Jones wrote:
"Why, you ask? In two words - "chain reaction". This ability to self-sustain is 
a very clear
indication of at least a limited chain reaction. I will define the "limited" 
part in another post."

 
It may be a chain reaction, but most likely NOT the kind that escalates as fast 
as in a nuclear
bomb.  In fact, it will probably self-extinguish when it hits the melting point 
of the nickel...
granted, if this were to happen, you would need to replace the guts, or even 
the whole reactor, but
at least you haven't vaporized the town and all its inhabitants!!! :-)

-Mark




  _____  

From: Jones Beene [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 8:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Monday Update to Release Information on Self Sustain Mode



Let me expand the following thought a bit:

 

"The fact that the Rossi reaction will self-sustain without external input 
energy is a strong
negative."

 

Why, you ask? In two words - "chain reaction". This ability to self-sustain is 
a very clear
indication of at least a limited chain reaction. I will define the "limited" 
part in another post.

 

And, furthermore, if there are any "conspiracy theory" cynics out there who 
took a fancy to the
scenario mentioned previously, in what was admittedly a tongue-in-cheek posting 
about Rossi possibly
being set-up a patsy in an ongoing false-flag type of conspiracy . (and I bet 
there are a few of you
reading this now) .

 

. then you have already noticed that the 'official' purpose (rationalization) 
of any high-level
meddling, whether it comes via agents of the US Navy or Big Oil or whomever, 
will be to keep this
technology out of the hands of people like Iran, North Korea, and so on .. 
(good intentions gone
bad?) 

 

Anyway, as a summation, the following should clarify the premise of what is 
still "highly unlikely"
but cannot be ruled out. The hope is at least by airing this out now, it might 
cause a reappraisal
by certain bad actors - such as - if it is so transparent from the git-go that 
any dilettante could
imagine it - should we really go through with it? 

 

1)    This device involves nuclear reactions, even if tangential

2)    It is shown to be self-sustaining as a chain reaction

3)    It will be eventually taken-over and sequestered by higher level 
authorizes, sooner or later
for reasons of either public safety or national defense.

 

And finally, if there is a larger conspiracy afoot to make this  happen 
"sooner, rather than later,"
such as by double-agents within Rossi's own group of confidants - then what 
better way to do it then
to stage a demo which goes out of control - and the reactor experiences a 
tragic meltdown at an
international conference in India, where the issue of "collateral damage" is of 
far less concern
than in Europe or the USA, and where high officials are routinely bought off. 
You get the picture:
if there are a few fatalities, all the better (from the cynical perspective).

 

Machiavelli was from Florence, a few days walk from Bologna, but when the wind 
is blowing from that
direction can you still smell the stench. 

 

Jones   . still, with "mostly" facetious intent :-)

 

Pun of the day: The irony of cold fusion is heated confusion . 

 

 

Jed, all

 

Yes, this development is important, but not exactly for the reason specified. 
In fact, IMO - it
makes the device far riskier in the eyes of "authorities." (and more subject to 
eventual political
interference by Oil interests). 

 

Not to nitpick, but going from 20:1 P-out/P-in is ALWAYS self sustaining, if 
*controlling the
reaction via input energy is not required*, i.e. if the "quality" of the input 
does not need to be
specific (i.e. RF or ultrasound, etc). 

 

IOW - if a special kind of input energy such as resonant ultrasound is not 
needed, then with a high
COP - it is merely a matter of insulating against heat loss well enough to 
retain what would be the
equivalent input heat, or to extract less heat than the input. So if you 
believe the demo as
presented, then this announcement is a strong negative, not a positive.

 

The fact that they can do it without P-in indicates to me NOT that there is any 
fundamental
improvement or change from before - but that a 'runaway' is more likely due to 
failure of controls.
The so-called 'holy grail' can easily exist in circumstance with P-in required, 
and in fact that
could easily be preferable. You want a failsafe control mechanism. 

 

Otherwise a runaway is more likely. In fact as far as the 'grail' metaphor 
goes, I think most
engineers would STRONGLY prefer to control the reaction via P-in.

Instead shutting it off such a by controlling H2 pressure - is much trickier.

 

If you want to keep the Nuclear Regulatory people from shutting down your 
entire operation - then
the very first thing you MUST avoid is a runaway reaction, even if the 
radioactive release, is
minimal.

 

A runaway could squelch everything from the start. It would not surprise me at 
all if our NRC were
not already in talks with the equivalent agency in Italy over this very issue - 
and some of that
could be due to political pressure from either Oil of the multi-billion hot 
fusion recipients.

 

Jones

 

 

This is important! Rossi is saying that on Monday, they will upload a report by 
Levi et al.
describing a self-sustaining run. This is the Holy Grail of cold fusion: a 
self-sustaining device
that produces commercially useful levels of power.

 

People may have some doubts about Rossi's credibility, but I think there is no 
reason to doubt Levi
and the others. If they say they saw the thing self-sustain, I for one will 
believe it. As I said
before, this development is not all that surprising. There is plenty of 
supporting evidence from
other experiments. There is no reason to doubt that a scaled up machine can be 
built.

 

It is a little surprising that the breakthrough came with Ni-H. The 
temperatures and power density
with Ni-H have usually been low in the past, as far as I know. Pd-D has 
achieved greater power
density.

 

- Jed

 

Reply via email to