Danny, you have me a bit confused. Does your comment refer to the subject that I posted by this title or are you just using my post as a path into vortex? If you are questioning my knowledge, I am an engineer by trade.
Dave -----Original Message----- From: Danny Ross Lunsford <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Mon, Oct 31, 2011 9:38 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty Hi all, I'm new. What I find astounding is the knee-jerk reactions of the intelligent lay person, who may even be an engineer or a scientist in a "softer" discipline (no disrespect intended). I participate in an amateur astronomy forum where, as things go, I'm probably the senior physics person in the "Science" discussions. When I lately attempted to bring up the exciting news about LENR, there appeared from nowhere a couple of computer types who just practically shouted me down with stupid, derisive comments. When I finally lost my patience with this treatment, I was berated by the MODERATOR and the thread was locked. Now this sort of behavior is just irrational. It's just as irrational as refusing to look through Galileo's telescope because it's blasphemous to do so. So why it is so widespread? At the same time, any topic no matter how unlikely and outlandish may be entertained, if it has, say, been mentioned on one of those execrable TV shows hosted by some like that loon Michio Kaku. It doesn't matter how removed from reality - time travel, wormholes, multiverses, etc. etc. etc. When I attempt to point out that all of this stuff is just mental masturbation with no observable consequences, inevitably another weevil shows up with derisive comments, appeals to authority, mystical ideas about quantum mechanics etc. etc. etc. So on the one hand, perhaps the most interesting thing in physics since the discovery of electromagnetism is not allowed to be discussed, while any sort of nonsense whatsoever is a free-for-all open forum. The net result is, no one learns anything, crazy ideas are reinforced, everyone gets a trophy. It's very depressing. It's not just ridicule of LENR - ask Halton Arp about how he's been treated. His famous comment is - "If 90 percent of the universe is not detectable, why bother looking?" Something like eternal inflation is an idea so devoid of physical sense that it staggers my imagination that any intelligent person could take it seriously. When Cooperstock demonstrated that Einstein was right and dark matter amounted to a mistaken approximation to a non-linear system, he was attacked by a green graduate student whose argument was easily swatted away by Cooperstock as one might correct a beginner - but it was too late, the most important work in relativity since Einstein himself is just ignored. They are now giving Nobel Prizes for out-and-out mistakes. So once the fact of LENR becomes common knowledge, how will the high priests of pathological physics react - the string theorists and other con-artists? Will we see a rebirth of the culture of science, with a mass ejection of the many posers who feed the pathological skeptics? That is my sincerest hope - my career was over before it began, because my schooling was exactly contemporary with the rise of this pathology, and I could not consider becoming a part of it. I would like to think that someone today who is in the same place as I was 30 years ago could make a better go of it. -drl ---------------------------------------------- "I write a little. I erase a lot." - Chopin --- On Mon, 10/31/11, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: From: David Roberson <[email protected]> Subject: [Vo]: Large ECAT System Test Convincing But Not Pretty To: [email protected] Date: Monday, October 31, 2011, 7:01 PM The latest system test where 107 individual ECAT modules were connected together was successful but could have been much more convincing. System instabilities forced the power output to be reduced to 470 kW and for it to be run in an open loop mode instead of the 1 MW that we were all expecting. I had hoped to see well behaved output steam temperature and pressure. But what could we realistically expect to see under these conditions? Mr. Rossi did all that was humanly possible as he found himself pressed against a schedule that was not flexible when the real world system issues appeared. I have taken some time to discuss some of the possibilities and problems. It seems logical that a well designed ECAT steam control system would need to monitor the water level and operating temperature. Some form of electronically controlled input valve could ideally regulate the water level to an acceptable degree and the duty cycle of the AC input waveform could be adjusted to regulate the net heating power for the cores. This may sound easy, but it is far from it. Boiling water tends to keep its vaporization temperature constant which attempts to defeat the temperature loop. The control of temperature is further complicated by the large delay that exists between the application of a modified input power duty cycle and its effects upon water temperature. Sluggish control and dangerous overshoots can easily be encountered due to this delay. Determining the idea control algorithm is a complex and demanding task with many tradeoffs needing to be considered. Even if an individual module is working smoothly in isolation, a combination of 107 ECAT devices will complicate the situation immensely. The output pressure and temperature variations caused by system instabilities can modify the loading seen at each ECAT output and make it loose control entirely. I would venture a guess that this is the reason why the test was run in the self sustaining mode instead of the powered mode where the full 1 MW would have been possible provided the system did not go unstable. The self sustaining mode is not without its problems when subjected to the loading of the other 106 ECAT modules. By reviewing the data from the October test I was able to determine some of the characteristics expected to be encountered in this mode. First, the core temperature must be operating at a level that is below maximum output power available under stable drive conditions. Notice that the output level is apparently 470 KWs for this system test instead of the 1 MW available. This is a big sacrifice that the skeptics love to complain about forever. They do not understand that this is necessary if the core is to eventually cool off and cease to generate energy. Second, loading of the brother ECATs will cause the internal water of each unit to oscillate between boiling and non boiling conditions as the pressure on the far side of the check valves varies. A quick review of the output vapor temperature variations during the test demonstrates this condition quite well. It will take an extended effort to eliminate the variation in the self sustaining mode. I am not sure the task will be any easier for the feedback controlled 1 MW system. The great news is that Mr. Rossi has demonstrated a large system that generates plenty of excess energy. This result is pretty much in line with what I projected in my last review of the October test results. It is difficult to understand how the skeptics are unable to realize that the ECAT is a real LENR device that will change the world in time. We owe Mr. Rossi a great deal of gratitude for standing up under such a ridiculous amount of ridicule. Sure, his test procedures were imperfect but I was able to determine that the LENR effect was present with careful observations. Dave
