Re: [Vo]:Am I the only one..
Eric-- I second your comments. Bob - Original Message - From: Eric Walker To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 9:22 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Am I the only one.. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Blaze Spinnaker wrote: .. that wants the replication to be real so that the global energy / scientific revolution starts in some old fringe Russian scientist's living room?? Personally, I could not think of a more just reward to the physics establishment for its intransigence than for LENR to make big news as the result of an aging Russian scientist replicating in his apartment a device that was invented by a petulant Italian inventor with a colorful past. I would be very happy if things end up playing out this way, and am hoping they do. It would prove that karma exists, and the physics establishment would have to suffer through the consequences. I think the jury is still out as to whether Parkhomov is really seeing something, although I am cautiously optimistic. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Am I the only one..
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Blaze Spinnaker wrote: .. that wants the replication to be real so that the global energy / > scientific revolution starts in some old fringe Russian scientist's living > room?? > Personally, I could not think of a more just reward to the physics establishment for its intransigence than for LENR to make big news as the result of an aging Russian scientist replicating in his apartment a device that was invented by a petulant Italian inventor with a colorful past. I would be very happy if things end up playing out this way, and am hoping they do. It would prove that karma exists, and the physics establishment would have to suffer through the consequences. I think the jury is still out as to whether Parkhomov is really seeing something, although I am cautiously optimistic. Eric
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
Any COP higher than 2 would be easy to detect with the setup I have proposed. Also, it will silence one argument of the skeptics, that there is no control in the LENR experiments (i.e. an easily verifiable null hypothesis). One can always find problems with calorimetry... With two reactors operating in about the same conditions, one with fuel and the other without, if the reactor with fuel is significantly hotter than the one without, we have excess heat present. Alberto. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Jack Cole wrote: > Without all the details, it may be hard to fully evaluate this. If the > thermocouple was on the inside of the cell (and only one was used), it > opens the possibility of differences in heat conduction. Imagine a > thermocouple in the air in the center of the tube versus touching the > nickel fuel in the active run. The heat would conduct more readily through > the nickel than it would through the air (obviously). If the control run > was heated up much more rapidly and given less time to fully heat the > inside of the chamber, that may also be a problem. It would be good to > have a second thermocouple affixed to the outside of the heater (assuming > he didn't use more than one TC). > > There would be some fairly obvious indications that something was wrong if > this was a big problem (e.g., incandescence level differences). It seems > unlikely that Parkhomov would have missed something like that. > > Overall, it seems to support his previous findings. Looking forward to > more details. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Alberto De Souza < > alberto.investi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I would suggest running two identical reactors in the same room (one >> without fuel) with heating resistances (identical) in series. If the fueled >> reactor becomes hotter, we have excess heat. One can film (MFMP style) the >> measurement of the resistance of the heaters before, and the voltage on >> them during the operation, to prove to skeptics that one have excess heat. >> >> Alberto. >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Peter Gluck >> wrote: >> >>> The main player is hydrogen. LIALH$ contains ` 10% in weight >>> H2, i.e. 6mgr. >>> 2 gr H2 is 22410 mL in standard conditions; ergo 6mgr hydrogen >>> makes 67 mL gas. This is disappearing during the process >>> adsorbed in the melt and...? >>> Peter >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:22 PM, wrote: >>> If there are some air in the reactor the oxygen will oxidise Ni an possible other compounds then the temperature becomes high enough. This binds the oxygen and it will lower the pressure. It will also make some heat, but only until the oxygen are consumed. Torulf On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:44:40 -0400, ChemE Stewart wrote: That's awesome! On Thursday, March 19, 2015, Jack Cole wrote: > It is impressive even without calorimetry. He would have to make a > severe mistake on input power measurement to be off that far. To be more > specific, he would have to make a mistake on input power measurement on > the > run with fuel that he did not make on the run without the fuel (very > unlikely). > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Peter Gluck > wrote: > >> Dear Jack, >> This morning - 8 hours ago, the reactor was still working. Nothing >> was announced till now. >> I am sure Alexander will work out a proper calorimetry system, not >> easy >> - if no sufficient cooling (as in his older system) risk of >> overheating and burnout. >> I have searched for the new sort of nickel he is using- it is Ni-carbonyl >> powder according to GOST 9722-97 (Like ASTM, DIN) type PNK-O2 >> See please here- with Google Translate >> http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf >> Please tell me if it does not work so. >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Cole wrote: >> >>> Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a >>> method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, >>> the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out >>> chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to >>> weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial >>> supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. >>> There is >>> another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure >>> at >>> max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for >>> initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck >>> wrote: >>> >> The evolution of pressure is a lesson of realism, we have >> calculaled hundreds of bars from inside and have 1/2 bars from outside. >> Best wishes, >> Peter >> >>>
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
Without all the details, it may be hard to fully evaluate this. If the thermocouple was on the inside of the cell (and only one was used), it opens the possibility of differences in heat conduction. Imagine a thermocouple in the air in the center of the tube versus touching the nickel fuel in the active run. The heat would conduct more readily through the nickel than it would through the air (obviously). If the control run was heated up much more rapidly and given less time to fully heat the inside of the chamber, that may also be a problem. It would be good to have a second thermocouple affixed to the outside of the heater (assuming he didn't use more than one TC). There would be some fairly obvious indications that something was wrong if this was a big problem (e.g., incandescence level differences). It seems unlikely that Parkhomov would have missed something like that. Overall, it seems to support his previous findings. Looking forward to more details. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Alberto De Souza < alberto.investi...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would suggest running two identical reactors in the same room (one > without fuel) with heating resistances (identical) in series. If the fueled > reactor becomes hotter, we have excess heat. One can film (MFMP style) the > measurement of the resistance of the heaters before, and the voltage on > them during the operation, to prove to skeptics that one have excess heat. > > Alberto. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Peter Gluck > wrote: > >> The main player is hydrogen. LIALH$ contains ` 10% in weight >> H2, i.e. 6mgr. >> 2 gr H2 is 22410 mL in standard conditions; ergo 6mgr hydrogen >> makes 67 mL gas. This is disappearing during the process >> adsorbed in the melt and...? >> Peter >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:22 PM, wrote: >> >>> If there are some air in the reactor the oxygen will oxidise Ni an >>> possible other compounds then the temperature becomes high enough. >>> >>> This binds the oxygen and it will lower the pressure. >>> >>> It will also make some heat, but only until the oxygen are consumed. >>> >>> Torulf >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:44:40 -0400, ChemE Stewart >>> wrote: >>> >>> That's awesome! >>> >>> On Thursday, March 19, 2015, Jack Cole wrote: >>> It is impressive even without calorimetry. He would have to make a severe mistake on input power measurement to be off that far. To be more specific, he would have to make a mistake on input power measurement on the run with fuel that he did not make on the run without the fuel (very unlikely). On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: > Dear Jack, > This morning - 8 hours ago, the reactor was still working. Nothing was > announced till now. > I am sure Alexander will work out a proper calorimetry system, not easy > - if no sufficient cooling (as in his older system) risk of > overheating and burnout. > I have searched for the new sort of nickel he is using- it is Ni-carbonyl > powder according to GOST 9722-97 (Like ASTM, DIN) type PNK-O2 > See please here- with Google Translate > http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf > Please tell me if it does not work so. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Cole wrote: > >> Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a >> method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, >> the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out >> chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to >> weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial >> supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. There >> is >> another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure >> at >> max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for >> initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck >> wrote: >> > The evolution of pressure is a lesson of realism, we have calculaled > hundreds of bars from inside and have 1/2 bars from outside. > Best wishes, > Peter > >> Dear Friends, >>> I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible >>> >>> >>> >>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html >>> We will discuss detais and connections later. >>> Peter >>> -- >>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>> Cluj, Romania >>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > >> >> >> -- >> Dr. Peter Gluck >> Cluj, Romania >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >> > >
[Vo]:Re: Am I the only one..
For that matter, without the calorimetry we don't really know if it's 3 COP. It could be < 1 COP and the run without the fuel was just < 1/3 COP. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Blaze Spinnaker wrote: > That being said, is it possible that the the first run just burned up the > shell of the tube / insulation and is now radiating heat more easily. > > At some point Alexander is going to have to remove the fuel and re-run the > test. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Blaze Spinnaker > wrote: > >> .. that wants the replication to be real so that the global energy / >> scientific revolution starts in some old fringe Russian scientist's living >> room?? >> >> >> >> >> >
[Vo]:Re: Am I the only one..
That being said, is it possible that the the first run just burned up the shell of the tube / insulation and is now radiating heat more easily. At some point Alexander is going to have to remove the fuel and re-run the test. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Blaze Spinnaker wrote: > .. that wants the replication to be real so that the global energy / > scientific revolution starts in some old fringe Russian scientist's living > room?? > > > > >
[Vo]:Am I the only one..
.. that wants the replication to be real so that the global energy / scientific revolution starts in some old fringe Russian scientist's living room??
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
I would suggest running two identical reactors in the same room (one without fuel) with heating resistances (identical) in series. If the fueled reactor becomes hotter, we have excess heat. One can film (MFMP style) the measurement of the resistance of the heaters before, and the voltage on them during the operation, to prove to skeptics that one have excess heat. Alberto. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Peter Gluck wrote: > The main player is hydrogen. LIALH$ contains ` 10% in weight > H2, i.e. 6mgr. > 2 gr H2 is 22410 mL in standard conditions; ergo 6mgr hydrogen > makes 67 mL gas. This is disappearing during the process > adsorbed in the melt and...? > Peter > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:22 PM, wrote: > >> If there are some air in the reactor the oxygen will oxidise Ni an >> possible other compounds then the temperature becomes high enough. >> >> This binds the oxygen and it will lower the pressure. >> >> It will also make some heat, but only until the oxygen are consumed. >> >> Torulf >> >> >> >> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:44:40 -0400, ChemE Stewart >> wrote: >> >> That's awesome! >> >> On Thursday, March 19, 2015, Jack Cole wrote: >> >>> It is impressive even without calorimetry. He would have to make a >>> severe mistake on input power measurement to be off that far. To be more >>> specific, he would have to make a mistake on input power measurement on the >>> run with fuel that he did not make on the run without the fuel (very >>> unlikely). >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Peter Gluck >>> wrote: >>> Dear Jack, This morning - 8 hours ago, the reactor was still working. Nothing was announced till now. I am sure Alexander will work out a proper calorimetry system, not easy - if no sufficient cooling (as in his older system) risk of overheating and burnout. I have searched for the new sort of nickel he is using- it is Ni-carbonyl powder according to GOST 9722-97 (Like ASTM, DIN) type PNK-O2 See please here- with Google Translate http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf Please tell me if it does not work so. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Cole wrote: > Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a > method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, > the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out > chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to > weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial > supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. There > is > another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure at > max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for > initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck > wrote: > The evolution of pressure is a lesson of realism, we have calculaled hundreds of bars from inside and have 1/2 bars from outside. Best wishes, Peter > Dear Friends, >> I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible >> >> >> >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html >> We will discuss detais and connections later. >> Peter >> -- >> Dr. Peter Gluck >> Cluj, Romania >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >> > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
The main player is hydrogen. LIALH$ contains ` 10% in weight H2, i.e. 6mgr. 2 gr H2 is 22410 mL in standard conditions; ergo 6mgr hydrogen makes 67 mL gas. This is disappearing during the process adsorbed in the melt and...? Peter On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:22 PM, wrote: > If there are some air in the reactor the oxygen will oxidise Ni an > possible other compounds then the temperature becomes high enough. > > This binds the oxygen and it will lower the pressure. > > It will also make some heat, but only until the oxygen are consumed. > > Torulf > > > > On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:44:40 -0400, ChemE Stewart > wrote: > > That's awesome! > > On Thursday, March 19, 2015, Jack Cole wrote: > >> It is impressive even without calorimetry. He would have to make a >> severe mistake on input power measurement to be off that far. To be more >> specific, he would have to make a mistake on input power measurement on the >> run with fuel that he did not make on the run without the fuel (very >> unlikely). >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Peter Gluck >> wrote: >> >>> Dear Jack, >>> This morning - 8 hours ago, the reactor was still working. Nothing was >>> announced till now. >>> I am sure Alexander will work out a proper calorimetry system, not easy >>> - if no sufficient cooling (as in his older system) risk of overheating >>> and burnout. >>> I have searched for the new sort of nickel he is using- it is Ni-carbonyl >>> powder according to GOST 9722-97 (Like ASTM, DIN) type PNK-O2 >>> See please here- with Google Translate >>> http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf >>> Please tell me if it does not work so. >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Cole wrote: >>> Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. There is another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure at max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: >>> The evolution of pressure is a lesson of realism, we have calculaled >>> hundreds of bars from inside and have 1/2 bars from outside. >>> Best wishes, >>> Peter >>> Dear Friends, > I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible > > > > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html > We will discuss detais and connections later. > Peter > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>> Cluj, Romania >>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>> >> -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
If there are some air in the reactor the oxygen will oxidise Ni an possible other compounds then the temperature becomes high enough. This binds the oxygen and it will lower the pressure. It will also make some heat, but only until the oxygen are consumed. Torulf On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:44:40 -0400, ChemE Stewart wrote: That's awesome! On Thursday, March 19, 2015, Jack Cole wrote: It is impressive even without calorimetry. He would have to make a severe mistake on input power measurement to be off that far. To be more specific, he would have to make a mistake on input power measurement on the run with fuel that he did not make on the run without the fuel (very unlikely). On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: Dear Jack, This morning - 8 hours ago, the reactor was still working. Nothing was announced till now. I am sure Alexander will work out a proper calorimetry system, not easy - if no sufficient cooling (as in his older system) risk of overheating and burnout. I have searched for the new sort of nickel he is using- it is Ni-carbonyl powder according to GOST 9722-97 (Like ASTM, DIN) type PNK-O2 See please here- with Google Translate http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf [2] Please tell me if it does not work so. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Cole wrote: Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. There is another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure at max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: The evolution of pressure is a lesson of realism, we have calculaled hundreds of bars from inside and have 1/2 bars from outside. Best wishes, Peter Dear Friends, I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html [3] We will discuss detais and connections later. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com [4] -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com [5] Links: -- [1] mailto:jcol...@gmail.com [2] http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf [3] http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html [4] http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com [5] http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
That's awesome! On Thursday, March 19, 2015, Jack Cole wrote: > It is impressive even without calorimetry. He would have to make a severe > mistake on input power measurement to be off that far. To be more > specific, he would have to make a mistake on input power measurement on the > run with fuel that he did not make on the run without the fuel (very > unlikely). > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Peter Gluck > wrote: > >> Dear Jack, >> >> This morning - 8 hours ago, the reactor was still working. Nothing was >> announced till now. >> I am sure Alexander will work out a proper calorimetry system, not easy >> - if no sufficient cooling (as in his older system) risk of overheating >> and burnout. >> I have searched for the new sort of nickel he is using- it is Ni-carbonyl >> powder according to GOST 9722-97 (Like ASTM, DIN) type PNK-O2 >> See please here- with Google Translate >> http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf >> Please tell me if it does not work so. >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Cole > > wrote: >> >>> Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a >>> method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, >>> the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out >>> chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to >>> weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial >>> supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. There is >>> another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure at >>> max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for >>> initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck >> > wrote: >>> >> >> The evolution of pressure is a lesson of realism, we have calculaled >> hundreds of bars from inside and have 1/2 bars from outside. >> >> Best wishes, >> Peter >> >>> Dear Friends, I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html We will discuss detais and connections later. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Dr. Peter Gluck >> Cluj, Romania >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >> > >
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
It is impressive even without calorimetry. He would have to make a severe mistake on input power measurement to be off that far. To be more specific, he would have to make a mistake on input power measurement on the run with fuel that he did not make on the run without the fuel (very unlikely). On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: > Dear Jack, > > This morning - 8 hours ago, the reactor was still working. Nothing was > announced till now. > I am sure Alexander will work out a proper calorimetry system, not easy > - if no sufficient cooling (as in his older system) risk of overheating > and burnout. > I have searched for the new sort of nickel he is using- it is Ni-carbonyl > powder according to GOST 9722-97 (Like ASTM, DIN) type PNK-O2 > See please here- with Google Translate > http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf > Please tell me if it does not work so. > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Cole wrote: > >> Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a >> method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, >> the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out >> chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to >> weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial >> supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. There is >> another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure at >> max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for >> initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck >> wrote: >> > > The evolution of pressure is a lesson of realism, we have calculaled > hundreds of bars from inside and have 1/2 bars from outside. > > Best wishes, > Peter > >> >>> Dear Friends, >>> >>> I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible >>> >>> >>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html >>> >>> We will discuss detais and connections later. >>> Peter >>> -- >>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>> Cluj, Romania >>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>> >> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
Dear Jack, This morning - 8 hours ago, the reactor was still working. Nothing was announced till now. I am sure Alexander will work out a proper calorimetry system, not easy - if no sufficient cooling (as in his older system) risk of overheating and burnout. I have searched for the new sort of nickel he is using- it is Ni-carbonyl powder according to GOST 9722-97 (Like ASTM, DIN) type PNK-O2 See please here- with Google Translate http://meganorm.ru/Data2/1/4294820/4294820717.pdf Please tell me if it does not work so. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Cole wrote: > Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a > method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, > the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out > chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to > weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial > supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. There is > another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure at > max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for > initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck > wrote: > The evolution of pressure is a lesson of realism, we have calculaled hundreds of bars from inside and have 1/2 bars from outside. Best wishes, Peter > >> Dear Friends, >> >> I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible >> >> >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html >> >> We will discuss detais and connections later. >> Peter >> -- >> Dr. Peter Gluck >> Cluj, Romania >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >> > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
Great work Peter. The fact that he has repeated the results using a method alternative to his calorimetry is very encouraging. In addition, the fact that he was able to run for such a long time easily rules out chemical effects. Hopefully, it will keep on running for more days to weeks. I was concerned about the fact that he ran out of his initial supply of nickel, but fortunately, the concern appears unfounded. There is another important detail disclosed - he only obtained 5 bar of pressure at max. This may well indicate that relatively low pressures are fine for initiating the reaction. That's good news from a safety perspective. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible > > > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html > > We will discuss detais and connections later. > Peter > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
Re: [Vo]:melted alumina tube
Looks to be not LENR and not hydrogen related. Similar thing happened with no fuel. http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IMG_20150319_082625_750.jpg On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:39 PM, wrote: > I played with termite and stuff like that then I was young. > > I ignited termite with gunpowder and it melted steel. > > > > > > On Tue, 17 Mar 2015 21:08:17 -0500, Jack Cole wrote: > > If it actually got hot enough to ignite the thermite, that might melt the > alumina. I was thinking Bob said some time ago that it takes temps > somewhere above 2000C to ignite thermite. I haven't done the calculations > for that yet. > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 8:16 PM, wrote: > >> Aluminium powder and Fe2O3 may give lots of heat in short time a termite >> reaction. >> >> Have you any calculations about how much energy this reaction may release? >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 17 Mar 2015 18:26:24 -0400, Axil Axil wrote: >> >> Steady accumulation of energy followed by its rapid release can result >> in the delivery of a larger amount of instantaneous power over a shorter >> period of time (although the total energy is the same). Energy is typically >> stored within a circuit of the device. What happens is based on the circuit >> of the dimmer. >> >> By releasing the stored energy over a very short interval (a process that >> is called energy compression), a huge amount of peak power can be delivered >> to a load. For example, if one joule of energy is stored within a capacitor >> and then evenly released to a load over one second, the peak power >> delivered to the load would only be 1 watt. However, if all of the stored >> energy were released within one microsecond, the peak power would be one >> megawatt, a million times greater. >> >> If the current rise is fast enough, the wire does not have enough time to >> heat up, but the magnetic flux during the rise might be huge. >> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 6:09 PM, David L. Babcock >> wrote: >> >>> "Very sharp" -just means that the power is applied nearly >>> instantaneously. Not any more power, just whatever equals E2 /R. >>> However the temperature gradient would indeed be higher, so the wire would >>> expand sooner than the matrix around. If the matrix temperature rises and >>> falls a lot during a small part of a line cycle, stress might get pretty >>> high. But isn't the wire a near-zero expansion/temperature material? >>> >>> Ol' Bab -who was an engineer... >>> >>> >>> >>> On 3/17/2015 4:02 PM, Axil Axil wrote: >>> >>> In these triac light dimmers, the rise/fall times are very sharp maybe >>> in the nanoseconds. That means that a lot of instantaneous power is being >>> feed into the heater wire as the power pulse starts when the leading edge >>> waveform is used. >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Axil Axil wrote: >>> According to Jack, the reaction did not happen in the fuel, but in the insolating layer. The fuel composition does not matter. IMHP, what matters is the exact nature of the heater current. On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Robert Ellefson wrote: > Jack, > > > > Fantastic! I’m really stoked to hear of your progress. I think your > powder recipe sounds very interesting, and I would love to know more about > the details of the reactants. It sounds like you’ve come up with a > mixture > which may contain one or more key ingredients not yet identified as being > of primary significance to the high-gain modes of these systems. > > > > If I may fire away: > > What size Fe2O3 and TiH2 grains were present? > > Is this mixture generally not hygroscopic, and therefore is curing the > reactor’s sealant a simple matter as compared to LAH? > Are you tumbling or milling these reactants, or performing any other > notable processing steps, prior to putting them into the reactors? > > > > Thanks for sharing, and keep up the great work! > > > > -Bob > > > > > > *From:* Jack Cole [mailto:jcol...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 17, 2015 1:08 PM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:melted alumina tube > > > > Bob, > > > > The input power was ~260W. I don't know what the R value of the > insulation is. I had the cell surrounded by high purity alumina powder > and > covered with a thin sheet of ceramic insulation. I used standard 120V AC > 60hz with a triac type dimmer switch (chops the waves starting at V=0). > I'll have to check with the manufacturer to see what the remaining 5% of > the tube is. The heating element was Kanthal A1. It's strange that the > heating element was able to completely melt at points. In the past, it > has > always failed before melting. > > > > I was using INCO type 255 nickel, TiH2, LiOh, KOH, aluminum powder, > and Fe2O3.
[Vo]:fast LENR news about Parkhomov, etc.,
Dear Friends, I wanted that you should receive these news as fast as possible http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/fast-issue-lenr-parkhomov-news-from.html We will discuss detais and connections later. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
