Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Jarold McWilliams]

Yes, I know.  His original offer to defkalion and Rossi are genuine, and this 
one is genuine even though it doesn't make sense.  He's just stupid, but he is 
genuine.
On Mar 1, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Randy Wuller wrote:

> The problem with Dick Smith's Prize is that it is being offered to the 
> independent tester.  On its face it seeks to compromise the independence and 
> credibility of the tester.  Nothing could be dumber.  In addition the reason 
> to establish a prize is to stimulate investment in an attempt to break a 
> technological barrier, in that regard prizes are really effective.  The 
> Orteig prize won by Lindbergh was only $25,000 but generated investment of 
> over $400,000.  Smith's prize which is not paid to the LENR 
> researcher/inventor does not even create this stimulus.
> 
> Ransom
> - Original Message - From: "Jarold McWilliams" 
> To: 
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 10:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)
> 
> 
> It depends on what he loses it for.  Why do milliionaires give a million 
> dollars to charities?  It would be a much better use of money to spend it on 
> proving cold fusion is real.  I think Dick Smith's offer is genuine, and he 
> won't try to back out of paying the million dollars if it is proven.  I do 
> think he is kind of stupid with the protocols he was expecting Defkalion to 
> make though.
> On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:32 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Jarold McWilliams  
>> wrote:
>>> If cold fusion is real, Dick Smith immediately makes millions of dollars, so
>>> I don't think he would care much about losing a million.
>> 
>> It's been my experience that people with millions of dollars do care
>> about losing a million dollars.
>> 
>> 
>> T
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Randy Wuller]

The problem with Dick Smith's Prize is that it is being offered to the 
independent tester.  On its face it seeks to compromise the independence and 
credibility of the tester.  Nothing could be dumber.  In addition the reason 
to establish a prize is to stimulate investment in an attempt to break a 
technological barrier, in that regard prizes are really effective.  The 
Orteig prize won by Lindbergh was only $25,000 but generated investment of 
over $400,000.  Smith's prize which is not paid to the LENR 
researcher/inventor does not even create this stimulus.


Ransom
- Original Message - 
From: "Jarold McWilliams" 

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)


It depends on what he loses it for.  Why do milliionaires give a million 
dollars to charities?  It would be a much better use of money to spend it on 
proving cold fusion is real.  I think Dick Smith's offer is genuine, and he 
won't try to back out of paying the million dollars if it is proven.  I do 
think he is kind of stupid with the protocols he was expecting Defkalion to 
make though.

On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:32 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Jarold McWilliams  
wrote:
If cold fusion is real, Dick Smith immediately makes millions of dollars, 
so

I don't think he would care much about losing a million.


It's been my experience that people with millions of dollars do care
about losing a million dollars.


T

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Jarold McWilliams]

It depends on what he loses it for.  Why do milliionaires give a million 
dollars to charities?  It would be a much better use of money to spend it on 
proving cold fusion is real.  I think Dick Smith's offer is genuine, and he 
won't try to back out of paying the million dollars if it is proven.  I do 
think he is kind of stupid with the protocols he was expecting Defkalion to 
make though.  
On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:32 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Jarold McWilliams  
> wrote:
>> If cold fusion is real, Dick Smith immediately makes millions of dollars, so
>> I don't think he would care much about losing a million.
> 
> It's been my experience that people with millions of dollars do care
> about losing a million dollars.
> 
> 
> T
> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Terry Blanton]

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Jarold McWilliams  wrote:
> If cold fusion is real, Dick Smith immediately makes millions of dollars, so
> I don't think he would care much about losing a million.

It's been my experience that people with millions of dollars do care
about losing a million dollars.


T

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Jarold McWilliams]

If cold fusion is real, Dick Smith immediately makes millions of dollars, so I 
don't think he would care much about losing a million.  
On Mar 1, 2012, at 12:15 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

> If Dick Smith had not been such an ignorant jerk and had not turned down 
> Defkalion's fair offer, he would have been one of the independent entities in 
> testing Hyperions. 
> 
> Of course it is plausible, that losing $one million had been such a shock, 
> that he would have hidden the results in shame and never publish them...
> 
>—Jouni
> 
> On 1 Mar 2012, at 07:16, Jarold McWilliams  wrote:
> 
>> What if DGT didn't have any tests?  We'll never get results because these 
>> visiting entities might not even exist.  Why can't DGT release the test 
>> results without the entities, but just don't mention who the entities are?  
>> This doesn't prove they have anything, but it's a start, and there is no 
>> reason not to.
>> On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:02 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:
>> 
>>> Daniel:
>>>  
>>> As DGT has stated SEVERAL times, is it up to the visiting entities, NOT 
>>> DGT, to release test results!!!  You are not reading things correctly.. 
>>> perhaps because English is not your native language.  Those entities, if 
>>> they CHOOSE to release the results, will very likely do it via the 
>>> mainstream media, and their own website, NOT DGT’s website.  Thus, the 
>>> closing down of the DGT forum will not make any difference as to whether 
>>> data is publicly released…
>>>  
>>> -Mark
>>>  
>>> From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com] 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 2:07 PM
>>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)
>>>  
>>> Do not expect to see any data from these tests:
>>>  
>>> "Until Defkalion Green Technologies has its product, we shall no longer get 
>>> involved in the games and blogs of online media. Our next announcement in 
>>> the coming months will be that of a successful and certified product."
>>>  
>>> http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1278 
>>>  
>>> Data is surely a  part  of  these  online games.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>> 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Jouni Valkonen]

If Dick Smith had not been such an ignorant jerk and had not turned down 
Defkalion's fair offer, he would have been one of the independent entities in 
testing Hyperions. 

Of course it is plausible, that losing $one million had been such a shock, that 
he would have hidden the results in shame and never publish them...

   ―Jouni

On 1 Mar 2012, at 07:16, Jarold McWilliams  wrote:

> What if DGT didn't have any tests?  We'll never get results because these 
> visiting entities might not even exist.  Why can't DGT release the test 
> results without the entities, but just don't mention who the entities are?  
> This doesn't prove they have anything, but it's a start, and there is no 
> reason not to.
> On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:02 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:
> 
>> Daniel:
>>  
>> As DGT has stated SEVERAL times, is it up to the visiting entities, NOT DGT, 
>> to release test results!!!  You are not reading things correctly.. perhaps 
>> because English is not your native language.  Those entities, if they CHOOSE 
>> to release the results, will very likely do it via the mainstream media, and 
>> their own website, NOT DGT’s website.  Thus, the closing down of the DGT 
>> forum will not make any difference as to whether data is publicly released…
>>  
>> -Mark
>>  
>> From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 2:07 PM
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)
>>  
>> Do not expect to see any data from these tests:
>>  
>> "Until Defkalion Green Technologies has its product, we shall no longer get 
>> involved in the games and blogs of online media. Our next announcement in 
>> the coming months will be that of a successful and certified product."
>>  
>> http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1278 
>>  
>> Data is surely a  part  of  these  online games.
>> 
>>  
>> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Jarold McWilliams]

Whatever.  Defkalion and Rossi themselves said they would have independent 
verification by the end of March.
On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:18 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

> You are in such a hurry. I will wait until Oct30th. I chose this date last 
> year, for a 3rd party confirmation of a working product, because it is close 
> to AR`s 1MW test. I will apply the same date to DGT. 
> 
> 2012/3/1 Jarold McWilliams 
> DGT may not owe us anything, but I don't owe them anything either.  Defkalion 
> has shown us nothing, and Rossi just had some demos that he was in complete 
> control of.  I don't owe them any patience, though I will still wait until 
> March 31.  If nothing happens by then, there is no reason for me to pay any 
> more attention to this.  Maybe it's just me, but if I was in Defkalion's 
> position, I'd get independent verification as soon as possible.  They should 
> get plenty of money through awards and licenses if they sell the product to a 
> large company.  Everyday, the world is wasting billions of dollars and 
> millions of people are dying unnecessarily.  Just the discovery of an LENR 
> device that produces useful energy output would end this waste immediately.  
> Does it really make a difference if you are making a billion dollars in a 
> world where basically everything is free?  I would be happy enough knowing I 
> helped every single person on the planet, and I wouldn't care much about the 
> money.  I'm not big into conspiracy theories.  Oil companies would probably 
> just switch to something dealing with LENR and make more money than before.  
> If you're a scientist, it would create tons of good paying jobs, and you are 
> at the forefront in an exciting new era of civilization.  
> 
> On Feb 29, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
> 
>> Hi Guenter -- your reply-to address is your own email address.
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Guenter Wildgruber  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> DGT did not make a substantial error up to now.
>> Btw, my own projects often have delays and complications and modifications. 
>> That's the way it is.
>> 
>> In a situation like DGK or Rossi You have to fight against a headwind of 
>> 99%, and the rest is a substantial lot of idiots, who cannot tell the 
>> difference between a hole and a substantial spot.
>> 
>> I agree with Defkalion that they are not obligated to continue to publicly 
>> discuss their progress.  But from a PR perspective I think it's a gauche 
>> move to close their forum in this way.  They've given skeptics additional 
>> credibility in calling the two main high-profile commercial LENR initiatives 
>> scams.  Perhaps this will not affect Defkalion's own business plan since 
>> they're self-funded, but it could have ramifications for others who are 
>> interested in exploring the topic.
>> 
>> It might have been preferable for Defkalion not to attempt to engage the 
>> public at all and to stay in stealth mode as long as possible.  I can 
>> understand their learning about PR as they go.  But with opinions so set 
>> against LENR in some mainstream scientific circles, here's to hoping that 
>> other initiatives will steer a steadier course in how they communicate to 
>> the public what they're doing.
>> 
>> Eric
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
> 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Daniel Rocha]

You are in such a hurry. I will wait until Oct30th. I chose this date last
year, for a 3rd party confirmation of a working product, because it is
close to AR`s 1MW test. I will apply the same date to DGT.

2012/3/1 Jarold McWilliams 

> DGT may not owe us anything, but I don't owe them anything either.
>  Defkalion has shown us nothing, and Rossi just had some demos that he was
> in complete control of.  I don't owe them any patience, though I will still
> wait until March 31.  If nothing happens by then, there is no reason for me
> to pay any more attention to this.  Maybe it's just me, but if I was in
> Defkalion's position, I'd get independent verification as soon as possible.
>  They should get plenty of money through awards and licenses if they sell
> the product to a large company.  Everyday, the world is wasting billions of
> dollars and millions of people are dying unnecessarily.  Just the discovery
> of an LENR device that produces useful energy output would end this waste
> immediately.  Does it really make a difference if you are making a billion
> dollars in a world where basically everything is free?  I would be happy
> enough knowing I helped every single person on the planet, and I wouldn't
> care much about the money.  I'm not big into conspiracy theories.  Oil
> companies would probably just switch to something dealing with LENR and
> make more money than before.  If you're a scientist, it would create tons
> of good paying jobs, and you are at the forefront in an exciting new era of
> civilization.
>
> On Feb 29, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
>
> Hi Guenter -- your reply-to address is your own email address.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Guenter Wildgruber  > wrote:
>
> DGT did not make a substantial error up to now.
>> Btw, my own projects often have delays and complications and
>> modifications. That's the way it is.
>>
>> In a situation like DGK or Rossi You have to fight against a headwind of
>> 99%, and the rest is a substantial lot of idiots, who cannot tell the
>> difference between a hole and a substantial spot.
>>
>
> I agree with Defkalion that they are not obligated to continue to publicly
> discuss their progress.  But from a PR perspective I think it's a gauche
> move to close their forum in this way.  They've given skeptics additional
> credibility in calling the two main high-profile commercial LENR
> initiatives scams.  Perhaps this will not affect Defkalion's own business
> plan since they're self-funded, but it could have ramifications for others
> who are interested in exploring the topic.
>
> It might have been preferable for Defkalion not to attempt to engage the
> public at all and to stay in stealth mode as long as possible.  I can
> understand their learning about PR as they go.  But with opinions so set
> against LENR in some mainstream scientific circles, here's to hoping that
> other initiatives will steer a steadier course in how they communicate to
> the public what they're doing.
>
> Eric
>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Jarold McWilliams]

What if DGT didn't have any tests?  We'll never get results because these 
visiting entities might not even exist.  Why can't DGT release the test results 
without the entities, but just don't mention who the entities are?  This 
doesn't prove they have anything, but it's a start, and there is no reason not 
to.
On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:02 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:

> Daniel:
>  
> As DGT has stated SEVERAL times, is it up to the visiting entities, NOT DGT, 
> to release test results!!!  You are not reading things correctly.. perhaps 
> because English is not your native language.  Those entities, if they CHOOSE 
> to release the results, will very likely do it via the mainstream media, and 
> their own website, NOT DGT’s website.  Thus, the closing down of the DGT 
> forum will not make any difference as to whether data is publicly released…
>  
> -Mark
>  
> From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 2:07 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)
>  
> Do not expect to see any data from these tests:
>  
> "Until Defkalion Green Technologies has its product, we shall no longer get 
> involved in the games and blogs of online media. Our next announcement in the 
> coming months will be that of a successful and certified product."
>  
> http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1278 
>  
> Data is surely a  part  of  these  online games.
> 
>  
> 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Jarold McWilliams]

DGT may not owe us anything, but I don't owe them anything either.  Defkalion 
has shown us nothing, and Rossi just had some demos that he was in complete 
control of.  I don't owe them any patience, though I will still wait until 
March 31.  If nothing happens by then, there is no reason for me to pay any 
more attention to this.  Maybe it's just me, but if I was in Defkalion's 
position, I'd get independent verification as soon as possible.  They should 
get plenty of money through awards and licenses if they sell the product to a 
large company.  Everyday, the world is wasting billions of dollars and millions 
of people are dying unnecessarily.  Just the discovery of an LENR device that 
produces useful energy output would end this waste immediately.  Does it really 
make a difference if you are making a billion dollars in a world where 
basically everything is free?  I would be happy enough knowing I helped every 
single person on the planet, and I wouldn't care much about the money.  I'm not 
big into conspiracy theories.  Oil companies would probably just switch to 
something dealing with LENR and make more money than before.  If you're a 
scientist, it would create tons of good paying jobs, and you are at the 
forefront in an exciting new era of civilization.  
On Feb 29, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Eric Walker wrote:

> Hi Guenter -- your reply-to address is your own email address.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Guenter Wildgruber  
> wrote:
> 
> DGT did not make a substantial error up to now.
> Btw, my own projects often have delays and complications and modifications. 
> That's the way it is.
> 
> In a situation like DGK or Rossi You have to fight against a headwind of 99%, 
> and the rest is a substantial lot of idiots, who cannot tell the difference 
> between a hole and a substantial spot.
> 
> I agree with Defkalion that they are not obligated to continue to publicly 
> discuss their progress.  But from a PR perspective I think it's a gauche move 
> to close their forum in this way.  They've given skeptics additional 
> credibility in calling the two main high-profile commercial LENR initiatives 
> scams.  Perhaps this will not affect Defkalion's own business plan since 
> they're self-funded, but it could have ramifications for others who are 
> interested in exploring the topic.
> 
> It might have been preferable for Defkalion not to attempt to engage the 
> public at all and to stay in stealth mode as long as possible.  I can 
> understand their learning about PR as they go.  But with opinions so set 
> against LENR in some mainstream scientific circles, here's to hoping that 
> other initiatives will steer a steadier course in how they communicate to the 
> public what they're doing.
> 
> Eric
> 

RE: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint]

Daniel:

 

As DGT has stated SEVERAL times, is it up to the visiting entities, NOT DGT,
to release test results!!!  You are not reading things correctly.. perhaps
because English is not your native language.  Those entities, if they CHOOSE
to release the results, will very likely do it via the mainstream media, and
their own website, NOT DGT's website.  Thus, the closing down of the DGT
forum will not make any difference as to whether data is publicly released.

 

-Mark

 

From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 2:07 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

 

Do not expect to see any data from these tests:

 

"Until Defkalion Green Technologies has its product, we shall no longer get
involved in the games and blogs of online media. Our next announcement in
the coming months will be that of a successful and certified product."

 

http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4
<http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1278> &t=1278 

 

Data is surely a  part  of  these  online games.

 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Eric Walker]

Hi Guenter -- your reply-to address is your own email address.


On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Guenter Wildgruber
wrote:

DGT did not make a substantial error up to now.
> Btw, my own projects often have delays and complications and
> modifications. That's the way it is.
>
> In a situation like DGK or Rossi You have to fight against a headwind of
> 99%, and the rest is a substantial lot of idiots, who cannot tell the
> difference between a hole and a substantial spot.
>

I agree with Defkalion that they are not obligated to continue to publicly
discuss their progress.  But from a PR perspective I think it's a gauche
move to close their forum in this way.  They've given skeptics additional
credibility in calling the two main high-profile commercial LENR
initiatives scams.  Perhaps this will not affect Defkalion's own business
plan since they're self-funded, but it could have ramifications for others
who are interested in exploring the topic.

It might have been preferable for Defkalion not to attempt to engage the
public at all and to stay in stealth mode as long as possible.  I can
understand their learning about PR as they go.  But with opinions so set
against LENR in some mainstream scientific circles, here's to hoping that
other initiatives will steer a steadier course in how they communicate to
the public what they're doing.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Guenter Wildgruber]

 Von: Craig Brown 
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Gesendet: 0:42 Donnerstag, 1.März 2012
Betreff: RE: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)
 

>...if they did that would be a bad move.

Ofcourse.

But remember.:
If somebody said, that the sun would not revolve around the earth, what would 
have been his fate?
(eg here around me, 200m away: the biggest fusion-research-centre in Germany 
would collapse in an instant.
So what would their opinion be? Thousands of jobs. Billions of funding. You 
guess.)

The burden of proof is quite heavy, even if  You state the obvious, right?

RE: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Craig Brown]

Defkalion have previously stated that the groups of testers were entirely free to publish their own results. Perhaps we will start to see announcemnts turn up online over the coming weeks/months. I don't think Defkalion will try to restrict them talking - if they did that would be a bad move.


 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety
(NyTeknik)
From: Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, March 01, 2012 8:07 am
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

Do not expect to see any data from these tests:"Until Defkalion Green Technologies has its product, we shall no longer get involved in the games and blogs of online media. Our next announcement in the coming months will be that of a successful and certified product." http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1278  Data is surely a  part  of  these  online games.2012/2/29 Jouni Valkonen <jounivalko...@gmail.com> I do not see how they have changed their test protocol. They did this just like they told to do, that is a twin test. I guess that they first thought to do it 2x24 hours, but 2x12 hours was find to be enough for the testing purpose, that was to demonstrate the cold fusion effect. Of course these kind of tests do not give information on long term performance.  But anyway, we need to wait for the report if it is going to be published before April 1st, when all planned tests are finished.    ―Jouni  On 29 Feb 2012, at 19:52, Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:  > Defkalion does not bother to explain why these tests differ > significantly from those that were originally planned. It is ok to > change plans, but without an explanation it makes their behaviour look > suspicious. Similarly they never explained why the tests planned for > last august never occured. IMO, this is bad PR on their part. > > Harry > > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Making tests- internal or with other parties is now >> a routine activity for DGT; tests can be of different duration and can >> differ by other parameters too. Till >> we have no data and other information, we cannot say what the tests show. >> The tests are done with and for people who will take decisions and have >> influence. >> If these people do not need or do not like publicity,our curiosity will >> suffer. >> Peter >> >> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> So, each reaction merely last 12 hours and not 48 hours. 2 teams already, >>> when we just expected only 1. *facepalm* >>> >>> This story gets worse and worse for DGT. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 2012/2/29 Robert Leguillon <robert.leguil...@hotmail.com> >>>> >>>> UPDATED (February 29): In an interview with New Technology, said >>>> Alexandros Xanthoulis that the test was conducted on 24 February and that it >>>> is not focused on security, as the product is ready for such tests. The >>>> focus instead was to show that the released heat energy from a "Low Energy >>>> Nuclear Reaction" and not from a chemical source. The test lasted for 24 >>>> hours and comprising both an empty and active site reactor changed after 12 >>>> hours. Xanthoulis also told that two of the seven international groups have >>>> already carried out their tests and that the final test is scheduled for >>>> late March. He did not know when or if the test results will be published. / >>>> End update /. >>>> >>>> >>>> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyteknik.se%2Fnyheter%2Fenergi_miljo%2Fenergi%2Farticle3419329.ece >>>> >>>>  >>>> From: alain.sep...@gmail.com >>>> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:59:44 +0100 >>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety >>>> (NyTeknik) >>>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889 >>>> Defkalion disagree with that article: >>>> >>>> "Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the >>>> journalist. >>>> We expect his response after a direct communication with him. >>>> DGT" >>>> >>>> 2012/2/29 Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>> Defkalion failed 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Guenter Wildgruber]

 Von: Daniel Rocha 
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Gesendet: 23:07 Mittwoch, 29.Februar 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)
 

Do not expect to see any data from these tests:

"Until Defkalion Green Technologies has its product, we shall no longer get 
involved in the games and blogs of online media. Our next announcement in the 
coming months will be that of a successful and certified product."

http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1278 
###
Daniel, 
sorry to say, but You seem to be one of the lot, who cannot hold the water.

DGT did not make a substantial error up to now.
Btw, my own projects often have delays and complications and modifications. 
That's the way it is.

In a situation like DGK or Rossi You have to fight against a headwind of 99%, 
and the rest is a substantial lot of idiots, who cannot tell the difference 
between a hole and a substantial spot.

In this case the 'data'-question is largely irrelevant. COP 20 can even 
detected by a else blind government-official.

The DGK-issue can be settled by just waiting a month or two.
So what is the REAL issue of the childish? To know it at the first minute, or 
what?

Calm down.

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Daniel Rocha]

Do not expect to see any data from these tests:

"Until Defkalion Green Technologies has its product, we shall no longer get
involved in the games and blogs of online media. Our next announcement in
the coming months will be that of a successful and certified product."

http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1278

Data is surely a  part  of  these  online games.

2012/2/29 Jouni Valkonen 

> I do not see how they have changed their test protocol. They did this just
> like they told to do, that is a twin test. I guess that they first thought
> to do it 2x24 hours, but 2x12 hours was find to be enough for the testing
> purpose, that was to demonstrate the cold fusion effect. Of course these
> kind of tests do not give information on long term performance.
>
> But anyway, we need to wait for the report if it is going to be published
> before April 1st, when all planned tests are finished.
>
>   --Jouni
>
> On 29 Feb 2012, at 19:52, Harry Veeder  wrote:
>
> > Defkalion does not bother to explain why these tests differ
> > significantly from those that were originally planned. It is ok to
> > change plans, but without an explanation it makes their behaviour look
> > suspicious. Similarly they never explained why the tests planned for
> > last august never occured. IMO, this is bad PR on their part.
> >
> > Harry
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Peter Gluck 
> wrote:
> >> Making tests- internal or with other parties is now
> >> a routine activity for DGT; tests can be of different duration and can
> >> differ by other parameters too. Till
> >> we have no data and other information, we cannot say what the tests
> show.
> >> The tests are done with and for people who will take decisions and have
> >> influence.
> >> If these people do not need or do not like publicity,our curiosity will
> >> suffer.
> >> Peter
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Daniel Rocha 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> So, each reaction merely last 12 hours and not 48 hours. 2 teams
> already,
> >>> when we just expected only 1. *facepalm*
> >>>
> >>> This story gets worse and worse for DGT.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2012/2/29 Robert Leguillon 
> >>>>
> >>>> UPDATED (February 29): In an interview with New Technology, said
> >>>> Alexandros Xanthoulis that the test was conducted on 24 February and
> that it
> >>>> is not focused on security, as the product is ready for such tests.
> The
> >>>> focus instead was to show that the released heat energy from a "Low
> Energy
> >>>> Nuclear Reaction" and not from a chemical source. The test lasted for
> 24
> >>>> hours and comprising both an empty and active site reactor changed
> after 12
> >>>> hours. Xanthoulis also told that two of the seven international
> groups have
> >>>> already carried out their tests and that the final test is scheduled
> for
> >>>> late March. He did not know when or if the test results will be
> published. /
> >>>> End update /.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyteknik.se%2Fnyheter%2Fenergi_miljo%2Fenergi%2Farticle3419329.ece
> >>>>
> >>>> 
> >>>> From: alain.sep...@gmail.com
> >>>> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:59:44 +0100
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety
> >>>> (NyTeknik)
> >>>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889
> >>>> Defkalion disagree with that article:
> >>>>
> >>>> "Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the
> >>>> journalist.
> >>>> We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
> >>>> DGT"
> >>>>
> >>>> 2012/2/29 Harry Veeder 
> >>>>
> >>>> Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
> >>>> representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
> >>>> Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
> >>>> annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
> >>>> gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
> >>>> meant?
> >>>>
> >>>> Harry
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha 
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>> " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The
> >>>>> sources
> >>>>> also said that the test was not focused on power or energy
> measurements
> >>>>> but
> >>>>> rather on safety."
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> >>>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> >>> danieldi...@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Dr. Peter Gluck
> >> Cluj, Romania
> >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
> >>
> >
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Jouni Valkonen]

I do not see how they have changed their test protocol. They did this just like 
they told to do, that is a twin test. I guess that they first thought to do it 
2x24 hours, but 2x12 hours was find to be enough for the testing purpose, that 
was to demonstrate the cold fusion effect. Of course these kind of tests do not 
give information on long term performance.

But anyway, we need to wait for the report if it is going to be published 
before April 1st, when all planned tests are finished.

   ―Jouni

On 29 Feb 2012, at 19:52, Harry Veeder  wrote:

> Defkalion does not bother to explain why these tests differ
> significantly from those that were originally planned. It is ok to
> change plans, but without an explanation it makes their behaviour look
> suspicious. Similarly they never explained why the tests planned for
> last august never occured. IMO, this is bad PR on their part.
> 
> Harry
> 
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Peter Gluck  wrote:
>> Making tests- internal or with other parties is now
>> a routine activity for DGT; tests can be of different duration and can
>> differ by other parameters too. Till
>> we have no data and other information, we cannot say what the tests show.
>> The tests are done with and for people who will take decisions and have
>> influence.
>> If these people do not need or do not like publicity,our curiosity will
>> suffer.
>> Peter
>> 
>> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:
>>> 
>>> So, each reaction merely last 12 hours and not 48 hours. 2 teams already,
>>> when we just expected only 1. *facepalm*
>>> 
>>> This story gets worse and worse for DGT.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2012/2/29 Robert Leguillon 
>>>> 
>>>> UPDATED (February 29): In an interview with New Technology, said
>>>> Alexandros Xanthoulis that the test was conducted on 24 February and that 
>>>> it
>>>> is not focused on security, as the product is ready for such tests. The
>>>> focus instead was to show that the released heat energy from a "Low Energy
>>>> Nuclear Reaction" and not from a chemical source. The test lasted for 24
>>>> hours and comprising both an empty and active site reactor changed after 12
>>>> hours. Xanthoulis also told that two of the seven international groups have
>>>> already carried out their tests and that the final test is scheduled for
>>>> late March. He did not know when or if the test results will be published. 
>>>> /
>>>> End update /.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyteknik.se%2Fnyheter%2Fenergi_miljo%2Fenergi%2Farticle3419329.ece
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: alain.sep...@gmail.com
>>>> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:59:44 +0100
>>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety
>>>> (NyTeknik)
>>>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889
>>>> Defkalion disagree with that article:
>>>> 
>>>> "Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the
>>>> journalist.
>>>> We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
>>>> DGT"
>>>> 
>>>> 2012/2/29 Harry Veeder 
>>>> 
>>>> Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
>>>> representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
>>>> Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
>>>> annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
>>>> gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
>>>> meant?
>>>> 
>>>> Harry
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according
>>>>> to
>>>>> sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The
>>>>> sources
>>>>> also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements
>>>>> but
>>>>> rather on safety."
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Dr. Peter Gluck
>> Cluj, Romania
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Harry Veeder]

Defkalion does not bother to explain why these tests differ
significantly from those that were originally planned. It is ok to
change plans, but without an explanation it makes their behaviour look
suspicious. Similarly they never explained why the tests planned for
last august never occured. IMO, this is bad PR on their part.

Harry

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Peter Gluck  wrote:
> Making tests- internal or with other parties is now
> a routine activity for DGT; tests can be of different duration and can
> differ by other parameters too. Till
> we have no data and other information, we cannot say what the tests show.
> The tests are done with and for people who will take decisions and have
> influence.
> If these people do not need or do not like publicity,our curiosity will
> suffer.
> Peter
>
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:
>>
>> So, each reaction merely last 12 hours and not 48 hours. 2 teams already,
>> when we just expected only 1. *facepalm*
>>
>> This story gets worse and worse for DGT.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2012/2/29 Robert Leguillon 
>>>
>>> UPDATED (February 29): In an interview with New Technology, said
>>> Alexandros Xanthoulis that the test was conducted on 24 February and that it
>>> is not focused on security, as the product is ready for such tests. The
>>> focus instead was to show that the released heat energy from a "Low Energy
>>> Nuclear Reaction" and not from a chemical source. The test lasted for 24
>>> hours and comprising both an empty and active site reactor changed after 12
>>> hours. Xanthoulis also told that two of the seven international groups have
>>> already carried out their tests and that the final test is scheduled for
>>> late March. He did not know when or if the test results will be published. /
>>> End update /.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyteknik.se%2Fnyheter%2Fenergi_miljo%2Fenergi%2Farticle3419329.ece
>>>
>>> 
>>> From: alain.sep...@gmail.com
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:59:44 +0100
>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety
>>> (NyTeknik)
>>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889
>>> Defkalion disagree with that article:
>>>
>>> "Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the
>>> journalist.
>>> We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
>>> DGT"
>>>
>>> 2012/2/29 Harry Veeder 
>>>
>>> Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
>>> representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
>>> Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
>>> annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
>>> gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
>>> meant?
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha 
>>> wrote:
>>> > " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according
>>> > to
>>> > sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The
>>> > sources
>>> > also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements
>>> > but
>>> > rather on safety."
>>> >
>>> > http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>> > danieldi...@gmail.com
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Gluck
> Cluj, Romania
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Daniel Rocha]

I wish it was only my curiosity that were suffering. I feel more
disappointed than anxious for results.

2012/2/29 Peter Gluck 

> Making tests- internal or with other parties is now
> a routine activity for DGT; tests can be of different duration and can
> differ by other parameters too. Till
> we have no data and other information, we cannot say what the tests show.
> The tests are done with and for people who will take decisions and have
> influence.
> If these people do not need or do not like publicity,our curiosity will
> suffer.
> Peter
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>> So, each reaction merely last 12 hours and not 48 hours. 2 teams already,
>> when we just expected only 1. *facepalm*
>>
>> This story gets worse and worse for DGT.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2012/2/29 Robert Leguillon 
>>
>>>  *UPDATED* (February 29): In an interview with New Technology, said
>>> Alexandros Xanthoulis that the test was conducted on 24 February and that
>>> it is not focused on security, as the product is ready for such tests. The
>>> focus instead was to show that the released heat energy from a "Low Energy
>>> Nuclear Reaction" and not from a chemical source. The test lasted for
>>> 24 hours and comprising both an empty and active site reactor changed after
>>> 12 hours. Xanthoulis also told that two of the seven international
>>> groups have already carried out their tests and that the final test is
>>> scheduled for late March. He did not know when or if the test results
>>> will be published. / End update /.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyteknik.se%2Fnyheter%2Fenergi_miljo%2Fenergi%2Farticle3419329.ece
>>>
>>>  --
>>> From: alain.sep...@gmail.com
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:59:44 +0100
>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety
>>> (NyTeknik)
>>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889
>>> Defkalion disagree with that article:
>>>
>>> "Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the
>>> journalist.
>>> We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
>>> DGT"
>>>
>>> 2012/2/29 Harry Veeder 
>>>
>>> Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
>>> representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
>>> Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
>>> annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
>>> gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
>>> meant?
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha 
>>> wrote:
>>> > " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according
>>> to
>>> > sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The
>>> sources
>>> > also said that the test was not focused on power or energy
>>> measurements but
>>> > rather on safety."
>>> >
>>> > http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>> > danieldi...@gmail.com
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Gluck
> Cluj, Romania
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Peter Gluck]

Making tests- internal or with other parties is now
a routine activity for DGT; tests can be of different duration and can
differ by other parameters too. Till
we have no data and other information, we cannot say what the tests show.
The tests are done with and for people who will take decisions and have
influence.
If these people do not need or do not like publicity,our curiosity will
suffer.
Peter

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> So, each reaction merely last 12 hours and not 48 hours. 2 teams already,
> when we just expected only 1. *facepalm*
>
> This story gets worse and worse for DGT.
>
>
>
>
> 2012/2/29 Robert Leguillon 
>
>>  *UPDATED* (February 29): In an interview with New Technology, said
>> Alexandros Xanthoulis that the test was conducted on 24 February and that
>> it is not focused on security, as the product is ready for such tests. The
>> focus instead was to show that the released heat energy from a "Low Energy
>> Nuclear Reaction" and not from a chemical source. The test lasted for 24
>> hours and comprising both an empty and active site reactor changed after 12
>> hours. Xanthoulis also told that two of the seven international groups
>> have already carried out their tests and that the final test is scheduled
>> for late March. He did not know when or if the test results will be
>> published. / End update /.
>>
>>
>> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyteknik.se%2Fnyheter%2Fenergi_miljo%2Fenergi%2Farticle3419329.ece
>>
>>  ------
>> From: alain.sep...@gmail.com
>> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:59:44 +0100
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety
>> (NyTeknik)
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889
>> Defkalion disagree with that article:
>>
>> "Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the
>> journalist.
>> We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
>> DGT"
>>
>> 2012/2/29 Harry Veeder 
>>
>> Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
>> representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
>> Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
>> annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
>> gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
>> meant?
>>
>> Harry
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha 
>> wrote:
>> > " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
>> > sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The
>> sources
>> > also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements
>> but
>> > rather on safety."
>> >
>> > http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
>> >
>> > --
>> > Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> > danieldi...@gmail.com
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>
>


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

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Daniel Rocha]

So, each reaction merely last 12 hours and not 48 hours. 2 teams already,
when we just expected only 1. *facepalm*

This story gets worse and worse for DGT.



2012/2/29 Robert Leguillon 

>  *UPDATED* (February 29): In an interview with New Technology, said
> Alexandros Xanthoulis that the test was conducted on 24 February and that
> it is not focused on security, as the product is ready for such tests. The
> focus instead was to show that the released heat energy from a "Low Energy
> Nuclear Reaction" and not from a chemical source. The test lasted for 24
> hours and comprising both an empty and active site reactor changed after 12
> hours. Xanthoulis also told that two of the seven international groups
> have already carried out their tests and that the final test is scheduled
> for late March. He did not know when or if the test results will be
> published. / End update /.
>
>
> http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyteknik.se%2Fnyheter%2Fenergi_miljo%2Fenergi%2Farticle3419329.ece
>
>  --
> From: alain.sep...@gmail.com
> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:59:44 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>
>
> http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889
> Defkalion disagree with that article:
>
> "Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the
> journalist.
> We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
> DGT"
>
> 2012/2/29 Harry Veeder 
>
> Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
> representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
> Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
> annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
> gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
> meant?
>
> Harry
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha 
> wrote:
> > " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
> > sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The sources
> > also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements
> but
> > rather on safety."
> >
> > http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Rocha - RJ
> > danieldi...@gmail.com
> >
>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

RE: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Robert Leguillon]

UPDATED (February 29): In an interview with New Technology, said Alexandros 
Xanthoulis that the test was conducted on 24 February and that it is not 
focused on security, as the product is ready for such tests. The focus instead 
was to show that the released heat energy from a "Low Energy Nuclear Reaction" 
and not from a chemical source. The test lasted for 24 hours and comprising 
both an empty and active site reactor changed after 12 hours. Xanthoulis also 
told that two of the seven international groups have already carried out their 
tests and that the final test is scheduled for late March. He did not know when 
or if the test results will be published. / End update /. 
 
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyteknik.se%2Fnyheter%2Fenergi_miljo%2Fenergi%2Farticle3419329.ece
 



From: alain.sep...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:59:44 +0100
Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889
Defkalion disagree with that article:

"Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the journalist.
We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
DGT"


2012/2/29 Harry Veeder 

Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
meant?

Harry



On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:
> " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
> sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The sources
> also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements but
> rather on safety."
>
> http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>


  

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Alain Sepeda]

http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272&p=6889#p6889
Defkalion disagree with that article:

"Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the
journalist.
We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
DGT"

2012/2/29 Harry Veeder 

> Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
> representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
> Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
> annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
> gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
> meant?
>
> Harry
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha 
> wrote:
> > " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
> > sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The sources
> > also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements
> but
> > rather on safety."
> >
> > http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Rocha - RJ
> > danieldi...@gmail.com
> >
>
>

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Daniel Rocha]

I feel like banging my head against a wall.

2012/2/29 Akira Shirakawa 

> On 2012-02-29 02:30, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>> " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
>> sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The
>> sources also said that the test was not focused on power or energy
>> measurements but rather on safety."
>>
>> http://www.nyteknik.se/**nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/**article3419346.ece
>>
>
> DGT's reaction to Lewan's article:
>
> http://www.defkalion-energy.**com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=**1272
>
>  Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the
>> journalist.
>> We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
>> DGT
>>
>
> Cheers,
> S.A.
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Akira Shirakawa]

On 2012-02-29 02:30, Daniel Rocha wrote:

" The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The
sources also said that the test was not focused on power or energy
measurements but rather on safety."

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece


DGT's reaction to Lewan's article:

http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1272


Nytechnik article is 100% wrong based on pure speculations of the journalist.
We expect his response after a direct communication with him.
DGT


Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Harry Veeder]

Defkalion failed to make it clear on their forum that the government
representatives have so far only evaluated the Hyperion's safety.
Surely, they realize that most people interpreted their vague
annoncement of "positive results" as "positive measures of energy
gain". Why do we have to learn through Mats Lewan what they really
meant?

Harry

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:
> " The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
> sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The sources
> also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements but
> rather on safety."
>
> http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Robert]

What I found most amazing, was all of the Rossi info:
 On February 20, 2012 Rossi performed a demonstration to show the actual level 
of development. Among the participants was chemist Roland Pettersson, retired 
Associate Professor from the University of Uppsala, who also attended a test of 
Rossi's E-cat on 6 October 2011. 
Roland Pettersson told Ny Teknik that the system was now much more stable. A 
new set of control electronics was used and the system was started just pushing 
a button. However, no energy measurement was performed. 
The E-cat was apparently operated without refilling from a hydrogen canister. 
Instead the hydrogen was supposedly stored in a piece of solid material 
–possibly in a metal hydride. The material contained a few grams of hydrogen 
gas which would last for six months of operation, according to Rossi. If 
hydrogen is stored in this manner, certification of a consumer product based on 
the technology should be much easier than if a canister is included in the 
system. 
Roland Pettersson and other participants were also shown a prototype of the 
consumer version of the E-cat that Rossi says he is planning to manufacture in 
a robotized factory. As previously stated by Rossi it was slightly larger than 
an ordinary laptop, and had simple connections for input and output of water. 
Production is according to Rossi planned to start next winter or at least 
within 18 months, and a million units should be manufactured per year. The 
price is expected to be between 600 and 900 dollars, and the device should be 
easily connected to existing systems for water heating. Users should be able to 
change a cartridge of fuel after six months of operation. Rossi estimates the 
price of the cartridge to be a few tens of dollars. 
Rossi has also announced that his company in the U.S., Leonardo Corporation, is 
now owned by a group of investors and that he is the CEO. Independent testing 
of his technology has not yet been performed.

Daniel Rocha  wrote:

>" The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
>sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The sources
>also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements but
>rather on safety."
>
>http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece
>
>-- 
>Daniel Rocha - RJ
>danieldi...@gmail.com

[Vo]:DGT's 1st test did not test power, just safety (NyTeknik)

[Daniel Rocha]

" The test was supposed to start on Friday 24 February, but according to
sources of Ny Teknik it was initiated only after the weekend. The sources
also said that the test was not focused on power or energy measurements but
rather on safety."

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3419346.ece

-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com