Dear Abd,
I agree with your thread of thinking.
However, in the paper I have intentionally not mentioned
that our Sacrosanct Physics is in a state indistinguishable from a Crisis,
There are many similar problems having no genuine theory, or not complete
theory, or two theories that are in part
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/10/leonardo-corp-releases-new-hot-cat-report/
Awesome! He ran it for 228 hours.
Unless he's deluded or lying, he's got it.
Craig
On 10/12/2012 12:36 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/10/leonardo-corp-releases-new-hot-cat-report/
I've been disappointed by his claims too many times - with his uncanny
ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory through sloppiness. As
far as most of the world is concerned (and even a lot of people who follow
this closely) until we see independent confirmation this is just more
The only egg on Eric's face was due to editing, to make the subject of
free energy interesting for viewers.
The $300,000 gravity wheel never ran more than three hours, and that was
aided by the wind.
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Aldo_Costa%27s_Gravity_Motor
From the above link, Eric
If claim of Rossi are right, the power density per gram of powder is awesome
596.85 W/g ( (14337-2400)/20 )
Celani's wire is around ~70 W/g
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: vendredi 12 octobre 2012 18:37
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject:
Why Rossi is taking energy produced per weight as a power density ? In the
report he says :
POWER DENSITY
163,4 MW*kg^-1 (onehundred sixtythree point four MWh
per kg)
(see the Ragone Plot at pag. 15 of the Penon Report
attached)
He
If average power over 228 hours is 14.337 KW, and the total charge is 20
g, then shouldn't the power density be:
14337 / 20 = 716 watts/gm = 716 kw / kg
Craig
On 10/12/2012 01:15 PM, Arnaud Kodeck wrote:
Why Rossi is taking energy produced per weight as a power density ? In the
report he says
At 09:36 AM 10/12/2012, Terry Blanton wrote:
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/10/leonardo-corp-releases-new-hot-cat-report/
Electrical measurements : pce-830
http://www.industrial-needs.com/manual/power-anlayser-pce-830.pdf
If claim of Rossi are right, the power density per gram of powder is
awesome 596.85 W/g ( (14337-2400)/20 )
This is correct. I neglected to subtract out the input power.
Craig
On 10/12/2012 01:21 PM, Craig Haynie wrote:
If average power over 228 hours is 14.337 KW, and the total charge is 20
Yet another Rossi said...
It is getting a little bit repetitive.
2012/10/12 Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com
If claim of Rossi are right, the power density per gram of powder is
awesome 596.85 W/g ( (14337-2400)/20 )
This is correct. I neglected to subtract out the input power.
The COP went up!!!
2012/10/12 Bruno Santos besantos1...@gmail.com
Yet another Rossi said...
It is getting a little bit repetitive.
2012/10/12 Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com
If claim of Rossi are right, the power density per gram of powder is
awesome 596.85 W/g ( (14337-2400)/20 )
The Red Pill:
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/429561/the-measurement-that-would-reveal-the-universe-as/
Do we really want to know?
terry sez:
The Red Pill:
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/429561/the-measurement-that-would-reveal-the-universe-as/
Do we really want to know?
Probably doesn't matter all that much... unless the universe is
preparaing to install a new OS within the next millennium or so.
In which case,
*Russ’s popper experimentation has shown some useful engineering details
regarding systems that use arching in a hydrogen atmosphere.*
* *
*The popper will become contaminated with tungsten powder after a
relatively small number of arc discharges are done by Thoriated Tungsten
Electrodes at high
Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been disappointed by his claims too many times - with his uncanny
ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory through sloppiness.
Exactly.
- Jed
I certainly hope that the new data is accurate. But if history repeats itself,
there are likely to be errors of some type. When will we get to see
independent test results to give us the confidence that we so much desire?
Dave
I agree. I think it will alter any material on earth it comes into contact
with over a period of time. Will need disposable parts...
On Friday, October 12, 2012, Axil Axil wrote:
*Russ’s popper experimentation has shown some useful engineering details
regarding systems that use arching in a
The higher COP includes additional energy calculated when the transformer
overheated, vessel wall melted, table cracked from embrittlement and the
blinding array of photons released:)
On Friday, October 12, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
I certainly hope that the new data is accurate. But if
This is his paint supplier: http://www.universokema.eu/
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 7:35 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
The higher COP includes additional energy calculated when the transformer
overheated, vessel wall melted, table cracked from embrittlement and the
blinding array of
Updated report:
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/10/update-andrea-rossi-provides-corrected-pordenone-hot-cat-report/
Still has some , vs . mixups.
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Patrick Ellul ellulpatr...@gmail.comwrote:
This is his paint supplier: http://www.universokema.eu/
On Sat, Oct
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:27 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I certainly hope that the new data is accurate. But if history repeats
itself, there are likely to be errors of some type. When will we get to see
independent test results to give us the confidence that we so much
Maybe so ChemE! My quick analysis reveals that the true COP in the self
sustaining mode is in line with his earlier statements. If you take the total
input energy during the self sustaining mode (278.4 kWh) and divide by the
hours in this mode (118 Hours) you get 2.359 kW. This matches his
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:41:29 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
That may be true according to conventional wisdom, however consider the
following possibility. Severely shrunken Hydrino molecules could
easily migrate
through the interstitial spaces in solid matter, and
Dave,
In selfsustaining mode, there is no input power to the cylinder. So I don't
understand the 3 first sentences of your email. Self sustain mode is no
input power and you say 2.359 kW. Duty cycle is 118/328 = 0.359. Time when
the system was not in self sustaining mode is 328-118 = 210 hours.
Forwarded with permission.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Lewan Mats Mats.Lewan@**
Date: Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 5:30 PM
Subject: Direct Mail: Hot Cat COP 11.7
To: hohlr...@gmail.com hohlr...@gmail.com
Cc: Alan Fletcher alanfletc...@farcad.com, David Roberson
Andrea Rossi
October 12th, 2012 at 3:27 PM
DEAR READERS:
THIS MORNING I SENT TO THE SPECIALIZED MAGAZINES THE TEXT OF MY REPORT.
UNFORTUNATELY, I CLICKED THE WRONG ADDRESS, AND SENT THE DRAFT FULL OF
TYPOS, WITH NONSENSE NUMBERS. I AM JUST RETURNED FROM PORDENONE AND
REALIZED THIS !!! ( IT IS
I think you are missing something Arnaud. Rossi uses the phrase self
sustaining to include operation where the input power is applied
intermittently. I consider this to be a drive it to the desired level and let
it drift until it needs to be re driven again mode. It is very difficult to
So from your point of view, Rossy is saying that in self sustaining mode,
the average consumed power is 2.4 kW ... That's not a so called self
sustaining mode ?!?
Dave, bear in mind also that the computation of the dissipated power is
completly faulty ... cfr mail from Mats.
This report is crap
Arnaud, I determined that the average consumed power input is 2.4 kW during the
self sustaining mode of operation according to the report. It is not what
you or I might call self sustaining operation, but I can see how Rossi might
consider it that. He might be thinking of the fact that the
I have completed my electrolysis experiment using a standard issue nickel with
a second one at the positive electrode. My electrolyte is sodium carbonate
(Arm Hammer washing soda) which does not foul up the positive electrode as
much as borax. For a short time it looked as though I was
31 matches
Mail list logo
