Jay,
Excellent idea - could even use off the shelf heat exchanger as your
link seems to indicate they already have their brazed products in automotive
and aerospace equipment. I like the idea of the heat transfer fluid being
inside the exchanger with the sputtered powder on the outside and
On 2011-06-18 16:07, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Hello group,
Today Rossi posted on his Blog some interesting info:
When E-Cats work without a drive, Rossi has to operate alone on them for
safety reasons. However Dr.Bianchini from the University of Bologna had
special permission to witness one
I think the fact that Levi was caught telling a white lie about a report
that does not exist is certainly news since it brings into question Levi's
trustworthiness. If he was caught lying about the existence of that
Galantini report, what else is he lying about? If you read the comments
section
Dear Friends,
It was a rather interesting week for the
E-cat, due to the steam dryness dispute
between Krivit and Rossi Levi. We could see
that the E-cat has very sharp verbal claws
if infuriated.
*The visit has not put doubts on the functionality*
*of the E-cat, but raised serious questions*
On 11-06-18 10:57 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-06-18 09:21 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
I don't think Galantini is a thermodynamics expert. Jed is right
about sparging the steam.
Why do they insist on using phase change measurements anyway? There
are a dozen
On 11-06-19 05:34 AM, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
On 2011-06-18 16:07, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Hello group,
Today Rossi posted on his Blog some interesting info:
When E-Cats work without a drive, Rossi has to operate alone on them
for safety reasons.
This is such a facile explanation ... We
How many reactions, which produce heat, and which may produce
runaway heat, can be quenched by ... *heating them up* ?
I would call that another big red flag.
I hope this thing is not a fake; I am just barely over the
trauma of the Steorn debacle.
On 2011-06-19 14:08, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
How many reactions, which produce heat, and which may produce runaway
heat, can be quenched by ... *heating them up* ?
To be fair, I don't think this is what Rossi actually means.
Self-sustaining reactors probably operate on a closed loop,
Fran,
Your point even better. Use round fins ~2 mm apart brazed to the center heat
transfer fluid tube. Center tube brazed to bottom cap which has a hole for
center tube, this brazed as well. Would use copper tubing for all these tubes
and fins, standard plumbing parts. Fill from upper side
Stephen,
I think you might be missing the point, in free running the
OOP is AT the critical temperature and the heat sinking must be exactly
balanced between quenching and runaway while normal operation is kept
slightly below the critical temperature such that a PWM can push the
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
Coupled with the admission that the steam was wet (which has seemed pretty
obvious to me for quite a while, though, as I've said before, I'm no expert)
this makes Galantini's assertions about steam look pretty unreliable.
1. I do not see them
Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
Why do they insist on using phase change measurements anyway? There
are a dozen better ways to measure energy flow.
I think Levi and Rossi did the private flow test in feburary to really
convince
themselves, and not to the arm chair skeptics,
Ooops, overlooked something in your message.
On 11-06-19 11:39 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
3. The second test with liquid phase flow calorimetry confirmed that
the first test was right
No it didn't because it wasn't public and details weren't documented.
It was viewed, in private, by exactly
http://the-explorer.com/steven-chu-looks-at-lattice-assisted-nuclear-reactions-cold-fusion/2011/3429583.html/
It *suggests* that Steven Chu was at the MIT meeting. But it clearly
*states* that he is looking at Cold Fusion. Anyone has a link
supporting the last claim?
Thanks!
Bastiaan.
This appears to be bunk. See this thread:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg47764.html
T
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Bastiaan Bergman
bastiaan.berg...@gmail.com wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
1. I do not see them admitting any such thing.
2. It cannot be obvious to you because you were not there and you have
not used instruments or done tests to measure the enthalpy of the steam.
It was obvious from the output temperature curves and
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
3. The second test with liquid phase flow calorimetry confirmed that the
first test was right
No it didn't because it wasn't public and details weren't documented.
I said that too. Only a few details were released. If you believe these
details,
...Or at least, this is what Rossi is implying in the comment below
pasted from his blog. It looks like we will know more details about it
after the presentation of the 1-MW plant in October. Rossi paints a grim
picture where LENR researchers backstab each other in order to obtain
research
At 06:13 PM 6/18/2011, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
From Rossi,
...
... For example, we had recently a fake journalist here who wrote
stupidities about the water in the steam: ...
I guess Rossi is still pissed off.
For many years, since I first started on-line conferencing
Rossi: About all the others, honestly, I do not care too much, they are
either
competitors, sometimes disguised as Research Laboratories anxious to
validate, fake journalists sent by the same, or just honest sceptic who
are not important for our market. Our universal credibility will come
from
On 11-06-19 12:04 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
1. I do not see them admitting any such thing.
2. It cannot be obvious to you because you were not there and
you have not used instruments or done tests to measure the
On 2011-06-19 18:05, Terry Blanton wrote:
Anyone have any idea what he means here? I do not recall a diagram.
Is he speaking of a water phase graph?
Yes, I think he's speaking of a water phase graph they (i.e. him and
Levi) have been shown, although privately as of yet. Perhaps the
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote:
1- The fake diagram of steam has been given to the “snake”
Anyone have any idea what he means here? I do not recall a diagram.
Is he speaking of a water phase graph?
T
On 11-06-19 11:39 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
Coupled with the admission that the steam was wet (which has
seemed pretty obvious to me for quite a while, though, as I've
said before, I'm no expert) this makes
As with most alleged conspiracies. People with similar interests naturally do
the same things.
It is just plain old-fashioned non-orchestrated Self-interest.
While on the topic, yes there really are people who conspire to pull a lot of
strings, but the diversity of their individual
On 2011-06-19 02:37, Harry Veeder wrote:
If I recall correctly someone wrote on the vortex list back in feburary or march
that Galantini never wrote a report, so that fact is not news. Steven
Kirvit managed to catch Levi uttering a 'white lie' to *him*. Is that fact
news?
Try read the
Rossi adds externally generated heat to reach and maintain steady state heat
production equilibrium.
One passive way to decrease reactor heat production is to decrease hydrogen
pressure. This can be done by absorbing hydrogen from the hydrogen envelope
using a hydride producing metal; for
Please add at this top as an edit...
Rossi runs his reactor subcritically. That is, the maximum amount of heat
that his reactor can produce will NOT increase internal reactor heat
production beyond a self-reinforcing increasing takeoff point.
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Axil Axil
Nick Palmer ni...@wynterwood.co.uk wrote:
He's certainly got a very bad case of Chris Tinsley's inventor's disease or
he's faking. His mention now of totally dry steam has clearly been made
because of Steve K's visit.. . .
Rossi does show some symptoms of that syndrome, but there is a
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
He [Rossi] could apologize. What would he lose if he did? Nothing that I can
see!
It would be out of character.
Yeah, just like Steven Kirvit could apologize for insinuating incompetency. lol.
Harry
At 10:57 PM 6/18/2011, Harry Veeder wrote:
If you were Rossi the businessman, and you knew your device has
turned water into steam for short periods of time without any input
power, wouldn't you treat the steam quality issue as a minor concern? Harry
Sure, I might, but I would also understand
At 10:57 PM 6/18/2011, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Sat, 18 Jun 2011 13:32:54 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
It's being operated, apparently, at a balance point. Other designs
...or as Dr. Schwartz would say, an OOP.
Well, no, even though I did refer to that term
On 11-06-19 12:13 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
That's like a poker game where nobody has to show their cards,
they just state what they have and everyone believes them.
In poker, you do not have to show your card if
From Andrea Rossi:
June 18th, 2011 at 4:02 AM
... By the way: in a statement he released further, he [Krivit]
said that while Prof. Levi told him there was a report about this issue,
I said in the interview that there was not a report about this issue.
This is a translation
At 08:08 AM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-06-19 05:34 AM, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
On 2011-06-18 16:07, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Today Rossi posted on his Blog some interesting info:
When E-Cats work without a drive, Rossi has to operate alone on
them for safety reasons.
This
On 11-06-19 02:40 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 08:08 AM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-06-19 05:34 AM, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
On 2011-06-18 16:07, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Today Rossi posted on his Blog some interesting info:
When E-Cats work without a drive, Rossi has to
At 11:17 AM 6/19/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
...Or at least, this is what Rossi is implying
in the comment below pasted from his blog. It
looks like we will know more details about it
after the presentation of the 1-MW plant in
October. Rossi paints a grim picture where LENR
researchers
At 11:39 AM 6/19/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
He is a very frank.He said emphatically he wants no more tests
before the 1 MW demonstration. I think that policy is ill-advised. I
do not understand it. But it is his decision, and I suppose he has his reasons.
Well, there are two possible reasons
At 08:37 PM 6/18/2011, you wrote:
Why Levi is upset is more evident in this
exchange between Steven Krivit and Luigi
Versaggi P.
https://www.facebook.com/#!/notes/cold-fusion-andrea-rossi-method/i-made-a-question-to-steven-krivit/235485236468276
If I recall correctly someone wrote on the
I've asserted recently that it was obvious to me that the steam was
wet, and I've said, several times, that it would take too long to
explain why. I've got a few minutes, so I'll see if I can fit in a
coherent explanation.
The attached graph (with my annotations) is from the paper
At 11:57 AM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I won't argue this with you again, Jed, I had enough trouble getting
you to admit that it's possible to have steam at higher than 100 C
at 1 atmosphere of pressure.
Stephen, perhaps you are making the same mistake here,
misunderstanding
At 12:03 PM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Ooops, overlooked something in your message.
On 11-06-19 11:39 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
3. The second test with liquid phase flow calorimetry confirmed
that the first test was right
No it didn't because it wasn't public and details weren't
On 11-06-19 04:38 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 11:57 AM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I won't argue this with you again, Jed, I had enough trouble getting
you to admit that it's possible to have steam at higher than 100 C at
1 atmosphere of pressure.
Stephen, perhaps you are
At 12:05 PM 6/19/2011, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote:
1- The fake diagram of steam has been given to the snake
Anyone have any idea what he means here? I do not recall a diagram.
Is he speaking of a water phase graph?
At 12:09 PM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I won't argue this with you again, Jed, I had enough trouble
getting you to admit that it's possible to have steam at higher
than 100 C at 1 atmosphere of pressure.
Oh come now. Don't make false accusations. I admitted fully and
frankly that
On 11-06-19 05:22 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 12:09 PM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I won't argue this with you again, Jed, I had enough trouble getting
you to admit that it's possible to have steam at higher than 100 C
at 1 atmosphere of pressure.
Oh come now. Don't make
At 12:44 PM 6/19/2011, Bastiaan Bergman wrote:
http://the-explorer.com/steven-chu-looks-at-lattice-assisted-nuclear-reactions-cold-fusion/2011/3429583.html/
It *suggests* that Steven Chu was at the MIT meeting. But it clearly
*states* that he is looking at Cold Fusion. Anyone has a link
- Original Message
From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, June 19, 2011 12:03:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Levi is upset
Ooops, overlooked something in your message.
On 11-06-19 11:39 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
3. The second test with
At 01:57 PM 6/19/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Generally, what the record showed wasn't what some of the
participants thought. They were reacting to, not what had actually
been said, but how they had, themselves,
At 02:11 PM 6/19/2011, Harry Veeder wrote:
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
He [Rossi] could apologize. What would he lose if he did? Nothing
that I can
see!
It would be out of character.
Yeah, just like Steven Kirvit could apologize for insinuating
incompetency. lol.
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Sun, 19 Jun 2011 14:16:03 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
At 10:57 PM 6/18/2011, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Sat, 18 Jun 2011 13:32:54 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
It's being operated, apparently, at a balance point. Other designs
In reply to francis 's message of Sun, 19 Jun 2011 09:11:41 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
Why not control the pump speed electronically (as well)?
Stephen,
I think you might be missing the point, in free running the
OOP is AT the critical temperature and the heat sinking must be exactly
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Sun, 19 Jun 2011 16:02:22 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
If the effluent isn't flowing, however, the
temperature rise is limited only by the need to heat the thermal mass of
the device, which is fixed.
The linearity argument is very far from conclusive, of
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Sun, 19 Jun 2011 16:02:22 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
Complex explanations have been proposed, ranging from insensitive
equipment to bizarre multibody fusion theories. Yet, a very simple
explanation covers the result very well: Rossi lies.
My own personal
At 02:46 PM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-06-19 02:40 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 08:08 AM 6/19/2011, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-06-19 05:34 AM, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
On 2011-06-18 16:07, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
Today Rossi posted on his Blog some interesting info:
From Robin,
My own personal impression (for what it's worth) is that Rossi has
something
important and knows it, but doesn't understand it completely, and
consequently
can't control it perfectly, which makes him a little insecure, so he
easily
feels threatened, and says whatever he thinks is
ahh... so it is nothing more than misunderstanding about the meaning of the
word
report.
Harry
- Original Message
From: Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, June 19, 2011 1:32:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Levi is upset
On 2011-06-19 02:37,
On 11-06-19 06:44 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Sun, 19 Jun 2011 16:02:22 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
If the effluent isn't flowing, however, the
temperature rise is limited only by the need to heat the thermal mass of
the device, which is fixed.
The
- Original Message
From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, June 19, 2011 8:01:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Levi is upset
On 11-06-18 10:57 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-06-18 09:21 PM, Terry Blanton
- Original Message
From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, June 19, 2011 9:09:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Something more on the steam
On 11-06-19 06:44 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Sun, 19 Jun
Rossi could use tungsten as a replacement for stainless steel (SS) as the
shell of his reaction vessel. The nano-powder has a higher melting
temperature then SS. Tungsten is also opaque to x-rays/gamma-rays can
replace lead shielding; and very importantly, it is also impermeable to
hydrogen
As a
61 matches
Mail list logo
