At 11:56 AM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
My sense, from the weak steam coming out of the
end, is that what seems to be marginal at the
end is an indication that more power is being
generated than the input electrical power, but
I'd not want to claim that this demo shows that, it's way too shaky.
No, it isn't shaky. The water would be 60°C or
less in most of these tests if there was no
anomalous heat. There would be no trace of
steam. The only question is: Is there a lot of
anomalous heat, or only a little? Who cares?!?
This appears to be taken from a probable error in
the Kullander/Essen report. They claimed that the
temperature would have not exceeded 60 degrees
without excess heat. In fact, I think that what
they intended to say was that the rate of change
would not have exceeded the rate up to 60 degrees if not for excess heat.
My guess is that it would still reach boiling
point, at roughly the time predicting by
extrapolation of the rate of temperature rise,
because the device is insulated and most heat
will not leave unless the water starts boiling.
It's a 600 watt steam kettle, I'd expect such to
boil water. Just not as quickly as seen. The
interesting thing about that test was the
increase in heating rate, that indicates higher
energy being generated than was present before.
That's the real and immediate evidence for excess heat.
They just mis-stated it.
The sad thing about this is that a convincing
demo -- absent true and serious fraud -- could be easily done.
That is true. But it would not matter how
convincing the test is. Some people would find
reasons to disbelieve it, and many would say it
has to be fraud. For example, many people would
say the thing has to be self-powered or in heat
after death or they will not believe it. This is
irrational, but that is what they would say.
Yes. I think we agree here. However, there are a
lot of people unconvinced, even increasing in
skepticism, because of the weakness of the demos.
You think that's stupidity or eccentricity,
whatever, I think it might be, or, more likely, it might be planned.
It's like the reactor itself, Rossi would want
the public response to be muted and somewhat
suppressed, because he will not want funding
poured into research by his competition. That's
dangerous for him, economically.
If his interest were science, he'd have released
the catalyst formula or other internal details.
That's not a condemnation, he has the right to
self-interest! It's just an apparent reality.
(He might actually be stronger as to patent
protection if he'd applied with full details.
This is part of this that I don't understand. It
may be that he's infringing on prior art, such as
Piantelli.... that could explain his strategy.)
Actually, this test is nowhere near as bad as
portrayed here. All this discussion of wet and
dry steam is bullshit. It is nitpicking. Any
steam at all is proof there is cold fusion heat,
and the amount of heat does not matter.
Jed, I think that is your conclusion from the
textual error of Essen and Kullander, an error
that is not supported by their actual data, which
shows no decline of heating as temperature
approached 60 C. The initial heating will produce
steam, that's almost certain. So the issue is how much steam.
This is like watching the Wright brothers fly
and arguing whether they are 10 feet in the air
or 20 feet. People do argue about that! At ~10
feet they had the advantage of ground effect.
Some people say this is cheating, so they did
not really fly at first. I say flying is flying and who cares.
Jed, you have fixed on this idea that it would
not boil at the input power. Where did you get that idea?
Look, Rossi, attacking Krivit, looks like a
complete nut case. Jed excuses this as an idiosyncracy of an inventor.
I do not excuse it. I explain it. There is world
of difference. It is causing me no end of
trouble, so I am in no mood to excuse it.
Okay, you explain it. But it need not cause you
trouble. Stop defending the indefensible,
particularly the use of an RH meter to report
steam quality. The demonstrations are, such as
I've seen, inconclusive, they are at most
suggestive. The private Levi test at higher flow
rate sounds good, but this was not repeated for
the public, and there are many ways to make
mistakes. More eyeballs means fewer possibilities for error.
Consider what Krivit saw. We know that the hose
very likely has water in it. You know very well
that "how much water" is a critical issue, as
well as the heat radiated from the hose. It would
be trivial to examine the steam coming from the
reactor in such a way as to rule out a problem
with water ejection, and that's what I see as the huge problem.
A little wet steam, piffle! You are right, unless
this thing is really running very wet for some
reason (it's possible), that would not explain
the apparent excess heat. But the fixed input
rate, combined with the difficulty that if the
thing runs out of water, the reaction rate may
run away, I'd guess that the input flow rate is
set a little higher than the actual steam
evolution rate, because it is either higher or
one risks running out. But this, then, risks
water actually flowing out of the hose. I'd
expect that water, though, to be below boiling
temperature, but there could be steam above it,
depending on how the internal device is arranged.
It's complicated, and to be convincing, a demo should be simple.
That's the point of using boiling water, anyway,
it's very direct, as long as there is a handle on
steam wetness. If I had the specifications for
the pipe fittings on the E-cat, I could make a
device to test the steam quality, I believe, for
a few dollars, and it would all be safe (or at
least could be used in a safe manner, with some precautions).
But my belief, at this point, is that Rossi
doesn't want a definitive demonstration, or he'd
have allowed one. He wants, in fact, to look
shady, it will be very satisfying to him when
he's vindicated by delivery.... Look at his
history. It makes sense. Besides the economic industrial secret issues.
