>From Terry
> > I wonder what could it be. It sounds like we will
> > find out soon, anyway.
>
> My guess is Lockheed-Martin. I've heard rumblings of something coming
> from Marietta; but, I always thought it was EEStor.
Wallmart! ...where they treat you like family!
Just kidding. (I wish!)
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:22 AM, SHIRAKAWA Akira
wrote:
> I wonder what could it be. It sounds like we will
> find out soon, anyway.
My guess is Lockheed-Martin. I've heard rumblings of something coming
from Marietta; but, I always thought it was EEStor.
T
Thank you very much for signalling this- it si a proof that he is doing
healthy logical professional DEVELOPMENT. Very interesting and very
different from scientific research- has a lot more dimensions, including
human ones. (I was engaged in thsi type of activity for 25 years in nthe
chenmical ind
On 2011-04-05 20:51, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
Rossi continues to answer and/or avoid answering questions.
I find this of interest too:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473
"[...] The walls of the reactor are made of stainless steel, copper
free. Yes, I have understood why scaling
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
> William :
>
> My understanding is that the reactor volume in the original E-CAT was around
> 1 liter or 1000cc and that the new smaller module has a volume of about
> 1/20th of a liter or 50cc. Is this correct?
>
> Also, what is the standard
William :
My understanding is that the reactor volume in the original E-CAT was
around 1 liter or 1000cc and that the new smaller module has a volume of
about 1/20th of a liter or 50cc. Is this correct?
Also, what is the standard power rating of this smaller module? Is it
officially 2.5 kW?
Ap
I think the problem is heat management and control; it seems that there very
frequent heat peaks at the start- and local overheating can destroy the
active sites. In the same time the triggering of the reaction needs uniform
heat.
One problem to be solved is that of design- a good commercial aspec
In reply to Alan J Fletcher's message of Tue, 05 Apr 2011 11:51:18 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Dear Mr. Gluck:
>I prefer to use small modules for economy scale and safety issues. To combine
>even thousands of modules in series and parallels is easy, and zero risk time
>thousands is always zero. Why risk?
I have asked him because I dislike the planned method of scale up. I hope he
has already tested step-wise combinations of, say 3, 12, 25 E-cats working
together. As with the airplanes- the start period is critical- heat peaks or
inhibition, oscillations (I think) An "E-lion" must have a more
sophi
9 matches
Mail list logo
