It shouldn't need to be continually fed new fuel. Once the Cathode is loaded there is enough fuel present to fuel it for many years at this small level of energy generation---this is part of why this cannot be fusion, but is likely to be ZPE as the time axes of atoms in the small cavities shrink, movement along these axes, which we usually call the passage of time---this movement through time space is accelerated and events in the cavity happen much faster. The biggest problem with the con-fusion hypothesis is also seen in the insanely high supposed-fusion byproducts. These are catalysts; the con-fusion is a smokescreen to steer us away from the true mechanism that really is producing anomalous heat. Wm. Scott Smithz-pec.yolasite.comScott
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 09:12:52 +0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why is calorimetry avoided in Rossi's experiments? From: [email protected] To: [email protected] It was so much trouble with intensity because the cathodes - more precisely the NAE are poisoned with gases that do not allow to D or H to enter and react. It was also bad for reproducibility the systems were grosso modo unpredictable. One step forward two steps backwards. As regarding Energetics- do you know how many intense processes (batches) they had? I know about exp. 64. But even that had no continuity Yes, I also think Rossi's great advantage is gas loaded nanoparticles. But prior to that it is gas unloaded active sites- all the gaseous competitors of hydrogen are removed completely. I think this is a sine qua non condition for such a system to work. Ed Storms has dismissed repeatedly my gas poisoning hypothesis.What could I say? Not important! But what do the experiments say?Peter On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: Calorimetry was a curse and a burden for Pd- D CF/LENR because much more money, creativity, patience, discusions was consumed for measuring small quantities of released heat instead of focussing on the intensification of the process. The results are known. I think Storms or McKubre would take exception to that. Not to speak for them, they have often said: 1. Scaling up Pd-D electrochemistry tends to scale up and amplify the noise as much as the signal. 2. You cannot intensify a process if you cannot even detect it. The main purpose of making sensitive calorimeters was to capture and then optimize tiny effects. The other purpose was to satisfy the skeptics, which was futile. 3. They did the best they could to intensify it, and succeeded to some extent. Techniques such as Energetics Technology produced much higher heat and a higher input to output ratio than older techniques; i.e. ~1 W input, ~20 W output. Bear in mind also that one of Rossi's key advantage's is the use of gas-loaded nanoparticles. This originated with Pd-D studies, by Arata. I do not know if Rossi was aware of Arata when he began working on this approach. Perhaps he only found out when he wrote the patent. Anyway, this was a major contribution from the Pd-D school of cold fusion. - Jed -- Dr. Peter GluckCluj, Romaniahttp://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
