Very nice work!
Alan, as I understand, you apply natural convection and no forced
(controlled) cooling. Right?
Op woensdag 26 juni 2013 schreef Alan Fletcher (a...@well.com) het volgende:
(I posted some of these in the Penon topic -- I have to redo all the
pictures for the web version).
My
I am pretty sure they did bring other instruments. I can ask. As I
mentioned, in previous studies Levi brought a small $20 wattmeter, similar
to a Kill-a-watt. (A European brand; I have forgotten the name. I have a
photo of it somewhere.)
John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
It depends of
I am not 100% sure, but I think an AC meter would read a current from such
fluctuating DC, I might be wrong, easy to test, but I am moving house soon
so my equipment is packed away, but some AC meters such as clamp meters
should still give an AC reading, as for an AC volt meter I am unsure,
maybe,
Quoting from a previous mail:
Consider two circuits connected by a pair of wires. Assuming circuits
do not accumulate charge nor radiate, whatever current goes in must
eventually go out, therefore it is sufficient to specify the
instantaneous current I(t) in one wire. If we take one of the
the AC powermeter and other AC instruments will see faster enough
fluctuating DC, as a kind of AC...
however they will miss the DC average, or the very slow changes...
If Essenall did not measure DC, they forget something.
however Rossi was not sure they did not bring a grandpa DC voltmeter lik
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com
wrote:
First of all, the clamp-on probes used with the PCE-830 cannot
measure DC current
I don't know about this one, but my 30-year-old analog Radio Shack
clip-on ammeter sure can measure DC. You turn the knob to DC
about Clamp and DC, there are 2 kind of clamp.
some are pure AC transformers, with good AC bandwidth (up to MHz).
some are hall effect, with DC sensibility, but moderate bandwidth (few
kHz), and very expensive.
it seems the PCE830 clamps are AC only...
maybe a bad choice for that test... I have
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
about Clamp and DC, there are 2 kind of clamp.
There is only one clamp on my Radio Shack ammeter.
I suppose it is not good for very low current.
(I can't find it . . . I may have thrown it out or given it away, but
anyway there was only one clamp.)
There is a reason (this is not about scam) that Rossi did not allow DC
measurement.
2013/6/26 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
about Clamp and DC, there are 2 kind of clamp.
There is only one clamp on my Radio Shack ammeter.
I suppose it is
Jed,
The DC and AC act independently of each other in this case. Even thought the
net flow might be one direction, the time varying portion (AC) reads the
correct value. You can think of DC as being very low frequency AC and the
power delivered by each component can be calculated
The answer is yes. The meter reads the AC component if it can not read both.
Some clamp on current meters read both.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Jun 26, 2013 8:47 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Face-Palm moment:
I once used clamp on current meters to measure the DC current being drawn by
high power solid state amplifiers. It was easier than breaking the leads and
placing in shunts at high current levels.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l
I express badly...
It is only different models of clamp...
you seems to have the Hall effect clamp, which measure DC and not to high
frequency AC.
Essen seems to have used inductive clamp. Moreover it seems the PCE830
filter-out DC anyway, for current and voltage.
I don't know why expensive
Alan:
Both you and the Penon doc mention inner and outer tubes being steel…
The recent ‘semi-independent’ test clearly stated that the outer cylinder was
ceramic, not metallic. The only metallic tube was the stainless steel
inner-most one… Is the Penon doc using an earlier eCat test?
-Mark
In normal AC system DC bias is VERY rare. anytime a transformer is
involved the dc bias goes to zero.
Any AC powered device with a transformer in the front end of the power
supply will likely fail in a catastrophic way if any significant DC bias is
present.
(You drive the transfomrer magnetic
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 8:38:53 AM
Alan:
Both you and the Penon doc mention inner and outer tubes being steel…
The recent ‘semi-independent’ test clearly stated that the outer
cylinder was ceramic, not metallic. The only metallic tube
From: Teslaalset robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 1:25:56 AM
Very nice work!
Alan, as I understand, you apply natural convection and no forced
(controlled) cooling. Right?
That's correct. The model has a linear resistor for CONVECT and non-linear
for RADIATE.
In
I will also add that adding DC bias to 3 phase power without blowing up the
step down transformer on the input side of this circuit
is an engineering effort in its own right... it would require skills in
power engineering and is not real simple...
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Paul Breed
From: Paul Breed
* In past jobs I've both designed and used power meters and I would have to
agree that if one is attempting to do fraud then putting DC bias on an AC
wall socket would be one possible way to do this. This fraud is easily
detected ... so it would be a risky thing to do
I agree Paul. The DC scam source would have to offer a way for the current
from that source to both enter the blue box and return without disrupting the
normal AC pathways.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Paul Breed p...@rasdoc.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Jun 26,
It is like a bad nightmare; it keeps coming back again and again. I suppose
this is what the skeptics are left hanging on too since all the evidence is
strongly against them. When will they finally realize that Rossi may have
something? Who expects to see Mary, Cude or any of the others
I wrote:
about Clamp and DC, there are 2 kind of clamp.
There is only one clamp on my Radio Shack ammeter.
I take that back. The old one did not. Modern ones apparently do,
presumably with the Hall effect. See:
http://www.amazon.com/home-improvement/dp/B001VGND88
My old one was a
Even if fraud is highly unlikely, didn't Essen make a technically erroneous
claim?
Harry
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:04 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It is like a bad nightmare; it keeps coming back again and again. I
suppose this is what the skeptics are left hanging on too
Allow me to summarize the DC injection hypothesis:
- It is theoretically possible to add DC to provide ~3kW of power that
would be invisible to the PCE-830.
However:
- Given the size of the wires, I guess that amperage would need to be
below 50 A. Otherwise the wires would heat up too much and
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:18 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Even if fraud is highly unlikely, didn't Essen make a technically erroneous
claim?
Essen does seem to infer that the symmetry of the displayed waveform
implies no DC offset, which would be a false conclusion IF the
Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Allow me to summarize the DC injection hypothesis:
Thanks!
- It is theoretically possible to add DC to provide ~3kW of power that
would be invisible to the PCE-830.
That would be in the first test, where the cell melted. Much less power is
needed
I am going to link to this on facebook
Harry
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Allow me to summarize the DC injection hypothesis:
- It is theoretically possible to add DC to provide ~3kW of power that
would be invisible to the PCE-830.
However:
-
Today (June 26, 2013)...
http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/follow-2/295-simultaneous-test-runs-eu-us
Update 18:15 UTC -
Both the EU Cells and the US Cells were switched on and BOTH indicated
excess energy as the cells came to equilibrium at higher temperatures than
during the
A live audio/video discussion is happening now on google hangout:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/112746934321590853702/posts/15RhcoJk6de
Harry
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:05 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Today (June 26, 2013)...
In regard to these Cold Fusion adversaries, don't be too naive. I have
encountered many incidents in using the internet in which I strongly suspect
that sock puppet shills are used to derail certain topics.
On one site, I offered the latest news on Rossi's device and was suddenly
inundated by
Reference:
http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2010/04/27/protons-not-as-strange-as-expected
There has been a great deal of speculation about the effect of electron
penetration into the nucleus, and the hydrogen nucleus (proton) especially
those carrying fractional quantum numbers.
The
From: H Veeder
* The US Cell was indicating approximately 1.4 watts excess, again, well
above the ~0.5W confidence interval. Very exciting to see something
positive and especially simultaneous.
Harry,
If you are in contact with them - please ask if they are still using
Jones,
Yes they are using nichrome and are aware of the issues but they are not
using H in control cells.
Harry
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
** **
** **
*From:* H Veeder
** **
**Ø **The US Cell was indicating approximately 1.4 watts
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
If Quantum is serious about showing excess heat – then they must move away
from using a control which is also active !
Or use an absolute method such as flow calorimetry, rather than a
comparative method.
The problem of blanks that are not blank goes
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 26 Jun 2013 16:00:27 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
Reference:
http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2010/04/27/protons-not-as-strange-as-expected
There has been a great deal of speculation about the effect of electron
penetration into the nucleus, and the
http://www.kph.uni-mainz.de/eng/index.php
Research work of the Institute for Nuclear Physics at the Johannes
Gutenberg-University Mainz puts its focus on understanding the phenomenon
and interactions of hadrons, hence on mesons and baryons. According to
present knowledge, these objects are
Wire Dimensions:
220micron diameter
20micron active layer
100cm
1m*pi*220um*20um?mm^3
([{1 * meter} * pi] * [220 * {micro*meter}]) * (20 * [micro*meter]) ?
(milli*met
er)^3
= 13.823007 mm^3
Excess power:
2.5W
1m*pi*220um*20um;2.5W?W/cm^3
([{(1 * meter) * pi} * {220 * (micro*meter)}] * [20 *
Jones,
I was listening to the google chat and their control cells are run under
*vacuum* conditions, so the only chance of any H being present is if some
water (liquid or vapor) was present after evacuating the cell. I did not
catch what kind of vacuum they pulled, but I think it is safe to say
On 6/26/2013 1:24 PM, Paul Breed wrote:
In normal AC system DC bias is VERY rare. anytime a transformer is
involved the dc bias goes to zero.
Any AC powered device with a transformer in the front end of the power
supply will likely fail in a catastrophic way if any significant DC
bias is
Well, that is good - but they should probably use neon instead of helium in
control cells and absolutely fresh nichrome (never exposed to hydrogen),
As mentioned earlier, the first proton in any nickel alloy will bury itself
in the FCC crystal and cannot be removed without actually melting the
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Well, that is good - but they should probably use neon instead of helium in
control cells and absolutely fresh nichrome (never exposed to hydrogen),
Yes. Better a gas than a vacuum. Heat transfer in a vacuum is a whole
different animal.
- Jed
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:04 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
When will they finally realize that Rossi may have something?
They always knew he might, but they are skeptics and will always oppose any
advancement or change until it is over one way or the other.
Who expects to
Chris Zell chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote:
This is the era of the NSA. Have no doubt that everything is being watched.
I doubt the NSA has any interest in cold fusion. I wish they would take
notice of it. That might solve our funding problems!
If someone could produce a large bang I am pretty
Jones,
you wrote, but they should probably use neon instead of helium in control
cells
What makes you think they used helium??? They said, and I restated, that
they operate their control cells in a *VACUUM*, so I take that to mean that
they assemble the cell, and then attach it to a vacuum pump
Mark - I did not see your message ahead of posting mine.
However, the point stands that no amount of vacuum pumping will ever remove
the alloyed proton from nickel. That proton remains until the nickel is
melted.
Whether or not nickel-hydride with 7% by atomic volume hydrogen will give
much net
On 2013-06-27 00:42, Jones Beene wrote:
Whether or not nickel-hydride with 7% by atomic volume hydrogen will give
much net gain is debatable - but the lack of hydrogen gas in the cell after
vacuum purge may not be enough for a good control (if the nichrome was
previously alloyed with
John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
When will they finally realize that Rossi may have something?
They always knew he might . . .
I doubt that. I cannot read minds, but I get a sense that Shanahan, Nate
Lewis or Robert Park are certain they are right. It has never crossed their
minds
Jones' point about ANY exposure to H is acknowledged...
That being said, does anyone know the exact procedure by which the material
in the control cell was prepared and the cell assembled??? Obviously, the
nichrome wire was shipped to them, but was it exposed to air (humid air will
supply plenty
On 2013-06-27 00:55, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:
Jones' point about ANY exposure to H is acknowledged...
That being said, does anyone know the exact procedure by which the material
in the control cell was prepared and the cell assembled??? Obviously, the
nichrome wire was shipped to them, but was it
-Original Message-
From: Akira Shirakawa
Whether or not nickel-hydride with 7% by atomic volume hydrogen will give
much net gain is debatable - but the lack of hydrogen gas in the cell
after
vacuum purge may not be enough for a good control (if the nichrome was
previously alloyed
On 2013-06-27 01:09, Jones Beene wrote:
No - I was suggesting that in previous experiments to this one - the same
nichrome wire could have been used. Did they start out with a virgin wire
for this experiment or not? Often experimenters cut corners and reuse items
from previous runs.
I haven't
Am I missing something here? Surely if the control cell is producing some
small amount of energy from an LENR process due to contamination but it's
less than that being produced by the experimental cell then while a
baseline might be hard or even impossible to establish wouldn't a
significant
On 2013-06-26 22:37, Jones Beene wrote:
If you are in contact with them – please ask if they are still using
nichrome as a control.
Both cells (Activated [A] and Control [B] - there is one of each both in
EU and in the US, so four in total) have a NiCr wire (for
passive/indirect heating
Hi MarkG,
No, you're not missing anything. a control cell producing some small amount
of heat would result in a *conservative* (i.e., lower) estimate of power
generated in the test cell. assuming that the test cell is at least several
sigma above the control cell so experimental uncertainty was
-Original Message-
From: Akira Shirakawa
I haven't asked but as far as I have seen I'm fairly certain that for
the control cells they used completely fresh materials.
Well, let's face it - like everyone else in LENR they are severely
underfunded.
Therefore it is not a given that
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Thus - if there is residual hydrogen in the nichrome wire as well, it is
very likely to be gainful as a control, possibly strongly gainful - even
when run at a vacuum... not to mention the possibility of so-called
This is nickel free resistance wire.
It is highly preferable as a control in this type of experiment
http://www.amazon.com/Resistance-Heater-Kanthal-A-1-0-005/dp/B00BLBU8EA
http://compare.ebay.com/like/271204910484?var=lvltyp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes
var=sbar
attachment: winmail.dat
So, as I understand from the data [1] over the test runs the US cell saw a
gain of about 4.9% (1.49W/30.25W) and the EU Cell saw about 6.1%
(1.82W/30.05W).
[mg]
[1] http://data.hugnetlab.com/
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:43 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:
Hi MarkG,
No,
On 2013-06-27 02:33, Mark Gibbs wrote:
So, as I understand from the data [1] over the test runs the US cell saw
a gain of about 4.9% (1.49W/30.25W) and the EU Cell saw about 6.1%
(1.82W/30.05W).
That's about what they've written in the 18:15 UTC update here:
I have speculated previously that the EM drive is a form of Puthoff vacuum
engineering and Sawyers' claim that it is based on SR is in agreement with
my relativistic interpretation of Casimir effect which casts fractional
hydrogen as Lorentzian contractions. I am suggesting the focused
More to the point, what is important to note is that the amount is less
important than the reproducibility.
The experimental protocol here is open -- unlike Rossi -- and the
simultaneous appearance of two successes by two separate teams points to
the possibility that they have, indeed, found an
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
When will they finally realize that Rossi may have something?
They always knew he might . . .
I doubt that. I cannot read minds, but I get a sense that Shanahan, Nate
Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it's important to note that this is still preliminary data and
that unexpected measurement artifacts might lurk somewhere.
Yes.
I don't like to be a wet blanket, but over the years I have seen dozens of
results like this come and go.
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:40:10 -0400:
Hi,
http://www.kph.uni-mainz.de/eng/index.php
[snip]
This site contains many papers describing research into electron proton
scattering. It looks like the experiments are still ongoing.
IOW, you based your analysis on the
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 26 Jun 2013 18:46:24 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
He got that wrong. Most of the time, most people are inclined to stop
progress. As Martin said: People do not want progress. It makes them
uncomfortable. They dont want it, and they shant have it.
I don't thinks
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 12:05 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Both the EU Cells and the US Cells were switched on and BOTH indicated
excess energy as the cells came to equilibrium at higher temperatures than
during the calibration tests. The EU cell with the active wire was
Try this site, it has references.
http://www.jlab.org/highlights/phys.html
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:10 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:40:10 -0400:
Hi,
http://www.kph.uni-mainz.de/eng/index.php
[snip]
This site contains many papers
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
For the MFMP calorimeters currently being used, with the glass and the SB
equation, I suspect it will not be that convincing for people until they
see 10-20 W excess heat (integrated excess power, including periods of
Question: If skeptics really do not believe that something is possible,
then why must they fight so hard to defend reality from such an ill
conceived notion?
Especially when something like cold fusion clearly could not be believed
for long if funded and embraced and it turned out to be entirely
Twelve days ago I wrote:
Presumably the experiment ran for a while, but nonetheless one gets the
impression that the tritium is more than simply the result of some side
reaction, and it looks like the main daughter in this case.
This was in connection with a slide presented by Michael McKubre
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CirilloDtransmutat.pdf
Transmutation of metal at low energy in a confined plasma in water
*
Conclusions
*
The plasma is able to initiate transmutation reactions. Future studies are
underway to understand the mechanism of these reactions. We propose that
these
Analysis by germanium gamma detectors revealed presence of 100 billion
atoms of Ag, Pd, Rh, and (one) Ru isotopes having ratios unlike those from
bombardment by high-energy deuteron or proton beams.
72 matches
Mail list logo
