from:"Jed Rothwell"

Re: [Vo]:Corrections to heat after death calculations

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell


Horace Heffner wrote:


All the opinions in the world can not change the fact that water was 
probably coming out of the device in large mass proportions, whither 
or not the device produced some nuclear heat.



Here is what all the opinions in the world cannot change: liquid flow 
test proves that the machine is producing 12 to 16 kW of excess heat. 
Period.


Years ago when Fleischmann published the boil off experiments there was 
a great deal of debate similar to this. Many people claim that droplets 
of on world water might be leaving the cell, which would reduce the 
total enthalpy. Fleischmann did an inventory of the lithium remaining in 
the cell and showed this is not the case. A terabyte of blather on the 
Internet cannot refute this simple test. Blather, Speculations and 
opinion do not count. The only thing that counts is actual test results 
and these results prove that Levi and Rossi are correct. No one disputes 
that the tests could be better but given the input and output ratios and 
the high level of heat these results are good enough to prove the point.


As I stated previously these tests would not be good enough for an 
investor to put millions of dollars into the device. More rigorous tests 
are needed there because it is possible that Levi et al. are lying. 
There would be no point to betting large sums of money that they are 
honest when the question can easily be resolved with independent tests.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:A simple method for extremely accurate enthalpy measurement

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell

Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:


 Horace wrote: «I would note that steam sparging can have large errors due
 to steam escaping, due to variability in measuring the temperature decline
 curve, due to variations in the calorimetry constant with temperature, and
 due to imperfect stirring techniques.»


As noted these objections are invalid:

There is no problem measuring the temperature as long as you stir the water
before and after you sparge the steam.

There is actually no need to measure the decline curve, although it does
improve accuracy somewhat. you do not need to measure it because you do this
quickly so that there is no significant heat loss during the process.

It is hard to imagine what an imperfect stirring technique would be. Just
stir it a lot make sure the temperature is the same in different locations.
Use several thermometers.



 There was not significant steam escaping. Temperature decline was
 irrelevant, because experiment lasted only 32 seconds.


Exactly. You should not do this for more than 5 min., and you should not let
the temperature rise more than 10° above ambient.



 And stirring is irrelevant, because sub-boiling water needs to be stirred
 only before final temperature is measured.


Stir before, too. As I said, use multiple thermometers or move the one you
have to different locations.



 Steam sparging is very accurate, fast
 and simple to do method for calorimetry . . .


Yes, it is but it has limitations. It can only be used for brief samples. It
is a lot of work and can only be done five times an hour.

You should use a tall container for this, with a lot of water in it. Choose
a well insulated one if there is one available, such as large Dewar. That
eliminates heat loss.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Corrections to heat after death calculations

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell


Horace Heffner wrote:

Here is what all the opinions in the world cannot change: liquid flow 
test proves that the machine is producing 12 to 16 kW of excess heat. 
Period.


Again, where is the data for this test.


http://lenr-canr.org/News.htm#Rossi18HourTest

(with links to NyTeknik)

And do not tell me this data is incomplete. It is all you need to know, 
contrary to what Lomax asserts.



Fleischmann did an inventory of the lithium remaining in the cell and 
showed this is not the case. A terabyte of blather on the Internet 
cannot refute this simple test.


This is irrelevant.  Fleischmann did boil-off tests. There was not 
more mass of water flowing over the side of his beaker and onto the 
floor (or down a drain) than produced as steam.


It is similar insofar as people continued to raise an objection long 
after it was decisively proved invalid, by experiment. That's 
ridiculous. Once the experiment proves you are wrong, you should admit 
that, shut up, and move on. When people ignore experimental results no 
progress will be made and no question will be settled.



The public tests were not good enough to prove that *any* nuclear 
energy was created.


This is your opinion. Many experts disagree, as do I.


Lying is not an important issue with the public tests. The issue is 
whether the calorimetry showed anything at all.


People who know a great deal about calorimetry agree that it did. The 
fact that the second test with a different calorimetric technique gave 
the same result proves that it did. This cannot be a coincidence.



It would be a failure to exercise due diligence to invest large sums 
of money, without independent tests, in a project where the key data 
in the public demonstrations, the calorimetry, was so flawed.


They are not flawed. This is a figment of your imagination, just as the 
objections to Fleischmann's experiment were. Repeatedly asserting that 
something is flawed does not actually make it flawed. If the calorimetry 
had been flawed the second test with cooling water would have revealed 
this. It is fundamental to the scientific method that if you suspect 
there may be a problem you do a second experiment with different 
instrument types of different procedures to either confirm or disprove 
the results. That is the only way to settle the issue. Arguing, 
hypothesizing and debating get you nowhere. You do a test. Levi et al. 
did a test. They proved their point. There is nothing more to be done, 
nothing left to argue about, and nothing more to be said.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:September 22 might be Rossi's final deadline

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell


Peter Heckert wrote:

- Although Rossi initially complained about it, he agreed to perform 
tests without phase changes (no steam)
I dont understand this. The devices where tested all the times with 
steam successfully.

So they should be tested with steam . . .


Many people prefer to avoid the phase change. There has been 
considerable contention here about this issue. The devices have also 
been tested with liquid phase, and Rossi told me that his one megawatt 
device is intended to heat water only, not to produce steam.


Defkalion runs all of their reactors in liquid phase only, albeit not 
usually water.




Never change a working experiment!


That is a good rule of thumb. However, as I said these devices have been 
tested with liquid phase only. Rossi prefers steam because it is easier, 
more convenient, and he is sure that the result is accurate. since other 
people do have some doubts about this I think it would be diplomatic to 
use liquid phase calorimetry.


As you said, there is something to be said for using both methods.


So far I have read, scientists where invited for late october. Are 
their any news about this?


Rossi told me he would announce the detailed schedule at the end of 
September.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:September 22 might be Rossi's final deadline

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:


 And I also hope he will be obliged to test individual E-cats
 instead of that monstruous combination of 330 E-cats.
 With such an impossible set-up everything is possible.


I believe NASA is testing smaller units. The 1 MW gadget is not ready.


Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote:


 - Although Rossi initially complained about it, he agreed to perform tests
 without phase changes (no steam)


Sounds like him, doesn't it?



 - Tests will begin on September 3rd [and according to Rossi in one his
 posts on JoNP, they will last about two months [3] ]


I believe those are different tests. They will begin in October and go for
two months. I am pleased to hear he intends to spend so much time on them.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:September 22 might be Rossi's final deadline

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell


Peter Heckert wrote:


Yes, Rossi can look inside, but we cannot, so we cannot accept it.

Even if the pope himself swears it on the holy bible I would not 
finally believe this before I have seen it myself.


Do you mean: 1. Until you see an actual machine in operation? Or 2. 
Until you have seen the nuclear-active material itself?


If you mean 1: I do not understand why you will not take the word of 
NASA researchers, or Prof. Levi for that matter.


2. I have seen several cold fusion cathodes. You can't tell anything by 
looking at them. Even if you could see the powder and the inside of the 
cell, it would tell you nothing and give you no reason to believe the 
thing is actually a nuclear reactor. You have to spend weeks examining 
it with SEM and other clever gadgets. You have to be an expert in using 
these gadgets.



So Rossi requests more faith and believe from me than the pope would 
ever request.


You seem to be rejecting Rossi, NASA and Defkalion. How long are you 
going to continue with this policy? How many scientists must observe 
this thing before you will take their word that it is real?


I cannot understand this extreme skepticism. Other researchers have 
reported heat from nickel hydrides. many others have reported heat from 
palladium deuterides. Why is it such a stretch to believe Rossi? just 
because the power density and absolute power is higher that is no reason 
to doubt these results, or to classify them as being more difficult to 
believe. On the contrary, higher power and higher temperatures are 
easier to measure and therefore easier to believe.


It seems some people find this difficult to believe because it means the 
Rossi device is suitable for practical applications. Why should this 
make it harder to believe?!? Did you suppose that cold fusion would 
remain a laboratory curiosity forever? This makes no sense to me. 
Nothing about cold fusion ever indicated that it would necessarily 
remain a small-scale laboratory curiosity, like muon catalyzed fusion. 
On the contrary, since the early 90s there have been many reports of 
large heat releases and high temperatures. It was clear that if the 
reaction could be controlled it could become a practical source of energy.


There are some cold fusion researchers who disagree with this. Mizuno, 
McKubre and a few others agree with me, saying it was clear all along 
that cold fusion could be practical, and making it practical was the 
entire purpose of the research.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:September 22 might be Rossi's final deadline

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:


 If they use a transparent measuring method like massflow calorimetry that
 excludes any possible error, then I believe it.


You mean liquid state mass flow calorimetry, with no phase change. Not steam
or ice calorimetry.

That is a reasonable demand. I believe that is what NASA intends to do. That
is what Defkalion does, as I said.

Celani and many others have pointed out that phase changes are complicated,
and a lot of people have said that here of course.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:A simple method for extremely accurate enthalpy measurement

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell

Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:

This test shows your true colors.  It indicates that you actually expect the
 steam power to be on the order of 100 watts, not 10,000 watts or even 1,000
 watts.  If you put a wand issuing 10,000 watts steam power into the bucket
 you will get a notion of what I mean.


I don't see your point. I used to do this test with a hose producing 75 kW
at Hydrodynamics Inc. It worked fine. The results were close to the expected
amount from that heater.



 Beyond that, this bucket method works only for a brief snapshot of power.
  It does nothing to accomplish an overall energy balance for a test.


It proves that the steam is dry. For the rest of the test, you can depend on
temperatures. It does not get wet one minute and dry the next. If you think
it percolates just hold the hose out for 10 minutes.


A much better test would involve a much larger reservoir.


Not too big, or the change in temperature will be small. You can't prolong
it because the heat will radiate from the container.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:A simple method for extremely accurate enthalpy measurement

2011-09-01 Thread Jed Rothwell

Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:

 I don't see your point. I used to do this test with a hose producing 75 kW
 at Hydrodynamics Inc. It worked fine. The results were close to the expected
 amount from that heater.


 If that was a Griggs device I wonder if your memory might be failing you,
 like mine has been failing me.  Didn't Griggs use around 7 hp motors and
 achieve much less than a COP of 2, more like 1.2?


He had small ones but I tested huge ones. They could be set to produce no
excess, in which case this method recovered about 90% of the input energy,
as I recall. It was tricky to make them produce excess. You could tell the
thing was in the excess mode by the sound.

You can see a photo a huge one here:

http://hydrodynamics.com/products/large-flow-reactors/

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Corrections to heat after death calculations

2011-09-02 Thread Jed Rothwell

Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:

My first reaction is: did it not occur to anyone in 18 hours to reduce the
 flow by a factor of 10 so as to get more reliable numbers?


I would not recommend that:

1. The machine went bonkers when they started the run, producing very high
heat. I think it is safer to leave the cooling water flow high.

2. A 5°C temperature difference is huge and easily measured.

3. You should not change experimental parameters midway through the run.


Other reports refer to the reactor chamber as being about 50 ml. Photos seem
 to confirm this.  This must have been a special device for this test.


This was the larger device shown in the photos and used in the first set of
tests.



 Jed uses 3000 L/h, or 0.83 liter/sec.  Not that a 20% difference is
 significant.


They told me it was 3000 L/h. with that kind of flowmeter I trust the
cumulative total more than the instantaneous reading. A more recent report
says it was just under 1 L per second.



 Since we don't know the geometry of the device, we don't know where and how
 the output thermometer was located.


Yes we do. It is shown in some photos.



  If it is in a metal well, it is possible that it was heated slightly via
 the high thermal conductivity of copper between the resistance heater and
 the thermometer.


With a 5°C temperature difference this would be insignificant. During the
first phase when it went bonkers this might have been a factor, causing the
output heat to seem larger than it was.

- Jed

[Vo]:Comments about Hydrodynamics

2011-09-02 Thread Jed Rothwell

Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:


 I am happy to see such a neat application was found for Grigg's technology.
  I hope he has benefited from it.


Griggs left the company many years ago. The company seems to be doing well.
They no longer talk about the fact that their machine sometimes appear to
produce anomalous excess energy.



 I didn't see any mention of the power used. The motors definitely look to
 be in or over the 100 HP (75 kW), range though!


They have small ones and large ones.



  I am still curious about the inner diameter of the steam hose you used.  I
 find it difficult to believe 75 kW of steam can be stuck into a bucket by
 hand for calorimetry.



I do not recall the size of the hose. It was pretty big. This is not a
bucket. It is a 50 gallon steel drum fill with water from a hose and then
placed on the weight scale with a forklift. It is stirred with a hefty 2 x
4. The water gets dangerously hot after about 10 minutes. When the test is
finished, the steel drum is hauled out of the building with the forklift and
dumped into the parking lot.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Comments about Hydrodynamics

2011-09-02 Thread Jed Rothwell

Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:

What do you mean by excess heat? I thought it was a link to a website of bio
 fuel.


It is a long story. The Hydrodynamics gadget produces heat by generating
ultrasound. Under some circumstances it appears to produce anomalous excess
heat. Many years ago they invited me out to see the gadget because they knew
I was involved in cold fusion and they suspected this might be some form of
cold fusion.

The heat was confirmed with various tests at their factory and also at
customer sites. These tests included large-scale flow calorimetry with
liquid water and also steam which was sparged into a 50 gallon steel drum,
as I mentioned. The company spent a great deal of money constructing an
industrial scale flow calorimeter, which was designed by the Dean of
mechanical engineering at Georgia Tech. This calorimeter confirmed the
excess.

I think it is very likely the excess heat is real but I have no solid
widespread replications or other rigorous proof of that.

As I recall, the machine typically transferred around 90% of the input
electric power to the steam or hot water. That is when nothing anomalous or
unusual is happening. When it was producing anomalous heat, the steam had
roughly 110% to 120% of the heat from the input power. That would be many
kilowatts of excess heat but it was only a small fraction of the total
output and it had no commercial significance.

The company found that discussing this anomaly only confused the customers
and made people suspect they were up to something, so they have stopped
making the claims.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Meat without slaughter: '6 months' to bio-sausages

2011-09-02 Thread Jed Rothwell

I sure hope this works out. I described this enthusiastically in chapter 16
of my book.

I have read that the first cultured meat (in vitro meat) may not taste
very good. It may lack flavor and the fibers may not stick together much,
giving it an odd texture. Perhaps they can use it for filler, or sausage, or
some other niche market. They can then gradually improve the technology and
move into the mainstream market. This is the sales strategy described in the
book The Innovator's Dilemma, which I highly recommend.

As I see it, there are two ways to approach this market:

1. From the low-end as I just described.

2. From the extreme high-end, that is, the medical market growing
replacement human organs from the patient's own cells. You could charge
$100,000 a pound for something like a replacement heart.

There has been progress in growing human organs. I believe it is
fundamentally the same technology as in vitro meat production. Descriptions
of it sounds similar to me.

They have grown a rat's heart, apparently, at U. Minnesota. See:

http://singularityhub.com/2009/06/08/growing-organs-in-the-lab/

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Comments about Hydrodynamics

2011-09-02 Thread Jed Rothwell

Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:

Do you have links for articles regarding this experiment? It looks like
 fishy.


See p. 43-1 here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EPRIproceedingc.pdf

it was not fishy. I do not do fishy stuff. It was inconclusive. it is
unfinished business. If cold fusion takes off I hope that funding to
investigate this kind of phenomenon becomes available.

- Jed

[Vo]:Greek press report: Defkalion has not applied for license or safety testing

2011-09-03 Thread Jed Rothwell

See:

http://www.xanthipress.gr/eidiseis/politiki/9154-xynidis-kontos-aitisi-ergostasio-syntixi-defkalion-.html

A translation sent to me by someone (maybe done by Google):

No applications for plant in Xanthi

With new negative letters answered, as expected, the question submitted by
the MP [member of parliament? M. Y.] Xanthi New Republic to
competentministers on the issue of environmental impacts from the possible
establishment of Xanthi plant devices producing energy from fusion of
hydrogen-nickel.

After the replies of the Ministry of Finance to the Ministry of Environment
and the Ministry of Development responded to Members of the Southwest there
is filed an application for the company Defkalion for this investment and
therefore can not assess the potential environmental burden .

Indeed the response of the Ministry of Development, signed by the Deputy
Minister Socrates Xynidis.

In this report: In response to the above question tabled in the House by
Congressman Alexander Short [That's a translation of Alexander Kontos --
M.Y.] , you know that it has submitted documentation to permit installation
and operation of industrial plant of this type»

Negative responses from Papakonstantinou - Sokos.

Respondents who were released from Alexander Short [Kontos], included a
cover of the Environment Minister George Papakonstantinou and a response by
the Head of the Department of Industry that the YPEKA not submitted any
application. Also by the Secretary of ADMTH letter sent by the Director of
the relative address of Apoakentromensi Administration Lambrini Rizos.

There is no known application for approval of building fusion power
nickel-hydrogen has not been filed and that of the crop [??] should be
ensured through the Environmental Impact Study filed in each case.

Re: [Vo]:New June video interviews by Krivit

2011-09-03 Thread Jed Rothwell

OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote:


  The last 20 seconds of part 4 of the interview were amazing! :D

 Yes, it would appear that Rossi changed his mind. ;-) Very mercurial of
 him.


In the last 20 seconds he says Krivit did a very good job. I agree that he
did, in the interviews. I wish he had gathered more information during the
demonstration, especially the method of measuring the flow rate.

Rossi was upset by Krivit's conclusions from these interviews, and his long
report. So was I. I thought in particular he distorted Levi's statements
about the purpose of the 18-hour test, and the reasons Levi does not plan to
publish the results. As I said some weeks ago, this resembles Mizuno's large
heat after death event, described in his book, and summarized here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTnucleartra.pdf

This event was irrefutable proof of a massive, self-sustaining nuclear
reaction.  Mizuno has never had any doubt whatever about that. Unless Mizuno
is liar or a lunatic, I have no doubt about it either. This event was far
more convincing than, for example, all of the experiments done by McKubre
combined. Unfortunately, the instrumentation was not very good for reasons
beyond Mizuno's control, and there is no chance any journal would publish
anything about this. The only recorded evidence remaining from this is the
pen recorder trace leading up the heat burst, before the cell was
disconnected and submerged in the bucket of water. That's not good enough
for a formal scientific presentation. Mizuno has never tried to publish
these results or describe them in a conference. He discusses them with
anyone who asks, and he included them in his book. He first discussed them
with a reporter from Bungei Shunju, a top-notch, conservative establishment
magazine, which is where I learned about them. He is not hiding them.

Levi's data isn't good enough for a peer-reviewed paper, and he is not
interested in publishing anything less formal than that. It is fine for
NyTeknik, just as Mizuno's report was well suited for Bungi Shunju, or in
the U.S., someplace like Wired Magazine.

I understand Levi's point of view. I don't agree with him completely, but I
get it. It is absurd for Krivit to suggest there is something unethical or
unusual about discussing the data with reporters even though it is not
suitable for a formal paper.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New June video interviews by Krivit

2011-09-04 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:


 This makes me a little bit sceptic about LENR. They research for 20 years
 now and still have no repeatable results.


That is incorrect. You need to read the literature more carefully before
commenting on this research. McKubre, Storms and others describe how to do
repeatable experiments. The success rate is far higher than, for example,
cloning or commercial transistor production circa 1955. See, for example:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEhowtoprodu.pdf

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New June video interviews by Krivit

2011-09-04 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

10-20% COP is easily explained as measuring error.


Not with the instruments used by McKubre or Storms. If you think it would be
easy I suggest you write a paper explaining how that might work with the
system described here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHisothermala.pdf

In any case, they measured far more than 20% in some cases, ranging from
300% to infinity (no input power).

Just because you assert that something is easily explained that does not
actually mean you have easily explained it. I do not get a sense that you
have read the literature carefully or that you can back up your assertions,
either easily or with difficulty. I say that because if you had read the
literature you would know that excess heat has often exceeded 20%, and you
would know that cold fusion is much easier to replicate than many other
physics experiments. You might also realize that the difficulty of
replication is not considered a reason to reject a finding. The Princeton
PPPL and the Top Quark experiments are far more difficult to replicate than
cold fusion but I do not think they have been rejected on that basis.

If you do not wish to do your homework and learn about this subject, that's
fine, but you should not expect people here to take your comments seriously.
I, for one, plan to ignore you unless you indicate a willingness to learn
the facts about cold fusion instead of waving your hands and making up
stuff.

- Jed

[Vo]:New translations of papers into Portuguese

2011-09-06 Thread Jed Rothwell

See:

Chubb, S.R., *O Reator Rossi de 10kW.* Infinite Energy, 2011(96): p. 31.

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ChubbSRoreatorros.pdf

Bacchi, S., *ColetÃ¢nea de artigos sobre o aparelho de fusÃ£o a frio Rossi*.
2011, LENR-CANR.org.

[That title doesn't survive conversion.]

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BacchiScoletneade.pdf

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New translations of papers into Portuguese

2011-09-06 Thread Jed Rothwell

MJ feli...@gmail.com wrote:


 Coletânea de artigos sobre o aparelho de fusão a frio de Andrea Rossi


Hmmm . . . It is properly formatted in EndNote but by the time it gets
converted to HTML format by my Pascal program the ã characters are lost. I
guess I should convert them to a.

American software is provincial when it comes to ASCII codes from other
languages. We can't process anything but [a..z]. Especially software from
long ago like this compiler.

The abstract looks okay. It comes out:


Andrea Rossi e Sergio Focardi realizaram uma demonstração pública em 14 de
Janeiro de 2011 do ECat (catalisador de energia) aquecedor de água Rossi, um
reator níquel-hidrogênio a fusão, na Universidade de Bolonha (Itália). Um
groupo de cerca de 50 scientistas da  universidade e do Instituto Nazionale
di Fisica Nucleare (INFN, o Instituto de Física Nuclear Italiano) onde se
examinou o dispositivo. O experimento foi organizado pelo Dr. Giuseppe Levi
e outros docentes da Universidaede de Bolonha/INFN.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New translations of papers into Portuguese

2011-09-06 Thread Jed Rothwell

I changed the a which changed the name:

Bacchi, S., *Coletanea de artigos sobre o aparelho de fusao a frio Rossi*.
2011, LENR-CANR.org.

New name:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BacchiScoletanead.pdf

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes

2011-09-08 Thread Jed Rothwell


Alan: Thanks again for monitoring Rossi's blog.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:So Cal Dark

2011-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell

I read this story and tried to look up another, and got this error 
message from NBCSandiego.com:


Our servers are down so we're digging up the streets and blocking 
traffic. We are pretty sure this will go faster than the most recent 
City construction project, so check back soon. Sorry for the inconvenience.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:So Cal Dark

2011-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell

Some interesting quotes from Slate:

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/09/09/california_blackout_utility_worker_s_error_in_yuma_leaves_san_di.html

QUOTE

Much of Southern California and parts of Arizona and even Mexico came to a
standstill Thursday, apparently thanks to a blunder by a single electrical
worker in sandy Yuma, Arizona.

Electricity officials blamed operator error for an enormous blackout that
cast 4 million customers, including pretty much all of San Diego, into
darkness beginning around 3:30 p.m. Thursday. Power came back on for many
customers early Friday morning.

In the meantime, streets were gridlocked, people were trapped in elevators,
and flights from San Diego were canceled . . .   Alarms shrieked, sewage
pumps failed, nuclear plants in San Onofre shut down, and people were stuck
on rides at Sea World and Legoland.

Nice going, anonymous utility worker in Yuma. . . .


Why it spread as far as San Diego is the subject of an investigation. It
seems the outage caused a series of other sections of the grid to overload,
and the blackout cascaded from one to the next. It’s
worrisome, BusinessWeek notes, because it suggests the region’s power grid
is more fragile than anyone realized.

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes

2011-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:


 really interesting but unverifiable now. Otherwise it is a temporary
 saison morte in the Rossi camp, nothing happens. Dekalion seems to be dead
 and unressurectable . . .


I doubt that. As far as I know Defkalion intends to continue with their
plans to begin manufacturing this year.

- Jed

[Vo]:Grimshaw paper

2011-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell

See:

Grimshaw, T., *Evidence-Based Public Policy toward Cold Fusion: Rational
Choices for a Potential Alternative Energy Source*. 2008, The University of
Texas at Austin.

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GrimshawTevidenceba.pdf

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes

2011-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

I hope so too but I have not a iota of proof for that, except wishful
 thinking and sympathy for them.
 Do you have more?


I have had some contact with the company. They tell me everything is going
forward as planned. That isn't proof of anything, but I suppose that if the
plans were canceled I would've heard about it. After the controversy with
Rossi began, they told PESN:

. . . official testing, certification and approval by the Greek Authorities
is still in progress.

http://pesn.com/2011/08/10/9501891_Defkalion_Responds_in_Support_of_Rossi/

I know nothing about the contract between Rossi and Defkalion, but I doubt
that it allows Rossi to unilaterally dissolve the agreement. I doubt any
businessman would sign such a contract, especially when dealing with someone
as mercurial as Rossi.

Defkalion was supposed to re-open their website this month but they have not
yet as far as I know.

- Jed

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes

2011-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell


Peter Gluck wrote:


But Xanthi Press wrote no testing by State authorities no
plant. Confusing.


The Sept. 1 report said they do not have a license for the plant yet. 
Defkalion confirmed they are still working on that. I do not think the 
report said there has been no testing.


There is also some confusion about the nature of the factory. Apparently 
a local university professor thinks they need a license for the use and 
storage of massive amounts of hydrogen; ~150 tons. That would require a 
license. They do not need that much, obviously. My guess is that the 
professor thinks this is a conventional fuel cell, which would call for 
lots of hydrogen. They are talking about catalysts and reactors so this 
mistake would be understandable.


- Jed

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes

2011-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell

OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:

Inquiring minds want to know... What does Defkalilon's have on hand?
 Do they possess the equivalent of Rossi's eCat technology in-house, or
 not.


They say they do. See their web site, their statements at PESN, and the
press conference in Athens.

At one point, Rossi said they do not have the technology. However, he was
present during the press conference, sitting at the podium. He was later
interviewed by several reporters. I suppose that if they had been lying he
would have said something like: This press conference was a fraud; they do
not have any eCats. They have never tested one. He said nothing like that.
He was agreeable as you see in the videos. So I discount his later
statements. Also, I believe he more or less retracted saying the dispute is
only related to money, not technical claims.

Along the same lines, the Minister of Energy attended the press conference.
He also seemed agreeable. During the press conference they claimed they are
testing devices at the Ministry. I suppose if that were not true he would
have said something. I'm only speculating here. This is circumstantial
evidence at best. Perhaps the Minister did not have any knowledge of the
company or any knowledge what they were doing yet he attended the press
conference anyway and he sat there nodding when they made statements about
his ministry which -- if untrue -- will soon result in a scandal that will
cause him to be fired, and perhaps bring down the administration.

I do not suppose a politician would do that, but you never know. Stranger
things have happened.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too

2011-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell

OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote:


 A subtle point the above premise may have gotten completely wrong is the
 fact that as automation takes over more and more jobs in traditional
 manufacturing sectors it is NOT necessarily true that these misplaced
 workers will end up being reemployed in various service sector areas of the
 economy. The problem many politicians seem oblivious to and subsequently
 refuse to acknowledge to their constituents is the fact that increasing
 numbers of service sector jobs are ALSO ending up being automated.

Yes, the pace of progress has picked up. Progress in computers and robots
was stalled for a long time. In the 1960s, some experts believed we might
have something like the HAL computer portrayed in the movie 2001 by the
year 2000. That did not happen. Many people went to the opposite extreme,
saying that computers will never be able to translate, drive automobiles, or
think in any sense of the word. Now we have effective translation and
prototype antonymous automobiles (Google) and artificial intelligence in the
Watson computer far ahead of what I expected a few years ago. I do not know
the state of the art in robotics but I expect it will soon improve rapidly.
This is bound to have a profound impact on all sectors of the economy. *All
sectors* -- that's Johnson's point. The notion that we can go from
manufacturing to service reminds me of Asimov's classic short story The
Last Question which begins with two inebriated scientists arguing about
entropy and the fate of the universe:

. . .  What I say is that a sun won’t last forever. That’s all I’m saying.
We’re safe for twenty billion years, but then what? Lupov pointed a
slightly shaky finger at the other. And don’t say we’ll switch to another
sun.

There was silence for a while. Adell put his glass to his lips only
occasionally, and Lupov’s eyes slowly closed. They rested.

Then Lupov’s eyes snapped open. You’re thinking we’ll switch to another sun
when ours is done, aren’t you?

I’m not thinking.

Sure you are. You’re weak on logic, that’s the trouble with you. You’re
like the guy in the story who was caught in a sudden shower and who ran to a
grove of trees and got under one. He wasn’t worried, you see, because he
figured when one tree got wet through, he would just get under another one.

I get it, said Adell. Don’t shout. When the sun is done, the other stars
will be gone, too.

- Jed

[Vo]:The effect of cold fusion on employment

2011-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell

fznidar...@aol.com wrote:

 Yes has you read Lights in a Tunnel it is shareware and goes through this.

 Would free energy mean more or less jobs, perhaps Jed knows.


When I wrote the book in 2004, in chapter 20 on employment I said that cold
fusion would not have a large impact. Nearly everyone in the energy business
will be put out of work, but a surprisingly small number of people work in
that sector. Back then it was 1.2 million people in the U.S., including 0.9
million at gas stations. Many gas stations double as convenience stores, so
not all of those people will lose their jobs.

1.2 million seems like lot, but consider that 6 million worked in finance
and insurance back then.

I concluded that this will not a big problem as long as society as a whole
takes steps to re-employ people from energy sector. About half of them are
highly skilled people who can build other things we will need, such as
desalination plants for my pet megaproject (see chapter 8).

The bigger question is: will the aggregate impact of cold fusion likely
reduce employment, or increase it? There are two sets of answers:

1. Answers based on economics.
2. Answers based on technology.

1. Economics

I don't know enough about economics to address this in any depth. Hal Fox
envisioned an ever increasing economy after cold fusion removes the limits
to growth. I don't see how that would work. I can't imagine what we
first-world people would need with twice or three times or ten times more
GNP. There is a practical limit to consumption. My wife  I have two cars
already. We don't need a dozen. I have Netflix and I don't have time to
watch more than 2 or 3 movies a month. What would I do with dozens of new
movies a month? I sure as heck do not want to consume more healthcare if I
can avoid it. I wouldn't want to eat filet mignon every day even if it were
grown as cultured meat. No one in Atlanta wants to drive a car if it can be
avoided. You could hand out free gasoline and free Mercedes-Benz cars, but
you would not increase the consumption of transportation here because the
traffic is so bad.

I have not read this in the newspapers, but I get a sense that one cause of
the Japanese economic doldrums of the last few decades is most people in
Japan have enough stuff. Consumer demand is satiated. They reached the
practical limits of consumption in the 1980s and 1990s. Population growth
came to a halt, so there were no new consumers. Of course there are poor
people there. Unfortunately, the number are growing, as is the gap between
rich and poor. But most people are middle-class. I know many middle-class
professionals of my age. By the 1990s, they all had enough living space
(because they are not in Tokyo), plenty of books, electronics, nice cars,
televisions, washing machines and so on. They did not need or want anything
more. Automobiles and television sales are clearly at the replacement rate,
and those machines last a long time.

2. Technology

I am well qualified to address this, and I think the answer is clear. It is
an easy question. There is no doubt in my mind that cold fusion will take
far fewer workers than conventional sources such as fossil fuel, wind or
fission.

The 1.2 million people in this sector will be replaced with a few thousand
people, who manufacture specialized cold fusion related materials and
equipment such as finely divided nickel or purified hydrogen. Most energy
will be built into the product. For example, automobile engines will have a
supply of powder and nickel built in, which is replaced about as often as
lubricating oil is now. It will not take any more production line employees
to fabricate these engines than it now takes to fabricate something like a
Prius hybrid engine. A cold fusion engine will not call for more expensive
materials, greater precision, or more labor than conventional engines do,
and of course there is no need for fuel. So everyone employed in extracting,
purifying, transporting, or refueling engines of all types will be out of a
job. In the transportation sector, all of those people will be replaced by a
handful of auto mechanics who swap out the powder and hydrogen tank once a
year, or once every 5 years.

The electric power and natural gas sectors will vanish completely in the
time it takes to replace space heating HVAC equipment, water heaters, and so
on. That's about 15 years in the residential sector, and 30 in the
commercial sector. However, once the electric power and other energy utility
companies lose a about a third of the customers and revenues they will
collapse. This should happen roughly 8 years into the transition. The U.S.
Post Office has lost about 37% of its First Class business because of e-mail
and it is on the verge of collapse. European and Japanese post offices
survive, but they are downsized. The Japanese Post Office still doubles as a
banking and insurance system, I believe. (Not sure what happened to
Koizumi's plans to break it up. The actual Post Offices look

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes

2011-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell

mix...@bigpond.com wrote:

I don't see why they would need to store any Hydrogen. They could just
 produce
 it on demand through electrolysis. If they can't do this then the device is
 worthless anyway.


It is a bad idea to produce hydrogen on demand with electrolysis. That adds
to the complexity and cost of the machine; it causes explosions, and the
hydrogen is impure. Since you only need minute quantities of hydrogen it is
much better to purchase it in pressure vessels.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too

2011-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell

mix...@bigpond.com wrote:


 I get it, said Adell. Don’t shout. When the sun is done, the other
 stars
 will be gone, too.
 
 This is of course not true. New stars are being born all the time.


They know that. The basic point remains valid. Read the whole story:

http://filer.case.edu/dts8/thelastq.htm

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The effect of cold fusion on employment

2011-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell

mix...@bigpond.com wrote:


 then cold fusion will reduce overall employment by 1.2 million people.
 Inexorably.
 [snip]
 This may well be true in the USA which already has a high standard of
 living,
 however CF will make a huge difference in the developing world, where
 billions
 of people currently can only dream of your standard of living.
 CF could make it possible for the entire world to enjoy a standard of
 living
 equivalent to that in the USA, in fact better, in as much as all waste will
 be
 recycled leading to a far less polluted planet, where we can all lead a
 healthier life.


I hope that is what happens, but even if it does, it will not have much
affect on U.S. employment. The 1.2 million people I referred to are in the
U.S. They will not be replaced by other workers in the U.S. producing
equipment such as cars or space heaters for the third world because we do
not sell industrial equipment to the third world. Japan, China and Korea
have those markets sewed up. Nowadays they sell gasoline cars; in 20 years
they will sell cold fusion cars. More of them, I hope. But I doubt the U.S.
will have any role in it. In any case, modern manufacturing requires very
few people.

In the U.S. the prospects are for more unemployment, because we refuse to
invest in new technology or manufacturing. We have handed over the markets
for computers, iPads and most consumer goods to the Chinese in return for
cheap stuff at Walmart. Hey, it wasn't my decision.


[snip]
 BTW don't forget all the new jobs that will be created in the manufacturing
 sector as all your everyday items are upgraded to utilize the new energy
 source,


The upgrade transition will not last for long and it will not create new
jobs after it is done. On the contrary, the upgrade will be to newer
production lines which take fewer workers.


and also for newly created products, such as personal flying equipment;
 currently not practical due to the limited amount of fuel that can be
 carried.


In my first message I specified: if we decide to live more or less the way
we do now, consuming about as much energy per capita as we do now, with
roughly as much transportation . . . Personal flying equipment would be a
change from the way we live now. It would require more energy. Whether it
would also call for more employment or not I cannot judge.

- Jed

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes

2011-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell

mix...@bigpond.com wrote:


 Over the long haul, it's going to need to come from electrolysis anyway.
 That's
 where most of our hydrogen is. It doesn't need to cause explosions if done
 correctly.


Of course. Over the short-haul too. But it should be done at specialized
facilities by experienced people. Do-it-yourself or automated electrolysis
equipment has been tested. It often explodes. It is really bad idea when all
you need is a tiny amount anyway.



 As to purity, I seriously doubt that the purity need be any less than
 that obtained from natural gas (once again, if done correctly) . . .


Not according to Mizuno, who is an expert. He designed elaborate equipment
to purify hydrogen that was already commercial grade. Doing it correctly
is the key point. It cannot be done correctly with a small-scale, automated,
do-it-yourself machine. Perhaps this will be possible in the future. There
is no need for it now. Commercial-grade hydrogen from a tank will not add
any measurable extra cost to a cold fusion device.



 . . .  and I don't
 think purity is of such a concern for the Rossi device anyway, judging by
 procedures used during testing.


Mizuno, Storms and others have told me that purity is always an issue. Also,
Rossi's tests have been short, and in the laboratory. These are crude
devices with bad performance. For a cell that will run in an automobile, an
airplane or factory for years flawlessly, you want the cleanest, best
materials you can get.



 Furthermore, it may eventually even prove
 possible to ensure that any impurity comprises the catalyst itself, so that
 it
 may even be beneficial.


In that case you would want carefully controlled dopants added to the
hydrogen. Not random contamination.

- Jed

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes

2011-09-11 Thread Jed Rothwell

mix...@bigpond.com wrote:


 Who said anything about do it yourself? I didn't mean to imply that every
 device sold should have an electrolyzer included. What I meant was that the
 factory could have a dedicated unit that they used to produce bottled
 Hydrogen
 for inclusion in the devices.


That would be fine. Some people have suggested that the units should be sold
with individual electrolyzers, so that they could be loaded with water
instead of hydrogen. That would be a bad idea.

- Jed

[Vo]:Photos of antique typewriters illustrate large variation in nascent technology

2011-09-12 Thread Jed Rothwell

See:

http://www.slate.com/id/2303250/

Photos of early personal computers:

http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/personal-computers/17/intro

When a technology is just getting started, product designers do not know
what the machines should look like. They do not understand what the customer
wants, what works well, what is necessary and what can be dispensed with.
Later, as the technology matures, products from many different manufacturers
look more and more alike. Early typewriters and computers all look different
from one another. Nowadays you can barely tell computers apart.

I discussed this in chapter 7 of my book. Page 62 has a marvelous
illustration of a future personal portable computer designed by a committee
in 1981. The committee members had few practical ideas ideas about how
computers should look what they should do. I can tell what they were
thinking because this illustration comes from the transcript of the informal
discussion they held, published in the Japanese edition of Scientific
American. It is symptomatic of early machines that the designers don't know
what it is they're trying to accomplish because they have no experience
using the machines. It is not their fault. They tend to go overboard and
throw in all sorts of features that are not called for. Early technology
sometimes is more elaborate than later versions.This also happens because of
what Frederick Brooks calls the second system effect (see The Mythical Man
Month, chapter 5).

As the technology matures, product designs tend to merge, and products begin
to look alike. in some cases this happens quickly and deliberately because
of government regulations, or because of industry standards. In the 1950s
some U.S. automobiles had decorative fins and protrusions on the front
bumper that many people thought resembled breasts. See:

http://www.art.com/products/p13804728-sa-i2758790/bill-bachmann-detail-of-classic-car-57-chevy.htm

These sharp objects and bumps injured people in accidents, especially
pedestrians, so they were banned in the 1960s. Later, government fuel
efficiency standards forced all cars to have rounded, aerodynamic shapes. In
the 1980s, the need for industry standards and software compatibility
quickly forced all computers to be IBM PC compatible, except for Apple
computers.

If cold fusion devices go into commercial production, in the early days of
the technology I expect to see large variations such as:

Internally, the type and morphology of the metal or powder, the operating
temperature and other technical details.

The size and shape of the machines.

The look and feel of the computer controls. This will resemble the variation
among thermostats from different HVAC manufacturers, or the dashboards of
different automobiles.

The type of conversion from heat to electricity; micro-turbines,
thermoelectric devices, Stirling engines, possibly small piston steam
engines, various different working fluids.

Hydrogen stored in conventional pressure tanks versus hydrogen produced on
demand with electrolysis.

These differences will quickly be winnowed into a few basic designs for
different market sectors. This will proceed more rapidly than it did for
automobiles or personal computers because -- as I said in chapter 14 -- no
one cares what a water heater looks like. People do not look at power
generation equipment or heaters. Such equipment does not have features that
most customers care about. The only two parameters that the customer looks
for are reliability and low cost. There is such thing as customer loyalty to
one particular design, or design appeal, as there is with things such as Mac
computers or sports cars. So, market forces will all quickly winnow out all
but the most cost-effective designs.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Photos of antique typewriters illustrate large variation in nascent technology

2011-09-12 Thread Jed Rothwell

I wrote:


 It is symptomatic of early machines that the designers don't know what it
 is they're trying to accomplish because they have no experience using the
 machines. It is not their fault. They tend to go overboard and throw in all
 sorts of features that are not called for. Early technology sometimes is
 more elaborate than later versions.


One of the best examples of this is the SS Great Eastern, 1859. It was the
tragic masterpiece of I. K. Brunel, one of history's greatest engineers. It
was by far the largest ship ever built up to that time. It had paddle
wheels, a screw propeller, and sails. You might say Brunel did not know how
to power such a gigantic ship so he used every method available.

Brunel was an unparalleled genius but even he did not have a clear enough
vision of how a ship built on such an gigantic scale should work. He did not
know, and could not know, because the ship was so much larger than anything
that had been built previously. It was so big, they could not even launch it
at first. As a commercial venture it was an unmitigated disaster, until it
was used to lay the first effective transatlantic cable in 1865.

I have no doubt there will be many commercial disasters and bankruptcies in
the early years of commercial cold fusion. It will be an extremely risky
business.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Photos of antique typewriters illustrate large variation in nascent technology

2011-09-12 Thread Jed Rothwell

Examples of elaborate and useless features in naval technology include:

Modern naval rams, which became popular in the late 19th century after the
Battle of Lissa (1866).

Cage masts, seen in battleships before Pearl Harbor. They were supposed to
let shells fly through without toppling the mast. I do not know if they ever
did that but they were top-heavy and no defense against aircraft bombs.

There are many examples of useless weapons, especially during times of rapid
technological change, because people seldom actually fight wars and they
have little idea how to do it until the war begins. People often
overestimate the potential effect of a weapon. In 1914 the Germans were
anxious to mobilize and begin fighting World War I exactly according to a
predetermined schedule which was dictated by railroad transportation. They
thought that the first country to put millions of soldiers on Western Front
would easily win. In 1941, Marshal and other Distinguish soldiers thought
that a handful of US long-range B-17 bombers in the Philippines could
devastate Japan.

There are also weapons and peaceful technologies that turn out to be more
effective than most people anticipated. The personal computer and the
Internet are good examples, as are unmanned drone aircraft from the recent
wars in the Middle East. I have no doubt that cold fusion will be far more
effective than most people can now imagine. Defkalion's assertion that it
will be one energy solution out of many is, in my opinion, preposterous.
This is like saying in 1978 that slide rules and metal-part calculators will
surely remain competitive against electronic calculators. Twenty years after
effective cold fusion devices are sold there is no chance the fossil fuel
industry or wind turbine industry will exist, in any form, period. It will
bankrupt these industries much faster than the Internet put an end to first
class mail, or microcomputers bankrupted DEC, Data General and the other
minicomputer makers.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:E-cat news at Nyteknik

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:


 Can this be? The Hydrogen bottle lost 25 bar of pressure and about 42 grams
 of hydrogen between April and September.
 Does this make sense?
 How much H2 is typically inside the bottle?


It is probably leaking a little. I have not seen the hardware, but based on
Rossi's other devices, I doubt it is as gas-tight as something like a
laboratory-grade Swagelok connector.

Also, it is hard to measure such small amounts of gas accurately.

- Jed

[Vo]:NyTeknik September 14, 2011 articles: titles and URLs

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

[LENR-CANR.org News Item]

Rossi eCat device demonstrated in self-sustaining mode

September 14, 2011

NyTeknik published three articles and two videos about the Rossi device:

*See the E-cat run in self-sustained mode* Article and video

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3264362.ece

*Test of Energy Catalyzer, Bologna, September 7, 2011* Analysis of
calorimetry

http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3264365.ece/BINARY/Report+E-cat+test+September+7+%28pdf%29

Abstract: The Rossi device was run for just over half an hour without
external energy input. Ny Teknik assisted recently in a test where the
‘E-cat’ invented by Andrea Rossi was run in self-sustained mode.

*Here’s Rossi’s one megawatt plant* Article and video

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3264361.ece

Abstract: Here it is: the plant that according to inventor Andrea Rossi will
produce one megawatt of thermal energy via an unknown reaction in his
‘energy catalyzer’. The plant is now being shipped to the United States.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:E-cat news at Nyteknik

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

Joe Catania zrosumg...@aol.com wrote:

The E-Cat ran for 35 minutes without electrical power? Did anyone tell you
 that the thermal inertia will run the E-Cat for that long?


At 22:35 input electric power was 2.5 kW. All electric power was cut off at
this time. The temperature dropped from 131.9°C down to 123.0°C, which is
the expected amount.

At 22:40, 5 minutes later, the temperature rose to 133.7°C, higher than it
was with electric power input.

By 23:10 when the run ended, the temperature had fallen to 122.7°C.

Stored heat cannot explain this behavior. That would violate the second law
of thermodynamics. Since the flow rate remained stable, the temperature
cannot rise without some source of energy production within the cell.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:E-cat news at Nyteknik

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:

Meanwhile, Mr. Rothwell replied to your original comment by posting thermal
measurements that apparently reveal the interesting fact that thermal
inertia had already been taken into account when the temperature initially
dropped from 131.9 C down to 123.0 C soon after input power had been cut
off.

That data is from:

*Test of Energy Catalyzer, Bologna, September 7, 2011* Analysis of
calorimetry

http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3264365.ece/BINARY/Report+E-cat+test+September+7+%28pdf%29

I am glad to see Lewan included a fairly detailed time-stamped data log in
this report. We could have used that in previous reports.

As Lewan remarks, it is a shame they did not let it run another hour in
self-sustaining (heat after death) mode. But it was late at night, after
all.

I am still working through this report.

Someone here suggested that the power supplies might have affected the
thermocouples. I don't think so. Thermocouples and interface equipment
attached to them are designed to work around machines with power supplies
and magnetic fields. If the power supplies produced affected thermocouple
performance, the people observing the experiment would have seen that happen
immediately when the power went on, and again when it went off. Also this
could not explain the temperature rise 10 minutes after the power went off.

Catania apparently thinks that thermal inertia can cause a temperature to
rise when there is no internal power production and no change in the flow
rate (rate of heat loss). This is a violation of the laws of thermodynamics.
Thermal inertia can only produce a temperature that falls at some rate. The
highest temperature would have to be recorded just before the power was
turned off.

I believe the temperature could rise because of thermal inertia if you cut
the flow rate and if there were a very hot body inside the cell.

- Jed

[Vo]:Duty cycle was 100% in latter part of test

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:


 And (regrettably) incomplete. We know that the power to the resistor was
 being cycled on and  off, but not the actual duty ratio!


The duty cycle is 100% after 19:40. It says:

19:40Power was increased to the maximum value, “9.” [blue box control],
and  power was at this point constantly switched on. . . .

I take that to mean a 100% duty cycle. We can ask Lewan if you suspect it
means anything else. See the note for 19:10.


Input AC current was 11.6 A. Over-all AC voltage was 218 volts. DC
voltage was zero.

2.5 kW. Lewan uses 2.6 kW.


Water came out -- but we don't know its temperature.


Well, it would have boiled away a lot more if it was much hotter than 100°C.
You can see it steaming but it would have burst into a lot of steam if it
had been superheated.

Ask Lewan if you have questions. Don't bother him with trivial stuff. Read
everything carefully before you ask.

- Jed

[Vo]:The pump was left running during the self-sustaining event

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

There is one thing that irritated me. When they show the e-cat in
 self-sustained mode, then I cannot hear the pump anymore. Did they stop the
 pump and why?


There is no way they would stop the pump! The temperature would climb and it
would blow up.

I do not see what you mean. (I don't hear what you mean.) In the video,
starting around 5:00 they turn off the power. I hear the pump still running.

The pump sound is gone at 6:10 in the video, which is after the test
concludes, just before they open the reactor. The log shows that was
real-time 23:10.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The pump was left running during the self-sustaining event

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

I wrote:


 I do not see what you mean. (I don't hear what you mean.) In the video,
 starting around 5:00 they turn off the power. I hear the pump still running.


I mean the video minute 5, which occurred at 23:10 real-time. The pump sound
continues until the video jumps ahead to real-time 23:10.

- Jed

[Vo]:Video time synced to real time

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

I mean the video minute 5, which occurred at 23:10 real-time. The pump sound
 continues until the video jumps ahead to real-time 23:10.

 Yes, I have seen it now. I was in error, sorry.


I got it wrong, too. Minute 5 is real-time 23:35.

It is a shame they did not time-stamp the video.

By the way, the graph on the last page shows the temperature rising after
the cut off at 22:35. I assume these points are averaged and smoothed. The
lines represent:

blue Serie1 Ambient room temperature
red Serie2 Inlet water temperature
green Serie3 Outlet temperature

Let's coordinate video and real-time:

Video time 0:15 Gas is already added, pump is on. Resistor is at maximum
power, 9 (as shown in video time 1:40). So this is after 19:40 real-time.

Continuous video taken.

Video time 3:42 Computer screen shows outlet vapor 129.10°C. Lewan says the
test has continued for a couple of hours. He says: We started at 6:30 pm
and now it is is 10:20. (22:20) Okay, that pegs the time.

Transition at video time 4:13. Shows steam. Some water.

Transition at video 4:40. Lewan says Okay, now it is 10:30 (22:30) Heating
is shown at full power, 9, continuous duty cycle.

Video time 4:50. Power is turned down to 0. Lewan: Now at 10:30 we switch
off the electrical resistance. Amperage drops from 11 to to 0.1 A.

Continuous video.

Video time 5:50, one minute after power cut off. Computer screen shown. No
change in outlet temperature, which is 133.50°C, computer time 22:38. So,
cooling is not instantaneous; the power supply did not affect the
thermocouples.

The log shows the temperature is 123.0°C. This is probably a typo. Will ask
Lewan.

Video time 6:04. Video transition. Lewan: Now it is 10:10. (He must mean
11:10 pm; i.e. 23:10) We have been going a half an hour without any
electrical energy. (Actually, 35 minutes.)

Video 6:45 valve open. Hot water and steam come out.

Video 8:07. End.

Re: [Vo]:E-cat news at Nyteknik

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com 
mailto:svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:


   Meanwhile, Mr. Rothwell replied to your original comment by posting
   thermal measurements that apparently reveal the interesting fact
   that thermal inertia had already been taken into account when the
   temperature initially dropped from 131.9 C down to 123.0 C soon
   after input power had been cut off.


Okay, that's probably a typo, as shown in the video. For once Catania is 
correct. The temperature did not drop suddenly and then rise. I expect 
it did drop soon, given the loss of 2.5 kW input at a flow rate of 185 
ml/min.


See my message Video time synced to real time. I will confirm this 
with Lewan.


- Jed

[Vo]:Lewan report corrected

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

A new version of this report has been uploaded:

*Test of Energy Catalyzer, Bologna, September 7, 2011* Analysis of
calorimetry



http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3264365.ece/BINARY/Report+E-cat+test+September+7+%28pdf%29


The new version says QUOTE:

22:35 Power to the resistance was cut off.

Input AC current was 0.11 A. Over-all AC voltage was 232
volts. DC voltage was zero.

AC current through the resistance was 0.11 A.

T2=29.0°C, T3=133.0°C. (*Typo corrected Sept 14*).

22:40 T2=28.9°C, T3=133.7°C.

22:50 T2=28.8°C, T3=131.2°C.

END QUOTE


There is a slight temperature rise at 22:40. Could be significant. I would
like to see second-by-second data after the power cut off.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:E-cat news at Nyteknik

2011-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell

Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

Lewan did report that at setting 5 the ON and OFF times were equal.
 So taking the duty cycle as PLC/9 is about as good as we can guess.


Lewan wrote that PLC/9 is full cycle. Also, that is a single digit decimal
display. It don't go any higher than 9. Nine is it. Back in the day it would
have gone all hexadecimal on you: 9, A, B, C, D, E, F. The programmers
would smile knowingly and the civilians would wonder what the heck that was
doing in a numeric display.

- Jed

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

301 - 400 of 13551 matches

Mail list logo