From: Robert Lynn
If it operates in the way he claims and Dave has modelled
then all he needs to do is put the reactor in a high temperature
thermostatically controlled fluid bath, like molten salt,
First - think about what you are suggesting. A molten sale bath will
requires hundreds of thousands of dollars to pull off, even if it works -
which it probably will not. For what? To appease a few hard line skeptics?
That money is better spent finding electronic control parameters that cost a
small fraction of molten salt.
... and it will then run just fine in self sustaining
operation without electrical input and using a thermostatically controlled
feed of coolant water to control the bath temperature. And I am sorry, but
if he hasn't figured that out in the last 2 years then he is a total muppet.
No, I think that it is you who do not understand the "ratcheting" phenomenon
- which almost everyone has seen in the lab - when applying thermal input to
Ni-H ... to one degree or another.
Constant heat input offers too little control. The reason for this is not
known but many experimenters have seen it. In Dave's model, as I understand
it - this relates to some kind of positive feedback parameter. The metaphor
is that thermal input serves the same purpose as control rods in a fission
reactor. We will let Dave explain it, but AFAIK he hasn't suggested constant
heat as an option.
Input power needs to be applied at a low duty cycle in the range of seconds
for good control, letting the temperature drop below a threshold level
during the off periods. Rossi has probably found a regime that works well
enough to be protected as either trade secret or IP.
A skeptic might complain that this kind of thermal ratcheting is such a
simple factor that it is not worth protecting as either, but then again,
they and several other smart commentators have missed it here already. Why
should Rossi make it that input parameter obvious to potential competitors,
when he could very well have another patent in the works?
BTW - the reason why a "ratcheting regime" works in this case could also be
related to stimulating internal hydrogen mobility - as well as some kind of
positive feedback loop. A molten salt bath would be completely
counter-indicated - if that is the case, and it would be a total waste of
time and other resources.
Rossi has been presented with an offer of a non-contact flow calorimeter -
and he should avail himself of that offer if indeed he wants to prove the
thermal gain to more of his critics.
In fact, the only proof for changing the mind of some skeptic will be to
"close the loop" and convert enough heat to electricity to internally power
the device. That will probably be easier to do than molten salt.
Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
