RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
There are a lot of assumptions, but you are probably right. It would be surprising that the team didn't have a look from the 4 mm hole. What is inside of the eCat is the most important to witness (even more important that the COP1). A 4 mm hole is enough for an eye to see the inside of the tube. Even a camera of a smartphone can do this. That is a question we need to ask to the test team. They should answer us and remove any doubts. If the test team was not allowed to examine the inside of the eCat, it means then that the test wasn't independent, but well under the Rossi's tricks. It would be nice to have an answer from the tester about this as well. In the case of the ash, most probably, the results aren't presentative at all of the real reactant. The ash has hardened and glued to the inside of the tube and taken back by Rossi. We shouldn't concentrate too much on the ash except that we see transmutation ongoing inside of the eCat with isotopic change without gamma. Arnaud _ From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] Sent: samedi 18 octobre 2014 16:29 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. The reaction tube was only a 4mm diameter hole and as much a 28 cm deep. In addition, there was the plug for this end in the center of which the thermocouple was glued. The thermocouple must be present as part of the CCI/MicroFusion 3-phase control system. So, even while it was not clear from the report, the dummy runs would have been operated with the plug in the hole (probably not glued), obscuring the view into the hole. Rossi himself added the powder to this hole in the presence of others and glued in the plug. Rossi removed the plug and then the ash in the presence of others, probably not allowing them the difficult view down the reaction tube. Brian Ahern says, The Rossi test had the unknown condition that he be present at the test and nobody was to gain unfettered access to the ingredients. So, it is highly likely that no one had the opportunity to inspect the inside of this 4 mm hole well enough to know if it was virgin ceramic or powder was inside. The upshot is that we don't know that the added powder was really the whole fuel; and it is highly likely, as I said, that it was just the consumable portion plus maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. In the case of the ash, the only thing that came out was debris that had loosened from the inside. The quartz was likely from a grain in the alumina or part of the coating on the inside of the tube. Where did the 62Ni come from? With the temperature excursions of this tube, it is likely some portions flaked off from its attachment to the inside of the tube, and it was there was random junk slag from the reactions. So the ash cannot be said to have evolved from the input powder, which itself was not the active fuel. Bob Higgins On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Arnaud Kodeck arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be wrote: Bob, How do you know that the tube was first coated with enriched 62Ni as you claim here below? The observers could notice the presence of Ni on the inside wall by just looking inside the eCat before the dummy run. Arnaud _ For all we know, the inside of the reaction tube was first coated with an isotopically enriched 62Ni powder which was bonded or sintered to the inside wall. Then when the reactor was open, a few of the wall particles became dislodged and became part of the ash. These were not necessarily transmuted from the fuel, because I believe we only saw some consumable powder (probably the hydride) and maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. The point is that what was put in was not representative of the active fuel - it is a clue, but not statistically representative of the active portion of the fuel. Obviously this is an opinion. Given the high temperature, none of what Rossi originally put in would have come back out, except perhaps some small amount of the Ni that had collected in a colder spot in the reaction tube. What more likely came out were small pieces that had flaked off of the sides of the reactor tube due to thermal expansion mismatch as it was heated and cooled, that were in the tube before he put in the ~1g of consumables taken to be the fuel.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Arnaud-- As I understand, the hole was not open during operation. Operators could not look in during operation. After shutdown, without a good light source it would be hard to see anything through a 4 mm hole. Bob - Original Message - From: Arnaud Kodeck To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 2:23 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. There are a lot of assumptions, but you are probably right. It would be surprising that the team didn't have a look from the 4 mm hole. What is inside of the eCat is the most important to witness (even more important that the COP1). A 4 mm hole is enough for an eye to see the inside of the tube. Even a camera of a smartphone can do this. That is a question we need to ask to the test team. They should answer us and remove any doubts. If the test team was not allowed to examine the inside of the eCat, it means then that the test wasn't independent, but well under the Rossi's tricks. It would be nice to have an answer from the tester about this as well. In the case of the ash, most probably, the results aren't presentative at all of the real reactant. The ash has hardened and glued to the inside of the tube and taken back by Rossi. We shouldn't concentrate too much on the ash except that we see transmutation ongoing inside of the eCat with isotopic change without gamma. Arnaud -- From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] Sent: samedi 18 octobre 2014 16:29 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. The reaction tube was only a 4mm diameter hole and as much a 28 cm deep. In addition, there was the plug for this end in the center of which the thermocouple was glued. The thermocouple must be present as part of the CCI/MicroFusion 3-phase control system. So, even while it was not clear from the report, the dummy runs would have been operated with the plug in the hole (probably not glued), obscuring the view into the hole. Rossi himself added the powder to this hole in the presence of others and glued in the plug. Rossi removed the plug and then the ash in the presence of others, probably not allowing them the difficult view down the reaction tube. Brian Ahern says, The Rossi test had the unknown condition that he be present at the test and nobody was to gain unfettered access to the ingredients. So, it is highly likely that no one had the opportunity to inspect the inside of this 4 mm hole well enough to know if it was virgin ceramic or powder was inside. The upshot is that we don't know that the added powder was really the whole fuel; and it is highly likely, as I said, that it was just the consumable portion plus maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. In the case of the ash, the only thing that came out was debris that had loosened from the inside. The quartz was likely from a grain in the alumina or part of the coating on the inside of the tube. Where did the 62Ni come from? With the temperature excursions of this tube, it is likely some portions flaked off from its attachment to the inside of the tube, and it was there was random junk slag from the reactions. So the ash cannot be said to have evolved from the input powder, which itself was not the active fuel. Bob Higgins On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Arnaud Kodeck arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be wrote: Bob, How do you know that the tube was first coated with enriched 62Ni as you claim here below? The observers could notice the presence of Ni on the inside wall by just looking inside the eCat before the dummy run. Arnaud -- For all we know, the inside of the reaction tube was first coated with an isotopically enriched 62Ni powder which was bonded or sintered to the inside wall. Then when the reactor was open, a few of the wall particles became dislodged and became part of the ash. These were not necessarily transmuted from the fuel, because I believe we only saw some consumable powder (probably the hydride) and maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. The point is that what was put in was not representative of the active fuel - it is a clue, but not statistically representative of the active portion of the fuel. Obviously this is an opinion. Given the high temperature, none of what Rossi originally put in would have come back out, except perhaps some small amount of the Ni that had collected in a colder spot in the reaction tube. What more likely came out were small pieces that had flaked off of the sides of the reactor tube due to thermal expansion mismatch as it was heated and cooled, that were in the tube before he put in the ~1g of consumables taken to be the fuel.
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Bob, How do you know that the tube was first coated with enriched 62Ni as you claim here below? The observers could notice the presence of Ni on the inside wall by just looking inside the eCat before the dummy run. Arnaud _ For all we know, the inside of the reaction tube was first coated with an isotopically enriched 62Ni powder which was bonded or sintered to the inside wall. Then when the reactor was open, a few of the wall particles became dislodged and became part of the ash. These were not necessarily transmuted from the fuel, because I believe we only saw some consumable powder (probably the hydride) and maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. The point is that what was put in was not representative of the active fuel - it is a clue, but not statistically representative of the active portion of the fuel. Obviously this is an opinion. Given the high temperature, none of what Rossi originally put in would have come back out, except perhaps some small amount of the Ni that had collected in a colder spot in the reaction tube. What more likely came out were small pieces that had flaked off of the sides of the reactor tube due to thermal expansion mismatch as it was heated and cooled, that were in the tube before he put in the ~1g of consumables taken to be the fuel.
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Arnaud, He is Robert, not Bob and he never claimed to know but he is correct that the overwhelming probability is that pure Ni62 was added into the test sample in some way. Rossi may not have done it, but he had the opportunity and the motive, and the fact is clear: that the sample was compromised by the addition of a pure isotope. Is there any evidence that the observers were allowed to even look into the tube? Jones From: Arnaud Kodeck Bob, How do you know that the tube was first coated with enriched 62Ni as you claim here below? The observers could notice the presence of Ni on the inside wall by just looking inside the eCat before the dummy run. Arnaud _ For all we know, the inside of the reaction tube was first coated with an isotopically enriched 62Ni powder which was bonded or sintered to the inside wall. Then when the reactor was open, a few of the wall particles became dislodged and became part of the ash. These were not necessarily transmuted from the fuel, because I believe we only saw some consumable powder (probably the hydride) and maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. The point is that what was put in was not representative of the active fuel - it is a clue, but not statistically representative of the active portion of the fuel. Obviously this is an opinion. Given the high temperature, none of what Rossi originally put in would have come back out, except perhaps some small amount of the Ni that had collected in a colder spot in the reaction tube. What more likely came out were small pieces that had flaked off of the sides of the reactor tube due to thermal expansion mismatch as it was heated and cooled, that were in the tube before he put in the ~1g of consumables taken to be the fuel.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
The reaction tube was only a 4mm diameter hole and as much a 28 cm deep. In addition, there was the plug for this end in the center of which the thermocouple was glued. The thermocouple must be present as part of the CCI/MicroFusion 3-phase control system. So, even while it was not clear from the report, the dummy runs would have been operated with the plug in the hole (probably not glued), obscuring the view into the hole. Rossi himself added the powder to this hole in the presence of others and glued in the plug. Rossi removed the plug and then the ash in the presence of others, probably not allowing them the difficult view down the reaction tube. Brian Ahern says, The Rossi test had the unknown condition that he be present at the test and nobody was to gain unfettered access to the ingredients. So, it is highly likely that no one had the opportunity to inspect the inside of this 4 mm hole well enough to know if it was virgin ceramic or powder was inside. The upshot is that we don't know that the added powder was really the whole fuel; and it is highly likely, as I said, that it was just the consumable portion plus maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. In the case of the ash, the only thing that came out was debris that had loosened from the inside. The quartz was likely from a grain in the alumina or part of the coating on the inside of the tube. Where did the 62Ni come from? With the temperature excursions of this tube, it is likely some portions flaked off from its attachment to the inside of the tube, and it was there was random junk slag from the reactions. So the ash cannot be said to have evolved from the input powder, which itself was not the active fuel. Bob Higgins On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Arnaud Kodeck arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be wrote: Bob, How do you know that the tube was first coated with enriched 62Ni as you claim here below? The observers could notice the presence of Ni on the inside wall by just looking inside the eCat before the dummy run. Arnaud -- For all we know, the inside of the reaction tube was first coated with an isotopically enriched 62Ni powder which was bonded or sintered to the inside wall. Then when the reactor was open, a few of the wall particles became dislodged and became part of the ash. These were not necessarily transmuted from the fuel, because I believe we only saw some consumable powder (probably the hydride) and maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. The point is that what was put in was not representative of the active fuel - it is a clue, but not statistically representative of the active portion of the fuel. Obviously this is an opinion. Given the high temperature, none of what Rossi originally put in would have come back out, except perhaps some small amount of the Ni that had collected in a colder spot in the reaction tube. What more likely came out were small pieces that had flaked off of the sides of the reactor tube due to thermal expansion mismatch as it was heated and cooled, that were in the tube before he put in the ~1g of consumables taken to be the fuel.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Rossi's position might have been advanced through the addition of Ni62 isotope in that this could be claimed as proof of transmutation and associated nuclear activity. But transmutation was also proved using the increase in the Lithium 6 isotope. Rossi could not have spiked the ash with Lithium 6 since access to that isotope is restricted to the same level of access as plutonium with both being proliferation control items. So Ni62 has no value one way or the other in the propaganda game. On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com wrote: The reaction tube was only a 4mm diameter hole and as much a 28 cm deep. In addition, there was the plug for this end in the center of which the thermocouple was glued. The thermocouple must be present as part of the CCI/MicroFusion 3-phase control system. So, even while it was not clear from the report, the dummy runs would have been operated with the plug in the hole (probably not glued), obscuring the view into the hole. Rossi himself added the powder to this hole in the presence of others and glued in the plug. Rossi removed the plug and then the ash in the presence of others, probably not allowing them the difficult view down the reaction tube. Brian Ahern says, The Rossi test had the unknown condition that he be present at the test and nobody was to gain unfettered access to the ingredients. So, it is highly likely that no one had the opportunity to inspect the inside of this 4 mm hole well enough to know if it was virgin ceramic or powder was inside. The upshot is that we don't know that the added powder was really the whole fuel; and it is highly likely, as I said, that it was just the consumable portion plus maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. In the case of the ash, the only thing that came out was debris that had loosened from the inside. The quartz was likely from a grain in the alumina or part of the coating on the inside of the tube. Where did the 62Ni come from? With the temperature excursions of this tube, it is likely some portions flaked off from its attachment to the inside of the tube, and it was there was random junk slag from the reactions. So the ash cannot be said to have evolved from the input powder, which itself was not the active fuel. Bob Higgins On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Arnaud Kodeck arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be wrote: Bob, How do you know that the tube was first coated with enriched 62Ni as you claim here below? The observers could notice the presence of Ni on the inside wall by just looking inside the eCat before the dummy run. Arnaud -- For all we know, the inside of the reaction tube was first coated with an isotopically enriched 62Ni powder which was bonded or sintered to the inside wall. Then when the reactor was open, a few of the wall particles became dislodged and became part of the ash. These were not necessarily transmuted from the fuel, because I believe we only saw some consumable powder (probably the hydride) and maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. The point is that what was put in was not representative of the active fuel - it is a clue, but not statistically representative of the active portion of the fuel. Obviously this is an opinion. Given the high temperature, none of what Rossi originally put in would have come back out, except perhaps some small amount of the Ni that had collected in a colder spot in the reaction tube. What more likely came out were small pieces that had flaked off of the sides of the reactor tube due to thermal expansion mismatch as it was heated and cooled, that were in the tube before he put in the ~1g of consumables taken to be the fuel.
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
From: Axil * Rossi could not have spiked the ash with Lithium 6 since access to that isotope is restricted to the same level of access as plutonium with both being proliferation control items. Not so. Rossi could buy 6Li in kilograms if he so desired. Recent press release of interest: http://www.y12.doe.gov/global-security/lithium-based-technologies The Y12 National Security Complex supplies lithium, in unclassified forms, to customers worldwide through the DOE Office of Science, Isotope Business Office. Historically, the typical order of 6Li was only gram quantities used in research and development. However, over the past three years demand has increased steadily with typical orders of around 10–20 kg each. Such increase in demand is a direct result of the use of 6Li in neutron detectors attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: No matter how strongly you believe in the phenomenon of LENR, and I’m firmly in that camp – bad actors should be weeded out. Rossi is a bad actor here ... This is the same conclusion that Krivit has come to, and that Pomp and Mary Yugo and many others have come to. All on the basis of the most circumstantial of evidence. My theory -- these folks are not comfortable with ambiguity and gaps in one's knowledge. There is a burning desire to fill in the gaps, even when the information necessary to do so is incomplete or unavailable. The temptation to take short cuts to get to some kind of certainty must be so overwhelming to these people that they do not realize they're doing it. Eric
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
If a polariton condensate is in place throughout the E-Cat, the 900 watts of electrical heat pumping from external power would be evenly distributed throughout the total volume of the reactor. Under the influence of Polariton condensation, the temperature of the reactor's total volume would be the same as the surface temperature, say 1400C for example. There should be a 200C temperature increase at the central core but that 1600C core temperature is not witnessed by melted nickel powder and heater wiring, This 1400C external temperature is a sure sign that a polariton condensate is at work throughout the entire volume of the E-Cat On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:57 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Bob, If we assume that a high temperature structure is surrounding and immediately adjacent to the fuel chamber the materials within that chamber should be as a minimum the structure temperature unless heat is flowing into the fuel chamber. I suppose that the fuel could be cooler provided you believe some form of heat pump is absorbing the heat flowing into the fuel and sending it out in the form of high energy radiation. I do not expect for that to happen so my visualization is that the core is hotter than anywhere else within the device with the possible exception of the resistive wires directly. The core material can be cooler than the heating wires provided a path for heat to bypass the literal wires exists. That path should be available in most cases. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 10:58 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dave-- I thought it was reported that Rossi cut the end of the reactor with a diamond saw. There would have been no plugged charging hole to contend with. I do not think the temperature in the reactor was high enough to melt the Ni or Ni alloy nano particles. As I suggested the energy of reaction was released as radiant energy and did not raise the temperature of the reactants significantly. The Li metal vapor would have acted to remove heat to the wall of the reactor, if the nano particles of Ni (alloy) got to hot. It is my assumption that the temperature of the vapor (maybe plasma) was fairly uniform within the reactor vessel (alumina containment). It may be that the isotopes of Ni below 62 were indeed depleted and not seen in the ash. Bob Cook - Original Message - *From:* David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2014 5:28 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Bob, how would we explain the appearance of the ash material that was extracted from the tube? According to the testers the device can operate at higher powers than they experienced which would certainly lead to complete melting of the nickel. What are the chances that some of the other materials in the fuel mix might result in 'slag' that prevents the Nickel crystals from growing very large. It would seem likely for the condensing nickel to form a blockage of the small interior channel into which the fuel was inserted. If that happened, the amount of material that could be analyzed would be quite limited. That might explain the large amount of Ni62 if the sample were constricted to the material near the end cap and not an average. I asked about the amount of material that was collected as ash from which the samples were drawn and do not recall getting an answer. One last comment. If the true temperature of the fuel reached the level that the IR measurements suggested then I would be very surprised to find that a gram was extracted after the test was completed. Local melting and crystallization would very likely plug up the charging hole in several locations. Just my thoughts. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. One thing we can be pretty sure of is that any Ni in this reactor at 1300-1400C will have no nano-features. The nano-scale portions melt at about half the temperature of the bulk material. So what would happen is that if there was Ni with nano-scale features, these features would melt before the bulk and cease to be nano. Long before you get to 1000C, Ni particles (if that is what he used) would sinter themselves together and to the wall of the reactor. I do suspect that nano-features are still required for the reaction. In order for them to exist at these temperatures, Rossi must have substituted a new metal, perhaps zirconium. Previously he said he had experimented with other materials, but they didn't work as well as Ni. Well, in his quest to get the temperature hotter, he may have switched to one of these alternate formulations. This switch
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Robert Dorr rod...@comcast.net wrote: 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. In the case of some metals, oxygen will react with the surface of the metal thereby forming a protective layer against further corrosion. I take it this would not be possible with tungsten or another refractory? Does this imply that heating elements operating above ~ 1400 C must be used in a low-oxygen environment? I note that kanthal super, referred to by Bob Higgins elsewhere, appears to be used in some cases under a normal atmosphere: http://www.kanthal.com/scaled/11551/headtest-width960height320.jpg http://www.keithcompany.com/images/gallery/2-zone%20super%20kanthal%20heating%20elements.jpg Eric
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I wrote: I note that kanthal super, referred to by Bob Higgins elsewhere, appears to be used in some cases under a normal atmosphere: ... It now occurs to me why the alumina tubes might have been used in the Lugano test: http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat_pics/141011_lugano_fig12a.jpg The three alumina tubes on either side of the E-Cat, within which run the three cables delivering the 3-phase power, might be protecting not the cables but the surroundings, for the the cables themselves might not be Inconel at that point; they might be kanthal super or something similar, e.g., heating elements. Note that kanthal super looks like it is somewhat ductile in some of its forms: http://i00.i.aliimg.com/photo/v0/60026153072/Kanthal_Super_Heating_Elements_Kanthal_Wire_for.jpg http://i01.i.aliimg.com/photo/v0/1968666257_1/resistance_wire_kanthal_super_heating_elements_for.jpg_220x220.jpg The word brittle does not come readily to mind when I look at these images. Eric
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
yes Eric, I notice many critics just show that many people cannor manage uncertainty, unknown, the phi 1/0... there have to thing with a prediction scenario, not with alternative stories that they weight as more or less credible. moreover they cannot backtrack, like a prolog engine can do... they are greedy like those outdated optimisation methods... they can only go forward. note that this incapacity to go backward to change one position is what found the groupthink. people who starte reasonably, rationally, to believe in an hypothesis, after they invested too much (as a group) in that hypothesis, cannot accept the losses and backtrack. this is an education problem 2014-10-17 8:04 GMT+02:00 Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com: On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: No matter how strongly you believe in the phenomenon of LENR, and I’m firmly in that camp – bad actors should be weeded out. Rossi is a bad actor here ... This is the same conclusion that Krivit has come to, and that Pomp and Mary Yugo and many others have come to. All on the basis of the most circumstantial of evidence. My theory -- these folks are not comfortable with ambiguity and gaps in one's knowledge. There is a burning desire to fill in the gaps, even when the information necessary to do so is incomplete or unavailable. The temptation to take short cuts to get to some kind of certainty must be so overwhelming to these people that they do not realize they're doing it. Eric
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Dave-- My experience in the design of fission reactors includes the fact that some energy produced by the fissioning of U is lost to the outside of the fuel element and does not contribute to the internal temperature. This is true for fast neutron energies, and much of the gamma energy produced. Most however goes into thermal energy of the fuel inside the cladding because its source is the the thermal excitation of the fuel lattice by distribution of kinetic energy of fission fragments, energetic electrons and other particles, not including photons and neutrons. Until we understand the actual energy production of the LENR reactor, it is only speculation as to what the internal temperature could be. However, my speculation is that all heat in the Rossi LENR is produced without energetic neutrons or photons, but with lattice thermal (vibrational coupling to the spin energy changes) of the coherent nano particles of the reactor. This thermal heat is effectively transferred to the alumina reactor vessel with little differential temperatures within the reactor cavity itself by convection of the nano particles themselves and the Li metal vapor forming part of the mix of the hot gas interior. I consider the resonant conditions involving spin coupling in a magnetic field are involved and that Rossi has designed the reactor to maintain a constant temperature, critical to allowing the reaction (involving the Li vapor) to take place within or on the surface of the Ni nano particles. The small nano particles do not generate a significant internal temperature above the effective reactor gas temperature. Hence they do not melt and change their structure to become fused together. As Bob Higgins has suggested there may be a higher temperature substrate or alloy designed by Rossi to allow the temperature of the gas to go higher than would be possible with pure Ni nano particles. If he has not done that change, it could be the basis for reaching higher reaction temperatures and more efficient operation in any connected electrical production system. IMHO NASA should take notice to this discussion to improve their thermoelectric space probe energy sources. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 10:57 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Bob, If we assume that a high temperature structure is surrounding and immediately adjacent to the fuel chamber the materials within that chamber should be as a minimum the structure temperature unless heat is flowing into the fuel chamber. I suppose that the fuel could be cooler provided you believe some form of heat pump is absorbing the heat flowing into the fuel and sending it out in the form of high energy radiation. I do not expect for that to happen so my visualization is that the core is hotter than anywhere else within the device with the possible exception of the resistive wires directly. The core material can be cooler than the heating wires provided a path for heat to bypass the literal wires exists. That path should be available in most cases. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 10:58 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dave-- I thought it was reported that Rossi cut the end of the reactor with a diamond saw. There would have been no plugged charging hole to contend with. I do not think the temperature in the reactor was high enough to melt the Ni or Ni alloy nano particles. As I suggested the energy of reaction was released as radiant energy and did not raise the temperature of the reactants significantly. The Li metal vapor would have acted to remove heat to the wall of the reactor, if the nano particles of Ni (alloy) got to hot. It is my assumption that the temperature of the vapor (maybe plasma) was fairly uniform within the reactor vessel (alumina containment). It may be that the isotopes of Ni below 62 were indeed depleted and not seen in the ash. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Bob, how would we explain the appearance of the ash material that was extracted from the tube? According to the testers the device can operate at higher powers than they experienced which would certainly lead to complete melting of the nickel. What are the chances that some of the other materials in the fuel mix might result in 'slag' that prevents the Nickel crystals from growing very large. It would seem likely for the condensing nickel to form a blockage of the small interior channel into which the fuel was inserted. If that happened, the amount of material
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Eric-- Well said. Bob - Original Message - From: Eric Walker To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:04 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: No matter how strongly you believe in the phenomenon of LENR, and I’m firmly in that camp – bad actors should be weeded out. Rossi is a bad actor here ... This is the same conclusion that Krivit has come to, and that Pomp and Mary Yugo and many others have come to. All on the basis of the most circumstantial of evidence. My theory -- these folks are not comfortable with ambiguity and gaps in one's knowledge. There is a burning desire to fill in the gaps, even when the information necessary to do so is incomplete or unavailable. The temptation to take short cuts to get to some kind of certainty must be so overwhelming to these people that they do not realize they're doing it. Eric
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
It is not clear from the report exactly how much ash was extracted from the reactor. In the SEM of the 2 ash particles on page 45 in Appendix 3, particle 2 is silica - known to be in the grain boundaries of alumina. In 96% alumina, there are 4% of other oxides and and in 99.8% alumina, there are still these oxides between the grains, only less of them. This silica is almost certainly a particle from an alumina grain boundary. Note that the Ni particle is really a lump. It is almost a 0.5mm chunk of sintered Ni. The fact that it came out at all (as opposed to being sintered to the side) probably means it came from a cooler portion of the reactor. From working on a replica design of this reactor, the 5 cm ends of the convection tube are probably not heated with the heater wire. This means that there are probably places inside the reaction tube that are cooler and where sintering may occur between the Ni grains but not necessarily to the alumina wall. Sintering is not the same as crystal growth, and I wouldn't consider the large Ni ash grain as a crystal growth. It is more like the features of the individual grains that come in contact melt together slightly permanently bonding them with a grain boundary of oxides and contaminants remaining in the boundary. For all we know, the inside of the reaction tube was first coated with an isotopically enriched 62Ni powder which was bonded or sintered to the inside wall. Then when the reactor was open, a few of the wall particles became dislodged and became part of the ash. These were not necessarily transmuted from the fuel, because I believe we only saw some consumable powder (probably the hydride) and maybe some obfuscation Ni powder. The point is that what was put in was not representative of the active fuel - it is a clue, but not statistically representative of the active portion of the fuel. Obviously this is an opinion. Given the high temperature, none of what Rossi originally put in would have come back out, except perhaps some small amount of the Ni that had collected in a colder spot in the reaction tube. What more likely came out were small pieces that had flaked off of the sides of the reactor tube due to thermal expansion mismatch as it was heated and cooled, that were in the tube before he put in the ~1g of consumables taken to be the fuel. I don't know that he put in enough powder to ever plug up a 4 mm hole. The big agglomerate of Ni in the ash was about 0.5mm. Bob On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:28 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Bob, how would we explain the appearance of the ash material that was extracted from the tube? According to the testers the device can operate at higher powers than they experienced which would certainly lead to complete melting of the nickel. What are the chances that some of the other materials in the fuel mix might result in 'slag' that prevents the Nickel crystals from growing very large. It would seem likely for the condensing nickel to form a blockage of the small interior channel into which the fuel was inserted. If that happened, the amount of material that could be analyzed would be quite limited. That might explain the large amount of Ni62 if the sample were constricted to the material near the end cap and not an average. I asked about the amount of material that was collected as ash from which the samples were drawn and do not recall getting an answer. One last comment. If the true temperature of the fuel reached the level that the IR measurements suggested then I would be very surprised to find that a gram was extracted after the test was completed. Local melting and crystallization would very likely plug up the charging hole in several locations. Just my thoughts. Dave
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Bob, I understand your point that there may not be a substantial rise in temperature within the active core provided the energy is released in a form other than direct thermal energy. This concept appears quite sound and may in fact be operating within the HotCat. The best case scenario would be for incoming heat energy from the resistor wires diffusing into the fuel and then being converted into other forms of energy. If that were possible, the fuel might actually remain at a temperature that is slightly lower than the surrounding temperature. I have a suspicion that the laws of thermodynamics would not permit this type of trade off to exist, but I am open to be proven in error. The report mentioned that it was possible to operate the device at a power level in excess of the power chosen for the testing. If this is true, then even higher temperatures than those recorded may be possible. What is the limit to operating temperature and what establishes that value? If melting of the fuel does not quench the energy production process then the idea of fixed NAE is down the drain. There are many conflicting observations around. We need plenty of additional data before a clear understanding of exactly how this device operates can be established. I wish the testers had taken time to step up the input power in small steps while observing the output temperature. My simulation model could then be adjusted to match those observations and thereby offer much further proof of additional core power generation. The rapid power output/ power input ration seen for the one step taken is extremely strong evidence toward proof that the device works as advertised. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 17, 2014 10:29 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dave-- My experience in the design of fission reactors includes the fact that some energy produced by the fissioning of U is lost to the outside of the fuel element and does not contribute to the internal temperature. This is true for fast neutron energies, and much of the gamma energy produced. Most however goes into thermal energy of the fuel inside the cladding because its source is the the thermal excitation of the fuel lattice by distribution of kinetic energy of fission fragments, energetic electrons and other particles, not including photons and neutrons. Until we understand the actual energy production of the LENR reactor, it is only speculation as to what the internal temperature could be. However, my speculation is that all heat in the Rossi LENR is produced without energetic neutrons or photons, but with lattice thermal (vibrational coupling to the spin energy changes) of the coherent nano particles of the reactor. This thermal heat is effectively transferred to the alumina reactor vessel with little differential temperatures within the reactor cavity itself by convection of the nano particles themselves and the Li metal vapor forming part of the mix of the hot gas interior. I consider the resonant conditions involving spin coupling in a magnetic field are involved and that Rossi has designed the reactor to maintain a constant temperature, critical to allowing the reaction (involving the Li vapor) to take place within or on the surface of the Ni nano particles. The small nano particles do not generate a significant internal temperature above the effective reactor gas temperature. Hence they do not melt and change their structure to become fused together. As Bob Higgins has suggested there may be a higher temperature substrate or alloy designed by Rossi to allow the temperature of the gas to go higher than would be possible with pure Ni nano particles. If he has not done that change, it could be the basis for reaching higher reaction temperatures and more efficient operation in any connected electrical production system. IMHO NASA should take notice to this discussion to improve their thermoelectric space probe energy sources. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 10:57 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Bob, If we assume that a high temperature structure is surrounding and immediately adjacent to the fuel chamber the materials within that chamber should be as a minimum the structure temperature unless heat is flowing into the fuel chamber. I suppose that the fuel could be cooler provided you believe some form of heat pump is absorbing the heat flowing into the fuel and sending it out in the form of high energy radiation. I do not expect for that to happen so my visualization is that the core is hotter than anywhere else within the device with the possible exception of the resistive wires directly. The core
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Dave-- I agree with your comments. It occurred to me that the potential for increased power may have to due with different resonant frequencies provided by the magnetic field to effect better coupling. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 9:34 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Bob, I understand your point that there may not be a substantial rise in temperature within the active core provided the energy is released in a form other than direct thermal energy. This concept appears quite sound and may in fact be operating within the HotCat. The best case scenario would be for incoming heat energy from the resistor wires diffusing into the fuel and then being converted into other forms of energy. If that were possible, the fuel might actually remain at a temperature that is slightly lower than the surrounding temperature. I have a suspicion that the laws of thermodynamics would not permit this type of trade off to exist, but I am open to be proven in error. The report mentioned that it was possible to operate the device at a power level in excess of the power chosen for the testing. If this is true, then even higher temperatures than those recorded may be possible. What is the limit to operating temperature and what establishes that value? If melting of the fuel does not quench the energy production process then the idea of fixed NAE is down the drain. There are many conflicting observations around. We need plenty of additional data before a clear understanding of exactly how this device operates can be established. I wish the testers had taken time to step up the input power in small steps while observing the output temperature. My simulation model could then be adjusted to match those observations and thereby offer much further proof of additional core power generation. The rapid power output/ power input ration seen for the one step taken is extremely strong evidence toward proof that the device works as advertised. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 17, 2014 10:29 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dave-- My experience in the design of fission reactors includes the fact that some energy produced by the fissioning of U is lost to the outside of the fuel element and does not contribute to the internal temperature. This is true for fast neutron energies, and much of the gamma energy produced. Most however goes into thermal energy of the fuel inside the cladding because its source is the the thermal excitation of the fuel lattice by distribution of kinetic energy of fission fragments, energetic electrons and other particles, not including photons and neutrons. Until we understand the actual energy production of the LENR reactor, it is only speculation as to what the internal temperature could be. However, my speculation is that all heat in the Rossi LENR is produced without energetic neutrons or photons, but with lattice thermal (vibrational coupling to the spin energy changes) of the coherent nano particles of the reactor. This thermal heat is effectively transferred to the alumina reactor vessel with little differential temperatures within the reactor cavity itself by convection of the nano particles themselves and the Li metal vapor forming part of the mix of the hot gas interior. I consider the resonant conditions involving spin coupling in a magnetic field are involved and that Rossi has designed the reactor to maintain a constant temperature, critical to allowing the reaction (involving the Li vapor) to take place within or on the surface of the Ni nano particles. The small nano particles do not generate a significant internal temperature above the effective reactor gas temperature. Hence they do not melt and change their structure to become fused together. As Bob Higgins has suggested there may be a higher temperature substrate or alloy designed by Rossi to allow the temperature of the gas to go higher than would be possible with pure Ni nano particles. If he has not done that change, it could be the basis for reaching higher reaction temperatures and more efficient operation in any connected electrical production system. IMHO NASA should take notice to this discussion to improve their thermoelectric space probe energy sources. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 10:57 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Bob, If we assume that a high temperature structure is surrounding and immediately adjacent to the fuel chamber the materials within that chamber should be as a minimum the structure temperature unless heat is flowing
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
(Dave, my granddad is Bob, I'm Robert :) ), I would be over the moon if we had incontrovertible evidence of COP, but with a strong grounding in and respect for the scientific method you cannot and should not ever give bold assertions a free ride without vigorous critical review the skeptics of the world won't go any easier on him than I will. Which is what I am trying to provide, and unfortunately the harder I have looked at it and the more issues I have analysed the more likely it seems that the gain = 1 hypothesis is as strong as gain 1. Occams razor would then favour gain=1 rather than a collection of miraculously fortuitous LENR characteristics that include numerous transmutation pathways (fission and fusion of Ni and Li) without ionising radiation, or change in reaction rate as it goes from natural isotope ratios to essentially all Li6+Ni2, But my suspicions really shot through the roof after reading that Rossi bought 99% Ni62 from a commercial supplier at one point - and that is why I decided to look so hard at the physical attributes of the device (thermodynamics/hightemp materials are my forte) - to see whether it was thermodynamically unabiguous that there was gain 1. The needless ambiguity of the test raises my ire, that the power input is so clumsily measured when it would be so easy to use series resistors, triac switched single phase AC, PWM DC power supply or etc with the same electromagnetic effects within the reactor. Rossi with his resources could get someone to make such an unambiguous power supply/meter in a day - but as usual he has chosen the dark path of deliberate obfuscation. Likewise with the lack of thermocouples or proper flow calorimetry - so easy when the COP and power output are large. But back to the physical problems: -The major red flag is that of inconel heating wire temp being necessarily 1300-1350°C (and realistically probably lower) while thermography is claiming 1412°C surface temps screams out that there is a massive error in the calorimetry, rendering the claims of gain meaningless unless or until that error can be explained satisfactorily. Hopeful theories about refractories wires etc just don't stand up to practical considerations (joining them to inconel that will anyway be melted at joint, forming these horribly brittle materials, keeping them away from air). -Knowing that the alumina is translucent also opens up so many possibilities for errors - and the translucence is unknown and unquantified for the material used over the range of temperatures and for the range of wavelengths of emitted light created by hot embedded wires - claims of it not being a problem don't hold water due to the above demonstrated/known error in the reactor temperature. We have no idea how much porosity it has, how thin it is, or what surface impurities might accumulate during long term high temperature operation to alter emissivity/translucence etc. -That I have identified a likely construction for the reactor that gives the visual results seen during testing (glowing wires wrapped around inner tube, but with minimal and variable contact quenching bought on by differential thermal expansion), all encased in outer shell), with no reactor gain only increases the strength of the gain=0 hypothesis. This could all be fixed easily by Rossi releasing more details of construction - even photos of cut-open reactor or just doing a proper independent black box test with good calorimetry. But as ever he is playing games due to paranoia, perverseness or worse motives. He could have made billions by now and the world would be massively better off if he wasn't persisting in his school-boy intrigues. On 16 October 2014 12:25, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Bob, you appear to be too convinced that the gain is unity and are going to great lengths to obtain that result. The testers are well respected scientists and no one should assume that they are so easily misslead. Besides, there are several measurements that support the fact that the COP is greater than unity which you seem to brush off. I wonder about whether or not the actual temperature is correct as well, but am in no position to prove one way or the other. The most important observation that supports the elevated COP is the slope of output power versus input power that they measure about their chosen operating point. I can think of no way to fake that measurement without a dose of true magic. And then it would be extremely difficult to understand why the measured behavior tends to follow what my simulation predicts. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 15, 2014 11:53 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Nullis in verba. :) I believe my eyes more than others words. In finding so many potential faults with so little published information (they had a month to investigate!!) I can
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Well I can argue that there is no excess heat - The thermography is proven to be wrong (inconel resistance wires melt at 1300-1350°C 1412°C surface reactor temp claimed, and wires would have to be much hotter than reactor surface). If there is little to no conductive contact between non-melting wires and outer shell then the outer shell is only around 1000°C and there is no excess heat - a sensible physical model given what we can see in photos, with cameras perhaps 'seeing' or being badly skewed by the radiative output+ different emissivity of the wires rather than the translucent alumina of unknown thickness, porosity and transmissivity in the wavelengths of interest. So with the thermography proven to be massively in error how do you know there was any excess heat? (There is also problems with the convective heat transfer, due to sitting above a hot surface though they are smaller in impact, just as radiative heat transfer might be slightly impacted by hot frame underneath but probably also minor). On 16 October 2014 13:02, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: You could explain the glow pattern with those assumptions but you would still need to explain away the excess heat. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Not if it is touching the walls of inner or outer alumina tube in places, intermittent contact due to vagaries of original wire winding around inner tube and subsequent large differential thermal expansion so that the wire is quenched in some places but not in others. Would explain the variation in glow that we see (along with slight translucence of alumina tube), and would change as the wire gets hotter and relaxes pre-existing springiness that might otherwise hold the wire in contact with the inner tube - would lead to wire temperature increasing faster than power input would suggest - ie what we see with supposedly increasing COP. Most likely means of construction is winding wires around an inner tube, or winding them around a different mandrel and then slipping them over the tube. Bonding them to the inner tube is an extra step that (based on inconsistency/variability of surface glow) has likely not been done and for which their would be little initial motive anyway. And massive relative thermal expansion of the wire (~1%) would likely have cracked any ceramic bonding or attempts to rigidly encase the wires or bond them to the inner tube anyway. Differential thermal expansion means that the internal tube/vessel is likely only bonded to the thermocouple end cap, otherwise the external tube would be broken by axial stress due to differential thermal expansion of higher temperature of inner tube compared to external tube. On 16 October 2014 10:58, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: If the wire inside the reactor was hot enough to glow it should produce a more uniform spiral glow along the entire length of the tube. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the bright wires in the reactor. Hard to believe it would be colder inside the reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to radiate to. I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires that are the bright areas. On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw the opposite conclusion. Confirmation bias on both our parts :) I think it is equivocal at best. On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Sorry Robert, I will make every attempt to use your correct name in the future. Thanks for clarifying your reasons for exhibiting the strong critical position against the report. I admit that I harbor questions about the accuracy of the temperature measurements for many of the reasons that you point out. To me the slope in COP with temperature and the particle analysis are strong indicators that the device is generating some type of nuclear power within its core. I can not honestly believe that Rossi would be attempting a scam as you seem to think...he risks far too much. One tiny slip and he is toast. I recall reading in his blog that Ni62 was the active element from a couple of years back. At that time he was talking of developing a process that enriched the raw material in order to achieve that goal. Could that have been what he thought was happening within his reactor at the time? That would explain why he bought some of that isotope for research. I give him the benefit of the doubt. The 3 phase power concern just does not hold water to me. Remember the device tested is not normally used in isolation, but instead is a part of a much larger system. Phase balancing is quite common when a large amount of power is required and I would likely have done exactly the same thing as Rossi. There are other reasons that I believe the test proves that power is generated within the core that I have covered previously and will not repeat at this time since it is late here. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 2:20 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. (Dave, my granddad is Bob, I'm Robert :) ), I would be over the moon if we had incontrovertible evidence of COP, but with a strong grounding in and respect for the scientific method you cannot and should not ever give bold assertions a free ride without vigorous critical review the skeptics of the world won't go any easier on him than I will. Which is what I am trying to provide, and unfortunately the harder I have looked at it and the more issues I have analysed the more likely it seems that the gain = 1 hypothesis is as strong as gain 1. Occams razor would then favour gain=1 rather than a collection of miraculously fortuitous LENR characteristics that include numerous transmutation pathways (fission and fusion of Ni and Li) without ionising radiation, or change in reaction rate as it goes from natural isotope ratios to essentially all Li6+Ni2, But my suspicions really shot through the roof after reading that Rossi bought 99% Ni62 from a commercial supplier at one point - and that is why I decided to look so hard at the physical attributes of the device (thermodynamics/hightemp materials are my forte) - to see whether it was thermodynamically unabiguous that there was gain 1. The needless ambiguity of the test raises my ire, that the power input is so clumsily measured when it would be so easy to use series resistors, triac switched single phase AC, PWM DC power supply or etc with the same electromagnetic effects within the reactor. Rossi with his resources could get someone to make such an unambiguous power supply/meter in a day - but as usual he has chosen the dark path of deliberate obfuscation. Likewise with the lack of thermocouples or proper flow calorimetry - so easy when the COP and power output are large. But back to the physical problems: -The major red flag is that of inconel heating wire temp being necessarily 1300-1350°C (and realistically probably lower) while thermography is claiming 1412°C surface temps screams out that there is a massive error in the calorimetry, rendering the claims of gain meaningless unless or until that error can be explained satisfactorily. Hopeful theories about refractories wires etc just don't stand up to practical considerations (joining them to inconel that will anyway be melted at joint, forming these horribly brittle materials, keeping them away from air). -Knowing that the alumina is translucent also opens up so many possibilities for errors - and the translucence is unknown and unquantified for the material used over the range of temperatures and for the range of wavelengths of emitted light created by hot embedded wires - claims of it not being a problem don't hold water due to the above demonstrated/known error in the reactor temperature. We have no idea how much porosity it has, how thin it is, or what surface impurities might accumulate during long term high temperature operation to alter emissivity/translucence etc. -That I have identified a likely construction for the reactor that gives the visual results seen during testing (glowing wires wrapped around inner tube, but with minimal and variable contact quenching bought on by differential thermal expansion), all encased in outer shell), with no reactor
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
All fair points of view Dave. Though with regard to 3 phase, at 900W input there is obviously no need, adds a lot of mechanical complexity (3 heater wires rather than 1) and a little more electrical complexity and would still get impulsive waveform using rectified DC + half H bridge to provide an ac pwm output - really simple linear power control that is dead simple to measure and control power output of, with much greater scope for variation of pulse frequency and duration. I doubt you or any other engineer or electrician would choose to do it the crude and restrictive way he has. Haven't tackled the electrical side of things much; but as an EE would you agree that conceptually it would be possible to hide a 10kHz AC signal superimposed on the grid supplied 3phase with amplitude a little less than the AC so as not to trigger the Triac turn off? (Hardware pretty simple, just 50% duty cycle driven half-H bridge of phase added to the 50Hz signal by means of a series transformer). My rough calculation suggest that could allow 3x the power to be delivered to the reactor without showing up on the PCE meter or having any DC component. Not that I think it likely (far too much potential for getting caught by someone with a multimeter or oscilloscope), but if the power meters were known to have a max frequency threshold then could this allow you to deliver more power without it being easily spotted? On 16 October 2014 16:12, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Sorry Robert, I will make every attempt to use your correct name in the future. Thanks for clarifying your reasons for exhibiting the strong critical position against the report. I admit that I harbor questions about the accuracy of the temperature measurements for many of the reasons that you point out. To me the slope in COP with temperature and the particle analysis are strong indicators that the device is generating some type of nuclear power within its core. I can not honestly believe that Rossi would be attempting a scam as you seem to think...he risks far too much. One tiny slip and he is toast. I recall reading in his blog that Ni62 was the active element from a couple of years back. At that time he was talking of developing a process that enriched the raw material in order to achieve that goal. Could that have been what he thought was happening within his reactor at the time? That would explain why he bought some of that isotope for research. I give him the benefit of the doubt. The 3 phase power concern just does not hold water to me. Remember the device tested is not normally used in isolation, but instead is a part of a much larger system. Phase balancing is quite common when a large amount of power is required and I would likely have done exactly the same thing as Rossi. There are other reasons that I believe the test proves that power is generated within the core that I have covered previously and will not repeat at this time since it is late here. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 2:20 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. (Dave, my granddad is Bob, I'm Robert :) ), I would be over the moon if we had incontrovertible evidence of COP, but with a strong grounding in and respect for the scientific method you cannot and should not ever give bold assertions a free ride without vigorous critical review the skeptics of the world won't go any easier on him than I will. Which is what I am trying to provide, and unfortunately the harder I have looked at it and the more issues I have analysed the more likely it seems that the gain = 1 hypothesis is as strong as gain 1. Occams razor would then favour gain=1 rather than a collection of miraculously fortuitous LENR characteristics that include numerous transmutation pathways (fission and fusion of Ni and Li) without ionising radiation, or change in reaction rate as it goes from natural isotope ratios to essentially all Li6+Ni2, But my suspicions really shot through the roof after reading that Rossi bought 99% Ni62 from a commercial supplier at one point - and that is why I decided to look so hard at the physical attributes of the device (thermodynamics/hightemp materials are my forte) - to see whether it was thermodynamically unabiguous that there was gain 1. The needless ambiguity of the test raises my ire, that the power input is so clumsily measured when it would be so easy to use series resistors, triac switched single phase AC, PWM DC power supply or etc with the same electromagnetic effects within the reactor. Rossi with his resources could get someone to make such an unambiguous power supply/meter in a day - but as usual he has chosen the dark path of deliberate obfuscation. Likewise with the lack of thermocouples or proper flow calorimetry - so easy when the COP and power output
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
The reason Rossi is using a 3 phases power supply might be the rotating field created by a 3 phases AC power supply. _ From: Robert Lynn [mailto:robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com] Sent: jeudi 16 octobre 2014 11:09 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. All fair points of view Dave. Though with regard to 3 phase, at 900W input there is obviously no need, adds a lot of mechanical complexity (3 heater wires rather than 1) and a little more electrical complexity and would still get impulsive waveform using rectified DC + half H bridge to provide an ac pwm output - really simple linear power control that is dead simple to measure and control power output of, with much greater scope for variation of pulse frequency and duration. I doubt you or any other engineer or electrician would choose to do it the crude and restrictive way he has. Haven't tackled the electrical side of things much; but as an EE would you agree that conceptually it would be possible to hide a 10kHz AC signal superimposed on the grid supplied 3phase with amplitude a little less than the AC so as not to trigger the Triac turn off? (Hardware pretty simple, just 50% duty cycle driven half-H bridge of phase added to the 50Hz signal by means of a series transformer). My rough calculation suggest that could allow 3x the power to be delivered to the reactor without showing up on the PCE meter or having any DC component. Not that I think it likely (far too much potential for getting caught by someone with a multimeter or oscilloscope), but if the power meters were known to have a max frequency threshold then could this allow you to deliver more power without it being easily spotted? On 16 October 2014 16:12, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Sorry Robert, I will make every attempt to use your correct name in the future. Thanks for clarifying your reasons for exhibiting the strong critical position against the report. I admit that I harbor questions about the accuracy of the temperature measurements for many of the reasons that you point out. To me the slope in COP with temperature and the particle analysis are strong indicators that the device is generating some type of nuclear power within its core. I can not honestly believe that Rossi would be attempting a scam as you seem to think...he risks far too much. One tiny slip and he is toast. I recall reading in his blog that Ni62 was the active element from a couple of years back. At that time he was talking of developing a process that enriched the raw material in order to achieve that goal. Could that have been what he thought was happening within his reactor at the time? That would explain why he bought some of that isotope for research. I give him the benefit of the doubt. The 3 phase power concern just does not hold water to me. Remember the device tested is not normally used in isolation, but instead is a part of a much larger system. Phase balancing is quite common when a large amount of power is required and I would likely have done exactly the same thing as Rossi. There are other reasons that I believe the test proves that power is generated within the core that I have covered previously and will not repeat at this time since it is late here. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 2:20 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. (Dave, my granddad is Bob, I'm Robert :) ), I would be over the moon if we had incontrovertible evidence of COP, but with a strong grounding in and respect for the scientific method you cannot and should not ever give bold assertions a free ride without vigorous critical review the skeptics of the world won't go any easier on him than I will. Which is what I am trying to provide, and unfortunately the harder I have looked at it and the more issues I have analysed the more likely it seems that the gain = 1 hypothesis is as strong as gain 1. Occams razor would then favour gain=1 rather than a collection of miraculously fortuitous LENR characteristics that include numerous transmutation pathways (fission and fusion of Ni and Li) without ionising radiation, or change in reaction rate as it goes from natural isotope ratios to essentially all Li6+Ni2, But my suspicions really shot through the roof after reading that Rossi bought 99% Ni62 from a commercial supplier at one point - and that is why I decided to look so hard at the physical attributes of the device (thermodynamics/hightemp materials are my forte) - to see whether it was thermodynamically unabiguous that there was gain 1. The needless ambiguity of the test raises my ire, that the power input is so clumsily measured when it would be so easy to use series resistors, triac switched single phase AC, PWM DC power supply or etc with the same electromagnetic effects within the reactor. Rossi with his
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
The three phase connection is not too surprising if we assume that many more of these units are to be mounted in a complete system. It would be extra work for Rossi to construct a new device using only one phase for the scientists to measure. I give him a pass on this point. In the past I have dedicated a great deal of effort toward proving that the input power can be calculated by only considering the fundamental component of the input current. Power from a sinewave source can only be extracted by the current that is flowing at the same frequency as the source voltage. You can look this up in text books if you are curious. Briefly, power delivered from a sine wave source is determined by taking the product of the RMS voltage at that frequency and multiplying it by the RMS current at the same frequency while taking the phase difference into account. Any DC or harmonic currents entering the device due to internal effects are not able to change that calculation except for how they might enter into changing the current at the fundamental. I have made spice models of the current problem that you are mentioning and proved that this assertion is accurate. Remember that the same issue arose after the last test. Every indication is that the input power was measured accurately. It may not be quite as simple as some believe to achieve stable power control for the CATs. My simulation indicates that the COP changes throughout the input and hence output power range. The incremental COP is at a maximum below the power at which the overall COP reaches it peak. And, to complicate matters, the overall COP actually falls once the peak level is exceeded. This can be viewed as a type of negative resistance region. I am still reviewing the model to better understand the implications. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 5:08 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. All fair points of view Dave. Though with regard to 3 phase, at 900W input there is obviously no need, adds a lot of mechanical complexity (3 heater wires rather than 1) and a little more electrical complexity and would still get impulsive waveform using rectified DC + half H bridge to provide an ac pwm output - really simple linear power control that is dead simple to measure and control power output of, with much greater scope for variation of pulse frequency and duration. I doubt you or any other engineer or electrician would choose to do it the crude and restrictive way he has. Haven't tackled the electrical side of things much; but as an EE would you agree that conceptually it would be possible to hide a 10kHz AC signal superimposed on the grid supplied 3phase with amplitude a little less than the AC so as not to trigger the Triac turn off? (Hardware pretty simple, just 50% duty cycle driven half-H bridge of phase added to the 50Hz signal by means of a series transformer). My rough calculation suggest that could allow 3x the power to be delivered to the reactor without showing up on the PCE meter or having any DC component. Not that I think it likely (far too much potential for getting caught by someone with a multimeter or oscilloscope), but if the power meters were known to have a max frequency threshold then could this allow you to deliver more power without it being easily spotted? On 16 October 2014 16:12, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Sorry Robert, I will make every attempt to use your correct name in the future. Thanks for clarifying your reasons for exhibiting the strong critical position against the report. I admit that I harbor questions about the accuracy of the temperature measurements for many of the reasons that you point out. To me the slope in COP with temperature and the particle analysis are strong indicators that the device is generating some type of nuclear power within its core. I can not honestly believe that Rossi would be attempting a scam as you seem to think...he risks far too much. One tiny slip and he is toast. I recall reading in his blog that Ni62 was the active element from a couple of years back. At that time he was talking of developing a process that enriched the raw material in order to achieve that goal. Could that have been what he thought was happening within his reactor at the time? That would explain why he bought some of that isotope for research. I give him the benefit of the doubt. The 3 phase power concern just does not hold water to me. Remember the device tested is not normally used in isolation, but instead is a part of a much larger system. Phase balancing is quite common when a large amount of power is required and I would likely have done exactly the same thing as Rossi. There are other reasons that I believe the test proves that power is generated within the core that I have
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
From: Robert Lynn Well I can argue that there is no excess heat - The thermography is proven to be wrong (inconel resistance wires melt at 1300-1350°C 1412°C surface reactor temp claimed, and wires would have to be much hotter than reactor surface). Robert, Even if the thermography were not in error, meaning the internal wiring was tungsten or another conductor, and even if there was strong apparent excess heat, or no excess heat - everyone keeps overlooking the fact that Rossi intervened to prevent calibration of the so-called “dummy” reactor. That is FATAL to this report, which is little more than junk science because of that one overwhelming issue. Some observers want to blame Levi instead, but if Levi was not planning to fully calibrate anyway, that only shifts the blame, but does not change the conclusion of gross incompetence, at best - and deliberate deceit at worst. That is because it is possible, even likely - that there never was a “dummy” reactor. (to be explained) Rossi proponents either aren’t listening or do not understand that he has a long history of not playing by the rules, or else they do not understand the full implication of intervening in an “independent” report at all of the critical stages. But the lack of calibration is the key issue which dooms this report. Everything else is a footnote. The ironic thing is that failure to calibrate does not mean that there is no excess heat. In fact there is a fair to good chance that there is more excess than claimed. What the lack of calibration does mean is that Rossi is hiding something - and has used trickery to promote an agenda which includes more than financial gain. He has plenty of motive, even if his royalty deal has no milestones and even if the patent office is not impressed with these shenanigans. My best guess is that there never was a “dummy” and that the reactor which was tested came already engineered to produce excess heat, no matter what was put in it. He could have loaded it with bat guano and it would have worked. The “magic act” of loading and unloading “salted” powders then becomes the sham, which was a ploy to convince the patent office of something while throwing off the competition, and buying time. It could also be evidence of a contractual milestone in a multi-year royalty agreement. Yet Rossi may have invented something of great value. That is the irony. Let me reiterate that the odds of finding pure Ni62 (assuming that it was not salted into a sample) is greater than the proverbial monkey typing out the Twelfth Night with no typos. Rossi may well be a genius inventor, or just plain lucky but he is his own worst enemy if my suspicion is correct. That suspicion is that he staged this entire episode as a carefully crafted charade to not only fool potential competitors and the USPTO, but perhaps his benefactors at IH as well. He has thermal gain, and he justifies everything with the rationalization that if caught – he still has discovered a paradigm shift in physics. Worst of all – Rossi may well have a secret that he does not want even his benefactors to understand at this time since he does not understand it himself, and until he does, he has no one else he can trust (in his own mind). But since he is his own worst enemy, the reasoning becomes circular. This report stinks and it sets back LENR many years. attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Jones, what you write here is pure speculation. I share some concerns about the temperature measurements and how they might influence the output power, but there is certainly no serious evidence that Rossi was able to impact the testing in a serious manner. Why do you continue to suggest a scam of some type? If anything happened in error I for one believe it was an honest mistake. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 12:13 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. From: Robert Lynn Well I can argue that there is no excess heat - The thermography is proven to be wrong (inconel resistance wires melt at 1300-1350°C 1412°C surface reactor temp claimed, and wires would have to be much hotter than reactor surface). Robert, Even if the thermography were not in error, meaning the internal wiring was tungsten or another conductor, and even if there was strong apparent excess heat, or no excess heat - everyone keeps overlooking the fact that Rossi intervened to prevent calibration of the so-called “dummy” reactor. That is FATAL to this report, which is little more than junk science because of that one overwhelming issue. Some observers want to blame Levi instead, but if Levi was not planning to fully calibrate anyway, that only shifts the blame, but does not change the conclusion of gross incompetence, at best - and deliberate deceit at worst. That is because it is possible, even likely - that there never was a “dummy” reactor. (to be explained) Rossi proponents either aren’t listening or do not understand that he has a long history of not playing by the rules, or else they do not understand the full implication of intervening in an “independent” report at all of the critical stages. But the lack of calibration is the key issue which dooms this report. Everything else is a footnote. The ironic thing is that failure to calibrate does not mean that there is no excess heat. In fact there is a fair to good chance that there is more excess than claimed. What the lack of calibration does mean is that Rossi is hiding something - and has used trickery to promote an agenda which includes more than financial gain. He has plenty of motive, even if his royalty deal has no milestones and even if the patent office is not impressed with these shenanigans. My best guess is that there never was a “dummy” and that the reactor which was tested came already engineered to produce excess heat, no matter what was put in it. He could have loaded it with bat guano and it would have worked. The “magic act” of loading and unloading “salted” powders then becomes the sham, which was a ploy to convince the patent office of something while throwing off the competition, and buying time. It could also be evidence of a contractual milestone in a multi-year royalty agreement. Yet Rossi may have invented something of great value. That is the irony. Let me reiterate that the odds of finding pure Ni62 (assuming that it was not salted into a sample) is greater than the proverbial monkey typing out the Twelfth Night with no typos. Rossi may well be a genius inventor, or just plain lucky but he is his own worst enemy if my suspicion is correct. That suspicion is that he staged this entire episode as a carefully crafted charade to not only fool potential competitors and the USPTO, but perhaps his benefactors at IH as well. He has thermal gain, and he justifies everything with the rationalization that if caught – he still has discovered a paradigm shift in physics. Worst of all – Rossi may well have a secret that he does not want even his benefactors to understand at this time since he does not understand it himself, and until he does, he has no one else he can trust (in his own mind). But since he is his own worst enemy, the reasoning becomes circular. This report stinks and it sets back LENR many years.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Dear David, It might be informative if your model could be modified to check the heat production of the nickel particles and their temperature and the flow of that heat from the central channel that encloses the nickel particles to the outside edge of the reactor some centimeters away so that that temperature is maintained at a steady 1400C. It seems to me intuitively that the temperature of those particles being less than one gram in weight can support the 1400C external temperature without approaching a temperature that is beyond the melting point of nickel. I figure that there is a delta T of about 200C involved between the heat production zone and the outside edge of the reactor. That puts the nickel particles at 1600C or greater. The particles should have all melted. Something does not make sense in this regard considering that these nickel particles are receiving 900 watts of thermal stimulation in addition to the heat that they are generating through the LENR reaction. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The three phase connection is not too surprising if we assume that many more of these units are to be mounted in a complete system. It would be extra work for Rossi to construct a new device using only one phase for the scientists to measure. I give him a pass on this point. In the past I have dedicated a great deal of effort toward proving that the input power can be calculated by only considering the fundamental component of the input current. Power from a sinewave source can only be extracted by the current that is flowing at the same frequency as the source voltage. You can look this up in text books if you are curious. Briefly, power delivered from a sine wave source is determined by taking the product of the RMS voltage at that frequency and multiplying it by the RMS current at the same frequency while taking the phase difference into account. Any DC or harmonic currents entering the device due to internal effects are not able to change that calculation except for how they might enter into changing the current at the fundamental. I have made spice models of the current problem that you are mentioning and proved that this assertion is accurate. Remember that the same issue arose after the last test. Every indication is that the input power was measured accurately. It may not be quite as simple as some believe to achieve stable power control for the CATs. My simulation indicates that the COP changes throughout the input and hence output power range. The incremental COP is at a maximum below the power at which the overall COP reaches it peak. And, to complicate matters, the overall COP actually falls once the peak level is exceeded. This can be viewed as a type of negative resistance region. I am still reviewing the model to better understand the implications. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 5:08 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. All fair points of view Dave. Though with regard to 3 phase, at 900W input there is obviously no need, adds a lot of mechanical complexity (3 heater wires rather than 1) and a little more electrical complexity and would still get impulsive waveform using rectified DC + half H bridge to provide an ac pwm output - really simple linear power control that is dead simple to measure and control power output of, with much greater scope for variation of pulse frequency and duration. I doubt you or any other engineer or electrician would choose to do it the crude and restrictive way he has. Haven't tackled the electrical side of things much; but as an EE would you agree that conceptually it would be possible to hide a 10kHz AC signal superimposed on the grid supplied 3phase with amplitude a little less than the AC so as not to trigger the Triac turn off? (Hardware pretty simple, just 50% duty cycle driven half-H bridge of phase added to the 50Hz signal by means of a series transformer). My rough calculation suggest that could allow 3x the power to be delivered to the reactor without showing up on the PCE meter or having any DC component. Not that I think it likely (far too much potential for getting caught by someone with a multimeter or oscilloscope), but if the power meters were known to have a max frequency threshold then could this allow you to deliver more power without it being easily spotted? On 16 October 2014 16:12, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Sorry Robert, I will make every attempt to use your correct name in the future. Thanks for clarifying your reasons for exhibiting the strong critical position against the report. I admit that I harbor questions about the accuracy of the temperature measurements for many of the reasons that you point out. To me the slope in COP with temperature
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Dave, that was my first thought too, but in going over the construction of the heater coils, it turned out to be a pain to deal with the heater wire cross-overs. You would not do this just because you were planning to connect the array to a 3-phase supply. You could simply have an array of 3N, have single phase coils, and balance each phase with the single phase coils in the array device. To go to the trouble of making each unit 3-phase demands a better reason. I posted earlier that I believe that the 3-phase is specifically used to create a linear moving field (like a linear motor) to circulate the lithium plasma that likely forms at high temperature. This would make the device much more uniformly heated in the face of chaotic LENR occurring inside the reactor and would help avoid hot spots. Bob On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:13 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The three phase connection is not too surprising if we assume that many more of these units are to be mounted in a complete system. It would be extra work for Rossi to construct a new device using only one phase for the scientists to measure. I give him a pass on this point.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I wish my model would handle that question, but it is quite limited. Think of it as being able to estimate overall trends instead of minute details. Stable operation of the HotCat appears to be due to the geometry of the device. The external area and how it is treated with the rings, etc. could well be a secret known to Rossi and his team. Think of the behavior of a fuel sample when exposed to heat and the design becomes more transparent. The input heat source can be viewed as a bias that sets the operating point to which the reactor responds. Once an operating point is established by obtaining a fixed temperature you can then determine whether or not the device is stable. Consider a tiny delta in temperature occurs due to noise or parameter changes. This small increase in temperature results in additional heat being produced by the core. Now that increase in heat energy is applied to the core and leads to an increase of its temperature. But, the increase in core temperature also results in an increase to the amount of energy that is radiated, convected and conducted away from itself. A stable system is able to expel more heat in this manner than is generated by the core. And, the closer to a balance you come by geometry and operational temperature, the higher the positive feedback and hence COP. That is the secret to the design of the geometry according to my model. Of course none of this fancy balancing occurs when a dead core is used. In that case the input and output are always tied directly to the source and no positive feedback occurs. The behavior seen by the scientists matches that which is expected when a live core is present and is the main reason that I am confident that real core heating is present. It makes complete sense. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 12:40 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dear David, It might be informative if your model could be modifiedto check the heat production of the nickel particles and their temperature andthe flow of that heat from the central channel that encloses the nickelparticles to the outside edge of the reactor some centimeters away so that thattemperature is maintained at a steady 1400C. It seems to me intuitively that the temperature of thoseparticles being less than one gram in weight can support the 1400C externaltemperature without approaching a temperature that is beyond the melting pointof nickel. I figure that there is a delta T of about 200C involved betweenthe heat production zone and the outside edge of the reactor. That puts thenickel particles at 1600C or greater. The particles should have all melted.Something does not make sense in this regard considering that these nickelparticles are receiving 900 watts of thermal stimulation in addition to theheat that they are generating through the LENR reaction. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The three phase connection is not too surprising if we assume that many more of these units are to be mounted in a complete system. It would be extra work for Rossi to construct a new device using only one phase for the scientists to measure. I give him a pass on this point. In the past I have dedicated a great deal of effort toward proving that the input power can be calculated by only considering the fundamental component of the input current. Power from a sinewave source can only be extracted by the current that is flowing at the same frequency as the source voltage. You can look this up in text books if you are curious. Briefly, power delivered from a sine wave source is determined by taking the product of the RMS voltage at that frequency and multiplying it by the RMS current at the same frequency while taking the phase difference into account. Any DC or harmonic currents entering the device due to internal effects are not able to change that calculation except for how they might enter into changing the current at the fundamental. I have made spice models of the current problem that you are mentioning and proved that this assertion is accurate. Remember that the same issue arose after the last test. Every indication is that the input power was measured accurately. It may not be quite as simple as some believe to achieve stable power control for the CATs. My simulation indicates that the COP changes throughout the input and hence output power range. The incremental COP is at a maximum below the power at which the overall COP reaches it peak. And, to complicate matters, the overall COP actually falls once the peak level is exceeded. This can be viewed as a type of negative resistance region. I am still reviewing the model to better understand the implications. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
From: David Roberson Jones, what you write here is pure speculation. Dave - I made it clear that this was my opinion. Can I not express my opinion? In order to fill in the blanks, to make a complete scenario – that does require speculation. But it is fact, ABSOLUTE FACT - that the odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. Given that, a scam is the only probable scenario. From there on, follow the buck. I share some concerns about the temperature measurements and how they might influence the output power, but there is certainly no serious evidence that Rossi was able to impact the testing in a serious manner. Temperature is not my concern. In fact, the temperature measurement could be correct or even on the low side. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. That is my problem. Why do you continue to suggest a scam of some type? The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. If anything happened in error I for one believe it was an honest mistake. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. There is no room for honest mistake given that the testing was done two different ways by two different people with the same result. This isotope was salted into the sample. From there on, the details to make it fit together are speculation, but so is extending you paper model to an un-calibrated experiment which was improperly performed. Jones
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Bob, there may be a need for the type of behavior that you are describing, but I am looking for the simplest explanation. I plead ignorant to your description of an issue with the wires crossing over in some manner. In my imagination, I can see all three wires spiriling around in parallel without any cross overs. Perhaps I need to construct a model before I can get an accurate understanding of how this occurs. Have you performed that task? It appears to me that each resistor wire is terminated into a single external wire and I fail to see why that would be difficult to do. My visualization might be impaired! Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 12:41 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dave, that was my first thought too, but in going over the construction of the heater coils, it turned out to be a pain to deal with the heater wire cross-overs. You would not do this just because you were planning to connect the array to a 3-phase supply. You could simply have an array of 3N, have single phase coils, and balance each phase with the single phase coils in the array device. To go to the trouble of making each unit 3-phase demands a better reason. I posted earlier that I believe that the 3-phase is specifically used to create a linear moving field (like a linear motor) to circulate the lithium plasma that likely forms at high temperature. This would make the device much more uniformly heated in the face of chaotic LENR occurring inside the reactor and would help avoid hot spots. Bob On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:13 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The three phase connection is not too surprising if we assume that many more of these units are to be mounted in a complete system. It would be extra work for Rossi to construct a new device using only one phase for the scientists to measure. I give him a pass on this point.
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
BTW Dave, No matter how strongly you believe in the phenomenon of LENR, and I’m firmly in that camp – bad actors should be weeded out. Rossi is a bad actor here, even if he is only trying to protect his trade secret. We would all be better off if this report never surfaced. John Stuart Mill sez (courtesy of Gary Wright) “Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on, and do nothing.” From: David Roberson Jones, what you write here is pure speculation. Dave - I made it clear that this was my opinion. Can I not express my opinion? In order to fill in the blanks, to make a complete scenario – that does require speculation. But it is fact, ABSOLUTE FACT - that the odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. Given that, a scam is the only probable scenario. From there on, follow the buck. I share some concerns about the temperature measurements and how they might influence the output power, but there is certainly no serious evidence that Rossi was able to impact the testing in a serious manner. Temperature is not my concern. In fact, the temperature measurement could be correct or even on the low side. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. That is my problem. Why do you continue to suggest a scam of some type? The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. If anything happened in error I for one believe it was an honest mistake. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. There is no room for honest mistake given that the testing was done two different ways by two different people with the same result. This isotope was salted into the sample. From there on, the details to make it fit together are speculation, but so is extending you paper model to an un-calibrated experiment which was improperly performed. Jones
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Jones-please continue to speculate about new thoughts as that is our best method of getting to the truth. I get a bit concerned when I hear you speak of scams. You apparently have drawn that conclusion at this point due to the isotope measurements and that is certainly strange. But, have you considered that something unusual is happening to the fuel that perhaps enabled the enriched Ni62 to be expelled but trapped most of the other material? Strange things happen in the universe, some of which defy explanation until the complete picture is obtained. You have a right to question occurrences that do not add up, but I hope that you will avoid using the 's' word until it has been proven. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 1:27 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. From:David Roberson Jones, what you write here is pure speculation. Dave - I made it clearthat this was my opinion. Can I not express my opinion? In order to fill in theblanks, to make a complete scenario – that does require speculation. But it is fact, ABSOLUTEFACT - that the odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. Giventhat, a scam is the only probable scenario. From there on, follow the buck. I share some concerns about the temperature measurements and howthey might influence the output power, but there is certainly no seriousevidence that Rossi was able to impact the testing in a serious manner. Temperature is not myconcern. In fact, the temperature measurement could be correct or even on thelow side. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. That ismy problem. Why do you continue to suggest a scam of some type? The odds of finding pureNi62 in a sample are astronomical. If anything happened in error I for one believe it was an honestmistake. The odds of finding pureNi62 in a sample are astronomical. There is no room for honest mistake giventhat the testing was done two different ways by two different people with thesame result. This isotope was saltedinto the sample. From there on, the details to make it fit together are speculation,but so is extending you paper model to an un-calibrated experiment which wasimproperly performed. Jones
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Dave, I like the idea of a triply wound helix, but I will have to think about whether it would provide the same kind of conveyor moving field - it may. It would solve the cross-over issues of the coils. It is the non-axial components of the field that would seem to be at play in both cases - triple helix or three successive axial coils. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:29 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Bob, there may be a need for the type of behavior that you are describing, but I am looking for the simplest explanation. I plead ignorant to your description of an issue with the wires crossing over in some manner. In my imagination, I can see all three wires spiriling around in parallel without any cross overs. Perhaps I need to construct a model before I can get an accurate understanding of how this occurs. Have you performed that task? It appears to me that each resistor wire is terminated into a single external wire and I fail to see why that would be difficult to do. My visualization might be impaired! Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 12:41 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dave, that was my first thought too, but in going over the construction of the heater coils, it turned out to be a pain to deal with the heater wire cross-overs. You would not do this just because you were planning to connect the array to a 3-phase supply. You could simply have an array of 3N, have single phase coils, and balance each phase with the single phase coils in the array device. To go to the trouble of making each unit 3-phase demands a better reason. I posted earlier that I believe that the 3-phase is specifically used to create a linear moving field (like a linear motor) to circulate the lithium plasma that likely forms at high temperature. This would make the device much more uniformly heated in the face of chaotic LENR occurring inside the reactor and would help avoid hot spots. Bob On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:13 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The three phase connection is not too surprising if we assume that many more of these units are to be mounted in a complete system. It would be extra work for Rossi to construct a new device using only one phase for the scientists to measure. I give him a pass on this point.
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
From: David Roberson * Jones-please continue to speculate about new thoughts as that is our best method of getting to the truth. I get a bit concerned when I hear you speak of scams. Please suggest a better word to describe the actions of an inventor – if he has a breakthrough which could benefit society hugely, resorts to dishonesty designed to protect details which he does not understand in hopes that other cannot benefit, instead of himself. Of course, if he has nothing at all it is a more obvious scam, but is there a euphemism for this subset? Would “quasi-scam” be more appropriate? This is not “victimless”. Would not society be better off if Rossi chose to reveal nothing? This level of deceptive conduct could actually be more despicable than the blatant TV scams such as Acai berries, diet pills, Miss Cleo or the Video Professor - since it is designed to keep intelligent people and researchers in the field from finding the truth, instead of merely enriching the scammer at the expense of the gullible. * You apparently have drawn that conclusion at this point due to the isotope measurements and that is certainly strange. But, have you considered that something unusual is happening to the fuel that perhaps enabled the enriched Ni62 to be expelled but trapped most of the other material? Yes, I have agonized over this for many days – scouring the technical journals, hoping to find any glimmer of an alternative scenario which would not imply intentional deception. There is none. Again, let me paraphrase JSM: it is delusion that one can do no harm if he sits back, observes and forms no opinion. Dishonest men need nothing more than that good men should stay silent and do nothing. Dave - I made it clear that this was my opinion. Can I not express my opinion? In order to fill in the blanks, to make a complete scenario – that does require speculation. But it is fact, ABSOLUTE FACT - that the odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. Given that, a scam is the only probable scenario. From there on, follow the buck. I share some concerns about the temperature measurements and how they might influence the output power, but there is certainly no serious evidence that Rossi was able to impact the testing in a serious manner. Temperature is not my concern. In fact, the temperature measurement could be correct or even on the low side. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. That is my problem. Why do you continue to suggest a scam of some type? The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. If anything happened in error I for one believe it was an honest mistake. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. There is no room for honest mistake given that the testing was done two different ways by two different people with the same result. This isotope was salted into the sample. From there on, the details to make it fit together are speculation, but so is extending you paper model to an un-calibrated experiment which was improperly performed. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Jones: I thought you were a lawyer, what you discuss isn’t fraud.So for example, let’s say Rossi knew that by setting up the constraints associated with testing the ash, (1% from stuff that fell out), everyone would be misled as to what was actually happening. That’s more appropriately described as protecting your IP. It isn’t actionable and I am not even sure it is unethical. We have no right to IH’s IP. Misleading you may be good business and you are not in privity. Now if the whole thing doesn’t really work, now that is a horse of a different color, but even then we wouldn’t be wronged. The parties with rights would be those in privity, IH, any other investors. I doubt even the testers would have an actionable right, but it would be possible depending on the agreement. Ransom _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 1:58 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. From: David Roberson * Jones-please continue to speculate about new thoughts as that is our best method of getting to the truth. I get a bit concerned when I hear you speak of scams. Please suggest a better word to describe the actions of an inventor – if he has a breakthrough which could benefit society hugely, resorts to dishonesty designed to protect details which he does not understand in hopes that other cannot benefit, instead of himself. Of course, if he has nothing at all it is a more obvious scam, but is there a euphemism for this subset? Would “quasi-scam” be more appropriate? This is not “victimless”. Would not society be better off if Rossi chose to reveal nothing? This level of deceptive conduct could actually be more despicable than the blatant TV scams such as Acai berries, diet pills, Miss Cleo or the Video Professor - since it is designed to keep intelligent people and researchers in the field from finding the truth, instead of merely enriching the scammer at the expense of the gullible. * You apparently have drawn that conclusion at this point due to the isotope measurements and that is certainly strange. But, have you considered that something unusual is happening to the fuel that perhaps enabled the enriched Ni62 to be expelled but trapped most of the other material? Yes, I have agonized over this for many days – scouring the technical journals, hoping to find any glimmer of an alternative scenario which would not imply intentional deception. There is none. Again, let me paraphrase JSM: it is delusion that one can do no harm if he sits back, observes and forms no opinion. Dishonest men need nothing more than that good men should stay silent and do nothing. Dave - I made it clear that this was my opinion. Can I not express my opinion? In order to fill in the blanks, to make a complete scenario – that does require speculation. But it is fact, ABSOLUTE FACT - that the odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. Given that, a scam is the only probable scenario. From there on, follow the buck. I share some concerns about the temperature measurements and how they might influence the output power, but there is certainly no serious evidence that Rossi was able to impact the testing in a serious manner. Temperature is not my concern. In fact, the temperature measurement could be correct or even on the low side. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. That is my problem. Why do you continue to suggest a scam of some type? The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. If anything happened in error I for one believe it was an honest mistake. The odds of finding pure Ni62 in a sample are astronomical. There is no room for honest mistake given that the testing was done two different ways by two different people with the same result. This isotope was salted into the sample. From there on, the details to make it fit together are speculation, but so is extending you paper model to an un-calibrated experiment which was improperly performed. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
From: Randy Wuller So for example, let’s say Rossi knew that by setting up the constraints associated with testing the ash, (1% from stuff that fell out), everyone would be misled as to what was actually happening. That’s more appropriately described as protecting your IP. Randy - I never said anything about a crime. Why are you? None of the TV scams I mentioned were prosecuted as a crime, as far as I know. If dishonesty was a crime, we would have to lock up half of the politicians in DC. Make that: more than half. And also - aren’t you assuming that he is not misleading his funder, as well? Would your opinion change if you found out that his royalty agreement was a long-term deal structured around performance milestones? I have no idea what his deal consists of, but I doubt if he can walk away with a large sum without some kind of verification that the device actually works. It is normal business practice with many inventions that a large portion of the total royalty payment will in escrow pending milestones and/or will be delayed until cash-flow starts, meaning that a commercial product emerges. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Bob, I like your idea on the mixing plasma with the rotating field of a 3phases AC power supply. The heat is more homogeneous spread inside the reactor and create a flux. Moreover it may have an action on the reaction occurring in the eCat. Arnaud _ From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] Sent: jeudi 16 octobre 2014 18:41 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dave, that was my first thought too, but in going over the construction of the heater coils, it turned out to be a pain to deal with the heater wire cross-overs. You would not do this just because you were planning to connect the array to a 3-phase supply. You could simply have an array of 3N, have single phase coils, and balance each phase with the single phase coils in the array device. To go to the trouble of making each unit 3-phase demands a better reason. I posted earlier that I believe that the 3-phase is specifically used to create a linear moving field (like a linear motor) to circulate the lithium plasma that likely forms at high temperature. This would make the device much more uniformly heated in the face of chaotic LENR occurring inside the reactor and would help avoid hot spots. Bob On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:13 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The three phase connection is not too surprising if we assume that many more of these units are to be mounted in a complete system. It would be extra work for Rossi to construct a new device using only one phase for the scientists to measure. I give him a pass on this point.
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Jones: If it isn’t a crime it could still be the subject of a civil action, but if neither apply, what is it? Maybe there is some moral line crossed but I suggest the word scam is not the right one in that case. Ransom _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 3:11 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. From: Randy Wuller So for example, let’s say Rossi knew that by setting up the constraints associated with testing the ash, (1% from stuff that fell out), everyone would be misled as to what was actually happening. That’s more appropriately described as protecting your IP. Randy - I never said anything about a crime. Why are you? None of the TV scams I mentioned were prosecuted as a crime, as far as I know. If dishonesty was a crime, we would have to lock up half of the politicians in DC. Make that: more than half. And also - aren’t you assuming that he is not misleading his funder, as well? Would your opinion change if you found out that his royalty agreement was a long-term deal structured around performance milestones? I have no idea what his deal consists of, but I doubt if he can walk away with a large sum without some kind of verification that the device actually works. It is normal business practice with many inventions that a large portion of the total royalty payment will in escrow pending milestones and/or will be delayed until cash-flow starts, meaning that a commercial product emerges. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Axil, David etal-- I would have guessed that a vapor of Li metal (I am not sure a plasma would occur) may be a fairly good heat transfer agent, much like He works as a cooling fluid. I would be surprised if there were a 200 degree delta T between the edge of the reactor and its center. Delta T across the alumina vessel may be that 200 degrees, if the energy transfer is by photons generated by the reaction directly, rather than by lattice stimulation of the reacting material with its IR radiation, most of the heat may deposited in the reactor vessel (alumina) or escape through the vessel to the outside surroundings. Maybe Dave's calculation would be able to say what the delta T across the alumina would be with a given heat flux assuming published heat transfer coeff's for alumina. Helium gas is a good heat transfer agent and Li, being of low mass, would be almost as good. My thought about the reactor design is as follows: 1. The reactive material, Ni or some alloy of Ni is free in the vessel along with Li metal. 2. The external energy supply is an inductance heater as well as supplying an oscillating magnetic field--which is controlled to effect resonant conditions. 3. The reactants, Li and Ni nano particles, reach a temperature where the LENR happens when the magnetic field is appropriate and resonances match. 4. The reaction causes the release of photons of determined energy (a function of the magnetic field) with a change in the nuclear structure of the Li and the Ni isotopes reacting. These photons are relatively low energy and not gammas seen in classical nuclear transitions associated with high kinetic energy reactions or transitions of excited radioactive isotopes. 5. The temperature, or the combination of temperature and magnetic field strength, in the Ni nano particles control the rate of the reaction via a negative temperature coeff. much like a water cooled, U fueled, fission reactor. 6. As the free reactants are used up or become glued to the reactor vessel so that free mixing of the Ni and the Li is no longer possible, the LENR stops. 7. The electrical leads are not inconel, but are tungsten or other high temperature electrical conductor. I would not expect that corrosion is an issue with the alumina or the reactants. The wire conductors would have to hold up in a Li, nano Ni hot gas environment, however. Free O would be a problem for corrosion and may change the Ni so as to become non-reactive. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 9:40 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dear David, It might be informative if your model could be modified to check the heat production of the nickel particles and their temperature and the flow of that heat from the central channel that encloses the nickel particles to the outside edge of the reactor some centimeters away so that that temperature is maintained at a steady 1400C. It seems to me intuitively that the temperature of those particles being less than one gram in weight can support the 1400C external temperature without approaching a temperature that is beyond the melting point of nickel. I figure that there is a delta T of about 200C involved between the heat production zone and the outside edge of the reactor. That puts the nickel particles at 1600C or greater. The particles should have all melted. Something does not make sense in this regard considering that these nickel particles are receiving 900 watts of thermal stimulation in addition to the heat that they are generating through the LENR reaction. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The three phase connection is not too surprising if we assume that many more of these units are to be mounted in a complete system. It would be extra work for Rossi to construct a new device using only one phase for the scientists to measure. I give him a pass on this point. In the past I have dedicated a great deal of effort toward proving that the input power can be calculated by only considering the fundamental component of the input current. Power from a sinewave source can only be extracted by the current that is flowing at the same frequency as the source voltage. You can look this up in text books if you are curious. Briefly, power delivered from a sine wave source is determined by taking the product of the RMS voltage at that frequency and multiplying it by the RMS current at the same frequency while taking the phase difference into account. Any DC or harmonic currents entering the device due to internal effects are not able to change that calculation except for how they might enter into changing the current at the fundamental. I have made spice models of the current problem that you are mentioning and proved that this assertion
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
One thing we can be pretty sure of is that any Ni in this reactor at 1300-1400C will have no nano-features. The nano-scale portions melt at about half the temperature of the bulk material. So what would happen is that if there was Ni with nano-scale features, these features would melt before the bulk and cease to be nano. Long before you get to 1000C, Ni particles (if that is what he used) would sinter themselves together and to the wall of the reactor. I do suspect that nano-features are still required for the reaction. In order for them to exist at these temperatures, Rossi must have substituted a new metal, perhaps zirconium. Previously he said he had experimented with other materials, but they didn't work as well as Ni. Well, in his quest to get the temperature hotter, he may have switched to one of these alternate formulations. This switch caused the hotCat to work at a higher temperature, but probably with a lower COP than his original recipe, colder eCats. Zirconium is a refractory metal which melts (bulk) at 1855C. This is still borderline for maintaining any nano-scale features at the Lugano hotCat temperatures. Rossi may have put the catalyzed zirconium particles in a ceramic washcoat inside the inner ceramic tube as is done for catalytic converters. The washcoat may prevent proton conduction just by itself, and will hold the zirconium particles close to the wall for best lowest thermal resistance. When you open the reactor to take out the ash there won't be any active material that comes out. The heater wire is probably Kanthal Super or the like which is good to over 1500C when encapsulated in a ceramic coating to prevent air from reaching the wire. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil, David etal-- I would have guessed that a vapor of Li metal (I am not sure a plasma would occur) may be a fairly good heat transfer agent, much like He works as a cooling fluid. I would be surprised if there were a 200 degree delta T between the edge of the reactor and its center. Delta T across the alumina vessel may be that 200 degrees, if the energy transfer is by photons generated by the reaction directly, rather than by lattice stimulation of the reacting material with its IR radiation, most of the heat may deposited in the reactor vessel (alumina) or escape through the vessel to the outside surroundings. Maybe Dave's calculation would be able to say what the delta T across the alumina would be with a given heat flux assuming published heat transfer coeff's for alumina. Helium gas is a good heat transfer agent and Li, being of low mass, would be almost as good. My thought about the reactor design is as follows: 1. The reactive material, Ni or some alloy of Ni is free in the vessel along with Li metal. 2. The external energy supply is an inductance heater as well as supplying an oscillating magnetic field--which is controlled to effect resonant conditions. 3. The reactants, Li and Ni nano particles, reach a temperature where the LENR happens when the magnetic field is appropriate and resonances match. 4. The reaction causes the release of photons of determined energy (a function of the magnetic field) with a change in the nuclear structure of the Li and the Ni isotopes reacting. These photons are relatively low energy and not gammas seen in classical nuclear transitions associated with high kinetic energy reactions or transitions of excited radioactive isotopes. 5. The temperature, or the combination of temperature and magnetic field strength, in the Ni nano particles control the rate of the reaction via a negative temperature coeff. much like a water cooled, U fueled, fission reactor. 6. As the free reactants are used up or become glued to the reactor vessel so that free mixing of the Ni and the Li is no longer possible, the LENR stops. 7. The electrical leads are not inconel, but are tungsten or other high temperature electrical conductor. I would not expect that corrosion is an issue with the alumina or the reactants. The wire conductors would have to hold up in a Li, nano Ni hot gas environment, however. Free O would be a problem for corrosion and may change the Ni so as to become non-reactive.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Bob, how would we explain the appearance of the ash material that was extracted from the tube? According to the testers the device can operate at higher powers than they experienced which would certainly lead to complete melting of the nickel. What are the chances that some of the other materials in the fuel mix might result in 'slag' that prevents the Nickel crystals from growing very large. It would seem likely for the condensing nickel to form a blockage of the small interior channel into which the fuel was inserted. If that happened, the amount of material that could be analyzed would be quite limited. That might explain the large amount of Ni62 if the sample were constricted to the material near the end cap and not an average. I asked about the amount of material that was collected as ash from which the samples were drawn and do not recall getting an answer. One last comment. If the true temperature of the fuel reached the level that the IR measurements suggested then I would be very surprised to find that a gram was extracted after the test was completed. Local melting and crystallization would very likely plug up the charging hole in several locations. Just my thoughts. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. One thing we can be pretty sure of is that any Ni in this reactor at 1300-1400C will have no nano-features. The nano-scale portions melt at about half the temperature of the bulk material. So what would happen is that if there was Ni with nano-scale features, these features would melt before the bulk and cease to be nano. Long before you get to 1000C, Ni particles (if that is what he used) would sinter themselves together and to the wall of the reactor. I do suspect that nano-features are still required for the reaction. In order for them to exist at these temperatures, Rossi must have substituted a new metal, perhaps zirconium. Previously he said he had experimented with other materials, but they didn't work as well as Ni. Well, in his quest to get the temperature hotter, he may have switched to one of these alternate formulations. This switch caused the hotCat to work at a higher temperature, but probably with a lower COP than his original recipe, colder eCats. Zirconium is a refractory metal which melts (bulk) at 1855C. This is still borderline for maintaining any nano-scale features at the Lugano hotCat temperatures. Rossi may have put the catalyzed zirconium particles in a ceramic washcoat inside the inner ceramic tube as is done for catalytic converters. The washcoat may prevent proton conduction just by itself, and will hold the zirconium particles close to the wall for best lowest thermal resistance. When you open the reactor to take out the ash there won't be any active material that comes out. The heater wire is probably Kanthal Super or the like which is good to over 1500C when encapsulated in a ceramic coating to prevent air from reaching the wire. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil, David etal-- I would have guessed that a vapor of Li metal (I am not sure a plasma would occur) may be a fairly good heat transfer agent, much like He works as a cooling fluid. I would be surprised if there were a 200 degree delta T between the edge of the reactor and its center. Delta T across the alumina vessel may be that 200 degrees, if the energy transfer is by photons generated by the reaction directly, rather than by lattice stimulation of the reacting material with its IR radiation, most of the heat may deposited in the reactor vessel (alumina) or escape through the vessel to the outside surroundings. Maybe Dave's calculation would be able to say what the delta T across the alumina would be with a given heat flux assuming published heat transfer coeff's for alumina. Helium gas is a good heat transfer agent and Li, being of low mass, would be almost as good. My thought about the reactor design is as follows: 1. The reactive material, Ni or some alloy of Ni is free in the vessel along with Li metal. 2. The external energy supply is an inductance heater as well as supplying an oscillating magnetic field--which is controlled to effect resonant conditions. 3. The reactants, Li and Ni nano particles, reach a temperature where the LENR happens when the magnetic field is appropriate and resonances match. 4. The reaction causes the release of photons of determined energy (a function of the magnetic field) with a change in the nuclear structure of the Li and the Ni isotopes reacting. These photons are relatively low energy and not gammas seen in classical nuclear transitions associated with high kinetic energy reactions or transitions of excited radioactive isotopes. 5
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
So Rossi's quasi-scam is to jerk around a bunch of scientists with phony reactors so as to throw off his competitors? harry On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: Randy Wuller So for example, let’s say Rossi knew that by setting up the constraints associated with testing the ash, (1% from stuff that fell out), everyone would be misled as to what was actually happening. That’s more appropriately described as protecting your IP. Randy - I never said anything about a crime. Why are you? None of the TV scams I mentioned were prosecuted as a crime, as far as I know. If dishonesty was a crime, we would have to lock up half of the politicians in DC. Make that: more than half. And also - aren’t you assuming that he is not misleading his funder, as well? Would your opinion change if you found out that his royalty agreement was a long-term deal structured around performance milestones? I have no idea what his deal consists of, but I doubt if he can walk away with a large sum without some kind of verification that the device actually works. It is normal business practice with many inventions that a large portion of the total royalty payment will in escrow pending milestones and/or will be delayed until cash-flow starts, meaning that a commercial product emerges. Jones
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Dave-- I thought it was reported that Rossi cut the end of the reactor with a diamond saw. There would have been no plugged charging hole to contend with. I do not think the temperature in the reactor was high enough to melt the Ni or Ni alloy nano particles. As I suggested the energy of reaction was released as radiant energy and did not raise the temperature of the reactants significantly. The Li metal vapor would have acted to remove heat to the wall of the reactor, if the nano particles of Ni (alloy) got to hot. It is my assumption that the temperature of the vapor (maybe plasma) was fairly uniform within the reactor vessel (alumina containment). It may be that the isotopes of Ni below 62 were indeed depleted and not seen in the ash. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Bob, how would we explain the appearance of the ash material that was extracted from the tube? According to the testers the device can operate at higher powers than they experienced which would certainly lead to complete melting of the nickel. What are the chances that some of the other materials in the fuel mix might result in 'slag' that prevents the Nickel crystals from growing very large. It would seem likely for the condensing nickel to form a blockage of the small interior channel into which the fuel was inserted. If that happened, the amount of material that could be analyzed would be quite limited. That might explain the large amount of Ni62 if the sample were constricted to the material near the end cap and not an average. I asked about the amount of material that was collected as ash from which the samples were drawn and do not recall getting an answer. One last comment. If the true temperature of the fuel reached the level that the IR measurements suggested then I would be very surprised to find that a gram was extracted after the test was completed. Local melting and crystallization would very likely plug up the charging hole in several locations. Just my thoughts. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. One thing we can be pretty sure of is that any Ni in this reactor at 1300-1400C will have no nano-features. The nano-scale portions melt at about half the temperature of the bulk material. So what would happen is that if there was Ni with nano-scale features, these features would melt before the bulk and cease to be nano. Long before you get to 1000C, Ni particles (if that is what he used) would sinter themselves together and to the wall of the reactor. I do suspect that nano-features are still required for the reaction. In order for them to exist at these temperatures, Rossi must have substituted a new metal, perhaps zirconium. Previously he said he had experimented with other materials, but they didn't work as well as Ni. Well, in his quest to get the temperature hotter, he may have switched to one of these alternate formulations. This switch caused the hotCat to work at a higher temperature, but probably with a lower COP than his original recipe, colder eCats. Zirconium is a refractory metal which melts (bulk) at 1855C. This is still borderline for maintaining any nano-scale features at the Lugano hotCat temperatures. Rossi may have put the catalyzed zirconium particles in a ceramic washcoat inside the inner ceramic tube as is done for catalytic converters. The washcoat may prevent proton conduction just by itself, and will hold the zirconium particles close to the wall for best lowest thermal resistance. When you open the reactor to take out the ash there won't be any active material that comes out. The heater wire is probably Kanthal Super or the like which is good to over 1500C when encapsulated in a ceramic coating to prevent air from reaching the wire. On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil, David etal-- I would have guessed that a vapor of Li metal (I am not sure a plasma would occur) may be a fairly good heat transfer agent, much like He works as a cooling fluid. I would be surprised if there were a 200 degree delta T between the edge of the reactor and its center. Delta T across the alumina vessel may be that 200 degrees, if the energy transfer is by photons generated by the reaction directly, rather than by lattice stimulation of the reacting material with its IR radiation, most of the heat may deposited in the reactor vessel (alumina) or escape through the vessel to the outside surroundings. Maybe Dave's calculation would be able to say what the delta T across the alumina would be with a given heat flux assuming
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Bob, If we assume that a high temperature structure is surrounding and immediately adjacent to the fuel chamber the materials within that chamber should be as a minimum the structure temperature unless heat is flowing into the fuel chamber. I suppose that the fuel could be cooler provided you believe some form of heat pump is absorbing the heat flowing into the fuel and sending it out in the form of high energy radiation. I do not expect for that to happen so my visualization is that the core is hotter than anywhere else within the device with the possible exception of the resistive wires directly. The core material can be cooler than the heating wires provided a path for heat to bypass the literal wires exists. That path should be available in most cases. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 10:58 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Dave-- I thought it was reported that Rossi cut the end of the reactor with a diamond saw. There would have been no plugged charging hole to contend with. I do not think the temperature in the reactor was high enough to melt the Ni or Ni alloy nano particles. As I suggested the energy of reaction was released as radiant energy and did not raise the temperature of the reactants significantly. The Li metal vapor would have acted to remove heat to the wall of the reactor, if the nano particles of Ni (alloy) got to hot. It is my assumption that the temperature of the vapor (maybe plasma) was fairly uniform within the reactor vessel (alumina containment). It may be that the isotopes of Ni below 62 were indeed depleted and not seen in the ash. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Bob, how would we explain the appearance of the ash material that was extracted from the tube? According to the testers the device can operate at higher powers than they experienced which would certainly lead to complete melting of the nickel. What are the chances that some of the other materials in the fuel mix might result in 'slag' that prevents the Nickel crystals from growing very large. It would seem likely for the condensing nickel to form a blockage of the small interior channel into which the fuel was inserted.If that happened, the amount of material that could be analyzed would be quite limited. That might explain the large amount of Ni62 if the sample were constricted to the material near the end cap and not an average. I asked about the amount of material that was collected as ash from which the samples were drawn and do not recall getting an answer. One last comment. If the true temperature of the fuel reached the level that the IR measurements suggested then I would be very surprised to find that a gram was extracted after the test was completed. Local melting and crystallization would very likely plug up the charging hole in several locations. Just my thoughts. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. One thing we can be pretty sure of is that any Ni in this reactor at 1300-1400C will have no nano-features. The nano-scale portions melt at about half the temperature of the bulk material. So what would happen is that if there was Ni with nano-scale features, these features would melt before the bulk and cease to be nano. Long before you get to 1000C, Ni particles (if that is what he used) would sinter themselves together and to the wall of the reactor. I do suspect that nano-features are still required for the reaction. In order for them to exist at these temperatures, Rossi must have substituted a new metal, perhaps zirconium. Previously he said he had experimented with other materials, but they didn't work as well as Ni. Well, in his quest to get the temperature hotter, he may have switched to one of these alternate formulations. This switch caused the hotCat to work at a higher temperature, but probably with a lower COP than his original recipe, colder eCats. Zirconium is a refractory metal which melts (bulk) at 1855C. This is still borderline for maintaining any nano-scale features at the Lugano hotCat temperatures. Rossi may have put the catalyzed zirconium particles in a ceramic washcoat inside the inner ceramic tube as is done for catalytic converters. The washcoat may prevent proton conduction just by itself, and will hold the zirconium particles close to the wall for best lowest thermal resistance. When you open the reactor to take out
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw the opposite conclusion. Confirmation bias on both our parts :) I think it is equivocal at best. On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the bright wires in the reactor. Hard to believe it would be colder inside the reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to radiate to. I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires that are the bright areas. On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw the opposite conclusion. Confirmation bias on both our parts :) I think it is equivocal at best. On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
From: ChemE Stewart If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. If this is 3-phase 50-cycle, then the photo should be showing the gap of the odd phase at any instant, which gap moves in one direction or the other, which is the marquee-effect of 3-phase (effective directionality). Thus one expects non-uniform width and continuity of the conductors … this is really 3-phase, no?
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
The photo is an average of radiation from 50 Hz cycles, not instantaneous...temp does not swing that quickly...?... On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* ChemE Stewart If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. If this is 3-phase 50-cycle, then the photo should be showing the gap of the odd phase at any instant, which gap moves in one direction or the other, which is the marquee-effect of 3-phase (effective directionality). Thus one expects non-uniform width and continuity of the conductors … this is really 3-phase, no?
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
They specifically say in the report the coils are the dark areas. I doubt they're lying about that. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* ChemE Stewart If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. If this is 3-phase 50-cycle, then the photo should be showing the gap of the odd phase at any instant, which gap moves in one direction or the other, which is the marquee-effect of 3-phase (effective directionality). Thus one expects non-uniform width and continuity of the conductors … this is really 3-phase, no?
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Can you attach that photo? I am not sure which one On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the bright wires in the reactor. Hard to believe it would be colder inside the reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to radiate to. I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires that are the bright areas. On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com'); wrote: I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw the opposite conclusion. Confirmation bias on both our parts :) I think it is equivocal at best. On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cheme...@gmail.com'); wrote: If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com'); wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hveeder...@gmail.com'); wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Depends on the camera exposure time… Probably a digital camera. What would the exposure time be? From: ChemE Stewart The photo is an average of radiation from 50 Hz cycles, not instantaneous...temp does not swing that quickly...?... If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. If this is 3-phase 50-cycle, then the photo should be showing the gap of the odd phase at any instant, which gap moves in one direction or the other, which is the marquee-effect of 3-phase (effective directionality). Thus one expects non-uniform width and continuity of the conductors … this is really 3-phase, no?
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I think it also depends on high quickly the wire temp oscillates, thermal conductivity, etc On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Depends on the camera exposure time… Probably a digital camera. What would the exposure time be? *From:* ChemE Stewart The photo is an average of radiation from 50 Hz cycles, not instantaneous...temp does not swing that quickly...?... If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. If this is 3-phase 50-cycle, then the photo should be showing the gap of the odd phase at any instant, which gap moves in one direction or the other, which is the marquee-effect of 3-phase (effective directionality). Thus one expects non-uniform width and continuity of the conductors … this is really 3-phase, no?
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Not lying, but perhaps again confirmation bias, based on wrong assumptions. 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? On 15 October 2014 21:12, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote: They specifically say in the report the coils are the dark areas. I doubt they're lying about that. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* ChemE Stewart If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. If this is 3-phase 50-cycle, then the photo should be showing the gap of the odd phase at any instant, which gap moves in one direction or the other, which is the marquee-effect of 3-phase (effective directionality). Thus one expects non-uniform width and continuity of the conductors … this is really 3-phase, no?
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
The wire is not in the reactor, it is embedded in the insulating alumina shell On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Not lying, but perhaps again confirmation bias, based on wrong assumptions. 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? On 15 October 2014 21:12, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','blazespinna...@gmail.com'); wrote: They specifically say in the report the coils are the dark areas. I doubt they're lying about that. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jone...@pacbell.net'); wrote: *From:* ChemE Stewart If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. If this is 3-phase 50-cycle, then the photo should be showing the gap of the odd phase at any instant, which gap moves in one direction or the other, which is the marquee-effect of 3-phase (effective directionality). Thus one expects non-uniform width and continuity of the conductors … this is really 3-phase, no?
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
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_2 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nickel-600-Inconel-Wire-041-1-04mm-x-10-3m-/320676194894?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2hash=item4aa9ca6a4e hash=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.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I keep thinking he has built some sort of alumina/ceramic klystron/microwave tube with that reactor. http://www.daenotes.com/electronics/microwave-radar/microwave-tube-devices On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net 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 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.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: I think it also depends on high quickly the wire temp oscillates, thermal conductivity, etc Macroscopic changes in temperature are very slow compared to the kinds of pulses a camera might capture. Unless you are talking about temperature changes in micro degrees they always take minutes, even when the pulse of heat lasts milliseconds. This is what calorimeters show. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
From: ChemE Stewart I keep thinking he has built some sort of alumina/ceramic klystron/microwave tube with that reactor. Maybe… but is it not fair to say that you are kinda’ obsessed with microwaves :-) BTW in response to James Bowery’s post on Meryl – the SPP is an intense magnetic vortex.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 6:28:37 AM The wire is not in the reactor, it is embedded in the insulating alumina shell. That's a guess. But it might be true. I drew (and scanned) some diagrams of a possible structure following the March 2013 hotcats -- where there was a ceramic insert inside the outer steel tube, and round which the heater wire was strung, lengthways. But I now think that's not feasible. First, the new tube is too narrow. Secondly, it's not perfectly straight, so a ceramic wire-holder wouldn't slide in. (In the 2013 hotcat the outer cylinder was steel). They might be able to slide in a more flexible holder, eg made of mica, but there's no evidence for that. Setting aside the concerns that the nickel powder would have melted, it seems that the powder was easily poured out, which implies a smooth inner wall. So now we have even more guessing. Figure 2 was probably taken during the dummy run. The heaters are on, but there is no glow through the ceramic, though they are glowing outside the tube. Figure 10 from the dummy run shows slight evidence of spiral banding (orange-ish) from top-left to bottom-right in segments 1-2-3 4-5-6 and 7-8-9 : but this looks to be a coarser spiral than than the distinct bands of fig 12. Since we don't know which end is which, we can't even tell if this is in the same direction as the visible-light banding. Again, I complain that there are no IR pictures during the live run. Since there WAS visible banding they should have taken visible and IR pictures from the same angle and orientation. If the wire IS embedded in the ceramic, there may or may not be a gap around it. And the overall energy pathways could give bright-wires or dark-wires, depending on the relative balance of heat conduction, radiation in any gaps, and transmission through the ceramic. I'll put up my diagrams: they apply to the 2013 test, even if the don't in this one. ps : Overall, I'm sticking at inconclusive.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
But the wire cannot be tungsten outside of the reactor where it is exposed to air! Only inconel will survive air exposure at such temperatures for a month, and it maxes out at about 1300-1350°C (even that is pushing it). And that wire (Fig 12b) is visibly brighter than the wire lines in the reactor (or brightest surface areas of reactor), hence hotter. So QED the reactor surface is 1400°C. The thermography is flat out wrong for reasons unknown, and knowing that it is wrong you have to set aside all the conclusions that are based on it! The wire in the reactor in an insulated environment is necessarily hotter than the wire outside the reactor, and while everyone might want to believe that they must therefore be using exotic refractory wires that cannot be the case: There is no way to joining the inconel wire to a refractory metal at a temperature above the melting point of inconel within the insulated and even higher temperature of an oxygen-free sealed environment within the reactor. The only conclusion that makes sense is that the wires in the reactor are at or below the melting temperature of inconel, and in such circumstances the only way that they do not melt and fail is if the reactor surface temperature is at least 2-300°C lower as I have previously shown. As to growing belief in gain, I started out that way, but more I have looked at the thermal physics in play and the inconsistencies it creates the less believable it has become, the pictures and heat transfer physics at play make it a strong possibility that there was no gain. On 15 October 2014 21:40, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net 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 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.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
You would think after 30 days of sitting around, staring at the reactor , drinking coffee, eating lunch, sleeping and thinking about it, the team of scientists would have discussed all of this and verified. They would have plenty of time to triple check readings, even some type of portable thermocouple, etc. We suffer from a lack of information, possibly on purpose. On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: But the wire cannot be tungsten outside of the reactor where it is exposed to air! Only inconel will survive air exposure at such temperatures for a month, and it maxes out at about 1300-1350°C (even that is pushing it). And that wire (Fig 12b) is visibly brighter than the wire lines in the reactor (or brightest surface areas of reactor), hence hotter. So QED the reactor surface is 1400°C. The thermography is flat out wrong for reasons unknown, and knowing that it is wrong you have to set aside all the conclusions that are based on it! The wire in the reactor in an insulated environment is necessarily hotter than the wire outside the reactor, and while everyone might want to believe that they must therefore be using exotic refractory wires that cannot be the case: There is no way to joining the inconel wire to a refractory metal at a temperature above the melting point of inconel within the insulated and even higher temperature of an oxygen-free sealed environment within the reactor. The only conclusion that makes sense is that the wires in the reactor are at or below the melting temperature of inconel, and in such circumstances the only way that they do not melt and fail is if the reactor surface temperature is at least 2-300°C lower as I have previously shown. As to growing belief in gain, I started out that way, but more I have looked at the thermal physics in play and the inconsistencies it creates the less believable it has become, the pictures and heat transfer physics at play make it a strong possibility that there was no gain. On 15 October 2014 21:40, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jone...@pacbell.net'); 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 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.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
fig 2 : http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig2.jpg No banding, dummy run fig10 : http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig10.png Possible IR banding, dummy run fig 12a : http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig12a.jpg Strong visible banding - Original Message - From: Alan Fletcher a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 7:08:57 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 6:28:37 AM The wire is not in the reactor, it is embedded in the insulating alumina shell. That's a guess. But it might be true. I drew (and scanned) some diagrams of a possible structure following the March 2013 hotcats -- where there was a ceramic insert inside the outer steel tube, and round which the heater wire was strung, lengthways. But I now think that's not feasible. First, the new tube is too narrow. Secondly, it's not perfectly straight, so a ceramic wire-holder wouldn't slide in. (In the 2013 hotcat the outer cylinder was steel). They might be able to slide in a more flexible holder, eg made of mica, but there's no evidence for that. Setting aside the concerns that the nickel powder would have melted, it seems that the powder was easily poured out, which implies a smooth inner wall. So now we have even more guessing. Figure 2 was probably taken during the dummy run. The heaters are on, but there is no glow through the ceramic, though they are glowing outside the tube. Figure 10 from the dummy run shows slight evidence of spiral banding (orange-ish) from top-left to bottom-right in segments 1-2-3 4-5-6 and 7-8-9 : but this looks to be a coarser spiral than than the distinct bands of fig 12. Since we don't know which end is which, we can't even tell if this is in the same direction as the visible-light banding. Again, I complain that there are no IR pictures during the live run. Since there WAS visible banding they should have taken visible and IR pictures from the same angle and orientation. If the wire IS embedded in the ceramic, there may or may not be a gap around it. And the overall energy pathways could give bright-wires or dark-wires, depending on the relative balance of heat conduction, radiation in any gaps, and transmission through the ceramic. I'll put up my diagrams: they apply to the 2013 test, even if the don't in this one. ps : Overall, I'm sticking at inconclusive.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
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]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Your conclusion that there is no gain is incorrect. If that were the situation, the behavior that the testers witnessed with increasing temperature could not have happened. I do not know how much gain was actually present due to some of the questions that remain about the true temperature, but I do not doubt that a significant amount is shown. If you question the fact that the COP is greater than 1, then you should make an attempt to explain what the experimenters witnessed as the input power was increased by 100 watts. Gain is the only sensible explanation as far as I can imagine. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 15, 2014 10:25 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. But the wire cannot be tungsten outside of the reactor where it is exposed to air! Only inconel will survive air exposure at such temperatures for a month, and it maxes out at about 1300-1350°C (even that is pushing it). And that wire (Fig 12b) is visibly brighter than the wire lines in the reactor (or brightest surface areas of reactor), hence hotter. So QED the reactor surface is 1400°C. The thermography is flat out wrong for reasons unknown, and knowing that it is wrong you have to set aside all the conclusions that are based on it! The wire in the reactor in an insulated environment is necessarily hotter than the wire outside the reactor, and while everyone might want to believe that they must therefore be using exotic refractory wires that cannot be the case: There is no way to joining the inconel wire to a refractory metal at a temperature above the melting point of inconel within the insulated and even higher temperature of an oxygen-free sealed environment within the reactor. The only conclusion that makes sense is that the wires in the reactor are at or below the melting temperature of inconel, and in such circumstances the only way that they do not melt and fail is if the reactor surface temperature is at least 2-300°C lower as I have previously shown. As to growing belief in gain, I started out that way, but more I have looked at the thermal physics in play and the inconsistencies it creates the less believable it has become, the pictures and heat transfer physics at play make it a strong possibility that there was no gain. On 15 October 2014 21:40, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: Robert Lynn How can the Inconelwire in Fig 12b be hotter/brighter in the cooler external environment outsidethe end of the reactor than it is in the hotter internal environment inside thereactor? In FWIWdepartment, here is the grade of Inconel often used for resistor wire Inconel600. 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 As Ericsuggests, given the impossibility of Inconel - they must be using something elsebesides Inconel. I agree. Tungsten comes to mind. Thisgoes along with a growing belief that there is gain here and it could be morethan they claim or less … since they did not calibrate - but there is alsointentional deception, meaning that this is not a scientific report, but one designedto look that way using cast of PhDs who were essentially asleep at the wheel.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
12A looks like a damn flame shooting out the end of the thing! Thin/uniform bands spiraling one way and thinker bands going the other. That alumina shell looks wrapped, sort of like a paper mache newspaper wrap, like alumina felt soaked in glue and wrapped. It is not even straight. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: fig 2 : http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig2.jpg No banding, dummy run fig10 : http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig10.png Possible IR banding, dummy run fig 12a : http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig12a.jpg Strong visible banding -- *From: *Alan Fletcher a...@well.com *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent: *Wednesday, October 15, 2014 7:08:57 AM *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. *From: *ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com *Sent: *Wednesday, October 15, 2014 6:28:37 AM The wire is not in the reactor, it is embedded in the insulating alumina shell. That's a guess. But it might be true. I drew (and scanned) some diagrams of a possible structure following the March 2013 hotcats -- where there was a ceramic insert inside the outer steel tube, and round which the heater wire was strung, lengthways. But I now think that's not feasible. First, the new tube is too narrow. Secondly, it's not perfectly straight, so a ceramic wire-holder wouldn't slide in. (In the 2013 hotcat the outer cylinder was steel). They might be able to slide in a more flexible holder, eg made of mica, but there's no evidence for that. Setting aside the concerns that the nickel powder would have melted, it seems that the powder was easily poured out, which implies a smooth inner wall. So now we have even more guessing. Figure 2 was probably taken during the dummy run. The heaters are on, but there is no glow through the ceramic, though they are glowing outside the tube. Figure 10 from the dummy run shows slight evidence of spiral banding (orange-ish) from top-left to bottom-right in segments 1-2-3 4-5-6 and 7-8-9 : but this looks to be a coarser spiral than than the distinct bands of fig 12. Since we don't know which end is which, we can't even tell if this is in the same direction as the visible-light banding. Again, I complain that there are no IR pictures during the live run. Since there WAS visible banding they should have taken visible and IR pictures from the same angle and orientation. If the wire IS embedded in the ceramic, there may or may not be a gap around it. And the overall energy pathways could give bright-wires or dark-wires, depending on the relative balance of heat conduction, radiation in any gaps, and transmission through the ceramic. I'll put up my diagrams: they apply to the 2013 test, even if the don't in this one. ps : Overall, I'm sticking at inconclusive.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I wrote: Macroscopic changes in temperature are very slow compared to the kinds of pulses a camera might capture. I mean they all blur together. If there are moving pulses of heat under the alumina, by the time the heat reaches the surface it blurs together and you would not see light and dark areas with an IR camera or by any other technique. They do not exist. The surface is all the same temperature to within micro-degrees. With the right equipment you might see moving waves of tiny temperature differences. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I agree On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I wrote: Macroscopic changes in temperature are very slow compared to the kinds of pulses a camera might capture. I mean they all blur together. If there are moving pulses of heat under the alumina, by the time the heat reaches the surface it blurs together and you would not see light and dark areas with an IR camera or by any other technique. They do not exist. The surface is all the same temperature to within micro-degrees. With the right equipment you might see moving waves of tiny temperature differences. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Robert Lynn wrote: But the wire cannot be tungsten outside of the reactor where it is exposed to air! It could be exposed to air in the reactor too. One could imagine the leads into the end-caps are Inconel - and the wire coils are tungsten coated with alumina, or else body is two pieces as Bob Higgins suggests, with the tungsten encased and the two pieces are diffusion bonded and with Inconel leads.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I wrote up my analysis of the banding : (Draft -- I'll rename it later). http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014a.php Short answer : we don't even know whether the bright bands line up with the wires, or the gaps between them. There are multiple explanations, which depend on the structure used to hold the wires, and on the properties of everything. Insufficient data !
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Since they are measuring the input energy to the wire that makes no sense On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','a...@well.com'); wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Do you have exceptional hearing?
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
It has nothing to do with measuring of the wire power, except that as the wire heats up, increase the thermal resistance of the heat flow between wire and reactor body (by reducing number of points of physical contact) and of course the wire temperature will go up (given same input power) - I suggest you think a bit longer about it. On 16 October 2014 08:33, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Since they are measuring the input energy to the wire that makes no sense On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
If the wire were the brightest area there would be no excess heat. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
But the reactor heat should drop at the same time. I guess it depends if they are measuring heat loss on all surfaces of the device. The total dissipated heat should not change except for due to the reaction and changes to input power. I have not read the report in detail to see how many measurements they were doing On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: It has nothing to do with measuring of the wire power, except that as the wire heats up, increase the thermal resistance of the heat flow between wire and reactor body (by reducing number of points of physical contact) and of course the wire temperature will go up (given same input power) - I suggest you think a bit longer about it. On 16 October 2014 08:33, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Since they are measuring the input energy to the wire that makes no sense On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Does this not indicate that the wire must be producing inductive heating in the powder? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
I think it is, but irregardless a wire alone cannot create COP1 On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Does this not indicate that the wire must be producing inductive heating in the powder? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com'); wrote: the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','a...@well.com'); wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
So how do you imagine it inductively heats the powder given low AC frequency, weak solenoid magnetic field, tiny cross section area powder, and high resistivity of nickel near its melting point? The physics + mathematics to estimate the magnetic field strength and eddy currents induced are high-school /freshman physics level (estimate wire turns, solenoid inductance = applied voltage gives current rate of change, = solenoid magnetic field strength rate of change = eddy currents induced in particles of given diameter - power dissipation, so you could very quickly do some calculation to confirm or disprove your theory, and numbers would at least give foundation to your hope. On 16 October 2014 09:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Does this not indicate that the wire must be producing inductive heating in the powder? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Why did Rossi say that a DC current applied to the wire would not work? Why does the startup procedure need for a magnetic field to be applied? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 9:56 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: So how do you imagine it inductively heats the powder given low AC frequency, weak solenoid magnetic field, tiny cross section area powder, and high resistivity of nickel near its melting point? The physics + mathematics to estimate the magnetic field strength and eddy currents induced are high-school /freshman physics level (estimate wire turns, solenoid inductance = applied voltage gives current rate of change, = solenoid magnetic field strength rate of change = eddy currents induced in particles of given diameter - power dissipation, so you could very quickly do some calculation to confirm or disprove your theory, and numbers would at least give foundation to your hope. On 16 October 2014 09:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Does this not indicate that the wire must be producing inductive heating in the powder? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
So how many turns are in the coil? And what are you calculating for a field strength? On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: So how do you imagine it inductively heats the powder given low AC frequency, weak solenoid magnetic field, tiny cross section area powder, and high resistivity of nickel near its melting point? The physics + mathematics to estimate the magnetic field strength and eddy currents induced are high-school /freshman physics level (estimate wire turns, solenoid inductance = applied voltage gives current rate of change, = solenoid magnetic field strength rate of change = eddy currents induced in particles of given diameter - power dissipation, so you could very quickly do some calculation to confirm or disprove your theory, and numbers would at least give foundation to your hope. On 16 October 2014 09:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','janap...@gmail.com'); wrote: Does this not indicate that the wire must be producing inductive heating in the powder? On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com'); wrote: the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up, breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact - prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than contact-conduction. This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','a...@well.com'); wrote: New version with embedded wires. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal contact with the Alumina.
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
If the wire inside the reactor was hot enough to glow it should produce a more uniform spiral glow along the entire length of the tube. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the bright wires in the reactor. Hard to believe it would be colder inside the reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to radiate to. I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires that are the bright areas. On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw the opposite conclusion. Confirmation bias on both our parts :) I think it is equivocal at best. On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Not if it is touching the walls of inner or outer alumina tube in places, intermittent contact due to vagaries of original wire winding around inner tube and subsequent large differential thermal expansion so that the wire is quenched in some places but not in others. Would explain the variation in glow that we see (along with slight translucence of alumina tube), and would change as the wire gets hotter and relaxes pre-existing springiness that might otherwise hold the wire in contact with the inner tube - would lead to wire temperature increasing faster than power input would suggest - ie what we see with supposedly increasing COP. Most likely means of construction is winding wires around an inner tube, or winding them around a different mandrel and then slipping them over the tube. Bonding them to the inner tube is an extra step that (based on inconsistency/variability of surface glow) has likely not been done and for which their would be little initial motive anyway. And massive relative thermal expansion of the wire (~1%) would likely have cracked any ceramic bonding or attempts to rigidly encase the wires or bond them to the inner tube anyway. Differential thermal expansion means that the internal tube/vessel is likely only bonded to the thermocouple end cap, otherwise the external tube would be broken by axial stress due to differential thermal expansion of higher temperature of inner tube compared to external tube. On 16 October 2014 10:58, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: If the wire inside the reactor was hot enough to glow it should produce a more uniform spiral glow along the entire length of the tube. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the bright wires in the reactor. Hard to believe it would be colder inside the reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to radiate to. I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires that are the bright areas. On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw the opposite conclusion. Confirmation bias on both our parts :) I think it is equivocal at best. On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Thanks for posting your ideas. I hadn't seen that picture of the march 2013 reactor sitting on the scale with heating coils visible. Why don't we just accept that the authors of the 2014 test also know enough about the construction of the reactor to say that the dark bands align with the wires? Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: I wrote up my analysis of the banding : (Draft -- I'll rename it later). http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014a.php Short answer : we don't even know whether the bright bands line up with the wires, or the gaps between them. There are multiple explanations, which depend on the structure used to hold the wires, and on the properties of everything. Insufficient data !
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
This is the likely what makes it appear that there is a gain above 1. So at least we have you now believing that a wire cannot create a gain above 1 and that the wire is not inside the reactor core. I wonder if we can estimate number of coil wraps from the photo(dark bands), we might be able to estimate an inductance On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Not if it is touching the walls of inner or outer alumina tube in places, intermittent contact due to vagaries of original wire winding around inner tube and subsequent large differential thermal expansion so that the wire is quenched in some places but not in others. Would explain the variation in glow that we see (along with slight translucence of alumina tube), and would change as the wire gets hotter and relaxes pre-existing springiness that might otherwise hold the wire in contact with the inner tube - would lead to wire temperature increasing faster than power input would suggest - ie what we see with supposedly increasing COP. Most likely means of construction is winding wires around an inner tube, or winding them around a different mandrel and then slipping them over the tube. Bonding them to the inner tube is an extra step that (based on inconsistency/variability of surface glow) has likely not been done and for which their would be little initial motive anyway. And massive relative thermal expansion of the wire (~1%) would likely have cracked any ceramic bonding or attempts to rigidly encase the wires or bond them to the inner tube anyway. Differential thermal expansion means that the internal tube/vessel is likely only bonded to the thermocouple end cap, otherwise the external tube would be broken by axial stress due to differential thermal expansion of higher temperature of inner tube compared to external tube. On 16 October 2014 10:58, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hveeder...@gmail.com'); wrote: If the wire inside the reactor was hot enough to glow it should produce a more uniform spiral glow along the entire length of the tube. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com'); wrote: Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the bright wires in the reactor. Hard to believe it would be colder inside the reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to radiate to. I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires that are the bright areas. On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com'); wrote: I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw the opposite conclusion. Confirmation bias on both our parts :) I think it is equivocal at best. On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cheme...@gmail.com'); wrote: If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com'); wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','hveeder...@gmail.com'); wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Nullis in verba. :) I believe my eyes more than others words. In finding so many potential faults with so little published information (they had a month to investigate!!) I can only say that I am unimpressed by the critical observational skills of the testers. If they had approached this demo with a more critical mindset I might be more inclined to believe them. On 16 October 2014 11:41, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for posting your ideas. I hadn't seen that picture of the march 2013 reactor sitting on the scale with heating coils visible. Why don't we just accept that the authors of the 2014 test also know enough about the construction of the reactor to say that the dark bands align with the wires? Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: I wrote up my analysis of the banding : (Draft -- I'll rename it later). http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014a.php Short answer : we don't even know whether the bright bands line up with the wires, or the gaps between them. There are multiple explanations, which depend on the structure used to hold the wires, and on the properties of everything. Insufficient data !
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Nullis in verba. :) I believe my eyes more than others words. In finding so many potential faults with so little published information (they had a month to investigate!!) I can only say that I am unimpressed by the critical observational skills or reporting of the testers. If they had approached this demo with a more critical mindset I might be more inclined to believe them. There is a mountain to climb to convince the world, and they have not really helped that process. On 16 October 2014 11:41, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for posting your ideas. I hadn't seen that picture of the march 2013 reactor sitting on the scale with heating coils visible. Why don't we just accept that the authors of the 2014 test also know enough about the construction of the reactor to say that the dark bands align with the wires? Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: I wrote up my analysis of the banding : (Draft -- I'll rename it later). http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014a.php Short answer : we don't even know whether the bright bands line up with the wires, or the gaps between them. There are multiple explanations, which depend on the structure used to hold the wires, and on the properties of everything. Insufficient data !
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Bob, you appear to be too convinced that the gain is unity and are going to great lengths to obtain that result. The testers are well respected scientists and no one should assume that they are so easily misslead. Besides, there are several measurements that support the fact that the COP is greater than unity which you seem to brush off. I wonder about whether or not the actual temperature is correct as well, but am in no position to prove one way or the other. The most important observation that supports the elevated COP is the slope of output power versus input power that they measure about their chosen operating point. I can think of no way to fake that measurement without a dose of true magic. And then it would be extremely difficult to understand why the measured behavior tends to follow what my simulation predicts. Dave -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 15, 2014 11:53 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire. Nullis in verba. :) I believe my eyes more than others words. In finding so many potential faults with so little published information (they had a month to investigate!!) I can only say that I am unimpressed by the critical observational skills of the testers. If they had approached this demo with a more critical mindset I might be more inclined to believe them. On 16 October 2014 11:41, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for posting your ideas. I hadn't seen that picture of the march 2013 reactor sitting on the scale with heating coils visible. Why don't we just accept that the authors of the 2014 test also know enough about the construction of the reactor to say that the dark bands align with the wires? Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: I wrote up my analysis of the banding : (Draft -- I'll rename it later). http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014a.php Short answer : we don't even know whether the bright bands line up with the wires, or the gaps between them. There are multiple explanations, which depend on the structure used to hold the wires, and on the properties of everything. Insufficient data !
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Look at this way the paper is getting peer reviewed in public. Hopefully they will revise the paper to address the criticisms. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:58 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Nullis in verba. :) I believe my eyes more than others words. In finding so many potential faults with so little published information (they had a month to investigate!!) I can only say that I am unimpressed by the critical observational skills or reporting of the testers. If they had approached this demo with a more critical mindset I might be more inclined to believe them. There is a mountain to climb to convince the world, and they have not really helped that process. On 16 October 2014 11:41, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for posting your ideas. I hadn't seen that picture of the march 2013 reactor sitting on the scale with heating coils visible. Why don't we just accept that the authors of the 2014 test also know enough about the construction of the reactor to say that the dark bands align with the wires? Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: I wrote up my analysis of the banding : (Draft -- I'll rename it later). http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014a.php Short answer : we don't even know whether the bright bands line up with the wires, or the gaps between them. There are multiple explanations, which depend on the structure used to hold the wires, and on the properties of everything. Insufficient data !
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
You could explain the glow pattern with those assumptions but you would still need to explain away the excess heat. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Not if it is touching the walls of inner or outer alumina tube in places, intermittent contact due to vagaries of original wire winding around inner tube and subsequent large differential thermal expansion so that the wire is quenched in some places but not in others. Would explain the variation in glow that we see (along with slight translucence of alumina tube), and would change as the wire gets hotter and relaxes pre-existing springiness that might otherwise hold the wire in contact with the inner tube - would lead to wire temperature increasing faster than power input would suggest - ie what we see with supposedly increasing COP. Most likely means of construction is winding wires around an inner tube, or winding them around a different mandrel and then slipping them over the tube. Bonding them to the inner tube is an extra step that (based on inconsistency/variability of surface glow) has likely not been done and for which their would be little initial motive anyway. And massive relative thermal expansion of the wire (~1%) would likely have cracked any ceramic bonding or attempts to rigidly encase the wires or bond them to the inner tube anyway. Differential thermal expansion means that the internal tube/vessel is likely only bonded to the thermocouple end cap, otherwise the external tube would be broken by axial stress due to differential thermal expansion of higher temperature of inner tube compared to external tube. On 16 October 2014 10:58, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: If the wire inside the reactor was hot enough to glow it should produce a more uniform spiral glow along the entire length of the tube. Harry On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the bright wires in the reactor. Hard to believe it would be colder inside the reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to radiate to. I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires that are the bright areas. On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw the opposite conclusion. Confirmation bias on both our parts :) I think it is equivocal at best. On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade. I am 95% confident that is the shadow of the coil. The light areas change in brightness, width, etc. On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: how do you know this? How do you know the the wire is not the brightest area? On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However, since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and therefore can't melt. Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Figure 10 from the dummy run shows slight evidence of spiral banding (orange-ish) from top-left to bottom-right in segments 1-2-3 4-5-6 and 7-8-9 : but this looks to be a coarser spiral than than the distinct bands of fig 12. Since we don't know which end is which, we can't even tell if this is in the same direction as the visible-light banding. The report says that figure 12b (the image taken in the dark) was taken from the back, opposite the image of the device on the rack with the visible slanted lines and the alumina tubes containing the 3 phase input wires. Eric
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
Another strange thing might be happening. Assuming the electrical input power measurements are correct, is there enough electrical power flowing through the wires to cause the wires external to the reactor to glow with the observed color? Harry
Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: There is a mountain to climb to convince the world, and they have not really helped that process. Agreed. There seems to be consensus that the report is interesting but flawed. It will convince no one concerning the E-Cat who is not already convinced. The report was authored by some of the same people who have been doing testing on the E-Cat since 2011. I suspect that is because they're the only ones Rossi will allow near the device. I do not expect a more rigorous test from this group in the future. Nonetheless the data they have provided in this and previous tests are very interesting to pore over, keeping in mind the great uncertainty. Eric
