Oops typo: should have been "over 100 hours" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 11:14 AM Subject: [Vo]:E-Cat general observations
> My very first post here, so be gentle. By way of introduction, I was on > Usenet back in the P&F days and made some money off palladium futures - I > mention this to indicate that I've been in this space before. It seems so > very long ago. I used to post with the moniker LordSnooty back then. I > certainly remember Jed Rothwell's excellent posts from those days. So, some > general comments: > > 1. I don't see how either the energy and power density can be hoaxed, > especially with continuous run times of over 100 days. > > 2. I don't have a problem with this verification being done at Rossi's > facility, because he doesn't want people carting off the device and > reverse-engineering the catalyst (I'm guessing palladium :) and the drive > waveform. Nevertheless, this wasn't a "pure" third party verification. > > 3. You'll notice that the plot for Plutonium has the axes erroneously > swapped. > > 4. The technology is green, but not rechargeable (except by inserting a new > cell). This makes it a razor and razor blades type economic proposition. > Nickel and hydrogen are dirt cheap and plentiful resources. > > 5. VASIMR together with this seems to make a decent combination for a future > intrasolar space drive. > > 6. The missing test piece is electrical output. Same engineering issue as > with any nuclear reactor; to turn heat into electricity. > > Andrew Palfreyman >
