On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Nope. When you put 800 W into something like this, a large fraction of it
radiates from the cell into the surroundings.
The cell is insulated.
It is too hot to touch
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
element is always completely submerged. I.E. input flow is adjusted so
that it matches evaporation rate.
First of all, the flow rate is not adjusted in any of the demos after
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Well, that would explain the temperature regulation, but it's not exactly
the same, because there is no pump pushing whatever is in the ecat,
vaporized or not, out. In the case of the teapot, the exiting steam
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:
It is important that tea pot does not overflow, because it messes up
calculations, because steam is not dry anymore. Therefore E-Cat's
inner volume has to be big enough
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote:
It is notable that the power input varies depending on the controller
actions, that if the power input (plus any nuclear output heat if any)
should become less than that required to convert all the input water to
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote:
The power is noted to be 770 W. If you assume no nuclear reaction then
that is all there is. It should only take minutes to reach equilibrium.
True. Some say it's really 800W (230V), but still only minutes, as you
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/6/25 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com:
Well it might be if the reactor were at the bottom of a tea pot, and the
output at the top of the pot. But the input and output to the reactor are
both horizontal
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
First, here is my conclusion based on the methodology and resoning below:
If certain conditions are present, one can reduce this to a mass-in, mass
out problem, and you
don't need to measure the volume of steam
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 1:50 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Jeff,
thermometer was calibrated and unlike common belief, boiling point was not
100 degrees, but 99.7°C ± 0.1.
The fact is that steam must be dry if it's temperature is above 100.1 °C ±
0.1 at atmospheric
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 8:58 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Joshua Cude's message of Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:20:48 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
I was talking about running it above boiling, but way below the level
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/6/25 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com
wrote:
2011/6/25 Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com:
Well it might be if the reactor
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
You stated:
But steam at 100C and 1 atmosphere pressure has a density of 0.6 kg /
m^3. It can't be 10 g/m^3.
I thought it would have been clear by how I worded it, but apparently not,
so let me be perfectly
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 2:09 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
The perfect regulation is a much more reliable indication that the fluid is
at the boiling point than any evidence you can get from a probe that
measures temperature and pressure.
Since the probe is what indicates
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com wrote:
Why would you divide the energy to vaporize 1 g of water (starting at
10 C) by the energy to heat it from 10 C to 100 C (liquid)? Seems
random to me.
Because those are the two extremes of a situation that results in
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Josh:
Your off by a factor of 1000 on the saturation mass of water vapor at 100.1
and 1 atm...
So I'll assume that your calc was in kg/m^3, and you forgot to convert to
grams...
NIST has a really nice website for
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Joshua wtote on Saturday, June 25, 2011 11:49 PM:
Okay, due to my randomly selecting an unrealisticly low flow-rate of
10g/sec, I can see where it
could be confusing. Let me try to clear things up...
10 g/s is
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Mysterious AND measured boiling point of water was 99.7±0.1°C. Therefore if
steam temperature is above 100.1±0.1°C, then the steam is dry, because water
cannot remain in liquid phase in normal atmospheric pressure
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Steven:
Another proposal here is that liquid water is ejected out of the chimney,
which may very well
happen. This is certainly possible with the new, smaller e-Cats which have
a much shorter chimney,
but I would
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Good try but you forgot the surface tension. When you boil water in the
kettle then you will get bubbles. Therefore steam can be hotter than actual
boiling point. If you reduce the surface tension or make fine mist
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
Geezus Josh, you're grasping at straws... and obviously flawed ones at
that.
First:
It should be COMPELETLY obvious that we're talking about the
behavior/performance of the system at steady-state -- NOT start-up.
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
Again, I think it would be obvious that ***IF*** the heat production of the
reactor is not enough to vaporize nearly all of the water flowing in each
second, then YES, the chimney will eventually fill up and spill
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
There is a concern that due to the likely rigorous boiling inside, some
(macroscopic) liquid water is being thrown upward and some of it exiting
thru the opening in the side of the chimney...
Depends what you mean by
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
Josh wrote:
they will have seen a mist coming out of the chimney.
No, Kullander specifically states in his report:
The 100 °C temperature is reached at 10:42 and at about 10:45 all the
water is completely
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
I did as you suggest and searched for '2-phase flow', and even refined it
by adding steam quality to the search terms... I'm sorry to disappoint
you, but it only took the first two references I looked at to satisfy
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
So when the reactor fluctuates to the high side, most of that energy is
absorbed by the hydrogen and or water,
If the water absorbs heat, then it either gets hotter, or it changes phase.
If the device is already
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote:
Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad
Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error
and remind myself how very easy it is to shift into criticizing and
judging our
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:09 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Nor does the manufacturer's brochure assert that steam quality can be
measured with their equipment . . .
It said the equipment measures enthalpy. You can't do that unless you know
the quality of the steam. It also
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Look, suppose for the sake of argument you are right. Suppose the steam is
much wetter than Galantini thought. It makes no difference! It cannot be
so wet there is no anomalous heat.
But a small amount of anomalous
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 1:06 AM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
Peter Ekstrom's analysis:
“the E-Cat does not produce excess Energy”.
http://www.fysik.org/WebSite/fragelada/resurser/cold_fusion_krivit.pdf
Rossi responds to Peter Ekstrom's analysis:
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
*1. Not all of the water is turned to steam.*
If applied power is making all of steam, the following would be observed.
Applied power = 745 watt
Flow rate = 7 liter/hr = 1.94 g/sec
Power to heat water to
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com wrote:
Rossi has not done a definitive test. I don't trust him on his input
mass flow rate (2 grams per second) . . .
You don't trust that he can read a digital weight scale?
I
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Experts in those meters such as Galantini say you are wrong.
I don't believe Galantini is an expert in those meters. And anyway,
academics can be wrong.
The manufacturer's brochure says you are wrong.
No. They make
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
All steam is dry steam when it leaves the surface of water by
definition.
Where is this definition given? There are very clear, well-defined, concepts
related to steam, dry steam, wet steam, and steam quality. A simple
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wrong. Steam can be wet.
No sir.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam
Yes Sir. From that article:
but such wet-steam conditions have
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Steam can be wet. Live with it.
Semantics, I know; but, wet steam is not steam:
steam
[steem]
–noun
1.
water in the form of an invisible gas or vapor.
Water in the form of an invisible gas or vapor can have
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Wet steam just exist when there is a 2-fluid flow,
No, it can exist under a variety of condtions.
Steam is dry.
Some steam is dry. Some steam is wet. You just admitted steam can be wet
above.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Only inside the hose. Outside it, it is clean.
Why should it change as it leaves the hose?
Either way, both at horizontal and vertical inclinations of the hose, at
100C and 6m/s, no more than 15% of the mass can be
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Steam can be wet. Live with it.
Water cannot leave the surface of water. It must be in a gaseous
form.
Drop a stone into a pond to prove
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Really, the water exits the reactor by a mechanical method.
The water, in whatever state, is forced through by a pump. That's a
mechanical method.
The water either overflows the pipe as a liquid or leaves as a gas.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:51 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Josh, Correct me if I'm wrong but I gather you believe (or are
convinced of the fact) that the videos you viewed proved that tiny
suspended condensed water droplets (mist) was observed being
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Take a look at Fig. 2.2.3 (about 2/3rds of the way down the page) on this
website:
http://www.spiraxsarco.com/resources/steam-engineering-tutorials/steam-engineering-principles-and-he
at-transfer/what-is-steam.asp
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 5:26 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
From Josh:
This is not
based so much on whether it's visible at the end of the
hose, but on the speed and volume of the gas, once it
does become visible. And in the case of the Lewan run,
on
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 8:37 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.comwrote:
From Josh,
For brevity sake I'm just going to focus on the following:
I don't think the quality of the video is good enough to judge that.
Fair enough.
Take a look at figure 2.2.3 on the site
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
What if the E-Cat is operating with a 98% 'full charge' on the
heat-capacitor? It would still have considerable capacity left to absorb
heat fluctuations without significantly changing steam temperature.
It
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
Assuming the boiling is always happening at the same pressure, you can
extend the horizontal line B-C to the temperature axis and treat that as the
temperature of boiling. Wet steam is present only AT the temperature of
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
The inconclusive epithet is from roughly twenty years ago, and we can see
this crumbling by the time of the 2004 U.S. DoE review, where excess heat
evidence was considered conclusive by half the panel, and it's
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 4:23 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua,
You may recall, I conjectured:
... how can this newly formed H2O gas be
expected to be much above 100 C if it doesn't
have a chance to hang around long enough to
absorb additional
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
There is not the slightest chance the government will make a mistake
measuring 450 W in and 20,000 W out. No engineer or scientists on planet
earth could make a mistake on that scale.
Perhaps not, but if it's true,
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Take a look at this video, simulating steam production at 1200W with a
4m long hose:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVwINedGR_Q
It does look like the swedish's magzine video, NyTeknik, including the
weird sounds,
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com
wrote:
If considered that in E-Cat there is constantly flowing cool water to
replenish boiled water, then it is quite obvious that 2.5 kilowatt is
very much possible with Mats' E-Cat.
I disagree. Heating the constant
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is a technological hoax that bamboozled $150 million from high
officials in oil companies and governments. I did not realize such large,
high-level hoaxes existed:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.comwrote:
5. The pressure in the ecat cannot be room pressure, or the fluid
would not flow out of the ecat into the room.
As I understand the operation, fluid does not flow out. Steam is venting
from a hole in the device.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
This document, “the E-Cat does not produce excess Energy” has some some
strange assertions.
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Alan J Fletcher wrote:
[KRIVIT] Professors Sven Kullander, retired from Uppsala University, and
Hanno Essen, with the Royal Institute of Technology, endorsed Rossi's
claimed technology in a news story on Feb. 23,
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
In many discussions of this, it was assumed that the only issue was steam
quality. If we were to assume very wet steam, say 20% by weight, we would
then be able to infer excess heat, assuming complete boiling
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Nevertheless, this report from Kullander and Essen could be interpreted
quite in line with what Krivit is claiming:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
Semantics. Yes, steam can be much wetter than 20%, particularly after
condenstation, under marginal conditions it could approach 100%. This,
however, wouldn't be called steam. It would be called hot water.
Yes,
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
wrote:
Semantics. Yes, steam can be much wetter than 20%, particularly after
condenstation, under marginal conditions it could approach
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
It is all nonsense and bullshit. The 18-hour tests with flowing water
proved that the large cell is producing ~17 kW.
If it did, then the steam should have been a few hundred degrees C in the
January test, and not
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 11:44 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
From Jed and Josh:
It is all nonsense and bullshit. The 18-hour tests with
flowing water proved that the large cell is producing
~17 kW.
If it did, then the steam should have been a few
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
**
JC stated:
...and the heated walls are at a higher temperature. So, it must get
hotter.
What makes you think that the walls of the vertical section (i.e., the
'chimney') are at a higher temperature than the walls
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 2:15 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua,
I waited in anticipation to see if you could help explain to me the
errors I might have made in my reasoning.
And yet you responded to everything except the part where I explained the
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/7/15 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com:
I must say, I'm appalled at how much time has been wasted on
inadequate demonstrations.
This is surprising considering that anyone here has never said
anything
On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 4:50 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
My perception on the reactor core has always implied that the volume
of water entering the reactor core could vary.
Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mistaken. Rossi uses a
pump
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua apparently wrote:
Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mistaken.
Rossi uses a pump designed to maintain a constant flow, and all
his calculations (including Krivit's video of him calculating
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:10 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
From my POV it is conceivable that Rossi, while monitoring the January
demonstration, might have occasionally adjusted water inflow to help
maintain a consistent volume of water within the
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.comwrote:
Hello group,
Andrea Rossi
July 17th, 2011 at 1:54 PM
Dear Paul Story:
Very funny: this clown, named Julian Brown, wrote me saying he was an
officer of the Patent Office and that he wanted give me suggestions.
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 03:27 AM 7/17/2011, Damon Craig wrote:
Uhhh. I give up. How is a kink in a thermal curve evidence of exothermic
activity?
It's unclear what Damon is responding to. However, a change in the slope of
a
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 12:40 AM 7/17/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
(Remember the skeptics evolution as a phenomenon is proved:
1. It's not true; 2. It may be true, but not important. 3. It's true and
important, but we have always known
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
I know quite what Rossi would have said: Too dangerous. I emptied it just
now, so it's safe to hold this up, but water condenses inside the hose,
because the steam
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Julian Brown wrote:
Basically, the whole set up defies even approximate quantitative
calorimetric analysis.
This is nonsensical speculation. E-Cat is designed to be a standard
boiling water reactor and boiling
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
You've apparently missed a lot of the discussion here. There is an issue
with wet vs dry steam, and you are probably correct about the steam value,
but all bets are off if water actually starts to overflow.
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
Cude may be making an obvious error, assuming power figures from one test
apply to another.
No. I'm objecting to Rothwell making exactly that assumption.
I have no problem with Rothwell arguing that the
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed, it's important to read statements from critics like Cude very
carefully.
No can do. He is in my kill file. I only see snippets when other people
quote him. Life is too short to read such blather and nonsense.
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not argue with ghosts.
I don't blame you, after the pathetic wet steam is not possible salvo.
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote:
Dear people,
How can we make sure that 1MW e-cat is true during a presentation?
That's a good question. Individual ecats have produced nothing but
controversy. If the MW reactor is just multiple ecats, and they use
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.comwrote:
So most of the time he now performs stress tests on his modules in
self-sustaining mode, apparently. That's an amazing claim! Just
demonstrating one of those running for a reasonable amount of time would
have
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 09:14 PM 7/17/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
So most of the time he now performs stress tests on his modules in
self-sustaining mode, apparently. That's an amazing claim! Just
demonstrating one of those running
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Jed, this is dead wrong. This is obvious. Suppose you have *almost* full
vaporization, not all the water is boiling, so water level in the E-Cat will
rise.
Almost full vaporization is a
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
2011/7/18 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com:
P.J van Noorden wrote:
It is very important to notice that water boils at 100.5 C when the
outside air pressure is 1030 mBar, which can be the case when a high
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:20 AM, P.J van Noorden pjvannoor...@caiway.nlwrote:
To conventionally explain the boilingpoint of 100.5 degrC the backpressure
in the Ecat must have been 30mbar (for a boilingpoint of 99.6degC) and
20mbar for a boilingpoint of 99.9degC. This compares to resp 30.6
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
P.J van Noorden wrote:
It is very important to notice that water boils at 100.5 C when the
outside air pressure is 1030 mBar, which can be the case when a high
pressure system is covering Italy . . .
In the April
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
P.J van Noorden wrote:
the airpressure on April 28th 2011 was 1011 mbar, so the boilingpoint must
have been 99.9 degC. The difference in boilingtemperature can be
explained by the accuracy of the thermometer (+/- 0.4
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 12:55 AM 7/18/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:
a...@lomaxdesign.coma**b...@lomaxdesign.com a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
At 09:14 PM 7/17/2011, Akira
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
How do you take a 30 minute glance?
Well, Brown said in his report that Rossi showed him heat after death for
about 2 minutes. (He also told me this.) That's more than 30
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Abd wrote:
Whatever is the cause, that the temperature is nailed shows that there is
steam and water in
equilibrium.
It's only been recently that Rossi admits to achieving completely dry
steam,
The claim is
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
In all the talk about the start up slope and thermal mass, one can almost
forget the metals. Here
are the specific heats for most of the materials that make up the majority
of the e-Cat:
- Hydrogen (gas) 14.30
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Robert Leguillon
robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
So not only is very wet steam with 95% liquid by mass possible, but there
are ways to measure it accurately. Not with an RH probe, though.
Sorry, but some people seem to think that horse is still
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
In my opinion, Kullander made some mistakes, and he should simply
acknowledge them and move on.
Where, in his report, are these mistakes? Someone here claimed that he did
not measure
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
1 minute after turn off, boiling was mostly stopped. T1 99.7 ~ 99.8°C
(marginally hotter than before turn off, because the metal pot was still
hot). T2 98.7°C
2 minutes after turn off. T1 99.3°C, T2 97.7°C
7
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
I forgot to mention there were ~2 L of water in the pot.
I wrote:
3 Omega GT-736590 thermometers, red liquid, total immersion, -10 to 100°C,
marked in 1°C increments
Correction: -10 to 110°C
Regarding the
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
I expect it is well mixed from the heat alone. There are gradients in a pot
of hot water and it is hot near the bottom, but the water moves around
pretty quickly.
There are gradients in pure water, sure. Always below
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see if it
will float over a boiling pot of water.
Extra question answered, free of charge. I won't bother trying it, because
it won't float,
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
200W from the hose
Maybe.
and 200W from the e cat structure, at lest.
I don't believe it. Rossi never claims it, and this 200W would figure in his
power calculation (the losses in the hose don't), and he never
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 03:58 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
In the paper they show how their technique can measure steam quality to
within a few per cent between 5% and 80%. 5% corresponds to 5 % steam by
mass, and yes
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
Sure, if you sufficiently obstruct the flow, you could lift styrofoam
easily. I was referring to a *piece* of styrofoam, presumably small. And the
question was about bouyancy, not about flow. You can support a
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
This is probably correct analysis. I think that this is possible to
calculate fairly accurately, if we know the diameter of opening for the
hose. As boiling point of water inside E-Cat is what is measured with the
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com wrote:
Why don t people realize that Ni-H LENR ..has intrinisc merit.
Because people like to see evidence before they accept extraordinary
claims.
Also, I think the Dennis Bushnell is quite knowledgeable on this topic.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
The overall question is How much of the water is actually vaporized? And
there isn't an answer. No steps were taken to demonstrate this critical
aspect of the demonstrations.
On this, we are in complete
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote:
Due to these blunders, their measurements were meaningless.
Probably true.
However,
there is one useful information in that March experiment, what has
been ignored. They observed that E-Cat heated water for
1 - 100 of 906 matches
Mail list logo
