Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-19 Thread Jed Rothwell

Harry Veeder noted the PesWiki report:

http://pesn.com/2011/01/17/9501746_Focardi-Rossi_10_kW_cold_fusion_prepping_for_market/

This is a good summary. Lots of details in one place, such as the fact 
that Rossi says they plan to ship the first units in three months, and 
they are manufacturing a 1 megawatt plant composed of 125 modules.


I have been hearing rumors to this effect for months. I discounted them 
because I had no proof the device even exists. I cannot believe 
something like that just because trustworthy  informed sources tell me 
it is true. I need to see experimental proof. Now, I have seen it.


Needless to say his credibility is much higher now that several 
professors have signed off on his work. It is a great relief to me. I 
did not suspect him of fraud but to be frank I worried that he might be 
crazy. After all, many people have often made bold claims that turned 
out to be wrong. People have made honest mistake even on the 1 kW  heat 
reaction scale. Wishful thinking or ignorance of basic physics are 
usually the cause.


Of course there are risks and Rossi may yet fail. I think there is no 
chance this is fraud, but he might trip up over technical issues. It 
might be more difficult to replicate that he realizes. Maybe he will run 
out of active material and find out he cannot make more. Or the gadget 
might blow up, and blow him to kingdom come.


- Jed



Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Stephen A. Lawrence


On 01/18/2011 12:03 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
 Rossi also says that they  have had one reactor that has run
 continually for two years, providing heat  for a factory. 
   

Slightly longer quote from the Peswiki page:

 Rossi also says that they have had one reactor that has run
 continually for two years, providing heat for a factory.  Also, the
 reactors can self sustain by turning off the input, but they prefer to
 have an input.

So if they need some electricity to control it, why don't they use the
output to run a generator, and close the loop?  At 10:1, they ought to
be able to turn the heat output into enough electricity to drive the
thing with a good bit left over.   Then they could provide heat /and/
run the lights in the factory.  And at that point they'd be off the
grid, and they'd be completely shut of the old Well are you /sure/ it's
OU? question.  And wouldn't /that/ make a whizzy demo!

Starting can be done with batteries, of course, just like you start your
car with a battery.  You need some electricity to run an ICE, but
/nobody/ plugs their gasoline car into the mains to get it going in the
morning (block heaters excepted).

We don't close the loop because we /prefer/ to have an input.That
seems strange, to put it mildly.

Kind of like saying, I make all the electricity I need with
photoelectrics on the roof, but I /prefer/ to buy some from Ontario
Hydro as well.



 The results of last week's demonstration pale in comparison to this claim.


 Harry


   


Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Jed Rothwell
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:


 So if they need some electricity to control it, why don't they use the
 output to run a generator, and close the loop?  At 10:1, they ought to be
 able to turn the heat output into enough electricity to drive the thing with
 a good bit left over.


Designing or purchasing a heat engine for this would be expensive and time
consuming. In the first round of installations it makes more sense to use AC
power for the control current


And at that point they'd be off the grid, and they'd be completely shut of
 the old Well are you *sure* it's OU? question.  And wouldn't *that* make
 a whizzy demo!


It would make a great demo, and I would love to see it, but anyone not
convinced by 0.4 kW in and 12 kW out will not be convinced by anything. At
this stage, engineering a heat engine just to close the loop would be a
distraction.

If the control current were 1000 times smaller than the output, you could
use thermoelectric chips which require little engineering and work over a
broad range of temperature. The Russians have some for camping and
remote villages, which can be used with burning wood. In the U.S. there are
some for small yachts which use burning natural gas, I think.

- Jed


Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Stephen A. Lawrence


On 01/18/2011 11:00 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
 Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
  

 So if they need some electricity to control it, why don't they use
 the output to run a generator, and close the loop?  At 10:1, they
 ought to be able to turn the heat output into enough electricity
 to drive the thing with a good bit left over.


 Designing or purchasing a heat engine for this would be expensive and
 time consuming. In the first round of installations it makes more
 sense to use AC power for the control current


 And at that point they'd be off the grid, and they'd be completely
 shut of the old Well are you /sure/ it's OU? question.  And
 wouldn't /that/ make a whizzy demo!


 It would make a great demo, and I would love to see it, but anyone not
 convinced by 0.4 kW in and 12 kW out will not be convinced by
 anything. At this stage, engineering a heat engine just to close the
 loop would be a distraction.

Sure.  But the quote from PW makes it sound like they have had this in
place for some time.  Seems like it would have been an obvious thing to
do back when they were setting up to heat the factory with a reactor --
unless, of course, the factory is one room and the heating is done
just by running the generator and letting it warm up its surroundings a
bit.  (Depending on where they are in Italy, the heat required might be
pretty minimal, come to think of it.)

And as to not being convinced by anything ... as long as the
conclusions are based on precise heat measurements there is room for
doubt.  Once the loop is closed there is no more room for doubt.  This
issue has come up time and again with perpetual motion machine
claimants, along with rumors of a factory powered by a magic motor. 
There *is* a good reason for closing the loop, and their assertion that
they could run with no electrical input, but just don't want to, sounds
absurd.

I do not need to take measurements to be sure the furnace in this house
really works.  All I need to do is step in the front door, and my senses
give me a conclusive, albeit qualitative, answer.

Here is a truism:  /As long as you need calorimetry to determine if a
heater works, it doesn't work well enough to be interesting./  Their
device works well enough that they could dispense with the calorimetry,
just by running it /unplugged/ and showing that it still gets hot.  But
they prefer not to.  Errrm.



 If the control current were 1000 times smaller than the output, you
 could use thermoelectric chips which require little engineering and
 work over a broad range of temperature. The Russians have some for
 camping and remote villages, which can be used with burning wood. In
 the U.S. there are some for small yachts which use burning natural
 gas, I think.

 - Jed



Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Jed Rothwell

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

And as to not being convinced by anything ... as long as the 
conclusions are based on precise heat measurements there is room for 
doubt.


These conclusions are based on somewhat imprecise measurements, and you 
can be just as certain with no measurements at all. Just look at the 
thing. You see water going in at about a liter every three minutes, 
steam coming out, and only a thin, ordinary wire going to the power 
supplies. It would be physically impossible for that wire to supply the 
electricity needed to vaporize that much water. Impossible by a wide 
margin; at least a factor of 4. You don't even need to see the power 
meter or thermometers to be sure of this.




  Once the loop is closed there is no more room for doubt.


As far as I am concerned, this is first principle proof, and it is as 
convincing as a self sustaining machine, or as Fleischmann's boil-off 
video. Unless there are camera tricks or hidden wires involved this is 
massive anomalous heat. I do not think there are tricks or hidden wires 
because the professors involved would notice that, and they would not 
stand for it. If it were only the inventor, and everything was under his 
exclusive control, I might suspect a fake, but I would be just as 
suspicious of a self-sustaining demo under the control of the inventor.


- Jed



Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread mixent
In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:52:45 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
They sure do! I wish I knew the name of that factory, and I could see 
photos or interviews.
[snip]
It's probably the factory mentioned in the patent:-

A practical embodiment of the inventive apparatus, installed on October 16,
2007, is at present perfectly operating 24 hours per day, and provides an amount
of heat sufficient to heat the factory of the

Company EON of via Carlo Ragazzi 18, at Bondeno

(Province of Ferrara) . For better understanding the invention, the main
components of the above mentioned apparatus have been schematically shown in
Table 2.

(See
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=2009125444IA=IT2008000532DISPLAY=DESC)
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html



Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Harry Veeder




- Original Message 
 From: mix...@bigpond.com mix...@bigpond.com
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Tue, January 18, 2011 4:52:48 PM
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi
 
 In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:52:45  -0500:
 Hi,
 [snip]
 They sure do! I wish I knew the name of that  factory, and I could see 
 photos or interviews.
 [snip]
 It's  probably the factory mentioned in the patent:-
 
 A practical embodiment of  the inventive apparatus, installed on October 16,
 2007, is at present  perfectly operating 24 hours per day, and provides an 
amount
 of heat  sufficient to heat the factory of the
 
 Company EON of via Carlo Ragazzi  18, at Bondeno
 
 (Province of Ferrara) . For better understanding the  invention, the main
 components of the above mentioned apparatus have been  schematically shown in
 Table 2.
 
 (See
 
http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?WO=2009125444IA=IT2008000532DISPLAY=DESC)
 Regards,
 
 Robin  van Spaandonk
 
 http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
 


great work Robin.

I used google maps and input: via Carlo Ragazzi 18 Bondeno Ferrara.
The satellite view shows something like a factory at that location.

harry




Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Jed Rothwell
Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:


 great work Robin.

 I used google maps and input: via Carlo Ragazzi 18 Bondeno Ferrara.
 The satellite view shows something like a factory at that location.


Oh brave new world! Now, if you could only zoom in and see inside the
building, we'd have it. See:

The Googling

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPgV6-gnQaE

- Jed


Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Rich Murray
A hidden factor of 4 increase in electric power input to a resistive
heater is possible: Rich Murray 2011.01.18

1. Use four power input wires, one hidden from the floor up through
the inside of each of the four table legs -- in fact table legs could
conceal as many as 4 -- 9 wires each -- has anyone tried moving the
table?

2. A single thin wire can supply power at lower current and higher
voltage, as a thin layer of insulating plastic can insulate 880 AC
volts, 4 X 220 volts, and 1/4 the current at 220 volts, as Er = V**2 X
I = 4**2 X 1/4 = 16 X 1/4 = 4 ...,ie, 4X more energy.

Such an additional thin wire, 1/2 the diameter (1/4 the area) of a 220
volt wire, could be easily hidden within a regular 3 wire extension
cord, for instance by being disguised as the third ground wire -- or
such extra wires may be in power cables made for special purposes,
where some device needs a high voltage feed in addition to 240 volt
AC.

3. Gold wires carry much more power than Cu wires...

Strict testing might necessitate bringing in a standard propane gas
motor electric generator, or a special power input box to monitor the
actual power outputs from the 3-prong plug, with attention to
capability to detect current flows from hidden wires of metal or
conducting plastic, glass, films, or paint.

Also, H2 gas and other gas or liquid fluids could be fed into the
device via tubes hidden in the H2 and H20 input and exit tubes.

The reported gamma rays are, however, possibly definite evidence of
nuclear reactions.

So, there are many feasible ways for fraud to elude the usual scrutiny
of academic scientists -- and these are ideas from an unskilled
layman...

Rich Murray  505-819-7388  rmfor...@gmail.com


On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
 Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

 And as to not being convinced by anything ... as long as the conclusions
 are based on precise heat measurements there is room for doubt.

 These conclusions are based on somewhat imprecise measurements, and you can
 be just as certain with no measurements at all. Just look at the thing. You
 see water going in at about a liter every three minutes, steam coming out,
 and only a thin, ordinary wire going to the power supplies. It would be
 physically impossible for that wire to supply the electricity needed to
 vaporize that much water. Impossible by a wide margin; at least a factor of
 4. You don't even need to see the power meter or thermometers to be sure of
 this.


  Once the loop is closed there is no more room for doubt.

 As far as I am concerned, this is first principle proof, and it is as
 convincing as a self sustaining machine, or as Fleischmann's boil-off video.
 Unless there are camera tricks or hidden wires involved this is massive
 anomalous heat. I do not think there are tricks or hidden wires because the
 professors involved would notice that, and they would not stand for it. If
 it were only the inventor, and everything was under his exclusive control, I
 might suspect a fake, but I would be just as suspicious of a self-sustaining
 demo under the control of the inventor.

 - Jed





Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Stephen A. Lawrence
But, Rich, the input power was measured -- /not/ by Rossi -- and the
setup was apparently done by the other profs, /not/ by Rossi himself.

The power supply and the other paraphernalia (aside from the reactor)
were apparently provided by various other profs, /not/ by Rossi.

So unless you're assuming a conspiracy of at least two or three of the
presenters, scenarios which require hollow legs in the table, special
wiring to the outlet, phony power supply leads, and so forth just will
not fly.



On 01/18/2011 10:25 PM, Rich Murray wrote:
 A hidden factor of 4 increase in electric power input to a resistive
 heater is possible: Rich Murray 2011.01.18

 1. Use four power input wires, one hidden from the floor up through
 the inside of each of the four table legs -- in fact table legs could
 conceal as many as 4 -- 9 wires each -- has anyone tried moving the
 table?

 2. A single thin wire can supply power at lower current and higher
 voltage, as a thin layer of insulating plastic can insulate 880 AC
 volts, 4 X 220 volts, and 1/4 the current at 220 volts, as Er = V**2 X
 I = 4**2 X 1/4 = 16 X 1/4 = 4 ...,ie, 4X more energy.

 Such an additional thin wire, 1/2 the diameter (1/4 the area) of a 220
 volt wire, could be easily hidden within a regular 3 wire extension
 cord, for instance by being disguised as the third ground wire -- or
 such extra wires may be in power cables made for special purposes,
 where some device needs a high voltage feed in addition to 240 volt
 AC.

 3. Gold wires carry much more power than Cu wires...

 Strict testing might necessitate bringing in a standard propane gas
 motor electric generator, or a special power input box to monitor the
 actual power outputs from the 3-prong plug, with attention to
 capability to detect current flows from hidden wires of metal or
 conducting plastic, glass, films, or paint.

 Also, H2 gas and other gas or liquid fluids could be fed into the
 device via tubes hidden in the H2 and H20 input and exit tubes.

 The reported gamma rays are, however, possibly definite evidence of
 nuclear reactions.

 So, there are many feasible ways for fraud to elude the usual scrutiny
 of academic scientists -- and these are ideas from an unskilled
 layman...

 Rich Murray  505-819-7388  rmfor...@gmail.com


 On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
   
 Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

 
 And as to not being convinced by anything ... as long as the conclusions
 are based on precise heat measurements there is room for doubt.
   
 These conclusions are based on somewhat imprecise measurements, and you can
 be just as certain with no measurements at all. Just look at the thing. You
 see water going in at about a liter every three minutes, steam coming out,
 and only a thin, ordinary wire going to the power supplies. It would be
 physically impossible for that wire to supply the electricity needed to
 vaporize that much water. Impossible by a wide margin; at least a factor of
 4. You don't even need to see the power meter or thermometers to be sure of
 this.


 
  Once the loop is closed there is no more room for doubt.
   
 As far as I am concerned, this is first principle proof, and it is as
 convincing as a self sustaining machine, or as Fleischmann's boil-off video.
 Unless there are camera tricks or hidden wires involved this is massive
 anomalous heat. I do not think there are tricks or hidden wires because the
 professors involved would notice that, and they would not stand for it. If
 it were only the inventor, and everything was under his exclusive control, I
 might suspect a fake, but I would be just as suspicious of a self-sustaining
 demo under the control of the inventor.

 - Jed


 

   


Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Jed Rothwell
Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote:

A hidden factor of 4 increase in electric power input to a resistive
 heater is possible: Rich Murray 2011.01.18


It would have to be a factor of 30, not 4. The power meter shows 400 W, and
the output is 12 kW.



 1. Use four power input wires, one hidden from the floor up through
 the inside of each of the four table legs -- in fact table legs could
 conceal as many as 4 -- 9 wires each -- has anyone tried moving the
 table?


That's preposterous. You can see that the machine is sitting on a board with
rubber feet and has been moved around from one photo to the next. You know
that the researchers who verified it inserted the temperature probes and
tubes, insulation and blue tape all over it. Do you really, seriously think
they would not notice wires going into it?

This is real life, not a pulp thriller novel or James Bond.




 2. A single thin wire can supply power at lower current and higher
 voltage, as a thin layer of insulating plastic can insulate 880 AC
 volts, 4 X 220 volts, and 1/4 the current at 220 volts, as Er = V**2 X
 I = 4**2 X 1/4 = 16 X 1/4 = 4 ...,ie, 4X more energy.


Have you ever seen the size of the wires going into a 10 kW electric motor
or heater? It is enormous!

- Jed


Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread Rich Murray
Thanks for the lively counter-arguments!

Say, was or was not the demo on the same table in the same corner in
the same room in the same huge industrial building within which tests
have been run over and over in recent months?...

High voltages allow much thinner wires to carry the same energy with
smaller currents...

I suggest skeptical ideas, so they can hopefully be decisively dispatched.

I was impressed by Ed Storms' explanation that steady input energy
can serve to stabilize a positive feedback energy generation process
just under the level of high output beyond which meltdown or explosion
occurs...

So, also, it seems that a undercover operator could use hidden
portable gamma and neutron intensity and spectral analyzers to
accurately and quickly garner critical information while hanging
around near a operating unit, wearing a tweed jacket, if not a trench
coat or a white lab coat?

I'd like to know more about NiH as a spillover catalyst -- can
someone explain in detail and give sources?

Thanks,  Rich

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
 Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote:

 A hidden factor of 4 increase in electric power input to a resistive
 heater is possible: Rich Murray 2011.01.18

 It would have to be a factor of 30, not 4. The power meter shows 400 W, and
 the output is 12 kW.


 1. Use four power input wires, one hidden from the floor up through
 the inside of each of the four table legs -- in fact table legs could
 conceal as many as 4 -- 9 wires each -- has anyone tried moving the
 table?

 That's preposterous. You can see that the machine is sitting on a board with
 rubber feet and has been moved around from one photo to the next. You know
 that the researchers who verified it inserted the temperature probes and
 tubes, insulation and blue tape all over it. Do you really, seriously think
 they would not notice wires going into it?
 This is real life, not a pulp thriller novel or James Bond.


 2. A single thin wire can supply power at lower current and higher
 voltage, as a thin layer of insulating plastic can insulate 880 AC
 volts, 4 X 220 volts, and 1/4 the current at 220 volts, as Er = V**2 X
 I = 4**2 X 1/4 = 16 X 1/4 = 4 ...,ie, 4X more energy.

 Have you ever seen the size of the wires going into a 10 kW electric motor
 or heater? It is enormous!
 - Jed




Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-18 Thread mixent
In reply to  Rich Murray's message of Tue, 18 Jan 2011 20:25:31 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
3. Gold wires carry much more power than Cu wires...

Gold is not as good a conductor as copper. Silver is slightly better.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html



Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-17 Thread Terry Blanton
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 7:06 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:

 Personally, I'd be ecstatic if we had verified independent replication
 by the end of 2011.

I think Andrea Rossi has made it clear that there will be no
replication.  He says he wants to sell product.

T



Re: [Vo]:PesWiki's report on Focardi and Rossi

2011-01-17 Thread Harry Veeder




Steven V Johnson wrote:

 In addition to Jed's recent, and highly appreciated, report on the
 Energy  Catalyzer), I noticed that one of my latest Google news feeds
 keyed to  Blacklight Power directed me to the pesn.com Pure Energy
 Systems  (PesWiki) web site where a verbose (and HIGHLY optimistic and
 probably  unrealistic) report on the Focardi and Rossi's device ensues.
 
 See:
http://pesn.com/2011/01/17/9501746_Focardi-Rossi_10_kW_cold_fusion_prepping_for_market/
/
 
 http://tinyurl.com/4vluzrt
 
 Excerpt  samples:

snip
 
 Rossi also says that they  have had one reactor that has run
 continually for two years, providing heat  for a factory. 


The results of last week's demonstration pale in comparison to this claim.


Harry