Or is the copper vapour forming a catalytic layer on the Nickel to have
Hydrogen absorbed faster........



On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Teslaalset <[email protected]>wrote:

> So, this is why Rossi claimed to have nickel converted into copper and
> recently says this is not the case anymore. Je probably does not use copper
> tubes anymore for holding the nickel.
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hmm... this may be the first time that the particular detail about copper
>> metal vapor has come up, but it raises the issue (if Rossi could be
>> believed) ... about copper vapor and an internal laser.
>>
>> It could be inadvertent lasing but providing a window in his reactor could
>> indicate that it is also being stimulated. Copper vapor lasers are
>> efficient, but require 1500 C - so halides are often used.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_vapor_laser
>>
>> ... makes one wonder if copper hydride would work. This paper turns up:
>>
>> http://tf.nist.gov/general/pdf/939.pdf
>>
>> ... but we all tend to think of Rossi as not being that sophisticated. It
>> would be mind boggling if lasing were being employed.
>>
>> Rothwell has been saying for some time that the underneath the clown
>> costume, Rossi is a brilliant inventor and that the is method in his
>> madness.
>>
>> Is the Hot-Cat an indication of more intentional misdirection, or is Rossi
>> for real ?
>>
>>
>>                 From: Mark Snoswell
>>
>>                 LOL - Copper is incredibly mobile with a vapour pressure
>> several orders of magnitude higher then Nickel at the same temperature.
>> Even
>> at 950C the copper vapour is spreading is spreading copper everywhere...
>> almost as annoying as all the inconsistencies in Rossi's patent.
>>
>>                 From: David Roberson
>>
>>                 How would the nickel/hydrogen mixture be at a lower
>> temperature than the region that completely surrounds it?  Heat would
>> travel
>> toward the cooler center until it was in equilibrium.
>>
>>                 Dave
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to