Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

You want Young's Modulus, see Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young%27s_modulus - Original Message - From: "Mark Iverson" To: Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 7:02 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 But Robin, how about the 2nd half of that excerpt, where the

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

"super catalytic" effects on gas law leading to anomalous heat. Regards Fran -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] Sent: Friday, July 15, 2011 12:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 In reply to Mark

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

No, because I cannot travel from reasons of health, more precisely lack of it Peter On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 7:20 AM, wrote: > In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:08:15 +0300: > Hi, > [snip] > >Everything would be OK, if and when Defkalion would show us a small army > of > >

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:02:26 -0700: Hi, [snip] >But Robin, how about the 2nd half of that excerpt, where the optimal >grain-size is more than a >micrometer, not nanometers... I would think that a 'tubercle', which is likely >composed of numerous >'grains', woul

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:08:15 +0300: Hi, [snip] >Everything would be OK, if and when Defkalion would show us a small army of >Hyperions, working at their site. They told me on the forum that they have >already tested combinations of max 6 devices in the kW range an

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

In reply to mix...@bigpond.com's message of Fri, 15 Jul 2011 08:22:30 +1000: Hi, Oops! Having never heard of tubercles, I just assumed it was a language problem! It was - mine! :( >In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Wed, 13 Jul 2011 07:33:15 -0700: >Hi, >[snip] >>The tubercles are essential

RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

grain size is more in the micrometer range rather than the nanometer range." -Mark -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 3:23 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 In reply to Mark Iverson

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Wed, 13 Jul 2011 07:33:15 -0700: Hi, [snip] >The tubercles are essential in order for the reaction rate to reach levels >high enough for the >implied total power output per volume or mass to reach orders of magnitude >kW/kg - this level of >power density is

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Wed, 13 Jul 2011 07:24:19 -0700: Hi, [snip] >Another tidbit, but from part 1 of 2... > >"The post-reaction analysis shows a copper isotope ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 1.6, >while the natural >occurrence show a ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 2.24 which is a statistically

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

:21 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 I expect this report is exaggerated or confused. NASA is not charged with authority to devise a program to make cold fusion "the main energy source for the world." That is far beyond their mandate. Heck, they

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > What the heck are you talking about?!? Of course it delivers more than you >> put into it. This is a peculiar thing to say. >> > What a pecular thing so say. I've read closely the Levi, Kullander and Essen, and Levan reports and haven't found

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

... or at least to get their speech in synch :) 2011/7/13 Jed Rothwell > I...I think Rossi and the people at Defkalion should *sit down and review > the designs*, and they should publish accurate information in agreement > from both sides. > > - Jed > >

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

Just consider this sentence... After the initial meeting with NASA, Defkalion GT and Ampenergo will sit down and develop a joint program for the introduction of the E-Cat as a main energy source to the world. and break it down... After the initial meeting with NASA, Defkalion GT and Ampenerg

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

jectories prevail, > he may be importing Hyperions to the US Market, while trying to walk in the > lead of a speeding locomotive. > > Jed's comment that Rossi and Defkalion need to get their stories straight > just had me thinking, - if Rossi is in Miami, is Defkalion running ah

RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

inking, - if Rossi is in Miami, is Defkalion running ahead without him? Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:21:25 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com I expect this report is exaggerated or confused. NASA is not charged with authority to devise a pro

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

Damon, Nasa wants a cheap power source in order to deliver cargo to the orbit. And power for ion engines that enable fast deep space missions to the asteroids, Mars and beyond. E-Cat is perfect power source for aeroplane, but it can be applied also for launch vehicle. On Jul 13, 2011 2:14 PM, "Dam

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

I expect this report is exaggerated or confused. NASA is not charged with authority to devise a program to make cold fusion "the main energy source for the world." That is far beyond their mandate. Heck, they don't even have rockets anymore. I wonder if it was Rossi who claimed that NASA is doing

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

damnest nonsense I've ever seen -- I still hope that amid the mass ascension of varied hot air balloons all over, that at least one reproducible little CF effect emerges, however humble, as the catalyst for a mass stampede of scientists... but, mostly, expect irredescent popping bubbles...

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

"iridescent" -- my phonetic spelling terrible this 24 hours, sitting beside my wife Sondra in Physicians Medical Center Hospital in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and for another 48 hours, after her successful R hip replacement yesterday morning, anterior surgery from the front of the thigh in less than an

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 Below follows a stylized E-Cat Q&A section part 2 /2 from the interview with Andrea Rossi in Stockholm, 5th July 2011 "...Question: Finally, how do you measure the amount of non-vaporized water in the steam? Answer: This has unfortuna

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

> > -Mark** > > > -- > *From:* Alan J Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:31 PM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 > > http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-t

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]: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]:Ecatreport part 2

From: Mark Iverson >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:24:19 AM >Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 > > > >Another tidbit, but from part 1 of 2... >  >"The post-reaction analysis shows a copper isotope ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 1.6, while the na

RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

M To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 Defkalion GT has hired a separate team of people in order to get this in place because of the complexity of the issue. The biggest problem has been to find an auto-destru

RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

on of Copper content in the post reaction samples." -Mark _ From: Alan J Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:31 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 Defkalion GT h

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

Damon Craig wrote: The plot thickens. It may very well be that the device doesn't have to deliver more energy than put into it. What the heck are you talking about?!? Of course it delivers more than you put into it. This is a peculiar thing to say. It may have a market even if it fails th

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

What does NASA have to say about this? On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Alan J Fletcher wrote: > http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 > > *The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 14th > July (2011) together with NASA...* >

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

The plot thickens. It may very well be that the device doesn't have to deliver more energy than put into it. It may have a market even if it fails this criterion. I get odd feeling that Mr. Rossi may not know the difference. On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Akira Shirakawa wrote: > On 2011-07-13

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

On 2011-07-13 02:55, 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 Ah, sorry, I just noticed (too late...) that you did actually quote that as well. I must be blind to text in italics (as it was rendered on my

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

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: * * * The management team of both Defkalion and