This is the same old run-around we get from Levi, including willful
withholding of information.
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Michele Comitini michele.comit...@gmail.com wrote:
Nope. Even if I did, it would prove nothing, since anyone can write a
It seems Krivit has Rossi-isms of his own.
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 1:45 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Terry sez:
Our analysis shows a possible energy gain of one to two times.
end excerpt
I wonder who constitutes Our?
Expanding on Terry's
It irritates me to no end. All the rational evidence we have been presented
supports the claim that water spills through the outlet.
However you wish to hold fast the assurtion (am I correct in this?) that
this does not happen, but that liquid water exits as suspended droplets and
maybe a little
Beautiful photo montage of a number of hot fusion's devastating failures.
None of them had a ghost of a chance:
http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/38167/?nlid=nldlynld=2011-07-29
How much precious RD resources have been funneled into this abysmal joke
(by the skeptics of LENR) ?
$100
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Not a one of these monstrosities has produced as much excess power as
Rossi,
even if his steam is dripping wet.
Not true. All plasma fusion devices produce excess power. The PPPL produced
about 10 MW for about 0.6 s (~6 MJ).
As far as I know, none has
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
It irritates me to no end. All the rational evidence we have been presented
supports the claim that water spills through the outlet.
No, that cannot be happening. As Storms pointed out, there would be no steam
at the end of the hose. As I pointed out, the
http://www.hereticalbuilders.com/showthread.php?t=522page=6
On Jul 30, 2011 3:50 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
It irritates me to no end. All the rational evidence we have been
presented supports the claim that water spills through the outlet.
No, that cannot be happening. As Storms pointed out,
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
It irritates me to no end. All the rational evidence we have been presented
supports the claim that water spills through the outlet.
I have not seen this evidence. There is a mixture of liquid water and
mist/steam at the
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
It irritates me to no end. All the rational evidence we have been presented
supports the claim that water spills through the outlet.
No, that cannot be happening. As Storms
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
No, that cannot be happening. As Storms pointed out, there would be no
steam at the end of the hose. As I pointed out, the temperature would
immediately fall below boiling. It would be obvious.
That is very
http://blogs.forbes.com/uciliawang/2011/07/20/gms-search-for-a-home-for-used-chevy-volt-batteries/
GM is looking for ways to re-use its Chevy Volt’s lithium-ion
batteries after they have served their purpose or the cars are heading
to the junk yard. Batteries already can be recycled to retrieve
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
How much precious RD resources have been funneled into this abysmal joke
(by the skeptics of LENR) ?
$100 billion from the USA alone (in 2010 dollars) ? Maybe more.
Not a one of these monstrosities has produced as much
Greetings Vortex,
IF my memory is correct there was a hot water test on the Rossi Device.
Also, it appears the the results of the hot water test were. OK.
So IF ...this is true, it seems to make all of the wrangling of the
NERVOUS NELLIES of Cold Fusion-- Pointless.
I am willing
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the same old run-around we get from Levi, including willful
withholding of information.
You make it sound as if this were a police investigation and you are the
District Attorney. Let me set you straight.
1. Levi and I are under no obligation to
From: Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2011 11:19:01 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:History of gigantic boondoggle
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
How much precious RD resources have been funneled into this
time passes news about Piantelli's work.
Thanks for translating this.
Perhaps Piantelli has been spurred into working more quickly and going
commercial quickly by Rossi. Piantelli has been doing this research for
a long time but he has not published many papers. He has been keeping a
Still waiting.
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the same old run-around we get from Levi, including willful
withholding of information.
You make it sound as if this were a police investigation and you
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com wrote:
Greetings Vortex,
IF my memory is correct there was a hot water test on the Rossi Device.
Also, it appears the the results of the hot water test were. OK.
There's no evidence this.
So IF ...this is
Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote:
Francesco Piantelli's problem is that independent replication attempts
failed so far. Piantelli described precisely his reactor in his patents, but
nobody could repeat his results . . .
As far as I know, that is correct. I may have overlooked a
What further amazes me is the degree of disconnect between simple newtonian
physics and everyday life experiences displayed by so many.
Storms, if I recall, misundersood how steam made its way along a hose that
also contained water.
Isn't this highschool physics?
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 5:49 AM,
www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1890
...has he discovered a law of physics hereto unknown but intriguing enough to
spur the imagination for some modern-day Teslas? MIT thinks so, as do a host of
other legitimate laboratories. And so does Thane.
Harry
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, it appears the the results of the hot water test were. OK.
There's no evidence this.
Yes, there is evidence for this. It was published in NyTeknik and in the
news section of LENR-CANR.org. You are not satisfied with this evidence. In
your
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
What further amazes me is the degree of disconnect between simple newtonian
physics and everyday life experiences displayed by so many.
I agree. People seem to have no experience with teapots or steam cleaners.
Storms, if I recall, misundersood how
Dear Angela,
I have asked Piantelli's opinion about these independent
replications with negative results, Perhaps there were no adequate
nanostructures on the surfaces of the Ni rods.
The slogan: a patent can be reproduced by those skilled enough is many
times a void formula. You cannot reproduce
Newtonian physics is generally not a part of everyday life experiences. It
is an abstract generalisation deduced from some idealised situations.
Harry
From: Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2011 2:57:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Wet Steam: Energy
That is an article written for CICAP (kind of italian skeptics society) so
it can be taken seriously. See :
http://www.cicap.org/new/articolo.php?id=273588
Translation http://goo.gl/info/1mgr8#
mic
Il giorno 30/lug/2011 20:56, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com ha
scritto:
Angela Kemmler
Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
Newtonian physics is generally not a part of everyday life experiences. It
is an abstract generalisation deduced from some idealised situations.
Good point. That's why these physics were not discovered until Newton, and
why it took a genius like Newton to
Brian Josephson
July 30th, 2011 at 4:17 AM
October demo
Andrea,
Youve said the 1MW E-cat due in October will be the real test, but in
what way will it be more convincing than the ones done so far? Will it be
done in such a way that people are sure about the amount of water/steam
coming out
Daniel, the fact is the rotor speeds up (experiences angular acceleration) when
it suppose to slow down. The evidence of anomolous acceleration is abundantly
clear and experts acknowledge this. However it is shunned by many experts
because they can't explain it in ordinary terms. They insist on
Marcia Pires
July 30th, 2011 at 11:24 AM
Dear Andrea Rossi,
How much heat of the reactor is absorbed by the water and how much is
absorbed by the solid parts of the e-cat?
Best wishes,
Marcia Pires
Andrea Rossi
July 30th, 2011 at 11:52 AM
Dear Marcia Pires:
The reactor is very well
Andrea Rossi
July 29th, 2011 at 4:59 PM
Dear Lars:
.
The progression of my work, that as you know is focused on the
manufacturing of the 1 MW plant, is very good and we are perfectly in
time for the scheduled delivery in October. You bet. If some skeptic will
tell you that for some reason
From Alan:
Quoting Rossi:
July 29th, 2011 at 4:59 PM
Dear Lars:
.
The progression of my work, that as you know is focused on the
manufacturing of the 1 MW plant, is very good and we are perfectly
in time for the scheduled delivery in October. You bet. If some
skeptic
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 08:20: Joshua Cude wrote
[snip] Are you suggesting that because of the billions gambled on fusion
research,
that money should also be invested in perpetual motion claims? [/snip]
Joshua,
Perpetual motion and violation of COE arguments are fallacious arguments
used by
Frank and Mike. Don't get too excited. The article you linked to is heavily
biased by the rhetoric of James Taylor from the libertarian/right wing
think-tank lobby group, the Heartland Institute. In fact he goes so
ridiculously over the top with his various uses of alarmist (count them!)
that
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/NET370.shtml
Harry
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 6:43 PM, francis froarty...@comcast.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 08:20: *Joshua Cude wrote*
[snip] Are you suggesting that because of the billions gambled on fusion
research,
that money should also be invested in perpetual motion claims? [/snip]
** **
So, according to this:
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3709appendixa4.shtml
We have 383W for the hose and 100W inside the hose. If the flux is 1.5g/s,
we have 75*1.5*4.184 = 470.7W to heat the water up to boiling point. The
total loss is around 950W. The alleged output is 4700W , so we
I met Thane in 2008 in the an undergraduate lab of the facaulty of engineering
University of Ottawa. He was granted the lab space by a generous
electrical engineering professor. (The professor's and/or the University's
generousity ran out in 2010). I and some members of the Ottawa Skeptic
39 matches
Mail list logo
