account you read) from months to years. As to the trouble to change the design? Maybe to deceive the reporters with the heat exchanger measurements on October 6.
Re: [Vo]:A bit of humor at Rossi's expense
Am 29.11.2011 18:15, schrieb Mary Yugo: If you're easily offended, just skip it. http://www.moletrap.co.uk/wiki/index.php/Rossicaptions Here's another one to load up: attachment: ColdFusion2.jpeg
Re: [Vo]:Next customer -- public, NE USA
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Well, you see, the problem is that there are many possible errors in their determinations and they did not do what was need to rule them out. No, there are not. This is your imagination. Take away the heat of vaporization, and there is no way the remaining heat could rule out non-nuclear origins. If they had said there is no heat you would insist this was a bullet-proof test. Not a chance. Nothing Rossi has done is bullet proof, and none of it proves heat from nuclear sources. After Fleischmann and Pons released their videos of a boil off, many skeptics went on for years claiming the tests were questionable. That was incorrect. Those were first-principle, visual proof that the effect produces massive anomalous heat. There is no way it could be wrong. Of course it could be wrong, and probably was. It's not hard to make a video of boiling water. If they were right, set it up again with proper controls. Instead, Pons has gone into hiding. It is true that the tests witnessed by EK were somewhat sloppy. They could have used better instrumentation. However, EK are good scientists and they understand that no experiment is perfect and that these instruments are good enough to establish an irrefutable claim. They may be good scientists in some capacity, but they did not demonstrate it when they used visual inspection and a relative humidity probe to determine that the steam was dry. They were uncommonly *bad* scientists when they simply accepted that the power transfer from that ecat to the water could increase by a factor of 7 in about 3 minutes, when it took 20 minutes to reach boiling. Credentials mean nothing when they make obvious, mind-numbingly stupid mistakes. And although Kullander was cautious in his latest talk, he still doesn't seem to realize that it is not plausible for a fixed mass flow rate to change discontinuously from 100% liquid to 100% dry steam. Whether this was out of politeness, a desire to have Rossi call them again, or a lack of diligence and determination, I don't know. I am sure it is for the reasons they stated: the test is irrefutable. Actually he said more measurements are needed. You may disagree with that, but please do not assume that EK are lying, or they secretly agree with you, or they lack determination, or they are timid and afraid to ask Rossi to do something. More likely, they are just wrong. It doesn't matter how qualified they are. They tested the E-cat incorrectly-- each and every public time. So you say, but every expert I have heard from disagrees. Because you put your fingers in your ears when experts disagree. Read the experts Krivit consulted.
[Vo]:Defkalion
I don't know about everyone else but I am on pins and needles awaiting the Defkalion press-release. A year ago, with Rossi's first public demo, I thought the world is changed and so many of our global problems can be solved. With essentially unlimited free energy, pollution, global warming, food shortages would no-longer be inevitable. But with Rossi's approach to bringing ecat to the world, by design, or lack of design, it almost seems the scam-sayers are right. Tomorrow, by way of Defkalion, we might finally get at a definitive answer that LENR is not just real (which we know it is) but something that can be harnessed. I am in Eastern Standard time, will my breakfast be in a brave new world?
[Vo]:paper updated
I have showed that the energy level of the hydrogen atom, cold fusion, and the photon occur across paths of matching impedance. I was a bit baffled by the higher Z elements and the fine structure of the atom. I believe I have solved this part now. http://www.wbabin.net/science/znidarsic3.pdf Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]: Defkalion: We have Rossi's formula
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: If it’s all a hoax, gotta ask yourself, why would Rossi go to all the trouble of completely changing the reactor? If the thing is NOT producing any excess power, and if the Ni powder is NOT melting, WHY go to all this trouble to change reactor design? It's a changeup to keep the batters guessing. There was already too much converging analysis of the old design. Too many demands to avoid steam. The new design is not only flatter, it is also much heavier, and capable of storing more heat, so he could try some self-sustained runs. Confuse everybody all over again. But this can be turned around. If the thing *was* producing energy, as some are convinced, and if the 18-hour test was valid, and if he has operated a reactor for years in a factory, why completely redesign it? I think it fits a hoax better.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
Albert Ellul November 29th, 2011 at 4:29 AM Dear Andrea, May I make one suggestion: Would it be possible to include a counter on you website showing the number of people that have confirmed the pre-order for the 10KW heater? Just thinking. Andrea Rossi November 29th, 2011 at 9:29 AM November 29th, 2011 at 9:29 AM Dear Albert Ellul: I prefer not, I want to analyze a neutral reaction of the public to make projections.This is a very important study, not just a collection of pre-orders. Warm Regards, AR
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion
FWIW I would recommend if at all possible trying to find a place of neutrality on the Rossi/Defkalion matter. In my view, there is too much rampant anticipation going on - and that's not a good thing. Inevitably, unbridled anticipation tends to generate profound disappointment when the anticipated event doesn't go according to what one had hoped. Granted, it IS exciting to anticipate the possibility that a major foundation is being laid out for a brave new Rossi world of cheap energy for the entire planet. Shoot! Who isn't for that! But we are not there yet. And despite what Defkalion may or may not reveal to the public on Nov. 30 - even if the best case scenario manifests it is likely to take a massive multi-billion dollar financial investment in RD + engineering to get Rossi's little understood technology ready for prime time - and by prime time I mean truly ready for Joe Public, the consumer. Some predictions would seem to suggest the evolution of this (still not 100% proven) technology could take as long as 5 - 10 years (and probably longer) before we in the peanut gallery see anything rolling off the shelves of Wall Mart. And this all assumes that Rossi and his ecat technology is for real. That's still a really BIG assumption in many corners of society - and ya know, they have every reason at this stage of the game to remain skeptical. In the meantime, I hope fort the best. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion: “We have Rossi’s formula”
2011/11/29 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com: I think the only device that did not somehow impress the people who attended demonstrations, according to these, was the one shown to Krivit. Maybe it was Rossi who set up Krivit knowing that he supported Piantelli and that Krivit would ultimately look foolish reporting negatively on the eCat. evil grin I rub my hands. T
[Vo]:Factory heater at EON
Daniel Rocha wrote: Did he ever say entire factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only his room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below 400W, if that was the state of the art back then. The heater in the factory produced 5 to 8 kW thermal. It is a small factory. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Building E-Cat based thermal electricity plants
At 09:50 PM 11/28/2011, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: Is the 1MW in addition to, or instead of the 100kW ?
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
Dear Albert Ellul: I prefer not, I want to analyze a neutral reaction of the public to make projections.*This is a very important study*, not just a collection of pre-orders. Warm Regards, AR Unbeknownst to the cold fusion enthusiasts, Rossi is really doing a phenomenological study on the perception and judgement of those who believe in in LENR. This explains everything about Rossi's behavior. AR is not really interested in proving that LENR works or taking a lot of money from his followers or believers, although it doesn't hurt that some cash rich corporation could pay or have paid him millions to do testing on his invention. He intently interacts and studies his audience mainly over the internet, primarily to elicit responses from them, and he tries to get his audience to make decisions based not entirely on science or facts, but rather on subjective experiences. This is the definition on phenomenology from the wiki: phenomenology thus attempts to create conditions for the objectivehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivity_(philosophy) study of topics usually regarded as subjectivehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject_(philosophy): consciousness and the content of conscious experiences such as judgmentshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgments , perceptions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptions, and emotionshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotions . Why phenomenology you ask? Well, Rossi has done this before in 1973; his master's thesis: Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_Relativity and its interrelationship with Edmund Husserlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Husserl ’s Phenomenology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenology_(philosophy).
[Vo]:Piantelli's amazing claims
This has been discussed elsewhere, but a lot is happening and the threads here are tangled up with [Vo]:Re:[Vo] problem, so I thought I would reiterated it. Piantelli has been making some amazing claims lately. See: http://ecatnews.com/?p=581 Original source in Italian: http://www.energeticambiente.it/sistemi-idrogeno-nikel/14742857-novita-cella-piantelli.html Some quotes: For some time now, rumours have been circulating about Professor Focardi’s former collaboration partner, Professor Piantelli. Focardi and Piantelli were the first to show the true potential of Ni-H LENR. . . . These reports are beginning to gel and Roy Virgilio confirmed in Saturday’s talk at Viarregio that Piantelli was indeed preparing an eCat competitor. Virgilio expands on earlier scant details on this site (Italian). The following covers the important points so far: * Prof. Piantelli is working with the University of Siena on his Ni-H cell * In the last few days, old cells have been rekindled with ease after working for months in the past. * The cells were not pushed to perform and yet confirmed small excess energy. * Still in progress with a schedule of up to two months * Old cells have excess energy of about 2-3 times input * New ones plan an excess of about 200 times the energy input . . . * Patents are filed and pending * Some collaboration with a major U.S. institution including 3 days in the Siena lab . . . * Confirms the presence of 6-7 Mev Protons . . . END QUOTES Piantelli has loads of academic credibility. He is been supported for many years by an Italian automobile manufacturer. I wish I could recall which one. As you see from the photos of his lab he has top-notch equipment. He has been working slowly, in contrast to Rossi. Mike Melich remarked that Piantelli comes from part of Italy where there is a large monastery they began building in A.D. 1346. They are still not finished. - Jed
[Vo]:Toyota announces plug-in hybrid sales
See (in Japanese): http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/atmoney/news/2029-OYT1T00943.htm Summary: Sales will begin January 30, 2012. Minimum sales price will be ¥3,200,000 ($41,000). after government rebates it comes to ¥2,750,000. it takes roughly 3 hours to recharge. The range on batteries alone is 26.4 km. Efficiency is 60.1 km per liter (141 mpg), compared to an ordinary Prius which gets 32.6 km per liter (77 mpg). (Those efficiency ratings sound too high to me.) They hope to sell 60,000 vehicles next year in Japan, the US and Europe. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
From Ahsoka, Unbeknownst to the cold fusion enthusiasts, Rossi is really doing a phenomenological study on the perception and judgement of those who believe in in LENR. ... Assuming you're serious, and that Rossi's entire eCat endeavor has been nothing more than a phenomenological study of judgment - simply to satisfy Rossi's intellectual curiosity... Boy! You've really got him by the short hairs now! I suggest you confront Rossi with your assessment of his assessment. Be sure to report back to us on your findings. OTOH, assuming you're not serious: Good job! Made me laugh! ;-) Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Factory heater at EON
Are you sure of that? It was before the small scale tests for McKubre... and in the very close to beginning of development of the ecat. 2011/11/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Daniel Rocha wrote: Did he ever say entire factory or just heat a factory? :) Or was only his room? Seeing his old tests to McKubre, it should be something below 400W, if that was the state of the art back then. The heater in the factory produced 5 to 8 kW thermal. It is a small factory. - Jed -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi opens 10 KW expression of interest list and sets 10 kW price
Rossi wrote: Unit to conform to all USA, State and Local regulations Unit to conform to USA domestic insurance regulations (Tower Insurance) I do not think it will be possible to meet these two conditions in 2012 or 2013 either. The insurance regulators have never heard of this device. The insurance industry's Underwriters Laboratories (UL) has never heard of it. I do not think they can test a revolutionary device like this and certify it in a short amount of time. My guess is that the reality of regulations and conventional industry will soon catch up with Rossi. This will begin to happen as soon as important people realize his claims are true. I have been saying for some time that this device should be treated like any other technology, which means it has to be carefully tested and certified. Some people say that this will stymie the development of cold fusion. Perhaps it will, but I do not think people in the 21st century will allow things to proceed any other way. We have high standards for safety and reliability. Perhaps our standards are too high but that's how things are. Perhaps when important people realize this is real, Rossi will have an easier time securing a patent. That would benefit everyone. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Factory heater at EON
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Are you sure of that? Pretty sure. Reliable sources say so. Sorry to sound like a Magic 8-Ball. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Piantelli's amazing claims
On 2011-11-29 20:38, Jed Rothwell wrote: Original source in Italian: http://www.energeticambiente.it/sistemi-idrogeno-nikel/14742857-novita-cella-piantelli.html Hopefully we will have additional news on Piantelli by Roy Virgilio soon. There were supposed to be some by the second half of November but it looks like this got delayed a bit. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Toyota announces plug-in hybrid sales
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:50:06 -0500: Hi, [snip] See (in Japanese): http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/atmoney/news/2029-OYT1T00943.htm Summary: Sales will begin January 30, 2012. Minimum sales price will be ¥3,200,000 ($41,000). after government rebates it comes to ¥2,750,000. it takes roughly 3 hours to recharge. The range on batteries alone is 26.4 km. Efficiency is 60.1 km per liter (141 mpg), compared to an ordinary Prius which gets 32.6 km per liter (77 mpg). (Those efficiency ratings sound too high to me.) They are probably based on the notion that a larger percentage of driving will be pure electric, thus decreasing the amount of gasoline consumed during any given trip. They hope to sell 60,000 vehicles next year in Japan, the US and Europe. - Jed Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Piantelli's amazing claims
Am 29.11.2011 20:38, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Piantelli has loads of academic credibility. He is been supported for many years by an Italian automobile manufacturer. I wish I could recall which one. So far I have read this was Fiat Avio SpA, which was Fiat's aviation business. They sold it some time ago. Peter
Re: [Vo]:Toyota announces plug-in hybrid sales
Am 29.11.2011 21:05, schrieb mix...@bigpond.com: In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:50:06 -0500: Hi, [snip] See (in Japanese): http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/atmoney/news/2029-OYT1T00943.htm Summary: Sales will begin January 30, 2012. Minimum sales price will be ¥3,200,000 ($41,000). after government rebates it comes to ¥2,750,000. it takes roughly 3 hours to recharge. The range on batteries alone is 26.4 km. Efficiency is 60.1 km per liter (141 mpg), compared to an ordinary Prius which gets 32.6 km per liter (77 mpg). (Those efficiency ratings sound too high to me.) They are probably based on the notion that a larger percentage of driving will be pure electric, thus decreasing the amount of gasoline consumed during any given trip. I think this 26 km distance is worst case. Their system can use the energy released during braking to recharge the batteries and this does substantially reduce fuel consumption. Peter
Re: [Vo]:Toyota announces plug-in hybrid sales
mix...@bigpond.com wrote: Efficiency is 60.1 km per liter (141 mpg), compared to an ordinary Prius which gets 32.6 km per liter (77 mpg). (Those efficiency ratings sound too high to me.) They are probably based on the notion that a larger percentage of driving will be pure electric, thus decreasing the amount of gasoline consumed during any given trip. I think so. The Volt has a similar formula for mileage. However, the second number 77 mpg is too high for the present-day Prius. It is more like 50 mpg, I think. Perhaps the Japanese regulators have a different method of measuring this than the EPA. it is not difficult to get 77 mpg with a regular Prius in good driving conditions. the EPA used to have different standards which gave the Prius higher numbers. Ah, here is an official web site in English, that pegs it at 87 mpg: http://www.toyota.com/prius-plug-in/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Factory heater at EON
So, DGT was trying to test self sustaining for 48 hours. Odd test. Why exactly this one? 2011/11/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Are you sure of that? Pretty sure. Reliable sources say so. Sorry to sound like a Magic 8-Ball. - Jed -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
[Vo]:Virtual Particles are Gravitational Dipoles
I had always wondered about this: Four reasons why the quantum vacuum may explain dark matter November 28, 2011 by Lisa Zyga (PhysOrg.com) -- Earlier this year, PhysOrg reported on a new idea that suggested that gravitational charges in the quantum vacuum could provide an alternative to dark matter. The idea rests on the hypothesis that particles and antiparticles have gravitational charges of opposite sign. As a consequence, virtual particle-antiparticle pairs in the quantum vacuum form gravitational dipoles (having both a positive and negative gravitational charge) that can interact with baryonic matter to produce phenomena usually attributed to dark matter. Although CERN physicist Dragan Slavkov Hajdukovic, who proposed the idea, mathematically demonstrated that these gravitational dipoles could explain the observed rotational curves of galaxies without dark matter in his initial study, he noted that much more work needed to be done. http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-quantum-vacuum-dark.html more
Re: [Vo]:Piantelli's amazing claims
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:38:04 -0500: Hi, [snip] * Confirms the presence of 6-7 Mev Protons The suggestion that 6-7 MeV protons are responsible doesn't add up. If you bombard Nickel with 6-7 MeV protons you don't get enough energy from the fusion reactions to accelerate the original protons (otherwise this method would have been employed years ago). It also leaves open the question of where the 6-7 MeV protons came from in the first place. IOW this sounds like a half-baked theory. Of course it's possible that either a small Hydrino molecule or IRH is fusing with the Ni, and the energy is being carried away by unfused protons, some of which achieve an energy of 6-7 MeV. A few of these would then also undergo the occasional fusion reaction, contributing a little extra. However most of the energy must of necessity come from the original reaction that gave the protons their energy. Note also that 6-7 MeV is the energy that you get from fusing a proton with a Ni nucleus, so a likely reaction is the fusion of a Hydrino molecule with a Ni nucleus, where one of the two protons fuses, and the other is ejected carrying the energy of the fusion reaction of the first proton. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
I think it is likely that the intellectual property rights for cold fusion will soon result in a gigantic legal brawl with countless lawsuits. I suppose that powerful interests may line up behind Piantelli to sue Rossi, and vice versa, with everyone suing Defkalion. A lawsuit frenzy should not hold back the development of the technology. Production and sales usually continue even when intellectual property rights are disputed. Still, it would be regrettable. Someone here suggested that the best solution to this problem would be for governments to throw a large pile of money that everyone involved in the initial development of cold fusion. I think that would probably be a good idea. I hope that Fleischmann and Pons get a large chunk of it. Rossi deserves a lot too. Many people do. There is precedent for this. In 1917, the United States wanted to begin large-scale mass production of aircraft for World War I. The industry was hamstrung by patent fights especially by the original patent which had been bought by Wright-Martin. There was a confused tangle of conflicting claims and different patents. I do not recall exactly how was worked out, but books about aviation say that Congress cut the Gordian knot and establishing a single source for royalty payments owned by the government. It paid everyone who still had a valid patent in aviation, including Wright-Martin. Something like this a world-wide scale, with many different governments contributing, will probably be needed to work through the cold fusion patent mess. Thanks to the magic of the Internet, you can read the original hearings about this issue. Do a Google search for this document: Hearings ... on estimates submitted by the secretary of the Navy, 1917 By United States Congress House Committee on Naval Affairs When that document appears, look for aviation patent read p. 1177 and 1115. These people were pragmatic. This is a sensible discussion. One of the statements submitted to Congress says that the automobile industry had a similar tangle of patents: I understand that a similar condition arose among automobile manufacturers, and organization was finally formed among them for the purposes of straightening out patent litigation, and I understand that the scheme has worked out most satisfactorily. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Virtual Particles are Gravitational Dipoles
Gee wiz! I sed something sort of like this about three to six months ago in the Vort Collective. However, I'm sure what I said was stated much more crudely. I recall conjecturing that the aggregate mass existence of all those fleeting virtual particles could possibly in themselves contribute to the over-all dark matter gravity equation. I did NOT however elaborate on the di-pole, positive/negative aspect. (Not my area of expertise! ;-) ) I only conjectured that perhaps a LOT of unexplained mass might exist in the midst of all that naught quantum fluctuating going on behind our back. I wonder if I can find that old post of mine... Can I pick up my Nobel Prize now? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:01 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: Someone here suggested that the best solution to this problem would be for governments to throw a large pile of money that everyone involved in the initial development of cold fusion. I think that would probably be a good idea. I hope that Fleischmann and Pons get a large chunk of it. Rossi deserves a lot too. Many people do. When we start talking about morality, I feel a need to step in... It's not good to take money from people who do not want to give it up, even if someone has a 'noble' way in which to use it. If you are I did this, it would be called theft. And to take money from people to give to those working in one of the largest pent-up markets in history, is just adding insult to injury. Craig
[Vo]:Rereading Rossi's Patent Application
I recommend giving his patent application another read, should you have the time. I like that his reactions are both fission and fusion simultaneously - talk about multi-tasking!: [0069] In particular, said graphs clearly show that zinc is formed, whereas zinc was not present in the nickel powder originally loaded into the apparatus said zinc being actually generated by a fusion of a nickel atom and two hydrogen atoms. [0070] This demonstrates that, in addition to fusion, the inventive reaction also provides a nickel nucleus fission phenomenon generating lighter stable atoms. [0071] Moreover, it has been found that, after having generated energy the used powders contained both copper and lighter than nickel atoms (such as sulphur, chlorine, potassium, calcium). [0072] This demonstrate that, in addition to fusion, also a nickel nucleus fission phenomenon generating lighter stable atoms occurs. The photo of the Rossi's nano-nickel is great, though. It's an opportunity to look at grain size and geometry: It appears that the grains vary from 5-15 um (1,000-3,000 beard-seconds). He'd mentioned that they were more on the um scale than the nm scale, which jives with the supplied evidence. As for his claim of surface tubercles contributing to the reaction, the photographed grains do indeed look bumpy and not uniformly smooth. A picture is indeed worth a thousand words... well, 56 words if you are succinct. http://www.google.com/patents?id=84vwEBAJpg=PA3source=gbs_selected_pagescad=2#v=onepageqf=false
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
Here are some notes on the outcome. I though Uncle Sam purchased the patents, as originally planned. Not so, according to: The American aviation experience: a history By Tim Brady There was a tangle of 130 patents, all essential to aviation. On July 24, 1917 Congress appropriated $640 million for aviation the largest appropriation ever made by Congress for a single purpose The manufacturers agreed to set up a cross patent agreement whereby any manufacturer could use patents by paying a fee to our organization set up by the patent holders. This organization would then apportion the seas to the various patent holders. The Manufacturers' Aircraft Association was thus created to collect and apportion fees and to speak for the industry. . . . - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
Due to the international nature of these patents, what do you predict today? Would LENR be coopted by the IAEA or UN? Would there be a declaration of energy as a human right, and thus richer countries subsidizing the energy needs of poorer nations? Or would $ for new energy sources be pried from developed nations as payback for future adverse effects of previous AGW (climate reparations)? Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Here are some notes on the outcome. I though Uncle Sam purchased the patents, as originally planned. Not so, according to: The American aviation experience: a history By Tim Brady There was a tangle of 130 patents, all essential to aviation. On July 24, 1917 Congress appropriated $640 million for aviation the largest appropriation ever made by Congress for a single purpose The manufacturers agreed to set up a cross patent agreement whereby any manufacturer could use patents by paying a fee to our organization set up by the patent holders. This organization would then apportion the seas to the various patent holders. The Manufacturers' Aircraft Association was thus created to collect and apportion fees and to speak for the industry. . . . - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:01 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: Someone here suggested that the best solution to this problem would be for governments to throw a large pile of money that everyone involved in the initial development of cold fusion. I think that would probably be a good idea. I hope that Fleischmann and Pons get a large chunk of it. Rossi deserves a lot too. Many people do. When we start talking about morality, I feel a need to step in... It's not good to take money from people who do not want to give it up, even if someone has a 'noble' way in which to use it. If you are I did this, it would be called theft. I do not understand this argument. Fleischmann, Pons, Rossi and many others have intellectual property rights. They invented cold fusion. They deserve a patent just like any other inventors. History and circumstances probably will deny them this patent, so they deserve compensation. This problem was primarily caused by the Patent Office, but many other institutions such as the Department of Energy and the Washington Post contributed to the morass. Blame cannot be assigned to any single person or institution. Rather than argue about this for years and rather than spend hundreds of millions of dollars on legal fees, it would make sense to sweep aside the arguments, give people what they deserve, and proceed with industrial production of cold fusion devices. The total amount of royalties paid will be trivial compared to the benefits to society. Cold fusion is likely save billions of dollars every day worldwide, and 50,000 lives per week. Paying a few billion dollars to Fleischmann, Pons, Rossi and others would be trivial fraction of this. And to take money from people to give to those working in one of the largest pent-up markets in history, is just adding insult to injury. I am not talking about getting anyone to people who be working on cold fusion in the near future. They will learn plenty from the market. I'm talking about diverting a tiny fraction of this to pay the people who invented the technology. Normally they would be granted a patent a paid by that mechanism. Fleischmann is not working on anything. He is old and suffering from a fatal disease. He got nothing for his efforts in cold fusion. Neither did any of the other pioneers. They are mostly old or dead. All they got was 22 years of grief and opprobrium. These people or their survivors deserve something. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: Due to the international nature of these patents, what do you predict today? I know little about patents. My only prediction is that the people who deserve a patent for the basic invention of cold fusion will not get one. Cold fusion is essentially in the public domain. That is what intellectual property experts have told me. Would LENR be coopted by the IAEA or UN? Would there be a declaration of energy as a human right, and thus richer countries subsidizing the energy needs of poorer nations? I do not think that will be necessary. Cold fusion devices will be so cheap that even people in the Third World will be able to purchase them, just as they purchase automobiles and bicycles today. They also purchase large amounts of kerosene for illumination. If they stop spending money on kerosene and gasoline for automobiles and motorcycles, there will be plenty of money left over for them to buy cold fusion devices instead. They pay much more for kerosene per liter than we do. They pay thousands of times more per lumen for lighting than we do. I predict this problem will solve itself. However, the tangle of intellectual property and the injustice against people such as Fleischmann will not be solved except with deliberate government action. Governments and big industry caused this problem in the first place by ignoring cold fusion for 22 years despite conclusive evidence that it exists and it is a potential source of energy. They caused the problem; let them fix it. As for how the US citizens might pay our share of this, the amount of money we will save by abolishing the Department of Energy and bankrupting Exxon will easily pay for it. The money we will save in a single day will pay for it. The 20,000 lives we save per year by closing down the coal industry will pay for it hundreds of times over. Add in the benefits from bankrupting Iran and reducing military threats in the Middle East and the cost of compensating Fleischmann et al. becomes a rounding-off error. Bankrupting Saudi Arabia will probably not have any direct benefits for us other than schadenfreude. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Piantelli's amazing claims
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:59 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:38:04 -0500: Note also that 6-7 MeV is the energy that you get from fusing a proton with a Ni nucleus, so a likely reaction is the fusion of a Hydrino molecule with a Ni nucleus, where one of the two protons fuses, and the other is ejected carrying the energy of the fusion reaction of the first proton. So, you don't buy Piantelli's theory that H- ions are formed within the lattice by capturing an extra electron then the entire ion is being captured by the Ni nucleus due to the H- ion overcoming the Coulomb barrier? T
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:34 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 16:01 -0500, Jed Rothwell wrote: Someone here suggested that the best solution to this problem would be for governments to throw a large pile of money that everyone involved in the initial development of cold fusion. I think that would probably be a good idea. I hope that Fleischmann and Pons get a large chunk of it. Rossi deserves a lot too. Many people do. When we start talking about morality, I feel a need to step in... It's not good to take money from people who do not want to give it up, even if someone has a 'noble' way in which to use it. If you are I did this, it would be called theft. I do not understand this argument. Fleischmann, Pons, Rossi and many others have intellectual property rights. They invented cold fusion. They deserve a patent just like any other inventors. History and circumstances probably will deny them this patent, so they deserve compensation. But you're not proposing a solution within a moral framework. You're advocating that people take money from those who may not want to give it, and then give it to those to whom you believe deserve it. Taxation is theft because it sits outside of any moral framework and rests on the foundation that 'might makes right'. This is the same principle that legitimized slavery. I fully support their claims to intellectual property, but that's where the battle should be fought. Craig
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Fleischmann is not working on anything. He is old and suffering from a fatal disease. He got nothing for his efforts in cold fusion. Neither did any of the other pioneers. They are mostly old or dead. All they got was 22 years of grief and opprobrium. These people or their survivors deserve something. Where is Stanley Pons? T
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Where is Stanley Pons? He is living quietly in France. I have not heard from him in years. - Jed
[Vo]:Defkalion Prepares
A new discussion section just appeared on the Defkalion forum: Discussion on Hyperion Specs (Unlocked following Spec release on November 30th 2011) Let the fun begin! T
Re: [Vo]:Congress cuts the Gordian knot of aviation patents in 1917
Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: But you're not proposing a solution within a moral framework. You're advocating that people take money from those who may not want to give it . . . In that case it should come from a temporary tax on the sale of cold fusion devices. A royalty, in other words. Taxation is theft because it sits outside of any moral framework . . . I do not think so but that is beyond the scope of the discussion. Wrong forum. I fully support their claims to intellectual property, but that's where the battle should be fought. It has been fought and lost there already, thanks to the U.S.P.O., the DoE and others. Experts tell me it is too late for anyone to get a patent for cold fusion, probably including Rossi. Some other equitable and pragmatic solution should be found. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion Prepares
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: A new discussion section just appeared on the Defkalion forum: Discussion on Hyperion Specs (Unlocked following Spec release on November 30th 2011) Let the fun begin! Ah. I get it. You refer to this: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=17 It is presently locked but it will open soon. - Jed
