Jouni Valkonen wrote:
And since there is no radiation, I do not see that it is plausible have
> claimed levels of excess heat.
So, you dismiss the entire body of cold fusion research? Is that what you
are saying? Do you think that all of the other researchers are also frauds,
or do you suppose
Sorry Axil it is unclear to me from your response which side you fall on
regarding nanospire and Leclair's work.
Interesting article from a little while back regarding it:
http://pieeconomics.blogspot.com/p/cavitation-transmutation-take-this-viral.html
Axil Axil wrote:
>Like most things in
Puts the shuttle disasters in perspective... ie: They weren't "disasters"
-- they were more like "wrecks".
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> David Roberson wrote:
>
>
>> It might take a little time for Rossi to gain total control over his
>> device. How would you like to
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
However convincing proof, if that is desired, is just that ecat is made to
> do real work while it is completely unplugged.
Yes. If they could do this without melting the machine it would be a good
idea. Since they already melted one, no one should doubt that will happen
a
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
"This is not true. The test was arranged in Rossi's facilities and by
Giuseppe
Levi. And problem is that we do not know what is financial relationship
between Rossi and Levi, so Levi, who has been chief scientist in all
ecat tests, cannot be considered as independent entit
Ken,
Interesting - I didn't know of these experiments and this was written in
May 2012. There may be more to Znardisc's (sp??) theory afterall.
http://pieeconomics.blogspot.com/p/cavitation-transmutation-take-this-viral.html
- Jim
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 9:51 PM, Joe Hughes wrote:
> Interesti
James Bowery wrote:
Puts the shuttle disasters in perspective... ie: They weren't "disasters"
> -- they were more like "wrecks".
>
They were flight tests.
Those were prototypes. It turned out that was not a good design. See:
"Beam Me Out Of This Death Trap, Scotty"
http://www.washingtonmonth
Jed,
A replication of my proof that a DC cheater current can not steal undetected
power from a sine wave line source was completed. I will make a further post
explaining the particulars later. This issue should be put to rest. As you
say, we know how to measure power accurately.
Dave
---
On Jun 4, 2013, at 4:36 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> if the people doing the test have any doubt about that, they can bring a
> portable generator.
Portable generator is also fine and even better, because it leaves very little
room for tricks and doubt. But after 10 or so demonstrations we have h
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>The first tier of people to replicate were the crème de la crème of
> electrochemistry. I mean people who now have laboratories named after them
> such as Ernest Yeager, and people who should have laboratories named after
> them such as Joh
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
> Portable generator is also fine and even better, because it leaves very
> little room for tricks and doubt.
Very little room? Where would this room be? I mean in real life.
> But after 10 or so demonstrations we have had only one portable generator
> and that also wa
Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>
> ***That reminds me. One thing I keep running into is how many articles
> and replications have been published in peer-reviewed journals? And
> skeptics do not consider the Journal of Nuclear Physics to be a "real" peer
> reviewed journal. Does LENR-CANR.org have these
From: Jed Rothwell
And yes, there is a significant qualitative difference
between COP of 6 and COP of 2.5 in terms of market value. The HotCat could
be on either end of that spectrum, based on what the last report indicated.
I am
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
On Jun 3, 2013, at 11:31 PM, "a.ashfield" wrote:
> > In fact an independent test has been carried out.
>
> This is not true. The test was arranged in Rossi's facilities and by
> Giuseppe Levi. And problem is that we do not know what is financi
On Jun 4, 2013, at 4:55 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Jouni Valkonen wrote:
>
>> But after 10 or so demonstrations we have had only one portable generator
>> and that also was brought by Rossi.
>
> Nothing in the recent test was brought by Rossi. This test was a hands-off
> "black box" test, exa
Jones Beene wrote:
> There have been a handful of runaway reactions in 23 years. Very rare.
> There
> is no reliable evidence of infinite COP for more than a few hours, without
> runaway.
>
There have been many high COP runs lasting hours, and some heat after death
events lasting hours or days.
I have opened a dispute notice on Wiki. As far as I know, anyone can
join the fray (at the bottom.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Energy_Catalyzer_discussion
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Berke Durak wrote:
I love the mailing list format as its dependence on third-party
> infrastructure is minimal and replaceable but it's a bit too easy for
> opponents to flood and derail discussions.
>
One thing that recently occurred to me is that there is a ver
Yes very interesting I knew i had read something about that when reviewing the
cavitation article and Sonoluminescence piece but could not place it. You
connected the dots for me. It was Znidarsics work. Here is the latest paper i
can find. published in December of 2012. He must be on the right
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
> Leading scam hypothesis does assume that Giuseppe Levi is a scammer and he
> is as bad as Rossi. And he brought most of the instruments.
>
I see. And these other co-authors are so stupid they do not even notice the
equipment is not working? Even though they calibrated th
Unlike most if not all of the LENR faithful, I believe that LeClair has a
powerful LENR system. The LeClair system produces so much power that nobody
can think of it as a LENR system. They think that LENR must be weak.
I am coming to believe that LENR is a powerful energy concentration
mechanism,
On Jun 4, 2013, at 5:16 AM, Eric Walker wrote:
> In my opinion, people should not bring up fraud unless they have specific
> and compelling evidence. I do not know what the law (e.g., US law) says
> about the permissible boundaries for discussing possible fraud in a public
> forum, but we sh
On Jun 4, 2013, at 5:29 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> I think this "leading scam hypothesis" is far, far removed from reality.
>
How much money you are willing to bet? A couple hundred bucks maybe?
―Jouni
Your hunch amounts to overwhelming evidence? Rossi is public figure? You
think you can accuse someone of fraud and not be subject to possible suit?
As a practicing lawyer, your comments make me shudder!
Ransom
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 3, 2013, at 9:37 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
>
> On J
Cool. Thanks.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>
>>
>> ***That reminds me. One thing I keep running into is how many articles
>> and replications have been published in peer-reviewed journals? And
>> skeptics do not consider the Journal of Nuclear
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
>
> How much money you are willing to bet? A couple hundred bucks maybe?
>
I never place bets.
I once had to spend a few weeks in Las Vegas installing computers in
casinos. I never spent a nickel in a slot machine.
Las Vegas is the worst place I have ever been to. I'd rat
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Jouni Valkonen wrote:
>
>>
>> How much money you are willing to bet? A couple hundred bucks maybe?
>>
>
> I never place bets.
>
***I do. It was my pleasure to put my money where my mouth was on Cold
Fusion and cash in. But, alas, Intrade ha
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 2:03 PM, DJ Cravens wrote:
You may want to refigure that if you want to run for extended times- an
> Olympic pool (likely overkill) has a volume of 2.5 million liters and some
> are indoors and have covers. ( I would just use bubble wrap) You could
> easily go long enough
I wrote:
I don't know what kind of thermal load the E-Cat can sustain, but I agree
> that dropping it into a backyard swimming pool for two weeks until the
> water starts boiling would be a pretty good publicity stunt. I don't
> actually have a sense how long it would take for the water to boil -
Metrologically speaking, it doesn't matter if an entity creates excess
heat by violating the laws of thermodynamics. What matters is that our
instruments work according to the laws of thermodynamics. As long as they
do, we can determine with confidence how much excess heat the entity
creates.
harr
A visual demonstration would impress the masses.
Use a real ecat and a dummy ecat with the same input power to inflate a
balloon
The real ecat will inflate the balloon faster.
Harry
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> DJ Cravens wrote:
>
> Notice I did not say flow calorime
101 - 131 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
