date:20110417

Thank you for this interesting information. But even Rossy will not try to
use H2O2 as fake energy  source of heat in Rossi's E-cat, I bet.
Peter

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Mark Iverson  wrote:

>  RE: Yves Rossy, the Jet Man.
> Of all the people that would have the exact same date of birth, it had to
> be someone like him.
>
> -Mark
>
>  --
> *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 17, 2011 12:39 PM
>
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible
>
>  Peter,
>
>
>
> An authority to contact for anyone interested in the safety issues would be
> the “Swiss Rocket Man” – since he puts his life on the line with this stuff
> daily. It is very dangerous at full strength but less so when diluted.
>
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Rossy
>
>
>
> Notice his name is Rossy - instead of Rossi, and that he is also known as
> the “fusion man” due to the surprising shock wave power of peroxide (which
> has little heat energy but high brisance)
>
>
>
> His old website, where he explains how it is done with peroxide is not
> active any more AFAIK.
>
>
>
> That could be for liability reasons.
>
>
>
> Jones
>
>
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

RE: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

I think the wiki needs a REALLY BIG BANNER at the top explaining that nickel 
powder is toxic and
hydrogen gas is highly combustible...

-Mark

  _  

From: Esa Ruoho [mailto:esaru...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 3:35 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints


http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_A._Rossi_Cold_Fusion_Generator:Rossi%27s_Hints

If anyone wants to send me the current state of the current article via email, 
I'll just post it
there and let's get a move on. It surely is at least a good idea to have it 
related to the
already-existing FAQ on PESWiki. 


On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:18 AM, Charles Hope  
wrote:


If everyone wants to start keeping our list there, on a new page, that would be 
great. If there is
no concern about their policies, I suggest it. 




Sent from my iPhone. 

On Apr 17, 2011, at 17:35, Esa Ruoho  wrote:



BTW, is this not a good place to set one up at?
 

http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_Rossi's_Cold_Fusion_Energy_Catalyzer_(E-Cat):_Freq
uently_Asked_Questions
 



On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Esa Ruoho <  
esaru...@gmail.com> wrote:


Hear hear! 



On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Charles Hope < 

lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com> wrote:


I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than passing 
around a word document.


Sent from my iPhone.

RE: [Vo]:Latest radio talk and lectures

2011-04-17 Thread fznidarsic

snip

More than that, is there a way to waste my waist, or is that another issue?


/snip


Yes your waste extends to the whole person.

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

RE: Yves Rossy, the Jet Man.
Of all the people that would have the exact same date of birth, it had to be 
someone like him.

-Mark

  _  

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 12:39 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible



Peter,

 

An authority to contact for anyone interested in the safety issues would be the 
"Swiss Rocket Man" -
since he puts his life on the line with this stuff daily. It is very dangerous 
at full strength but
less so when diluted.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Rossy

 

Notice his name is Rossy - instead of Rossi, and that he is also known as the 
"fusion man" due to
the surprising shock wave power of peroxide (which has little heat energy but 
high brisance)

 

His old website, where he explains how it is done with peroxide is not active 
any more AFAIK. 

 

That could be for liability reasons.

 

Jones

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Jones:
 
I know we're all a bit frustrated by the way details have come out, and what 
seems like some
contradictory statements, but it is what it is.  What's that saying about not 
wasting time on things
you cannot change... you're one of the more knowledgeable ones on this forum 
and if you choose to
devote energy to analyzing this story as it unfolds, perhaps its best to expend 
the energy analyzing
what we do have!  If nothing else, you learn things you didn't know, you pass 
on that knowledge and
insight, and when this is accepted by the mainstream, you just might get 
offered a cushy (and
exciting) job since you're on top of the technical details!!   
 
I'd give my left nut to be working in this field!  Heck, I'd give BOTH of 
'em since I'm not
going to be using them anymore in my life... they're just hangin around these 
days and not of much
use. 
LoL  :-)

-Mark


  _  

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 12:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible



Mark,

 

It goes without saying that this was a hasty fiction put together to show how 
this demo (or any
similar demo by anyone) could be partially faked (i.e. "enhanced") in a way 
that could fit into a
coherent story. and certainly was not intended to be anything more than that. I 
should have prefaced
the post - to make that clear. 

 

However, I am in the outspoken minority (minority of one?) who do not trust 
Rossi to be honest about
important details, especially when they contradict, as they often do, more 
reliable sources. like
the Swedish isotope analysis, for instance.

 

However, I vaguely recall the video interview a week or so ago - with the CEO 
of the Greek company .
in which he indicated that a goodly portion of the $100 million has already 
been released. Did
anyone else catch this interview?

 

Jones

 

 

From: Mark Iverson 

 

Items 5 and 7 are not fitting with the details that Rossi has stated, which is 
that he ONLY receives
money when the plant is producing energy... so there is no "up-front cash".  
Don't think that the
scenario is consistent with first-hand information...  

 

5)At this time, Rossi is already arranging a deal with the Greeks, possibly 
for far less money
than was finalized after the demo.

 

7)Then . flash . Rossi decides he can "enhance" the demo, and possibly 
close the deal with the
Greeks for more up-front cash - by using the low COP of about 4 to heat a 
peroxide blend and get the
'apparent' COP up to maybe 30.

 

-Mark

[Vo]:Non-newtonian fluids, protons and frog eggs

2011-04-17 Thread Harry Veeder

When all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail.

Electric repulsion at the atomic scale might have the characteristics of a 
non-newtonian (thixotropic) liquid.

Slam like charges together and they resist intensely. Bring the 
charges together slowly and the resistance diminishes.

(e.g cornstarch 
and water --> "oblek" ).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp1wUodQgqQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU7iuJ98fRQ&feature=related


See how this non-newtonian fluid made from a mix of corn starch and water
can protect an egg placed in a plastic bag containing the fuild.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYSlK4f94p0
It suggests a new model of the "liquid drop" nucleus, where the liquid is a 
non-newtonian fluid.

A proton would be like a frog's egg
http://keep3.sjfc.edu/students/jmm02377/e-port/frog-eggs.jpg
where the surrounding jelly is the electrostatic field which has the quality of 
a non-newtonian fuild.

Harry

Re: [Vo]:Thixotropic fields?

2011-04-17 Thread Harry Veeder



> 
> When all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail.
> 
> Electric repulsion at the atomic scale might have the characteristics of a 
> thixotropic liquid.
> 
> Slam like charges together and they resist intensely. Bring the 
> charges together slowly and the resistance diminishes.
> 
> (e.g cornstarch 
> and water --> "oblek" ).
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp1wUodQgqQ
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UU7iuJ98fRQ&feature=related
> 
> Harry
> 
> 

See how this non-newtonian (thixotropic) fluid made from a mix of corn starch 
and water
can protect an egg placed in a plastic bag containing the fuild.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYSlK4f94p0
It suggests a new model of the "liquid drop" nucleus, where the liquid is a 
non-newtonian fluid.
Harry

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Jones Beene  wrote:

Of course, these calculations will of necessity be based on the presumed
> surface area of a stainless steel inner reactor, as Rossi assures us is
> there - and the flow rate of the liquid.
>

And how do you know what the shape is, or surface area? Where was this
reported?

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

*  Okay, so in the Feb. 10 test, input was 80 W and output was not 16 kW or
130 kW but 320 W (4 times input) 

 

It is a mistake to conflate the two tests. Both have their own separate
problems. This is not new to Jed, and there is no reason to repeat the
details of the problems with the Feb 10 fiasco now, since the insurmountable
looming problem for anything above a few kW will be coming out soon. Anyway
I have less faith, not more, in the Feb 10 test, but both are physically
impossible. 

 

But again 400 watts in and 1600 out is FANTASTIC, a Nobel quality finding !
so even the skeptics cannot rejoice. We simply need to put the discovery
into the right framework.

 

Myself or someone else will be presenting evidence this coming week
(hopefully) from an expert in thermodynamics, if Krivit does not scoop the
story - that the gain claimed is physically impossible, under any
circumstances - even in a fission reactor; and the reason is mundane and
overlooked: heat transfer.

 

Of course, these calculations will of necessity be based on the presumed
surface area of a stainless steel inner reactor, as Rossi assures us is
there - and the flow rate of the liquid. Those who have fallen for the
impossibly large claim will then be forced to invent some other kind of
magical way to provide an order of magnitude more surface area than is
possible, given the weight and internal pressurization.

 

IOW the average of 16 kW is physically impossible ! The 130 kW claim borders
on complete ignorance of thermodynamics. I understand that this data will be
presented first to Levi for comment. Professional courtesy, one presumes.

 

What was that joke about the lawyer in the shark tank. !?!

 

Jones

Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

2011-04-17 Thread Esa Ruoho

http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_A._Rossi_Cold_Fusion_Generator:Rossi%27s_Hints

If anyone wants to send me the current state of the current article via
email, I'll just post it there and let's get a move on. It surely is at
least a good idea to have it related to the already-existing FAQ on PESWiki.


On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:18 AM, Charles Hope
wrote:

> If everyone wants to start keeping our list there, on a new page, that
> would be great. If there is no concern about their policies, I suggest it.
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone.
>
> On Apr 17, 2011, at 17:35, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
>
> BTW, is this not a good place to set one up at?
>
> 
> http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_Rossi's_Cold_Fusion_Energy_Catalyzer_(E-Cat):_Frequently_Asked_Questions
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Esa Ruoho < 
> esaru...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hear hear!
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Charles Hope 
>> <
>> lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than
>>> passing around a word document.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone.
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Why is calorimetry avoided in Rossi's experiments?

Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:

> In particular, the input water
> was tap water, with no temperature control, with a very low initial
> temperature, and the temp was measured only at the start and end of the
> run, allowing the possibility that the input temperature varied by some
> amount during the run.

No, the inlet and outlet temperatures were measured at regular intervals
during the run. I do not know how often. They were not measured only once.

> I seem to recall the flow rate was also measured at the start, and then
> assumed constant during the run.

It was measured manually at the start and again later on,
and continuously with a flowmeter that shows cumulative totals, such as the
kind you have in your house, that they use to bill you for water.

These details have not been made public. No report has been published. They
were related to me by phone and e-mail from the people who did the
experiment, and also to Mats Lewan. Granted, that is an informal way to
communicate with the public. With such an important experiment, I wish they
would publish something. You can fault their presentation, but the actual
methods and instruments used in the test are industry standard for working
with boilers of this size. This is how it is done. You might invent a more
sophisticated, complicated method that is much more precise, but it will not
be more accurate. It will not be more credible, or believable, because the
most credible method is the one everyone uses routinely for this purpose, by
definition.

For example, if you are measuring the floodwater level in a river, you look
at the rulers painted on the side of bridges. You might take a photo with a
cell phone camera. You can invent a highly sophisticated instrument that
pings the top of the water with sonar or radar to get a more accurate
reading, but no one will say it is more credible because reading the ruler
is simple and foolproof, because the water level in a river does not vary
much from one side to the other even in a flood, whereas a unique fancy
gadget that you invent might have unknown problems.

In no sense are these methods or instruments "sloppy." An $20 off-the-shelf
watt meter and a clamp-on ammeter may not be as sophisticated as a $16,000
power meter, but there is absolutely no reason to believe they are
inadequate to the task. A modern digital $20 watt meter is more reliable and
accurate than expensive instruments were a generation ago. It is physically
impossible for this to be an artifact of input power in any case.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

If everyone wants to start keeping our list there, on a new page, that would be 
great. If there is no concern about their policies, I suggest it. 


 

Sent from my iPhone. 

On Apr 17, 2011, at 17:35, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> BTW, is this not a good place to set one up at?
> http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_Rossi's_Cold_Fusion_Energy_Catalyzer_(E-Cat):_Frequently_Asked_Questions
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:
> Hear hear!
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Charles Hope  
> wrote:
> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than passing 
> around a word document.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone.
> 
>

Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

Flash is required?!

Sent from my iPhone. 

On Apr 17, 2011, at 17:36, ".:.gotjosh"  wrote:

> I have begun to author a webspace at ahead.com:
> http://ahead.com/begreencc/ecatrossi
> 
> it is a bit more visual and zoomable than a wiki... although not as
> searchable for the purely textual components...
> 
> please contact me if you would like to collaborate / contribute...
> 
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 23:21, Charles Hope
>  wrote:
>> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than passing 
>> around a word document.
>> 
>

Re: [Vo]:Why is calorimetry avoided in Rossi's experiments?

2011-04-17 Thread Stephen A. Lawrence

On 04/16/2011 04:11 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> I still see no documentation of calorimetry techniques applied.  Did I
> miss something?

Horace, I don't understand what you're saying here.

The first of the public demos used flow calorimetry:  Known flow rate,
and known temperature rise, gives heat produced.  You can take issue
with it on the grounds that they were claiming that the effluent was dry
steam and so all the enthalpy of evaporation was produced, when maybe it
wasn't, but it's absurd to claim there was no calorimetry done. 
Furthermore, even if you assume no steam at all was actually produced,
the measurements from the instruments clearly indicated the water was
heated from 20 degrees to 100 degrees, which is already over unity -- it
indicates close to a kilowatt was produced, and the electrical energy in
was 400 watts.

The later test (February?) used flowing water at less than boiling. 
Again, it's flow calorimetry, and flow rate times temperature rise gives
heat produced.  You can pick at the quality of the calorimetry, but it's
absurd to say no calorimetry was done.  In particular, the input water
was tap water, with no temperature control, with a very low initial
temperature, and the temp was measured only at the start and end of the
run, allowing the possibility that the input temperature varied by some
amount during the run.  Since the temp rise was 5 degrees, an input
temperature variation of a few degrees during the run would have made a
gross difference to the calculated heat produced.  I seem to recall the
flow rate was also measured at the start, and then assumed constant
during the run.  You can say, perhaps rightly, that these are flaws in
the calorimetry, but again, it's absurd to claim there was no calorimetry.

>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:About isotopic ratio on spent fuel (E-Cat)

2011-04-17 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

>From Jay:

> Axil, please continue posting, your comments are appreciated. 

I second that.

> As I understand, this forum exists only for sharing information and ideas;
> personal comments should not be posted nor ever considered.

Actually... keep in mind that "Personal comments" are often posted here.
"Personal comments" are not what is at issue. There is a big difference
between posting "personal comments" versus "commentary" meant to deride the
character of other vort participants.

Mr. Beaty has written a few personal definitions on posting behavior:

See:
http://amasci.com/weird/wvort.html

Of particular note are the following technical definitions:

**

The Vortex-L list was originally created for discussions of professional
research into fluid vortex/cavitation devices which exhibit anomalous energy
effects (ie: the inventions of Schaeffer, Huffman, Griggs, and Potapov among
others.) Currently it has evolved into a discussion on "taboo" physics
reports and research. SKEPTICS BEWARE, the topics wander from Cold Fusion,
to reports of excess energy in Free Energy devices, gravity generation and
detection, reports of theoretically impossible phenomena, and all sorts of
supposedly crackpot claims. Before you subscribe, please see the rules
below. This is a public, lightly- moderated smartlist list. There is no
charge, but donations towards expenses are recommended.



There is additional information worth reading.

SOME "PERSONAL" THOUGHTS OF MY OWN:

I find it refreshing that the vortex-l list is one of the most eclectic
discussion groups I've ever run across. Not only is avant-garde scientific
material discussed here, antidotes of a "personal" nature have often
expressed here as well. Such eclectic combinations have resulted in a rich
potpourri of intellect, science, and philosophical perspective which has the
potential of enriching the lives of everyone who participates in what I like
to call: The Vort Collective.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Jones Beene  wrote:

> JB: When the Swedish Professors find and document a robust COP of 4 instead
> of 30 they will be thrilled beyond words ! The prior test will be written
> off as measurement error.
>
>
>
> JR: That's preposterous. A measurement error on that scale is out of the
> question.
>
>
>
> JB: Nonsense ! In fact, this is the scenario that best fits the facts,
> whether you like it or not.
>

Okay, so in the Feb. 10 test, input was 80 W and output was not 16 kW or 130
kW but 320 W (4 times input) the whole time. Is that what you mean? It was a
factor of 50 error, and a factor of 406 at the apparent higher power. You
consider this measurement error plausible.

Which of the 4 parameters do you suppose were wrong? Or was it a
combination? Do you think the flow rate was actually 9 ml/s and both the
observers and the flowmeter mistook this for 1 L/s? It is hard to believe a
flowmeter could be so inaccurate.

You say that scenario "best fits the facts." Which facts do you have in
mind? None that I am aware of. None of the items numbered 1 - 16 above are
factual, as far as I know. You made them up. For example you said: ". . .
 Of course a part of the funds are in escrow . . ." and ". . . he has worded
the contract in such a way that in the end a showing of strong overunity is
the criterion – not the full 30-1 gain." There are no funds in escrow as far
as anyone knows, and the only detail about the contract that has been
discussed is that the machine should produce 1 MW. There has been no word
about the gain.

There is no harm in inventing scenarios but you should take care not to
believe something that you yourself dreamed up on the spur of the moment.

> There is no chance that the demo was done correctly in measuring P-out, as
> Horace very accurately points out.
>

I disagree. In my opinion, Horace's assertions are no in evidence, to say
the least. Any ordinary thermocouple or thermometer can measure a 5°C
temperature difference with high confidence. Assertions to the contrary are
not "very accurate" -- they are very strange.

Also, the people who did the demo know more about measuring temperatures and
energy than I do, and I suspect they know more than Horace does. Possibly
more than you do.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

I have begun to author a webspace at ahead.com:
http://ahead.com/begreencc/ecatrossi

it is a bit more visual and zoomable than a wiki... although not as
searchable for the purely textual components...

please contact me if you would like to collaborate / contribute...

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 23:21, Charles Hope
 wrote:
> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than passing 
> around a word document.
>

Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

2011-04-17 Thread Esa Ruoho

BTW, is this not a good place to set one up at?
http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_Rossi's_Cold_Fusion_Energy_Catalyzer_(E-Cat):_Frequently_Asked_Questions

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> Hear hear!
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Charles Hope <
> lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than
>> passing around a word document.
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone.
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

2011-04-17 Thread Esa Ruoho

Hear hear!


On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Charles Hope  wrote:

> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than
> passing around a word document.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone.
>

Re: [Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

I believe that when Rossi talks about using only milligrams of catalyst, he
is not making a mistake. The patent contains “a patent of interest section”
where a number of these patents address ion production, acceleration, and
their direction.

I believe that Rossi is ionizing NiO particles and firing them into the
reaction vessel at high speed with the intent of imbedding them into the
wall of the stainless steel (SS) vessel.

If the exciter is magnetic and/or electrostatic force, the only place that
these forces will have effect is on or very near the surface of the SS
reaction chamber.

The big Cat-E (10 KW) was said to contain only a gram of catalyst. That is
too small a volume of catalyst to fill a 1000 cm3 vessel. However, it is
sufficient to coat its walls with a rough thick surface layer. A Cat-E
totally filled with nanopowder with all of it producing heat cannot pass
that internal heat to the wall of the SS vessel very well.

Tight nanoparticle packing needed for efficient heat transfer would work
against efficient hydrogen flow and vice versa.

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 3:09 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:

> Again, I think you are really onto something here also!
> did you read my comment from this morning?
> (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473&cpage=3#comment-33413)
>
> I really want to know where the elements of the electric resistive
> heater are mounted. Does anyone have definitive info about that?
> Could they even be in contact with the Nickel Powder/matrix?
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 19:48, Axil Axil  wrote:
> > An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.
> >
> > One of the assertions coming from Rossi  is that the heat-output reaction
> > can be started/stopped at the flick of a switch. If so, then there needs
> to
> > be separate "exciter" (so to speak) exclusive of heat.
> >
> >
> >
> > An alterative exciter that controls the Rossi reaction which is not heat
> > must be electrostatic and/or magnetic excitation of the walls of the
> > stainless steel reaction chamber generated by the inductive heater.
> >
> >
> >
> > Heat alone cannot be the factor that controls the reaction because the
> heat
> > from nuclear processes would interfere (add to) with the application of
> > control heat and result in a runaway meltdown.
> >
> >
>
>

[Vo]:A wiki for compiling Rossi's hints

I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than passing 
around a word document. 


Sent from my iPhone.

Re: [Vo]:About isotopic ratio on spent fuel (E-Cat)

If the waste is identical to the fuel, that means no reaction involving it 
actually occurred, by definition. The material is at best merely a catalyst for 
a reaction with other fuel and waste. 





Sent from my iPhone. 

On Apr 15, 2011, at 22:52, Axil Axil  wrote:

> The scam status of the Rossi reactor has nothing to do with natural abundance 
> in Lenr reactions. It has been shown that all Lenr reactions produce waste 
> conformant to natural abundance. Like all Lenr reactions, the Rossi reactor 
> show natural abundance in it’s ash product. This should lend credence to the 
> claim that the Rossi reaction is real and that it is a valid Lenr Reaction.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> Wait a minute. You want to change half the Standard Model of Physics in
> order to suggest that Rossi's device has some tiny chance of being
> theoretically possible in the oddball way that he thinks it is - when we're
> not even sure that it's not a total scam?
> 
> ... now that is true devotion to a cause 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Harry Veeder
> 
> Has anyone described the necessary chain of stellar events that would
> produce
> the present isotopic abundance of copper and is there proof that all those
> events actually happened?
> 
> My point is perhaps some elements/isotopes are formed naturally by a LENR
> process rather than by a succession  of stellar events. Therefore the reason
> why the isotopic abundance produced by the Rossi reactor is natural is
> because the Rossi reactor emulates how nature does it.
> 
> Harry
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

FW: [Vo]:Make a cup of tea

2011-04-17 Thread Jack Harbach-O'Sullivan

The Japanese Zen-Tea Ceremony decended from the Chinese Tao Master 'Tsao-Tung' 
whose
school was called simply 'Quiet Sitting' aka 
contemplative-calmness-centeredness///yadda yadda.

?QUIET SITTNG/TEA & Tsao-Tung:

These days to be called 'Tsao-Tung' by anyone Taiwanese and or Mainland Chinese 
is to refer
to somebody simply as 'tea-drinker.'

Japanese WW-II aspirations to relocate/colonize Australia was based upon the 
long-standing Zen/Shinto
Prophesies in ancient Japanese lore that what is happening now to Japan herald 
it's eminent destruction.

This would be the PERFECT TIME to make the Japanese an offer of RELOCATION that 
they could'nt refuse. . .
There INTELLECTUAL/SCIENTIFIC/CULTURAL treasures would WELL BE WORTH absorption 
by a sponsoring country
with LOTS OF EXTRA SPACE. . .  And the U.S. could sure use a NOBEL CAUSE and a 
STIMULATIVE SHOT IN THE OLD
ECONOMIC KEISTER aka as notable Japanese Resources. . . .

Short of that:  Only a Hot-Nuke or two will acceptably expend the fuel 
promising an ongoing Super-Chernobyl and since
the AXIS IS SHIFTING BACK to INTER-GLACIAL GYRO-STABILITY-EQUILIBRIUM the next 
Tsunami; and the next; is soon
to ERADICATE JAPAN as a major planetary Gold-Mine-Resourse and give us A GRIM 
SEA-FLOOR-SERIES/MATRIX of CHERNOBYLS.

This is the HAND-WRITING ON THE WALL FOLKS. . . we wise up, get CREATIVELY 
GENEROUS,  or put our heads between our legs and KISS THE PLANETARY FUTURE 
ADIOS. . . .

Not the time for contemplative-QUIET SITTING

> Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 11:33:15 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Make a cup of tea
> From: hohlr...@gmail.com
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> 
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> > For Park, Garwin and the others I would recommend a nice hot Japanese bath,
> > in an old fashioned iron tub called a "Goenmon-buro." That's named after the
> > famous 16th century thief Goenmon. See:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_Goemon
> > They should consider using it the way they did for its namesake.
> 
> Hmmm. And I was going to suggest they ensure the cadmium levels were
> sufficiently high for their taste. Much better, Jed.
> 
> T
>

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

JR:  In real life, this scenario cannot be squared with the fact that tests
at U. Bologna are continuing, and units will probably be delivered to
universities in Sweden. 

 

JB: That is why we have NDAs, and you can bet your bottom dollar that
everyone involved have signed them.

 

JR: Nonsense. As I pointed out above, NDAs do not cover criminal activities,

 

JB: Are you accusing him of a crime? Shame on you. AFAIK no crime has been
committed. If Rossi has real OU, and I believe that he does as clearly
stated - and he wants to prove that theatrically - where is the crime? I
have not suggested it, and if you are now suggesting it - then please make
it clear that this is your own opinion - not mine.

 

JB: There is no question at all that they WILL sign NDAs if they want to be
a part of this continuing R&D. They do have competent attorneys in Italy and
only a fool would dispense with NDAs.

 

JB: When the Swedish Professors find and document a robust COP of 4 instead
of 30 they will be thrilled beyond words ! The prior test will be written
off as measurement error.

 

JR: That's preposterous. A measurement error on that scale is out of the
question.

 

JB: Nonsense ! In fact, this is the scenario that best fits the facts,
whether you like it or not. 

 

There is no chance that the demo was done correctly in measuring P-out, as
Horace very accurately points out. Thankfully, the substantial errors still
leaves plenty of room for gain

 

Shoddy work!

 

Jones

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

I wrote:

> Not at all. When the Swedish Professors find and document a robust COP of 4
>> instead of 30 they will be thrilled beyond words ! The prior test will be
>> written off as measurement error.
>>
>
> That's preposterous. A measurement error on that scale is out of the
> question.
>

I suppose it is possible they decide that the units delivered to them are
nowhere near as good a the one in Bologna.

Meanwhile, back in Bologna, by this time Levi et al. are becoming very
suspicious, because the unit they are testing suddenly stopped working, or
when they brought it to the lab it did not work. This cannot end well.
Sooner or later they open the cell, look at it for a minute or two and they
realize they have been had. How long would it take for a chemist to
recognize equipment used to ignite hydrogen peroxide? Pretty soon the
Italian police are tearing down the walls of the other building to reveal
the hidden 50-ton tank.

There is absolutely, positively, no way this kind of scam would work outside
of a 5th rate thriller.

Also, you can safely dismiss the possibility that Levi or Essen do not
understand how to open and close a faucet, by the way.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

I agree that these are very relevant "what ifs", ad i also think
that there is a certain logic to the idea that the.
perhaps the reactor could continue to run and be controlled with no
electrical input to the resistors.
perhaps not.

i don't want to get too opinionated here until i build my third or
fourth working prototype ;-)

but for now, i want to wrap my head around a reasonable set of assumptions
so i can get my first one working (even if it is only producing 2:1)

perhaps it is good to clarify here that the patent application
explicitly says resistance heaters - is there new information that i
am unaware of indicating that induction heaters are used?

Jed, about your scramming theories - from what i read on the blog, the
reaction is ended just by shutting off the resistors and the internal
hydrogen flow and increasing the water flow:
-
Mattia
March 22nd, 2011 at 3:13 PM
Dear Rossi,
how can you say that it‚s easy to cut the hydrogen supply and cool
down the E-Cat increasing the flow of water as much as necessary?
Levi said: we loaded the unit with hydrogen at the beginning, and then
the bottle was closed. It then worked for 18 hours with the bottle
closed.

Andrea Rossi
March 23rd, 2011 at 1:55 AM
Dear Mr Mattia Rizzi:
The internal hydrogen supply system is different from the external
supply system. The external (general) supply system is the one of
which you are talking about, but then the hydrogen makes a path that
is cut if power goes off or if we want for any reason.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
-
internal hydrogen path?
the hydrogen makes a path that is cut?
so there is a pressurized internal hydrogen chamber that has a
controlled release into the reaction chamber?

but if this is the case (that there is a digitally controlled release
of hydrogen into the reaction chamber), doesn't that represent a
single point of failure that could lead to over heating if the valve
ruptures or the integrity of the seal fails?


>
> That's grand, but what if heat is the only thing that works? What if
> electrostatic excitation has no effect on the reaction?
> I think it would make more sense to title this thread, "It would be nice ...

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> Ø  In real life, this scenario cannot be squared with the fact that tests
> at U. Bologna are continuing, and units will probably be delivered to
> universities in Sweden.
>
>
>
> That is why we have NDAs, and you can bet your bottom dollar that everyone
> involved have signed them.
>

Nonsense. As I pointed out above, NDAs do not cover criminal activities, or
excuse the person signing them from reporting crimes to the police. These
people are NOT -- rpt NOT -- going to allow themselves to used as pawns by
someone scheming to steal 100 million euros. You would have to be insane to
do that.

> Not at all. When the Swedish Professors find and document a robust COP of 4
> instead of 30 they will be thrilled beyond words ! The prior test will be
> written off as measurement error.
>

That's preposterous. A measurement error on that scale is out of the
question.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Jones Beene  wrote:

> Ha, ha. And how would this work now that they are testing it in Rossi's
> absence? I imagine they will notice.
>
>
>
> JB: There will be no more public disclosures IMO.
>

Obviously if they find it is a fraud they will disclose that. They are not
going to let themselves be used by someone scheming to steal 100 million
euros. They would be criminally liable if they did not alert the police.

> Surely the hidden tank will run out, or they will try another source of
> water.
>
>
>
> JB: Part of the deal with the University is surely going to be a strong NDA
> - till AR sez it’s OK
>

If they discover the thing is fake, all NDAs will be out the window! No one
would honor such an agreement with a crook. If they open the cell and find
magic electric wires, or Rossi shows up at the university to install a
50-ton tank of chemicals, the deception will end instantly, and they will
tell everyone.

It is amusing to imagine what he might say when he shows up with a large
truck and a crew of workmen to install the 50-ton tank. Does anyone suppose
they would let him connect that to the water supply, no questions asked, no
one curious to find out what it is? Also, the professors might wonder why he
demands they call the workmen back after 50 tons of cooling fluid have run
through the machine. "Just tell them to come by; don't ask why. And don't
look in that tank. Ignore it; it isn't important and it's none of your
business. It has NOTHING to do with this experiment."

The scenarios described by Fletcher call for brain-dead or hypnotized
scientists who do not take elementary precautions or bother to look closely
at the machine. That's improbable. The scenarios described by Heffner call
for people who are too stupid to turn a faucet on or off, and a world full
of thermometers that cannot measure the difference between a person with a
high fever, and a stone-cold corpse. That's even more improbable. But
somehow, the notion of Rossi and a crew of workmen showing up at three
different universities and installing large tanks, pumps and other equipment
without anyone noticing or caring strikes me as the most improbable "Just So
Story" of all.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

* 

*  In real life, this scenario cannot be squared with the fact that tests at
U. Bologna are continuing, and units will probably be delivered to
universities in Sweden. 

 

That is why we have NDAs, and you can bet your bottom dollar that everyone
involved have signed them.

 

*  Obviously, any tricks would be revealed by these tests.

 

Not at all. When the Swedish Professors find and document a robust COP of 4
instead of 30 they will be thrilled beyond words ! The prior test will be
written off as measurement error.

 

If these Professors can then deduce and tell Rossi how it is happening, he
will be thrilled. You and I will not hear a word from them nor anything of
value until October at the earliest. NDA in action.

 

If some trick Rossi used is actually exposed before then, you will probably
hear of it from Piantelli by way of Krivit's newsletter. This is actually a
fair bet to happen before October, come to think of it.

 

Jones

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Peter,

 

An authority to contact for anyone interested in the safety issues would be
the "Swiss Rocket Man" - since he puts his life on the line with this stuff
daily. It is very dangerous at full strength but less so when diluted.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yves_Rossy

 

Notice his name is Rossy - instead of Rossi, and that he is also known as
the "fusion man" due to the surprising shock wave power of peroxide (which
has little heat energy but high brisance)

 

His old website, where he explains how it is done with peroxide is not
active any more AFAIK. 

 

That could be for liability reasons.

 

Jones

 

 

 

From: Peter Gluck 

 

 

Dear Friends,

How many hydrogen peroxide explosion have you "seen"?

I remember 3,  great risk to mimic fire with this stuff. iron is a good
catalyst for peroxide decomposition. May I ask you to read the MSDS

of this substance? Thanks!

Peter

[Vo]:Chamber Pressure with changing temperature

using the estimate of 0.09 grams of hydrogen pressurized
into a 50cc chamber with
5cc occupied by 50g of nickel (at 8.8g/cc)
and 45cc unoccupied (for the hydrogen to fill)
with a starting pressure of ~24atm at 20C
the pressure will grow to ~64atm at 500C

atm   deg K deg C
24.22   293 20
25.87   313 40
27.53   333 60
29.18   353 80
30.83   373 100
34.97   423 150
39.10   473 200
43.23   523 250
47.36   573 300
55.63   673 400
63.90   773 500

(are my calculations correct ? -
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?hl=en_GB&hl=en_GB&key=0Aj441n89_v_VdHhXMHZ6MmlRWlh0RVJKYVBwd3B4amc&output=html)

Re: [Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

You are right, or not?

a) the cleaning must be done prior to introducing hydogen read please patent
2010/058288

b) if AxilAxil's NiO hypothesis is real, then water will be formed in the
reaction space and at 400 C it will develop a considerable pressure.
I do not think that NiO is the key, excuse me for that. For the time given
it is only a mental construct.

Peter

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:14 PM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:

> the swedes indicate that the H2 was loaded without first purging the
> chamber.
>
> Axil's hypothesis of the involvement of NiO further strengthens that
> small quantities of air/oxygen in the chamber ought to be ok.
>
> > prior to that it is gas unloaded active sites- all the gaseous
> competitors
> > of hydrogen are removed completely. I think this is a sine qua non
> condition
> > for such a system to work.
>
>

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

francis  wrote:

.. I took this to mean the unit could produce it’s own electrical to operate
> the controls while I’ve seen other comments on here where people seem to
> indicate the reactors were working with no heating. Can someone clarify?
>

No, they said it can run with no control at all. No heat, no nothing, in
pure heat-after-death. See the Notes on Rossi device (or FAQ I guess we
should call it). Rossi says it can run without controlling heat. Levi said
he observed it run in this mode. But Rossi says this is dangerous.

Naturally, it can also be used to generate electricity to feed that back. At
the input/output ratio of 1:200 that would trivial. You could use
thermoelectric chips. However, that would reduce safety a little, and
increase complexity. Since mains electricity is available everywhere this
machine is likely to be installed in the next few years, they should put off
developing that for a while.

Vehicle propulsion would require the machine generate its own electricity.
It also calls for a high efficiency heat engine. I suppose a steam turbine
would be a good choice, where mechanical power is fed to the wheels and also
to drive a generator. It would also need a battery, I think. The main Rossi
heat supply would be left on in standby mode, but it might be a good idea to
have a battery backup for the control electronics and resistance heaters.

I described some similar systems in my book.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

the swedes indicate that the H2 was loaded without first purging the chamber.

Axil's hypothesis of the involvement of NiO further strengthens that
small quantities of air/oxygen in the chamber ought to be ok.

> prior to that it is gas unloaded active sites- all the gaseous competitors
> of hydrogen are removed completely. I think this is a sine qua non condition
> for such a system to work.

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Dear Friends,
How many hydrogen peroxide explosion have you "seen"?
I remember 3,  great risk to mimic fire with this stuff. iron is a good
catalyst for peroxide decomposition. May I ask you to read the MSDS
of this substance? Thanks!
Peter

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>  Mark,
>
>
>
> It goes without saying that this was a hasty fiction put together to show
> how this demo (or any similar demo by anyone) could be partially faked (i.e.
> “enhanced”) in a way that could fit into a coherent story… and certainly was
> not intended to be anything more than that. I should have prefaced the post
> - to make that clear.
>
>
>
> However, I am in the outspoken minority (minority of one?) who do not trust
> Rossi to be honest about important details, especially when they contradict,
> as they often do, more reliable sources… like the Swedish isotope analysis,
> for instance.
>
>
>
> However, I vaguely recall the video interview a week or so ago - with the
> CEO of the Greek company … in which he indicated that a goodly portion of
> the $100 million has already been released. Did anyone else catch this
> interview?
>
>
>
> Jones
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Mark Iverson
>
>
>
> Items 5 and 7 are not fitting with the details that Rossi has stated, which
> is that he ONLY receives money when the plant is producing energy... so
> there is no "up-front cash".  Don't think that the scenario is consistent
> with first-hand information...
>
>
>
> 5)At this time, Rossi is already arranging a deal with the Greeks,
> possibly for far less money than was finalized after the demo.
>
>
>
> 7)Then … flash … Rossi decides he can “enhance” the demo, and possibly
> close the deal with the Greeks for more up-front cash - by using the low COP
> of about 4 to heat a peroxide blend and get the ‘apparent’ COP up to maybe
> 30.
>
>
>
> -Mark
>
>
>   --
>
> *From:* Jones
>
> First, don’t get me wrong. I thought the Bologna demo was robust and
> legitimate at the time, and still think it could have been strongly OU – but
> less so than appearances might indicate.
>
> However, there is no real proof of any huge gain until better controls are
> implemented. I agree fully with Horace that the demo was shoddy. However,
> all of us must realize by now, that any further public testing CANNOT HELP
> Rossi. Deals are signed and he has nothing to gain till he gets the megawatt
> device ready.
>
>
>
> A scenario which can answer a lot of questions would be this:
>
>
>
> 1)Focardi, Piantelli and many others have built Ni-H experiments for
> years that showed modest gain
>
> 2)Mills has built Ni-H systems that purportedly show much higher gain
>
> 3)Rossi teamed with Focardi circa 2006, and they were able to get a
> system up to say – COP of 4 by using nanopowder and Mills’ catalysts – maybe
> less, but reliable.
>
> 4)Focardi is in ill-health and recently asks for a public demo while
> he can still enjoy it
>
> 5)At this time, Rossi is already arranging a deal with the Greeks,
> possibly for far less money than was finalized after the demo.
>
> 6)Rossi decides to do the Bologna demo for the benefit of his old
> friend and mentor
>
> 7)Then … flash … Rossi decides he can “enhance” the demo, and possibly
> close the deal with the Greeks for more up-front cash - by using the low COP
> of about 4 to heat a peroxide blend and get the ‘apparent’ COP up to maybe
> 30.
>
> 8)He would already know about this blend, since the Chinese have been
> promoting it for a year or so.
>
> 9)Then the demo in Bologna and the positive PR.
>
> 10) The Greeks see this demo, are very impressed, fear competition - and
> sign the check in January for more than they wanted to.
>
> 11) Of course a part of the funds are in escrow, but remember, Rossi can
> still build reactors that are OU, so he can pull off something impressive in
> the end, even without the peroxide boost and get the full payment.
>
> 12) Thus he has worded the contract in such a way that in the end a
> showing of strong overunity is the criterion – not the full 30-1 gain
>
> 13) ERGO even without the ‘enhancement’ he used in the demo – he can be
> successful on the contract clauses and claim his fee, but it might require
> 700 reactors to get to the megawatt instead of 100.
>
> 14) Even with 700 it still makes economic sense but at 3 cents per kW-hr
> instead of 1 cent.
>
> 15) In the mean time Rossi thinks that by using U of Bologna, the Swedes
> and others - to figure out the underlying details that he realizes he does
> not know, he might actually get the device into a more robust range than his
> fall-back gain (COP = ~4)
>
> 16) Everyone lives happily ever after
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jed Rothwell
>
>
>
> Jones Beene wrote:
>
>  Considerably less than the $100 million Euros that a Greek investor might
> be willing to advance ….
>
>  Ha, ha. And how would this work now that they are testing it in Rossi's
> absence? I imagin

Re: [Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

Axil Axil  wrote:

> An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.
>
> One of the assertions coming from Rossi  is that the heat-output reaction
can be started/stopped at the flick of a switch. If so, then there needs to
be separate "exciter" (so to speak) exclusive of heat.
>
> An alterative exciter that controls the Rossi reaction which is not heat
must be electrostatic and/or magnetic excitation of the walls of the
stainless steel reaction chamber generated by the inductive heater.

That's grand, but what if heat is the only thing that works? What if
electrostatic excitation has no effect on the reaction?

I think it would make more sense to title this thread, "It would be nice to
have an Cat-E exciter exclusive of heat." An exciter is desirable, not
"required." We would not want to abandon this technology if it turns out
heat is the only control.

The only way to stop a fission reaction is to insert the control rods and
then wait for the residual reaction heat to go away. That takes weeks. The
people at Fukushima wish there was an alternative method, but there isn't.

It seems likely to me that gas pressure is a control parameter. I suggested
you might be able to scram a Rossi reactor by degassing it. I had in mind
using a vacuum pump for this purpose. Not just letting the gas out, but
rapidly pumping it. I assume that all E-Cats will be equipped with gas pumps
to pressurize them or depressurize them, and hydrogen tanks. It would not be
a good idea to ship a cell with the gas already in it, so you need to
pressurize it on site. If you want quench the reaction and turn off the
machine in a normal shut down, it would not be a good idea to simply vent
the gas. I assume it may contain some radioactive waste such as tritium.

In an emergency shut-down (a reactor scram) you would vent the gas outside
the building and ignite it, as I said before. I assume this can be done more
quickly than pumping the system down. Also it would be done when the system
is hot, whereas a normal pump-down operation would be done when the reaction
is already quenched and cooling. In an emergency you might also inject
deuterium gas, or nitrogen, if it turns out that works. I do not think you
would want to do that during a normal shut-down. It would contaminate the
catalyst.

Focardi suggested they might use electrolysis to produce hydrogen on site,
on demand. That seems like a bad idea to me. Electrolysis is not the safest
process. It is complicated and would add to the expense. A small tank of
hydrogen is better I think. As I said, the pump would put the gas from the
cell back into the tank when you want to turn off the machine completely.
Perhaps another, low pressure tank would be used instead.

Most of the time, reactors will be left running constantly. There is no need
to turn one off to save fuel. I hope it can be controlled to run at a
low-power standby mode, to reduce waste heat and the noise from fans and
pumps. The machine would have to be fully turned off to perform maintenance,
to replace the catalyst, or before removing and scrapping it.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

Again, I think you are really onto something here also!
did you read my comment from this morning?
(http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473&cpage=3#comment-33413)

I really want to know where the elements of the electric resistive
heater are mounted. Does anyone have definitive info about that?
Could they even be in contact with the Nickel Powder/matrix?

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 19:48, Axil Axil  wrote:
> An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.
>
> One of the assertions coming from Rossi  is that the heat-output reaction
> can be started/stopped at the flick of a switch. If so, then there needs to
> be separate "exciter" (so to speak) exclusive of heat.
>
>
>
> An alterative exciter that controls the Rossi reaction which is not heat
> must be electrostatic and/or magnetic excitation of the walls of the
> stainless steel reaction chamber generated by the inductive heater.
>
>
>
> Heat alone cannot be the factor that controls the reaction because the heat
> from nuclear processes would interfere (add to) with the application of
> control heat and result in a runaway meltdown.
>
>

[Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

2011-04-17 Thread francis

Axil Axil wrote on Sun, 17 Apr 2011 10:49:25 

An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

Heat alone cannot be the factor that controls the reaction because the heat

from nuclear processes would interfere (add to) with the application of

control heat and result in a runaway meltdown.

 

Your statement is probably true for emergency quenching but I think the
cooling loop is designed to extract more heat than the initial stages of a
runaway can do without - intentionally making the device dependent upon  the
heaters for continued operation. I am a little confused regarding statements
that the e-cat can work without wall power on it's own .. I took this to
mean the unit could produce it's own electrical to operate the controls
while I've seen other comments on here where people seem to indicate the
reactors were working with no heating. Can someone clarify?

Fran

Re: [Vo]:NiO is the answer

You might be seriously onto something there...
next question: how to condition the powder to be optimally oxidized?

could it be as simple as baking in an air atmosphere somewhere between
600-1200C ?
(http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15337365)

I am getting more and more sure that i can make one of these at home
in my kiln ;-)

.:.gotjosh

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 20:25, Axil Axil  wrote:
> NiO is the answer
>
> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=11&ved=0CB0QFjAAOAo&url=https%3A%2F%2Fpubweb.bnl.gov%2Fpeople%2Ffrenkel%2FNIO%2Fjacs.pdf&ei=sgyrTauKHOn20gHnhcH5CA&usg=AFQjCNFQpN-Hy2kt7yqpK3zilbCxaDGbRA&sig2=IM5WSgAI5S3nc-6x3952CA
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rust is not possible

See the message "NiO is the answer"

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>  Axil,
>
>
>
> Ø
>
> Ø  Loading hydrogen into Rust does not produce nuclear derived heat.
>
>
>
> Correct – it produce iron and water. I do not see Fe2O3 specifically as
> being involved at all in Rossi.
>
>
>
> FeO – however, when fully supported (shared oxygen) does make sense - but
> not Fe2O3. After all, the Swedes said iron in some form was there at a fair
> percentage, and they did sophisticated testing.
>
>
>
> Hydrogen reduction is one way that low carbon iron is processed from iron
> ore by the way. Iron ore is essentially rust. How to you propose to
> attenuate the reduction of rust inside the Rossi cell ? It could not last an
> hour.
>
>
>
> Having said that – your speculation about nickel oxide and copper oxide as
> Mott insulators does have merit, BUT ONLY when they are positioned to share
> their oxygen atom with the zirconia support. Otherwise they would be rapidly
> reduced also. In the same way, FeO is possible to be used as a catalyst - if
> and when supported on a dielectric, plus FeO is probably a Mott insulator. I
> don’t think rust qualifies at all, since it is fairly conductive.
>
>
>
> BTW – iron oxides of various levels have been used in tonnage as a bulk
> catalysts with hydrogen for a long time – that much is true. When used in
> the Haber process, the oxides are partially reduced ahead of time, and there
> is a competing oxidant present (nitrogen) which lowers the rate of full
> reduction to iron, but even so - catalyst must be replaced periodically and
> often, which is inconsistent with running a Rossi reactor continuously. Rust
> or magnetite was ideal in the original Haber process since it is more
> valuable when reduced, than as a refined ore.
>
>
>
> If there was to be any heat anomaly involving rust - we would have known
> about it long ago, as the ammonia industry is old, competitive and was a
> national priority 100 years ago. Every detail of Haber and its offshoots has
> been thoroughly analyzed.
>
>
>
> Jones
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Mark,

 

It goes without saying that this was a hasty fiction put together to show
how this demo (or any similar demo by anyone) could be partially faked (i.e.
"enhanced") in a way that could fit into a coherent story. and certainly was
not intended to be anything more than that. I should have prefaced the post
- to make that clear. 

 

However, I am in the outspoken minority (minority of one?) who do not trust
Rossi to be honest about important details, especially when they contradict,
as they often do, more reliable sources. like the Swedish isotope analysis,
for instance.

 

However, I vaguely recall the video interview a week or so ago - with the
CEO of the Greek company . in which he indicated that a goodly portion of
the $100 million has already been released. Did anyone else catch this
interview?

 

Jones

 

 

From: Mark Iverson 

 

Items 5 and 7 are not fitting with the details that Rossi has stated, which
is that he ONLY receives money when the plant is producing energy... so
there is no "up-front cash".  Don't think that the scenario is consistent
with first-hand information...  

 

5)At this time, Rossi is already arranging a deal with the Greeks,
possibly for far less money than was finalized after the demo.

 

7)Then . flash . Rossi decides he can "enhance" the demo, and possibly
close the deal with the Greeks for more up-front cash - by using the low COP
of about 4 to heat a peroxide blend and get the 'apparent' COP up to maybe
30.

 

-Mark

 

  _  

From: Jones 

First, don't get me wrong. I thought the Bologna demo was robust and
legitimate at the time, and still think it could have been strongly OU - but
less so than appearances might indicate. 

However, there is no real proof of any huge gain until better controls are
implemented. I agree fully with Horace that the demo was shoddy. However,
all of us must realize by now, that any further public testing CANNOT HELP
Rossi. Deals are signed and he has nothing to gain till he gets the megawatt
device ready.

 

A scenario which can answer a lot of questions would be this:

 

1)Focardi, Piantelli and many others have built Ni-H experiments for
years that showed modest gain

2)Mills has built Ni-H systems that purportedly show much higher gain

3)Rossi teamed with Focardi circa 2006, and they were able to get a
system up to say - COP of 4 by using nanopowder and Mills' catalysts - maybe
less, but reliable.

4)Focardi is in ill-health and recently asks for a public demo while he
can still enjoy it

5)At this time, Rossi is already arranging a deal with the Greeks,
possibly for far less money than was finalized after the demo.

6)Rossi decides to do the Bologna demo for the benefit of his old friend
and mentor

7)Then . flash . Rossi decides he can "enhance" the demo, and possibly
close the deal with the Greeks for more up-front cash - by using the low COP
of about 4 to heat a peroxide blend and get the 'apparent' COP up to maybe
30.

8)He would already know about this blend, since the Chinese have been
promoting it for a year or so.

9)Then the demo in Bologna and the positive PR.

10) The Greeks see this demo, are very impressed, fear competition - and
sign the check in January for more than they wanted to. 

11) Of course a part of the funds are in escrow, but remember, Rossi can
still build reactors that are OU, so he can pull off something impressive in
the end, even without the peroxide boost and get the full payment. 

12) Thus he has worded the contract in such a way that in the end a showing
of strong overunity is the criterion - not the full 30-1 gain 

13) ERGO even without the 'enhancement' he used in the demo - he can be
successful on the contract clauses and claim his fee, but it might require
700 reactors to get to the megawatt instead of 100.

14) Even with 700 it still makes economic sense but at 3 cents per kW-hr
instead of 1 cent.

15) In the mean time Rossi thinks that by using U of Bologna, the Swedes and
others - to figure out the underlying details that he realizes he does not
know, he might actually get the device into a more robust range than his
fall-back gain (COP = ~4)

16) Everyone lives happily ever after

 

 

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

Jones Beene wrote:

Considerably less than the $100 million Euros that a Greek investor might be
willing to advance ..

Ha, ha. And how would this work now that they are testing it in Rossi's
absence? I imagine they will notice. 

 

JB: There will be no more public disclosures IMO.

 

Surely the hidden tank will run out, or they will try another source of
water.

 

JB: Part of the deal with the University is surely going to be a strong NDA
- till AR sez it's OK

 

BTW - calculations based on heat content can be thrown out the window with
peroxide blends, which produce cold steam with less energy than seems
physically possible .

Re: [Vo]:Rust is not possible

see the message "An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of
heat."

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Let us generalize the discussion about the two catalysts involved in the
> Rossi reaction in terms of there function requirements to see if a reaction
> control mechanism can be derived.
>
>
>
> Let us get into the details on this point as follows:
>
>
>
> Under the assumption that the nuclear active area in the Rossi process is
> within large numbers of nanoscopic crystal defects in catalyst N (for
> nuclear) and catalyst C (for control) is somehow the controlling mechanism,
> what can that mechanism be?
>
>
>
> The nuclear heat comes from catalyst N. To transfer that nuclear heat to
> the stainless steel reaction vessel, the catalyst N must be in surface
> contact with the wall of this stainless steel vessel.
>
>
>
> Adjusting the preheating input adjusts the power output of the reactor. How
> can this be.
>
>
>
> The catalyst C must be in surface contact with the preheating input. The
> catalyst C must not be in surface contact with the catalyst N since the
> nuclear heat produced by catalyst N does not affect the catalyst C.
>
>
>
> There must be a space between the catalyst N and catalyst C and that space
> is filled with hydrogen an insolating material.
>
>
>
> Catalyst C is a Mott insulator that produces electrostatic charge. This
> charge increases as the temperature of catalyst C increases since the atomic
> all distances in catalyst C increase with temperature. Catalyst C must also
> be mounted on a material that can conduct input heat to catalyst C.
>
>
>
> When preheating input is applied to the catalyst C, its production of
> electrostatic force increases. This force travels across the insolating gap
> to the Catalyst N and increases the nuclear reaction.
>
>
>
> A decrease in the preheating input reduces the electrostatic force
> impinging on the nuclear active areas in the catalyst N. This reduces the
> nuclear reaction.
>
>
>
> Preheating input changes electrostatic force from 0 to 100%. This is the
> adjusting mechanism.
>
>
>
> If the catalyst C and catalyst N were physically mixed the reaction would
> be self sustaining.
>
>
>
> Reducing the pressure of the hydrogen increases the insulation value
> between the catalyst N and the catalyst C thereby reducing nuclear activity,
> since some small part of the nuclear heat travels across the insulation gap
> from the catalyst N to the catalyst C thereby supplementing the preheating
> input.
>
>
>
> What chemical compounds can catalyst C and catalyst N be. What catalyst is
> associated with nickel and what element is associated with catalyst N (a
> Mott insulator).  Catalyst N must be highly porous with many nuclear
> defects in its crystal structure and beside nickel only two other elements
> are involved. One must be oxygen to form a Mott insulator.
>
>
>
>
>
> Catalyst N must be a element that can form a oxide with high levels of
> defects in it crystal structure. All compounds must survive for years in a
> hot hydrogen environment.
>
>
>
> I assumed that Iron was involved as a catalyst because of the reference to
> US patent 20010024789 = Methods for generating catalytic proteins.
>
>
>
> On its face, this is a strange subject of interest for a nuclear reactor.
>
>
>
> But this is a standard method of producing Iron oxide catalysts of the form
> Fe2O3.
>
>
>
>
> http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=20010024789.PGNR.&OS=DN/20010024789&RS=DN/20010024789
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>>  Axil,
>>
>>
>>
>> Ø
>>
>> Ø  Loading hydrogen into Rust does not produce nuclear derived heat.
>>
>>
>>
>> Correct – it produce iron and water. I do not see Fe2O3 specifically as
>> being involved at all in Rossi.
>>
>>
>>
>> FeO – however, when fully supported (shared oxygen) does make sense - but
>> not Fe2O3. After all, the Swedes said iron in some form was there at a fair
>> percentage, and they did sophisticated testing.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hydrogen reduction is one way that low carbon iron is processed from iron
>> ore by the way. Iron ore is essentially rust. How to you propose to
>> attenuate the reduction of rust inside the Rossi cell ? It could not last an
>> hour.
>>
>>
>>
>> Having said that – your speculation about nickel oxide and copper oxide as
>> Mott insulators does have merit, BUT ONLY when they are positioned to share
>> their oxygen atom with the zirconia support. Otherwise they would be rapidly
>> reduced also. In the same way, FeO is possible to be used as a catalyst - if
>> and when supported on a dielectric, plus FeO is probably a Mott insulator. I
>> don’t think rust qualifies at all, since it is fairly conductive.
>>
>>
>>
>> BTW – iron oxides of various levels have been used in tonnage as a bulk
>> catalysts with hydrogen for a long time – that much is true. When used in
>> the Haber process

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Mark Iverson  wrote:

 Items 5 and 7 are not fitting with the details that Rossi has stated, which
> is that he ONLY receives money when the plant is producing energy... so
> there is no "up-front cash".  Don't think that the scenario is consistent
> with first-hand information...
>

My impression is that Jones Beene made up this scenario, as a hypothetical.
It is another "Just So Story." As such, it is harmless.

In real life, this scenario cannot be squared with the fact that tests at U.
Bologna are continuing, and units will probably be delivered to universities
in Sweden. Obviously, any tricks would be revealed by these tests. Rossi is
not going to install 50-ton tanks of chemicals in these universities.

None of the tricks listed by Alan Fletcher would survive these tests either.
Most of them would be detected in a few minutes by any half-awake
person. Some of them are interesting mind-experiments, but in real life we
can rule them out. Fletcher's speculation is harmless too, but it causes a
minor annoyance: some of the skeptics take these ideas seriously. The
Wikipedia article on the E-Cat now has a pointer to them.

We cannot blame Fletcher for what skeptics do. They will find any number of
reasons to deny this. I expect they will soon erase the Wikipedia article.
They do not matter.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

Gaas poisoning is still important (decisive)  because hydrogen must meet
active  sites that are clean and free and not  blocked by adsorbed gases.

Other I do not think that  the Rossi method is a continuation of Arata's
nanoparticles system- see what writes Piantelli about "cluster"
nanostructures of Nickel.

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Terry Blanton  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Wm. Scott Smith 
> wrote:
> > It shouldn't need to be continually fed new fuel.
>
> I do not believe the ECat is.  As I understand the goal, the user will
> purchase a pressurized "cartridge" which will run the ECat for several
> months at which time you will replace and recycle the cartridge.
>
> Kewl, eh?
>
> T
>
>

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:NiO is the answer

NiO is the answer

The use of hydrogen reduction of oxide creates abundant lattice defects in
NiO or any other oxide when exposed to hot hydrogen over an extended
timeframe.

Hydrogen based NiO reduction will create large numbers of O vacancies in the
surface of the NiO crystal.

The presence of O vacancies leads to an increase in the adsorption energy of
H2 and substantially lowers the energy barrier associated with the cleavage
of the H-H bond. At the same time, adsorbed hydrogen can induce the
migration of O vacancies from the bulk to the surface of the oxide.

These large numbers of O vacancies provide the nuclear active sites where
large numbers of hydrogen atoms are drawn and packed in. The oxygen within
the bulk of the NiO particle will strongly attract H into the particle.

This hydrogen reduction process of NiO will produce a nickel metal foam like
structure on the surface of the NiO particle heavily packed with H.

See the following

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=11&ved=0CB0QFjAAOAo&url=https%3A%2F%2Fpubweb.bnl.gov%2Fpeople%2Ffrenkel%2FNIO%2Fjacs.pdf&ei=sgyrTauKHOn20gHnhcH5CA&usg=AFQjCNFQpN-Hy2kt7yqpK3zilbCxaDGbRA&sig2=IM5WSgAI5S3nc-6x3952CA

Abstract:

Reduction of an oxide in hydrogen is a method frequently employed in the
preparation of active catalysts and electronic devices. Synchrotron-based
time-resolved X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray absorption fine structure
(NEXAFS/EXAFS), photoemission, and first-principles density-functional (DF)
slab calculations were used to study the reaction of H2 with nickel oxide.
In experiments with a NiO(100) crystal and NiO powders, oxide reduction is
observed at atmospheric pressures and elevated temperatures (250-350 °C),
but only after an induction period. The results of in situ time-resolved XRD
and NEXAFS/EXAFS show a direct NiO to Ni transformation without accumulation
of any intermediate phase. During the induction period, surface defect sites
are created that provide a high efficiency for the dissociation of H2. A
perfect NiO(100) surface, the most common face of nickel oxide, exhibits a
negligible reactivity toward H2. The presence of O vacancies leads to an
increase in the adsorption energy of H2 and substantially lowers the energy
barrier associated with the cleavage of the H-H bond. At the same time,
adsorbed hydrogen can induce the migration of O vacancies from the bulk to
the surface of the oxide. A correlation is observed between the
concentration of vacancies in the NiO lattice and the rate of oxide
reduction. These results illustrate the complex role played by O vacancies
in the mechanism for reduction of an oxide. The kinetic models frequently
used to explain the existence of an induction time during the reduction
process can be important, but a more relevant aspect is the initial
production of active sites for the rapid dissociation of H2.

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Items 5 and 7 are not fitting with the details that Rossi has stated, which is 
that he ONLY receives
money when the plant is producing energy... so there is no "up-front cash".  
Don't think that the
scenario is consistent with first-hand information...  
 

5)At this time, Rossi is already arranging a deal with the Greeks, possibly 
for far less money
than was finalized after the demo.

 

7)Then  flash  Rossi decides he can enhance the demo, and possibly 
close the deal with the
Greeks for more up-front cash - by using the low COP of about 4 to heat a 
peroxide blend and get the
apparent COP up to maybe 30.

 
-Mark

  _  

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Sunday, April 17, 2011 9:42 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible



First, dont get me wrong. I thought the Bologna demo was robust and legitimate 
at the time, and
still think it could have been strongly OU  but less so than appearances might 
indicate. 

 

However, there is no real proof of any huge gain until better controls are 
implemented. I agree
fully with Horace that the demo was shoddy. However, all of us must realize by 
now, that any further
public testing CANNOT HELP Rossi. Deals are signed and he has nothing to gain 
till he gets the
megawatt device ready.

 

A scenario which can answer a lot of questions would be this:

 

1)Focardi, Piantelli and many others have built Ni-H experiments for years 
that showed modest
gain

2)Mills has built Ni-H systems that purportedly show much higher gain

3)Rossi teamed with Focardi circa 2006, and they were able to get a system 
up to say  COP of 4
by using nanopowder and Mills catalysts  maybe less, but reliable.

4)Focardi is in ill-health and recently asks for a public demo while he can 
still enjoy it

5)At this time, Rossi is already arranging a deal with the Greeks, possibly 
for far less money
than was finalized after the demo.

6)Rossi decides to do the Bologna demo for the benefit of his old friend 
and mentor

7)Then  flash  Rossi decides he can enhance the demo, and possibly 
close the deal with the
Greeks for more up-front cash - by using the low COP of about 4 to heat a 
peroxide blend and get the
apparent COP up to maybe 30.

8)He would already know about this blend, since the Chinese have been 
promoting it for a year or
so.

9)Then the demo in Bologna and the positive PR.

10) The Greeks see this demo, are very impressed, fear competition - and sign 
the check in January
for more than they wanted to. 

11) Of course a part of the funds are in escrow, but remember, Rossi can still 
build reactors that
are OU, so he can pull off something impressive in the end, even without the 
peroxide boost and get
the full payment. 

12) Thus he has worded the contract in such a way that in the end a showing of 
strong overunity is
the criterion  not the full 30-1 gain 

13) ERGO even without the enhancement he used in the demo  he can be 
successful on the contract
clauses and claim his fee, but it might require 700 reactors to get to the 
megawatt instead of 100.

14) Even with 700 it still makes economic sense but at 3 cents per kW-hr 
instead of 1 cent.

15) In the mean time Rossi thinks that by using U of Bologna, the Swedes and 
others - to figure out
the underlying details that he realizes he does not know, he might actually get 
the device into a
more robust range than his fall-back gain (COP = ~4)

16) Everyone lives happily ever after

 

 

 

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

Jones Beene  wrote:

 

Considerably less than the $100 million Euros that a Greek investor might be 
willing to advance .

 

Ha, ha. And how would this work now that they are testing it in Rossi's 
absence? I imagine they will
notice. Surely the hidden tank will run out, or they will try another source of 
water.

 

 

BTW  calculations based on heat content can be thrown out the window with 
peroxide blends, which
produce cold steam with less energy than seems physically possible 

 

What is "cold steam"? This stuff boils at 150°C, it seems.

 

The Rossi device steam is 101°C, if you believe thermometers work.

 

- Jed

[Vo]:An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

An independent Cat-E exciter is required exclusive of heat.

One of the assertions coming from Rossi  is that the heat-output reaction
can be started/stopped at the flick of a switch. If so, then there needs to
be separate "exciter" (so to speak) exclusive of heat.



An alterative exciter that controls the Rossi reaction which is not heat
must be electrostatic and/or magnetic excitation of the walls of the
stainless steel reaction chamber generated by the inductive heater.



Heat alone cannot be the factor that controls the reaction because the heat
from nuclear processes would interfere (add to) with the application of
control heat and result in a runaway meltdown.

Re: [Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

2011-04-17 Thread Terry Blanton

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Wm. Scott Smith  wrote:
> It shouldn't need to be continually fed new fuel.

I do not believe the ECat is.  As I understand the goal, the user will
purchase a pressurized "cartridge" which will run the ECat for several
months at which time you will replace and recycle the cartridge.

Kewl, eh?

T

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

2011-04-17 Thread peatbog

> Jones Beene  wrote:
> 
>  Considerably less than the $100 million Euros that a Greek
> investor might
> > be willing to advance ….
> >
> 
> Ha, ha. And how would this work now that they are testing it in
> Rossi's absence? I imagine they will notice. Surely the hidden
> tank will run out, or they will try another source of water.

Maybe Rossi is using ice-nine.

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

First, dont get me wrong. I thought the Bologna demo was robust and
legitimate at the time, and still think it could have been strongly OU  but
less so than appearances might indicate. 

 

However, there is no real proof of any huge gain until better controls are
implemented. I agree fully with Horace that the demo was shoddy. However,
all of us must realize by now, that any further public testing CANNOT HELP
Rossi. Deals are signed and he has nothing to gain till he gets the megawatt
device ready.

 

A scenario which can answer a lot of questions would be this:

 

1)Focardi, Piantelli and many others have built Ni-H experiments for
years that showed modest gain

2)Mills has built Ni-H systems that purportedly show much higher gain

3)Rossi teamed with Focardi circa 2006, and they were able to get a
system up to say  COP of 4 by using nanopowder and Mills catalysts  maybe
less, but reliable.

4)Focardi is in ill-health and recently asks for a public demo while he
can still enjoy it

5)At this time, Rossi is already arranging a deal with the Greeks,
possibly for far less money than was finalized after the demo.

6)Rossi decides to do the Bologna demo for the benefit of his old friend
and mentor

7)Then  flash  Rossi decides he can enhance the demo, and possibly
close the deal with the Greeks for more up-front cash - by using the low COP
of about 4 to heat a peroxide blend and get the apparent COP up to maybe
30.

8)He would already know about this blend, since the Chinese have been
promoting it for a year or so.

9)Then the demo in Bologna and the positive PR.

10) The Greeks see this demo, are very impressed, fear competition - and
sign the check in January for more than they wanted to. 

11) Of course a part of the funds are in escrow, but remember, Rossi can
still build reactors that are OU, so he can pull off something impressive in
the end, even without the peroxide boost and get the full payment. 

12) Thus he has worded the contract in such a way that in the end a showing
of strong overunity is the criterion  not the full 30-1 gain 

13) ERGO even without the enhancement he used in the demo  he can be
successful on the contract clauses and claim his fee, but it might require
700 reactors to get to the megawatt instead of 100.

14) Even with 700 it still makes economic sense but at 3 cents per kW-hr
instead of 1 cent.

15) In the mean time Rossi thinks that by using U of Bologna, the Swedes and
others - to figure out the underlying details that he realizes he does not
know, he might actually get the device into a more robust range than his
fall-back gain (COP = ~4)

16) Everyone lives happily ever after

 

 

 

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

Jones Beene  wrote:

 

Considerably less than the $100 million Euros that a Greek investor might be
willing to advance .

 

Ha, ha. And how would this work now that they are testing it in Rossi's
absence? I imagine they will notice. Surely the hidden tank will run out, or
they will try another source of water.

 

 

BTW  calculations based on heat content can be thrown out the window with
peroxide blends, which produce cold steam with less energy than seems
physically possible 

 

What is "cold steam"? This stuff boils at 150°C, it seems.

 

The Rossi device steam is 101°C, if you believe thermometers work.

 

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Jones Beene  wrote:

 Considerably less than the $100 million Euros that a Greek investor might
> be willing to advance ….
>

Ha, ha. And how would this work now that they are testing it in Rossi's
absence? I imagine they will notice. Surely the hidden tank will run out, or
they will try another source of water.

> BTW – calculations based on heat content can be thrown out the window with
> peroxide blends, which produce cold steam with less energy than seems
> physically possible …
>

What is "cold steam"? This stuff boils at 150°C, it seems.

The Rossi device steam is 101°C, if you believe thermometers work.

- Jed

[Vo]:Gas Poisoning Unimportant if its Fusion But . . .

2011-04-17 Thread Wm. Scott Smith


It shouldn't need to be continually fed new fuel. Once the Cathode is loaded 
there is enough fuel present to fuel it for many years at this small level of 
energy generation---this is part of why this cannot be fusion, but is likely to 
be ZPE as the time axes of atoms in the small cavities shrink, movement along 
these axes, which we usually call the passage of time---this movement through 
time space is accelerated and events in the cavity happen much faster.
The biggest problem with the con-fusion hypothesis is also seen in the insanely 
high supposed-fusion byproducts. These are catalysts; the con-fusion is a 
smokescreen to steer us away from the true mechanism that really is producing 
anomalous heat.
Wm. Scott Smithz-pec.yolasite.comScott

Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 09:12:52 +0300
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why is calorimetry avoided in Rossi's experiments?
From: peter.gl...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

It was so much trouble with intensity because the cathodes - more precisely the 
NAE are poisoned with gases that do not allow to D or H to enter and react. It 
was also bad for reproducibility the systems were grosso modo unpredictable. 
One step forward two steps backwards.

As regarding Energetics- do you know how many intense processes (batches) they 
had?  I know about  exp. 64. But even that had no continuity

Yes, I also think Rossi's great advantage is gas loaded nanoparticles. But 
prior to that it is gas unloaded active sites- all the gaseous competitors of 
hydrogen are removed completely. I think this is a sine qua non condition for 
such a system to work.

Ed Storms has dismissed repeatedly my gas poisoning hypothesis.What could I 
say? Not important! But what do the experiments say?Peter
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

Peter Gluck  wrote:


Calorimetry was a curse and a burden for Pd- D CF/LENR because much more money, 
creativity, patience, discusions was consumed for measuring small quantities of 
released heat instead of focussing on the intensification of the process. The 
results are known.


I think Storms or McKubre would take exception to that. Not to speak for them, 
they have often said:
1. Scaling up Pd-D electrochemistry tends to scale up and amplify the noise as 
much as the signal.


2. You cannot intensify a process if you cannot even detect it. The main 
purpose of making sensitive calorimeters was to capture and then optimize tiny 
effects. The other purpose was to satisfy the skeptics, which was futile.


3. They did the best they could to intensify it, and succeeded to some extent. 
Techniques such as Energetics Technology produced much higher heat and a higher 
input to output ratio than older techniques; i.e. ~1 W input, ~20 W output.


Bear in mind also that one of Rossi's key advantage's is the use of gas-loaded 
nanoparticles. This originated with Pd-D studies, by Arata. I do not know if 
Rossi was aware of Arata when he began working on this approach. Perhaps he 
only found out when he wrote the patent. Anyway, this was a major contribution 
from the Pd-D school of cold fusion.


- Jed



-- 
Dr. Peter GluckCluj, Romaniahttp://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

BTW - calculations based on heat content can be thrown out the window with
peroxide blends, which produce cold steam with less energy than seems
physically possible .

 

Check out the video of a brave German - crossing the English channel by air
- using a few kilos of peroxide

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN_hgt4InyI

 

 

 

From: Jones Beene 

Subject: RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

 

Considerably less than the $100 million Euros that a Greek investor might be
willing to advance ..

 

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

Jones Beene wrote:

 

In the category of clear water-based liquids which burn cleanly enough to be
used indoors, and which could be confused with water in a testing
arrangement (since it would be so unexpected as the 'trick' used to pull-off
the deception) - there are several choices.

 

How much would it cost to make 54 tons of it?

Re: [Vo]:Rai News 24 "the inquiry" on LENR

2011-04-17 Thread SHIRAKAWA Akira


On 2011-04-17 15:15, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Is there no mention of Rossi? That's ungracious. He is the reason they
have gained credibility with the public, and they are being interviewed
on TV.


There was absolutely no mention of him, but from what I've read around 
it appears this was due to an agreement made beforehand as the next 
episode of that TV program on the LENR issue will be entirely dedicated 
to Rossi's E-Cat.


Cheers,
S.A.

RE: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Considerably less than the $100 million Euros that a Greek investor might be
willing to advance ..

 

 

From: Jed Rothwell 

 

Jones Beene wrote:

 

In the category of clear water-based liquids which burn cleanly enough to be
used indoors, and which could be confused with water in a testing
arrangement (since it would be so unexpected as the 'trick' used to pull-off
the deception) - there are several choices.

 

How much would it cost to make 54 tons of it?

Re: [Vo]:Rossi To Provide E-Cat for University of Uppsala and Stockholm

2011-04-17 Thread Terry Blanton

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> He said he did not have time for academic scientists.

I'm sure he was thinking of US adademia, rife with deception, back
stabbing and outright fraud.

Can you imagine MIT, bastion of hot fusion, testing an ECat objectively?

T

Re: [Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

Jones Beene  wrote:

 In the category of clear water-based liquids which burn cleanly enough to
> be used indoors, and which could be confused with water in a testing
> arrangement (since it would be so unexpected as the ‘trick’ used to pull-off
> the deception) - there are several choices.
>

How much would it cost to make 54 tons of it? That's how much they would
need for the 18-hour test. Might be hard to hide.

- Jed

[Vo]:Clear, odorless, water-based & combustible

In the category of clear water-based liquids which burn cleanly enough to be
used indoors, and which could be confused with water in a testing
arrangement (since it would be so unexpected as the 'trick' used to pull-off
the deception) - there are several choices. 

 

These are miscible and with 40-50% water and the resultant blend would be
combustible at that dilution level - would go undetected by a group of
observers who assumed that it was water. All of these ingredients would be
expected to be legitimately found in any company which produces or evaluates
alternative fuels - and if the ruse was discovered prematurely . "oops,
Igor, you brought in the wrong container," or else "yes, our municipal water
is very polluted here".

 

A form of alcohol, called Sterno, or 'canned heat' is made from jellied
alcohol and burned directly from its can. The food service industry uses it
for buffet heating and chafing, and it produces little smell and no
monoxide; however, it would need to be used with less gel and no added color
- to resemble water. The primary exhaust product is steam (~2/3). The gel
keeps alcohol volatility under control and acts to denature it, as it is
toxic to ingest. The heat content is about 18 MJ/l - or half of gasoline.

 

Hydrogen peroxide produces only steam. HOOH is more viscous than water, but
appears colorless in solution. It is both an oxidant an a propellant. When
used in a blend, it would provide free oxygen and steam, so that air is not
needed to combust the other ingredients (or less is needed). 

 

Ethylene glycol is an automotive antifreeze. In its pure form, it is an
odorless, colorless, sweet-tasting liquid and toxic to consume. As
antifreeze is denatured to discourage pets from ingesting and color is
added. In pure form, it can serve as the gel for the other ingredients.

 

A mix of these with water should be adequate to produce a combustible
non-volatile, odorless liquid whose primary exhaust product is steam, with
no remnant smell and with a heat content sufficient to convert all of the
liquid to steam using a common catalyst. This hypothetical liquid would be
more viscous than water, and with a peristaltic pump, it would be expected
to produce more of an abnormal sloshing noise than would be expected of
water.

 

In summary - the heat content of this water-like liquid would be under 10
MJ/l and the net effect of the deception will be to convert all of it into
steam so there is absolutely no argument that a chemical, non-nuclear
reaction is not sufficient to produce the steam which is documented. There
will be pure CO2 present in the exhaust, but it would go unnoticed, as it is
odorless and colorless.

Re: [Vo]:Make a cup of tea

2011-04-17 Thread Terry Blanton

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> For Park, Garwin and the others I would recommend a nice hot Japanese bath,
> in an old fashioned iron tub called a "Goenmon-buro." That's named after the
> famous 16th century thief Goenmon. See:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_Goemon
> They should consider using it the way they did for its namesake.

Hmmm.  And I was going to suggest they ensure the cadmium levels were
sufficiently high for their taste.  Much better, Jed.

T

Re: [Vo]:Rossi To Provide E-Cat for University of Uppsala and Stockholm

2011-04-17 Thread Göran Crafte

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> This is excellent news!
>
>
I am also very happy about this. First, because it indicates that Andrea
Rossi will complete his mission. Secondly, being a Swede and having been
studying at both the University of Uppsala and the University of Stockholm
certainly gives this a certain flavor! I have to get a ticket for the Nobel
Prize ceremony!

However, being a realist, I say like Mr. Rossi that you should not sell the
bear before it is shot. Life is very interesting anyway!

Göran Crafte

Re: [Vo]:Rai News 24 "the inquiry" on LENR

I know well- Roberto, Emilio and Francesco, had no opportunity to met prof
Yogendra  Sristava. And prof Carpinteri who was a pleasant revelation to me
too. The ideas of geofusion, fracture fusion, piezowhatever have circulated
even in the first year of Cold Fusion, mainly by Russian scientist (see e.g.
the Britz Bibliography) but Prof Carpinteri made them high quality science.
However this is not exactly mainstream LENR i.e energy source.
Italian (and worlwide) Ni-H  LENR started with the Italian Cold Fusion Hot
Potato in 1994- and this was even not mentioned in the discussion..

And I got inspiration for a new septoe for the Ego Out Blog;

"*Even very high intelligences are NOT additive"*

Peter

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Michele Comitini <
michele.comit...@gmail.com> wrote:

> prof. Alberto Carpinteri explains some interesting things how fission
> and fusion by piezonuclear has affected the Crust isotopic abundance.
> He is convinced that piezonuclear is equivalent to LENR with high
> pressure (aka nano powders) and that could be a reason of isotopic
> distribution of Cu in E-cat nano powders  after 2 months running.
>
> mic
>
> 2011/4/17 Peter Gluck :
> > Thank you a lot! Here it became a bit diluted in my opinion.
> > Not a word about the Ni-H systems.
> > But very interesting it has to continue I hope.
> > Peter
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:59 AM, SHIRAKAWA Akira
> >  wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2011-04-17 07:13, Peter Gluck wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Grazie.  a Vi prego- la seconda parte?
> >>> It was very well organized and had logical fluency...
> >>
> >> Part 1:
> >> http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/canale-tv.php?id=22918
> >>
> >> Part 2:
> >> http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/canale-tv.php?id=22919
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> S.A.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dr. Peter Gluck
> > Cluj, Romania
> > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
> >
>
>

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Make a cup of tea

Meant Go-emon 石川五右衛門

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Make a cup of tea

For Park, Garwin and the others I would recommend a nice hot Japanese bath,
in an old fashioned iron tub called a "Goenmon-buro." That's named after the
famous 16th century thief Goenmon. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_Goemon

They should consider using it the way they did for its namesake.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rai News 24 "the inquiry" on LENR

Peter Gluck  wrote:


> Not a word about the Ni-H systems.
> But very interesting it has to continue I hope.
>

Is there no mention of Rossi? That's ungracious. He is the reason they have
gained credibility with the public, and they are being interviewed on TV.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Make a cup of tea

2011-04-17 Thread Michele Comitini

Espresso is my suggestion, but they have to make E-cat work with
pressures up tu 20bar.


2011/4/17 Andrea Selva :
> E-cat tests were performed in Italy so heating a big pot of spaghetti would
> better fit with local custom
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Harry Veeder  wrote:
>>
>> Rossi should build a special purpose Ecat so that
>> Richard Garwin can heat his cup of tea. ;-)
>>
>>
>> "I require that you be able to make one of these things, replicate it, put
>> it
>> here. It heats up the cup of tea. I'll drink the tea. Then you make me
>> another
>> cup of tea. And I'll drink that too. "
>>
>> http://www.wanttoknow.info/energy/cold_fusion_reactor
>>
>> Harry
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Tarallo Water Diversion Fake

2011-04-17 Thread Michele Comitini

next time they can connect an espesso machine. Everyone will enjoy a
great coffee: the little metallic flawor from Cu should give a great
result ;-)

mic

2011/4/17 Jones Beene :
> Hey Alan,
>
> All this talk about ways to fake the Rossi experiment got me to thinking
> about a clever way which may not have been mentioned – or maybe I overlooked
> it if it was covered already.
>
> Was hydrogen peroxide mentioned? And/or did anyone actually *taste the
> water* in the first test ?
>
> BTW I do not think this demo was a scam, but this scheme could be worth
> mentioning.
>
> It was not generally known at the time in January, but has been mentioned
> since then - that the demonstration took place at a factory owned by
> Leonardo. If he wanted to scam, Rossi could have altered the plumbing to one
> faucet in that room only - to deliver a combustible clear liquid to fill the
> containers. He may have filled the containers in the presence of the
> assembled Professors, before the video started - so nobody would have given
> a second thought it could be anything but eau de municipal.
>
> As I recall no one in Italy willing drinks tap water, but in the interest of
> science – it could have happened. Hopefully we will hear that some brave
> soul had the foresight (courage) to try to drink a bit of it – so that we
> can eliminated this possibility too. If not, this opens up a way to get
> quite a bit of combustible volume into play – more than the one liter.
>
> As you may know, there has been a major effort in China to convert coal to
> liquid fuel – it is called CTL. Usually it is mixed alcohols. One company
> which has done this remarkably well is known as the “Shenzhen Group”. I have
> seen a video of a product that is colorless, odorless and water-based that
> burns completely as if was alcohol, but does not have the volatile odor like
> alcohol. In fact it was developed to be used indoors for heating and cooking
> in open kerosene type heaters which are common all over Asia. The biggest
> selling point is no smell and near zero monoxide - and this could be due to
> peroxide content.
>
> Of course, anything over 30% peroxide would be the perfect scam since it
> converts directly to steam. However, peroxide itself has a slightly
> different appearance, so it would need to be a new kind of blend.
>
> Rossi would know of this, as EON his other company - is in the alternative
> fuel business.
>
> Ever hear of the Swiss Rocket Man ?
>
> Sorry to bother you, if this has been covered.
>
> Jones

Re: [Vo]:Rai News 24 "the inquiry" on LENR

2011-04-17 Thread Michele Comitini

prof. Alberto Carpinteri explains some interesting things how fission
and fusion by piezonuclear has affected the Crust isotopic abundance.
He is convinced that piezonuclear is equivalent to LENR with high
pressure (aka nano powders) and that could be a reason of isotopic
distribution of Cu in E-cat nano powders  after 2 months running.

mic

2011/4/17 Peter Gluck :
> Thank you a lot! Here it became a bit diluted in my opinion.
> Not a word about the Ni-H systems.
> But very interesting it has to continue I hope.
> Peter
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:59 AM, SHIRAKAWA Akira
>  wrote:
>>
>> On 2011-04-17 07:13, Peter Gluck wrote:
>>>
>>> Grazie.  a Vi prego- la seconda parte?
>>> It was very well organized and had logical fluency...
>>
>> Part 1:
>> http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/canale-tv.php?id=22918
>>
>> Part 2:
>> http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/canale-tv.php?id=22919
>>
>> Cheers,
>> S.A.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Gluck
> Cluj, Romania
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi To Provide E-Cat for University of Uppsala and Stockholm

This is excellent news! For about a year now, I have been urging Rossi to
place some reactors in academic laboratories. I think they have a lot to
offer him. They have instruments and skills he lacks, and they can give him
a measure of credibility. It would be the opposite of "street-cred"
(street-credibility) -- call it "Ivory Tower Credibility" -- but it is still
useful.

His main strategy is to gain credibility, funding, and ultimately success by
selling machines for practical uses. That's great! I am thrilled by that.
However, I heard that he has extra reactors available, so I told him I think
it would be a great idea to pursue the academic track too. Approval from one
will reinforce the other. In the initial stages, before the whole world
acknowledges the machine is real, a corporation that is considering a
purchase may hesitate. A venture capitalist may hesitate to invest. Give
them independent academic evaluations from universities in Italy and Sweden,
and they will feel more confidence.

He said he did not have time for academic scientists. I sense he did not
trust them. I think he has now learned they can be useful to him. He says he
has learned a lot from them lately. That's good. I figured this would help.
There are smart professors dumb ones; helpful ones and ones who want to
steal your idea. I told him to look for good professors. I do not know if my
advice played any role, but I am pleased that he did it.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Make a cup of tea

2011-04-17 Thread Andrea Selva

E-cat tests were performed in Italy so heating a big pot of spaghetti would
better fit with local custom

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Harry Veeder  wrote:

> Rossi should build a special purpose Ecat so that
> Richard Garwin can heat his cup of tea. ;-)
>
>
> "I require that you be able to make one of these things, replicate it, put
> it
> here. It heats up the cup of tea. I'll drink the tea. Then you make me
> another
> cup of tea. And I'll drink that too. "
>
> http://www.wanttoknow.info/energy/cold_fusion_reactor
>
> Harry
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:In world in which thermometers do not work . . .

2011-04-17 Thread Andrea Selva

Thermometers do work, but ...
E-Cat tests remind me the kid that, to skip school, is claiming to be sick
after he put the thermometer in the tea cup :)

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> A hospital: "Doctor, this patient seems to have a high fever. It is
> registering 40°C. Then again, you can't depend on these thermometers! He
> might be stone-cold dead, at 15°C."
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rai News 24 "the inquiry" on LENR