This from Rossi's website comment section... But no one in Russia has been able to find the right combination to exploit/enhance the energy production in almost 40 years... I guess that's where Rossi-Focardi come in... or did it just happen by chance? Given that there are 6e9 people on the planet, of which 10e6 are scientists/engineers, and 10e8 technical documents/websites which are easily accessible, I calculate that there is a 1 in 6B chance that one would solve the world's energy/pollution crisis this year!! :-) :-) Did I mention that my mom is italian and her maiden name is Rossi??? ;-) -Mark Vladimir Leonov January 19th, 2011 at 3:27 AM I congratulate. This magnificent the achievement. However, as early as in 1974 the Belorussian scientist Sergey Usherenko discovered the effect of the ultradeep penetration (UDP) of particle-strikers of micron sizes in solid targets with the release of colossal energy in the channel of the target. The particles 10 100 microns in size, accelerated to a speed on the order of 1 km/s, pierced right through a steel target with a thickness of 200 mm, leaving a molten channel. Even according to approximate calculations the energy required for melting the channel is 100 10000 times greater than the kinetic energy of the particle-striker. This cannot be achieved by chemical reactions. Where does the additional energy in the Usherenko effect come from? It is obvious, that this additional energy can be generated only by the high-energy processes characteristic of nuclear physics and elementary particles. Leonov V. S. Quantum Energetics. Volume 1. Theory of Superunification. Cambridge International Science Publishing, 2010, 745 pages. http://leonov.inauka.ru/ Leonov V.S., Cold synthesis in the Usherenko effect and its application in power engineering, Agrokonsalt, Moscow, 2001. Leonov V.S., Russian Federation patent No. 220 1625, A method of generation of energy and a reactor for this purpose, Bull. 9, 2003. Leonov V.S.,The theory of the elastic quantised medium, part 2:New energy sources, Polibig, Minsk, 1997.
-Mark _____ From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 8:31 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure On 01/19/2011 11:06 AM, Jones Beene wrote: Stephen - How can you presume that there has been no deliberate attempt to confuse the situation? OK, my apologies! I assumed (apparently incorrectly!) that your choice of words was accidental rather than intentional. Of course if you meant to imply that Rossi was intentionally trying to mislead everyone when he said it was 1500 degrees in there, then 'disinformation' was indeed the right word. After all, there a few skeptics out there who have so much of their intellectual net worth tied up in the premise that LENR is pathological science - that deliberate sabotage in an early stage cannot be ruled out. IOW it is inappropriate for Stephen at this point in time, to counter one minor presumption with another one, even though I agree in principle that le mot juste is closer mis, not diss. It is too early to get to that level of precision. Since Stephen has chosen to assume a silly role here to be the self-appointed nit-picker deluxe, Hey, I'm a computer programmer. I pick nits for a living. Sometimes it sloshes over into real life (er, if we can consider Vortex to be real life...) Anyhow sorry about the semantic pickiness. lets apply the same standard to his incorrect presumptions, as he would apply them to others. Of course! :-) Jones From: Stephen A. Lawrence On 01/19/2011 10:25 AM, Jones Beene wrote: Peter, Thank you for clearing up the fact that the internal temperature is 400 C. There was some disinformation circulating about a much higher temperature. PLEASE! Let's strive for a little more precision in the language here! It was not "disinformation", which is "misinformation that is deliberately disseminated in order to influence or confuse rivals" (WordNet 2.0) The assertion that it was 1500 degrees was clearly either true or a simple error. It wasn't anyone's deliberate attempt at clouding the issue. Jones From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 10:10 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:a longer duration black box test would prove issue without disclosure When used for heating in homes, the device delivers very probably hot water. In the case of the experiment, the flow of the water was seemingly limited by the pump (we don't know its performance characteristics), the connection tube, the cooling space. Cooling water moves in pipe with maximum 2-3 meters/second Please do not forget- the temperature inside the generator is tipically >400 C so it is easy to deliver steam- and that's in some way more convincing than hot water Peter On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence <sa...@pobox.com> wrote: On 01/18/2011 02:52 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: CLOSE THE LOOP. He [Rossi] says he can run without any electrical input. Ergo he can close the loop, without the expense of a Stirling motor and generator. Actually, that is heat input, from an AC resistance heater. Presumably it would work as well with combustion heating. He said he can run without heat input, but it is dangerous. I do not think he elaborated on that. I gather it means he uses heat to modulate the reaction. The Piantelli Ni experiments required high temperature and external heating. I believe the control factors are heat and pressure. The H2 is at 2 atm, according to Celani. When you depressurize the cell, the reaction soon stops. That's good news. Cold fusion reactions are sometimes nearly as difficult to stop as they are to start. I assume the Rossi device has some internal self-regulation, or what Stan Pons called a "memory" that keeps electrochemical cells going back to the same power level after you refill the cell, tap on it, or disturb it some other way. I also assume there is something about the Rossi device that acts analogously to a self-quenching CANDU nuclear reactor. I am only speculating; I have no knowledge of this. The mechanism would be something like the metal degassing at very high temperature, cooling down, and then absorbing the gas and reacting again. That would explain why it quickly stops when you degas manually. I suspect the electric heater is in the core, and the cold fusion reaction occurs in the Ni powder surrounding that. I recall some of the Piantelli devices had heaters attached directly to the Ni bar. I think Rossi claimed the internal temperature of this thing is 1500°C. Ed Storms pointed out that cannot be right, because the melting point of Ni is 1,453°C. Perhaps that is a misunderstanding, or a mistranslation. Still, it must be pretty hot in there because the device is small and well insulated. Even with 400 W or 1000 W from the AC heater it must be quite hot internally. I assume (but I do not know) that the heater is the hottest part. That's how I imagine it works. Actually, I'd expect the joule heater to be rather cool relative to the reactive elements once the thing gets rolling. The reaction is contributing 10 kW or more at that point; the joule heater is just plugging along at 400 watts. That, also, makes it seem a little surprising that the joule heater continues to be used *after* "ignition". It's contributing just 4% of the total heat; you'd think they could just shut it off after the thing starts up. Of course, the reacting surface area may be large enough that it stays cooler than the heater, and perhaps the intense heat near the heater wire has something to do with the reason they continue to use it after "ignition". Incidentally, a 1500 degree internal temperature also makes the use of unpressurized water for a coolant seem to me to be a little iffy. Perhaps that has something to do with the reason they boil it all to steam, rather than running the pump harder and getting out hot water (which, it has been suggested, might have provided a more rock-solid output heat measure). - Jed
