Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:
> Defkalion has been burdened with poor management, too few qualified > scientists . . . I do not know how many scientists they have. > - and a flawed business plan. Dumber than dumb. Their business > plan envisioned charging extremely high up-front license fees for every > country. This is/was idiotic without very strong results indicating "ready > for market"... I have to agree. I was assuming they did have "market ready" technology. I think it is clear they got ahead of themselves, and they do not have it. If they had had what they claimed, their plan would have been viable. It would still be grandiose in my opinion. Thus, when it comes to managerial expectation, a COP of less than 3 would > completely ruin their former business plan - which looks already dead in > the > water to everyone else. Well, the low COP is a problem, but the main problem is the thing is a tabletop experimental unit. It does not run reliably. It is far from being market ready. There are rumors they have a market-ready one hidden away. I doubt it, because if they did, why hide it?!? Why not show it to NASA? > But think about this: those who are in it for the science, and many of us > here on vortex, see things differently to the extent that a PROVED result > of > far lower COP- say it was 200 watts-in on average, and say 300 watts out, > on > average, for a COP of half of what they claim - WOW - this would be true > beauty - phenomenal, state-of-the-art really, at least when proved, and > replicated by others! > Proved, reliable anything would be fine with me. 200 watts or 20. However, as I said before, I honestly do not understand this widespread obsession with the so-called COP. As I said it is *not* a COP in the technical sense. There is no "production" or conversion of input to output in any sense. More important: If you have a stable, controlled reaction, you can have any COP you like. There is no doubt cold fusion reactions with no input (an "infinite COP") are possible. Even if periodic input is needed the duty cycle can be set low. If you do *not* have a stable, controlled reaction, it does not matter how high the COP is. Your reactor is still not practical. It has no market value in its present state. Reactors that explode have a very high COP for a fraction of a second, but it does no good. Nobody wants that. In short, the only thing that matters is stability and control. Once you have them, you can get everything else: high power, a high COP, high temperatures, high Carnot efficiency. Test after test has shown that cold fusion reactions can have all these qualities, but without control they are useless. A controlled reaction at a fraction of a watt would be more significant that Rossi's megawatt reactor. When I say "control" I mean the ability to turn on, turn up and down (modulate), and turn off. This ability does not have to be as instantaneous the way it is with an electric light, or a gasoline motor controlled by a throttle. It might have a built-in lag, like the controls at a coal-fired power plant, or even a uranium fission power plant. - Jed
