Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat

At 10:08 AM 7/18/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: P.J van Noorden wrote: It is very important to notice that water boils at 100.5 C when the outside air pressure is 1030 mBar, which can be the case when a high pressure system is covering Italy . . . In the April 28 tests, Lewan reported: "we calib

Re: [Vo]:Krivit could be correct on Rossi

At 05:57 AM 7/18/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Tell me Lomax. Would you destroy the reputations of others to advance your own. Would you ask leading questions to preserve your own position? I reserve what can be called "personal attacks" for those who personally attack. I risk my reputation with

Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat

At 12:55 AM 7/18/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: At 09:14 PM 7/17/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: So most of the time he now performs stress tests on his modules in self-sus

Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat

At 09:14 PM 7/17/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: So most of the time he now performs stress tests on his modules in self-sustaining mode, apparently. That's an amazing claim! Just demonstrating one of those running for a reasonable amount of time would have rendered pointless most of the discussio

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 08:54 PM 7/17/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: However, "just right" in terms of exact full vaporization is difficult to reach, from an engineering perspective . . . Naa. It is a piece of ca

Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat

At 07:20 PM 7/17/2011, Terry Blanton wrote: http://ecatnews.com/?p=489#comment-85 Julian Brown July 17, 2011 - 10:25 pm Can i ask you, for the sake of my family, to remove my submission to your blog. It was sent in good faith, because I really care about the LENR field and don't want it to su

Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat

At 07:19 PM 7/17/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote: Julian Brown wrote: > Basically, the whole set up defies even approximate quantitative > calorimetric analysis. > This is nonsensical speculation. E-Cat is designed to be a standard boiling water reactor and boiling water reactor is exactly similar se

Re: [Vo]:The Mats Lewan demo

At 06:33 PM 7/17/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Both of these pseudoskeptical [yada, yada, yada]. I have no idea what you said there, but I admit, I didn't try very h

Re: [Vo]:New Sergio Focardi interview

At 06:21 PM 7/17/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: At 03:27 AM 7/17/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Uhhh. I give up. How is a kink in a thermal curve evidence of exothermic activ

Re: [Vo]:Krivit could be correct on Rossi

At 05:24 PM 7/17/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote: So, why does he uses the Oxford address? That doesn't make sense since the EPO's Julian, according to himself, was just in Oxford only during the 80's. Serious Imagination Deficiency. "How come?" as an argument. People sometimes use academic affiliati

Re: [Vo]:Krivit could be correct on Rossi

At 05:04 PM 7/17/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote: It seems that this EPO's Julian mentioned that he worked at Oxford during the 80's, to make some kind of smoke screan with Julian Brown from Oxford. They do not have anything to do with each other: http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&rls

Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat

At 04:30 PM 7/17/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: On 2011-07-17 22:16, Daniel Rocha wrote: I did not find any name Julian Brown related to EPO, except for an inventor with this name: Then it's possible that it isn't his real name or that he isn't related with EPO or other patent offices. If the l

Re: [Vo]:Krivit could be correct on Rossi

At 04:54 PM 7/17/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote: Julian Brown seems to be a clown. At least he is what you guys call a "pseudoskeptic". I'll be blunt. You are an idiot, Mr. Rocha. Brown shows no signs of being a pseudoskeptic, he did not knee-jerk reject Rossi's work, and apparently travelled to se

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 03:13 PM 7/17/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Joshua apparently wrote: > Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mistaken. > Rossi uses a pump designed to maintain a constant flow, and all > his calculations (including Krivit's video of him calculating > the power) assume constant flow

RE: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 02:10 PM 7/17/2011, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: From Joshua: >> OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson; >> My perception on the reactor core has always implied that the >> volume of water entering the reactor core could vary. > Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mist

Re: [Vo]:Antigravity- Easy Experiment-via Youtube

At 12:00 PM 7/17/2011, Terry Blanton wrote: The end was the best. Yeah, the card and the coin completely disappear, right at the end, showing that this was indeed a visual trick. Waste of time. That's why I'm disclosing that here. It's not impossible that some radio frequency phenomenon co

Re: [Vo]:New Sergio Focardi interview

At 03:27 AM 7/17/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Uhhh. I give up. How is a kink in a thermal curve evidence of exothermic activity? It's unclear what Damon is responding to. However, a change in the slope of a heating curve will generally indicate some variation in condition, such as changed input p

Re: [Vo]:The Mats Lewan demo

At 12:40 AM 7/17/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: (Remember the skeptics evolution as a phenomenon is proved: 1. It's not true; 2. It may be true, but not important. 3. It's true and important, but we have always known it.) Here's the believers' progression: 1. The experiment proves it's true. 2. OK

Re: [Vo]:New Sergio Focardi interview

At 06:38 PM 7/15/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 03:21 PM 7/15/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: A new interview to Sergio Focardi has been posted on Passerini's blog here: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/07/intervista-di-focardi-energylab.html Google translated short link: http://goo.gl/nxcMG It co

Re: [Vo]:The Mats Lewan demo

At 06:08 PM 7/15/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Having said that, I feel that Krivit should have paid more attention to some technical details. He should have made more observations and reported more facts, such as whether Rossi placed the feedwater reservoir on a weight scale, and if so, how much d

Re: [Vo]:Definitely proving cold fusion.

At 03:20 PM 7/15/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: There is no other way to be sure you have a cold fusion effect in the first place. There is no point to testing a cell that is not producing heat. That

[Vo]:The Mats Lewan demo

Lewan addresses, in this report, some of the issues which had been raised by discussions. http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3166552.ece As previously, the power output was calculated from the amount of water boiled into steam, and thus depends on the water flow. At the

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 10:32 AM 7/15/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: It is all nonsense and bullshit. The 18-hour tests with flowing water proved that the large cell is producing ~17 kW. If it did, then the ste

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 09:53 AM 7/15/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: And this has been said to you many times, Jed, and you keep repeating that this is "nonsense." It is all nonsense and bullshit. Sure, with proper specification of the "it." Nice to be able to agree.

Re: [Vo]:Definitely proving cold fusion.

I wander here into what I'm currently excited about At 09:44 AM 7/15/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Daniel Rocha wrote: So, why not making an LENR experiment close to a big neutrino detector, like the kamiokande? This was done at Kamiokande. Unfortunately the experiment was amateur and there

Re: [Vo]:Estimated range of possible power shown by 2 ml/second water flow in a Rossi-type demonstration

At 02:49 PM 7/14/2011, Rich Murray wrote: The 15 seconds when Rossi waved the misty end of the black hose against the black sweater were the Waterloo of this mistaken claim... Any signs that his associates are starting to face this unwelcome reality? Rich, you are making an assumption, that a

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

I don't know what it is about this, but Jed seems to have lost his ability to read and understand Of course, it could be me, I suppose. Aren't we always the last to know? At 02:45 PM 7/14/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Nevertheless, this report from Kul

Re: [Vo]:Estimated range of possible power shown by 2 ml/second water flow in a Rossi-type demonstration

At 12:50 PM 7/14/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: In many discussions of this, it was assumed that the only issue was "steam quality." If we were to assume very

[Vo]:Estimated range of possible power shown by 2 ml/second water flow in a Rossi-type demonstration

At 04:01 AM 7/13/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: If we apply the logic of the "block box" to the eCat then it is possible to argue it is a hoax even if the output is only dry steam. This is based on the assumption that it is theoretically possible to use a 600-700 watt resistance heater to transfo

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

At 08:55 PM 7/12/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: On 2011-07-13 02:31, Alan J Fletcher wrote: http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 The following excerpt from the above interview is "wow" news to me. Is NASA going to get actively involved with Rossi? Wow again if true: T

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 06:26 PM 7/12/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: [KRIVIT] Professors Sven Kullander, retired from Uppsala University, and Hanno Essén, with the Royal Institute of Technology, endorsed Rossi’s claimed technology in a news story on Feb. 23, 2011, before they had seen or inspected the device. Essé

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

At 05:25 AM 7/13/2011, Damon Craig wrote: What does NASA have to say about this? On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Alan J Fletcher <a...@well.com> wrote: http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-par

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion Offers Dealerships

At 08:54 AM 7/7/2011, Rock_nj wrote: Exactly the way "free energy" inventor (scammer) Dennis Lee raised money, by selling dealerships. Why would Defka​lion need to sell dealerships to raise money if they have such a blockbuster energy product? This thing is really starting to smell ba

Re: [Vo]:Suppose the DoE were testing a device instead of the Greek Min. of Energy

At 03:58 PM 7/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Jed claims that there has been extensive testing, but we don't have confirmation on that, AFAIK, from the actual testing agencies. And what, exactly,

Re: [Vo]:Analysis of e-Cat test by E. Storms

At 09:45 PM 7/5/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: The Kirvit video *might* be explained in terms of the Tarallo Water Diversion Fake: http://lenr.qumbu.com/fake_rossi_ecat_details_v323.php Tarallo suggests that there is a hose leading water out i

Re: [Vo]:Analysis of e-Cat test by E. Storms

At 08:50 PM 7/5/2011, Rich Murray wrote: MISTer Joshua Cude, you are, as always, right... No evidence at all for excess heat production... From "defective evidence" to "no evidence" is a leap. I just looked over the Kullander and Essen report, and what I see is that some assumptions were mad

Re: [Vo]:Analysis of e-Cat test by E. Storms

At 04:47 AM 7/5/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: BASIC CONCLUSION: None of the plausible assumptions are consistent with the claim for excess energy being wrong. These conclusions are an indication of what passes for evidence for cold fusion advocates. And are consistent (but much more obviously so)

Re: [Vo]:Feedback, formally - Analysis of e-Cat test by E. Storms

At 01:38 PM 7/4/2011, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: [with some personal history, which I very much appreciate, there are valuable lessons for all of us in this, so I sincerely thank Steven for sharing this, there is some historical pain there.) As to Driscoll -- and myself-- some

Re: [Vo]:Analysis of e-Cat test by E. Storms

At 11:09 PM 7/3/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Galantini has never said that "steam quality can be measured with a relative humidity meter." Not that I've seen. Of course he did! He gave the

Re: [Vo]:Analysis of e-Cat test by E. Storms

At 06:17 PM 7/3/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jeff Driscoll <hcarb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2. Rossi's assertions of that steam quality can be measured with a >> Relative Humidity meter (it can't). > > Yes, it can. No it can't, I wrote a detailed email on Vortex as to why

Re: [Vo]:Krivit accuses Rossi of not being a scientist, which Rossi isn't

At 06:12 PM 7/3/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Damon Craig <decra...@gmail.com> wrote: Calculating the output velocity is a good sanity check. Could you see what you get? No, it isn't a good sanity check at the end of a 3 m hose. It would be good with a short hose. I

Re: [Vo]:Analysis of e-Cat test by E. Storms

At 10:06 AM 7/3/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Here is an analysis of Rossi's e-Cat steam test from Ed Storms. Actually, this is a combination of two messages he sent me, with a clarification inserted into item 2. - Jed Thanks for forwarding this, Jed, and thanks to Dr. Storms for writing it. I

Re: [Vo]:Analysis of e-Cat test by E. Storms

At 10:48 AM 7/3/2011, Jeff Driscoll wrote: Rossi has not done a definitive test. I don't trust him on his input mass flow rate (2 grams per second) or whether or not it was turned to vapor or just spurted out as liquid slugs of water into the drain. Or something in between. Levi has a lot

Re: [Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that "Ad Pseudonym" against "Joshua Cude" ?

At 03:44 AM 6/30/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Rich Murray <rmfor...@gmail.com> wrote: Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error and remind mysel

Re: [Vo]:Krivit's Napoli visit? To all Italian-reading Vorts

At 11:28 AM 6/30/2011, Rich Murray wrote: This team was competent enough to dismiss their own excess energy claims. Transmutations and isotope shifts may well be the most convincing evidence for low levels of LENR -- widely reported in a variety of setups -- has this area been reviewed in detail

[Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that "Ad Pseudonym" against "Joshua Cude" ?

At 02:40 AM 6/30/2011, Rich Murray wrote: Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that "Ad Pseudonym" against "Joshua Cude" ? Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error and remind myself how very easy

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 06:04 PM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Let's see you find one substantive error in this paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHisothermala.pdf Cude, when he quoted Jed and responded to him, omitted this citation. However, in m

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 06:27 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: I have uploaded hundreds of papers proving that I am right. Oh, Geez, Jed, come off it. "I am right" is about as boring as is possible, and i

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 05:27 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: At 02:58 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: But still, you've identified a way the steam could be dry and still pinned to

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 05:09 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: My guess is that it would still reach boiling point, at roughly the time predicting by extrapolation of the rate of temp

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:58 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: But still, you've identified a way the steam could be dry and still pinned to the boiling point. Unfortunately, evidence that it *is* dry is still absent. And in the Krivit video, the feeble puff of steam at the output is pretty good evidence that most

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 11:56 AM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: My sense, from the weak steam coming out of the end, is that what seems to be marginal at the end is an indication that more power is being generated than the input electrical power, but I'd not want to claim that

Re: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion Press Conference

At 02:42 PM 6/23/2011, Angela Kemmler wrote: > > One of the listed attendees: The Green Party of Germany > > The Green Party of my country? (Die Grünen). I am a mmeber of that party since 20 years. It's almost impossible to imagine a German green party exponent to support a fusion tecnology

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 11:04 AM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Jed, I've asked this before. What second test proved what you show? Are you referring to the Levi test that increased the flow rate? How would this show that Galantini was correct? Yes, I meant the test with fl

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:45 AM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: You are indeed wrong. Time for a refresher. Look up vapor pressure in wikipedia for a start. Water evaporates into pure gas (not droplets) below its boiling point. Humidity measures the amount of water vapor (gas, not droplets) in the air. When the pa

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:32 AM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: It is not in any way proof that the E-Cat is *not* producing excess power. That's true, but I've only been argu

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 11:54 PM 6/22/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: Abd wrote: "Basically, the device does some math for you, based on certain assumptions. Unfortunately, the assumptions are the very issue here!" I don't' think that's correct... Not assumptions. The instrument does calculations based on scientific law

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 12:14 AM 6/23/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: Abd wrote: "One page 6, the list of humidity probes begins. The "robust" probe, part number 0628 0021, is rated to 180 C. The measurement range extends from 0 to 100% RH. However, the accuracy is not rated above 98%. Basically, the accuracy is 2%, fro

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 11:34 PM 6/22/2011, Finlay MacNab wrote: If the relative humidity sensor measures capacitance then the dielectric constant of steam and the dielectric constant of steam plus water would be very different and yield very different readings. A quick google search for capacitance measurement

Re: [Vo]:Water Flow Question

At 10:43 PM 6/22/2011, Craig Haynie wrote: How does Rossi control the water flow rate? If too much water flows, then it would not all convert to steam and it would pour out of the outlet. If it's too slow then the reactor would overheat. Does he control the water flow by its effect on reactor tem

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 10:38 PM 6/22/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote: Do you expect water droplets above 100C? This is like expecting microscopic ice to not immediately melt above 0C. Wrong question. Do we expect water droplets above the boiling point of water? No, not except transiently. Is Mr. Rocha assuming that the

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 08:08 PM 6/22/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: So, what specifically do you think that g/kg means in the context of a 2-phase mixture of steam and water? What do you use for the denominator to calculate the total mass of the

Re: [Vo]:relative humidity

At 06:56 PM 6/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: It would be possible, just from the experiments performed, to determine if the RH probe were of any use. If the RH r

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 06:50 PM 6/22/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: More frustration than confidence! > >THE INSTRUMENT DOES PROVIDE MASS OF WATER AS VAPOR, AND SUBTRACTING >THAT FROM THE MASS OF WATER GOING IN WILL GIVE YOU THE MASS OF LIQUID >WATER THAT IS COMING OUT!! Problem is, Mark, how do you get, from

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 06:50 PM 6/22/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: RE: Abd's comment about, "the instrument does not provide mass of water as vapor, unfortunately, that's not what it shows. It reads in g/m^3. To convert this to mass we'd need to know the volume, eh?" NO, you do NOT need to know the volume to calcula

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 06:45 PM 6/22/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Joshua Cude wrote: If the meter is giving mass per unit volume of the output, you need to know the *volume* of the output to get the mass of the steam. Ah. Here is what you overlooked. It also says that it gives mass of water per unit of mass. That

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 06:34 PM 6/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: I accept that the input flow rate is constant. But the output *volume* flow rate is very different because at least part of the water changes phase. If the meter is giving mass per unit volume of the output, you need to know the *volume* of the output

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 05:22 PM 6/22/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Joshua Cude wrote: Nope. All you have to know is how dry the steam is, what the temperature is, and what the total mass of the steam is. You can derive the steam flow rate from that. Right. But how do you get the total mass of the steam? Even in yo

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 04:41 PM 6/22/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: Abd wrote: "I have no idea what Galantini is expert in. Do you know?" Yes, chemistry. -Mark It is *claimed* that he is expert in chemistry. However, he may be expert in other things. If his only expertise is in chemistry, per se, he would not be q

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 04:38 PM 6/22/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: I have no idea what Galantini is expert in. Do you know? Yes. The second test proved beyond any doubt that he is an expert in identifying dry steam, and it proved that all of the objections raised here are bunk

Re: [Vo]:relative humidity

At 04:24 PM 6/22/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: - Original Message > Stop right there. You are citing Wikipedia as evidence? Are you saying that it is wrong and that your conception of RH is right? No. That would be stupid unless I spent a lot of time with that article, read and consider

RE: [Vo]:relative humidity

At 04:34 PM 6/22/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: Michele wrote: "Condense on the probe? What is the temperature of the probe? > 100° C or less? Galantini would not make such a mistake..." Exactly... As soon as the probe was placed in the steam flow, some condensation would occur on it, but within

Re: [Vo]:relative humidity

At 04:19 PM 6/22/2011, Michele Comitini wrote: 2011/6/22 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax : > The problem with this is that water would condense on the probe. You would > always see 100% liquid water, if this is how it's being detected, unless you > preheated the probe. Tricky. There are d

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 03:32 PM 6/22/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Joshua Cude wrote: Putting aside who is the pre-eminent expert (you, or the guy who designed the meter), you cannot argue with the second test. Then why did they bother with the 3rd, 4rth, 5th, and 6th demo? I suppose because different people wan

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 03:24 PM 6/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: Jeff Driscoll <hcarb...@gmail.com> wrote: yes, the meters measure the humidity of air, not steam quality. Galantini use

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 03:21 PM 6/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: Mark Iverson <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote: Many people have asserted that the two meters used in these studies do

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 03:21 PM 6/22/2011, Terry Blanton wrote: I don't know if her life is more enjoyable, but her path to the theatre is longer. Quoting: "Eeew, that's nasty!" Normal girl. I found a large spider dead on my bathroom floor, and showed it to my two young daughters. Both of them recoiled. It r

[Vo]:What did Galantini actually say?

There certainly is plenty of confusion to go around here. Were measurements by volume or by mass? -- the whole Krivit/Levi/Rossi flap. The meter in question measures a number of variables, I believe the relevant ones here are temperature, pressure, and relative humidity. It does not seem to

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:58 PM 6/22/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jeff Driscoll wrote: no it doesn't give the mass of water as vapor because it only works for measuring the mass of water of vapor in AIR. NOT in a mixture of vapor and microscopic water DROPLETS All air has microscopic water droplets in it. Sometimes

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:25 PM 6/22/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: AS I ALREADY STATED, I AGREE THAT THE INSTRUMENT DOES NOT MEASURE STEAM QUALITY! YOU"RE TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT! IT DOES GIVE YOU THE INFORMATION NEEDED TO CALCULATE IT THOUGH! THE INSTRUMENT DOES PROVIDE MASS OF WATER AS VAPOR, AND SUBTRACTING T

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:12 PM 6/22/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jeff Driscoll <hcarb...@gmail.com> wrote: yes, the meters measure the humidity of air, not steam quality. Galantini used the wrong instrument So you say, but Galantini and the manufacturers say differently. No, the manufac

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 01:58 PM 6/22/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: They measured the steam quality at the chimney with the meter. I do not think they actually saw the steam emerge directly from the chimney. Bummer. You sure? Many people have asserted that the two meters used in these studies do not measure by mass,

Re: [Vo]:relative humidity

At 02:00 PM 6/22/2011, Jeff Driscoll wrote: no, the instrument gives the mass of water in air at some temperature, so it is grams of water per kg of air, No. The meter reads in grams per cubic meter. But the question stands how do you get steam quality from that? steam quality is grams of v

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 12:12 PM 6/22/2011, Daniel Rocha wrote: Yes, that is true. But the steam is way too low for 2.5KW. If someone can provide me a mathematical example refuting that, I will be happy. *What steam?* Understand that 2.5 KW of steam being generated at the E-Cat is not going to be 2.5 KW of steam

Re: [Vo]:Submission to Journal of Nuclear Physics Forum

At 09:56 AM 6/22/2011, t...@wonksmedia.com wrote: The following was submitted to the Journal of Nuclear Physics Forum (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360&cpage=22#comments) this morning:

Re: [Vo]:relative humidity

Breaking the mold, I'm agreeing with Cude here, in part. At 05:29 AM 6/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: In any case, if the device is to be used to determine liquid content in steam, it would at least have to be calibrated for that purpose. There is no indication such a calibration was performed.

Re: [Vo]:relative humidity

At 04:16 AM 6/22/2011, Michele Comitini wrote: Harry, right: vapour is a gas. As it is O2. IMHO the probe of Dr Galantini detects the liquid phase of h2o or other liquid conductor capacitor. It is not a chemical reactant that binds to any h2o molecule that comes around. Conductivity

Re: [Vo]:relative humidity

At 12:52 AM 6/22/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_humidity -- A common misconception Often the notion of air holding water vapor is presented to describe the concept of relative humidity. Stop right there. You are citing Wikipedia as evidence? Wi

Re: [Vo]:Something more on the steam

At 12:02 AM 6/22/2011, Jeff Driscoll wrote: http://www.testosites.de/export/sites/default/datalogger2011/en_INT/local_downloads/brochure_EN.pdf yes, this device, and its probes, measure the relative humidity of *air* . It does not measure steam quality. What is Galantini doing? I don

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat proven to be a hoax?

At 11:20 PM 6/21/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: ABD wrote: "Rossi held up the hose, Krivit had also mentioned this. He didn't want to allow this to continue, he said it was dangerous. Really? How?" I think its quite obvious and simple... yes. That was a rhetorical question. It showed that there i

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat proven to be a hoax?

At 09:28 PM 6/21/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <<mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: How's this for a theory: The E-Cat is not boiling much of the water, only a little. The pump is putting out more water than can boil, so it runs out t

Re: [Vo]:Something more on the steam

At 03:41 PM 6/21/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jeff Driscoll wrote: I've been trying to say multiple times that the meter measures humidity of air up to 98% humidity. The probe can go to 150 C without being broken but that does not mean that it can measure accurately up to 150 C. But that's for *a

Re: [Vo]:Something more on the steam

At 03:36 PM 6/21/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Look, Abd, you need to get real. I honestly have no idea how these meters work. That's right. I can tell you this: the brochure is quite specific as to what is measured, and it ain't enthalpy. What are you tal

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat proven to be a hoax?

At 02:32 PM 6/21/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: BTW regarding heat loss issues, the main body of the E-cat is also radiating heat. Right. However, bottom line, the quantity of interest is how much water is being boiled. The water jacket apparently surrounds the reaction chamber, so almost all the

Re: [Vo]:[Video] Andrea Rossi Explains His Energy Catalyzer (NET - June 14, 2011)

At 02:27 PM 6/21/2011, Terry Blanton wrote: On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > But just sending gas up a vertical pipe is certainly not enough to either > clean or dry it. How does it leave the surface of a liquid and remain a liquid? Even with evaporation, it's onl

Re: [Vo]:Something more on the steam

At 01:46 PM 6/21/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: I don't think the probe is measuring the hot water at all. If they have already determined that the steam exiting the reactor is dry by sight and by feel, it is appropriate to measure the ratio of water-gas to air-gas with a suitable probe. But that'

Re: [Vo]:Something more on the steam

At 12:44 PM 6/21/2011, Jeff Driscoll wrote: Rossi is dumping the evidence down the drain. Why else would he not dump it into a big tank and measure the temperature rise of the water? Abd says he just wants to confuse people and keep competitors away - I say it's because Rossi is a fraud. Just

[Vo]:Steam quality measurement

http://thermo-diagnostics.com/files/Steam_Distribution_Quality.pdf talks about the measurement of steam quality. Page 3 and 4 show a method of measuring steam quality. It does not involve using a relative humidity meter, which, to me, looks like a fish bicycle for this measurement. An RH meter

[Vo]:Krivit's Kullander interview

http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/06/20/phone-interview-with-sven-kullander/ (copied in full for critical commentary under fair use) Phone Interview with Sven Kullander, Department of Radiation Sciences, Uppsala University June 20, 2011 Steven B. Krivit: When you looked at Andrea Rossi's En

Re: [Vo]:Something more on the steam

At 09:44 AM 6/21/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Jed, these devices measure a number of things directly, and others are calculated. I see no sign that the device is designed to measure steam quality. It's not a described application. Yes, it is. The Delta Ohm

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >