Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Bob Higgins]

When you say that "Cold Fusion at 300C would be fine for automobiles ...",
you have to take into account the fact that the 300C is the loaded
temperature of the system.  In RF technology, it is commonly known that to
get maximum transfer of power from a real source having a real source
impedance (in a linear system), the load resistance must match the source
resistance.  If you have a 50 ohm source, then you apply a 50 ohm load to
extract the maximum power from that source. But, the operating voltage
across the 50 ohm load is 1/2 of the voltage of the unloaded source.

So, in any practical LENR system, the fuel temperature will be much higher
than the actual operating temperature of the working fluid (maybe twice as
high).  I think a better FUEL temperature range for LENR would be in the
400-600C range for an apparatus with a working temperature of 300C.

On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 6:46 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> I wrote:
>
>>
>> Not that high. It is roughly at the level of a fission reactor core,
>> which is actually a lot cooler and less dense than, say, inside an internal
>> combustion engine cylinder, or a gas turbine. The temperature of a fission
>> reactor pellet is around 300 deg C.
>>
>
> Cold fusion at 300 deg C would be fine for automobiles, railroad
> locomotives or marine engines. The engine would be somewhat bulkier than
> today's internal combustion engines but on the other hand it would not need
> a fuel tank, and the engine block would not need to be as heavy, because it
> would not have to withstand repeated internal explosions. I expect a steam
> turbine of some sort would be the best first generation design. That is
> what various experts on heat engines have told me. You would need a
> condenser for vehicles of any sort. You cannot keep replenishing the water,
> the way people did with a Stanley Steamer automobile.
>
> Actually, even coal fired turbines have condensers. It improves
> performance. See:
>
> http://www.electrical4u.com/steam-condenser-of-turbine/
>
> Still, generating electricity uses up prodigious amounts of water.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Eric Walker]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

Piantelli's measurement of the Ni-H reaction shows prompt charged high
> energy protons.
>

Indeed.  As well as "heavy particles" (my vote: alphas) [1].

In saying that little in the way of prompt charged particles has been
observed I am close to parroting the teaching that charged particles are
not commensurate with excess heat. David Nagel wrote the following, which
is interesting to consider:

Temporal and quantitative correlations between excess heat and both fast
> particles and photons have been sought in a few cases. Such experiments are
> challenging. First, there has to be production of excess power, which is
> not always possible to achieve. Even when there is excess power production,
> it is commonly unsteady as a function of time. Good equipment for
> measurement of energetic particles is relatively expensive and not widely
> available. It is well known that the number of fast neutrons or charged
> particles emitted from LENR experiments is generally small. [2]


So the experiments are challenging and require expensive equipment.  The
last point about neutrons is easy to agree with; harder so with charged
particles.

There are people who will argue vociferously that prompt charged particles
are not part of the main process or processes in LENR.  I suppose there are
always a few people who will argue one or another position vociferously.
Such people are entitled to their opinion.  I myself find this avenue of
investigation very interesting. I have many questions:  how sure are we
about the limits on prompt charged particles?  Has an easy generalization
been allowed to slip through without a proper investigation?  (If so, this
would not be the first time.)  In those experiments that have been done, in
which was there a lot of excess heat?  What about the so-called "hamburger"
tracks seen in some of the CR-39 experiments?  Etc.

Eric


[1] https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6id5Hf-xMWOYXVjekJCN1ZkQk0/view,
slide 30.
[2] http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/Nagel118.pdf

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Bob Higgins]

Piantelli's measurement of the Ni-H reaction shows prompt charged high
energy protons.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Eric Walker  wrote:

>
> It is true that little in the way of prompt charged particles have been
> observed in LENR. But that says little about what Rossi may be seeing.
>
> Eric
>

RE: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Chris Zell]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/why-is-tax-evasion-so-bad-in-italy/2011/11/25/gIQA4NJ3vN_blog.html

Tax evasion is Italy’s favorite sport.  Everything has a context.  Amazing how 
often these ‘scientific’ discussions end up going ad hominem.

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jed Rothwell]

a.ashfield  wrote:


> Jones,
>
> You are wrong and libelous in saying Rossi was convicted of fraud. He was
> convicted of tax evasion.


Well, that seems like a minor error by Jones, not libel. Fraud is not much
worse than tax evasion. Now, if Jones had said "murder" that would be
libelous.

However, the conviction was thrown out by the courts. Rossi is no longer
guilty of anything, any more than I am. If Jones is aware of that fact then
I guess his statements are somewhat libelous, or at least uncalled for.

People who have experience doing business in Italy tell me that unfair
convictions, government corruption, and interference by the Mafia are
common. It sounds like doing business in the U.S. in the late 19th century.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Eric Walker]

Re the jet engine claim, if Rossi is seeing prompt charged particles, this
could have led him to speculate about the possibility of a jet engine.  If
the Papp engine was real, it is not difficult to imagine that it was
powered by having prompt charged particles (e.g., alpha particles)
momentarily ionize the working gas, which would lead to an abrupt
expansion. The working gas in the case of the Papp engine was confined, but
that need not be the case.

It is true that little in the way of prompt charged particles have been
observed in LENR. But that says little about what Rossi may be seeing.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Roarty, Francis X]

Frank,
… hotter on outside than inside could correlate with 5D Calvert theories, 
Axil’s citation about radiation not measured nearby outer reactor wall but some 
readings made at a distance – as you say black hole or relativistic physics 
where radiation might be displaced temporally while still occupying our same 3d 
spatial coordinates as the reactor and immediate surroundings.  If shrunken 
hydrogen in a lattice is relativistic for the reasons predicted by Naudts then 
emitted radiation would travel along the hypotenuse between time and space 
steadily returning to our same time coordinates but  losing power at what it 
perceives as the square of the distance while we perceive nothing  until the 
Lorentzian effects dissipate so that our equipment  can detect it {displaced 
out away from reactor walls]. IMHO this  isn’t the same as relativistic 
velocity of hydrogen ejected from the suns corona where the hydrogen is moving 
relative to a stationary background.. this is negative equivalent velocity 
where the environment is moving around an essentially slow moving hydrogen atom 
causing it to shrink and decay rapidly from our perspective – the escaping 
radiation from any reactions in this environment are still traveling thru this 
Ventorii like area of space time caused by vacuum suppression of the lattice 
and tapestry of Casimir geometry. I think this would explain a lot, anomalous 
decay rates and difficulty in measuring radiation at the source but I am not 
sure what happens to radiation traveling thru the extremes of Casimir 
geometry.. Experiments with lasers across the “mouth” of Casimir plates 
detected very little dilation but I think this was flawed implementation – like 
traveling straight across the bay of a river those experiments would not see 
the real tidal effects where the waterway narrows and whitewater provides a 
tapestry of different accelerations.
Fran

From: Frank Znidarsic [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 12:59 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

The whole thing makes sense if you take black hole physics, Casimir cavities, 
and shrunken atoms into account.

-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>>
To: vortex-l mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>>
Sent: Sun, Dec 27, 2015 12:54 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week
Whopper of the Week
1)  140 patents in progress
2)  Direct electricity or heat – either one or both
3)  Jet engine application
4)  Fully Robotic factory to make fuel wafers
5)  Reactor hotter on outside than inside
6)  No fuel module replaced in last 300 days
Please add your own favorite miracle to the growing list …

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[a.ashfield]

Jones,

You are wrong and libelous in saying Rossi was convicted of fraud. He 
was convicted of tax evasion.  Considering how his feedstock was 
retroactively classified as hazardous, of course he was in financial 
distress.


Will you admit you were TOTALLY wrong and apologize to those you have 
insulted if it turns out the 1 MW plant did in fact work with a COP>6  
in March 2016?  There is an independent referee as well as the customer 
who is paying for the output, to back up any claim.

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jed Rothwell]

Alain Sepeda  wrote:


> I take Rossi's statement as an indication that they can see openings to
>> create a propulsion unit for airplanes.
>>
> ...
>
> As I understood, the term "Jet Reactor" seems more to mean a "Brayton
> turbine", probably closed cycle like the old nuclear reactor planes.
>

All gas turbine engines are Brayton turbines. See:

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/brayton.html

I agree the fission powered turbine engines might be a model for cold
fusion engines. However, this is tiny, tiny fraction of the total energy
market, and it can only be addressed by experts at places like GE and Rolls
Royce decades from now. I do not think Rossi should devote attention to it
now. It is a distraction. Here is what I mean by "distraction":

Imagine it is December 17, 1903. Wilbur Wright writes in his diary: "we
were planning to fly today but instead we decide to spend the whole day
brainstorming about retractable landing gear on airplanes."

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Alain Sepeda]

2015-12-27 23:45 GMT+01:00 Lennart Thornros :

> I take Rossi's statement as an indication that they can see openings to
> create a propulsion unit for airplanes.
>
...

As I understood, the term "Jet Reactor" seems more to mean a "Brayton
turbine", probably closed cycle like the old nuclear reactor planes.

Brayton turbine are the most dense, but yes it requires high temperature.
If you accept the nameplate temperature of 1200-1400C (whether it was
measured at lugano is a question, but assuming E-cat is real this
temperature must not be incoherent for Rossi, or he would have informed the
testers) a brayton turbine is not so absurd.
Even the temperature observed at Ferarra (confirmed by TC) would allow
Brayton cycle.

beside that as said here the biggest problem maybe cooling.
there are bleeding edge technology that I've seen few years ago for high
density airflow radiators. Heat to power conversion is really the most
complex engineering problem. I'm more confident in LENR nanotech
improvement once billions are flowing, because billion have flown for
turbines since decades.

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:

Definition of “whopper”
>
> 1.   something unusually large or otherwise extreme of its kind
>
> 2.   an extravagant or monstrous lie.
>
>
>
> Which one applies here?
>

For most of the things you listed, neither applies. I do not see any reason
to doubt that they are working on many patents, or that the machine will
run for 300 days on a single charge of fuel. As I said, that seems too
short a time.

If he said they already have a robotic factory -- that's controversial. If
he said they are planning to build one, that's how any high tech product in
the 21st century is manufactured. No one would think of manufacturing this
sort of thing any other way. There is nothing controversial about it.

The reactor being hotter on the outside is a little surprising but it
violates no laws of physics.


It is astounding that Rothwell can admit on the one hand: “I do not take
> his claims seriously. I think they are more stream-of-consciousness than
> lies,” and then proceed to defend those extreme claims which have no basis
> in fact and make serious scientists think everyone here is a crank.
>

I am not defending anything. Everyone knows that Rossi says all kinds of
strange things in his blog. I have no idea what is true and what isn't. I
do not know what he tells the people at IH. In any case, most of the
statements on your list are not extreme. I doubt any scientist thinks that
planning a robotic factory makes Rossi a crank. Or writing patent
applications.



> This lack of character in a main player is not the way science should
> proceed.
>

Well, he is an odd character. I agree that nothing about Rossi is how
science should proceed. But this is not science. This is how commercial
development undertaken by an eccentric inventor proceeds. Read about
Edison, for example, and you will see that he told even more exaggerations
and outright lies.


We demand personal integrity in scientists – and Rossi provides almost none.
>

He is no scientist, that's for sure. You will find precious little personal
integrity in people such as Edison. He was a classic 19th century "sharp
dealer" who ripped off investors and partners, and infuriated many people
-- often for no reason. Sort of like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates or Donald
Trump. Highly successful, single minded people tend to be ruthless. Some
are even psychopaths. Rossi is a lot more human and honest than, say, Steve
Jobs.



> It is a huge mistake to believe that a failure by Rossi dooms the field.
>

I don't believe that.



> In fact, that scenario is exactly my expectation. We will see AR implode
> this Spring . . .
>

You seem to have more inside information than I do. Either that or your
predictions are based entirely on your own opinions. Anyone can have an
opinion about anything. That is not a strong foundation for a prediction of
this nature.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jed Rothwell]

I wrote:

>
> Not that high. It is roughly at the level of a fission reactor core, which
> is actually a lot cooler and less dense than, say, inside an internal
> combustion engine cylinder, or a gas turbine. The temperature of a fission
> reactor pellet is around 300 deg C.
>

Cold fusion at 300 deg C would be fine for automobiles, railroad
locomotives or marine engines. The engine would be somewhat bulkier than
today's internal combustion engines but on the other hand it would not need
a fuel tank, and the engine block would not need to be as heavy, because it
would not have to withstand repeated internal explosions. I expect a steam
turbine of some sort would be the best first generation design. That is
what various experts on heat engines have told me. You would need a
condenser for vehicles of any sort. You cannot keep replenishing the water,
the way people did with a Stanley Steamer automobile.

Actually, even coal fired turbines have condensers. It improves
performance. See:

http://www.electrical4u.com/steam-condenser-of-turbine/

Still, generating electricity uses up prodigious amounts of water.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jed Rothwell]

Lennart Thornros  wrote:


> I might have missed something but I thought LENR has high energy density.
>

Not that high. It is roughly at the level of a fission reactor core, which
is actually a lot cooler and less dense than, say, inside an internal
combustion engine cylinder, or a gas turbine. The temperature of a fission
reactor pellet is around 300 deg C. A gas turbine runs at ~900 deg C. See:

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Power-Reactors/Nuclear-Power-Reactors/

*Water or heavy water *must be maintained at very high pressure (1000-2200
psi, 7-15 MPa, 150 atmospheres) to enable it to function well above 100°C,
up to 345°C, as in present reactors. This has a major influence on reactor
engineering. However, supercritical water around 25 MPa can give 45%
thermal efficiency – as at some fossil-fuel power plants today with outlet
temperatures of 600°C, and at ultra supercritical levels (30+ MPa) 50% may
be attained.

Aerospace engines call for the highest possible power density, and very
high temperatures. Perhaps a cold fusion engine could have less power
density than a liquid fuel combustion engine. You could make it bigger and
less efficient because you do not have to carry chemical fuel. But even at
that, I do not think any system demonstrated up to now would work.

An earth-to-orbit rocket is the most demanding aerospace application. It is
not clear whether a Pd or Ni cold fusion reaction can even occur with
enough power density for this. Deep space propulsion systems, on the other
hand, would be easy with cold fusion, as Eugene Mallove pointed out. The
specific impulse is out-of-this-world.

Something like a propeller driven C-130 transport airplane could perhaps
soon be be made with cold fusion as the primary energy source. Today's
C-130 is a turbo-prop (a gas turbine engine turning a propeller). That has
a top speed of 368 mph, much slower than a jet airplane.

Even if you can make this work, it would take many years to develop it to
the point where it would be safe enough for manned aircraft or spacecraft,
as I said. Small unmanned craft (drones) are another matter.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[a.ashfield]

Bob Cook,
There is no doubt about the meaning when the title of the post is 
Whopper of the Week.


I wish Vortex didn't shuffle the order of the posts.  My post about the 
third one originally.

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Lennart Thornros]

Jones,
I agree about your statement about supporting LENR. I do think that just
now Rossi is the best shoot we have. Worship is not involved. Neither does
an opinion (or lack thereof) imply anything about the quality of others in
this group or outside.
I do disagree that LENR will will be regarded as valid if Rossi fails. You
 are saying that LENR is valid anyhow. That might be true but it will be
more uphill than it has so far - I think we agree that it is too much
slanted the wrong way already?
I do not know Rossi. I think from what I have read that he has qualities,
which I easily can recognize That is not making sure that his statements
are built on solid ground (integrity). There are many (most) entrepreneurs
/ risk-takers that have a high level of integrity, unfortunately the
opposite exists also. The same as with scientists.
You that Rossi will not succeed. I believe and hope he succeed.Our
differences in that regard does not matter much. It is what it is and I
have patient and will wait and see the outcome.
As we made no bet ( I do not even want to) there is no personal gain if I
am right. Therefore I really should just say nothing. What worries me is
that you think Rossi will fail and even indicate some kind of gleefulness
over that. First of all it has no more validation than the issues you are
questioning about Rossi, secondly and more important it will hurt LENR's
future.
Nobody needs con-artists. However, they are everywhere and are hard to sort
out, they would not be con-artist if they where, by definition. I see no
reason to judge one person just before he says he will give us evidence. At
least wait until you hear the excuses and the blaming of others.
I like your  sentence in the end end; "In short, no one can be sure that
Rossi is not the hi-tech messiah that his loyal fans seem to believe.
Either way, we should know fairly soon." I just think it is far from being
a fan or worship.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Definition of “whopper”
>
> 1.   something unusually large or otherwise extreme of its kind
>
> 2.   an extravagant or monstrous lie.
>
>
>
> Which one applies here?
>
>
>
> Let me make one thing clear. LENR (the field of inquiry) is … or should be
> what we seek to support – not a controversial inventor and certainly not
> some kind of warped hero-worship. LENR is valid, even if Rossi proves to be
> a con-man, and that could easily be the case.
>
> It is astounding that Rothwell can admit on the one hand: “I do not take
> his claims seriously. I think they are more stream-of-consciousness than
> lies,” and then proceed to defend those extreme claims which have no basis
> in fact and make serious scientists think everyone here is a crank.
>
>
>
> This lack of character in a main player is not the way science should
> proceed. We demand personal integrity in scientists – and Rossi provides
> almost none. It is a huge mistake to believe that a failure by Rossi dooms
> the field.
>
>
>
> In fact, that scenario is exactly my expectation. We will see AR implode
> this Spring, and shortly thereafter, we will see LENR blossom –despite his
> failure and the extreme funk of the loyal followers.
>
>
>
> Put simply- there is ample evidence in the reality of LENR but there is no
> valid scientific evidence that Rossi has ever demonstrated a megawatt
> device, nor even a watt device at high gain, nor that he even has a real
> “customer” who is hosting a year-long demo. This could all be a product of
> an unscrupulous sociopath’s imagination, along with the silent cooperation
> of gullible investors, who may face legal problems over their lack of
> proper vetting.
>
>
>
> As the time for approaches for that long-awaited report on this mystery
> device, we are probably seeing the expected signs of an artful-dodger and
> something like the old bait-and-shift. That is … if Rossi knows there will
> be no positive report which can be independently verified then he will
> vigorously attempt to deflect the expected criticism by this ploy which he
> is testing out now. Possibly, he will say that he has switched to a new and
> much better design or blah, blah, blah… and blame the lack of the report on
> Cherokee/IH or someone else. The situation is starting to stink already.
>
>
>
> Do not put you faith in Rossi. Instead look to the 25 year history of LENR
> and an evolving understanding of a valid field - which will mature and
> florish, with or without the assorted con-artists. My expectation is that
> it will be “without Rossi” but if not, all the better. Maybe he is a
> genius, a master chef selling the whopper … the one which is not a lie and
> not even bragging, just an indigestible slab of greasy beef served up by
> the only one to understand.
>
>
>
> In short,

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Lennart Thornros]

-Jed,
You said ;

​'​
It is implausible at this stage because jet engines require extremely high
temperatures and power density
​'
​
I might have missed something but I thought LENR has high energy density.
How to get high pressure is an engineering issue if I understand right. I
take Rossi's statement as an indication that they can see openings to
create a propulsion unit for airplanes.Your timeframe is not my experience
(I went to school 300 feet from a jet propulsion lab - probably why I did
not like school so much:).The safety aspect is there regardless of which
application we talk about. I think the progression is directed by the
market so either the easiest or the most profitable. My thinking was that
there is resources in the aerospace industry and they know that ROI takes
its time and the winner is the one that can command the new technology
first and best.
How and why and what can be developed I do not know. I am glad that you can
see the positive possibility p let us hope that Rossi has everything under
control for the sake of LENR and even more for the sake of having cheap
energy helping us even things out between different part of the world
without having to adopt islam.
Exciting is what I think.


Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Jed Rothwell 
wrote:

> Lennart Thornros  wrote:
>
>
>> If he can produce electricity why is a jet engine  implausible?
>>
>
> It is implausible at this stage because jet engines require extremely high
> temperatures and power density -- much more than any other application. It
> take 10 or 20 years to develop a new jet engine, compared to only ~2 to ~5
> years for an internal combustion engine or a generator (depending on the
> size of the machine).
>
> The other reason this is unlikely is that aerospace engines and other
> aerospace components such as radar are the most safety critical and
> expensive machines on earth. They are the last thing you develop, not the
> first. A jet engine failure can easily become catastrophic in a way that no
> automotive or marine engine would be.
>
> If cold fusion pans out I am sure that various aerospace engines will be
> developed, but they will be the last thing people develop, not among the
> first. They will be developed after many decades when the technology is
> mature and billions of other machines have been manufactured and run for
> billions of years cumulatively, making reliability as high as it is for
> today's liquid fuel heat engines.
>
> Near term aerospace applications might include propeller engines for
> drones, cold fusion electric power supplies, and synthetic liquid fuel made
> with cold fusion energy, which would lower the cost of air transportation.
>
> - Jed
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jones Beene]

Definition of “whopper”

1.   something unusually large or otherwise extreme of its kind

2.   an extravagant or monstrous lie.

 

Which one applies here? 

 

Let me make one thing clear. LENR (the field of inquiry) is … or should be what 
we seek to support – not a controversial inventor and certainly not some kind 
of warped hero-worship. LENR is valid, even if Rossi proves to be a con-man, 
and that could easily be the case.

It is astounding that Rothwell can admit on the one hand: “I do not take his 
claims seriously. I think they are more stream-of-consciousness than lies,” and 
then proceed to defend those extreme claims which have no basis in fact and 
make serious scientists think everyone here is a crank.

 

This lack of character in a main player is not the way science should proceed. 
We demand personal integrity in scientists – and Rossi provides almost none. It 
is a huge mistake to believe that a failure by Rossi dooms the field. 

 

In fact, that scenario is exactly my expectation. We will see AR implode this 
Spring, and shortly thereafter, we will see LENR blossom –despite his failure 
and the extreme funk of the loyal followers.

 

Put simply- there is ample evidence in the reality of LENR but there is no 
valid scientific evidence that Rossi has ever demonstrated a megawatt device, 
nor even a watt device at high gain, nor that he even has a real “customer” who 
is hosting a year-long demo. This could all be a product of an unscrupulous 
sociopath’s imagination, along with the silent cooperation of gullible 
investors, who may face legal problems over their lack of proper vetting. 

 

As the time for approaches for that long-awaited report on this mystery device, 
we are probably seeing the expected signs of an artful-dodger and something 
like the old bait-and-shift. That is … if Rossi knows there will be no positive 
report which can be independently verified then he will vigorously attempt to 
deflect the expected criticism by this ploy which he is testing out now. 
Possibly, he will say that he has switched to a new and much better design or 
blah, blah, blah… and blame the lack of the report on Cherokee/IH or someone 
else. The situation is starting to stink already.

 

Do not put you faith in Rossi. Instead look to the 25 year history of LENR and 
an evolving understanding of a valid field - which will mature and florish, 
with or without the assorted con-artists. My expectation is that it will be 
“without Rossi” but if not, all the better. Maybe he is a genius, a master chef 
selling the whopper … the one which is not a lie and not even bragging, just an 
indigestible slab of greasy beef served up by the only one to understand. 

 

In short, no one can be sure that Rossi is not the hi-tech messiah that his 
loyal fans seem to believe. Either way, we should know fairly soon. But if 
there is no positive independent report which can be verified, than Rossi’s 
memory should be dumped faster than you can say Defkalion. Who were they, 
anyway?

 

Jones

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jed Rothwell]

Lennart Thornros  wrote:


> If he can produce electricity why is a jet engine  implausible?
>

It is implausible at this stage because jet engines require extremely high
temperatures and power density -- much more than any other application. It
take 10 or 20 years to develop a new jet engine, compared to only ~2 to ~5
years for an internal combustion engine or a generator (depending on the
size of the machine).

The other reason this is unlikely is that aerospace engines and other
aerospace components such as radar are the most safety critical and
expensive machines on earth. They are the last thing you develop, not the
first. A jet engine failure can easily become catastrophic in a way that no
automotive or marine engine would be.

If cold fusion pans out I am sure that various aerospace engines will be
developed, but they will be the last thing people develop, not among the
first. They will be developed after many decades when the technology is
mature and billions of other machines have been manufactured and run for
billions of years cumulatively, making reliability as high as it is for
today's liquid fuel heat engines.

Near term aerospace applications might include propeller engines for
drones, cold fusion electric power supplies, and synthetic liquid fuel made
with cold fusion energy, which would lower the cost of air transportation.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Bob Cook]

Whopper of the WeekJones`--

I assume this is an optimistic assessment of the status of LENR—not a sarcastic 
one.  

You should clarify what your observation is intended to parlay.

Bob Cook

From: Jones Beene 
Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 9:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

Whopper of the Week

1) 140 patents in progress

2) Direct electricity or heat – either one or both

3) Jet engine application

4) Fully Robotic factory to make fuel wafers

5) Reactor hotter on outside than inside

6) No fuel module replaced in last 300 days


Please add your own favorite miracle to the growing list …

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[a.ashfield]

Jones,
See my post below yours Direct power from E-Cat X 
 for a 
hint of how electricity might be gathered.  Rossi is careful not to 
claim too much as it is obviously early days.


I don't know why you are quite so scathing in what you write about 
Rossi.  As far as I can tell he has advanced the field further than 
anyone else.  Agaricus put it well on Ecatworld.
"It is still remotely possible not only that Rossi is a fantasist but 
that all the other material published on LENR is specious and all those 
involved are frauds or delusional. However, as the probability of this 
now seems to be at the sub-1% level it makes rather more sense to accept 
the data at face value.


If this turns out to be an incorrect assessment, so be it, but from 
where I'm standing it seems more likely that it will be the diehard 
skeptics such as yourself whose assumed superiority will look pretty 
silly in a couple of years or less."


1)  140 patents in progress
2)  Direct electricity or heat - either one or both
3)  Jet engine application
4)  Fully Robotic factory to make fuel wafers
5)  Reactor hotter on outside than inside
6)  No fuel module replaced in last 300 days

1)  Who knows?  You don't
2)  A hint of how this is possible is given in my post
3)  I see little difficulty is using Hot Cats to simply replace the combustion 
on a small gas turbine.
4)  This is the logical route.  The automation machines came from shoe 
manufacturing.
5)  If the outside is hotter because of EM it, is possible.
6)  Unless you have proof that Rossi et Al et Darden are all liars, that is 
what he says.

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Lennart Thornros]

I think those claims are what we have been waiting for. (some of you guys
actively for 25 years). It cannot be right to say it is not serious. I
agree that there is no proof before it is in the market or scientifically
explained / tested. However, you must not disbelieve a final and good
outcome. I think it is trilling and fascinating and can hardly wait until I
can see the next chapter.
If he can produce electricity why is a jet engine  implausible? Even if it
is not engineered or cannot produce trust in comparison with the common
fossil fueled jet engine - I can understand that it is tempting to make
such experiment. It certainly would be a very lucrative market and AR and
IH could easily get much needed funding for further investments (building a
robot factory for example).
If he can get market dominance for a few years he can put in place a
business method that favors his product. I doubt that minimal fuel packages
is a good idea but perhaps the Sony idea (if it is not built by Sony it is
not compatible - maybe an old situation when Sony where dominating laptops).
In short there is finally lots of good news. They are not spoken with
openings for to return with explanations that gives any reasons to doubt
the statements to be both true and serious. I am admiring AR for putting
all his goodwill on the line. A nonperformance would ruin his credibility.
Unfortunately it would also make LENR obsolete for another 25 years.
I think we need to support the home team.:)

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Jed Rothwell 
wrote:

> I gather this is with regard to Rossi's claims. I do not take his claims
> seriously. I think they are more stream-of-consciousness than lies.
>
> Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>> Whopper of the Week
>>
>> 1)  140 patents in progress
>>
> How do you know this is not true? There is a lot of money behind Rossi.
> "In progress" can mean a lot of things. It could mean people are drafting
> patents (which does not cost much), or it could mean patents they have
> actually been filed (which costs a lot).
>
>
>> 2)  Direct electricity or heat – either one or both
>>
>> 3)  Jet engine application
>>
> Implausible at best.
>
>
>> 4)  Fully Robotic factory to make fuel wafers
>>
> Is he saying there is such a factory? Or that they are planning one. I am
> pretty sure there is no factory at present.
>
>
>> 5)  Reactor hotter on outside than inside
>>
> He says this is because of EM fields. That is plausible. It is not a
> violation of any law. The sun is hotter on the outside corona layer than
> the inside.
>
>
>> 6)  No fuel module replaced in last 300 days
>>
> That's entirely likely. I see no reason to doubt this. Any cold fusion
> device should be able to run that long. When the technology matures, they
> should go for years.
>
> The only surprising thing about this is how short the duration is. I
> suspect they may be engineering the thing to need a new fuel module as
> often as possible. In the old days we would say they are hoping to sell the
> razor at cost and then make money selling the blades. Nowadays it would be
> selling the printer at cost and then profiting on the ink cartridges.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jed Rothwell]

I gather this is with regard to Rossi's claims. I do not take his claims
seriously. I think they are more stream-of-consciousness than lies.

Jones Beene  wrote:

> Whopper of the Week
>
> 1)  140 patents in progress
>
How do you know this is not true? There is a lot of money behind Rossi. "In
progress" can mean a lot of things. It could mean people are drafting
patents (which does not cost much), or it could mean patents they have
actually been filed (which costs a lot).


> 2)  Direct electricity or heat – either one or both
>
> 3)  Jet engine application
>
Implausible at best.


> 4)  Fully Robotic factory to make fuel wafers
>
Is he saying there is such a factory? Or that they are planning one. I am
pretty sure there is no factory at present.


> 5)  Reactor hotter on outside than inside
>
He says this is because of EM fields. That is plausible. It is not a
violation of any law. The sun is hotter on the outside corona layer than
the inside.


> 6)  No fuel module replaced in last 300 days
>
That's entirely likely. I see no reason to doubt this. Any cold fusion
device should be able to run that long. When the technology matures, they
should go for years.

The only surprising thing about this is how short the duration is. I
suspect they may be engineering the thing to need a new fuel module as
often as possible. In the old days we would say they are hoping to sell the
razor at cost and then make money selling the blades. Nowadays it would be
selling the printer at cost and then profiting on the ink cartridges.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Frank Znidarsic]

The whole thing makes sense if you take black hole physics, Casimir cavities, 
and shrunken atoms into account.



-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Sun, Dec 27, 2015 12:54 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Whopper of the Week



Whopper of the Week
1)  140 patents in progress
2)  Direct electricity or heat – either one or both
3)  Jet engine application
4)  Fully Robotic factory to make fuel wafers
5)  Reactor hotter on outside than inside
6)  No fuel module replaced in last 300 days

Please add your own favorite miracle to the growing list …

[Vo]:Whopper of the Week

[Jones Beene]

Whopper of the Week

1)  140 patents in progress
2)  Direct electricity or heat - either one or both
3)  Jet engine application
4)  Fully Robotic factory to make fuel wafers
5)  Reactor hotter on outside than inside
6)  No fuel module replaced in last 300 days

Please add your own favorite miracle to the growing list .