Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
While this is not cold fusion, I had an opportunity to video a new energy lab, and took it. I will continue to create portraits of new energy researchers, if it comes my way. I see cold fusion as the most probable breakthrough for the near future, but the Papp engine may not be far behind, and is a technology that could operate alongside it. This is the sixth movie I have made this year, all by my lonesome since my cameraman/editor left me to pursue more lucrative endeavors. I'm getting better with each edit, with the goal of entertaining and educating. As a Clean Energy Advocate, I do not grill or snake scientists. I am not a detective (not yet anyway). I ask, they answer. I am grateful for all the help I continue to get in learning to ask the right questions. Cold Fusion Now wants to remain positive, and rated G for the kids! I want to show the kids, the students, and those who are looking for inspiration: What does a new energy lab look like? How do researchers in this field operate? What kind of research is going on? What kind of energy solutions are being pursued and, what is the level of development? This video shows one team's engines in development, an explanation of its operational principles, however incomplete, in their own words, and what they plan to do next. It has a light-science background for the general public. While the video does not appear to show over-unity by examining the speed of the piston, I would not dismiss this whole technology through Youtube analysis. I am convinced by what I've read that Joseph Papp had something going on. Now, a handful of teams are trying to reproduce it. For all our sake, I only hope they succeed. Please direct your technical questions about the Pulser to Heinz Klostermann at heinri...@me.com. Pseudo-skeptics have held the power of position, but now they are irrelevant - irrelevant I say! Maybe I don't have the right to say that, but the fact is, the noisy din of useless information does not carry their protestations far, nor does their message have penetration or staying power, as they did pre-Internet. Yes, the after-image of their sad, destructive paradigm still prevents the MSM from reporting on the developments in cold fusion and new energy; legislators and policy-makers are woefully uninformed and do not fund this research; pseudo-skeptics have chosen to be die-hards, and they will, as all old paradigms do. We are building a new house, so when the old one collapses, it'll be ready to move in! After a short break over the next couple weeks, 2013 projects for Cold Fusion Now include: * more cold fusion video interviews as dictated by my geographic location on the west coast, * a possible mini-conference in Los Angeles, * activist visits to schools and colleges in the So Cal area (Caltech look out!), * attendance at ICCF-18 to conduct one-on-one interviews, * putting next year's 2014 History of Cold Fusion Calendar together with a an awesome new theme (not tellin yet!) but it's really cool. You can help support my efforts by purchasing a Calendar here: http://coldfusionnow.org/store/2013-history-of-cold-fusion-calendar/ Thank you for all the feedback. Your comments help to make my art more communicative. Happy New Year! Ruby On 1/1/13 7:20 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Interesting video, but frustrating. Klostermann seems like a sweet old guy who is having fun working with the Papp concept. He's done all kinds of things, but the type of cannon he has built, and that we saw firing so many times, could easily be arranged so that energy output is measured. He's planing on using a government design for an electric generator, and predicts power output, etc., yet he's not done the most basic measurement, and he acknowledges that, but he seems to imply that it would be expensive. No, it would be about as easy as what he's already done, in fact, easier. The output of his cannon is the kinetic energy of the projectile, and that is easily measured. If the kinetic energy of the projectile is as we would expect, less than the energy dumped into the cannon by the ionizatin sources, then neither would a generator work to generate excess power. Yes, it would generate power, but less than the electrical power used to operate it. Ruby asked him the question, he didn't answer it. She's very polite and did not push him. Looks like she's having fun. Marshall Plan to support this is not going to happen unless someone shows over unity, convincingly. I recommend that Cold Fusion Now stay away from these very shaky Alternative Energy claims, and stick to LENR. That's where political support could be useful and effective. Otherwise pseudoskeptics, faced with some actual possible breakthrough, politically, will use support for something ilke the Papp engine to attack the credibility of the organization. At 12:39 PM 12/31/2012, Ruby wrote: video:
Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
At 02:41 PM 1/2/2013, Ruby wrote: While this is not cold fusion, I had an opportunity to video a new energy lab, and took it. I will continue to create portraits of new energy researchers, if it comes my way. Sure. However, be careful. What is the purpose of Cold Fusion Now? Do you aim to be politically effective? I see cold fusion as the most probable breakthrough for the near future, but the Papp engine may not be far behind, and is a technology that could operate alongside it. There are quite a few people working on Papp devices. There is no sign of any confirmation coming soon. Sure, it could happen. However, Papp Engine and Cold Fusion should not be associated. Cold fusion is an established scientific phenomenon. Papp Engines are not. Papp was crazy, that's obvious. Crazy doesn't negate his having found something, but it does mean that what he showed can't be trusted, because *he did fake things*. Some have been pointing out that he set up red herrings, claims that this or that was necessary, that wasn't. Maybe. This is the sixth movie I have made this year, all by my lonesome since my cameraman/editor left me to pursue more lucrative endeavors. I'm getting better with each edit, with the goal of entertaining and educating. As a Clean Energy Advocate, I do not grill or snake scientists. Nobody is suggesting you become a Steve Krivit clone. However, you would not have to be Steve Krivit to be informed, in advance, of what questions to ask to get the actually important information. You did ask Kolstermann about energy production. He gave you an answer. The answer actually means, if true, that *he has nothing*, that his conclusions that the noble gases were not necessary are *speculation*, because he hasn't actually shown energy production, which Papp supposedly did. Papp actually ran engines with dynamometers and expert engineers, if certain documents are correct, and I've heard private testimony that I trust. It certainly *looked like* he was producing energy! Were there hidden wires or a fuel supply? Ruby, all these things have happened before. There *have* been frauds, sometimes very convincing. I am not a detective (not yet anyway). I ask, they answer. I am grateful for all the help I continue to get in learning to ask the right questions. The problem that I see is associating *highly speculative* technologies, that have a high probability of not being real, with cold fusion. Cold fusion is real, it's testable, and it's been tested, over and over, with results reported in scientific journals. It has problems with reliability, but that's an entirely different issue. If the reliability problem cannot be solved, it's possible that cold fusion will never be practical. But it's real, and the chances are quite good that, with better understanding, the reliability problem can be solved. Reliability cuts two ways. Pons and Fleischmann started with a cm. cube of palladium. The thing melted down in about 1984, destroying their apparatus, burning a hole in the lab bench, and down inches into the concrete floor. That was not chemistry. After that happened, they scaled down, and most cold fusion experiments deliberately work with low quantities of materials, because unreliable can mean that one unexpectedly gets *much more* heat than expected. What is needed is basic research. This is not going to come from entrepreneurs, people who keep their work secret. It's going to come from scientists, and that takes money that is not about profit, though some funding may come from corporations doing background investigation. I cannot categorically state that the Papp engine is impossible, but I will state is that we do not know if it's possible, and the Klostermann video takes us no closer to knowing. If you want to cover every possible alternative technology, there are many. I was the administrator of the L-5 Society, over thirty years ago, and we were working on, among other projects, satellite solar power. That is a whole approach to solving not only the energy problem, but ultimately the whole problem of polluting the earth. But I'd not expect Cold Fusion Now to get involved. Having a page that links to other clean energy projects, great. But the level of focus on Kostermann seems too much to me. Cold Fusion Now wants to remain positive, and rated G for the kids! I want to show the kids, the students, and those who are looking for inspiration: What does a new energy lab look like? How do researchers in this field operate? What kind of research is going on? What kind of energy solutions are being pursued and, what is the level of development? Klostermann's shop does not look like a lab to me, it looks like a nice workshop. It doesn't actually look like an energy solution. It looks like an electric cannon, that doesn't do anything more than convert stored power from a capacitor bank to kinetic energy of the
Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
Interesting video, but frustrating. Klostermann seems like a sweet old guy who is having fun working with the Papp concept. He's done all kinds of things, but the type of cannon he has built, and that we saw firing so many times, could easily be arranged so that energy output is measured. He's planing on using a government design for an electric generator, and predicts power output, etc., yet he's not done the most basic measurement, and he acknowledges that, but he seems to imply that it would be expensive. No, it would be about as easy as what he's already done, in fact, easier. The output of his cannon is the kinetic energy of the projectile, and that is easily measured. If the kinetic energy of the projectile is as we would expect, less than the energy dumped into the cannon by the ionizatin sources, then neither would a generator work to generate excess power. Yes, it would generate power, but less than the electrical power used to operate it. Ruby asked him the question, he didn't answer it. She's very polite and did not push him. Looks like she's having fun. Marshall Plan to support this is not going to happen unless someone shows over unity, convincingly. I recommend that Cold Fusion Now stay away from these very shaky Alternative Energy claims, and stick to LENR. That's where political support could be useful and effective. Otherwise pseudoskeptics, faced with some actual possible breakthrough, politically, will use support for something ilke the Papp engine to attack the credibility of the organization. At 12:39 PM 12/31/2012, Ruby wrote: video: PULSER Plasma Engine Core: Recovering the Papp engine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbEhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE post: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine: There should be a Marshall Plan to support this http://coldfusionnow.org/heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-engine-there-should-be-a-marshall-plan-to-support-this/ -- Ruby Carat mailto:r...@coldfusionnow.orgr...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat http://www.coldfusionnow.orgwww.coldfusionnow.org
Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
The construction of the Klostermann test device is not in the proper configuration to test for over unity energy output. For that over unity test, the popper is best to use. The Papp reaction acts as a kind of capacitor which stores the energy input that has been expended in the production of the spark discharge. Experimentation with the Plasmatron, a device similar to the popper in some particulars if not concept will produce over unity energy output. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mT-94c1Q6Ms It is reasonable to expect that the feedback current when added to the energy exerted in the vigorous movement of the piston will comfortably exceed over unity energy production expectations. In my opinion, a popper configuration in preference to a cannon is most amenable to a full accounted of all the energy output sources that the Papp reaction may produce. When attacked by the pseudoskeptics, I would suggest to resist any tendency to intimidation but patiently explain all the subtleties involved in the Papp reaction. I am sure that is patience, together with a full command of the subject matter will be effective in protecting LENR from their skepticism. Cheers: Axil On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:20 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: Interesting video, but frustrating. Klostermann seems like a sweet old guy who is having fun working with the Papp concept. He's done all kinds of things, but the type of cannon he has built, and that we saw firing so many times, could easily be arranged so that energy output is measured. He's planing on using a government design for an electric generator, and predicts power output, etc., yet he's not done the most basic measurement, and he acknowledges that, but he seems to imply that it would be expensive. No, it would be about as easy as what he's already done, in fact, easier. The output of his cannon is the kinetic energy of the projectile, and that is easily measured. If the kinetic energy of the projectile is as we would expect, less than the energy dumped into the cannon by the ionizatin sources, then neither would a generator work to generate excess power. Yes, it would generate power, but less than the electrical power used to operate it. Ruby asked him the question, he didn't answer it. She's very polite and did not push him. Looks like she's having fun. Marshall Plan to support this is not going to happen unless someone shows over unity, convincingly. I recommend that Cold Fusion Now stay away from these very shaky Alternative Energy claims, and stick to LENR. That's where political support could be useful and effective. Otherwise pseudoskeptics, faced with some actual possible breakthrough, politically, will use support for something ilke the Papp engine to attack the credibility of the organization. At 12:39 PM 12/31/2012, Ruby wrote: video: PULSER Plasma Engine Core: Recovering the Papp engine http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=lNSAXbZfnbEhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE http://www.**youtube.com/watch?v=**lNSAXbZfnbEhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE post: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine: There should be a Marshall Plan to support this http://coldfusionnow.org/**heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-** engine-there-should-be-a-**marshall-plan-to-support-this/http://coldfusionnow.org/heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-engine-there-should-be-a-marshall-plan-to-support-this/ -- Ruby Carat mailto:r...@coldfusionnow.org**r...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat http://www.coldfusionnow.org**www.coldfusionnow.orghttp://www.coldfusionnow.org
Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: It is reasonable to expect that the feedback current when added to the energy exerted in the vigorous movement of the piston will comfortably exceed over unity energy production expectations. Eh?
Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
Allow me to restate and clarify specifically. For example, by effectively acting as a capacitor or a battery, if 500 watts of input power is used to create the spark per each discharge with little heat having been produced, the popper must act to preserve the input current in part or in total through electronegative ionization in the form of a resultant feedback current. In the engine design by Papp, he used this feedback current to power the spark discharge of the next cylinder in the firing chain. In the Papp engine, the magnitude of this feedback current might have been greater than the current that produced the spark discharge in the first place under certain noble gas mixtures. This increase in the feedback current might well be one of the contributors to over unity power generation in the Papp reaction. This may also be the reason why the Papp engine exploded during the R. Feynman demo when an unchecked positive feedback current loop was formed between the various cylinders when the circuit that controlled the current feed to these cylinders was disabled. Because of this positive current feedback, an increasing positive spark discharge current feedback loop having been directly supported by a gainful feedback current from other various cylinders in previous cylinder activations might have produced a series of plasmoids of increasing strength. It was this uncontrolled gainful current loop that eventually culminated in an explosive disintegration of the Papp engine after a few moments of unregulated operation when the control circuit was disabled after R. Feynman pulled the plug to the control unit. The relatively long delay in the time between the removal of the plug by Feynman and the onset of piston failure and its explosion points to a slow buildup of the strength of the feedback current and not an sudden explosion caused by a abrupt decompression of the reaction gases. Cheers: Axil On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 12:02 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: It is reasonable to expect that the feedback current when added to the energy exerted in the vigorous movement of the piston will comfortably exceed over unity energy production expectations. Eh?
[Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
video: PULSER Plasma Engine Core: Recovering the Papp engine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE post: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine: There should be a Marshall Plan to support this http://coldfusionnow.org/heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-engine-there-should-be-a-marshall-plan-to-support-this/ -- Ruby Carat r...@coldfusionnow.org mailto:r...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat www.coldfusionnow.org http://www.coldfusionnow.org
Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
8:54 in is a slow motion shot showing the 1lb projectile travelling about 2 meters in about 3 frames. He also claims that the effective energy delivered to the plasma is about 600J. sqrt(600J/(2*lbm))?m/s sqrt((600 * joule) / (2 * poundm)) ? meter / second = 25.717452 m/s 30frames/sec;3 frames/2m?m/s ([30 * frames] / second) * ([3 * frames] / [2 * meter])^-1 ? meter / second = 20 m/s So it appears he has an 80% efficient electric cannon. On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote: video: PULSER Plasma Engine Core: Recovering the Papp engine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE post: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine: There should be a Marshall Plan to support this http://coldfusionnow.org/heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-engine-there-should-be-a-marshall-plan-to-support-this/ -- Ruby Carat r...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat www.coldfusionnow.org
RE: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
Interesting observation. If you watch the white box/cannon assembly (not the cardboard white box 'target'), you would think that the recoil would cause it to move backward, in the opposite direction as the projectile (piston); in fact, the assembly moves in the SAME direction as the projectile. The only explanation that I can see is that the assembly is already placed against an immovable barrier which prevents the recoil from moving it to the right, and that force pushes back on the assembly moving it in the same direction as the projectile. -Mark From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 10:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine 8:54 in is a slow motion shot showing the 1lb projectile travelling about 2 meters in about 3 frames. He also claims that the effective energy delivered to the plasma is about 600J. sqrt(600J/(2*lbm))?m/s sqrt((600 * joule) / (2 * poundm)) ? meter / second = 25.717452 m/s 30frames/sec;3 frames/2m?m/s ([30 * frames] / second) * ([3 * frames] / [2 * meter])^-1 ? meter / second = 20 m/s So it appears he has an 80% efficient electric cannon. On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote: video: PULSER Plasma Engine Core: Recovering the Papp engine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE post: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine: There should be a Marshall Plan to support this http://coldfusionnow.org/heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-engine-there-should- be-a-marshall-plan-to-support-this/ http://coldfusionnow.org/heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-engine-there-should-b e-a-marshall-plan-to-support-this/ -- Ruby Carat r...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat www.coldfusionnow.org
Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
You have a good explanation for the lack of visible reaction away from the projectile. The law of conservation of momentum ensures that the initial movement of the barrel must be in the opposite direction. The amount of movement might be small if the barrel kinetic energy is absorbed by a barrier that is stiff, and that must be what we have. Energy can then be returned to the barrel from the barrier by spring action propelling it in the same direction as the piston. How often do claims of the type revealed within this video arise? You would think that by now we would realize most are nothing but fancy electric motors of an unusual design. I will be very surprised to see one that actually delivers over unity performance throughout a complete cycle when the total input is accurately determined. The inventor stated that a significant amount of energy still remained within the capacitor bank after a power pulse. Since energy stored within a capacitor is proportional to the square of the voltage I would not be so kind. 160^2/500^2=.1 Only 10% remains which is not a large proportion. Dave -Original Message- From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Dec 31, 2012 2:49 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine Interesting observation… If you watch the white box/cannon assembly (not the cardboard white box ‘target’), you would think that the recoil would cause it to move backward, in the opposite direction as the projectile (piston); in fact, the assembly moves in the SAME direction as the projectile. The only explanation that I can see is that the assembly is already placed against an immovable barrier which prevents the recoil from moving it to the right, and that force pushes back on the assembly moving it in the same direction as the projectile… -Mark From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 10:54 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine 8:54 in is a slow motion shot showing the 1lb projectile travelling about 2 meters in about 3 frames. He also claims that the effective energy delivered to the plasma is about 600J. sqrt(600J/(2*lbm))?m/s sqrt((600 * joule) / (2 * poundm)) ? meter / second = 25.717452 m/s 30frames/sec;3 frames/2m?m/s ([30 * frames] / second) * ([3 * frames] / [2 * meter])^-1 ? meter / second = 20 m/s So it appears he has an 80% efficient electric cannon. On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote: video: PULSER Plasma Engine Core: Recovering the Papp engine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE post: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine: There should be a Marshall Plan to support this http://coldfusionnow.org/heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-engine-there-should-be-a-marshall-plan-to-support-this/ -- Ruby Carat r...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat www.coldfusionnow.org
Re: [Vo]:new video: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine
Thanks Ruby; A great video from Ruby Carat. Russ used air in on demo and got poor results. Hydrogen was better and helium was the best. Heinz Klostermann uses air because his cannon system cannot be made gas tight. A linier motor can be made completely gas tight; as tight as a compressed gas tank. The lack of a pop when the projectile leaves the tube tells me that the system does not use gas pressure to apply energy to the projectile. I believe that a plasmoid hitting the face of the projectile is the means of energy transfer between the spark and the projectile. Cheers:Axil On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote: video: PULSER Plasma Engine Core: Recovering the Papp engine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE post: Heinz Klostermann on the Papp engine: There should be a Marshall Plan to support this http://coldfusionnow.org/heinz-klostermann-on-the-papp-engine-there-should-be-a-marshall-plan-to-support-this/ -- Ruby Carat r...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat www.coldfusionnow.org
