Kyle Mcallister kyle_mcallis...@yahoo.com wrote:
What people ought to understand, if (a BIG if) Rossi's machine really does
work, is that the radiation emission from it (whatever it is), is probably
going to be far less dangerous than the radionucleides emitted from burning
coal.
I agree.
Most processes do not scale linearly and offer new engineering
challenges at certain cusps. A good example could be the nanopowder
core of the reactor. If heat is generated uniformly within the core
and extracted only at the surface of the core the process can mimic
the heat enginee of corpulent
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Most processes do not scale linearly and offer new engineering
challenges at certain cusps. A good example could be the nanopowder
core of the reactor.
This is the kind of thing that may cause problems in a scale-up. But I think
the plan is to make
Yes, this is the way Tesla made their successful battery.
T
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sun, 30 Jan 2011 11:23:48 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Most processes do not scale linearly and offer new engineering
challenges at certain cusps. A good example could be the nanopowder
core of the reactor.
This is the
Most of us here on the forum agree that if the Rossi device is not faked, it
is the most important energy invention since the Manhattan project. This is
what Mills had claimed for his work about 6 months ago, but all of a sudden
BLP is 'eating dust' and stalled at the gate in the metaphorical
Most of us here on the forum agree that if the Rossi device is
not faked, it is the most important energy invention since the
Manhattan project. This is what Mills had claimed for his work
about 6 months ago, but all of a sudden BLP is 'eating dust' and
stalled at the gate in the metaphorical
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Think about it. It would not surprise me to see this project sequestered,
and with perhaps with Rossi’s full cooperation. He would be a fool to not to
go along with such a plan.
I think it has too great a military value
Good analysis, Jones however I would add this:
- the cell shows that 2 problems are solved- i*ntensity* and *
reproducibility*however what remains is *scale up*. A la prima vista it
seems that the 1 MW demo will be an assembly of say, 125 cells working
together. I hope not...I am an engineer and I
From Peter:
...
If you look carefully to Mills's papers he was more focused on
scale-up. Let's wait the two macro demonstrations - Rossi's and
BLP's they will be in the same time, almost. Interesting times..
Can anyone spell: p-a-t-e-n-t w-a-r?
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
peatbog peat...@teksavvy.com wrote:
Once Rossi
comes across with a convincing demo or the mw power plant, or
even does a long run of the 12kw device, it won't be long before
people figure out what the catalyst is and build the devices for
themselves.
Patents will be a joke. No country
Yes, Peter there is the looming issue of scale-up.
You say: it seems that the 1 MW demo will be an assembly of say, 125 cells
working together. I hope not...I am an engineer and I don't like the idea.
Yes, that was my initial reaction as well. However, if this device is
basically driven by
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sat, 29 Jan 2011 12:04:26 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
I think it has too great a military value to be hidden.
[snip]
The military value is a pittance compared to the positive impact it could have
on society as a whole. Besides, if you reduce population pressure
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Sat, 29 Jan 2011 19:52:33 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
Good analysis, Jones however I would add this:
- the cell shows that 2 problems are solved- i*ntensity* and *
reproducibility*however what remains is *scale up*. A la prima vista it
seems that the 1 MW demo will be
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 29 Jan 2011 08:28:55 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
Think about it. It would not surprise me to see this project sequestered,
and with perhaps with Rossi's full cooperation. He would be a fool to not to
go along with such a plan.
...which of course doesn't
mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
Well consider this, a series-parallel arrangement has advantages. If one of
the
parallel lines has a failure, then you just have somewhat reduced power
output
while it gets repaired. If you have a failure in a large single unit then
you
lose power completely
I think North Korea and other militaristic nations are reading every word on
Rossi's blog and putting it together with other information like we are
doing here on Vortex. These nations
Recognize the economical and military potential to winning this race and are
far less influenced by big oil and
Previously, when I suggested that large sums of money should be spent
ensuring the safety of the Rossi system, someone here objected that:
1. It would not be fair.
2. Rossi does not have that kind of money.
3. It would delay the introduction of the system.
Let me address these points:
1. It is
--- On Sat, 1/29/11, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Big Picture
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Saturday, January 29, 2011, 4:57 PM
This is an unknown nuclear reaction for crying out loud! A NUCLEAR
REACTION
In reply to Kyle Mcallister's message of Sat, 29 Jan 2011 22:03:44 -0800 (PST):
Hi,
[snip]
I guess all I have to say is, all the problems of worrying about convincing
the public that the thing (whatever it is) is safe, lie ultimately in
educating them in science.
[snip]
That's an impossible
http://www.documaga.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/scaleofuniverse.swf
At 1.7m you are close to the middle. Kewl!
T
21 matches
Mail list logo
