Horace wrote: «Sparging steam into a bucket, though far better that other
steam methods applied to date on Rossi's devices, and publicly disclosed,
has numerous serious drawbacks, which have already been discussed.»
And where they are discussed and by whom? There might be problems, and first
is
The computations in the following pdfs are provided in order to
hopefully permit more meaningful discussion or understanding of the
percolator effect as it relates to Rossi type devices and simulators:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/KrivitFilm.pdf
On Aug 24, 2011, at 11:02 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Horace wrote: «Sparging steam into a bucket, though far better that
other steam methods applied to date on Rossi's devices, and
publicly disclosed, has numerous serious drawbacks, which have
already been discussed.»
And where they are
Dear Jed,
I think the best patent agents can improve a situation
but cannot reverse a lost situation to one of a winner.
If he had a compound X acting as catalyst, he could easily get a patent
protecting the E-cats against copying of
the core with Compound X. Theoretically good, in practice
a bit
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote:
Report of 28 april:
http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3166569.ece/BINARY/Report+test+of+E-cat+28+April+2011.pdf
As you can hear, the stroke frequency is around 32 strokes/minute, which
equals to a maximum flow of 3.8 liters/h (= 12.1 *
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
The correct thing to do is to do calorimetry on the output using a well
calibrated professionally designed calorimeter independent of the device
itself . . .
Defkalion claims they have done this.
Alarm bells should go off in your head when you
One should stay away from E-Cat calorimetry and instead perform calorimetry on
the actual nickel-hydrogen reaction.
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 9:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Percolator Effect
Horace
At 04:51 PM 8/24/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I do not like to be argumentative. Perhaps I
misunderstand Abd's argument here. But it seems
to me he repeatedly claimed that in order to
measure a mysterious source of heat from an
unknown phonomenon, you must have detailed,
time-sequenced data. It
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 5:21 AM Peter wrote [snip] I do know about trade
secrets. I predict that a few months after corporations worldwide realize the
Rossi reactors are real, this trade secret will be broken in dozens of
corporations in the U.S., Europe, Japan and China. You can protect a
Joe Catania zrosumg...@aol.com wrote:
**
One should stay away from E-Cat calorimetry and instead perform calorimetry
on the actual nickel-hydrogen reaction.
What is the difference? An eCat is a reactor vessel, and so is a Defkalion
reactor. You can only perform calorimetry on a vessel of some
At 06:55 PM 8/24/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Here is an interesting footnote to history. I believe the speed of
sound was not established with this much precision until later. This
was done by assuming for simplicity that the speed of light is close
to infinite over short distances, and firing a
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
The instruments prove that radium and the Rossi reactor produce
stable, unvarying heat. That much we know.
No, we don't know that at all. Jed, sometimes I can't figure out where
you get this nonsense. We sort-of-know that the temperature in the
reactor chimney is
if this is the same pump
It’s the same dirty pump as you can see from videos and photos.
if they did not weigh the water
Again, is a “Rossi said”.
Lewan's report is more informative than Krivit's, isn't it?
In krivit’s video Rossi said that water flow was 7 kg/h.
Rossi is lying.
From: Jed
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
You are perfectly aware that Rossi chose to use a method of measuring
heat that was utterly inconclusive.
You meant the steam method. I am aware that some people think it is
inconclusive. As far as I know, experts in calorimetry and steam think
it is conclusive.
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
A single measure can be of interest, but rarely would it be conclusive.
This may be a misunderstanding. They did not perform a single
measurement. They measured repeatedly, and recorded the numbers. The
numbers were about the same in all cases, ~5°C, so that is
I'm suggesting what I believe many others have. What should be eliminated is
complications like anything flowing, anything shanging phase, heat leakage. If
we have a well characterized vessel (i.e. we know heat conduction properties
well we can use it to contain the reaction. Then we might be
can you be sure it is not true?
Cen we be sure that we are not inside “Thge Matrix”?
From: Jed Rothwell
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 3:59 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Percolator Effect
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
The correct thing to do is to do
What will happen after Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer will be proved as a hoax?
We will ever seen the “rossi-belivers”?
We will see lenr-canr website closed, after this stomach punch?
We will see cold fusion researchers stop doing sloppy calorimetry and focusing
more on STRONG nuclear radiations before
I have answered this question yesterday on my blog.
and have announced it here.
Not the end of the world, not the end of LENR
Peter
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.comwrote:
What will happen after Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer will be proved as a
hoax?
We will
Jed wrote the cited text, not I.
Without a patent Rossi is vulnerable, he made good publicity however has a
very weak strategy and a dreadful reputation management..
Peter
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Roarty, Francis X
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:
On Thursday, August 25, 2011 5:21 AM
At 07:48 AM 8/25/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
No one has raised a valid
objections to the flowing water test as far as I know. Your objection
seem to be that you want to see the number 5°C repeated a
thousand times. Go ahead and use a word processor to repeat it
yourself:
5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C 5°C
5°C 5°C 5°C
If I saw THAT I'd yell FAKE.
5.01°C 4.98°C 4.98°C 5.00°C ...
Yes, I was kidding.
| Abd ul-Rahman Lomax said
| .. and given the ubiquity of cheap logging devices ..
Ah .. the cheap
On Aug 25, 2011, at 5:59 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
The correct thing to do is to do calorimetry on the output using a
well calibrated professionally designed calorimeter independent of
the device itself . . .
Defkalion claims they have done
Joe Catania wrote:
I'm suggesting what I believe many others have. What should be
eliminated is complications like anything flowing, anything shanging
phase, heat leakage.
Phase changes are a problem, although ice calorimetry has been around
for a long time.
The only kind of calorimetry
How do you know that 1 click = 1 pump?
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
Hold on there! I assume you refer to the discussions and churning here, in
this group.
You assume wrongly. I refer in addition to Rossi's blog, the CMNS news
list, Krivit's blog, public press, etc., etc.
Ah, well these other forums are also
Pretty much the total destruction of all confidence I have in LENR. If so
many competent people in the field were cheated that easily by Rossi, I can
expect much worse from everyone, even in the sense of self deception.
Thank you Horace, I think you really have driven the final nails into
the Rossi coffin, with your exemplary analysis of the percolator
effect, along with cogent remarks about the endless wan discussions.
within mutual service, Rich Murray
On Aug 25, 2011 5:45 PM, Mattia Rizzi wrote:
In krivit’s video Rossi said that water flow was 7 kg/h.
Rossi is lying.
This is obvious. But question is why Rossi did lie in such a trivial way
that everyone can see it? Lie was so obvious, that it cannot be because
Rossi wanted to mislead
It’s a dosimetric pump.
In every stroke it can inject a maximum volume of 2ml of water (volume is
regulable)
It’s regulable from 20 to 100 strokes/minute.
So with a 100 strokes/min and a volume of 2ml, the pump is running witha flow
of 12 liter/h.
With 25 strokes/min, the pump is running up to
The best ratio of diameters OD/ID I can come up with for Rossi's hose
is 23/13, based on the attached png clip from Krivit's film of 14
June, 2011.
Anyone know what the actual dimension's of his hose are?
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
inline:
Robert Parks will be, once again, smug as a bug.
Frank Z
-Original Message-
From: Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Aug 25, 2011 7:26 am
Subject: [Vo]:The day after Rossi
What will happen after Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer will be
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Pretty much the total destruction of all confidence I have in LENR. If so
many competent people in the field were cheated that easily by Rossi, I can
expect much worse from everyone, even in the sense of self deception.
Some questions:
How many
«LENR is another avenue. It's not just about Rossi. If the Rossi thing
doesn't happen, then maybe something else will. Rossi has brought a lot of
attention to the field. Any researchers who have a legitimate claim are
going to benefit from this.»
–Michael A. Nelson, Nasa
On Aug 25, 2011 8:57 PM,
Here the thermal conductivity for rubber is given at about 0.14 W/(m K):
http://www.monachos.gr/eng/resources/thermo/conductivity.htm
I notice that Rick Cantwell used 0.2 W/(m K):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXTl8z_2Uqo
Anyone have a reference to a better number than 0.14 W/(m K).
Best
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
On Aug 25, 2011 5:45 PM, Mattia Rizzi wrote:
In krivit’s video Rossi said that water flow was 7 kg/h.
Rossi is lying.
This is obvious. But question is why Rossi did lie in such a trivial
way that everyone can see it?
I do not find it so obvious. It seems likely to
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
«LENR is another avenue. It's not just about Rossi. If the Rossi thing
doesn't happen, then maybe something else will. Rossi has brought a
lot of attention to the field. Any researchers who have a legitimate
claim are going to benefit from this.»
–Michael A. Nelson,
On 11-08-25 01:56 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
If Rossi turns out to be a fraud, or hugely mistaken for some reason,
the skeptics here will deserve no credit for predicting this.
Getting a little defensive, are we, Jed?
They have not discovered a single valid reason to doubt his work
There is a problem: if you don’t want to watch the reasons, then you can’t see
them.
Jed, if the enrgy catalyzer will be proved as a hoax (or Rossi diseapper from
the public scenes [even with moneys]) then you will close the
Jed, what is your academic background?
From: Jed Rothwell
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 8:44 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:People such as Edison, Jobs, Whitman and Rossi are not always
lying when they say things that are obviously false
I wrote:
If Jobs seriously believes
On Aug 25, 2011, at 9:14 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Brief public demos have been repeated 4 times in 8 months, I think.
That is a small number. Anyone would invest in this based on those
demos would be insane, in my opinion.
I am glad we agree on at least some aspect of this.
On Aug 25,
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
If Rossi turns out to be a fraud, or hugely mistaken for some reason,
the skeptics here will deserve no credit for predicting this.
Getting a little defensive, are we, Jed?
No, but I am sick of people who play it safe by predicting failure where
failure is
The 3rd video refers to Levi shutting of the power to the E-Cat and steam
production continuing for 15 minutes. This could easily be explained by thermal
inertia. IE the metal and hydrogen of the E-Cat will still be at a high
temperature when power is shut off therefore boiling will continue at
So, you believe the issue is settled by the use of flow calorimetry (hopefully
you mean without phase change).
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Percolator Effect
Joe Catania
Horace Heffner wrote:
It is not primarily the people competent in this field that stand to
be cheated if Rossi's device is a fraud or self deception. There are
plenty of people with a lot of money who are scientifically clueless.
These are the kind of people that can be suckered in by
Mattia Rizzi wrote:
Jed, what is your academic background?
Japanese language and literature.
- Jed
Jed, how many words wasted !
Just recall how Rossi reacted, time ago, when you proposed to make a test in
Bologna using your own tools and what he said when you asked him to visit
his Florida plant !
Didn't any alarm bell ring ?
I'm sure you are, in his opinion, one of the very very very whatever
Joe Catania zrosumg...@aol.com wrote:
**
The 3rd video refers to Levi shutting of the power to the E-Cat and steam
production continuing for 15 minutes. This could easily be explained by
thermal inertia. IE the metal and hydrogen of the E-Cat will still be at a
high temperature when power is
Dear Jed,
As a professional scientist I would like to take this opportunity to thank
you for you continued efforts to present a balanced perspective on cold fusion.
Since the January announcement at the University of Bologna sparked my
interest in the topic, your library of CF literature
Susan Gipp wrote:
Jed, how many words wasted !
Just recall how Rossi reacted, time ago, when you proposed to make a
test in Bologna using your own tools and what he said when you asked
him to visit his Florida plant !
Didn't any alarm bell ring ?
Yes, as I have said again and again, if we
On Aug 25, 2011, at 12:02 PM, Finlay MacNab wrote:
Dear Jed,
As a professional scientist I would like to take this
opportunity to thank you for you continued efforts to present a
balanced perspective on cold fusion. Since the January
announcement at the University of Bologna
Yes I honestly mean toward 100C. If the metal is below 100C to start we never
get boiling so of course its above 100C (by alot) and will cool to 100C which
is the temp of boiling water.
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, August 25,
Joe Catania wrote:
Yes I honestly mean toward 100C. If the metal is below 100C to start
we never get boiling so of course its above 100C (by alot) and will
cool to 100C which is the temp of boiling water.
I still don't follow what you have in mind. Take the metal at the bottom
of a pot on
Finlay MacNab wrote:
Since the January announcement at the University of Bologna sparked my
interest in the topic, your library of CF literature has been an
extremely useful resource for me. I value your point of view and in
my estimation you have the mind of a true scientist regardless of
I meant to say: I did not write all those papers, so the real credit goes to
the authors.
The researchers have done a terrific job with practically no resources. With
funding the size of sparrow's tears, as they say in Japanese. People often
say there has been no progress in cold fusion. I say
On Aug 24, 2011, at 11:02 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Horace wrote: «Sparging steam into a bucket, though far better that
other steam methods applied to date on Rossi's devices, and
publicly disclosed, has numerous serious drawbacks, which have
already been discussed.»
And where they are
On Aug 25, 2011, at 10:00 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
«LENR is another avenue. It's not just about Rossi. If the Rossi
thing doesn't happen, then maybe something else will. Rossi has
brought a lot of attention to the field. Any researchers who have a
legitimate claim are going to benefit
No, the metal is certainly 100C (I think alot greater). With no power added it
should cool according to laws of conduction and convection. Yes, after the
power is cut the metal does not get hotter, it cools- toward 100C. As heat is
transferred from metal to 100C water the water will boil
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed, if the enrgy catalyzer will be proved as a hoax (or Rossi diseapper
from the public scenes [even with moneys]) then you will close the LENR-CANR
website?
Does the web site frighten you? Is so, I understand, in
I appreciate the surprise help from Scott Jorden and Specturm Radio.
-Original Message-
From: Scott Jordan
To: Frank Znidarsic fznidar...@aol.com
Sent: Thu, Aug 25, 2011 12:11 pm
Subject: The YouTube version of your interview is finished
Hey Frank
I have been so behind lately, I
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Look at Kim Kardashian who has made $35 million just by being famous, with
no apparent assets other than her ass.
Jed,
Might I suggest that you look a bit higher?
T
On 8/25/2011 5:36 PM, Joe Catania wrote:
No, the metal is certainly 100C (I think alot greater).
Electric heaters such as the ones in the eCat have an upper limit in
temperature. It is much lower than a stove nichrome heating element,
which goes up to about 1200°C.
As for an experiment I
Dull red heat is only 500C. You are not being convincing about the E-Cat heaer
which it seems you know nothing about. Also the heater would seem to be
irrelevat if you believe theres actually an anomalous contribution. The flow
rate through a particular E-Cat is irrelevant. Take the Krivit
Oops. 3 kWh in 15 minutes, not 4. 10,800 kJ. Assuming the eCat weighs 10
kg and it is mostly carbon steel the temperature goes up 2,200 K, not
2,930 K. I guess it has to go up this much starting at 100°C, in order
to cool down to 100°C after releasing 3 kW. That's 373 K + 2,200 K which
is
No, its not out of the question at all. Since we don't know the flow rate of
water (whether its flowing or not) and since it isn't particularly relevant
I neglect it. Levi isn't saying it produced steam at a certain rate- just
it produced steam. Therefore my order of mag is as close as anyone
65 matches
Mail list logo
