In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:18:04 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
The best way for me to rationalize the situation is to imagine that the
Mills' redundancy process occurs first - and that BLP limits this reaction
to this first step on purpose - whereas in Rossi, the redundancy or
Re: the Jones/Jed spat
Part of it might be explained by the confusion between factor of 2 or 3
and factor of 1000. If one was meaning orders of magnitude and the other
wasn't, the flame war might become more resolvable.
Nick Palmer
On the side of the Planet - and the people - because
I would love a copy of that doc... please do send one my way.
i also made a calculation based on that line from the KE report
- surprisingly i got zero comments - although i consider it a very relevant
issue... 25 atm at startup is much more at 500C... i would love it if
someone could double
It might talk a bit longer. They don't actually *have* and ECat yet.
I would be surprised if they get one any time soon.
I concur.
Erik Furberg
April 17th, 2011 at 7:19
AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473cpage=3#comment-33439
Dear Mr. Rossi,
Its nice to hear that you will
Its really entertaining and all, but do you two really have to pollute every
single thread with this stuff? are you twin brothers from a former life who
just bicker constantly as a way of showing love?
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 02:25, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Jones Beene
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 3:43 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
Level 24 is not going to achieve metal fusion in our lifetime, so Mills is
probably correct when he says it's like calling continental drift a means of
transportation.
drawn into the stream
of undefined illusion
those diamond dreams
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:49 AM, .:.gotjosh ene...@begreen.nu wrote:
Its really entertaining and all, but do you two really have to pollute every
single thread with this stuff? are you twin brothers from a former life who
just bicker constantly as a way of showing love?
Being a newcomer, you
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com
The best way for me to rationalize the situation is to imagine that the
Mills' redundancy process occurs first - and that BLP limits this
reaction
to this first step on purpose - whereas in Rossi, the redundancy or
shrinkage process is a
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
BTW – Stiffler was NOT hiding the ground looping problem, and continues
to try to push it to the limits. I have not talked to him in years but he
posts his results to YouTube. Recently it appears he has been able to get
Nick,
No, all of this nonsense is explained by Rothwell picking out an irrelevant
detail in a long thread, and ignoring everything else - in order to cover
his trail in case the Swedish testing does conform to my prediction.
There is no factor of 1000 relevant to anything but the high thermal
I should add one thing relevant to the Swedish testing.
We presume (hope) that the Swedes will not use a hose connected to plumbing
where you get free water pressure, and will use a pump. The pump's power
must be included in P-in.
A liter/sec pump seems to require one horsepower or about .75 kW.
Charles Hope wrote:
Expert opinion, indeed. Not bad enough that the box is black but we're
reacting to a secret report shown only to Levi, the contents of which
can only be guessed at?
It is not a secret report shown to Levi, it is a public report made by
Levi, here:
I question the amount of nickel used. The one liter (1000 cc) Cat-E used 100
grams of catalyst. By proportion, a 50 cc volume should use only 5 grams of
catalyst. The density of the catalyst is too high. It should be about 3g/cc
since it is porous.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:33 AM, .:.gotjosh
Dear Jones,
just from curiosity, in what kind of P-in has to be included the pump's
power and why?
Peter
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
I should add one thing relevant to the Swedish testing.
We presume (hope) that the Swedes will not use a hose
From gotjosh:
Its really entertaining and all, but do you two really have to
pollute every single thread with this stuff? are you twin brothers
from a former life who just bicker constantly as a way of
showing love?
Adding to Terry's Kommentary Jones and Rothwell have been known to
spar with
mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
It is operating at a fraction of maximum. Even 130 kW is a fraction of 204 kW.
However I have only guessed at the length of the E-cat cylinder (20 cm seemed
reasonable to me, however increasing it to 60 cm while keeping the volume equal,
would increase the power to 354
Peter,
The Rossi effect is controlled in a narrow range by balancing heat removal
and heat addition.
It will not work reliably without constant heat removal.
Therefore, power input related to the proper operation must be included as
P-in.
Jones
From: Peter Gluck
Dear
This is the type of heater Rossi is using:
http://www.heaters.in/mica-band-heaters.html
It is affixed to the outside of the exterior copper pipe. In order to get
the heat from the heater onto the surface of the stainless steel reaction
vessel, there needs to be copper vanes between the
Jones Beene wrote:
I should add one thing relevant to the Swedish testing.
We presume (hope) that the Swedes will not use a hose connected to plumbing
where you get free water pressure, and will use a pump. The pump's power
must be included in P-in.
In flow calorimetry it is not possible to
Clarification. I wrote:
In flow calorimetry it is not possible to measure the power of the
circulation pump, because the pump adds heat to the water before the water
passes the inlet temperature sensor.
I meant the electrical and mechanical heat from the pump. That would be at
the milliwatt
http://www.blacklightpower.com/theory/theorypapers/F%5E2%20102307web3.pdf
I was referring to the report Jones Beene refers to, unseen, by an unnamed
author, which uses thermodynamics to raise questions.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Apr 20, 2011, at 9:58, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Charles Hope wrote:
Expert opinion, indeed. Not bad enough that the
Jones sez
...
...all of this nonsense is explained by Rothwell picking
out an irrelevant detail in a long thread, and ignoring
everything else - in order to cover his trail in case the
Swedish testing does conform to my prediction.
Defense Team: Your honor, I object! The prosecution is
Jones Beene wrote:
We presume (hope) that the Swedes will not use a hose connected to plumbing
where you get free water pressure, and will use a pump. The pump's power
must be included in P-in.
A liter/sec pump seems to require one horsepower or about .75 kW.
As I pointed out in another
Dear Jones,
If the power has to be included, it has to be measured. But only a part of
the energy consumed by the motor of the pump is used to make the water to
moveand this produces a small heating of water due to friction,
So the reverse is true- the power of the motor has to be subtracted from
Charles Hope wrote:
I was referring to the report Jones Beene refers to, unseen, by an unnamed
author, which uses thermodynamics to raise questions.
Oops. Of course. I see.
I wasn't aware this report has been (will be?) shown to Levi. He will
have good laugh from it. The author should also
Peter Gluck wrote:
Fortunately the inlet temperature of water is measured and this
includes or, if you wish excludes the effect of the pump/motor.
But he effect is negligible- and not on the side of Pin- it is at Pout.
No, not Pout. The heat from the pump shows up past Pout, at the place
Let's assume that on the order of a year, one of the many free energy
technologies, whether Ecat, ORBO, Blacklightpower's devices, and a few of
the many other possibilities comes to fruition as very practical devices,
I'd like to hear your opinions on business strategies these developments
will
Want I wanted to say- the pump is part of the cooling circuit to which the
heat produced is transfered. Has nothing to do with the heat produced.
peter
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Peter Gluck wrote:
Fortunately the inlet temperature of water is
From: Jed Rothwell
Jones made another statement about this which I cannot understand:
It [the Rossi cell] will not work reliably without constant heat removal.
Therefore, power input related to the proper operation must be included as
P-in.
JR: No cell can work without constant
Dear Peter,
I do not understand the problem. There are two systems involved: heat and
electricity
At the system level P-out is thermal and refers to net heat. The calorimetry
determines P-out for heat.
P-in for the system, not for the calorimetry, is determined by the sum of
all the
OK, old friend I understand what you sya, the energy of the pump is
consumed, is money spent for making the generator to work.
No connection with heat balance of the system- but goes to expenses.
Right?
Peter
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Dear Peter,
Dr. Randell Mills has a message to those who try to
connect in anyway his work with that of Rossi:
To me any intentional inference to hydrinos is a scam to copycat the
legitimate systems of BLP’s work.
Please make it clear to anyone that you are in contact with that I believe
that any implied
From: Peter Gluck
OK, old friend I understand what you say, the energy of the pump is
consumed, is money spent for making the generator to work.
No connection with heat balance of the system- but goes to expenses.
Right?
Dear Peter,
Yes, but we can take it further. As a
Dear Jones,
make some calculations please. for this case. OK?
The word constrictors is terrific (Boa)
Peter
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
*From:* Peter Gluck
OK, old friend I understand what you say, the energy of the pump is
consumed, is money
a) The pump does add a tiny amount of heat to the water passing
through it : the input temperature should be measured AFTER the pump.
b) There is FRICTIONAL loss in a pipe
http://www.efunda.com/formulae/fluids/calc_pipe_friction.cfm
(Though in that calculation it's expressed as pressure drop).
Very clear!
And exactly what anyone would expect at this stage of the game from both
Mills and Rossi, no ?
'Never show your hand too soon' if it is a poker game.
When the issue gets to the World court in a few years, Mills vs. Defkalion -
I hope that someone will remember this.
At 09:37 AM 4/20/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
a) The pump does add a tiny
amount of heat to the water passing through it : the input temperature
should be measured AFTER the pump.
b) There is FRICTIONAL loss in a pipe
http://www.efunda.com/formulae/fluids/calc_pipe_friction.cfm
(Though in that
If you will ask my opinion about the issue - I will say that the two
processes are different and independent. Amd there will be no World court
case. But please be nice and don't ask, I belong to a non-prophet
association.
Peter
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
another fake:
Rossi diverts the water into a secret room where it is warmed by the hot
air generated by a group of pathological skeptics.
Harry
From: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, April 20, 2011 12:43:30 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Pump power /// Friction must be
yes, good point Jones, the system input power includes the power to operate the
pump and the resistive heaters.
Harry
Jones Beene wrote:
JR:The power input related to the proper operation cannot be measured
with flow calorimetry, and even if it could, it would be many orders
of magnitude too small to be detected by these methods.
That is supposed to say the PUMPING operation cannot be measured . . .
No
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
a) The pump does add a tiny amount of heat to the water passing
through it : the input temperature should be measured AFTER the pump.
It is always measured after the pump. It would be rather difficult to
measure it before the pump. Offhand, I can't imagine how you would
hmm if water flow is required then could it be powered by the e-cat through
convective heating.
Harry
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, April 20, 2011 10:34:59 AM
Subject: [Vo]:Pump power must be included
Peter,
The “Rossi effect” is controlled in a
Harry Veeder wrote:
yes, good point Jones, the system input power includes the power to
operate the pump and the resistive heaters.
That is incorrect. Please review the messages I have posted. The input
power does not include the pump any more than it includes the overhead
lights or an
OK, Jed, this is a nit, and I'm stating that up front. But with that
said...
On 04/20/2011 02:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
There is no need to measure the pump input because it cannot transfer
to the system between the inlet and outlet temperature sensors. The
water does not slow down or stop
Alan Fletcher wrote:
H ... since they don't believe it. maybe I could act as Rossi's agent
to collect $1M .
Alan - I think someone should actually try this (arrange to be an Agent for
Rossi - to collect Randi's prize) . really.
On a more sodden note, here is the best Fake
I wrote: No, the Kill-a-watt goes between the control electronics and the
wall socket.
Technically, the power should be measured between the PLCs in the control
box and the resistance heaters in the cell. When you measure at the wall,
you overestimate power input because some of it is expended as
Calling Ed Storms!
Please set Jed straight on this issue.
He does not think that a large source of electrical power added to the
system needs to be accounted for.
There are two P-in points, one for the whole system and one for the
calorimetry.
He is going into brain freeze again
Jones Beene wrote:
On a more sodden note, here is the best Fake alert dreamt-up yet, in
terms of the ease of pulling it off - for situation where the E-cat is
cooled by a direct connection to the building's water supply, as in Feb.
Explain how this would work in the systems being sent to
Jones Beene wrote:
Calling Ed Storms!
Please set Jed straight on this issue.
You do not need Ed. Ask anyone who has done flow calorimetry about this.
Better yet, build a flow calorimeter. I have built several and seen dozens.
He does not think that a large source of electrical power
This 'Casimir' flow from higher to lower densities is what I've been referring
to as 'Plasma-Breach' function. If we postulate 'Casimir' as incident to being
the 'shell' of micro-worm-hole flow from
Hyper-Density/Hi-density-surrounding Hyper-Dark Space, AND then the
low-pressure-zone
Whether or not the water flow is powered by the pump
or a waterfall, the kinetic energy of the flow may be a factor.
A lack of water movement may explain why some PF type cells failed to perform
in
the past.
They depended on the fickle nature of convection to spring to life.
Harry
yes,
From: Jed Rothwell
He does not think that a large source of electrical power added to the
system needs to be accounted for.
*
* JR:It is NOT added to the system, for crying out loud. That is physically
impossible!
Of course it can be! It is potential energy! and potential energy
Ah, wait. The light dawns. As Peter Gluck said, this only makes sense if
you are talking about the electric bill. I see. Jones Beene wrote:
There are two P-in points, one for the whole system and one for the
calorimetry.
If by system you mean the cost of running the experiment, including
Harry Veeder wrote:
Whether or not the water flow is powered by the pump
or a waterfall, the kinetic energy of the flow may be a factor.
No, it may not. That's out of the question. I have operated many flow
calorimeters of all sizes and types, and there is absolutely no way you
can detect
From: Jed Rothwell
On a more sodden note, here is the best Fake alert dreamt-up yet, in terms
of the ease of pulling it off - for situation where the E-cat is cooled by a
direct connection to the building's water supply, as in Feb.
JR: Explain how this would work in the systems being sent to
Jones Beene wrote:
ØJR:It is NOT added to the system, for crying out loud. That is
physically impossible!
Of course it can be! It is potential energy! and potential energy can
always be added.
No it cannot be added. You can't cause that much friction with these
pipes. Not enough to
Harry,
I agree the energy utilized should be subtracted from the
output but how much of the pressure or flow rate is actually removed from the
system? - the differential measurements are only for temp but you should also
quantify the pressure/flow rate into the reactor and the
Axil,
I agree about 5g in proportion, but the KE report says:
The central container seen in figure 3 has an estimated volume of 50 cm3
and it contains 50 grams of nickel.
I also thought about the powder density/porosity and chose a number close to
the full density of nickel metal, as i imagined
Before going to sleep- I want to ask you, Jones what's non-test?
I have made many tests, few successful many great failures- but not a single
non-test
Please define- and tell what has happened? My scenario is that they had a
great initial heat peak (not expected( and they had to quench the system
From: Jed Rothwell
* JR:It is NOT added to the system, for crying out loud. That is physically
impossible!
Of course it can be! It is potential energy! and potential energy can always
be added.
*
* No it cannot be added. You can't cause that much friction with these
pipes. Not
From: Peter
Before going to sleep- I want to ask you, Jones what's non-test?
Simply - it is not reliable.
This is because it was closed to all but a few chosen viewers and there is a
credible way to fake it.
Even if you believe it was not faked, it supplies no credible evidence
Roarty, Francis X wrote:
I agree the energy utilized should be subtracted from
the output but how much of the pressure or flow rate is actually
removed from the system?
No measurable amount is removed. I guarantee that.
-- the differential measurements are only for temp
On 04/20/2011 02:36 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
Say WHAT? You just proved that all pipes inside the ecat are
*frictionless* !!
Actually, if you read what I wrote previously, and repeatedly, I said
that a tiny
Jed Rothwell
April 19th, 2011 at 7:40 PM
I have heard that the tests at Uppsala and Stockolm Universities will
begin this week. Is that so? Thats great!
Andrea Rossi
April 20th, 2011 at 3:14 PM
Dear Jed Rothwell:
Not true, before the start up of my 1 MW plant I will have time for
Jones Beene wrote
ØNo it cannot be added. You can't cause that much friction with these
pipes. Not enough to measure.
Are you serious !?! The gullibility quotient here defies the
imagination !
In fact, it is quite easy to add friction if that is your intent.
Okay, let's think about
At 01:41 PM 4/20/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I have heard that the tests at Uppsala and
Stockolm Universities will begin this week. Is that so? Thats great!
Not true, before the start up of my 1 MW plant I will have time for nothing.
It might just mean that KE are going to Bologna to do the
Oh, what a shame. You can't depend on the randi forum.
That's a given. There is no group of people more gullible, and ready to
believe baseless rumors. I talked to Randi himself about cold fusion
once. He is an ignoramus. He has read nothing and understands nothing.
When people such as Robert
An important point: This demo was first and foremost Rossi's tribute event
to Focardi - maybe a kind of pre-eulogy. Almost everyone agrees with that
characterization now - but it was not mentioned very often in the USA at the
time.
Rossi had every incentive to stage or enhance the results, not
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
It might just mean that KE are going to Bologna to do the very soon
test.
Anyway: you will have very soon a report about the same test
repeated, with the flow controlled in an “idiot-proof” system…you’ll
see, stay in touch.
I sure hope so.
I do not understand why
At 01:56 PM 4/19/2011, Jones Beene wrote:
Now you can parse all of this information and
look at the images of the size of the reactor
which are small - and estimate how much weight
of material for 'many channels' is possible. The
report which I was made aware of did this, and
as you can see
In reply to Alan J Fletcher's message of Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:37:23 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
If we assume 100 psi for the mains pressure, then a flow rate of 1 L /s equates
to a total power of 724 W, assuming all the power in the water gets used. This
would raise the temperature of that water by 0.173
From Jones:
...
We cannot assume honesty from a man like Rossi who
is seldom honest.
Not to mention – this demo was Rossi’s tribute event
to Focardi – maybe a kind of pre-eulogy.
Rossi had every incentive to fudge the results, to make
it look better than it was, or in case something went
In reply to Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.'s message of Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:17:33 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Before we all get too wrapped up in this technology, I would point out that if
only the Ni62 Ni64 are used, then the world's known nickel reserves (about 140
million tonnes) would only last 100 years at the
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:16:04 +0300:
Hi,
[snip]
That doesn't necessarily mean that either of them are correct. ;)
Dr. Randell Mills has a message to those who try to
connect in anyway his work with that of Rossi:
To me any intentional inference to hydrinos is
Steven, aka da' judge ...
This is simply a follow on to the Fakes thread.
I should have changed the Subject bar, which I did now.
Before one can eliminate fakes, one must identify how they could happen and an
ulterior motive. This was not on the record before, so I added it. I admitted
up
*Negative hydrogen (H-) ions make all the difference.*
From the 2010 Piantelli patent an important section is excerpted for your
convenience as follows:
[start quote] The H- ions can be obtained by treating, under particular
operative conditions, hydrogen H2 molecules that have been
Then we will have to use a Rossi engine to fetch a meteor:
http://meteorites.wustl.edu/id/metal.htm
T
In reply to .:.gotjosh's message of Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:33:49 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
I suspect that Hydrogen wouldn't be absorbed by the Ni fast enough for it to
become saturated when the Hydrogen is initially connected, so one might expect
the Hydrogen pressure in the container to actually drop
Re: estimated volume
Catalyst volume is important stuff. How true is it? Who made the estimate?
Any idea?
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 3:35 PM, .:.gotjosh ene...@begreen.nu wrote:
Axil,
I agree about 5g in proportion, but the KE report says:
The central container seen in figure 3 has an estimated
It's Supermagic!
No, it's merely Magic.
Everybody saw it. It's really Supermagic!
I'll admit it's Magic; but, sometimes people are so engrossed with
Magic that they want to believe it's Supermagic.
Well, we need Supermagic to save the world.
I think Magic will save the world.
I like
Disagree.
Without patent protection, disclosure will only help potential competitors
and no one would invest anything. He won't supply any of these devices to
anyone until there is a Notice of Allowance at patent office.
Also, if it is determined to be a nuclear process, government regulators
Jay Caplan wrote:
His only option to make money is to sell as many large water heaters as he
can as quickly as he can, and keep them serviced with sealed replacement
reactors.
He is planning to sell them in Greece. He has Friends in High Places there
and I gather he has permission. I do not
Terry sez:
...
You're prejudiced.
You're enchanted.
So... who do'ya have in mind to play these juicy parts? ;-)
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:50 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
So... who do'ya have in mind to play these juicy parts? ;-)
Paul Newman and Robert Redford?
T
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Straight through what? I'm not sure what that means. The air flow is
straight through an automobile radiator, but it has many channels. Does
the water come into contact with the nickel?
The nickel catalyst? How could it! The cell is sealed and
At 05:35 PM 4/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: ...
A bit earlier than the reply to you he has:
Andrea Rossi
April 20th, 2011 at 3:09 PM
Dear Mr Ivan Aquino:
1- we know the theory on the base of which our E-Cat work. We will
release it as soon as out patent will be granted. Safety issues have been
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
So I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens tomorrow. I
presume nyteknik will report on it
You are expecting something to happen tomorrow? I don't get it. Rossi just
said there will be no more public tests. Then again he said something
Reality check time: One HP is about 700 watts.
If Rossi has found a way to get multiple kilowatts of energy out of a 1
HP pump motor, while still drawing off enough energy to keep the water
moving, I say more power to him.
That would be every bit as remarkable -- and valuable -- as getting
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Whether or not the water flow is powered by the pump
or a waterfall, the kinetic energy of the flow may be a factor.
No, it may not. That's out of the question. I have operated many flow
calorimeters of all sizes and types, and there is absolutely no
From: Stephen A. Lawrence
If Rossi has found a way to get multiple kilowatts of energy out of a 1 HP
pump motor, while still drawing off enough energy to keep the water moving,
I say more power to him.
That would be every bit as remarkable -- and valuable -- as getting multiple
kilowatts of
Terry Blanton wrote:
It's Supermagic!
No, it's merely Magic.
Everybody saw it. It's really Supermagic!
I'll admit it's Magic; but, sometimes people are so engrossed with
Magic that they want to believe it's Supermagic.
Well, we need Supermagic to save the world.
I think Magic
Terry Blanton wrote:
It's Supermagic!
No, it's merely Magic.
Everybody saw it. It's really Supermagic!
I'll admit it's Magic; but, sometimes people are so engrossed with
Magic that they want to believe it's Supermagic.
Well, we need Supermagic to save the world.
The Hydro Dynamics pump used cavitation and shock waves from a dimpled rotor
spinning inside a housing to increase the temperature of water flowing
through the device. It was tested on a number of occasions to be OU, but not
reliably. Rothwell has reported on it. It is in production now and has
At 09:05 PM 4/20/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Straight through what? I'm not sure what that means. The air flow is
straight through an automobile radiator, but it has many channels.
Does the water come into contact with
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
I really don't think Jed said that. I really don't think he ever discussed
adding _friction_ to the system, whatever that might mean. (He may have
talked about adding _heat_, but that's something else again.)
Yes, that is what I meant. Loosely
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that the flow of water generates a significant
amount of heat by friction.
I was speculating that a flow of water is part of the recipe for making
excess
heat.
If it is a part of recipe you have to include the power required to bring about
that flow.
Harry
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:43:00 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
This event can take place due to the fermion nature of H-
ion; however, since H- ions have a mass 1838 times larger than an electron
mass, they tend towards deeper layers, and cause an emission of Auger
electrons and
whether or not caviation is occuring if the reactor were vibrating
that would also help to transfer energy
to the water.
Harry
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, April 20, 2011 11:04:49 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:How the water pump can add lots of energy
The
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
