Mary, I think that you are advocating a blank run because you do not have
necessary understanding how to do accurate calorimetry and more
importantly, how to use simplest possible methods to calibrate the
calorimetry.
(Lots of people such as Levi and Lewan had insufficient understanding for
doing
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Mary, I think that you are advocating a blank run because you do not have
necessary understanding how to do accurate calorimetry and more
importantly, how to use simplest possible methods to calibrate the
Mary wrote: »I have performed and published highly reliable results of
research involving calorimetry.»
But not with ecat. It is difficult to have understanding what is relevant
and what is not. In steam calorimetry there is only one necessary variable
relevant to be measured (i.e. steam
@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 3:59 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Detailed exposed of the e-cat scam.
Mary wrote: »I have performed and published highly reliable results of research
involving calorimetry.»
But not with ecat. It is difficult to have understanding what is relevant and
what is not. In steam
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:12 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I think Mary needs to prove to us that she knows anything about
calorimetry and has published on the subject. I have seen no evidence at
all. Why is she more believable than Rossi?
Try addressing the issues I raised
, 2011 9:19 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Detailed exposed of the e-cat scam.
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:12 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I think Mary needs to prove to us that she knows anything about calorimetry and
has published on the subject. I have seen no evidence at all. Why is she
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:11 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
All I requested is for you to show us the proof. Why should we believe
anything you say without proof? Please list your references so we can
verify your claim of knowledge.
I make no claims. There's nothing to
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
This is true that the Rossi's effect is trivial to demonstrate
unconditionally. But this is also the reason, that Rossi has not had
any interests to provide conclusive evidence to the public.
Speculation about
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a problem because of powder is expensive and difficult to
fabricate.
Not according to Rossi, who says it is easy to fabricate, and the cost is
negligible.
It is also a problem because after you contaminate
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
The trouble is that H2(gas)+Ni(powder) reacts exothermically, as the
hydrogen is adsorbed onto the nickel.
This is true, and it means that the run would still have to be long enough
to account for this. But this
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo wrote:
If so, the entire scientific community must be incredibly obstinate or
the proof for cold fusion isn't very good or some combination of both.
It is entirely the first. That is true of all other
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
**
On 11-11-16 05:32 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
There are actually some technical difficulties with a blank run in the
Rossi E-cat.
Wet
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Just out of curiosity, do I need to keep arguing in favor of calibration
with a blank? Is there anyone else who doesn't get why it's desirable?
Even essential? I understand a blank may not be perfect because of the
At 02:40 AM 11/17/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
Or use two ecats. Then of course you'd need someone independent to
select which one to use for the blank run.
Solves nothing. In fact, nor does my proposed protocol.
Rossi just turns on the fakium for the live run, and leaves it off
for the blank
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Just out of curiosity, do I need to keep arguing in favor of calibration
with a blank? Is there anyone else who doesn't get why it's desirable?
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
At 02:40 AM 11/17/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
Or use two ecats. Then of course you'd need someone independent to select
which one to use for the blank run.
Solves nothing. In fact, nor does my proposed protocol.
Rossi
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
One more minor point about the blank. I just remembered that the amount of
hydrogen Rossi claims is required for relatively short tests is negligible
in terms of heat of adsorption or reaction with nickel -- it's around a
gram if I recall correctly. So it
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
One more minor point about the blank. I just remembered that the amount
of hydrogen Rossi claims is required for relatively short tests is
negligible in terms of heat of
According to Krivit:
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/11/12/swedish-public-radio-turns-spotlight-on-lewan-and-ny-teknik/#comments
Steven B. Krivit says:
November 15, 2011 at
Interesting, after Krivit's first travel report Rossi immediately
attacked Krivit and labelled him as a Snake, although his report was
not that particularly harsh. I think Rossi was far more insightful
considering the true nature of Krivit than what we might have been
thought. I think it was not
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Anyway, it will be very interesting history written when all the
background connections are exposed and investigated. I would say that
poor Steven the Snake...
What do you find wrong with Krivit's summary?
good question, Mary !
Any proof for: All we know is that after the Oct. 28 show, the shipping
container with the 50 Fat-Cats was hauled away on a truck. ?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Jouni Valkonen
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Anyway, it will be very interesting history written when all the
background connections are exposed and investigated. I would say that
poor Steven the Snake...
If Rossi prevails, Krivit will certainly look bad,
Steven the Snake wrote:
1. Rossi has publicly told all his fans that he will not ask for money until
he has a
product for sale. 2. They believed him and propagated this information
widely but it is not true.
This is false. Rossi has refused to take money from investor and
private persons.
If Rossi prevails, Krivit will certainly look bad, and so will the entire
scientific establishment.
I disagree. With the present evidence, there is every reason to be
skeptical of Rossi. And Krivit is responding properly to the facts
presented to him. If Rossi's claims are real, he's done
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Steven the Snake wrote:
1. Rossi has publicly told all his fans that he will not ask for money
until he has a
product for sale. 2. They believed him and propagated this information
widely but it is not true.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
If Rossi prevails, Krivit will certainly look bad, and so will the entire
scientific establishment.
I disagree. With the present evidence, there is every reason to be
skeptical of Rossi.
That's true. The skepticism of
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
4. Rossi asked an engineer at NASA on July 22, 2011, for $15 million to
“test” his
device. NASA did not pay Rossi anything.
Should have paid. And also it was to be deposed in escrow account. Not
for Rossi.
Rossi and Ampenergo, or the the people behind Ampenergo at any rate,
are not strangers. He has known them since the late 90s.
Harry
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com
wrote:
Steven
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
If Rossi prevails, Krivit will certainly look bad, and so will the entire
scientific establishment.
That's true. The skepticism of Rossi is
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote:
good question, Mary !
Any proof for: All we know is that after the Oct. 28 show, the shipping
container with the 50 Fat-Cats was hauled away on a truck. ?
As of last week The Customer had not taken delivery on the MegaCat.
Joshua:
If Rossi prevails, Krivit will certainly look bad, and so will the entire
scientific establishment.
Mary:
I disagree. With the present evidence, there is every reason to be
skeptical of Rossi.
Joshua:
That's true. The skepticism of Rossi is justified.
Skepticism is justified, but
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Mary:
ALL of that is gone if a blank test with an electrical heater gives the
correct result at
the output measurement end. Rossi knows that -- he's been told many
times by
probably dozens of people. That
I need to add that a calibration run with an electrical heater supplying
all the heat also provides very valuable information about the heat
capacity and time constant of the system. And finally, if hydrogen (but
nothing else) is omitted for the blank run, any chemical reaction or other
2011/11/16 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com:
The purpose of a blank/calibration run, I say *again*, is to validate the
measuring method and equipment. I know of no other iron clad way to do
that. Without it, arguments about dryness of steam and thermocouple
placement and pressure and endless
There are actually some technical difficulties with a blank run in the
Rossi E-cat.
Wet cold fusion researchers sometimes have used H2O in a blank run,
and compared evolved heat using D2O with the blank output. If the D2O
produces a heat measurement value higher than the H2O then they can
Mary Yugo's recent cogent comments re blank runs are here replicated for
emphasis:
You keep saying that but it's not correct.
The purpose of controls (more precisely, blank runs in which nuclear fuel
is left out but an electrical heater is providing comparable power) is to
demonstrate that the
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
The trouble is that H2(gas)+Ni(powder) reacts exothermically, as the
hydrogen is adsorbed onto the nickel. This means that a blank run using,
say, nitrogen in place of hydrogen can be expected to produce *less*
*measured* *heat* than the H2 run . .
Mary Yugo wrote:
If so, the entire scientific community must be incredibly obstinate
or the proof for cold fusion isn't very good or some combination of both.
It is entirely the first. That is true of all other examples in which
the scientific establishment rejected claims for years or
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
There are actually some technical difficulties with a blank run in the
Rossi E-cat.
Wet cold fusion researchers sometimes have used H2O in a blank run, and
compared evolved heat using D2O with the blank output. If
On 11-11-16 05:32 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
There are actually some technical difficulties with a blank run
in the Rossi E-cat.
Wet cold fusion researchers sometimes have used H2O
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/11/16 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com:
The purpose of a blank/calibration run, I say *again*, is to validate the
measuring method and equipment. I know of no other iron clad way to do
that. Without it,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
The trouble is that H2(gas)+Ni(powder) reacts exothermically, as the
hydrogen is adsorbed onto the nickel. This means that a blank run using,
say, nitrogen in place of
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo wrote:
Or maybe cold fusion has yet to be properly demonstrated and the sincere
researchers are looking at errors and noise.
You can only believe that if you refuse to look at the data, or if you do
not
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
**
I don't really see an exothermic reaction with hydrogen as a problem. The
error would be in favor of Rossi and I am happy to accept it if (and only
if) he runs so long that it's accounted for...
Oh get real. You
On 11-11-16 06:16 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
I don't really see an exothermic reaction with hydrogen as a
problem. The error would be in favor of Rossi and I am happy to
accept it if
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
**
On 11-11-16 06:16 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
I don't really see an exothermic reaction with hydrogen as a problem.
The error would be in
47 matches
Mail list logo
