Correction RE: [Vo]:Hi-Yo Silver- the smoking gun of LENR emerges?

[Robert Dorr]

That should have been Pd 77% not Pd 67%.


Jones,

Thanks for the clarification regarding the JM Pd. I don't see in the 
document that you are citing that "JM Pd" in table 10 is referenced 
to "JM Pd Type A" that is apparently an alloy of Pd 67% and Ag 23%. 
Where does it say that the "JM Pd" in table 10 is "JM Pd Type A"? Are 
you saying that all  "JM Pd" is an alloy of Pd/Ag? Thanks for any 
information you can provide.


Bob




At 10:35 AM 10/29/2016, you wrote:
I should add that the precise atomic ratio of 77/23 in the alloy 
known as "Type A" which was discovered in 1930, is not arbitrary and 
is a critical parameter. Brian Ahern and Keith Johnson discovered 
the superconductive aspect (Tc) was maximized in an alloy at this 
precise ratio in a sharp peak, as is proton conductivity. If a 
different ratio is used, success is problematic, since proton 
conductivity comes first. For instance a 50/50 alloy would possibly 
fail to load hydrogen at all.


Since Pd as a pure metal is denser than Ag by a ratio of 120/105 the 
optimum alloy ratio, if stated by mass, is different than the atomic 
ratio - and alloys are often designated by mass - so you can see the 
problem with proper labeling.


From: Jones Beene

Thanks Robert. I should have spent more time on the explanation of 
that table, but the post was already getting too long.


The "JM Pd" is type A which is 23% Ag. This was apparently 
successful 17 times out of 28 including the hero effort which was 7 
times more P-out than any boron run.


The unsuccessful "NRL silver alloy" is a mystery and it does go 
against the contention that silver is the critical component, but 
they did say that deuterium loading was poor for the NRL sample, 
hence excess-heat production was not likely. Why loading was poor is 
not stated.


When silver vapor is used - as in Mills Sun Cell experiment, loading 
becomes a non-issue and surface area is maximized.


From: Robert Dorr

Looking at Table 10 in the document cited, it would appear that 
Boron is the smoking gun, not silver. In fact Pd-Ag never worked but 
Pd-B worked 7 out of 8 times.


Robert Dorr


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - <http://www.avg.com>www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7859 / Virus Database: 4664/13303 - Release Date: 10/29/16

RE: [Vo]:Hi-Yo Silver- the smoking gun of LENR emerges?

[Robert Dorr]

Jones,

Thanks for the clarification regarding the JM Pd. I don't see in the 
document that you are citing that "JM Pd" in table 10 is referenced 
to "JM Pd Type A" that is apparently an alloy of Pd 67% and Ag 23%. 
Where does it say that the "JM Pd" in table 10 is "JM Pd Type A"? Are 
you saying that all  "JM Pd" is an alloy of Pd/Ag? Thanks for any 
information you can provide.


Bob


At 10:35 AM 10/29/2016, you wrote:
I should add that the precise atomic ratio of 77/23 in the alloy 
known as "Type A" which was discovered in 1930, is not arbitrary and 
is a critical parameter. Brian Ahern and Keith Johnson discovered 
the superconductive aspect (Tc) was maximized in an alloy at this 
precise ratio in a sharp peak, as is proton conductivity. If a 
different ratio is used, success is problematic, since proton 
conductivity comes first. For instance a 50/50 alloy would possibly 
fail to load hydrogen at all.


Since Pd as a pure metal is denser than Ag by a ratio of 120/105 the 
optimum alloy ratio, if stated by mass, is different than the atomic 
ratio - and alloys are often designated by mass - so you can see the 
problem with proper labeling.


From: Jones Beene

Thanks Robert. I should have spent more time on the explanation of 
that table, but the post was already getting too long.


The "JM Pd" is type A which is 23% Ag. This was apparently 
successful 17 times out of 28 including the hero effort which was 7 
times more P-out than any boron run.


The unsuccessful "NRL silver alloy" is a mystery and it does go 
against the contention that silver is the critical component, but 
they did say that deuterium loading was poor for the NRL sample, 
hence excess-heat production was not likely. Why loading was poor is 
not stated.


When silver vapor is used - as in Mills Sun Cell experiment, loading 
becomes a non-issue and surface area is maximized.


From: Robert Dorr

Looking at Table 10 in the document cited, it would appear that 
Boron is the smoking gun, not silver. In fact Pd-Ag never worked but 
Pd-B worked 7 out of 8 times.


Robert Dorr


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - <http://www.avg.com>www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7859 / Virus Database: 4664/13303 - Release Date: 10/29/16

Re: [Vo]:Hi-Yo Silver- the smoking gun of LENR emerges?

[Robert Dorr]

Looking at Table 10 in the document cited, it 
would appear that Boron is the smoking gun, not 
silver. In fact Pd-Ag never worked but Pd-B worked 7 out of 8 times.


Robert Dorr



At 07:31 AM 10/29/2016, you wrote:

Fire up a rousing version of "The William Tell 
Overture" in order to appreciate the latest 
contention (you heard it first on vortex) that 
SILVER (not the horse but the shiny element 47) 
is the almost-hidden key to success in cold 
fusion... and also the Mills effect as well ! Or 
is it a coincidence that Randy absolutely 
depends on silver in his recent announcements?


At first, the large amount of silver used in the 
Sun Cell was said to be an electrical contact, 
but now Ag is admitted to be the only catalyst 
necessary for hydrogen redundancy/reactivity. 
The only parameter which is required for the 
reaction to self-sustain, according to Mills own 
statement (see the latest video on YT) - is 
“sufficient vapor pressure of silver in the 
presence of hydrogen”. That’s right – silver is the only catalyst needed.


Imagine that … but now imagine it in the context 
of cold fusion. Palladium and silver are very 
similar and often found together in nature. A 
silver-palladium alloy is superior to palladium 
for hydrogen diffusion or as a membrane 
purification. The palladium alloy Pd77 Ag23 is 
considered the best alloy for hydrogen 
diffusion, with technical superiority pure 
metal. The best alloy from J-M is called “Type A” and contains 23% silver.


Martin Fleischmann was adamant about the need 
for silver. This was a perennial subject on 
vortex for years in the past and Jed Rothwell’s 
comments are worth reviewing. "Type A" is the 
palladium J-M developed in the 1930s for their 
hydrogen filters. Fleischmann sez: "Look at the 
data from Miles. What does it tell you? When 
Uncle Martin gives you palladium, it works. When 
you get the palladium from somewhere else, it 
doesn't work! Why don't people pay attention to 
that?!?" He was referring to Table 10 in this 
document, which -- as Martin says -- no one seems to pay any attention to:


<http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesManomalousea.pdf>http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesManomalousea.pdf

It is now looking like the element silver, which 
adjoins Pd in the periodic table, could be the 
key to excess heat in both cold fusion and the 
Mills effect. But why? It is not likely that it 
works in a different way for Mills than it does for P


One thing is superconductivity. It is known in 
the early nineties that Pd-D is superconductive 
when loaded above 70%, but the highest 
transition state is found in the Pd-Ag alloy 
known as Type A, which is well above pure Pd. 
Yup … the same alloy we have been talking about. Coincidence?


Silver also has numerous metastable states with 
the most stable being Ag-108m with a half-life 
of 418 years. If you subscribe to the “virtual 
neutron” of Widom-Larsen or the DDL, or the UDH 
of Holmlid, then silver would possibly go to the 
108m metastable isotope by absorption of dense 
hydrogen and it could absorb as a halo nucleus. 
Ag-108m  is said to have an extremely high spin 
state of 6 (but I cannot find a citation for that).


In conclusion, if you follow the cutting edge 
between LENR and Mills, and can find the one 
overwhelming detail of similarity - then it is 
most likely silver and the fact that the gain is 
coming from Ag either as a catalyst or as a reactant.


In Mills, silver is catalyst but in LENR it is 
reactant. It will be interesting to see which 
end-result prevails in the end. Maybe there is room for both.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - <http://www.avg.com>www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7859 / Virus Database: 4664/13303 - Release Date: 10/29/16

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

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,

Rossi has said that he spent most of the time in 
the "Computer Container", which was a 9m X 2.5m X 
2.5m container separate from the "Reactor Container".


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:50 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Axil Axil <<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

Where did the spin come from that Rossi would 
have been cooked if  Rossi lived in the reactor container?



This is based on elementary knowledge of 
heaters. Mats Lewan, the people from NASA and 
many others observed that these heaters radiate 
a great deal of heat, even though they are 
wrapped in insulation. A video shows that a 
person who brushed up against one was burned and 
jumped back in pain. There are 52 of them. If 
they really are producing a megawatt of heat 
there is no doubt several hundred kilowatts are 
being radiated into the box, making it a large 
hot oven. This would also make the whole room 
too hot to survive in, and even with two overhead 1 m vent fans.


Furthermore, much of the heat is retained by the 
reactor. This is confirmed in the latest latest 
interview. Rossi says the water comes back at 
60°C. It is not vented as steam by the customer.


- Jed

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

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,

They had two fans over the production area and two fans over the reactor area.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:19 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:

I have seen pictures of the roof and there were two industrial type 
fans on the roof where the production was taking place.



Actually, sources tell me those are over the reactor, not the production area.

You would need ventilation over both.

- Jed

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

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,

All I was saying was that you don't need anything 
being produced to confirm that the proper amount 
of heat was being produced. Obviously it made 
I.H. feel better that something was being made 
with the heat. Why they didn't enter the 
production side I don't know. I would be 
surprised if they were actually prevented from 
entering the premises, but maybe they were. They 
approved the manufacturer according to the 
contract so they knew what was being produced. 
I'm sure we will find out when it gets to court.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:06 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
Get real, the proof is in the flow rates and the 
temperature delta. That is all that is required.



So you would pay $89 million without doing the 
most obvious test imaginable? Without the most 
elementary reality check? Even though it is 
obvious from the floor plan, the outward 
appearance of the building, overhead photos, 
local zoning regulations, and much else that 
there cannot possibly be industrial equipment 
next door using this much heat. You would just 
ignore all that and write a check?


Even if you want to stick to flow rates and 
temperatures, you would be risking your life to 
believe Rossi. He has demonstrated on many 
occasions that he is incapable of measuring flow 
rates and temperatures correctly. He almost 
killed the people from NASA doing that wrong. I 
would not go into the room where he is 
conducting an experiment if all I had was his 
measurements of flow and temperature.


- Jed

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

[Robert Dorr]

Axil,

I have seen pictures of the roof and there were 
two industrial type fans on the roof where the production was taking place.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:10 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:
Can you get a photo of the top of the factory 
building that shows no fan driven ventilation on 
the rood or the factory building?


On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Jed Rothwell 
<<mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
Get real, the proof is in the flow rates and the 
temperature delta. That is all that is required.



So you would pay $89 million without doing the 
most obvious test imaginable? Without the most 
elementary reality check? Even though it is 
obvious from the floor plan, the outward 
appearance of the building, overhead photos, 
local zoning regulations, and much else that 
there cannot possibly be industrial equipment 
next door using this much heat. You would just 
ignore all that and write a check?


Even if you want to stick to flow rates and 
temperatures, you would be risking your life to 
believe Rossi. He has demonstrated on many 
occasions that he is incapable of measuring flow 
rates and temperatures correctly. He almost 
killed the people from NASA doing that wrong. I 
would not go into the room where he is 
conducting an experiment if all I had was his 
measurements of flow and temperature.


- Jed

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

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,

Get real, the proof is in the flow rates and the temperature delta. 
That is all that is required.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 12:51 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:

Jed,

Heat is heat. It makes no difference if the heat (water/steam) was 
used to make chemicals or whether it was used to heat the air in the 
room next door.



Robert, for goodness sake, get real! If they were only releasing the 
heat in the air in the next room, you still need proof of that. You 
need to see the ventilation equipment. Anyone making a serious 
evaluation of this claim cannot simply take it for granted that some 
mysterious entity in the next room is getting and using an 
extraordinary amount of process heat -- enough to run a factory. 
That claim by itself is preposterous. It is, as I said, prima facie 
evidence of fraud.


In 6,500 sq. ft?!? Have you seen industrial equipment that uses this 
much process heat?


Do you really think anyone would pay $89 million without confirming 
every aspect of this claim, by every possible means? What kind of 
insane person would accept this claim without seeing the equipment 
next door; without talking with the dozens of people operating that 
equipment day and night; and without examining whatever industrial 
product they are producing by the ton? You need to confirm that X 
tons of Widgets per week really does call for a steady stream of 1 
MW of process heat.


This is an elementary step in the verification of the claim, at the 
most basic level.


- Jed

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

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,

Heat is heat. It makes no difference if the heat 
(water/steam) was used to make chemicals or 
whether it was used to heat the air in the room 
next door. To say it has to produce some form of 
physical process (although just heating air is 
considered work) is irrelevant and wrong.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR




At 12:17 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
Why would it matter what the person using the 
heat does with it. All you should be concerned 
with is the temperature of the out flowing 
fluid/steam and it's rate of flow and the 
temperature of the incoming water and it's rate of flow. . . .



You are joking. That has to be joke. No? You mean it??

It matters because seeing the equipment would 
prove there really is 1 MW of process heat being 
used. You could look at the nameplate of the 
equipment and see the capacity. You could watch 
the process. You could see that dozens of people 
are using the equipment night and day, 7 days a 
week. Because if they are not using all the 
heat, all the time, the heat returns to reactor, 
and the calorimetry is invalid. Or the reactor explodes.


It matters because it is quite impossible to fit 
industrial equipment using this much process 
heat into a 6,500 sq. ft. facility, and the 
claim itself is prima facie proof of fraud. It is preposterous.


If by some miracle you find this equipment 
there, in use, and running at a production level 
that consumes 1 MW, you would also observe 
ventilation equipment and other proof of this heat release.


Okay?

- Jed

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

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,


Why would it matter what the person using the heat does with it. All 
you should be concerned with is the temperature of the out flowing 
fluid/steam and it's rate of flow and the temperature of the incoming 
water and it's rate of flow. You could have a wall with two holes and 
two pipes in it, one out going hole /pipe and one incoming hole/pipe 
and not give a damn what is happening on the other side of the wall. 
The results will be the same.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,

They may have been 20KW. I found a link that indicates that he did 
indeed switch from the smaller e-cats to the 250KW units. The URL is 
"http://hydrofusion.com/news/e-cat-third-quarter-developments-2015;



The main quote is:

"Built-in Redundancy

In the first week of August, 2015, Rossi officially announced that 
the 1MW plant had built-in redundancy. The original E-Cat system is 
combined with the four 250 KW reactors he had perfected earlier in 
the year. This increases the safety margins significantly, and will 
figure greatly in the successful long-term test that is scheduled to 
end sometime in the first quarter of 2016. The large E-Cats, which 
Rossi calls Tigers, are the main source of power, and the smaller 
versions are for backup. Rossi gives a great deal of detail about the 
plant, stating that it is designed to continue running even if one of 
the main units is offline for maintenance, without having to resort 
to using the backup power. This provides, in effect, a double back-up 
for the production of power."


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 01:17 PM 5/15/2016, you wrote:

Okay, here are the specs for these boilers:

file:///home/chronos/u-1160197d37ec1500e70f021620dd3bae3f09f41c/Downloads/DR_Electric%20Steam%20Boiler_Nov10.pdf

The models S242 and CR242 are both 420 kW.

The dimensions for both are listed in inches: 43" L x 58" W x 78" H

That's 1 m x 1.5 m x 2 m

I think you could fit two of these in the shipping container. 
However, if you fired them both up, the heat would be intolerable. I 
expect the heat transfer efficiency of these units is better than 
the small square boxes in Rossi's device, so there would be less waste heat.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,

Didn't Rossi switch from the small square 10kw boxes you refer to, to 
4 250kw units.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 01:17 PM 5/15/2016, you wrote:

Okay, here are the specs for these boilers:

file:///home/chronos/u-1160197d37ec1500e70f021620dd3bae3f09f41c/Downloads/DR_Electric%20Steam%20Boiler_Nov10.pdf

The models S242 and CR242 are both 420 kW.

The dimensions for both are listed in inches: 43" L x 58" W x 78" H

That's 1 m x 1.5 m x 2 m

I think you could fit two of these in the shipping container. 
However, if you fired them both up, the heat would be intolerable. I 
expect the heat transfer efficiency of these units is better than 
the small square boxes in Rossi's device, so there would be less waste heat.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

[Robert Dorr]

I just don't see why it is so difficult 
determining the COP of such a large system. As 
far as I can see you have to make a few 
measurements to get a very good idea of a thermal 
plants performance. 1) temperature of water going 
in, 2) temperature or water going out, 3) water 
flow rate, 4) the difference in temperature of 
the incoming and outgoing water, 5) energy 
required to produce the temperature difference, 
6) and the energy consumed from the A.C. mains. 
The difference between the energy required to 
produce the temperature rise and the energy 
consumed from the A.C. Mains is the COP. I am not 
taking into account any losses, but with 
a  system this large and a COP of 50 who gives a damn.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR



At 06:00 AM 5/15/2016, you wrote:
Stephen Cooke 
<<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:


This is probably a naive question on my part, so 
I apologize for that. But in the interest of 
clarity I wonder if the definition of "excess 
heat" and "heat balance" is the same for all 
parties. I strongly expect it is of course.



As far as I know it is! I have not hear that 
Rossi has redefined this. It is the ratio of 
output to input power. Suppose 20 kW of 
electricity goes in, 1,000 kW comes out. That 
would be COP of 50, which is what Rossi claims. 
The I.H. people say that less than 20 kW is coming out, because of heat losses.


In any conventional electrical or combustion 
heater, the COP is always less than 1, because 
there are heat losses. In a heat pump, the COP 
can be higher than 1, but that is not actually a 
violation of the laws of thermodynamics (as some 
people imagine) because the surroundings outside 
the building grow colder. The heat is moved, not generated.


Â
It seems from what you said that the technicians 
measured heat from the device but apparently 
observed no excess heat due to LENR?



No excess heat from anything.
Â
Â
Is the heat balance the continuous heat provided 
by the plant regardless of input? External power 
or LENR? I.e balance over time?



I am not sure what you mean, but anyway, heat 
out always balances heat it. It is just an 
electric heater, as far as anyone can tell. (Anyone other than Rossi.)



Was 1MW heat power ever provided from external power alone?


No, that would not be possible. That takes a 
huge power supply transformer, such as what you 
see behind a shopping mall. A 1 MW transformer 
is the size of a pickup truck. This is just an ordinary warehouse facility.


I believe this is an image of a 1 MW transformer:

<http://image.slidesharecdn.com/workshoponenergyandgridconnectionbasicssalford26-140115050535-phpapp02/95/workshop-on-energy-and-grid-connection-basics-salford-260613-72-638.jpg?cb=1389762849>http://image.slidesharecdn.com/workshoponenergyandgridconnectionbasicssalford26-140115050535-phpapp02/95/workshop-on-energy-and-grid-connection-basics-salford-260613-72-638.jpg?cb=1389762849

Â
If so was 1MW thermal heat output from the 
plant? Regardless of the energy source?Â



Based on the data I have seen and the overall 
size and shape of the machine, there is no way 
this thing could be putting out 1 MW.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

[Robert Dorr]

Jed,

Since you are in communication with someone that 
is linked to I.H. maybe you can answer a few questions.


1) Is I.H.'s finding that the 1 MW e-cat plant 
produced no heat (COP <1) based on the very same 
data set that Rossi used to determine that the 
COP was greater than 50? Is the COP error a 
direct miscalculation of the data or is the error 
based on how the data was obtained, i.e., the 
wrong type of sensors, placement of the sensors, etc.


2) Were any of I.H.'s  COP findings based on 
sensor readings that Rossi didn't use or have access to?


3) Did I.H. receive a communication every 3 
months regarding the operation and performance, as Rossi has indicated?


4) If they did indeed receive the 3 month 
communications, when did I.H. determine that something was amiss?


5) Reading the contract it says that I.H. can 
make suggestions about the performance and 
operation of the plant, did I.H. ever make any 
comment to Rossi that the plant wasn't performing 
as required and ask him to make changes?


6) How well do you know the person(s) that have 
provided the information from I.H.? I only ask in 
that you seem very sure that the information that 
you have seen is accurate. If they are someone 
that you don't know very well, can you be certain 
that the information being given you is indeed accurate?


Thanks,

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 08:35 PM 5/14/2016, you wrote:

Axil Axil <<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
Â
Jed or another could negotiate the COP down but 
by how much is the question. 50 is really high to come down from.Â



I cannot negotiate anything. I have no standing 
in this and no role. I am not a professional 
HVAC engineer licensed in Florida, so no lawyer 
and no court would ask my opinion. If anyone 
did, that is all I would say: "I am not a 
professional HVAC engineer licensed in Florida."


Putting aside all of that, the COP is less than 
1. The machine produces no excess heat. That is 
what I.H. experts concluded. The COP is not 50, 
not 6, not 4, not 1.1. It is less than 1. There 
is no heat. That is why I.H. said it was not 
"substantiated." That's all there is to it.


If the court accepts the judgment of 
professional experts who say there is no excess 
heat, then the case will be thrown out of court. 
End of story. That is what lawyers have told me. 
Mr. Pretend Lawyer Axil disagrees, but that is what actual lawyers say.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:great paper by Ed Storms, quarrel, a bit of info

[Robert Dorr]

A good paper, especially for those interested in the PdD aspect of 
LENR. I like Ed Stroms approach of the PdD reaction.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 09:56 AM 4/24/2016, you wrote:

<http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-24-2016-lenr-great-paper-by-ed.html>http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-24-2016-lenr-great-paper-by-ed.html

cannot abandon independent thinking or just thinking

All the best,
peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
<http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com>http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:More from Goat-guy

[Robert Dorr]

Does taking measurements constitute "running" a boiler? As far as I know 
no one has ever said that they ran the boiler. (Penon, etc)


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


On 4/11/2016 8:14 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


In answer to those who claim that Rossi's friends and countrymen - 
Penon and Fabiani are qualified engineers, even though neither has 
professional certification in this country and both were admittedly 
illegally operating a boiler within the City of Miami in violation of 
municipal codes, there is the following... from the goatster.


BTW... the Leonardo complaint - alone can probably be used to prove 
both of these fine "engineers" are subject to immediate deportation 
for committing numerous misdemeanors and violations of other US laws 
while on a work visa ...


Goat-guy has this to say:

"There were absolutely competent engineers and nuclear experts working 
at the Chernobyl nuclear plant for years. And it went 'boom'. There 
were hundreds of completely competent engineers, physicists and 
designers overseeing the construction of the Japanese coastal nuclear 
power plants. Fukushima demonstrated that they hadn't considered the 
consequence of a natural disaster. Engineers, for all their 
earnestness aren't particularly good at being either curious enough -- 
or more-delicately, are not inclined to say anything bad about their 
employer's machinery" END of quote.


If Penon did not know about the clever way Rossi designed the test, 
which allowed data to be easily faked, then he might escape the legal 
consequences. If he knew, and said nothing, then it could cost him 
much more than Rossi has paid him.


Deportation would be a blessing.

Industrial Heat - should petition the Court to depose the two of them 
ASAP so they are on record before disappearing into Tuscany. However, 
Rossi is probably smart enough to have sent them packing already.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/12011 - Release Date: 04/11/16

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

[Robert Dorr]

I stand corrected. Rossi said, just today, that I.H built the E-Cat for 
the Lugano test and that they even signed it.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


On 4/7/2016 7:11 PM, Robert Dorr wrote:



You will notice it says that Rossi and I.H. provided an E-Cat for "a" 
test measurement (I read as a singular measurment) not necessarily for 
the Lugano Test. Possibly to verify any ionizing radiation. So many 
possible ways to read all of this rapidly developing information.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 06:56 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <rod...@comcast.net <mailto:rod...@comcast.net>> wrote:
Â

I keep seeing that supposedly  I.H. was the one that built the
e-cat used in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is
completely untrue.


I.H. is mentioned in the Lugano paper three times:


In the course of the year following the previous tests, the 
E-CatâEUR^(TM)s technology was transferred to Industrial Heat LLC, 
United States, where it was replicated and improved. . . .


The authors gratefully acknowledge Andrea Rossi and Industrial Heat 
LLC for providing us with the E-cat reactor to perform an independent 
test measurement. . . .


Lastly, our thanks to Industrial Heat LLC (USA) for providing 
financial support for the measurements performed for radiation 
protection purposes.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11988 - Release Date: 04/08/16

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

[Robert Dorr]

You will notice it says that Rossi and I.H. 
provided an E-Cat for "a" test measurement (I 
read as a singular measurment) not necessarily 
for the Lugano Test. Possibly to verify any 
ionizing radiation. So many possible ways to read 
all of this rapidly developing information.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 06:56 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
I keep seeing that supposedly  I.H. was the one 
that built the e-cat used in the Lugano test. As 
far as I can see that is completely untrue.



I.H. is mentioned in the Lugano paper three times:


In the course of the year following the previous 
tests, the E-Cat’s technology was transferred 
to Industrial Heat LLC, United States, where it 
was replicated and improved. . . .


The authors gratefully acknowledge Andrea Rossi 
and Industrial Heat LLC for providing us with 
the E-cat reactor to perform an independent test measurement. . . .


Lastly, our thanks to Industrial Heat LLC (USA) 
for providing financial support for the 
measurements performed for radiation protection purposes.

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

[Robert Dorr]

It wasn't a month long test, it was a 24 hour 
test performed in Ferrara  Italy. I keep seeing 
that supposedly  I.H. was the one that built the 
e-cat used in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is completely untrue.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 03:55 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:
They also paid Rossi $10 million dollars after 
validating that the device was working for a month.


Craig

On 04/07/2016 06:54 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
"Industrial Heat has worked for over three 
years to substantiate the results claimed by 
Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology – all without success".


It seems imply that Rossi did not generate any 
extra heat. I don't think they they'd say 
"without success" if any COP>1 was found, since 
the claim also include cold fusion and(with) COP>=6

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

[Robert Dorr]

Good old "Tit for Tat". I.H. is obviously disputing the results of the 
year long test based on lack of scientific rigor. One of these years 
maybe we will find out who has the better lawyer.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


On 4/7/2016 12:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

See:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html?tc=eml_cleartime

Here is the complete text:


Industrial Heat Statement on Meritless Litigation from Leonardo 
Corporation and Andrea Rossi


15:15 ET from Industrial Heat, LLC

RESEARCH TRIANGLE, N.C., April 7, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- We are aware of 
the lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against 
Industrial Heat. Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They 
are without merit and we are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves 
against this action. Industrial Heat has worked for over three years 
to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat 
technology – all without success. Leonardo Corporation and Mr. Rossi 
also have repeatedly breached their agreements. At the conclusion of 
these proceedings we are confident that the claims of Mr. Rossi and 
Leonardo Corporation will be rejected.


Industrial Heat continues to be focused on a scientifically rigorous 
approach that includes thorough, robust and accurate testing of 
promising LENR technologies. Our goal remains to deliver clean, safe 
and affordable energy.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11981 - Release Date: 04/07/16

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer

[Robert Dorr]

They do have an office at 7900 Glades Rd., Boca 
Raton, FL. The building is definitely large enough to use a 1MW plant.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 07:48 PM 4/6/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
It could be their business office and they have 
another building/warehouse at a different location.



Good point. However, I looked them up in various 
places and this is the only address listed. They 
are categorized as chemical distributors. I 
expect if they had a production facility 
somewhere large enough to need 1 MW of steam, it 
would have be listed in in Florida government business directories.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer

[Robert Dorr]

It could be their business office and they have another 
building/warehouse at a different location.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR



At 07:32 PM 4/6/2016, you wrote:

One of the legal documents lists Rossi's customer:

<http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdf>http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdf

p. 25

JM Chemical Products
7861 NW 46th St,
Doral, FL 33166

Just offhand, it does not look like the kind of building that needs 
1 MW of steam:


<https://www.google.com/maps/place/7861+NW+46th+St,+Doral,+FL+33166/@25.8152581,-80.3245231,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqBcXXFAoaY11yYhfOzC59Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x88d9bbd5b1e1203d:0x5e338a9c2e7f100d?hl=en>https://www.google.com/maps/place/7861+NW+46th+St,+Doral,+FL+33166/@25.8152581,-80.3245231,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqBcXXFAoaY11yYhfOzC59Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x88d9bbd5b1e1203d:0x5e338a9c2e7f100d?hl=en

I see lots of small companies in the building. If you were to put 1 
MW of steam into one of those offices, in a radiator or as live 
steam for an industrial application, you would cook the occupants. I 
mean that literally; that section of the building would get hot 
enough to kill and cook anyone inside.


This street view photo was taken in Feb. 2014.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint

[Robert Dorr]

I think that Rossi feels that he has been deeply 
wronged in the past and for some reason I.H. 
is/was trying to string him along on the payment 
of the 89 million dollars owed him and he wasn't 
going to wait for any excuses and filed as soon 
as he felt he might never see the money/profit he 
feels he is due. He just wasn't going to be taken 
again. Obviously, just my own take on what's going on.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR




At 06:27 PM 4/6/2016, you wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Blaze Spinnaker 
<<mailto:blazespinna...@gmail.com>blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote:


I am actually hopeful. Â 50x is pretty 
high.  It was installed in a customer site. 
  That's some crazy attempt at fraud.



I have a bad feeling about the lawsuit.  It 
does not make me any more confident in Rossi's 
account.  But I agree that if there is fraud, 
Rossi is now shooting for the moon.


Eric

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.

[Robert Dorr]

In the court filing it says that the average COP was in excess of 50 
and sometimes in excess of 60. All I can say is WOW! I hope it holds 
true. A lot of grist for the mill.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR



At 04:55 PM 4/6/2016, you wrote:
I have a feeling that Mr. Fulvio Fabiani has contributed to the 
development of the E-Cat in a big way and now that he is an IH 
employee, his status as a E-Cat developer gives IH a reason to claim 
a part of Rossi's IP. Rossi has always said that his team is a major 
part of E-Cat development. Maybe, that team, the members of the team 
and the company that these people work for should get a part of that IP.


Rossi has often said that he couldn't have done it without his team 
(he may regret saying such things) then they may rightly be co-inventors.

Re: [Vo]:has this document been saved to the LENR library?

[Robert Dorr]

Nicely done presentation. Well worth giving a look.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


On 4/4/2016 12:30 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t=j==s=web=1=rja=8=0ahUKEwiapIem2vXLAhVD5xoKHQXPBH8QFggeMAA=http%3A%2F%2Ftempid.altervista.org%2FSRI.pdf=AFQjCNHGSrVCJe9dIt-onShZbvLMIpg6cA=eA09bTdq_XpreFmHMhcTpQ 
<https://www.google.com/url?sa=t=j==s=web=1=rja=8=0ahUKEwiapIem2vXLAhVD5xoKHQXPBH8QFggeMAA=http%3A%2F%2Ftempid.altervista.org%2FSRI.pdf=AFQjCNHGSrVCJe9dIt-onShZbvLMIpg6cA=eA09bTdq_XpreFmHMhcTpQ>


Somebody has makwared the original SRI link.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11957 - Release Date: 04/04/16

Re: [Vo]:Rossi and IH have received the ERV Report

[Robert Dorr]

They made the statement ". . . Embracing failure as well as success 
is important, because we learn from both. . . ." , before the ERV's 
report was out. They didn't know what the ERV was going to say. My 
take on this statement was that they were trying to mitigate negative 
public reaction to a less than favorable report and possibly even a 
"failure" finding by the ERV. It came out positive instead of 
negative, wonderful! I think people are reading a lot into the IH 
statement that is unfounded.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR




It will be an absurd charade unless Industrial Heat signs off on it.


As far as I can tell, they have already repudiated it in their March 
10 statement:


<http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?p=1741>http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?p=1741

". . . Embracing failure as well as success is important, because we 
learn from both. . . .

Re: [Vo]:British Aero- Project GREENGLOW- Gravity Control..BBC March 23,2016

[Robert Dorr]

A very well done program, regarding the search for anti-gravity, as are 
most if not all of the BBC's Horizon series.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR



On 3/24/2016 6:10 AM, Ron Kita wrote:

Greetings Vortex-L,
Nick Cook of Janes Defence Weekly covered Project GreenGlow for years. 
Here is an update by the BBC. Rob Chambers of BAE a friend of mine was 
born in his ancestral town of Chambers-burg, PA and one of the PGG 
members: 
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/03/23/story-on-gravity-control-emdrive-on-bbc-2-today-2016-03-23-8-pm-utc/


Ad astra,
Ron Kita, Chiralex
Doylestown, PA120 miles East of Chambersburg/

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11875 - Release Date: 03/24/16

Re: [Vo]:Statement from Industrial Heat

[Robert Dorr]

I think they are just doing a cover your ass statement to their 
investors, knowing that Rossi is about to release his results and 
they want to make sure that their investors know that the information 
is not coming from official IH sources just in case there is a 
problem a bit further down the road with the interpretation of the 
Rossi results. Simple fiduciary resposibility.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 09:11 AM 3/11/2016, you wrote:

One possibility is that Rossi is doing something that rankles IH, and
IH does not like it one bit. It goes like this: IH was all set to sell
the 1 MW plant, but Rossi discovered a better LENR tech. Rossi decides
to go with the new tech that requires more time to perfect. IH now
must keep their investors happy with the delay of a year or more.
Rossi says that he is in charge and this Quark is the way to go. IH
says, we what to sell now, delay is causing us a boatload of trouble
with customers, investors, defense, and the government, Rossi says,
too bad, deal with it, I got to do what I got to do.

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Ok, they want a bit more discipline- but have you idea what viable LENR
>> technology they could have beyond Rossi's ?
>
>
> I wouldn't know about other technology. Based on the Lugano 
report, I do not

> think Rossi's technology is viable. I have not seen more recent reports
> about it.
>
> The first Levi study seeming promising, but the Lugano report showed no
> excess heat, as far as I can tell. Granted, it was poorly done, so it is
> hard to judge.
>
> "Viable" is a slippery word. Many cold fusion experiments are 
promising, but

> none (other than Rossi) are claimed to be remotely close to a practical or
> viable source of energy. They can be compared to nuclear fission in 1939.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

[Robert Dorr]

If the burst was from Rn-222 then I would expect various Radon daughters 
to show up on the gamma spectrum. Rn-222 is an alpha emitter.


Bob
WA7ZQR


On 2/24/2016 9:03 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


*From:* Daniel Rocha

In figure 7 (compare with figure 6),  it seems that the signal is 
above the background, in the region of 10-50kev by up to 100. So, that 
like >10 sigma. There is definitely something there.


There is of course “something” there. But not necessarily LENR.

The signal is entirely consistent with the increased Radon levels of 
this particular area. Read the fourth paragraph here about Santa Cruz 
– triple the national average:


http://patch.com/california/cupertino/santa-clara-countys-cancerous-radon-level-b948f150

Jones

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 2016.0.7442 / Virus Database: 4537/11689 - Release Date: 02/24/16

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

[Robert Dorr]

I may be wrong, but I'm under the impression that they have repeated 
this several times and there is more information to be released today.


Bob
WA7ZQR

On 2/24/2016 6:43 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


Where is the big surprise?

I woke this morning with anticipation - expecting to see proof from 
MFMP of a 5 hour self-sustained reaction. Instead, we get graphs of 
modest gain at the noise level and radiation counts peaking in the few 
hundred per second -- when we need to seeing a million times more - if 
the radiation does indeed relate to excess heat at kilowatt level. 
Yawn. Let's hope there is much more forthcoming than this.


What am I missing?

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 2016.0.7357 / Virus Database: 4537/11688 - Release Date: 02/24/16

[Vo]:Something big is happening

[Robert Dorr]

Watch the MFMP site (Quantumheat.org). It looks like a major 
announcement shortly.


Bob
WA7ZQR

[Vo]:Change in the air

[Robert Dorr]

Since the publication of the Rossi independent third party report on 
the ecat, I have noticed a distinct change in the attacks on Rossi 
and in more to the point, LENR in general. There has been a continual 
flood of ideas and papers regarding various aspects of LENR (and its 
various iterations) operation. I think that there is a general mood 
of acceptance that even though no one knows for sure the LENR 
mechanism, the mechanism exists. I see a rapidly increasing interest 
and very exciting times ahead. The floodgates have developed a crack, 
and the waters are rising.




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8518 - Release Date: 11/05/14

Re: [Vo]:Machined Part in NASA Mars photo found

[Robert Dorr]

As much as I would like to find evidence of life or prior life on 
Mars, I have to agree that the object shown in the picture is just an 
impression of one of the Mars Curiosity Rover instruments. If you 
look you will see that the big rock in the picture has been moved as 
if something pushed against it and the soil looks to be of a sandy 
nature, perfect for the making of an impression. I agree that it 
looks like the head of a Phillips screw.


Robert Dorr




At 08:36 AM 11/2/2014, you wrote:
That looks a lot like the impression left from a Philips screw head 
that has been pressed into the soil, since the image is from the 
Microscopic Imager it would be helpful to know the scale of the 
impression, if the artifact is in the 2 to 8 mm range, I would guess 
that part of the instrumentation used to position the Microscopic 
Imager was moved into contact with the surface leaving the mark of the screw.


Nixter




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8495 - Release Date: 11/02/14

RE: [Vo]:OT: Boyd Bushman discusses aliens and offers photographic proof

[Robert Dorr]

At 07:34 PM 10/31/2014, you wrote:



Another YouTube link to the same 
video,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZTXHw1mZD4.


If that's missing just to a search on YouTube for Boyd Bushman 
Deathbed Confession.


Kind of interesting.





The You Tube link doesn't work for me. Looks like there has been a 
copyright violation and YT took it off-line. Bummer.




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8491 - Release Date: 11/01/14

Re: [Vo]:MFMP interviews spokesman from WILLIAMSON

[Robert Dorr]

I read the report you linked to. Their main argument is that CCDs 
response at the temperature the ecat is operating at has a low 
reaction curve, i.e. the reaction to temperature change flattens out 
so it's harder to get an accurate reading with a change in 
temperature. The method that Williamson is using is a Spot 
Pyrometer which uses emissivity or for a better word reflectance, 
that's why they are concerned with the transparency of the object 
they are measuring at IR wavelengths. Williamson says they have 
looked at alumina at various temperatures and have included it's 
varying emissivity into an algorithm to give accurate temperature 
readings. Since alumina is opaque at the temperature of the ecat and 
the wavelengths they were measuring in the Lugano report, were of 
between 7.5u and 13u, they chose the appropriate IR cameras. The only 
thing that someone might have a question with in regards to the IR 
cameras and Rossi's ecat is, Were the cameras calibrated properly?, 
and they say on page 4 of the report that the cameras were calibrated 
by the respective manufacturers laboratories.


Robert Dorr


At 10:16 PM 10/25/2014, you wrote:
Hank Mills transcript : 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WNDVQVEhmUjJ4ek0/viewhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WNDVQVEhmUjJ4ek0/view


But it's still not clear whether they should use 8-14u or 2.5u

In any case, their spot pyrometer is most likely more accurate.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8454 - Release Date: 10/25/14




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8454 - Release Date: 10/25/14

Re: [Vo]:MFMP interviews spokesman from WILLIAMSON

[Robert Dorr]

As to whether a spot pyrometer is more accurate than an IR camera, I 
think depends on their use. For small area or pin point measurement I 
agree that a spot pyrometer may be more accurate, but for large or 
gross measurement I think the IR camera would be just as accurate if 
not more so. I think that there is no problem using the IR cameras 
for accurate measurement of the temperature of the Rossi ecat as long 
as the cameras were calibrated properly.


Robert Dorr


At 10:16 PM 10/25/2014, you wrote:
Hank Mills transcript : 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WNDVQVEhmUjJ4ek0/viewhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WNDVQVEhmUjJ4ek0/view


But it's still not clear whether they should use 8-14u or 2.5u

In any case, their spot pyrometer is most likely more accurate.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8454 - Release Date: 10/25/14




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8454 - Release Date: 10/25/14

Re: [Vo]:MFMP interviews spokesman from WILLIAMSON

[Robert Dorr]

If you measured at 2.5u you would be dealing with IR directly emitted 
from the interior of the hot cat because at that wavelength the 
alumina would be somewhat transparent to IR. Measuring at the 
wavelengths they did the IR cameras were only reading the surface 
temperature because of aluminas's opaqueness at wavelengths above 
approximately 3.5u. Almost everyone gets hung up on the visible 
wavelength pictures that were published in the report. They bear 
almost no relation to what the IR cameras were observing.


Robert Dorr


At 04:51 PM 10/24/2014, you wrote:

Worth listening to, but they were talking at cross-purposes at times.

3-way complication between reflectance, emission and transmission. 
Said that wires could cause shadows. (But not, by my analysis from a 
diffuse source. unless the wire is very close to the surface).


Their system can be used to *determine* the emissivity.

I *think* they said it would be better to measure Alumina at a lower 
wavelength (2.5u?) and not in the IR band (8-14)?


So far, I see no reason to budge from my initial evaluation of 
inconclusive. But just one more nail in the coffin and I might 
downgrade that to failed. (But a failed experiment doesn't 
necessarily mean the ecat doesn't work).


In short, they were nuts to stick with the hotcat/IR calorimetry, 
and should have asked for a fatcat with water (non-steam) calorimetry.


ps : I have a black body / emissivity simulator under construction. 
But will it rescue or kill the results?


--
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 2:50:05 PM

MFMP interviews a spokesman for the company Williamson which 
specializes in non-contact temperature measurement. They discuss the 
problem of measuring the temperature of Alumina at higher temperatures.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3O3bSu6N7vwcDJUWGl1Y0pmTWs/edit?pli=1https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3O3bSu6N7vwcDJUWGl1Y0pmTWs/edit?pli=1
(15 min. audio only must be downloaded to listen)

Harry

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8448 - Release Date: 10/24/14




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8448 - Release Date: 10/24/14

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

[Robert Dorr]

I've been thinking of tungsten for a while now. Do they make an alloy 
with tungsten that operates at high temps in an oxygen atmosphere. I ask 
because, although the tungsten that is embedded in the reactor would be 
protected from oxygen by the aluminum oxide coating, you have to connect 
it to power somewhere outside the reactor that would be exposed to air 
and the wire, if pure tungsten, would decompose rapidly. Also, I think 
that you continue to use the word deception without proof that Rossi has 
deceived anyone in this experiment. I realize that all the data goes 
against current knowledge, but do you think that we know absolutely 
everything there is to know about reactions at the nuclear level? I 
think not. I think that there is a reaction that is going on that does 
not follow our current knowledge and it may be determined that it is not 
nuclear in the common sense but it is indeed a novel reaction and it 
needs to be studied and not scoffed at.


Robert Dorr


On 10/15/2014 6:40 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


*From:* Robert Lynn

How can the Inconel wire in Fig 12b be hotter/brighter in the cooler 
external environment outside the end of the reactor than it is in the 
hotter internal environment inside the reactor?


In FWIW department, here is the grade of Inconel often used for 
resistor wire


Inconel 600. As you can see, it is rated to less than 540 C.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nickel-600-Inconel-Wire-041-1-04mm-x-10-3m-/320676194894?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2hash=item4aa9ca6a4e 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nickel-600-Inconel-Wire-041-1-04mm-x-10-3m-/320676194894?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2hash=item4aa9ca6a4e


As Eric suggests, given the impossibility of Inconel - they must be 
using something else besides Inconel. I agree. Tungsten comes to mind.


This goes along with a growing belief that there is gain here and it 
could be more than they claim or less … since they did not calibrate - 
but there is also intentional deception, meaning that this is not a 
scientific report, but one designed to look that way using  cast of 
PhDs who were essentially asleep at the wheel.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8393 - Release Date: 10/15/14

Re: [Vo]:Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project - Yahoo News

[Robert Dorr]

Makes you wonder if this is LENR related. 100 megawatts from a reactor 
that fits on a truck, and no radioactive waste!!! Hmmm


Robert Dorr


On 10/15/2014 8:19 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project - Yahoo News

WHOA !

http://news.yahoo.com/lockheed-says-makes-breakthrough-fusion-energy-project-123840986--finance.html

Get this:

“Ultra-dense deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, is found in the 
earth's oceans….


I am wondering if this is simply a naïve reporter (most likely) or it 
this truly ultra-dense in the context of f/H?


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8393 - Release Date: 10/15/14

Re: [Vo]:Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project - Yahoo News

[Robert Dorr]

Watching the video makes me a bit suspicious of the no radiation claim. 
High temperature fusion, magnetically bottled in a small container. 
Seems to me the container will eventually become radioactive.


Robert Dorr


On 10/15/2014 9:17 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


The video is pretty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embeddedv=UlYClniDFkM 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embeddedv=UlYClniDFkM


but sparse technical details. Looks a lot like they added magnetic 
coils to the Farnsworth Fusor.


I want to know about the ultra-dense deuterium…

*From:* Robert Dorr [mailto:rod...@comcast.net]
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 15, 2014 8:38 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy 
project - Yahoo News



Makes you wonder if this is LENR related. 100 megawatts from a reactor 
that fits on a truck, and no radioactive waste!!! Hmmm


Robert Dorr


On 10/15/2014 8:19 AM, Jones Beene wrote:

Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project - Yahoo News

WHOA !

http://news.yahoo.com/lockheed-says-makes-breakthrough-fusion-energy-project-123840986--finance.html

Get this:

“Ultra-dense deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, is found in the 
earth's oceans….


I am wondering if this is simply a naïve reporter (most likely) or it 
this truly ultra-dense in the context of f/H?


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8393 - Release Date: 10/15/14

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8394 - Release Date: 10/15/14

Re: [Vo]:Determining the transmittance . . . of semitransparent materials at elevated temperatures

[Robert Dorr]

The cameras were already calibrated by their respective manufacturers as 
stated on page 4 of the report, All the instruments used during the 
test are property of the authors of the present paper, and were 
calibrated in their respective manufacturers’ laboratories. Moreover, 
once in Lugano, a further check was made to ensure that the PCEs and the 
IR cameras were not yielding anomalous readings. So I see no reason to 
recalibrate over and over. They checked for anomalous readings and none 
were found.


Robert Dorr



On 10/13/2014 8:19 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


*From:* Jed Rothwell

2) They did not calibrate above 450 C and this was not done ON ORDERS 
FROM ROSSI


JR: It does not say that anywhere.

Please read the report carefully  before making silly rationalizations.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8382 - Release Date: 10/13/14

Re: [Vo]:If IH/Rossi was so paranoid about his baby..

[Robert Dorr]

He was the one that designed and built the
reactor, so he is/was the best choice to be the
one to cut it open and remove the charge. Seems
pretty logical to me. I guess maybe they ( the
scientist in third party test) just don't have
the same feeling that a lot of the pathoskeptics
have, and that is, at every step Rossi was just
waiting to make his move and deceive them. I know
it probably would have been better if Rossi had
left the planet during the test but even then
someone would claim deception by quantum
manipulation through the spooky force.  I sure
wish that the Patent Office would grant him his
patent and all this nonsense would be over. He
could reveal everything, go into full production
and the research coffers would fill up. Oh well, maybe some day.



At 05:01 AM 10/12/2014, you wrote:

I think a reasonable (and pretty fundamental
assumption) of a third party report is that the
inventor is not involved in anyway. Â  Given
that Rossi trusted them enough to handle it
without his presence or his lab, you have to
wonder why he didn't trust them enough to use a lab saw on it.

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Stefan
Israelsson Tampe
mailto:stefan.ita...@gmail.comstefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:
It depends on if they really thought it
compromozied the integrity. If you run the test
for 30 days at COP 3-4 you may well
relax on this point arguing that it would be
insane of Rossi to try play a trick then, risking getting caught.

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Blaze Spinnaker
mailto:blazespinna...@gmail.comblazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
They compromised the integrity of the report
because they were afraid to handle a lab saw?

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Stefan
Israelsson Tampe
mailto:stefan.ita...@gmail.comstefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not sure but It takes a practical man to do
it and whatever  Ross is, he is surly is one
hell of a man to work with tools so I guess it wasÂ
just an easy thing to do and the testers thought
that they could monitor it quite enough still to avoid cheating.

On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Blaze Spinnaker
mailto:blazespinna...@gmail.comblazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
..that he had to do the ash extraction himself,
why would have leave it in the hands of the
third party for so long?  What keeps them from
simply cutting it apart and figuring out what's inside themselves? Â

If he felt he could trust them not to do that,
why not trust them with instructions on how to cut it and extract the ash? Â

What rational reason was there that he had to be the one doing it?






No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8371 - Release Date: 10/11/14





-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8371 - Release Date: 10/11/14

RE: Isotope conversion completeness, was RE: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in

[Robert Dorr]

I

f I read the information correctly reactor is only transparent to 
I.R. below a wavelength of about 5 microns ( almost 0% transmissive 
at wavelengths longer than 5 microns) and they used I.R. cameras that 
were sensitive in the range of 7.5 microns and 13 microns. Therefor 
the cameras would never detect any I.R. (of very, very, little 1% ) 
emitted from the inside of the reactor. The reactor was opaque to 
infrared from the interior of the reactor.


Robert Dorr




At 05:41 PM 10/11/2014, you wrote:

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com

...and besides there is the little matter of all that excess energy.

All that excess?

In fact, here is nothing that can be called scientifically proved excess
energy at all... this is because the experiment is fatally flawed in using a
IR translucent reactor - and failing to coat it with a black coating - which
any grad student would know to do.

Where were the Swedes? Asleep at the wheel?

Apparently, there is an small hermetically sealed ampoule inside the
alumina, containing reactants. This ampoule is inside the larger translucent
tube, and there is net gain from it. We can agree on that.

The calculations of an expert with whom I am corresponding thinks the excess
could be in the range of COP 1.2 to 1.5 based on an assumed size for this
ampoule. It cannot be large. If it were to fill the entire open space, then
OK gain would be larger but far below the claim. Yet this is still gain and
I am overjoyed by that but not by these problems with the isotopes. That
stinks.

Anyway, I would not classify this result as all that excess... and in fact
the low COP could explain why these other things (suspicious isotopic
anomalies) have been included in a report that is well below expectations.

I will agree there is some gain, but perhaps half of what is claimed. That
provides motivation for fraud - when one is on record as claiming much
more.

Jones







-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8371 - Release Date: 10/11/14




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8371 - Release Date: 10/11/14

Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Kim Jung-Un missing from official North Korean website

[Robert Dorr]

They haven't removed his visage or news of his existence from the Korea 
Friendship Sites yet.


Robert Dorr


On 10/10/2014 7:08 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Ah. Good point.

Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com 
mailto:cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote:


He's not there on the wayback machine, either.


https://web.archive.org/web/20140208052408/http://korea-dpr.com/biography.html



No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8360 - Release Date: 10/10/14

Re: [Vo]:[Rossi TR#2] Reactor close down : all Li and Ni converted. Coincidentally?

[Robert Dorr]

First off let me get this out of the way, I am not a physicists so this 
is probably completely impossible, but I'll throw it out here anyway. 
What if the conversion of Ni 58 and Li 7 happen relatively quickly so 
that very soon after the reaction is commenced there is almost a 
complete conversion of Ni 58 to Ni 62 and an almost complete conversion 
of Li 7 to Li 6 and what sustains the reaction from that point on is 
primarily a cyclic reaction between Ni 62 and Li 6. Just throwing this 
out there. Go ahead and start telling me that this couldn't happen, I 
know it's a crazy idea.


Robert Dorr


On 10/9/2014 8:12 AM, Alain Sepeda wrote:
the powder change seems quite simple... no complex procedure... 
surprising.


2014-10-09 15:53 GMT+02:00 Alan Fletcher a...@well.com 
mailto:a...@well.com:


At 04:23 AM 10/9/2014, Teslaalset wrote:

I find it quite a coincident that after 32 days approximately
all Ni and Li were transmuted to Ni62 and Li6. I would have
guessed that running out of the original isotopes would create
a reduced performance which would be the reason for shutdown.
Why has this not been mentioned?


Although none of the tests show it, I still believe that the ECAT
will run, as advertised, for at least 6 months on one charge. The
time for this test was set by the experimental team (and most
likely by their host, which was paying for the power).

I'm beginning to think that this transmutation was a burn-in
secondary effect, particularly for the Lithium, which was there
only to provide the hydrogen.

If you ignore the bump when they changed the input power levels
(files 4 to 6)  the COP increased almost linearly over the whole test.

So maybe the long term COP depends on these transmutations -- ie
the availability of (most likely) Ni62, and coincidentally Li6 --
and would have stabilized just a few days later when the
transmutation was complete.

I wonder if Rossi knew this would happen. However, he usually runs
his Ecats at higher power, so the burn-in might be much quicker 
-- and he's never analyzed the ash  that early.


He's also hinted that the 1MW baby at the customer has also
needed constant attention and adjustment (including being called
out in the middle of the night). Maybe it too is undergoing a
settling-in period --- it's also been running for less than a month.

But we won't get those results for at least a year, and they will
be purely internal documents.

In short, I think it IS coincidental that the Ni and Li
transmutation was nearly complete at the end of the run, but that
some other reaction continues beyond that point.

And even if the 1g charge DID have to be replaced monthly it would
probably still be economical.





No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8355 - Release Date: 10/09/14

[Vo]:Interesting Mats Lewin Tweet regarding Rossi TPI Report

[Robert Dorr]

As reported on the e-cat News 
website:  Twitter 
https://twitter.com/Cim_PY_@https://twitter.com/Cim_PY_Cim_PY_ 
Hi Cimpy. As you know the famous third party report is upcoming. 
Within a week or so, is my understanding. Prepare.   I particularly 
like the last word of his Tweet, Prepare


Robert Dorr  



-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4025/8309 - Release Date: 10/01/14

Re: [Vo]:Interesting Mats Lewin Tweet regarding Rossi TPI Report

[Robert Dorr]

Opps, that should have been As reported on the E-Cat World website 
not the e-cat news website. Sorry


Robert Dorr





As reported on the e-cat News 
website:  Twitterhttps://twitter.com/Cim_PY_@ 
https://twitter.com/Cim_PY_Cim_PY_ Hi Cimpy. As you know the 
famous third party report is upcoming. Within a week or so, is my 
understanding. Prepare.   I particularly like the last word of his 
Tweet, Prepare


Robert Dorr

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4025/8309 - Release Date: 10/01/14

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4025/8309 - Release Date: 10/01/14




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4025/8309 - Release Date: 10/01/14

[Vo]:O.T. Very nice Mars Curiosity Tracker

[Robert Dorr]

The N.Y. Times has put up a very nice day by day travel tracker of 
Curiosity's journey across the surface of Mars. You can click on any 
particular day or location from the very beginning until the most 
current Sol and you will be presented with several pictures and 
panoramas of that day. Highly recommended .


Link:   
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/science/space/mars-curiosity-rover-tracker.html?ref=space#


Bob

Re: [Vo]:The recent ICCF18 (Defkcalion Demo)

[Robert Dorr]

I wasn't there and I don't know how their reactor is set up but I know 
that they are constantly monitoring reactor pressure and they could 
easily wire a kill switch, so that if a sudden rise in reactor pressure 
occurred it would kill the H.V. plasma/spark. No spark, no reaction, 
pressure drops.


Bob

I will agree that Mats (and Defkalion folks) are very brave to work
with this so casually.   Isn't anyone ever worried about these things
blowing up?

   


 



-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3209/6517 - Release Date: 07/24/13


   

Re: [Vo]:From no info to TMI from Defkalion

[Robert Dorr]

On 7/23/2013 9:27 AM, Peter Gluck wrote:

Blaze, in this case what is your alternative  to a blackbox?

I think the skeptihawks, steam- maniacs (not an issue here) and
invisible wire -obsessed are watching. Do you, Mary? Where is the
black magic, Joshua?


Peter


On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 7:02 PM, blaze spinnaker 
blazespinna...@gmail.com mailto:blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:



Peter,

Don't you just get it, this is all an elaborate scam. Mary will never be 
convinced of anything else, never, ever!! It is worthless to spend any 
amount of energy trying to convince her (him) of anything, other than 
this is all a complete hoax. I think that no response to Mary, is the 
only rational recourse to his (her) endless spewing.


Bob




The world will take notice only when a reproducible experiment
showing high COP (1.5?) is generally available.

These black box tests only convince the insiders and perhaps
potentially risk taking investors.


On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com
mailto:cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote:

Today is the break-out day. Two groups, both getting high
power, high
quality results?

People will start to take a lot more notice.

Craig





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

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3204/6513 - Release Date: 07/23/13

Re: [Vo]:From The Kiplinger's Letter, July 19, 2013 TECH section

[Robert Dorr]

I just thought of a new specification standard to express the 
printing capabilities of 3D printers,  PCPM  Pork Chops Per Minute. 
Oh boy, dinners calling.


Bob



At 06:59 PM 7/19/2013, you wrote:

PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel doesn't like to invest in normal 
things. First he backed a libertarian island paradise, then it was 
paying kids not to go to college, and now it's 3D-printed meat.


According to CNET, the Thiel Foundation announced it's donating 
$350,000 to a start-up called Modern Meadow which is developing 
something called bio-printing. Its ultimate aim? To print you a nice 
juicy pork chop, minus all of the environmental consequences that go 
into growing livestock.


Scientists have already been experimenting with bio-printing in the 
field of regenerative medicine. The hope is that if you need a 
kidney transplant in the future, doctors will simply be able to 
print you a new one.


Apparently, growing meat is easier than growing organs. In Modern 
Meadow's grant application to the Department of Agriculture, the 
company points out that as meat is a post mortem tissue, the 
vascularization of the final product is less critical than in 
medical applications. Mmm, I can smell that sizzling bio-printed 
post mortem tissue already.




http://svjart.OrionWorks.comsvjart.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/





No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3349 / Virus Database: 3204/6505 - Release Date: 07/19/13




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3349 / Virus Database: 3204/6505 - Release Date: 07/19/13

Re: [Vo]:Why Cold Fusion Has to Die

[Robert Dorr]

Personally I think the phrase Cold Fusion describes itself fairly 
well. When it comes to the way fusion was initially obtained, which 
is very hot indeed, this alternate, new method of creating fusion is 
pretty damned cold, no matter which way you go about it. Maybe we 
should call it New Fusion, or maybe Alternative Fusion, but both 
of those just sound a bit too groovy.


Bob




At 03:52 AM 7/15/2013, you wrote:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/07/15/why-cold-fusion-has-to-die/http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/07/15/why-cold-fusion-has-to-die/

[mg]

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3349 / Virus Database: 3204/6492 - Release Date: 07/15/13




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3349 / Virus Database: 3204/6492 - Release Date: 07/15/13

Re: [Vo]:U.S. Navy LENR patent

[Robert Dorr]

Just an observation, but it looks as though the G.E.C site hasn't been 
updated since 2010. There's been a lot happening in the LENR field in 
those three short years. Where have they been?


Bob


On 7/12/2013 12:26 PM, blaze spinnaker wrote:

The Genie sounds like LENR after it's been accepted:

   1. Our experiments are repeatable.
   2. Our experiments have been replicated by others.
   3. Our experiments provide direct evidence that nuclear reactions
  are involved including the production of high-energy neutrons.
  Although our experimental results are not predicted by current
  nuclear physics theories, *the results are real*.

http://globalenergycorporation.net/Tech.aspx


Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3204/6486 - Release Date: 07/12/13

Re: [Vo]:Interesting paper from nature about successful cold fusion experiment

[Robert Dorr]

Ed and Axil,

Maybe it would be nice if we could define Cold Fusion, LENR , as 
fusion at room temperature that only requires the addition of heat, 
below let's say 1000 degrees centigrade and possibly some pressure to 
start the fusion process. Any other type of fusion that requires a 
high energy process such as a high energy ion beam, that was used in 
the experiment being discussed here, would be considered a form of 
hot fusion. Just an thought.


Bob

At 09:15 AM 7/7/2013, you wrote:
My point Axil, is that the authors have no idea what they are 
talking about. This confusion is common and results in a great deal 
of confusion about how cold fusion works. Unless this confusion is 
eliminated from discussion, no agreement is possible.  This paper 
simply adds to the confusion, which many other papers have done as well.


Ed
On Jul 7, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

The paper says that the experimenters are claiming cold fusion. 
There is no mixing of fusion definitions involved in this paper to 
my understanding of it.



On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Edmund Storms 
mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
That is not a useful criteria because the Lawson criteria applies 
to a plasma and to a reaction that results in the hot fusion 
products, i.e. neutrons, tritium, etc. Cold fusion does not occur 
in plasma and results in helium without kinetic energy.  The 
reaction is defined as LENR only if the conditions and reaction 
products fit the conditions on which the definition is based. You 
are not free to change the definition to suit your personal beliefs.


Ed



On Jul 7, 2013, at 9:29 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

I am drawing a distinction between hot fusion and LENR in terms of 
the Lawson criterion. Specifically, if a fusion reaction cannot 
be characterized in terms of plasma density, plasma confinement 
time and plasma temperature, then the reaction is LENR.



On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Axil Axil 
mailto:janap...@gmail.comjanap...@gmail.com wrote:
Hot fusion is a nuclear reaction in which two or more atomic 
nuclei collide at very high speed and join to form a new type of 
atomic nucleus of compressing matter to high temperatures at high 
densities as defined by the to the Lawson criterion,
In nuclear fusion research, the Lawson criterion, first derived on 
fusion reactors (initially classified) by John D. Lawson in 1955 
and published in 1957, is an important general measure of a system 
that defines the conditions needed for a fusion reactor to reach 
ignition, that is, that the heating of the plasma by the products 
of the fusion reactions is sufficient to maintain the temperature 
of the plasma against all losses without external power input. As 
originally formulated the Lawson criterion gives a minimum 
required value for the product of the plasma (electron) density ne 
and the energy confinement time . Later analyses suggested that 
a more useful figure of merit is the triple product of density, 
confinement time, and plasma temperature T. The triple product 
also has a minimum required value, and the name Lawson criterion 
often refers to this inequality.
You are consistent at least; you had the same mindset as 
demonstrated here when you described the LeClair experiment as 
some other type of hot fusion.
The LeClair experiment is demonstrating a LENR reaction no matter 
what LeClair thinks is causing it.





On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Edmund Storms 
mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
If we cannot even agree about what the term LENR means or which 
phenomenon it describes, I see no hope in arriving at any common 
understanding. Please, can you make an effort to agree on some 
basic ideas so that the discussion can move forward? We are 
dealing with two different phenomenon. One uses high applied 
energy from various sources and the other requires no applied 
energy. One results in neutrons when deuterium is used, The other 
results in helium when deuterium is used. Can you at least 
acknowledge that these two different reactions occur?


Ed

On Jul 7, 2013, at 8:20 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

It seems to me that the reaction mechanism of the experiment 
referenced in this thread is electrostatic in nature relating to 
high voltage causation of fusion.



To draw a comparison, this is identical to the mechanism used in 
the Proton-21 experimental series.



Since Proton-21 is considered a cold fusion or more properly 
termed a LENR experiment, so to this referenced experiment should 
be termed a LENR experiment.



On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Edmund Storms 
mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
This paper makes the common mistake of mixing hot- and 
cold-fusion. These are two separate and independent phenomenon. 
They are not related except both are nuclear reactions involving 
fusion.  However, the conditions required for initiation and the 
nuclear products are entirely different. As long as hot- and 
cold-fusion 

Re: [Vo]:Interesting paper from nature about successful cold fusion experiment

[Robert Dorr]

In a way they are both a form of pressure albeit mechanical or 
chemical in nature.


Bob

At 11:25 AM 7/7/2013, you wrote:
I don't think that your criteria would include the Proton-21 
experiments or the exploding foil experiments as LENR.



On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Robert Dorr 
mailto:rod...@comcast.netrod...@comcast.net wrote:


Ed and Axil,

Maybe it would be nice if we could define Cold Fusion, LENR , as 
fusion at room temperature that only requires the addition of heat, 
below let's say 1000 degrees centigrade and possibly some pressure 
to start the fusion process. Any other type of fusion that requires 
a high energy process such as a high energy ion beam, that was used 
in the experiment being discussed here, would be considered a form 
of hot fusion. Just an thought.


Bob


At 09:15 AM 7/7/2013, you wrote:
My point Axil, is that the authors have no idea what they are 
talking about. This confusion is common and results in a great deal 
of confusion about how cold fusion works. Unless this confusion is 
eliminated from discussion, no agreement is possible.  This paper 
simply adds to the confusion, which many other papers have done as well.


Ed
On Jul 7, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

The paper says that the experimenters are claiming cold fusion. 
There is no mixing of fusion definitions involved in this paper to 
my understanding of it.



On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Edmund Storms 
mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
That is not a useful criteria because the Lawson criteria applies 
to a plasma and to a reaction that results in the hot fusion 
products, i.e. neutrons, tritium, etc. Cold fusion does not occur 
in plasma and results in helium without kinetic energy.  The 
reaction is defined as LENR only if the conditions and reaction 
products fit the conditions on which the definition is based. You 
are not free to change the definition to suit your personal beliefs.

Ed


On Jul 7, 2013, at 9:29 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

I am drawing a distinction between hot fusion and LENR in terms 
of the Lawson criterion. Specifically, if a fusion reaction 
cannot be characterized in terms of plasma density, plasma 
confinement time and plasma temperature, then the reaction is LENR.
On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Axil Axil 
mailto:janap...@gmail.comjanap...@gmail.com wrote:
Hot fusion is a nuclear reaction in which two or more atomic 
nuclei collide at very high speed and join to form a new type of 
atomic nucleus of compressing matter to high temperatures at high 
densities as defined by the to the Lawson criterion,
In nuclear fusion research, the Lawson criterion, first derived 
on fusion reactors (initially classified) by John D. Lawson in 
1955 and published in 1957, is an important general measure of a 
system that defines the conditions needed for a fusion reactor to 
reach ignition, that is, that the heating of the plasma by the 
products of the fusion reactions is sufficient to maintain the 
temperature of the plasma against all losses without external 
power input. As originally formulated the Lawson criterion gives 
a minimum required value for the product of the plasma (electron) 
density ne and the energy confinement time . Later analyses 
suggested that a more useful figure of merit is the triple 
product of density, confinement time, and plasma temperature T. 
The triple product also has a minimum required value, and the 
name Lawson criterion often refers to this inequality.
You are consistent at least; you had the same mindset as 
demonstrated here when you described the LeClair experiment as 
some other type of hot fusion.
The LeClair experiment is demonstrating a LENR reaction no matter 
what LeClair thinks is causing it.



On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Edmund Storms 
mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
If we cannot even agree about what the term LENR means or which 
phenomenon it describes, I see no hope in arriving at any common 
understanding. Please, can you make an effort to agree on some 
basic ideas so that the discussion can move forward? We are 
dealing with two different phenomenon. One uses high applied 
energy from various sources and the other requires no applied 
energy. One results in neutrons when deuterium is used, The other 
results in helium when deuterium is used. Can you at least 
acknowledge that these two different reactions occur?

Ed
On Jul 7, 2013, at 8:20 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

It seems to me that the reaction mechanism of the experiment 
referenced in this thread is electrostatic in nature relating to 
high voltage causation of fusion.


To draw a comparison, this is identical to the mechanism used in 
the Proton-21 experimental series.


Since Proton-21 is considered a cold fusion or more properly 
termed a LENR experiment, so to this referenced experiment 
should be termed a LENR experiment.


On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Edmund Storms 
mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com

Re: [Vo]:Interesting paper from nature about successful cold fusion experiment

[Robert Dorr]

That seems pretty straight forward to me.

Bob

At 11:27 AM 7/7/2013, you wrote:
Bob, here is the definition I plan to use at ICCF-18. This is 
accepted by most people in the field.  Hot fusion is so much 
different from cold fusion, no benefit is gained by mixing the two 
phenomenon. They can be easily separated because hot fusion makes 
neutrons when energy is generated. Cold fusion makes essentially no 
neutrons when energy is generated.


Ed


What are we talking about?
(cold fusion [CF], LENR, CANR, LANR, CMNS, Fleischmann-Pons Effect)
A nuclear process initiated on rare
occasions in apparently ordinary
material without application of
significant energy that generates
heat and nuclear products without
expected radiation when any
isotope of hydrogen is present.
On Jul 7, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Robert Dorr wrote:



Ed and Axil,

Maybe it would be nice if we could define Cold Fusion, LENR , 
as fusion at room temperature that only requires the addition of 
heat, below let's say 1000 degrees centigrade and possibly some 
pressure to start the fusion process. Any other type of fusion that 
requires a high energy process such as a high energy ion beam, that 
was used in the experiment being discussed here, would be 
considered a form of hot fusion. Just an thought.


Bob

At 09:15 AM 7/7/2013, you wrote:
My point Axil, is that the authors have no idea what they are 
talking about. This confusion is common and results in a great 
deal of confusion about how cold fusion works. Unless this 
confusion is eliminated from discussion, no agreement is 
possible.  This paper simply adds to the confusion, which many 
other papers have done as well.


Ed
On Jul 7, 2013, at 10:08 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

The paper says that the experimenters are claiming cold fusion. 
There is no mixing of fusion definitions involved in this paper 
to my understanding of it.



On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Edmund Storms 
mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
That is not a useful criteria because the Lawson criteria applies 
to a plasma and to a reaction that results in the hot fusion 
products, i.e. neutrons, tritium, etc. Cold fusion does not occur 
in plasma and results in helium without kinetic energy.  The 
reaction is defined as LENR only if the conditions and reaction 
products fit the conditions on which the definition is based. You 
are not free to change the definition to suit your personal beliefs.

Ed


On Jul 7, 2013, at 9:29 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

I am drawing a distinction between hot fusion and LENR in terms 
of the Lawson criterion. Specifically, if a fusion reaction 
cannot be characterized in terms of plasma density, plasma 
confinement time and plasma temperature, then the reaction is LENR.
On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Axil Axil 
mailto:janap...@gmail.comjanap...@gmail.com wrote:
Hot fusion is a nuclear reaction in which two or more atomic 
nuclei collide at very high speed and join to form a new type of 
atomic nucleus of compressing matter to high temperatures at 
high densities as defined by the to the Lawson criterion,
In nuclear fusion research, the Lawson criterion, first derived 
on fusion reactors (initially classified) by John D. Lawson in 
1955 and published in 1957, is an important general measure of a 
system that defines the conditions needed for a fusion reactor 
to reach ignition, that is, that the heating of the plasma by 
the products of the fusion reactions is sufficient to maintain 
the temperature of the plasma against all losses without 
external power input. As originally formulated the Lawson 
criterion gives a minimum required value for the product of the 
plasma (electron) density ne and the energy confinement time . 
Later analyses suggested that a more useful figure of merit is 
the triple product of density, confinement time, and plasma 
temperature T. The triple product also has a minimum required 
value, and the name Lawson criterion often refers to this inequality.
You are consistent at least; you had the same mindset as 
demonstrated here when you described the LeClair experiment as 
some other type of hot fusion.
The LeClair experiment is demonstrating a LENR reaction no 
matter what LeClair thinks is causing it.



On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Edmund Storms 
mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.comstor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
If we cannot even agree about what the term LENR means or which 
phenomenon it describes, I see no hope in arriving at any common 
understanding. Please, can you make an effort to agree on some 
basic ideas so that the discussion can move forward? We are 
dealing with two different phenomenon. One uses high applied 
energy from various sources and the other requires no applied 
energy. One results in neutrons when deuterium is used, The 
other results in helium when deuterium is used. Can you at least 
acknowledge that these two different reactions occur?

Ed
On Jul 7, 2013, at 8:20 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

It seems to me that the reaction mechanism

Re: [Vo]:LENUCO slipped to second - need votes NOW

[Robert Dorr]

I just voted for George Miley. While I was at the site I refreshed my 
browser over a 15 minute period and the Printable Photovoltaics 
entry went up 20 votes and it just keeps rising and George is now in 
third place. I am a bit dubious of this voting.


Robert Dorr


At 09:37 AM 3/15/2013, you wrote:



Please forward to all your friends and put LENR on the docket:

http://futureenergy.ultralightstartups.com/campaign/detail/861http://futureenergy.ultralightstartups.com/campaign/detail/861

SmrtPwrNet has 100 votes more for #1, and printable photovoltaics 
has 50 less for third.


However you feel about this technology, we should be able to gather 
support for LENR to be heard!



--
Ruby Carat
mailto:r...@coldfusionnow.orgr...@coldfusionnow.org
United States 1-707-616-4894
Skype ruby-carat
http://www.coldfusionnow.orgwww.coldfusionnow.org

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 2641/6173 - Release Date: 03/14/13




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 2641/6173 - Release Date: 03/14/13

RE: [Vo]:J Ouellette on how stuff works... another lenr bashing

[Robert Dorr]

It's hard to understand how someone who writes 
for the technology minded can be so brain dead. 
Investigating new technologies with a filter in 
place just leads to a reaffirmation of ones prior 
understanding. Not much learned. She makes me a bit cranky.


Robert Dorr


At 07:44 AM 1/12/2013, you wrote:

Ah… “cocktail party physics” …

“Combining the best of life into the worst of science ???”



From: mailto:alain.coetm...@gmail.comalain.coetm...@gmail.com

FYI and article by J ouellette
http://science.howstuffworks.com/starships-use-cold-fusion-propulsion.htm/printablehttp://science.howstuffworks.com/starships-use-cold-fusion-propulsion.htm/printable
start with a nice pitch and is finally lenr 
bashing, with cherry-picked critics on Rossi, 
scientific sophism presented as evidence and irony when not enough...


see my article
http://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?1017-JOuellette-LENR-bashing-Could-starships-use-cold-fusion-propulsionhttp://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?1017-JOuellette-LENR-bashing-Could-starships-use-cold-fusion-propulsion

some other story by Ouellette on lenr-forum
http://www.lenr-forum.com/tags.php?tag=ouellettehttp://www.lenr-forum.com/tags.php?tag=ouellette

Re: [Vo]:IR UFOs

[Robert Dorr]

They seem to traverse the sky at about the speed of low earth orbit satellites.

Robert Dorr



At 09:23 AM 11/23/2012, you wrote:

I'm sure that there is an explanation for this; but, I'm at a loss to
explain it:

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/406174/20121119/ufo-sighting-australia-melbourne-video.htm#.UK-ugIfAfvR

Re: [Vo]:New Article from Mark Gibbs : Cold Fusion a year later

[Robert Dorr]

It makes me sick every time I hear or read, that 
until Cold Fusion delivers a useable product it 
is still the illusion of buffoons. The Atom Bomb 
was just a theory until that moment in Nevada 
when Trinity lit up the sky and a strange new 
world was born. How much time, energy and money 
was spent, from the moment some one saw the 
possibility that nuclear fission could create a 
massive release of energy, until that moment in 
the desert? Literally billions of dollars and 
hundreds of thousands (millions?) of man hours of 
research and production, until the theory became 
Real. If only we could see past our prejudices, 
and spend a small amount of that human capital on 
the production of LENR (or whatever) this world could truely be new again.


Robert Dorr


At 07:43 AM 10/27/2012, you wrote:
More blather, confusion and insults from Gibbs. 
He cites a paper from that nitwit know-it-all 
Shanahan, the universal expert who thinks he 
knows more about tritium than the PPPL, more 
about calorimetry than Storms, Duncan or 
McKubre, and -- in short -- more about anything then everyone else combined.


He cites this paper from Shanahan:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3d7yWtb1doPc3otVGFUNDZKUDQ/edithttps://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3d7yWtb1doPc3otVGFUNDZKUDQ/edit

My responses, posted at NewWorkWorld, are below.

- Jed

Gibbs writes: That really underlines what the 
difference is between cold fusion fan boys and 
completely believe in its existence, and those 
who remain skeptical and demand proof in the 
form of useful technology, by which I mean a 
technology that delivers real, valuable commercial results.


Useful technology is not and never has been a 
valid scientific criterion to prove the 
existence of an effect. There are countless 
scientific effects and phenomena that have no 
practical use, yet which everyone agrees exist. 
Examples include high temperature 
superconductivity and supernova explosions. Many 
effects, such as electricity, had no practical 
use for decades after they were discovered. 
Nuclear fission was discovered in the 1890s but 
it had no practical use until 1945. 
Semiconductor research began in the 1920s but 
did not produce any useful results until 1949.


Gibbs' arguments make no sense. Furthermore, he 
calls distinguished scientists fanboys which is an outrageous insult.




Shanahan's conclusions are completely 
unjustified. He thinks that his opinion -- mere 
opinion -- automatically overrules rigorously 
peer-reviewed experimental results published in 
major journals. Results obtained by hundreds of 
distinguished experts from Los Alamos, BARC, the 
Princeton Plasma Fusion Lab and other 
world-class labs. Despite his ego, Shanahan does 
not know better than these people. The reasons 
given in his paper would never pass peer-review.


Cold fusion has been replicated thousands of 
times in hundreds of major laboratories. Here is 
the latest irrefutable result, from the Naval Research Laboratory:


http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/D.http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/D...

Anomalous Results in Fleischmann-Pons Type Electrochemical Experiments

Conclusions:

* Large excess power (≥ 1kJ) events generated in 5% of Pd90Rh10 cathodes

* Failed to disprove these results -- excess 
heat results observed at NRL are real!


Cells produced 40 times more output than input, 
and the heat far exceeded the limits of chemistry.


Gibbs' demand that researchers produce practical 
devices is unfair and unrealistic given the lack 
of funding and the academic politics.

Re: [Vo]:(Audio) NASA Chief Scientist on space exploration and LENR

[Robert Dorr]

It is just amazing, the disparity between the 
funding of research into Hot Fusion, compared 
to Cold Fusion. I mean NASA is spending $100 K 
to $300 K a year on cold fusion research. I'm 
surprised they even have a room with a beaker and 
a bunsen burner set up with that kind of money 
set aside for research into the new, potentially 
world changing source of energy. Of course, it's 
not just NASA but just about every branch of 
government supported research. It's quite frankly, outrageous.


Robert Dorr



At 09:20 PM 10/21/2012, you wrote:


Courtesy of website LENR ­ COLD FUSION
New Audio interview with Dennis Bushnell
http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/2012/10/22/dennis-bushnell-lenr/

Dr. Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist at NASA Langley Research Center,
discusses space exploration and (beginning at 8:22) NASA LENR research.

(Audio)
http://www.americanantigravity.com/news/space/dennis-bushnell-on-space-exploration.html

Re: [Vo]:Sci. Am. comments on documentary The Believers

[Robert Dorr]

Jed, I see where Mary YouKnow got her 2 cents in. I actually think 
this may be a good documentary, and I stress the may be.


Bob




http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/psi-vid/2012/10/14/the-believers-cold-fusion-at-the-chicago-international-film-festival/http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/psi-vid/2012/10/14/the-believers-cold-fusion-at-the-chicago-international-film-festival/

I get a bad feeling about this documentary. I don't like the trailer.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Mark LeClair presents his thesis and supporting evidence

[Robert Dorr]

Give this a try. Still there as of 4:30 AM West Coast,  USA. I can 
never remember if  it's PDT or PST!!


  
http://smartscarecrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/NanoSpire-Smart-Scarecrow-Presentation4.pdf


Bob


At 09:52 PM 9/20/2012, you wrote:

There is just 1 pic of the presentation. Is there more?

2012/9/21 Axil Axil mailto:janap...@gmail.comjanap...@gmail.com

http://smartscarecrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/092012_2020_Presentatio1.png


Mark LeClair presented his thesis and supporting evidence(see 
reference above) in a live presentation on 9/20/2012.


This presentation will be available on YouTube shortly.

In slide 39, mark said that the Pons-Fleischmann effect is just a 
very weak version of the LeClair effect. Could the water crystal be 
the active agent in the PF effect.



If this equivalency is true, could a tradeoff between the radiation 
and transmutation of cavatation in the LeClair effect be made by 
using nickel or palladium as the target material in the cavatation 
reactor where proton pairs on the surface of these metals might form 
and thermalize the nuclear reactivity of the water crystal(slide 16)?


On Slide 20, LeClair shows how a water crystal had carved a 5 foot 
trench in a coil of copper wire.





Cheers:   Axil




--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
mailto:danieldi...@gmail.comdanieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:question about passive solar heat

[Robert Dorr]

Frank,

Just an idea. I know you want to run the system even when the water 
is off, but you could design the system to momentarily pressurize as 
long as the apex valve is open, then turn off.


Bob

At 08:01 PM 9/19/2012, you wrote:
I live in the city with gas hot water.  Its not for me but its for 
an isolated cabin.  It has a pressurized system, however, I want to 
transfer hot water to the tank even when the water is off.


I think the loop idea may work.  It will only transfer a fraction of 
its flow rate to the tank and many have enough reserve lift to carry 
the cold water up.


It is getting a little late in the season to try it out.


-Original Message-
From: Robert Dorr rod...@comcast.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Sep 19, 2012 8:33 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:question about passive solar heat


Frank;

I made the assumption you are on a city type pressurized water 
system, therefore no need to lift to roof. If your not, I see the 
dilemma. Pretty hard to do without some type of pump.


Bob



At 05:24 PM 9/19/2012, you wrote:



Frank,

How about just using black hose running in a back and forth 
direction from the bottom of your roof to its apex, with a 
temperature sensitive valve at the apex point, and a black hose, 
from the apex, running down the sunny side of your house into the 
hot water container in your basement. When the water at the apex of 
your roof attains a pre-selected temperature the valve opens and 
lets waterenter the system from the low point of your roof pushing 
the water into the container in the basement, until the temperature 
at the apex lowers to a predetermined temperature and shuts off. Repeat.


Bob
snip

Thanks Bob.  The problem is that cold water must then be lifted to 
the roof from the basement.  It takes lift to get it to go up.

Re: Fwd: [Vo]:question about passive solar heat

[Robert Dorr]

Frank,

How about just using black hose running in a back and forth direction 
from the bottom of your roof to its apex, with a temperature 
sensitive valve at the apex point, and a black hose, from the 
apex,  running down the sunny side of your house into the hot water 
container in your basement. When the water at the apex of your roof 
attains a pre-selected temperature the valve opens and lets water 
enter the system from the low point of your roof pushing the water 
into the container in the basement, until the temperature at the apex 
lowers to a predetermined temperature and shuts off. Repeat.


Bob

At 08:49 PM 9/18/2012, you wrote:

What about this?  I run a black and white hose up the sunny side of 
the house from the basement.  The bottom of the circulating loop is 
lower than the tank.  I splice the bottom of the loop in with a T 
that connects to the tank drain.


Frank

Re: [Vo]:Godes/McKubre 100% reproducability

[Robert Dorr]

Craig,

I noticed several times in the cat patent, they mention invisible 
light. That's interesting, possibly an invalid patent, or possibly, 
one could patent one, using visible light.


Bob





On 09/19/2012 10:58 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
 [...]

 This has nothing to do with me. I am not in charge of policy at the
 U.S. Patent Office. They are the source of the problem. The purpose of
 a patent is to promote progress in technology by sharing information
 while protecting intellectual property. If the P.O. would do their
 job, information on cold fusion would spread as quickly as it does
 with any other commercial RD.

 - Jed


I wonder why the Patent Office cares if the device actually works? The
criteria should be that the work is original, complex, and involved a
significant labor investment. Instead, we have Amazon patenting a 'point
a click' method of purchasing, and we have the 'cat and laser' patent.

http://www.google.com/patents/US5443036

These are nonsense, and threaten the whole concept of intellectual
property, whereas original, creative, labor intensive, design, is denied.

Craig

Re: [Vo]:question about passive solar heat

[Robert Dorr]

Frank;

I made the assumption you are on a city type pressurized water 
system, therefore no need to lift to roof. If your not, I see the 
dilemma. Pretty hard to do without some type of pump.


Bob



At 05:24 PM 9/19/2012, you wrote:


Frank,

How about just using black hose running in a back and forth 
direction from the bottom of your roof to its apex, with a 
temperature sensitive valve at the apex point, and a black hose, 
from the apex, running down the sunny side of your house into the 
hot water container in your basement. When the water at the apex of 
your roof attains a pre-selected temperature the valve opens and 
lets waterenter the system from the low point of your roof pushing 
the water into the container in the basement, until the temperature 
at the apex lowers to a predetermined temperature and shuts off. Repeat.

Bob
snip

Thanks Bob.  The problem is that cold water must then be lifted to 
the roof from the basement.  It takes lift to get it to go up.

Re: [Vo]:Harping on the Right Things!

[Robert Dorr]

Just another observation. The spark plugs look as though they have 
been operated at a very high temperature. The writing on the plug 
which starts out blue, after operation have turned a rather rust 
color, indicative of high temperature use. And the general color of 
the metal of the spark plug that is visible has turned various 
colors, also the look of high temperature operation.


Robert Dorr

At 01:44 PM 7/15/2012, you wrote:



Sorry for the double post and a correction, I said the part was Ford 
Motorcraft Number SP-509, but it should be Ford Motorcraft Number SP-507.


Robert Dorr

Re: [Vo]:Harping on the Right Things!

[Robert Dorr]

I had a look at the multi-page Defkalion press release May of 2012, 
and on page 18 of the 35 page document there is a picture of one of 
the spark plugs laying on a table. It is somewhat unusual in that it 
has a very long threaded body. I did some looking and found a similar 
plug from Ford Motorcraft Number SP-509. They are almost the same, 
short of a body that is not quite threaded all the way to the tip. 
Anyway I have to say that it most certainly a spark plug and not a glow plug.



Robert Dorr


At 12:44 PM 7/15/2012, you wrote:
I supposed DGT can replace spark plug for glow plugs to misdirect, 
but that would still not explain the temp spike.


Sparks are the only mechanism that can bring H2 temps that high and 
then quickly back down again.  Glow plugs will not result in a temp spike.



When you look at the end plates of DGT reactors, you will notice 
that the thermocouples are very close to the spark plug.  A series 
of sparks would quickly raise the temperature of the H2 gas in the 
vicinity of the sparks, which is also where the thermocouples 
are.  Then a second later, the hot H2 gas diffuses and the temps are 
down again.  Hence a temp spike.


Jojo



- Original Message -
From: mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.comBob Higgins
To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 3:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Harping on the Right Things!

After surfing the different glow plugs on the web, I believe that 
Jojo is correct, that what is shown in the pictures offered by DGT 
are probably spark plugs.


However, might there be misdirection in DGT's pictures?  Would a 
glow plug screw in place of the spark plug in their reactor?  DGT 
could have put the spark plugs in their reactor for the pictures, 
while they normally use glow plugs in those positions.  The spare 
spark plug on the table was obvious and suspiciously left in the open.


Another possibility is that DGT found that the glow plugs were 
wearing out too quickly and they modified their reactor for a 
different type of heater that would have greater life.  Since they 
were left with the tapped glow plug holes, they plugged the holes 
with the spark plugs.  The spark plugs are never shown connected, 
but everything else is shown connected.


The comment from WM about DGT having trouble with the glow plugs 
not lasting long enough goes with what Jojo observes for a glow plug.


I am not convinced either way.

Bob

On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Jojo Jaro 
mailto:jth...@hotmail.comjth...@hotmail.com wrote:
And only if you want to waste your money.  Like I said, they don't 
last very long when used continously as would be the case if DGT 
were using these to heat their reactors.


A heating cartridge would make more sense for heating.

I tried using glow plugs in my first generation reactors with so-so 
results.  They tend to overheat and melt your ingredients.  Hard to 
control heat output.   They are designed to heat fast and 
furious.  Controllability is not an issue for their intended 
application as Diesel engine preheaters as they are fired only for a 
few seconds.  but, even in their intended application in diesel 
engines, they are one of the more frequently failing items.




Jojo


PS.  Those pictures are definitiely spark plugs.  No question about it.



- Original Message -
From: mailto:alain.sep...@gmail.comAlain Sepeda
To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 2:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Harping on the Right Things!

using a glowplug for heating is very natural, since it is very 
resistant, cheap, and easy to find.





--

Regards,
Bob Higgins

Re: [Vo]:Harping on the Right Things!

[Robert Dorr]

I had a look at the multi-page Defkalion press release May of 2012, 
and on page 18 of the 35 page document there is a picture of one of 
the spark plugs laying on a table. It is somewhat unusual in that it 
has a very long threaded body. I did some looking and found a similar 
plug from Ford Motorcraft Number SP-509. They are almost the same, 
short of a body that is not quite threaded all the way to the tip. 
Anyway I have to say that it most certainly a spark plug and not a glow plug.



Robert Dorr


At 12:44 PM 7/15/2012, you wrote:
I supposed DGT can replace spark plug for glow plugs to misdirect, 
but that would still not explain the temp spike.


Sparks are the only mechanism that can bring H2 temps that high and 
then quickly back down again.  Glow plugs will not result in a temp spike.



When you look at the end plates of DGT reactors, you will notice 
that the thermocouples are very close to the spark plug.  A series 
of sparks would quickly raise the temperature of the H2 gas in the 
vicinity of the sparks, which is also where the thermocouples 
are.  Then a second later, the hot H2 gas diffuses and the temps are 
down again.  Hence a temp spike.


Jojo



- Original Message -
From: mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.comBob Higgins
To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 3:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Harping on the Right Things!
After surfing the different glow plugs on the web, I believe that 
Jojo is correct, that what is shown in the pictures offered by DGT 
are probably spark plugs.
However, might there be misdirection in DGT's pictures?  Would a 
glow plug screw in place of the spark plug in their reactor?  DGT 
could have put the spark plugs in their reactor for the pictures, 
while they normally use glow plugs in those positions.  The spare 
spark plug on the table was obvious and suspiciously left in the open.
Another possibility is that DGT found that the glow plugs were 
wearing out too quickly and they modified their reactor for a 
different type of heater that would have greater life.  Since they 
were left with the tapped glow plug holes, they plugged the holes 
with the spark plugs.  The spark plugs are never shown connected, 
but everything else is shown connected.
The comment from WM about DGT having trouble with the glow plugs 
not lasting long enough goes with what Jojo observes for a glow plug.

I am not convinced either way.
Bob
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Jojo Jaro 
mailto:jth...@hotmail.comjth...@hotmail.com wrote:
And only if you want to waste your money.  Like I said, they don't 
last very long when used continously as would be the case if DGT 
were using these to heat their reactors.


A heating cartridge would make more sense for heating.

I tried using glow plugs in my first generation reactors with so-so 
results.  They tend to overheat and melt your ingredients.  Hard to 
control heat output.   They are designed to heat fast and 
furious.  Controllability is not an issue for their intended 
application as Diesel engine preheaters as they are fired only for a 
few seconds.  but, even in their intended application in diesel 
engines, they are one of the more frequently failing items.




Jojo


PS.  Those pictures are definitiely spark plugs.  No question about it.



- Original Message -
From: mailto:alain.sep...@gmail.comAlain Sepeda
To: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.comvortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 2:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Harping on the Right Things!
using a glowplug for heating is very natural, since it is very 
resistant, cheap, and easy to find.





--

Regards,
Bob Higgins

Re: [Vo]:Harping on the Right Things!

[Robert Dorr]

Sorry for the double post and a correction, I said the part was Ford 
Motorcraft Number SP-509, but it should be Ford Motorcraft Number SP-507.


Robert Dorr

RE: [Vo]:Open-Source-LENR-project

[Robert Dorr]

Interesting, the guy that is starting this Open Source Project is 
named Gary Wright from Las Vegas. The guy that turned in Rossi in 
Florida for building nuclear reactors was also named Gary Wright from 
Las Vegas. A coincidence?


Robert Dorr



At 08:44 AM 5/18/2012, you wrote:

I should add that there are several qualified open-source advocates who post
here regularly - Brad Lowe and Jaro are two of them. They are smart,
qualified and not hiding anything to arouse suspicions.

If Gary is in that category, my apologies. He should make his abilities
known. Maybe he is a dream-weaver extraordinaire who merely has his public
priorities reversed.

It is a not really a fine line, yet as of now he appears to be well over
onto the Aussie-Guy (Greg Watson) side of that line ...

_
From: Jones Beene

Hello Kevin - You ask why there has been no discussion here
... on what has the hallmarks of a Dennis Lee/ Carl Tilley/ Mike Brady, etc
type of derivative scam - with no apparent redeeming qualities ...

(Please feel free to list the redeeming qualities, if there
are any - and do not take this the wrong way, if the claimant is indeed a
hero inventor who has somehow hidden his true identity carefully; and yet
managed to present his venture exactly like Dennis Lee would do)


I haven't seen any discussions on this project in Vortex-L

 http://www.opensourcelenr.com/index.html

Kevmo

Re: [Vo]:Toyota demos 60 km/l hybrid prototype

[Robert Dorr]

It looks like a sad puppy.

Robert Dorr





http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/atmoney/news/20120411-OYT1T01265.htm

- Jed

It's appallingly ugly! :(




Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Nuclear drones

[Robert Dorr]

Short of using a LENR type device on board a drone, my guess is they 
would use Americium 241 in an Alpha-Voltaic configuration.


At 02:24 PM 4/4/2012, you wrote:

Axil Axil mailto:janap...@gmail.comjanap...@gmail.com wrote:

This huge cost for a nuclear heat source no matter which one they 
selected is extreme motivation to use LENR. One Rossi heat unit only 
costs a few hundred.



Sure. I can't imagine trying this without LENR. But I expect the 
people doing this project have never heard of LENR.


The Sandia document does not say a thing:

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/sand-uav.pdfhttp://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/sand-uav.pdf

QUOTE:

. . . Various DOE laboratory and contractor  personnel and 
facilities could have been used to perform detailed engineering, 
fabrication, assembly and  test operations including follow-on 
operational support. None of the results are currently in use by DOE 
and it is doubtful that they will be used in the near-term or 
mid-term future. Currently, none of the results can be shared openly 
with the public due to national security constraints.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Page 4 missing

[Robert Dorr]

Besides page 4, it is also missing pages 1,2 and 28 (Figure 9).

Robert Dorr



An important paper, relative to Ni-H which is on the LENR archive site:

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf

has a page missing - page 4 - and it could be important.