Hello group, You might want to watch this page for new ones in the short/medium term: http://www.google.com/patents/sitemap/en/Sitemap/G21/G21B/G21B_3.html Recently added (Publication date: Jul 25, 2013): * * * Yogendra Narain SRIVASTAVA, Allan Widom Nuclear reactor consuming nuclear fuel that contains atoms of elements having a low atomic number and a low mass number (WO 2013108159 A1) http://www.google.com/patents/WO2013108159A1?cl=en * * * Tadahiko Mizuno, Yasuo Ishikawa Method of and apparatus for nuclear transformation (US 20130188763 A1) http://www.google.com/patents/US20130188763 * * * Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-25 15:46, Craig wrote: Didn't Rossi use this method in the Oct 6, 2011 demo? He called it an 'RF Generator, which he brought in when it appeared the heating wasn't going to start the reaction as fast as he had hoped. It was a probe (I don't remember exactly for what), not a RF generator as claimed. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-25 16:28, Teslaalset wrote: I rather think in such case Rossi used a piezoresonator. Rossi likely uses piezoelectric catalyzer(s) as described in recent published patent application of Pekka Soininen. I had to dig this for you from where I remember reading about it: http://i.imgur.com/nrz0k7h.jpg It was a gamma probe for the internal reaction chamber like this one: http://www.ludlums.com/component/virtuemart/market-1/nuclear-power-plants-104/emergency-response-kit-86-detail?Itemid=0 http://www.ludlums.com/component/virtuemart/area-monitoring-5/detectors-57/gamma-scintillation-71/gamma-detector-171-detail?keyword=44-2Itemid=0 Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, As a reminder, this is the URL where today's demo (intended for the ICCF18 audience) will be broadcast live, in English: http://new.livestream.com/triwu2/Defkalion-US Some tech details about the streaming Some tech details Hello everybody, for your information, this streaming is broadcast from the real Defkalion labs with light equipment and crew. Yesterday (during the italian pre-cast) we had some problems with the internet bandwidth. We are not going to use any special connection (we had no time to arrange it) and in case the link drops it will be reestablished as soon as possible. Please be patient and consider that the event will be available after the broadcast also. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-23 14:13, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, I actually meant 10:00 EDT. That's 14:00 UTC / 16:00 CEST (local time), or about 1 hour and 40 minutes from now. I hope this clears things up, S.A.
On 2013-07-24 02:49, blaze spinnaker wrote: If all the water was vaporized, the output thermal power would have been above 27 kW. Sounds very thrilling! They've also been conservative about heat losses through the insulating reactor enclosure, not accounted for. During the inactive Argon run only about 85% the input energy made it to the coolant outlet. Losses might have increased with temperature during the active run. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-23 02:04, James Bowery wrote: That's not what the article says: http://it.ibtimes.com/articles/53211/20130722/fusione-fredda-defkalion-video-streaming-presentazione.htm It says a 4:1 ratio: Gamberale is talking about the notorious scientific paper by De Ninno et al. (ENEA), colloquially referred to as Rapporto 41 (Report #41, which Google translates to Ratio 41): http://www.fusione.enea.it/pubblications/TR/2002/RT-2002-41-FUS.pdf Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-21 20:38, Alan Fletcher wrote: Cop of 1.1 Good enough for science, but not dramatic enough for PR. According to an insider [...] it will actually show a ~6-7x energy gain, which is 1.1x As usual the critical part will be measuring input energy. They will use this energy meter: http://www.farnell.com/datasheets/579510.pdf Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-16 22:58, H Veeder wrote: Copied from a facebook group. Harry Officially confirmed. A couple more links in Italian confirming this news, but not exactly adding yet a whole lot of new details: http://22passi.blogspot.it/2013/07/fusione-fredda-diretta-streaming-22.html http://www.triwu.it/sezione-in-primo-piano/-/asset_publisher/E9rU/content/la-fusione-fredda-va-online Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-17 02:50, Rob Dingemans wrote: It looks a bit to me that somebody pulled this organization into the game to make the claims ridiculous, which in turn could work as a boomerang and could result in people not taking CICAP serious at all. In Dutch we would say schoenmaker blijf bij je leest, as in my perception the phenomena have nothing to do with any paranormal claims whatever. Think of this organization as a some sort of Italian counterpart of the JREF  without the 1-million dollar prize. They are known debunkers of paranormal and pseudoscientific claims and generally are highly regarded in the local mainstream media. As far as I know they rarely investigate claims they're not sure they can debunk or scientifically put under a bad light. In addition to their main website  (the English version previously linked is quite outdated) they have a relatively frequently updated blog version of their official magazine  where they covered cold fusion claims a few times in the past years. There's also a wikipedia page about them , for what it's worth. Cheers, S.A.  http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/about-the-foundation.html  http://www.cicap.org (in Italian)  http://www.queryonline.it/ (in Italian)  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CICAP
On 2013-07-17 03:50, blaze spinnaker wrote: They should be sending in engineers from companies which specialize in calorimetry and power measurement. Cynical skeptics have often complained that a magician or some sort of fraud expert should have been present during public LENR demos to check for possible tricks that regular scientists couldn't think of. Their wish has been fulfilled. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-15 16:01, DJ Cravens wrote: I asked Defkalion directly and got a non committal reply- neither confirming or denying. We do not disclose what we will present in NI Week and ICCF-18. This is unconfirmed news, but it seems there will be a Defkalion GT demo in Milan, Italy on July 22nd which will be live streamed on the internet and during ICCF18. Some skeptics, scientists and journalists from the international press have been invited to this demo. More details will be made available in due time. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-07-16 03:23, blaze spinnaker wrote: Unconfirmed rumor at this point, but if true: (face palm) Towards the end (minute 32:50 onwards) of the following podcast (in Italian) of a radio show about science and technology (Moebius , from Radio24, an all-news radio station owned by the newspaper Il Sole24 Ore ) the hosts briefly mention that: - A cold fusion demo will take place on July 22nd at around 23:30-00:00 italian time; - They have been invited to participate in it and to bring an expert of their choice to supervise the demo and discuss about possible tricks; - More details about it (they hardly mention any during the show) and a live stream will be soon made available on the radio station website ; - They will cover this event again on their next show; + Other small things I might have missed (most of the segment is a quick overview of CF/LENR history and about how physics sometimes can appear to be settled science although it never really isn't). http://audio.radio24.ilsole24ore.com/radio24_audio/2013/130714-moebius.mp3 They don't directly link Defkalion GT to this demo, but the hearsay information I've read around (22passi like you pointed to and a different blog where the same author occasionally writes) does and seems reliable. So, it's still mostly unconfirmed news but a demo of some sort will most definitely occur on July 22nd. Cheers, S.A.  http://www.radio24.ilsole24ore.com/programma/moebius/index.php  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_24_%28Italy%29  http://www.radio24.ilsole24ore.com/
Re: [Vo]:arXiv:1306.6364 Comments on the report Indications of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder
On 2013-06-28 07:02, Hamdi Ucar wrote: Thanks You forgot to include a link: http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.6364 In a recent report titled Indications of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder [arXiv:1305.3913], G. Levi and co-workers put forth several claims concerning the operations and performance of the so-called E-Cat of Andrea Rossi. We note first of all that the circumstances and people involved in the test make if far from being an independent one. We examine the claims put forth by the authors and note that in many cases they are not supported by the facts given in the report. The authors seem to jump to conclusions fitting pre-conceived ideas where alternative explanations are possible. In general we find that much attention is drawn to trivialities while important pieces of information and investigation are lacking and seem not to have been conducted or considered. These are characteristics more typically found in pseudo-scientific texts and have no place in a technical/scientific report on this level. We also note that the proposed claims would require new physics in not only one but several areas. Besides a cold-fusion like process without production of any radiation also extreme new material properties would be needed to explain what rather seems to be a problem of correct measurement. Therefore, it is clear to us that a truly independent and scientific investigation of the so called E-Cat device, convincingly demonstrating an anomalous heat energy production has not been presented in the arXiv report and is thus, to-date, still lacking. Cheers, S.A.
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 hydrogen). The control cells have not been exposed to hydrogen yet. Are you suggesting that they might have been, inadvertently? Cheers, S.A.
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 exposed to air (humid air will supply plenty of H)? How were the cells assembled?? I can't imagine that they were somehow assembled in a vacuum; perhaps in an inert gaseous environment?? The cells have *not* been assembled in a vacuum or in an inert gaseous environment as far as I know. They have all been calibrated with a vacuum applied for long periods of time, however. This one was the only first run alongside the activated cells, not the first run ever. Cheers, S.A.
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 asked but as far as I have seen I'm fairly certain that for the control cells they used completely fresh materials. It is a common misunderstanding to think that all the hydrogen can be pumped out of nickel by vacuum or a combination of heat and vacuum - and the Hunt group simply may not have known how tightly the last proton is bound to 14 nickel atoms in a FCC crystal. The alloyed proton will not come out even at 2700 degree F. IOW you can load nickel with hydrogen up to a 1:1 ratio, but you cannot unload the last proton in the FCC crystal without melting it. I don't think they are expecting to achieve *complete* hydrogen desorption; even Celani warned them that it's not an easy job at all to achieve that. It can be pumped out for the most part, but as you say there could be a remaining tiny amount virtually impossible to get out without destroying the wire. Cheers, S.A.
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 purposes) and a treated Constantan wire from Celani. The only difference between the control and the activated cells is that since yesterday in the activated cells several hydrogen loading cycles have been performed and are now apparently showing some excess heat under passive heating. It is expected that they will produce even more [apparent?] excess heat when the Celani wires will be directly heated (by applying current to them). Once Celani wires get loaded it seems that they will keep producing excess heat under vacuum for some amount of time (days) even when heated passively/indirectly. They are planning to activate the control cells at a later time. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-06-27 02:33, Mark Gibbs wrote: So, as I understand from the data  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: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/follow-2/295-simultaneous-test-runs-eu-us 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 indicating up to 2.5W of excess power over the 30.4W input power (~6% excess). That is well above the 95% confidence limits for that cell (~0.25W). 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. The indicated excess seems to be corroborated by several cell temperatures higher than calibration values. The control cells in each location are performing at or below calibration values. The internal cell temperatures seem to be slowly degrading, but the external cell temperatures are holding steady. The resistance of the active wires is slowly rising as, presumably, the hydrogen is leaving into the vacuum. The EU cell has been cycled already, leading to the the active wire unloading and rising up to a higher resistance than the wire had originally. I think it's important to note that this is still preliminary data and that unexpected measurement artifacts might lurk somewhere. For example, it's still not clear whether or not hydrogen loading affects the way infrared radiation (thermal radiation is the main heat transfer mode in these vacuumed cells) from the heated wires and other internal components is thermalized by the transparent borosilicate glass tube, from whose external temperature, output power calculations get computed. Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, The presentations shown during the June 3 LENR meeting at the European Parliament in Brussels can now be downloaded, in pdf format, from the ENEA website through the following URL: http://www.enea.it/it/Ufficio-Bruxelles/news/new-advancements-on-the-fleischmann-pons-effect-paving-the-way-for-a-potential-new-clean-renewable-energy-source Direct links: http://www.enea.it/it/Ufficio-Bruxelles/documenti/eventi/new-advancements-on-the-fleischmann-pons-effect/1-michael-mckubre-pdf http://www.enea.it/it/Ufficio-Bruxelles/documenti/eventi/new-advancements-on-the-fleischmann-pons-effect/2-vittorio-violante-pdf http://www.enea.it/it/Ufficio-Bruxelles/documenti/eventi/new-advancements-on-the-fleischmann-pons-effect/3-graham-hubler-pdf http://www.enea.it/it/Ufficio-Bruxelles/documenti/eventi/new-advancements-on-the-fleischmann-pons-effect/4-konrad-czerski-pdf http://www.enea.it/it/Ufficio-Bruxelles/documenti/eventi/new-advancements-on-the-fleischmann-pons-effect/5-robert-duncan-pdf Source: 22passi http://22passi.blogspot.com/2013/06/new-advancements-on-fleischmann-pons_13.html Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-06-04 21:12, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Here are the remaining links, just in case: New advancements on the Fleischmann-Pons Effect 3) Graham K. Hubler http://22passi.blogspot.com/2013/06/new-advancements-on-fleischmann-pons_5.html New advancements on the Fleischmann-Pons Effect 4) Konrad Czerski http://22passi.blogspot.com/2013/06/new-advancements-on-fleischmann-pons_7476.html New advancements on the Fleischmann-Pons Effect 5) Robert V. Duncan http://22passi.blogspot.com/2013/06/new-advancements-on-fleischmann-pons_5155.html Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-06-05 21:29, Harry Veeder wrote: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/follow-4/271-s-g-cells-preliminary-test-findings-for-run-2 The first test run of the Steel and Glass cell suggested that it took approximately 6% more power to maintain the same volume of water at the same temperature in the control cell when compared to the active cell. Does anybody have any rough idea of what would the error margin be for an experiment arranged like what can be seen in the photos in the link above? Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, Daniele Passerini of 22passi blog is posting photos and slides from yesterday's meeting at the EU parliament on LENR, from an anonymous source, along with other misc. information. As of writing only photos from McKubre's and Violante's presentation are available, but apparently more is going to be posted in the coming hours, so check out the following URL often: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2013/06/new-advancements-on-fleischmann-pons.html * * * 1: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2013/06/new-advancements-on-fleischmann-pons_4.html 2: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2013/06/new-advancements-on-fleischmann-pons_8754.html 3: ... 4: ... 5: ... * * * Enjoy, S.A.
On 2013-06-01 16:20, Jed Rothwell wrote: I heard rumors that they were going to have an actual demonstration at the NI conference. Their previous presentations and audiovisual material has not been impressive in my opinion. Perhaps I missed something, but as far as I know they have not presented quantitative data or calibration curves. Until they do I am not inclined to take the claims seriously. That wasn't a rumor, it's what Xanthoulis supposedly told to Sterling Allan a couple months ago: http://pesn.com/2013/04/04/9602290_Defkalion-laying-low-preparing-to-make-a-big-splash/ There could have been a misunderstanding regarding this, however. Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, It appears that this email by prof. Guglielmi of the University of Bath is being circulated in several blogs. In short, the author wonders whether Levi et al. did with their E-Cat investigation a good job from an ethical point of view. I don't necessarily agree with the message, but I think it's brave of him to put his real name (and those of a few supporters) on this. History will tell whether he was right or not. http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/2013/05/ethics-of-e-cat.html http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/05/27/scientific-ethics-of-e-cat-promoters-questioned/ http://ecatnews.com/?p=2545#comment-50191 http://wavewatching.net/fringe/the-hot-cat-report/#comment-5641 http://fusionefredda.wordpress.com/2013/05/24/vettore/#comment-21110 (original) Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 11:58:24 +0100 To: Giuseppe Levi, Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson, Lars Tegnér, Hanno Essén From: Alessio Guglielmi Subject: Ethics of your recent work with Mr Rossi Cc: Ugo Bardi, Dario Braga, Sylvie Coyaud, Camillo Franchini, Giancarlo Ruocco Dear Doctors Levi, Foschi, Hartman, Höistad, Pettersson, Tegnér and Essén, I have read your recent manuscript `Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder´ on arXiv and I am very perplexed. You are aware that several alleged technical mistakes have been pointed out, such as omitting control on DC current input (which has been acknowledged by Prof. Essén in a recent interview) and assuming that the output heat is released by a perfect black body (this assumption is contested by Prof. Gianni Comoretto, for example). The picture that emerges, and I am sorry if this sounds offensive, is that some crucial measures have not been taken seriously enough on a discovery that, if genuine, would alter the history of mankind. However, I have an issue that appears to me even more important, because it concerns the very essence of your continued activities on Rossi’s device. Our job as researchers is to advance knowledge, and to do so whatever we investigate must be reproducible by other researchers, so that the knowledge we generate becomes established and we can move forward. This seems at odds with your behaviour. You went to the workshop of a private individual who claims to be solving half of mankind’s problems, and performed measures on a device that you could not fully control and that is not available to other researchers. Therefore, your manuscript does not contain any reproducible experience. So, how does it advance knowledge? What do we learn? This brings me to asking another natural question: who will profit from the release of your manuscript? You do realise that Mr Rossi sells distribution licences and that he needs to convince customers to order some of his plants. There is no doubt that your manuscript will help that market, but is this something that academics should do? Is our job to help a private sell his stuff in the absence of solid, reproducible evidence? In other words, I wonder whether you are adhering to the scientific method and I wonder whether what you are doing is legitimate for academics. Others questioned your technical ability, but I think that the ethical questions that I am posing here come before, also because they are more understandable by the layman. I trust that you appreciate my frankness, and I hope that you can prove my concerns unjustified. I am forwarding this letter in copy to several persons who are following this matter: Ugo Bardi (Professor of Chemistry, Univ. Florence, blogger), Dario Braga (Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, University of Bologna), Sylvie Coyaud (Scientific Journalist, Il Sole 24 Ore), Camillo Franchini (blogger, former Supervisor of the CAMEN nuclear plant) and Giancarlo Ruocco (Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research, La Sapienza, Rome). Whoever wishes to publish this letter is welcome to do so, of course, and I hope that also the answer could be given public form. Could you please forward this letter to Dr Foschi, whose address I could not find? Best regards, Alessio Guglielmi University of Bath http://alessio.guglielmi.name Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-26 23:21, Jed Rothwell wrote: A Swedish correspondent sent me this link: http://www.energikatalysatorn.se/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2t=560sid=5450c28dab532569dee72f88a43a56f0start=330 Thanks for linking these observations. I think they are very important. I wonder why they haven't been included in the report, along with more information about observations and sanity checks performed by the testers and pictures of good quality of the equipment used. I still can't believe that there's not a single photo of the E-Cat control box or even a schematic diagram of the entire testing setup. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-24 00:46, Mark Gibbs wrote: Does anone have any more in-depth bios of the group that tested the E-Cat. This is what I have so far: Good job with the latest blog post. What about other professors and researchers cited in the ArXiv paper? Surely they wouldn't want to be associated with this unless they gave explicit permission for it. Cheers, S.A.
Test message If this email gets in, there are some comments by Hanno Essen on the latest third party report on phys.org: http://phys.org/news/2013-05-rossi-e-cat-energy-density-higher.html S.A.
Hello group, Have a look here (Google translated): http://www.elforsk.se/Aktuellt/Svenska-forskare-har-testat-Rossis-energikatalysator--E-cat/ Swedish researchers have tested Rossi energy catalyst - E-cat Researchers from Uppsala University and KTH Stockholm has conducted measurements of the produced heat energy from a device called the E-cat. It is known as an energy catalyst invented by the Italian scientist Andrea Rossi. The measurements show that the catalyst produces significantly more energy than can be explained by ordinary chemical reactions. The results are very remarkable. What lies behind the extraordinary heat production can not be explained today. There has been speculation over whether there can be any form of nuclear transformation. However, this is highly questionable. To learn more about what is going on you have to learn what is happening with the fuel and the waste it produces. The measurements have been funded by such Elforsk. !! Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, Given the ongoing interest on Vortex-l, I think these comments by Hanno Essén on the latest third party report in a recent article by Phys.org might be worth of attention: http://phys.org/news/2013-05-rossi-e-cat-energy-density-higher.html I have followed the Rossi E-Cats for a couple of years now and participated in two experiments (including the present one) and read, and heard, about several other more or less independent ones, Essén told /Phys.org/. My overall impression is that there must be something there, but scientists must always be cautious until everything has been checked and rechecked. Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-05-rossi-e-cat-energy-density-higher.html#jCp I have followed the Rossi E-Cats for a couple of years now and participated in two experiments (including the present one) and read, and heard, about several other more or less independent ones, Essén told /Phys.org/. My overall impression is that there must be something there, but scientists must always be cautious until everything has been checked and rechecked. Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-05-rossi-e-cat-energy-density-higher.html#jCp I have followed the Rossi E-Cats for a couple of years now and participated in two experiments (including the present one) and read, and heard, about several other more or less independent ones, Essén told Phys.org. My overall impression is that there must be something there, but scientists must always be cautious until everything has been checked and rechecked. [...] I got involved since, for the first time, an inventor of a new energy source was willing to allow meaningful observation and measurement, he said. There is always a risk that career and reputation is damaged, but for me scientific curiosity always has higher priority. [...] It is frustrating to observe a mysterious phenomenon but not be allowed to investigate it fully, yes, Essén said. I understand, however, that inventors are mainly interested in commercial applications and that this requires the keeping of industrial secrets. Cheers, S.A.
(this is my second attempt to send this message. I think the server is having problems with some emails) Hello group, Have a look here (Google translated): http://www.elforsk.se/Aktuellt/Svenska-forskare-har-testat-Rossis-energikatalysator--E-cat/ Swedish researchers have tested Rossi energy catalyst - E-cat Researchers from Uppsala University and KTH Stockholm has conducted measurements of the produced heat energy from a device called the E-cat. It is known as an energy catalyst invented by the Italian scientist Andrea Rossi. The measurements show that the catalyst produces significantly more energy than can be explained by ordinary chemical reactions. The results are very remarkable. What lies behind the extraordinary heat production can not be explained today. There has been speculation over whether there can be any form of nuclear transformation. However, this is highly questionable. To learn more about what is going on you have to learn what is happening with the fuel and the waste it produces. The measurements have been funded by such Elforsk. !! Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-23 21:45, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, A couple more links. Some more background on the ecat.com website: http://ecat.com/news/elforsk-publish-news-about-the-ecat-test What is Elforsk? On 17 December 1992 Vattenfall, Svenska Kraftnät (Swedish national grid), Association of Swedish Electric Utilities’ (Svenska Elverksföreningen) and Swedish Power Association (Svenska Kraftverksföreningen) agreed to set up Elforsk – Swedish Electrical Utilities’ R D Company (Svenska Elföretagens Forsknings- och Utvecklings- Elforsk – Aktiebolag). From E-Cat World, with links to hints to such cooperation during the past months: http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/05/swedish-rd-company-elforsk-ab-comments-positively-on-e-cat-report/ One could argue that the E-Cat HT report might not have been written under the best standards of quality for a scientific publication, but if the Swedish RD company formed by the association of the local national power grid and electric utilities is willing to put their name (and money) on this, then it might be the time to start taking Rossi seriously to not be caught unprepared. This is news that might have significant impact on business decisions in the short to medium term, in my opinion. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-23 17:09, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, (this email appeared on the list six hours later than when I sent it)
On 2013-05-22 21:25, Jed Rothwell wrote: Many of the comments at Forbes are toxic. The Skeptics have not given an inch. Mary Yugo remains convinced it is fraud. She imagines she has found many problems with it. Partially unrelated, but by the amount of comments, shares and facebook likes, I think this article is more popular than the the one on Forbes: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/156393-cold-fusion-reactor-independently-verified-has-1-times-the-energy-density-of-gas Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-22 21:47, Jed Rothwell wrote: Maybe there are more comments because people find the Disqus interface easier to use than Forbes'. It allows corrections, and a popularity vote. It is widely used these days. Disqus is indeed more user friendly, but the amount of Facebook likes is in my opinion a very good indicator of how popular a story is. For that one, just a few hours ago it was at 5.5k likes, while it's currently at 9.5k and still increasing very quickly. I checked other articles on extremetech.com and the most popular ones (eg Xbox One news) are at a few hundreds likes at most, with the majority being under 100. Actual page hits must be at least 5-6 times more than that, and therefore more than those of the article on Forbes for the Rossi story. Not that this is of any relevance to the third party report, I just found interesting that such story on that relatively unknown (to me at least) website could apparently become so popular. We recently discussed here what percent of academic scientists believe cold fusion is real. The only way to find out would be to conduct a poll. You might get a sense of it by counting up the comments at places like this. I think the CBS article associated with the 60 Minutes would be a better sample. The problem is, these are self-selected respondents, so the sample is skewed. You could perhaps look for people who appear to be academic scientists but even that would be distorted. I doubt there is any way to establish the real numbers, other than a poll. There is someone named goat something-or-other who writes incendiary comments attacking cold fusion in various forums. It seems like an obsession. He uses many obscenities and ad hominem attacks. He and the people at Wikipedia need to get a life. If you're referring to GoatGuy, he writes comments mainly on the NextBigFuture blog as far as I know. By the way, speaking of skeptic/negative views about the latest E-Cat report, here's a well argumented one (or better than average, at least) from a ScienceBlogs blogger: http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2013/05/21/the-e-cat-is-back-and-people-are-still-falling-for-it/ Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-22 22:11, Jed Rothwell wrote: Ah! I did not think of that. That is probably a good metric. It is still self-selected, and not a random group, but the extremists will have only one vote each. If the number of likes is sufficiently high I guess the effects of extremists at both ends would be diluted. I guess what you are saying is that we can look at articles which are generally in favor of cold fusion and compare them to ones that attack it, and see which is more popular with Facebook. If they are both published about the same time that should be a valid comparison. We would be looking at the opinions of the general public rather than academic scientists, but it would be useful information. Yes, with Facebook likes you would mainly see how much popular a story is in the general public. In other words, its public perception, and not much more. I wonder if we can establish a trend line with this data? I confess I have never looked at Facebook and I have no idea how it works or what is in it. I gather it is all the rage. I've no idea either, I don't use it actively. I can say however that if the Rossi third-party story is getting popular there, then it will likely become soon popular in the mainstream news media too. I think that Microsoft's Xbox One annoncement/presentation is getting all the attention at the moment, tough. Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-21 04:09, Jed Rothwell wrote: I just read this paper for the third time. This is a gem. [...] Luboš Motl seems to think otherwise, but I think he's adopted an excessively negative view probably due to personal bias against CF/LENR in general: http://motls.blogspot.com/2013/05/tommaso-dorigo-impressed-by-cold-fusion.html Tommaso Dorigo is another apparently highly regarded skeptic who isn't exactly convinced by the latest paper by Levi et al.: http://www.science20.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/cold_fusion_real-112511 I hope you'll have fun debating with them. Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, Today, international Business Times Italy featured an article about the recently released third party report about several E-Cat HT tests performed in Ferrara by Levi et al.: http://it.ibtimes.com/articles/49127/20130521/fusione-fredda-e-cat-andrea-rossi.htm (in Italian) Giuseppe Levi was contacted by the news writer and gave a few short related comments (semi-Google Translated below): --- As can be inferred, we are facing an unconventional energy source. ... We have been able to carry out our work in complete independence and freedom. From the very first moment, it was made clear that we could publish our results whatever they were. ... It's certainly not a reaction of chemical nature. The absence of radiationtells us that if it's a nuclear energy source, then it's new in nature than those known. ... [Regarding the total energy production] These data are in our work. In the most conservative case we have energy densities ten times greater than conventional ones. However this is certainly an extreme understatement. The report contains figures that are likely to be more realistic. [Do you believe that the E-Cat can turn upside down the global energy market?] Yes, without a doubt --- Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-16 05:34, Peter Gluck wrote: This morning, quite early, Daniele Passerini publishes a mystery list of 15 persons: http://22passi.blogspot.ro/2013/05/la-risposta-fa-36213.html Many of them are well known in our circles. He says these persons were driving a car for the coming (June 2) symposium of New Energy for a New World. Seem interesting. Peter It appears this is the answer to this riddle: * * * */New advancements on the Fleischmann-Pons Effect:/* */paving the way for a potential new clean renewable energy source? /* /*European Parliament - Brussels*/ /Monday, 3 June 2013 from 16:30 to 18:45, / /Room Jozsef Antall 6Q1/ // /The European community should become aware of the state-of-the-art of the studies on the Fleischmann-Pons Effect phenomenon and of the potential future perspectives in the field of Material Science and renewable, clean energy. Energy densities measured during Fleischmann and Pons Effect (FPE) are hundreds, thousands and even tens of thousands times larger than the maximum energy associated to any known chemical process. This effect was first discovered in 1989 by two electrochemists Prof. Martin Fleischmann and Dr. Stanley Pons, by loading palladium with deuterium (an isotope of hydrogen). This excess energy is not associated with nuclear radiation and does not appear when light water (H2O) is used. ENEA (Italy), Stanford Research International (SRI, USA) and Energetics LLC (USA) have been collaborating on an alternative energy project since 2004 based upon the Fleischmann-Pons Effect (FPE). The Naval Research Laboratory (NRL, USA) joined the research team in 2008 and since 2010 also the University of Missouri was involved in the research in cooperation with Energetics. All the collaborating institutions, after several years of scientific review process, do not question the existence of this very strong isotope effect as FPE has been observed during experiments in the four laboratories. The proposed event, tries to present the situation point of this promising research field and even to design the future steps at EU and International level./ * * * Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-10 15:53, Peter Gluck wrote: However enhanced excess energy is the first, sine qua non step. Rumors circulating about the Professors' Hot Cat report pre-publication text on the Web accessible for very selected persons. Not confirmed yet. I'm not asking for nor expecting any further detail here, but are these rumors from private correspondence with people you trust or did you read this up somewhere on the Internet in the LENR blogosphere? Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-05-03 20:06, Jack Cole wrote: Looks like AR has delivered on his promise. http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/05/e-cat-shipping-pictures-posted-on-the-jonp/ This photo just posted by Daniele Passerini is way more interesting: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-XuKgtxpqL9U/UYQSyPJP-OI/JYI/96mRUBJjs1w/s1600/hot-cat.JPG Source: http://22passi.blogspot.it/2013/05/fino-al-limite-di-rottura.html It's a 6 months old photo (previously unreleased) of a Hot-Cat being pushed to its operating limits. It does look hot. Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, Dr. Francesco Celani is reporting and encouraging to share that he found out that small amounts of liquid hydrocarbons such as Acetone can provide significant improvements to anomalous heat generation in gas-loaded LENR devices. No further details are available at the moment about his experiments and results (how much did heat generation improve? How was acetone provided to the system? What steps did he take to ensure that excess heat he measured was real and not of chemical nature? And so on). I guess he will present them during ICCF18. http://22passi.blogspot.it/2013/04/altre-ricette-segrete.html That being said, this isn't the first time I've read about the possible use of hydrocarbons (in small quantities) in LENR. Does this ring any bell to other posters here? Cheers, S.A. Dear Colleagues, as anticipated, we have found significative increase of anomalous heat when we ADDED small amounts (1-2cc) of liquid hydrocarbons to our cell, under partial vacuum conditions. Hystorically, in gas system, (since 2010), apart H2O and D2O (obviously NOT hydrocarbon), we tested: a) C2H5OH b) C2H5OD c) Methanol Since January 2013, following the kind suggestions of the Italian Company that previously (2011-2012) made systematic work (very long, expensive and tedious) on Constantan preparation, suggested to test the Acetone (CH3-C=O-CH3). The Company, metallurgical, is located in the North-Est of Italy. Several Researchers are interested on LENR phenomenologies and they have their own Laboratory. Just to-day they give me permission to share such information, for the mankind progress in the field of Science and Technology. OPEN ACCESS, OPEN SOURCE approach, like the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project. The results look enough robust. Also Ubaldo Mastromatteo, at STMicroelecronics (near Milan-Italy), tested the addition of Acetone, in an apparatus different of our (calorimetric). He got measurable improvements about Anomalous Heat Generation. PLEASE, SHARE THE INFORMATION. Tanks for Your kind attention. Francesco Celani
On 2013-04-13 00:12, Jed Rothwell wrote: See also: http://lenr-canr.org/?page_id=187#PhotosAccidents Maybe Celani has some photos to share that you could add to this page? Cheers S.A.
Hello group, Bruce Fast, blogger (I don't know anything more about him, sorry), visited Defkalion Canada offices in Vancouver and wrote a brief but informative report about it. Most of the information appears to have already been covered by Sterling D.Allan of PESN in his last week's the company CEO, but there are also new tidbits about near term DGT plans and some more background behind how the company was formed that I wasn't aware of: http://nickelpower.org/2013/04/10/my-visit-to-defkalion-canada/ It appears he made this visit back in February, but for some reason he reported only today about it. Was this information somehow embargoed? Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, Defkalion GT CEO Alex Xanthoulis agreed to be interviewed by Sterling D. Allan of PESN regarding the company's current status and future plans, and won't be giving any more information to the mainstream media until August, when DGT will be presented to the public (with a live demo) during NIWeek 2013 . Article here: http://pesn.com/2013/04/04/9602290_Defkalion-laying-low-preparing-to-make-a-big-splash/ Audio recording of the interview: http://m.podshow.com/media/1049/episodes/327524/pesn-327524-04-05-2013.mp3 Cheers, S.A.  http://www.ni.com/niweek/
On 03/26/2013 03:50 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Akira: Do you know who Prometeon is? (The organization that issued this announcement.) Did they do the tests? Will they issue a report? They are the sole authorized E-Cat reseller/licensee for Italy I don't know if they will issue reports. Apparently they have made tests on working E-Cat devices over the past months but they are not related to the upcoming third party scientific validation report. Have a look here: http://www.prometeon.it/ Cheers, S.A
On 2013-03-25 08:01, Harry Veeder wrote: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=791#comments Andrea Rossi March 24th, 2013 at 10:53 PM Prometon s.r.l issued a related press release (in Italian): http://www.22passi.it/downloads/Comunicato_stampa_Prometeon_25_3_2013.pdf Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-02-23 09:39, Alain Sepeda wrote: David on LENRNews.eu hav published a Swedish defense report : http://www.lenrnews.eu/swedish-defence/ This report would have not been surprising if it was just about plain nano/micrometric nickel powder experiments. The effects of hydrogen on nickel and nickel-based alloys have been studied for decades, without any nuclear or otherwise anomalous heating effect normally occurring. However, as far as I understand, presumably active samples obtained from Brian Ahern were used as well, and during these Swedish experiments in no case excess heat above error margins has ever been detected. Why is this worrying, people on other discussion venues are asking. The reason is that Ahern is one of the key researchers in the existing LENR community reported to successfully and reliably obtain significant (several watts) excess heat from Ni-H based experiments. He even has his own theory on the working mechanism, based on the concept of nano-magnetism. I'm assuming the Swedish researchers who performed the experiments have been in contact with him for tips and suggestions. Nevertheless, they haven't been able to independently reproduce his results. At this stage I think it's important to know what is Brian Ahern's opinion on this matter, which is probably known in the private mailing list CMNS. I invite people with access to that list to share relevant information here too, if possible. Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, Defkalion GT chief technical officer John Hadjichristos occasionally writes comments and answers questions on Peter Gluck's blog EGO OUT . I think this one posted today might be worth of some attention: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2013/02/strategic-principles-of-lenr-and-their.html?showComment=1361136108932#c5631682400193533930 This paragraph in particular: [...] We have allocated already funds for common RD and theoretical interpretation to specific distinguished members or teams of the existing LENR research community, providing them full access to our experimental data and resources. Hopefully the expected results of such focusing to objectives activities will start showing up in papers within 2013. Even though experimental data and resources is most probably under various NDAs, I wonder if those selected members and teams from the existing LENR research community are are among known posters from Vortex or CMNS (a private mailing list to which I have no access) and if their involvement with DGT (that is, their exact names) is under NDAs as well. Some disclosure here would boost DGT's public image a bit. Cheers, S.A.  http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/
On 2013-02-08 11:49, Moab Moab wrote: It seems LENUCO might be up to get funding from ARPA-E. Maybe. First he'll need enough votes. http://futureenergy.ultralightstartups.com/campaign/detail/861 It would have been in LENUCO's best interest to let people know about this in advance! What a wasted opportunity. (if not for funding, at least for visibility / public awareness) No chances to take the lead within the remaining time over other projects with 1500+ votes. Cheers, S.A.
Listen here: http://archive.thespaceshow.com/shows/1932-BWB-2013-01-18.mp3 (90 minute MP3 46.1MB) The Space Show website: http://www.thespaceshow.com/ Cheers, S.A.
On 2013-01-03 15:03, Peter Gluck wrote: Defkalion's E-Cat is launched in Italy too: http://www.nextme.it/scienza/energia/4914-e-cat-defkalion-italia They have a website - coming soon: http://www.mose-energy.com/ Additional information from user Renzo of E-CatWorld blog: The Defkalion website says: “European RD Center: 5 via Bastia, Milano 20139, Italy – Tel: +39 0253 92829″ the above phone number belongs to MOSE S.R.L. http://aziende.virgilio.it/20921491/mose-srl there are many S.R.L. with that name but I found one in Vigevano (not far from Milano) with an interesting description: http://tinyurl.com/az9hdlb “Study and research, design, construction and development of prototypes, and the engineering and mass production and sale of machinery and plants for the processing and production of energy, with high performance and high efficiency(activity carried out at the local facility in Noviglio)” they have applied for a patent http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP2319282.html and the firm is cited in a document by Celani http://www.22passi.it/downloads/Presentazione_Viareggio_2011b.pdf L. Gamberale. MOSE SrL, Viale Montegrappa 20, 27029 Vigevano (PV)-Italy. article from Nextme: http://www.nextme.it/scienza/energia/4914-e-cat-defkalion-italia the CEO of Mose s.r.l. is Franco Cappiello: http://it.linkedin.com/pub/dir/Franco/Cappiello http://tinyurl.com/b3vo4us http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHBW9RAHZLo Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-17 15:53, Jed Rothwell wrote: I cannot access Quantumheat.org for some reason. If anyone here can access it, please copy Storms' analysis to it. It works for me. Storms' analysis has already been linked a couple times in their latest blog post. The MFMP team should better contact him directly, though. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-16 17:29, Jed Rothwell wrote: Note that Ed left a comment here: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/177-write-up-of-eu-cell-baselines [...] It's the right time for suggestions and test requests to improve their experiment: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/177-write-up-of-eu-cell-baselines#comment-1377 Robert Greenyer 2012-12-16 17:11 @All I have recently arrived in Switzerland and am starting to upload videos from Rome at Nicolas' house. Mathieu has powered down the EU cell and bringing it here and it will be placed into a completely different environment. In the mean time, we would really like you all to brainstorm and collate your top of the pops change lists for the experiment and and any mini-experiment s that you want us to run. Hopefully I will make this the first of the collaborate tasks on the new section of the website. However, I think such suggestions would have to fit constraints of low cost, low complexity, reliability, safety. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-14 21:24, Jeff Berkowitz wrote: Did anyone ever find it? It's Power (Red) (bar) instead of Power (Red) (W). Bars instead of watts. Red is the active wire. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-13 13:25, Craig wrote: They shut the power off from around 4:30 am EST until around 5:45am EST. Does anyone know why? It appears they tried loading it with pure H2 instead of an H2-Ar mixture (75%-25%). This might (according to Dr.Celani) increase over time the apparent excess heat. According to MFMP calibrations with the inactive wire, at 1 bar of pressure the wire should about 1°C hotter at the input power level chosen (48 W), which means that their currently estimated excess heat under pure H2 should be about 0.7 higher than under H2-Ar for this reason alone. Anything significantly higher than this should be a due to a genuine increase of temperatures due to a LENR effect or unknown artifacts. By the way, the controversy with conservative baselines arose because the very first calibration performed with the inactive wire under H2-Ar gas (thick blue line in the graph below) and the last ones performed with the active wire under helium (not shown) showed significantly lower external glass temperature readings than the rest of those made with the inactive wire with different gases and pressures: http://www.quantumheat.org/images/PinTout-Calib-Final.png So, in order to avoid problems due to excess enthusiasm (my interpretation) they chose as a baseline the calibration showing the highest glass temperatures readings, which means that any possible excess heat effect with the active wire under hydrogen atmosphere might currently be significantly underestimated. Of course, this is assuming that LENR is indeed occurring inside the cell. There's still the chance that this could all be an unexpected error artifact especially since they're measuring temperatures from a more or less transparent glass tube. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-13 16:02, Jed Rothwell wrote: This is only my impression, but these graphs look far too smooth to be cold fusion. All of the actual cold fusion reactions I have seen fluctuate much more than this. They increase, decrease and sometimes stop for no apparent reason. This looks like an instrument artifact. Nevertheless, this appears to be the same effect as reported by Celani and Ubaldo Mastromatteo from STMicro: the higher the input power applied, the more the glass tube appears to heat compared to calibration runs with an inert wire and the active wire under inert conditions. This temperature difference appears to be significant. . So, in a way, their replication was successful. It's been suggested in their blog that they should use a steel tube (preferably painted in special black paint) instead of borosilicate glass, in order to make sure that there isn't some artifact happening with the active wire emissivity changing under loaded conditions and affecting temperature readings at the external glass thermocouple. If that quick and cheap test will be successful too, then the final answer will come from proper flow calorimetry. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-12 22:08, Arnaud Kodeck wrote: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/176-eu-cell-2-active-wire-run Promising results are shown from EU cell of MFMP ! It seems that even taking into account the most conservative baseline to determine output power by curve fitting (to the previously made calibration runs), they're already showing excess power at about 6W. With the least conservative baseline, that's about 20W. It looks like using borosilicate glass instead of quartz did really make a difference. Quartz glass is almost completely transparent to IR radiation, while borosilicate glass is mostly (although not totally) opaque to it. Note to readers: the MFMP team is not using the Stefan-Boltzmann law to determine output power. This decreases the likelihood of large errors. I think it's safe to say that the MFMP finally successfully replicated Celani's anomalous thermal effect from his treated Constantan wires. The next step is now to determine whether that is a real effect or it's all due to a really unexpected artifact lurking somewhere. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-12 22:47, Craig wrote: The have 48 watts of input power now and are getting out 52 - 54 watts on their conservative estimate. Their optimistic estimate shows them at around 67 - 70 watts out. The conservative estimate is *really* conservative. Basically, it's the calibration with the inert wire which gave the highest external glass temperature readings, putting aside that it was running at a lower hydrogen pressure (which increases glass temperatures slightly). Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-12 22:57, Arnaud Kodeck wrote: I would be a little more conservative. The excess power must be kept for more than an hour or two, to at least remove any chemical reaction that may occur. As shown now, the excess power has decreased just above 4W. That excess heat might not stay long. Cross finger that it will happen. You're right. More time is needed to rule out chemical reactions, for the current run. Before applying power directly to the active wire, they heated the cell with the reference (inert) wire for several hours continuously, and it still appeared to show significant amounts (a few watts) of excess heat however, so I think that chemical sources can already be ruled out. The real question, as I previously mentioned, probably is if this excess heat effect is actually real or not. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-12 22:57, Arnaud Kodeck wrote: As shown now, the excess power has decreased just above 4W. That excess heat might not stay long. Cross finger that it will happen. It looks like it increased again. Now it's at almost 8W. No apparent change in input power or external conditions. Surely, this cell is behaving interestingly. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-12 23:39, Harry Veeder wrote: I am confused about the location(s). Where exactly is/are the Celani replications occuring? In Europe (France) and in the US (Minnesota). The replication apparently showing excess heat as of now is the European one, which is very close to the original Celani experiment (using a borosilicate glass tube). They're planning to set up several different cells soon in the Minnesota lab in order to more confidently replicate the excess heat effect and verify that it's indeed real. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-13 03:29, Craig wrote: This is so strange. I set the data in View Test Celani Cell #2, found here: http://data.hugnetlab.com/ to view back 4 hours. Then I selected only P_Xs Low. Notice that the excess power is oscillating between 4 watts and 8 watts, in a very precise rhythm, with each wave appearing to have the same shape, and with each wave lasting about an hour. I also see that the wave appears to be tapering with the lows becoming higher and the heights become lower. There also seems to be a correlation with T_Ambient, but why? Whatever this is, it didn't happen with the previous overnight run with power applied to the inert wire (and the active wire partially loaded, in hydrogen atmosphere). This is a user-submitted image from the MFMP blog showing it: http://i.imgur.com/bB383.png (note that Power (Red) actually shows W instead of bar) From 2012-12-12 00:00 to about 10:00, external glass temperature (under 50W of indirect heating) didn't seem to fluctuate very much with ambient temperature. However with direct heating (48W) it does quite much. The main difference between those two runs is that the one with indirect heating had a starting hydrogen pressure of 2 bar (which increase with heat, of course), while the latter ones started at 1 bar, probably offering less thermal inertia (but still not explaining how glass temperature variations can be larger than ambient ones, assuming that these are the ones which drive them). Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-11 05:02, David Roberson wrote: I am seeking a bit of feedback from the Vortex crowd. For more feedback, next time try writing a new thread (by writing a new post to the mailing list at firstname.lastname@example.org with the write function or its equivalent in your email client) instead of replying to existing posts (with the reply function) when starting a new discussion about MFMP. All your threads so far are nested inside other ones, which makes them difficult to spot for people who use email clients in threaded mode, and also off-topic to those you're mistakenly replying to. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-07 16:02, Jed Rothwell wrote: I do not like this graph on page 2: http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/2%20layers%20constantan%20wire%20EDX%20and%20extra%20heat.pdf I attempted to reinterpret the (new) graph on page 2 to make it easier to understand. I admit that at first I had almost no idea of what it was trying to convey. Now I think I do: http://i.imgur.com/A0OBf.png Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-08 11:15, Akira Shirakawa wrote: I attempted to reinterpret the (new) graph on page 2 to make it easier to understand. I admit that at first I had almost no idea of what it was trying to convey. Now I think I do: http://i.imgur.com/A0OBf.png Combining data from the table on the left and the new graph (and some plausible assumptions) I managed to plot a graph of input power vs excess power: http://i.imgur.com/L9CV7.png At the highest point it's 21.8% more output power than the input. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-08 17:40, Ron Kita wrote: Greetings Vortex-L I just saw the photographs: http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/12/lenr-transmutation-replication-and.html Did Vortex show this before? Yes; see thread: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg73573.html Or: [Vo]:Probable Celani replication http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg73622.html Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-07 16:02, Jed Rothwell wrote: I do not like this graph on page 2: http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/2%20layers%20constantan%20wire%20EDX%20and%20extra%20heat.pdf There are no calibration points above 0.5 W input, and no live run data points below that. You have to have calibration points at the same power levels as the live run. There has to be overlap. If your highest input power during the live run is 4.6 W (as shown here) you have input 4.6 W during the calibration, or better yet 5 W. In an update posted by Daniele Passerini on his 22passi blog, Ubaldo Mastromatteo, main author of this Celani effect replication at STM labs, forwarded a graph showing a [one of many?] calibration run: http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/Grafico%20calibrazione%20test%20per%20Celani.pdf In short, by using different testing conditions which make the active wire inert, they obtained a linear relationship of output power with temperature. Wire performance under conditions which make it active is then compared to this linear trend curve fit. A relatively detailed description of how to read this and the previous graph (for those who didn't get it at first) and other clarifications on the status of this research at STMicroelectronics was also provided. It's in Italian, however. Those interested please use Google Translate at your own risk: http://22passi.blogspot.it/2012/12/nuove-energie-nella-scuola-contributi-e.html?showComment=1354986585787#c7435918095815006356 Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-08 22:01, Jed Rothwell wrote: Those are the same data points shown in the other graph. Indeed the graphs doesn't show this very clearly, but if you compare both of them carefully (check again!), in this case all data points are aligned with the linear/no excess heat trend line. This is because... [read below] So, in other words, they are using the active wire at temperatures below where the effect turns on, and this is their inert or blank calibration. ...actually, they make the active wire inert in a way that temperatures where the effect would normally show (the con produzione red data points) can be reached without excess heat production and used for calibration. No details on how this is achieved have been provided yet (although I expect they used a fully hydrogen-unloaded wire under an inert gas mixture). That's not a good method, in my opinion. They need to try a fully inert wire made from another substance, calibrating through the full range of temperatures that the active wire exposed to. They're doing it with a deactivated/inert Celani wire. After the calibration process they reactivate it by loading it with hydrogen. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-08 23:27, Jed Rothwell wrote: They are doing this now? Or do you mean they did it before but those data points are not published yet. That's what they did. The graphed calibration data points are in the document I previously linked. It's certainly not the full data set. It's supposed to be a small addendum to the 2-pages preview posted yesterday: http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/Grafico%20calibrazione%20test%20per%20Celani.pdf Data points, although are of different colors, are from the same run. That is just their fancy way to show the temperature ranges where normally (under activated conditions) there is excess heat and where there isn't. I'm aware there's not enough information to properly understand what's and how's their method, but that's the way it is right now. We will know more in a week. Calibrating with a gas other than hydrogen also seems like a bad idea to me. They need a wire that is definitely inert, in hydrogen and other conditions as similar to the active run as they can make them [...] I didn't intend to enter into discussions whether their calibration approach is solid or not, just presenting the facts as they're coming in. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-05 16:01, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, A quick update from Celani forwarded to 22passi: Dear Colleagues, just after the chaotic discovering of the name of the original Company (06 December 2012) that make replication of our experiment, I realised that some of the documents in the net could not correct because problems arising in the transfer from pc to MAC and viceversa. So, I am sending the original document, pdf format. * Please note the following, specific to the Constantan wire that I gave to STMicroelectronics (type 2L) for the specific experimentation: A) The wire is long ONLY 20cm (usually I used 100cm); B) The layers are ONLY 2 (i.e. type 2L). Usually I used 300-700 layers; C) The pressure in the chamber is only 0.5bar ABS of pure H2; D) They made CALORIMETRIC measurements, not only termometry; E) The SEM-EDX was made, AFTER the H2 absorption, both on reference section (smooth) and possible active sites (like floweres in the photo). *The principal investigator that made the experiment is Dr. Ubaldo Mastromatteo, for long time expert in the field. * Please, share the information to the Colleagues included in your mailing list. Thanks for Your time, Francesco CELANI The attached 'original' document in pdf format: http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/2%20layers%20constantan%20wire%20EDX%20and%20extra%20heat.pdf Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-07 16:02, Jed Rothwell wrote: [...] I am not happy with this. I need more information to judge it, but it gives me a bad feeling. I feel your confusion. Hopefully the full slides bound to be presented (and released to the public) on December 14th  will help clarify this. Cheers, S.A.  During this event: http://www.22passi.it/coherence2012/Coherence%202012_Brochure.pdf
On 2012-12-07 18:42, Jed Rothwell wrote: What is this? Details please. Who is Ortez? Have a look at the following link. Notice something? http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/10/leonardo-corp-releases-new-hot-cat-report/ Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-05 16:13, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://i.imgur.com/yA7HS.jpg I tried making an improved, clearer chart with data from this slide, showing the relationship between wire temperature and excess power. I've also extrapolated an additional data point at 400 °C: http://i.imgur.com/pDJoY.png Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, According to a recent email by Francesco Celani posted on 22passi, it appears that thermal anomalies from his treated constantan wires hav been successfully and independently validated by some researchers affiliated with a major multinational corporation. Source (in italian): http://22passi.blogspot.it/2012/12/nuove-energie-nella-scuola-contributi-e.html The email (hand-tweaked Google translation): from: Francesco.Celani to NextMe, 22 steps, EnergeticAmbiente, Vincenzo Valenzi Date: December 4, 2012 19:07 Subject: 2 Slides end of the meeting about the replica. Dear Colleagues, as requested, I am attaching a copy of the 2 slides about the first INDEPENDENT replication of thermal anomalies using nano-Constantan wires, according to our procedures regarding the preparation of the material. The experiments were carried out in complete autonomy, by researchers (experts) affiliated to a major international industry. Please note the following: - The reactor used is COMPLETELY different from the one we developed and used. As a result, the probability of a systematic error in the measurements has become highly unlikely; - Calorimetric measurements [were performed] and are not only thermometric (as used by us, in the specific case); - They used only 20 cm of wire, ie a fifth of that used by us; - The wire used is a base, type 2L, ie with only TWO layers of nanomaterial. Usually use wires with 200-700 layers. - Regarding the thermal anomalies, they begin with temperatures higher than those typically found with wires of 200-700 layers. The magnitude of the anomalies, normalized to a standard [wire] length, is approximately half of those seen with the wires from 200-700 layers. The mechanical robustness of the wires seems to be unchanged. Apart from my brief preview, the data SHOULD be presented and thoroughly discussed before December 15, by the authors of the measurements. Thanks for your attention, Francesco CELANI The slides reportedly coming from a major multinational corporation: http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/pirelli_wire_a.pptx By manually editing the file and displacing the cyan boxes (XYZ and Big international Company it becomes apparent that the company is STMicroelectronics. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-05 16:01, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, An improved version of Celani's ICCF17 presentation in a scientific paper format was also posted on the same blog: http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/ICCF17CelaniArtD.pdf These are the slides mentioned in the opening post, edited to show the name of the major international company: http://i.imgur.com/yA7HS.jpg http://i.imgur.com/cOTvo.jpg Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-05 16:50, Peter Gluck wrote: Dear Akira, I cannot open the file with the results- Try this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/48w8fsbd5jigwr8/pirelli_wire_a.pdf how great is the excess heat? 1.16W at 350 °C Wire mass = 0.055 g length = 200 mm diameter = 0.2 mm Input power not disclosed, but I guess it's the usual 48W. The excess heat is small, but calorimetry should be sound, and the wire is reported to be significantly less active than normal ones, in addition to being shorter. Let's see what is doing Quantum Heat now.And other groups tryingto reproduce Francesco's method. I think this will motivate them going forward. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-05 16:01, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, The results of this independent validation will likely be presented during this event, on December 14th: http://www.22passi.it/coherence2012/Coherence%202012_Brochure.pdf Have a look at the bottom left portion of the second page of this program. Search for STMicroelectronics. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-05 16:47, Jed Rothwell wrote: Ain't that nice! This should encourage the M.F.M. people to keep at it. It appears they have been already aware of these results for weeks, but they had an agreement to not disclose them before mid-December (too late now). Maybe that's where much of their confidence comes from: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/169-progress-on-almost-every-front#comment-1010 Celani says they used a completely different reactor. That's good. I assume that means a different cell configuration that allows some other method of calorimetry. Yes, he means that they used a different configuration allowing proper calorimetry. As I and others already suggested, I hope the MFMP will manage to obtain and test more wires at the same time in order to improve the signal/noise ratio and thus making the thermal anomaly visible without the need for sophisticated equipment. Even with 2-layered wires, researchers at STM obtained a power density of 21W/g. I don't know why they haven't done so already - one gram of treated nickel-copper alloy shouldn't be that expensive to prepare, most probably less than the hundreds of hours invested by the MFMP team on this project so far. Cheers, S.A.
Courtesy of DGT: The following article appeared in TO BHMA-Science at December 2nd, 2012 (http://www.tovima.gr/science/article/?aid=486578). For the non-Greek speaking people, here bellow is a translated in English version of this article. In this translation, one more explanatory paragraph [Gold Fusion's Trojan Horse, in italics] was included, as was provided to us by the scientific journalist Tasos Kafandaris. This paragraph was omitted from the printed version due to space limitations. DGT http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=4367 Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-04 10:26, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=4367 PDF version (containing a few photos) now available in the link above. Direct link: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=33 (you might need to be logged to the DGT forum) Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-12-04 23:34, Terry Blanton wrote: Well, well. When I go to their site I see a page announcing a new web site coming soon. Did you save the .pdf? If you could send to me I can post on google docs. Or you could if you do that sort of thing. I expected that something like this would happen sooner or later, so I saved a copy as soon as I displayed the pdf in my web browser: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ebiqjspd3qkiywo/20121102_Cold%20fusion%20-ENG.pdf?m Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-25 17:05, Jed Rothwell wrote: 1. It is lot harder to accomplish than it sounds. I can summarize it in a single sentence, apply the Arata technique to nickel but that describes years of effort. This might sound like a naive question, but isn't the Arata technique documented? And if it isn't, why it isn't? As long as recipes that work remain secret or purposely badly described, people will have to reinvent the wheel each time, resulting in delays of the scientific acceptance of the effect and the technology to the market. Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, The 8-page article published on the November issue of Popular Science is now publicly available for reading on the official PopSci website. For sure, user reactions in the comment section don't seem very enthusiastic, to say the least: http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-10/andrea-rossis-black-box Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-23 18:05, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Not related with the opening post, but this came just in from Google Alerts: http://discovermagazine.com/2012/nov/27-big-idea-bring-back-the-cold-fusion-dream A cautiously neutral article on cold fusion on Discover Magazine, mainly revolving around Widom-Larsen theory and Zawodny's known public efforts to test the WL theory. Nothing new, but it's interesting to see that this magazine picked it up. No mention whatsoever of Rossi or Defkalion. On the main website page the article headline is A sort-of return of Cold Fusion. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-22 14:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, As a side note, it appears that the entity which funded Michael A. Nelson's traveling expenses was not the Free Energy Foundation, but rather the New Energy Foundation. This correction comes from Mark Gibbs of Forbes. See  and footnotes on . The New Energy Foundation is none other than: http://www.infinite-energy.com/whoarewe/whoarewe.html Cheers, S.A.  http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/10/20/cold-fusion-gets-a-little-more-real/2/  http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/10/20/cold-fusion-gets-a-little-more-real/3/
Hello group, It appears that the pdf documents with redacted names wasn't the only one which sort of leaked from early uploads put on the official Defkalion GT forums and hastily replaced with different ones. Apparently there was another one, formatted as a presentation and signed by Micheal A. Nelson, which describes more in detail his visit do Defkalion GT labs. Congratulations to ecatnews.com blog for the timing in picking this up. http://ecatnews.com/?p=2464 The document (I suggest saving a copy in case it gets deleted): http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-22 14:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: The document (I suggest saving a copy in case it gets deleted): http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf By the way, I think it's important to point out that this document is dated March 2012, while the other two currently available for download are from September 2012 (differently than what I assumed in my opening post). On his March visit to DGT labs, Micheal A. Nelson hadn't had yet the chance to witness a DGT reactor demonstration. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-22 14:24, Jed Rothwell wrote: Every page in this document is marked Extremely Confidential. Evidently that does not mean much at Defkalion. I don't get all this confidentiality either. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-22 14:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: The document (I suggest saving a copy in case it gets deleted): http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf Compare the document above with this one: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Nelson-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf They look similar, don't they? I think it was supposed to be a presentation for internal use, probably not something on behalf of Dr. Michael Melich. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-22 06:29, Patrick Ellul wrote: Thanks for this. If anyone comes across a transcript of the portion where he talks about LENR, it would be very handy. A partial transcription I found on E-CatWorld: “LENR, which we’re working on here, we’ve got 22 years now of experiments on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, which indicate out of hundreds of experiments that this is real. And we now have a theory from Widom Larsen that it’s condensed matter nuclear physics, it is collective effects. It is not particle physics. It is not the usual business and you can get around the Coulomb barrier by forming ultra-weak neutrons using heavy electrons which not only enable you to form the neutrons but also converts the gamma radiation, which comes off the beta-decay, which is where the energy is finally produced – convert that into thermal so that you don’t have to have much radiation protection. So LENR is expected to be anywhere from twenty thousand to 3 million times chemical [energy] and that would really revolutionize space. LENR is not “heavily” investigated, we have a two to three hundred K effort. We are also cooperating with people that we can’t divulge under cooperative agreements. There is quite a lot of interest because LENR purportedly also produces trace mutations. So, if LENR [transmutation] works, we can take whatever is on the planet and possibly transmutate it into something we need.” Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-22 20:44, Jed Rothwell wrote: Storms, E. and B. Scanlan, /Nature of energetic radiation emitted from a metal exposed to H2/. J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci., 2012(submitted). http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEnatureofen.pdf I don't think I have the expertise needed to discuss this in detail, but it's quite an interesting, clearly written paper and I recommend others who do, to read it as well. It doesn't sound like it should be too hard to verify the claims for experienced researchers, but for this reason it's in turn hard to believe that radiation emission from metals (treated at a nanometric scale) just by exposure to H2 and [optionally] heat due to small scale fusion effects has never been observed so far, even by chance (as NAE, cracks, appear to be a prerequisite for this to happen), in other fields such as the battery/fuel cell industry for example. Hidden in plain sight would be a suitable expression to define this effect if really confirmed. Now we only need a foolproof, methodology to reliably and cheaply create these NAE on common metals (such as Ni, Cu). Maybe Francesco Celani has one? Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, After contacting Michael A. Nelson directly and receiving confirmation that he attended as an independent witness to Defkalion GT testings, it looks like Mark Gibbs changed his tune a bit. Full article here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/10/20/cold-fusion-gets-a-little-more-real/ Cheers, S.A.
Hello group, Today, an official announcement about test results was posted on the Defkalion GT forum: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17t=4143 As previously promised, we are attaching two files that contain a signed protocol and a preliminary report by one independent international group on our technology. This marks the end of our first cycle of testing on our lab reactors, which lasted five months with 21 different experiments having been conducted by three different international organizations. The attached documents indicate the test results obtained by one such team. The other two international well known testing organizations obtained equally impressive results following similar protocols while using their own instrumentation. These results, data, and full analyses by each of the three testers will be published in peer reviewed Journals as applicable by each Journal. Names of the testers and the organizations they represent are still under strict NDAs and have therefore been removed from the attached documents. Defkalion will not disclose names. In the attached protocol the first page represents our RD path and our testing strategy. The test performed under this protocol can be identified under step 1.3.2, which represents the end of this section of our work in progress. Subsequent RD steps and tests on our pre-industrial prototypes have already been scheduled by third parties (as depicted in step 2 – Hyperion Multi-Reactor Kernel Testing). Additionally, all such tests have been video recorded. The following two links indicate a small sample of such recordings. · Explanation of the calorimetry set-up: (uploading in progress) · Triggering the reaction: (uploading in progress) Defkalion Green Technologies 19th October, 2012 Links: Exec Sum of Defkalion Test Review - Sept 2012.pdf [52.49 KiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=31 2012-09-07_Test Report Validation_Signed_No Names.pdf [3.52 MiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=30 Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-19 14:12, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Exec Sum of Defkalion Test Review - Sept 2012.pdf [52.49 KiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=31 By the way, I wonder if the way DGT blacked out some information in the pdf above was *very* weak on purpose. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-19 14:12, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Today, an official announcement about test results was posted on the Defkalion GT forum: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17t=4143 Two videos have been added: Explanation of the calorimetry set-up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvmWGeryKQc Triggering the reaction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yax8oHzlXkI Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-19 14:12, Akira Shirakawa wrote: 2012-09-07_Test Report Validation_Signed_No Names.pdf [3.52 MiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=30 An earlier version with names of this test report has been posted on ecatnews.com, pulled from the browser cache of a user who happened to stumble upon it: http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012-09-07_Test-protocol-signed.pdf The other 2-pages, 52 kBytes report was also reported to be originally longer and more detailed, but it looks like that version is no longer available to the public. Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-19 17:17, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012-09-07_Test-protocol-signed.pdf On page 18: Test observer, Michael Nelson, was asked to come in lieu of Micheal Melich due to Dr. Melich's current constraints [...] Michael Melich is on Rossi's Board of Advisers too: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?page_id=2 This might sound like a stupid question, but since Rossi and his team were so adamant that Defkalion GT had absolutely nothing in their hands, now that Micheal Nelson positively reported for Melich on the excess heat from DGT's reactor, will they change their mind? Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-18 10:42, Mint Candy wrote: *Take note: Check Patent bottom right. http://lenr.scienceontheweb.net/ M.* A more convenient link to the patent: http://www.google.com/patents/US20120033775 Cheers, S.A.
On 2012-10-17 10:22, Peter Gluck wrote: FYI: Prof. Francesco Piantelli's US Patent Application is here: http://images3.freshpatents.com/pdf/US20110249783A1.pdf I've already seen this before. Look: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/PiantelliSmethodforp.pdf Cheers, S.A.