Re: [Vo]:Watts-up with 28, 30, 33 day cycles?
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Tue, 3 May 2011 09:30:24 -0400: Hi, [snip] And dark matter is seasonal: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20434-second-experiment-hints-at-seasonal-dark-matter-signal.html T DAMA uses an array of sodium iodide detectors to spot the rare moments when WIMPs slam into atoms in the detectors, producing flashes of light. ..I always wonder how they manage to filter out the effects of natural radioactivity? (which would likely vary from place to place). Not comic rays, but radioactive substances in the earth, e.g. the occasional neutron from natural fission of U235. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities!
In reply to francis 's message of Tue, 3 May 2011 06:09:29 -0400: Hi, [snip] Scott and I have collaborated and communicated at length regarding a Casimir theory based on relativistic contraction of the longer vacuum wavelengths which still appear full length to an observer inside the cavity instead of the present theory where the longerwavelengths are simply upshifted to higher frequency inside the cavity. As I understand it, they are not normally upshifted. They are excluded altogether, because they are too long to fit in the cavity. It's precisely because they are excluded that they press on the outside, but not on the inside walls of the cavity, hence producing a pressure that pushes the walls together. Only the wavelengths greater than the cavity dimensions are responsible for this, and since these represent but a minute fraction of the total, the force is very small, until the walls get very close together. That's because as they approach one another, the excluded wavelengths get shorter and shorter, representing an ever increasing amount of vacuum energy. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Lewan video is informative
In reply to Angela Kemmler's message of Tue, 03 May 2011 15:59:01 +0200: Hi, [snip] One should check the calculations and estimates there. But it looks as if arith. mean power was above or around 1 kW. I agree. Glad to see someone did the work. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Lewan did not measure all three cables
Hi, On 3-5-2011 22:38, Angela Kemmler wrote: In Europe you may find quite often a power outlet (wall outlet) without earth contact, so, this contact is not necessary. You find extension cords with only two wires. The third (earth) contact has only the purpose to protect you. In Germany you find often a particular fuse interrupting the tension, if a current above 10 mA flows over the earth contact. I'm sure this is also the case in other countries. To be more precise, the third (Yellow-green wire) is there to let a potential leaking-current from the equipment or housing flow back to the grid. Be aware that the current flowing through this earth-wire can be lethal ! However in Europe in most houses in the meter cupboard (where the 230 VAC is distributed through the house) always a maximum of 4 combined groups (usually 16 A each) are protected by a single electro-mechanical 30 mA differential circuit-breaker, which is activated (via a solenoid) when the current-difference between the Live (Brown wire) and Neutral (Blue wire) pair exceeds the 30 mA. Where this leaking-current is flowing is not relevant for this circuit-breaker, it may well be over a copper gas-pipe or water-pipe and not always necessarily over a dedicated earth-conductor as long as it is below the threshold, it will not activate the circuit-breaker. Kind regards, MoB
[Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
Hello Everyone, There is probably a simple explanation for this. In the new video that can be found on the following site. http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/canale-tv.php?id=23074 A schematic layout of the experiment is shown In the schematic there is a canister of hydrogen labeled H2 There is another canister beside it labeled D2 What is this canister? Is it just a second canister of hydrogen?
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
Hello Everyone, There is probably a simple explanation for this. In the new video that can be found on the following site. http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/canale-tv.php?id=23074 A schematic layout of the experiment is shown In the schematic there is a canister of hydrogen labeled H2 There is another canister beside it labeled D2 What is this canister? Is it just a second canister of hydrogen? The schematic is not from Rossis patent (he owns no so far). Its from a patent from Francesco Piantelli, who got a patent about H-Ni fusion in 1995 and a second in 2010. I understand italian quite well. In the rainews-video they interview the patent-lawyer of Piantelli, who says that Rossi will never get the patent because Piantelli invented it earlier. -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
Re: [Vo]:Lewan video is informative
Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 04 May 2011 17:32:32 +1000 Von: mix...@bigpond.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Lewan video is informative In reply to Angela Kemmler's message of Tue, 03 May 2011 15:59:01 +0200: Hi, [snip] One should check the calculations and estimates there. But it looks as if arith. mean power was above or around 1 kW. I agree. Glad to see someone did the work. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html Robin, your link to http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html seems not to work. -- NEU: FreePhone - kostenlos mobil telefonieren und surfen! Jetzt informieren: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freephone
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.dewrote: Hello Everyone, There is probably a simple explanation for this. In the new video that can be found on the following site. http://www.rainews24.rai.it/it/canale-tv.php?id=23074 A schematic layout of the experiment is shown In the schematic there is a canister of hydrogen labeled H2 There is another canister beside it labeled D2 What is this canister? Is it just a second canister of hydrogen? The schematic is not from Rossis patent (he owns no so far). Its from a patent from Francesco Piantelli, who got a patent about H-Ni fusion in 1995 and a second in 2010. I understand italian quite well. In the rainews-video they interview the patent-lawyer of Piantelli, who says that Rossi will never get the patent because Piantelli invented it earlier. -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities!
Robin, I had the same original displacement concept until recently and I think it is roughly equivalent to the up shifted term Scott and Thomas introduced me to. The issue with the displacement concept is it carries with it an image of a vacant portion of space where the displaced wavelength used to reside. While my relativistic theory doesn't exactly match either concept the up shifted concept Thomas Prevenslik first introduced me to comes from a thermal dynamic perspective of Casimir effect - I used to consider this the other camp for Casimir theory vs. the displacement camp that I was more comfortable with - Thomas comes at this from a perspective of thermal dynamics and will argue the plates are not pushed together and that ether doesn't need to exist to explain the effect, he explains the effect as an imbalance created by up shifting causing the plates to self attract. Although my relativistic concept now represents a new 3rd option/camp I chose to refer to the up shifting version as the alternative because it already deals with what I consider a misconception of there being a vacancy - the energy summation is still reduced because energy content reduces with wavelength until some cutoff frequency beyond which it is meaningless to integrate, therefore an up shifted spectrum will also sum to a lower energy total. For a while I just went with the idea that the vacancy got filled in with shorter wavelengths but the up shifted concept already handles that issue plus it is an easier transition to the relativistic concept because it already has the same remote perspective of faster wavelengths inside the cavity... the only thing it lacked was my position that the wavelengths would appear unchanged to a local observer in the cavity... which as I have said previously is more in keeping with the changes in energy density, anomalous increases in C transition time thru the cavity as measured externally and Claims of variation of radioactive decay rates. Regards Fran Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities! mixent Wed, 04 May 2011 00:28:40 -0700 In reply to francis 's message of Tue, 3 May 2011 06:09:29 -0400: Hi, [snip] Scott and I have collaborated and communicated at length regarding a Casimir theory based on relativistic contraction of the longer vacuum wavelengths which still appear full length to an observer inside the cavity instead of the present theory where the longerwavelengths are simply upshifted to higher frequency inside the cavity. As I understand it, they are not normally upshifted. They are excluded altogether, because they are too long to fit in the cavity. It's precisely because they are excluded that they press on the outside, but not on the inside walls of the cavity, hence producing a pressure that pushes the walls together. Only the wavelengths greater than the cavity dimensions are responsible for this, and since these represent but a minute fraction of the total, the force is very small, until the walls get very close together. That's because as they approach one another, the excluded wavelengths get shorter and shorter, representing an ever increasing amount of vacuum energy. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
Thanks! I do not think that a secret catalyst exists- it is about a better nanostructure of nichel made by physical or chemical (?) methods. It can be an alloy or a mixture but nanotechnology is the key. I told that the catalyst is actually NiEnTe, nichts, nada etc but people enjoy speculating.Vederemo! I can sincerely and technically appreciate the difficulties Rossi had in differentiating from Piantelli old patent. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.dewrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
So to be clear, do you think that Rossi's statement that a catalyst (two elements other than nickel) is used in the E-Cat is a lie? From: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, May 4, 2011 5:33:00 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Thanks! I do not think that a secret catalyst exists- it is about a better nanostructure of nichel made by physical or chemical (?) methods. It can be an alloy or a mixture but nanotechnology is the key. I told that the catalyst is actually NiEnTe, nichts, nada etc but people enjoy speculating.Vederemo! I can sincerely and technically appreciate the difficulties Rossi had in differentiating from Piantelli old patent. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:A Working hypothesis
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Maybe the worry is not a future nickel shortage ... so much as good old H2O. While we're fetching meteors for Ni we can grab a few comets on the way for water. T
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
It is no place for philosophy here but it is a problem of definition- things re not 11000% true or 100% lies. If it is a catalyzer- what does it catalyze? (accelerate a reaction and is not consumed?) Catalyzers work via active sites (see my ancient paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GluckPunderstand.pdf http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GluckPunderstand.pdf(active sites were later enobled to NAE) more more active sites per unit of volume or of weight= better catalyst, more intense reaction. Rossi's merit - is, I think a superior Ni nanostructure, with higher activity. An example- Rosii says there are 100 grams of NI in the core -true! He says there is 1 gram ni there- also true, because only a small fraction of Ni actually works. But E-cat is a good catchword and inspires speculation. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:59 PM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.comwrote: So to be clear, do you think that Rossi's statement that a catalyst (two elements other than nickel) is used in the E-Cat is a lie? -- *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Wed, May 4, 2011 5:33:00 AM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Thanks! I do not think that a secret catalyst exists- it is about a better nanostructure of nichel made by physical or chemical (?) methods. It can be an alloy or a mixture but nanotechnology is the key. I told that the catalyst is actually NiEnTe, nichts, nada etc but people enjoy speculating.Vederemo! I can sincerely and technically appreciate the difficulties Rossi had in differentiating from Piantelli old patent. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.dewrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
Rossi has specifically stated that the catalysts are elements that are not nickel. If there are not other elements in there then he has lied. If that is a case he is a sorry scumbag monster and I hope his technology goes no where. However, I think he is telling the truth. From: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, May 4, 2011 6:26:00 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister It is no place for philosophy here but it is a problem of definition- things re not 11000% true or 100% lies. If it is a catalyzer- what does it catalyze? (accelerate a reaction and is not consumed?) Catalyzers work via active sites (see my ancient paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GluckPunderstand.pdf (active sites were later enobled to NAE) more more active sites per unit of volume or of weight= better catalyst, more intense reaction. Rossi's merit - is, I think a superior Ni nanostructure, with higher activity. An example- Rosii says there are 100 grams of NI in the core -true! He says there is 1 gram ni there- also true, because only a small fraction of Ni actually works. But E-cat is a good catchword and inspires speculation. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:59 PM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.com wrote: So to be clear, do you think that Rossi's statement that a catalyst (two elements other than nickel) is used in the E-Cat is a lie? From: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, May 4, 2011 5:33:00 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Thanks! I do not think that a secret catalyst exists- it is about a better nanostructure of nichel made by physical or chemical (?) methods. It can be an alloy or a mixture but nanotechnology is the key. I told that the catalyst is actually NiEnTe, nichts, nada etc but people enjoy speculating.Vederemo! I can sincerely and technically appreciate the difficulties Rossi had in differentiating from Piantelli old patent. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Renewable Energy World Rossi coverage
May 3 article: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/05/swedish-skeptics-confirm-nuclear-process-in-tiny-4-7-kw-reactor
[Vo]:Floating wind turbines
Interesting approach. See: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/05/a-buoyant-future-for-floating-wind-turbines
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
But I spoke about an alloy or a mixture. As long as he does not uses ultra-high purity Ni there are always other elements present. I have some empathy for him- say he uses X and Y as additives and he confesses this clearly with data and details in his patent. What follows- practically, not legally? One of my patents was simply reproduced, stolen- and because it was a PROCESS not a Product- nothing could be done. This was at small level in a very different legal enevironment but is relevant. In my paper quoted yesterday in Steve Krivit's blog (in my comment) I have explained what problems has Rossi on the technical level. I have sent the same paper to Vortex a week ago but it was ignored completely. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:35 PM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.comwrote: Rossi has specifically stated that the catalysts are elements that are not nickel. If there are not other elements in there then he has lied. If that is a case he is a sorry scumbag monster and I hope his technology goes no where. However, I think he is telling the truth. -- *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Wed, May 4, 2011 6:26:00 AM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister It is no place for philosophy here but it is a problem of definition- things re not 11000% true or 100% lies. If it is a catalyzer- what does it catalyze? (accelerate a reaction and is not consumed?) Catalyzers work via active sites (see my ancient paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GluckPunderstand.pdf http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GluckPunderstand.pdf(active sites were later enobled to NAE) more more active sites per unit of volume or of weight= better catalyst, more intense reaction. Rossi's merit - is, I think a superior Ni nanostructure, with higher activity. An example- Rosii says there are 100 grams of NI in the core -true! He says there is 1 gram ni there- also true, because only a small fraction of Ni actually works. But E-cat is a good catchword and inspires speculation. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 3:59 PM, noone noone thesteornpa...@yahoo.comwrote: So to be clear, do you think that Rossi's statement that a catalyst (two elements other than nickel) is used in the E-Cat is a lie? -- *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Wed, May 4, 2011 5:33:00 AM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Thanks! I do not think that a secret catalyst exists- it is about a better nanostructure of nichel made by physical or chemical (?) methods. It can be an alloy or a mixture but nanotechnology is the key. I told that the catalyst is actually NiEnTe, nichts, nada etc but people enjoy speculating.Vederemo! I can sincerely and technically appreciate the difficulties Rossi had in differentiating from Piantelli old patent. Peter On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.dewrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: [Vo]:A Working hypothesis
One of more large comets intersecting with our orbit is possibly how some of the primordial water got here to begin with ... -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton Maybe the worry is not a future nickel shortage ... so much as good old H2O. While we're fetching meteors for Ni we can grab a few comets on the way for water. T
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
I believe the question is, What is canister D2 in the patent? On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:16 AM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
[Vo]:JOURNAL OF CONDENSED MATTER NUCLEAR SCIENCE #4
I did not even realize this was uploaded. See: http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol4.pdf
RE: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities!
Jones, the Reifenschweiler effect would represent a downshift - there are also claims that reflect an up shift where the radioactive decay rate is accelerated. This fits more my posit of segregation due to Casimir suppression where the lower density inside a Casimir boundary is balanced by an increased density spread over the outer surface of the plates. This would also explain why suppression can accomplish dilation so cheaply compared to spatial acceleration because it is a balanced effect. The Reifenschweiler effect would apply to gas atom with an affinity to migrate into the sails of the outer plates while claims of accelerated delay would apply to gas populations with an affinity to migrate into the cavity -probably just physical properties like charge and size that effect the average migration path.I think the cavity will always be more concentrated and the acceleration claims far more prounounced than claims of delay because the outer plates represent a large very shallow reservoir while the cavity and transition between represent a more concentrated fast moving stream. Regards Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 9:53 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities! If ZPE radiation is being upshifted in a cavity then the Reifenschweiler effect would more likely be an increase in the decay rate, not a decrease. This is because the nucleus would be over-stimulated in the sense of the induced gamma effect, and it would decay faster, not slower. If seems more likely that radiation is being neither upshifted or downshifted, at least in the Reifenschweiler effect. Unlike many observers, I see the decay rate of the tritium in the Casimir cavity (from the perspective of the tritium itself) as NOT changing ! ...but instead some of the beta decay is being ported into a ZPE sink instead, so it only appears to us, outside the cavity ,that the decay rate it is slower than it was. IOW some of the radiation goes into Dirac 'reciprocal space' or a correlate, and we simply do not see it in 3-space, but from the standpoint of the rate itself and the tritium itself - nothing has changed. This can explain the Rossi heating effect when you substitute IRH (inverted Rydberg hydrogen) for tritium. More on that later. Jones From: Roarty, Francis X Robin, I had the same original displacement concept until recently and I think it is roughly equivalent to the up shifted term Scott and Thomas introduced me to. The issue with the displacement concept is it carries with it an image of a vacant portion of space where the displaced wavelength used to reside. While my relativistic theory doesn't exactly match either concept the up shifted concept Thomas Prevenslik first introduced me to comes from a thermal dynamic perspective of Casimir effect - I used to consider this the other camp for Casimir theory vs. the displacement camp that I was more comfortable with - Thomas comes at this from a perspective of thermal dynamics and will argue the plates are not pushed together and that ether doesn't need to exist to explain the effect, he explains the effect as an imbalance created by up shifting causing the plates to self attract. Although my relativistic concept now represents a new 3rd option/camp I chose to refer to the up shifting version as the alternative because it already deals with what I consider a misconception of there being a vacancy - the energy summation is still reduced because energy content reduces with wavelength until some cutoff frequency beyond which it is meaningless to integrate, therefore an up shifted spectrum will also sum to a lower energy total. For a while I just went with the idea that the vacancy got filled in with shorter wavelengths but the up shifted concept already handles that issue plus it is an easier transition to the relativistic concept because it already has the same remote perspective of faster wavelengths inside the cavity... the only thing it lacked was my position that the wavelengths would appear unchanged to a local observer in the cavity... which as I have said previously is more in keeping with the changes in energy density, anomalous increases in C transition time thru the cavity as measured externally and Claims of variation of radioactive decay rates. Regards Fran Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities! mixent Wed, 04 May 2011 00:28:40 -0700 In reply to francis 's message of Tue, 3 May 2011 06:09:29 -0400: Hi, [snip] Scott and I have collaborated and communicated at length regarding a Casimir theory based on relativistic contraction of the longer vacuum wavelengths which still appear full length to an observer inside the cavity instead of the present theory where the longerwavelengths are simply upshifted to higher frequency inside
RE: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities!
ops - didn't see the rest of your post which I will reply to ON list after lunch but YES I do think any radiation or reaction that INITIATES inside the cavity will downshift on the exit path! _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 9:53 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities! If ZPE radiation is being upshifted in a cavity then the Reifenschweiler effect would more likely be an increase in the decay rate, not a decrease. This is because the nucleus would be over-stimulated in the sense of the induced gamma effect, and it would decay faster, not slower. If seems more likely that radiation is being neither upshifted or downshifted, at least in the Reifenschweiler effect. Unlike many observers, I see the decay rate of the tritium in the Casimir cavity (from the perspective of the tritium itself) as NOT changing ! ...but instead some of the beta decay is being ported into a ZPE sink instead, so it only appears to us, outside the cavity ,that the decay rate it is slower than it was. IOW some of the radiation goes into Dirac 'reciprocal space' or a correlate, and we simply do not see it in 3-space, but from the standpoint of the rate itself and the tritium itself - nothing has changed. This can explain the Rossi heating effect when you substitute IRH (inverted Rydberg hydrogen) for tritium. More on that later. Jones From: Roarty, Francis X Robin, I had the same original displacement concept until recently and I think it is roughly equivalent to the up shifted term Scott and Thomas introduced me to. The issue with the displacement concept is it carries with it an image of a vacant portion of space where the displaced wavelength used to reside. While my relativistic theory doesn't exactly match either concept the up shifted concept Thomas Prevenslik first introduced me to comes from a thermal dynamic perspective of Casimir effect - I used to consider this the other camp for Casimir theory vs. the displacement camp that I was more comfortable with - Thomas comes at this from a perspective of thermal dynamics and will argue the plates are not pushed together and that ether doesn't need to exist to explain the effect, he explains the effect as an imbalance created by up shifting causing the plates to self attract. Although my relativistic concept now represents a new 3rd option/camp I chose to refer to the up shifting version as the alternative because it already deals with what I consider a misconception of there being a vacancy - the energy summation is still reduced because energy content reduces with wavelength until some cutoff frequency beyond which it is meaningless to integrate, therefore an up shifted spectrum will also sum to a lower energy total. For a while I just went with the idea that the vacancy got filled in with shorter wavelengths but the up shifted concept already handles that issue plus it is an easier transition to the relativistic concept because it already has the same remote perspective of faster wavelengths inside the cavity... the only thing it lacked was my position that the wavelengths would appear unchanged to a local observer in the cavity... which as I have said previously is more in keeping with the changes in energy density, anomalous increases in C transition time thru the cavity as measured externally and Claims of variation of radioactive decay rates. Regards Fran Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities! mixent Wed, 04 May 2011 00:28:40 -0700 In reply to francis 's message of Tue, 3 May 2011 06:09:29 -0400: Hi, [snip] Scott and I have collaborated and communicated at length regarding a Casimir theory based on relativistic contraction of the longer vacuum wavelengths which still appear full length to an observer inside the cavity instead of the present theory where the longerwavelengths are simply upshifted to higher frequency inside the cavity. As I understand it, they are not normally upshifted. They are excluded altogether, because they are too long to fit in the cavity. It's precisely because they are excluded that they press on the outside, but not on the inside walls of the cavity, hence producing a pressure that pushes the walls together. Only the wavelengths greater than the cavity dimensions are responsible for this, and since these represent but a minute fraction of the total, the force is very small, until the walls get very close together. That's because as they approach one another, the excluded wavelengths get shorter and shorter, representing an ever increasing amount of vacuum energy. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Renewable Energy World Rossi coverage
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: May 3 article: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/05/swedish-skeptics-confirm-nuclear-process-in-tiny-4-7-kw-reactor And he calls himself a skeptic, harummph! The time has come to admit the mistake and get busy trying to improve our understanding so that we can perfect this amazing new technology. We have spent $20 billion and 55 years trying to reach break-even with hot fusion. Time to give cold fusion a chance. :-) T
[Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
Most casual observers of the Rossi device believe that the only two choices for the kilowatt levels of heat which is seen (aside from trickery) are chemical or nuclear. What else is there? During a chemical reaction both mass and energy are conserved, and the weight of the ash (reaction end-products) will equal the mass of the reactants. In contrast, a nuclear reaction turns a tiny amount of mass into energy, and the ash weighs slightly less. Because the 'c' or lightspeed component of e=mc^2 is large - and then is squared, it does not take much mass to provide lots of energy. Are those the only two choices? Obviously, there could be external energy being pumped in, but in the Rossi demo we are fairly certain it could not be the usual suspects - hidden wires or RF radiation. The wild card is the zero point field, but few casual observers know much about it. Even so, perhaps these limited choices may not be the end of story - even without wading too deeply into zero point - and that is because the nucleus is composed of smaller particles than protons and neutrons - quarks. Almost daily we are seeing reports from Fermilab and the LHC of how quarks are influenced by a fifth force (which may end up being a subset of ZPE) Of course, there is a semantics issue: of 'quark energy' being a subset of nuclear energy but that argument fades once we have the instrumentation necessary to analyze quarks and gluons in detail, since semantics is always about the observers' ignorance. Quarks are almost too small to specify and describe correctly in 2011, as having a unique identity, but that is changing daily. In chemistry - breaking bonds with high potential energy into bonds with lower potential energy results in gain. That is a clue as to where this is going. The chemical reaction involves valence electrons, and energy has merely been transformed from one form of energy to another, but is conserved. This may offer an analogy to quark energy, because there are six kinds of quarks, all having differing mass, and all are associated with packets of energy in a nucleus that provide a possible way in which potential energy can be converted in any kind of 'reorganization'. This can happen with input from the zero point field or not, but the bottom line is this: when bare protons are very close together, as Miley and Holmlid have proved is possible in the IRH state (inverted Rydberg hydrogen) - then they can act more like a bunch of quarks - the so-called quark soup than individual protons. About a month ago, I tried to frame this argument for the first time - and it got a bit too complex, but the time now seems right to take it under consideration, once again. It was not as clear then, as now, that this Rossi reaction has NO radiation signature. It all goes back to the excellent VB report - which in summary suggests that 10^17 nuclear reaction should have been detected over the long and energetic run, but in fact no nuclear reactions were detected. Here was the prior attempt at putting some of these ideas into words - Quark Power and it has a nice ring to it. Fran Roarty is also suggesting ways that cavity-QED can provide the impetus for the quark soup reorganization, but just as with any emergent meme, the proper wording is not yet in place to make this argument convincing to a broader audience. http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg44224.html Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
Jones Beene wrote: It was not as clear then, as now, that this Rossi reaction has NO radiation signature. It all goes back to the excellent VB report - which in summary suggests that 10^17 nuclear reaction should have been detected over the long and energetic run, but in fact no nuclear reactions were detected. Why is this any different from any other cold fusion reaction? The instruments VB used would not detect any nuclear reactions from a Pd-D experiment, yet there are other indications that is a nuclear reaction. Is your thesis that all cold fusion reactions are actually ZPE? Or are you suggesting Ni-H is but Pd-D is nuclear? Two radically different explanations for such similar phenomena seem one too many. - Jed
[Vo]:WAY OFF TOPIC and for Japanese readers only
Here are a series of Apple iPod advertisements with a voice-over in Japanese, but not just any Japanese. This is deep-fried, bleached-in-the-sun southern Japanese, kind of like south Georgia English, with vocabulary 150 years out of date: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bh-sENPLd44; If this guy was on NHK they would put subtitles on the screen. I have no trouble understanding him, but the people hit by the tsunami up north speak entirely different dialects. They interviewed a farmer from up there who is 101 years old. Without the subtitles I would not have understood him. It is as different as Vermont and south Georgia. England also has a wide range of dialects for such a small geographic area. Some areas were remarkably isolated well into the 20th century. A book about dialects that I read years ago said that in 1943, a linguist found an old guy in a village in southern England who had never heard of Winston Churchill. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:WAY OFF TOPIC and for Japanese readers only
On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 14:07 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: England also has a wide range of dialects for such a small geographic area. Some areas were remarkably isolated well into the 20th century. A book about dialects that I read years ago said that in 1943, a linguist found an old guy in a village in southern England who had never heard of Winston Churchill. Do you ever watch Jay Leno? There are people in America who do not know the name of the president of the United States. Craig Haynie Manchester, NH
RE: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
No - with palladium and deuterium - helium is expected and documented. Tritium is also expected in another branch and is documented Deuterium is very active for nuclear reactions as Farnsworth demonstrated (in his Fusor) long before PF. The Fusor is not cold fusion, but it shows how easy it is to get nuclear reactions with less power going in than a TV set. Hydrogen and deuterium are extremely different in many ways. There is plenty of reason why deuterium can be active for nuclear reactions and hydrogen not active. The two isotopes are 2:1 different in a.m.u - more than elements like carbon and oxygen for instance, and hydrogen has no neutron. That is the main thing. Hydrogen cannot fuse into helium in one step. Period. Hydrogen cannot fuse into tritium in one step. Period. Without a neutron, hydrogen cannot be shield or screened, so the probability of a nuclear interaction with anything else is extremely low. Deuterium is much more likely. And yes, I think that if you can find any cold fusion reaction with deuterium, which is operating a 4 kilowatts of excess - then the VB setup would have shown gammas. There would be enough bremsstrahlung if nothing else - for a strong signal at 4 kW. In fact no cold fusion setup has come close to 4 kW, and that is why this comparison is irrelevant. Jones -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell Jones Beene wrote: It was not as clear then, as now, that this Rossi reaction has NO radiation signature. It all goes back to the excellent VB report - which in summary suggests that 10^17 nuclear reaction should have been detected over the long and energetic run, but in fact no nuclear reactions were detected. Why is this any different from any other cold fusion reaction? The instruments VB used would not detect any nuclear reactions from a Pd-D experiment, yet there are other indications that is a nuclear reaction. Is your thesis that all cold fusion reactions are actually ZPE? Or are you suggesting Ni-H is but Pd-D is nuclear? Two radically different explanations for such similar phenomena seem one too many. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities!
Jones Beene wrote on Wed, 04 May 2011 06:54 [snip] Unlike many observers, I see the decay rate of the tritium in the Casimir cavity (from the perspective of the tritium itself) as NOT changing ! [/snip] Jones, I agree the rate is unchanged from the perspective of the tritium.. BUT I think tritium is in a HIGHER vacuum energy density because the decay is retarded. I think the Reifenschweiler effect tells us the tritium is experiencing a higher vacuum energy density associated with either the External walls of normal Casimir geometry or repulsive Casimir geometry. I am convinced time dilation is accomplished so easily by nano geometry suppression compared to the energy needed for spatial displacement is because the AVERAGE vacuum energy density remains unchanged above the nano scale- The quantum effect of the geometry is able to SEGREGATE the density into opposing reservoirs of different intensity and volume much more easily at and below the nano scale. The difference between these opposing reservoirs creates a permanent negative pressure conduit between them when the opening is sufficiently small such that the suppression keeps the reservoirs from becoming depleted. The outside of a cavity is a shield such that the reduced density inside means the external surface gradient accumulates pressure at an accelerated rate compared to normal matter that is exposed on all sides - or you could look at it as back pressure from the propagating vacuum wavelengths as they translate/up shift into the cavity. IMHO It would maintain a shallow reservoir of increased energy density spread over the entire exterior surface of the cavity. [snip]...but instead some of the beta decay is being ported into a ZPE sink instead, so it only appears to us, outside the cavity ,that the decay rate it is slower than it was. - IOW some of the radiation goes into Dirac 'reciprocal space' or a correlate, and we simply do not see it in 3-space, but from the standpoint of the rate itself and the tritium itself - nothing has changed.[/snip] Yes, although with Reifenschweiler effect you are talking about a repulsive Casimir geometry that increases vacuum energy density, this effect is just the same as spatially accelerating the tritium to near C such that it appears to slow from our perspective- when it returns to earth we seem to have aged greatly from it's perspective but it will then start aging at the same rate as us again since it is now in the same inertial frame. This is a mirror to the attractive Casimir phenomenon that lowers energy density inside a cavity. The hydrogen inside a normal Casimir geometry experiences LOWER energy density, deceleration or negative acceleration where it is the universe outside the cavity that appears to be racing away near C and when the hydrogen returns from the cavity it discovers that we, outside the cavity, have not aged while it has experienced years of time and chemical reactions. Regards Fran Jones Beene Wed, 04 May 2011 06:54:39 -0700 If ZPE radiation is being upshifted in a cavity then the Reifenschweiler effect would more likely be an increase in the decay rate, not a decrease. This is because the nucleus would be over-stimulated in the sense of the induced gamma effect, and it would decay faster, not slower. If seems more likely that radiation is being neither upshifted or downshifted, at least in the Reifenschweiler effect. Unlike many observers, I see the decay rate of the tritium in the Casimir cavity (from the perspective of the tritium itself) as NOT changing ! ...but instead some of the beta decay is being ported into a ZPE sink instead, so it only appears to us, outside the cavity ,that the decay rate it is slower than it was. IOW some of the radiation goes into Dirac 'reciprocal space' or a correlate, and we simply do not see it in 3-space, but from the standpoint of the rate itself and the tritium itself - nothing has changed. This can explain the Rossi heating effect when you substitute IRH (inverted Rydberg hydrogen) for tritium. More on that later. Jones
Re: [Vo]:WAY OFF TOPIC and for Japanese readers only
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 14:07 -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote: England also has a wide range of dialects for such a small geographic area. Some areas were remarkably isolated well into the 20th century. A book about dialects that I read years ago said that in 1943, a linguist found an old guy in a village in southern England who had never heard of Winston Churchill. Do you ever watch Jay Leno? There are people in America who do not know the name of the president of the United States. My wife was at the manicurist yesterday near the Sugarloaf Country Club and the women were discussing how the US had killed the president of Pakistan (ObL). T
Re: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
Jones Beene wrote: Hydrogen and deuterium are extremely different in many ways. There is plenty of reason why deuterium can be active for nuclear reactions and hydrogen not active. So you are suggesting that the mechanism for the Pd-D effect may be entirely different from Ni-H? One is fusion and the other may be ZPE? And yes, I think that if you can find any cold fusion reaction with deuterium, which is operating a 4 kilowatts of excess - then the VB setup would have shown gammas. There have been plenty of reactions at 10 to 100 W, ~40 times less. Surely, if they can detect gamma from 4 kW they could also detect them from 0.1 kW. Yet they do not. Except sporadically, on rare occasions such Iwamura's early electrochemical experiments. And these were at much lower power levels. So I do not think that the low power levels of Pd-D cold fusion are the barrier that prevents detection of gammas. I think there are none, and there would not be any even if you could afford to run 1 kg, 1000-cathode Pd-D experiment to produce 4 kW (or 1 kg of Zr-Pd nano-particle powder, or whatever it would take). In fact no cold fusion setup has come close to 4 kW, and that is why this comparison is irrelevant. Based on Iwamura and other who have detected gamma rays, and on cold fusion reactions that have come within an order of magnitude of Rossi, I think a rough comparison can be made. Also, people have barely begun looking for products of the Rossi reaction so we have no idea what they might be. For all anyone knows, the product might actually be copper with natural isotopes. I realize you reject that based on conventional theory, but anyone can reject all of cold fusion based on conventional theory. It is based on experiments, and you can never be absolutely certain what experiments will reveal. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:WAY OFF TOPIC and for Japanese readers only
Jed, Craig, Terry sez: England also has a wide range of dialects for such a small geographic area. Some areas were remarkably isolated well into the 20th century. A book about dialects that I read years ago said that in 1943, a linguist found an old guy in a village in southern England who had never heard of Winston Churchill. Do you ever watch Jay Leno? There are people in America who do not know the name of the president of the United States. My wife was at the manicurist yesterday near the Sugarloaf Country Club and the women were discussing how the US had killed the president of Pakistan (ObL). Ah, cut them some slack Terry! ;-) Musharraf, when he was still prez, probably had ObL over for dinner plenty of times during Ramadan. Shoot! They probably wuz neighbors! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13262131 http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/pervez_musharraf/index.html Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
Jed, I think they both share the same initial ZPE source that turns the quantum blender. The environment once established can be exploited by more than one energy extraction method. The ZPE doesn't have to be the extraction method - the blender is formed naturally and doesn't have any asymmetry but it gives you relativistic effects and possibly a relativistic radiation shield that down shifts any radiation or particles created inside inertial frames of low vacuum energy density. Regards Fran -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:49 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy Jones Beene wrote: Hydrogen and deuterium are extremely different in many ways. There is plenty of reason why deuterium can be active for nuclear reactions and hydrogen not active. So you are suggesting that the mechanism for the Pd-D effect may be entirely different from Ni-H? One is fusion and the other may be ZPE? And yes, I think that if you can find any cold fusion reaction with deuterium, which is operating a 4 kilowatts of excess - then the VB setup would have shown gammas. There have been plenty of reactions at 10 to 100 W, ~40 times less. Surely, if they can detect gamma from 4 kW they could also detect them from 0.1 kW. Yet they do not. Except sporadically, on rare occasions such Iwamura's early electrochemical experiments. And these were at much lower power levels. So I do not think that the low power levels of Pd-D cold fusion are the barrier that prevents detection of gammas. I think there are none, and there would not be any even if you could afford to run 1 kg, 1000-cathode Pd-D experiment to produce 4 kW (or 1 kg of Zr-Pd nano-particle powder, or whatever it would take). In fact no cold fusion setup has come close to 4 kW, and that is why this comparison is irrelevant. Based on Iwamura and other who have detected gamma rays, and on cold fusion reactions that have come within an order of magnitude of Rossi, I think a rough comparison can be made. Also, people have barely begun looking for products of the Rossi reaction so we have no idea what they might be. For all anyone knows, the product might actually be copper with natural isotopes. I realize you reject that based on conventional theory, but anyone can reject all of cold fusion based on conventional theory. It is based on experiments, and you can never be absolutely certain what experiments will reveal. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:WAY OFF TOPIC and for Japanese readers only
Craig Haynie wrote: Do you ever watch Jay Leno? There are people in America who do not know the name of the president of the United States. Good point. However, I expect that just about every American knew Lincoln was the president in 1863, and FDR was in 1943. Churchill was well known in the U.K. in the middle of WWII. I read this book 30 years ago . . . but I might even recall that the old geezer was unaware there was a war on. I find that very hard to believe, since there were Spitfires and Messershmits overhead. Maybe this was Penzance. I knew a man named Henry Ware. He was known as the Late Captain Ware during WWII because he was a linguist, interpreter and a U.S. army captain, and he was always late for meetings, including meetings between FDR, Churchill and Stalin. He lived in a tent on the roof of the U.S. Embassy, so they could not reach him at night. (The Russians love holding meetings in the dead of night.) Anyway, he traveled through Russia on assignment during the war, meeting with a variety of people. He met an old peasant in Georgia I think it was (their Georgia, not ours), and had a conversation along these lines: Capt Ware: So, what do you think of Stalin? OP: Who? Ware: Stalin! The leader of the USSR! OP: Ah, yes. The new Tsar. I've heard of him. No opinion. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
-Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell And yes, I think that if you can find any cold fusion reaction with deuterium, which is operating a 4 kilowatts of excess - then the VB setup would have shown gammas. JR: There have been plenty of reactions at 10 to 100 W, ~40 times less. Surely, if they can detect gamma from 4 kW they could also detect them from 0.1 kW. 100 watts continuous and no signal? Where and when? At 100 watts there should be a strong detectable signal with the VB setup, which is superb. Maybe not detectable with a gamma-scout ;) Can you give specifics of the 100 watt deuterium reaction which did NOT show any gammas with a sophisticated instrument? That would certainly change my opinion on this particular point, but let's defer to anyone who can add an expert opinion and this would be worth posing to VB. I think it is an important point because 100 watts is getting up there. For instance 200 watts into a Farnsworth Fusor will peg any and every meter. I am certain of that. A Fusor with only hydrogen instead of deuterium gives you zero BTW - which is essentially my point. Hydrogen is not active but deuterium is. When helium is the main ash, and when the strong gamma signature is absent at ~24 MeV (invoking some kind of phonon explanation) then we have essentially an alpha emission, and easily shielded. Therefore, you have to look for the secondary reactions - the bremsstrahlung (braking radiation) which would be way lower in energy. If you did not provide a good instrument for that, then you might miss it at 10 watts but at 100 watts it should show up IMO. If anyone out there knows differently - please speak up. Much of the bremsstrahlung would be below the 200 keV level but these have a long Boltzmann's tail. Therefore, at 100 watts into a Deuterium setup - IMO, there should be a strong signal when a high quality gamma setup is provided. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
Jones Beene wrote: JR: There have been plenty of reactions at 10 to 100 W, ~40 times less. Surely, if they can detect gamma from 4 kW they could also detect them from 0.1 kW. 100 watts continuous and no signal? Where and when? FP, Nice, France. They had every kind detector money can buy. Also, as I mentioned there have been several positive observations of gamma rays at much lower power levels, such as Iwamura, so I do not see how the power level can be the limiting factor. They have been detected with confidence at a fraction of a watt, so they were definitely there at times, and missing at other times. I don't see how the results would be any different with a much larger Pd-D cell that produces 4 kW. If gamma rays were not sporadic, Iwamura and many others would have seen them constantly. Since they were sporadic even when the power level was steady, they are not proportional to the power. They do not appear in a fixed ratio; they resemble the tritium and neutrons detected in these experiments, rather than the helium. It is clear that they can sometimes appear, under some unusual set of circumstances, but they usually do not appear. Therefore the reaction is usually -- but not always -- both aneutronic and sans-gamma-rays. Storms thinks the neutrons are probably caused by a secondary reaction, possibly something prosaic. The gamma rays could be as well, I suppose. However, that has no bearing on the fact that their presence proves the experiments are sensitive enough to detect them. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: [Vo] RaiNews24 (ITA)
Its a bit confusong: Rainews24 is the old name. Today it is Rainews. It is on my satellite list, Hotbird 6, 10.992 MHz. -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
RE: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
But you are missing the main point. If gammas are seen at all, and especially at the low levels you mention - then it proves without question that deuterium is active for nuclear reactions at low energy. Gammas are not seen with hydrogen. Hydrogen is not active for LENR. QED -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell Jones Beene wrote: JR: There have been plenty of reactions at 10 to 100 W, ~40 times less. Surely, if they can detect gamma from 4 kW they could also detect them from 0.1 kW. 100 watts continuous and no signal? Where and when? FP, Nice, France. They had every kind detector money can buy. Also, as I mentioned there have been several positive observations of gamma rays at much lower power levels, such as Iwamura, so I do not see how the power level can be the limiting factor. They have been detected with confidence at a fraction of a watt, so they were definitely there at times, and missing at other times. I don't see how the results would be any different with a much larger Pd-D cell that produces 4 kW. If gamma rays were not sporadic, Iwamura and many others would have seen them constantly. Since they were sporadic even when the power level was steady, they are not proportional to the power. They do not appear in a fixed ratio; they resemble the tritium and neutrons detected in these experiments, rather than the helium. It is clear that they can sometimes appear, under some unusual set of circumstances, but they usually do not appear. Therefore the reaction is usually -- but not always -- both aneutronic and sans-gamma-rays. Storms thinks the neutrons are probably caused by a secondary reaction, possibly something prosaic. The gamma rays could be as well, I suppose. However, that has no bearing on the fact that their presence proves the experiments are sensitive enough to detect them. - Jed
[Vo]:OT: Rebooting Civilization
Science writer Bob Holmes says our daily lives are filled with the accidents of history. The seven-day-work-week, the 24-hour-day, the layout of your computer keyboard -- he says these are all things that no clear-thinking person would ever create today. We're asking what our society would look like if we stripped it down and started from scratch. http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2011/05/04/rebooting-civilization/
Re: [Vo]:OT: Rebooting Civilization
On 11-05-04 04:58 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: Science writer Bob Holmes says our daily lives are filled with the accidents of history. The seven-day-work-week, Yes, that's much too long. A two-day workweek, with a 5-day weekend, would be a lot more reasonable. the 24-hour-day, Yes, that's much too short. There should surely be at least 30 hours in the day. the layout of your computer keyboard -- he says these are all things that no clear-thinking person would ever create today. We're asking what our society would look like if we stripped it down and started from scratch. http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2011/05/04/rebooting-civilization/
[Vo]:Rossi comments on attack in Italy, likelihood of home generators
Here are some recent comments from the blog. These are not particularly important but I went to the trouble to Google-translate one, so I thought I'd share them: Claudio May 4th, 2011 at 1:36 AM Dear Mr. Andrea Rossi, this morning I watched on the Italian television the special regarding the E-Cat. Let me tell you that I disagree the opinion that the report was against you. The journalist does the journalist. It was normal that he made an investigation in your past. In the tail of the special we can see scientists speak about your invention as an important discover. So I don’t consider this as the “mud machine was starting”. In the interview you say “I made some mistakes”… My father said (and not only him): only who doesn’t work don’t make mistakes. Salutations, Claudio Andrea Rossi May 4th, 2011 at 2:59 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=488cpage=1#comment-36678 Dear Mr Claudio: The journalist has been uncorrect because he has taken the chance of my present work to repeat the mud of 20 years ago. He ignored my defense: correctness wants that you listen both parties, if there is a litigation. In any case I take advantage of your precious comment to remember that my version ( which I tried to make as objective as possible) about my past are in http://www.ingandrearossi.com Warm Regards, A.R. Gherardo May 4th, 2011 at 3:02 PM Dott.Rossi, seguo da qualche mese la vs invenzione e spero proprio che sia quello che promette e che riesca a rivoluzionare in pieno il settore energetico (domestico in primis). Le chiedo alcuni chiarimenti non tecnici: 1) la produzione avverrà anche in Italia? Anche se è una terra ingrata è la nostra terra, non scappi all’estero e in quota parte ci aiuti a risorgere da questo guano politico-morale-economico. 2) una delle illusioni che mi ero fatto era una “caldaia” da mettere a casa che funziona per tanti anni (5-10) ma poi sento 6 mesi e poi ricarica/sostituzione. E’ un motivo commerciale o tecnico? Ci guadagni, il giusto, magari anche un po’ oltre, ma si ispiri anche ai principi di equità. 3) c’e’ una speranza concreta per un cubo energetico casalingo che ci dia acqua calda ed energia elettrica con conversione diretta? 4) 300 elementi per 1 MW… mi fa pensare che non sia la produzione di massa la killer application ma la produzione distribuita. Corretto? 5) 1200-2000€/kW… sembra tantino mi puo’ dire quale sarebbe il ROI del cittadino acquirente? 6) quando sarà acquistabile da privati? Continui a lavorare a questa alternativa fantastica, per la gloria, per i soldi e per il futuro dell’uomo. Un grazie per le sue risposte. Buon lavoro e in bocca al lupo! Gherardo GOOGLE TRANSLATE: Dott.Rossi, I follow a few months vs. the invention and hopefully that is what it says and who successfully revolutionize the energy sector in full (Primarily domestic). I ask some technical explanations: 1) the production will take place in Italy? Although it is an ungrateful land is our land, does not escape abroad and help us share to rise by This guano political, moral and economic. 2) one of the illusions that I had done was a Boiler to place at home that works for many years (5-10) but then I feel 6 months and then charge or replacement. It 's a reason commercial or technical? We earn the right, maybe a little ' beyond, but also draw on the principles of equity. 3) there is' a real hope for a cube energy home to give us hot water and electricity with direct conversion? 4) 300 parts per 1 MW ... makes me think that it is not the mass production but the killer application distributed generation. Correct? 5) 1200-2000 € / kW bit ... it seems I can 'say what ROI would be the buyer of the citizen? 6) when it will be bought by private individuals? Continue to work with this fantastic alternative, for the glory, for the money and the future of man. Thanks for your replies. Good work and in the mouth luck! Gherardo ROSSI'S RESPONSE (which was in English): Andrea Rossi May 4th, 2011 at 3:12 PM Dear Gherardo: 1- I will not work in Italy, at least for the first 10 years 2- a recharge every 6 months is necessary, is less frequent than usual technologies and very cheap. 3- possibly 4- yes 5- is the same price of standard technologies, but with a fuel price reduced by orders of magnitude 6- within the year Warm Regards, A.R. Claudio May 4th, 2011 at 12:36 PM Hi, Andrea I already know the facts regarding you. I visited and read your site. I believe in you. But, follow my advice, give as soon as possible an E-Cat to the Sveden university to make some indipendent tests. Before the “mud machine” starts. A friend, Claudio Andrea Rossi May 4th, 2011 at 3:15 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=488cpage=2#comment-36776 Dear Claudio: we will make further research with Uppsala University and Bologna University, for RD. The mud doesn’t worry me, we will start the delivery of our plants this year and the market will be the sole judge. About the Italian bullshit, no problem: we
RE: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
Let me refine this slightly: But you are missing the main point. If gammas are seen at all, and especially at the low levels you mention - then it proves without question that deuterium is active for nuclear reactions at low energy. Gammas are not seen with hydrogen. Hydrogen is not active for LENR. Yet we do agree that Hydrogen is active for excess heat in the same way that deuterium is active, so it is easy to miss the precise point. Hydrogen may be even more active for heat than deuterium, which essentially is the Rossi breakthrough, but the M.O. - the way the excess heat turns up is not the same. Before Rossi - we all thought deuterium was more active because helium was seen. Hydrogen does not produce noticeable radioactivity in the short term nor helium. Which is part of the premise behind the original posting. Now, the reaction which produces the excess heat with hydrogen could involve quarks (among many possibilities) and quarks are found in the nucleus, but that does not necessarily equate with a nuclear reaction because the IRH (inverted Rydberg hydrogen) state, which would permit can be characterized as much as a mass of quarks (quark soup) as a mass of protons. That is my interpretation of Miley/Holmlid and the dense hydrogen state. I don't think the average vortician appreciates how dense a 2D state can be. Which brings up another point - does anyone know Miley's take on Rossi??? Jones
Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities!
In reply to Roarty, Francis X's message of Wed, 04 May 2011 08:14:54 -0400: Hi Fran, [snip] Robin, I had the same original displacement concept until recently and I think it is roughly equivalent to the up shifted term Scott and Thomas introduced me to. The issue with the displacement concept is it carries with it an image of a vacant portion of space where the displaced wavelength used to reside. I see this a strength, not a weakness. Note that if black holes increase density, then you *need* a decrease in densitywhich leads to another thought. If a magnetic field is caused by pile up of aether in front of a moving charged body, then there should be a decrease in density behind it. :) While my relativistic theory doesn't exactly match either concept the up shifted concept Thomas Prevenslik first introduced me to comes from a thermal dynamic perspective of Casimir effect - I used to consider this the other camp for Casimir theory vs. the displacement camp that I was more comfortable with - Thomas comes at this from a perspective of thermal dynamics and will argue the plates are not pushed together and that ether doesn't need to exist to explain the effect, he explains the effect as an imbalance created by up shifting causing the plates to self attract. Milonni wrote a paper that was based on attraction. I think this is in Phys. Rev. A, #25 page 1315 (1982). You may find it of interest. Although my relativistic concept now represents a new 3rd option/camp I chose to refer to the up shifting version as the alternative because it already deals with what I consider a misconception of there being a vacancy - the energy summation is still reduced because energy content reduces with wavelength Do you mean increases with increase in wavelength, or increases with decrease in wavelength? until some cutoff frequency beyond which it is meaningless to integrate, therefore an up shifted spectrum will also sum to a lower energy total. For a while I just went with the idea that the vacancy got filled in with shorter wavelengths Note that because E = h*frequency, shorter wavelengths (higher frequency) represent more energy. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
[Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Interview with Rossi: http://www.radio24.ilsole24ore.com/radio24_audio/2011/110504-mrkilowatt the only news is that he tells that the working E-cat number has arrived to 147 as a side note, he says that while being interviewed he is in his Bologna lab experimenting new combinations of catalysts. mic
Re: [Vo]:Lewan video is informative
In reply to Angela Kemmler's message of Wed, 04 May 2011 12:33:01 +0200: Hi Angela, Thanks. Please try http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html . [snip] Robin, your link to http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html seems not to work. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:OT: Rebooting Civilization
I have often thought about similar topics. Chapter 7 of my book touches on it, especially the roles of contingency and incumbency in biology and technology (Gould's theme). Some observations: We do, in fact, reboot the world every century or so. We have to. Technology does not last, and must be rebuilt and replaced, albeit not all from scratch. Very few buildings or machines last longer than 200 years. They mention the QWERTY keyboard. The advantages of other keyboards have been exaggerated according to some authors. Keyboards are likely to be replaced for most applications with voice input, so we will reboot that. The talk about electric power generation and the advantages of distributed generation. This is gradually coming into use. They talk about decimal clocks. The French introduced them with the decimal system, but later abandoned them. There are some advantages of the 60 second minute and 60 minute hour. The second is a natural sequence for humans because it is the average pulse. 60 is a wonderful number. Older units such as inches and feet have many advantages that we sometimes lose sight of. These units are convenient for people working without precision instruments or modern tools. U.S. and Japanese carpenters use them for this reason. The other day, a fellow cutting up a fallen tree at my house measured the length of the tree in feet by walking along it placing one foot just in front of another -- measuring it in feet. One yard is the distance from your hand to your chest. The 12 inches in a foot is another wonderful number, being divisible by 2, 3, 4 and 6. As much as I favor change and innovation, I am also acutely aware that we do not remember more than a fraction of what our ancestors knew. Most knowledge is lost. Quoting myself: The staff at the University of Manchester built a one-third scale working replica of a 1712 Newcomen steam engine. They gained new respect for Newcomen’s original genius. They wrote, the true functions of the key components were fully understood and their relationship to the operation of the engine appreciated. (D. Cardwell) Our ancestors often set things up for good reasons which we have forgotten. If we abandon their technology or methods we will find out why they did these things, often at our peril. This is a key principal of the conservative outlook, and there is much to be said for it. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. On the other hand, some customs continue for no good reason, because we forgot or never know how they came about. See the modern parable of the leg of lamb: http://allisonreynolds.com/blog/me-anderings/the-leg-of-lamb-a-modern-parable/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities!
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 4 May 2011 06:53:02 -0700: Hi, I think there is a much simpler explanation, involving more or less T being absorbed into the Ti. When it's in the lattice the weak beta radiation is stopped by the metal. When the T is a free gas, the beta radiation is not prevented from reaching the detector. If ZPE radiation is being upshifted in a cavity then the Reifenschweiler effect would more likely be an increase in the decay rate, not a decrease. This is because the nucleus would be over-stimulated in the sense of the induced gamma effect, and it would decay faster, not slower. If seems more likely that radiation is being neither upshifted or downshifted, at least in the Reifenschweiler effect. Unlike many observers, I see the decay rate of the tritium in the Casimir cavity (from the perspective of the tritium itself) as NOT changing ! ...but instead some of the beta decay is being ported into a ZPE sink instead, so it only appears to us, outside the cavity ,that the decay rate it is slower than it was. IOW some of the radiation goes into Dirac 'reciprocal space' or a correlate, and we simply do not see it in 3-space, but from the standpoint of the rate itself and the tritium itself - nothing has changed. This can explain the Rossi heating effect when you substitute IRH (inverted Rydberg hydrogen) for tritium. More on that later. Jones From: Roarty, Francis X Robin, I had the same original displacement concept until recently and I think it is roughly equivalent to the up shifted term Scott and Thomas introduced me to. The issue with the displacement concept is it carries with it an image of a vacant portion of space where the displaced wavelength used to reside. While my relativistic theory doesn't exactly match either concept the up shifted concept Thomas Prevenslik first introduced me to comes from a thermal dynamic perspective of Casimir effect - I used to consider this the other camp for Casimir theory vs. the displacement camp that I was more comfortable with - Thomas comes at this from a perspective of thermal dynamics and will argue the plates are not pushed together and that ether doesn't need to exist to explain the effect, he explains the effect as an imbalance created by up shifting causing the plates to self attract. Although my relativistic concept now represents a new 3rd option/camp I chose to refer to the up shifting version as the alternative because it already deals with what I consider a misconception of there being a vacancy - the energy summation is still reduced because energy content reduces with wavelength until some cutoff frequency beyond which it is meaningless to integrate, therefore an up shifted spectrum will also sum to a lower energy total. For a while I just went with the idea that the vacancy got filled in with shorter wavelengths but the up shifted concept already handles that issue plus it is an easier transition to the relativistic concept because it already has the same remote perspective of faster wavelengths inside the cavity... the only thing it lacked was my position that the wavelengths would appear unchanged to a local observer in the cavity... which as I have said previously is more in keeping with the changes in energy density, anomalous increases in C transition time thru the cavity as measured externally and Claims of variation of radioactive decay rates. Regards Fran Re: [Vo]:We have a theory: Relativistic Casimir Cavities! mixent Wed, 04 May 2011 00:28:40 -0700 In reply to francis 's message of Tue, 3 May 2011 06:09:29 -0400: Hi, [snip] Scott and I have collaborated and communicated at length regarding a Casimir theory based on relativistic contraction of the longer vacuum wavelengths which still appear full length to an observer inside the cavity instead of the present theory where the longerwavelengths are simply upshifted to higher frequency inside the cavity. As I understand it, they are not normally upshifted. They are excluded altogether, because they are too long to fit in the cavity. It's precisely because they are excluded that they press on the outside, but not on the inside walls of the cavity, hence producing a pressure that pushes the walls together. Only the wavelengths greater than the cavity dimensions are responsible for this, and since these represent but a minute fraction of the total, the force is very small, until the walls get very close together. That's because as they approach one another, the excluded wavelengths get shorter and shorter, representing an ever increasing amount of vacuum energy. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on attack in Italy, likelihood of home generators
About the Italian bullshit, no problem: we will not work in Italy for the next years. I will have to move to another country just to have an E-cat in the basement? ;-) mic 2011/5/4 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com: Here are some recent comments from the blog. These are not particularly important but I went to the trouble to Google-translate one, so I thought I'd share them: Claudio May 4th, 2011 at 1:36 AM Dear Mr. Andrea Rossi, this morning I watched on the Italian television the special regarding the E-Cat. Let me tell you that I disagree the opinion that the report was against you. The journalist does the journalist. It was normal that he made an investigation in your past. In the tail of the special we can see scientists speak about your invention as an important discover. So I don’t consider this as the “mud machine was starting”. In the interview you say “I made some mistakes”… My father said (and not only him): only who doesn’t work don’t make mistakes. Salutations, Claudio Andrea Rossi May 4th, 2011 at 2:59 AM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=488cpage=1#comment-36678 Dear Mr Claudio: The journalist has been uncorrect because he has taken the chance of my present work to repeat the mud of 20 years ago. He ignored my defense: correctness wants that you listen both parties, if there is a litigation. In any case I take advantage of your precious comment to remember that my version ( which I tried to make as objective as possible) about my past are in http://www.ingandrearossi.com Warm Regards, A.R. Gherardo May 4th, 2011 at 3:02 PM Dott.Rossi, seguo da qualche mese la vs invenzione e spero proprio che sia quello che promette e che riesca a rivoluzionare in pieno il settore energetico (domestico in primis). Le chiedo alcuni chiarimenti non tecnici: 1) la produzione avverrà anche in Italia? Anche se è una terra ingrata è la nostra terra, non scappi all’estero e in quota parte ci aiuti a risorgere da questo guano politico-morale-economico. 2) una delle illusioni che mi ero fatto era una “caldaia” da mettere a casa che funziona per tanti anni (5-10) ma poi sento 6 mesi e poi ricarica/sostituzione. E’ un motivo commerciale o tecnico? Ci guadagni, il giusto, magari anche un po’ oltre, ma si ispiri anche ai principi di equità. 3) c’e’ una speranza concreta per un cubo energetico casalingo che ci dia acqua calda ed energia elettrica con conversione diretta? 4) 300 elementi per 1 MW… mi fa pensare che non sia la produzione di massa la killer application ma la produzione distribuita. Corretto? 5) 1200-2000€/kW… sembra tantino mi puo’ dire quale sarebbe il ROI del cittadino acquirente? 6) quando sarà acquistabile da privati? Continui a lavorare a questa alternativa fantastica, per la gloria, per i soldi e per il futuro dell’uomo. Un grazie per le sue risposte. Buon lavoro e in bocca al lupo! Gherardo GOOGLE TRANSLATE: Dott.Rossi, I follow a few months vs. the invention and hopefully that is what it says and who successfully revolutionize the energy sector in full (Primarily domestic). I ask some technical explanations: 1) the production will take place in Italy? Although it is an ungrateful land is our land, does not escape abroad and help us share to rise by This guano political, moral and economic. 2) one of the illusions that I had done was a Boiler to place at home that works for many years (5-10) but then I feel 6 months and then charge or replacement. It 's a reason commercial or technical? We earn the right, maybe a little ' beyond, but also draw on the principles of equity. 3) there is' a real hope for a cube energy home to give us hot water and electricity with direct conversion? 4) 300 parts per 1 MW ... makes me think that it is not the mass production but the killer application distributed generation. Correct? 5) 1200-2000 € / kW bit ... it seems I can 'say what ROI would be the buyer of the citizen? 6) when it will be bought by private individuals? Continue to work with this fantastic alternative, for the glory, for the money and the future of man. Thanks for your replies. Good work and in the mouth luck! Gherardo ROSSI'S RESPONSE (which was in English): Andrea Rossi May 4th, 2011 at 3:12 PM Dear Gherardo: 1- I will not work in Italy, at least for the first 10 years 2- a recharge every 6 months is necessary, is less frequent than usual technologies and very cheap. 3- possibly 4- yes 5- is the same price of standard technologies, but with a fuel price reduced by orders of magnitude 6- within the year Warm Regards, A.R. Claudio May 4th, 2011 at 12:36 PM Hi, Andrea I already know the facts regarding you. I visited and read your site. I believe in you. But, follow my advice, give as soon as possible an E-Cat to the Sveden university to make some indipendent tests. Before the “mud machine” starts. A friend, Claudio Andrea Rossi May 4th, 2011 at 3:15 PM
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Michele Comitini wrote: the only news is that he tells that the working E-cat number has arrived to 147 Someone is fabricating them at a furious rate. Surely he is not making that many himself. At this rate he will have enough for the 1 MW reactor soon. Let's see . . . he reported: 97 some time ago. Not sure when, or how many were in the lab being lined up for the 1 MW reactor. 105 on May 1, 2011 (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473cpage=6#comment-36179) 147 today, May 4, 2011 That's 42 new ones in 3 days. 14 per day. On the other hand, perhaps a batch of 42 of them arrived today, and there will not be another batch for several weeks. He needs ~300. About 150 more. If the rate is ~14/day he will have them in a few more weeks. Of course there are a million other problems to deal with when ganging them up together. It isn't just a matter of getting 300 units and sticking them together with Velcro. (Velco is what Google uses to assemble their supercomputers. That tells you people who develop technology other than computers feel jealousy and contempt for computer engineers. As a guy from GM said back in 1975: Stop telling me about the wonders of computer chips! I could make a million tiny cars, but what good would they do?!) I hope the new ones look better than the mini-Rossi cells tested by EK and Lewan. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Assuming some E-Cats are reserved for changeout, that means ~7KW/E-Cat (1MW/140). Does this mean that he is NOT satisfied with the kitty-cat (2.5KW), and it going back to a slightly larger reactor? Or has he been able to push the output up higher? Or a bit of both? -Mark -Original Message- From: Michele Comitini [mailto:michele.comit...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 2:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA] Interview with Rossi: http://www.radio24.ilsole24ore.com/radio24_audio/2011/110504-mrkilowatt the only news is that he tells that the working E-cat number has arrived to 147 as a side note, he says that while being interviewed he is in his Bologna lab experimenting new combinations of catalysts. mic
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
I meant to say that tells you WHY people who develop technology other than computers feel jealousy and contempt for computer engineers. Oh, and they do, too -- trust me. Maybe not so much nowadays, but they did in the go-go days of CPU development 1975 to 1995. It is a shame we cannot edit these messages. Especially me. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 04 May 2011 18:14:14 -0400: Hi, [snip] On the other hand, perhaps a batch of 42 of them arrived today I don't think they are being manufactured somewhere. That's what Defkalion is going to do, and it isn't running yet. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Does this mean that he is NOT satisfied with the kitty-cat (2.5KW), and it going back to a slightly larger reactor? I believe the kitty-cat tested by Lewan is exactly the same reactor that EK tested the other day, at ~4 kW. It has a 50 ml cell. I believe Lewan and Rossi took off the insulation, removed the chimney, wrapped new insulation around it, and ran it at somewhat lower power. Also higher input. Maybe the chimney improves efficiency?! Who knows. Based on the tests in December and January done by Levi et al., I have the impression that the things work better some days than others, and that input power varies, for reasons I cannot guess. This is not a bit surprising for a crude prototype machine. If any other cold fusion researcher got this level of reproducibility and control, he might think he had died and gone to heaven, but Rossi seemed kind of disturbed, or preoccupied, in Lewan's video. I don't read minds, but here is what I guess he was thinking to himself: If I'm putting in 300 W and getting out a lousy 2.5 kW, how am I ever going to make 300 of these things to play together nicely and produce 1 MW reliably, without blowing off the roof like the Fukushima reactor. That's sure as heck what I would be thinking! The performance in these demonstrations has been phenomenal. Nothing close to this has ever been done in the history of cold fusion. However, in my opinion, it is not good enough to scale up to a 1 MW reactor, and October is five minutes away on the timescale it takes to engineer such things. If Rossi pulls this off it will be the fastest RD since the Manhattan project. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Wed, 4 May 2011 15:33:00 +0300: Hi Peter, [snip] Thanks! I do not think that a secret catalyst exists- it is about a better nanostructure of nichel made by physical or chemical (?) methods. It can be an alloy or a mixture but nanotechnology is the key. I told that the catalyst is actually NiEnTe, nichts, nada etc but people enjoy speculating.Vederemo! That's because we assume you are only guessing, and don't have inside information. BTW what is En? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 4 May 2011 18:29:37 -0400: Hi, [snip] If I'm putting in 300 W and getting out a lousy 2.5 kW, how am I ever going to make 300 of these things to play together nicely and produce 1 MW reliably, without blowing off the roof like the Fukushima reactor. ..note that 2.5 kW / 300 W ~= 8, which is what he claims to be aiming for. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
From: Jed Rothwell I can't imagine he makes 14 a day working by himself! He must have a staff of people at his factory, or outsourced. If Rossi does not have a group, he is doing an inhuman amount of work. . (cough, cough) . and you can really believe any of Rossi's BS ! LOL It's all like this.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
330 E-cat needed for 1MW plant 2011/5/4 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com: mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I don't think they are being manufactured somewhere. That's what Defkalion is going to do, and it isn't running yet. Well, they are being fabricated, if not mass produced. Someone is doing that somewhere, at Rossi's expense. I can't imagine he makes 14 a day working by himself! He must have a staff of people at his factory, or outsourced. In the most famous example of trial and error inventing, Edison make dozens or hundreds of prototype incandescent lights in 1879. But he himself did not actually fabricate all those lights. He wasn't working by himself. He had lots of ambitious people on staff, such as an expert glassblower from Germany, Bohm. When a bulb shattered -- which was several times a day -- people would shout Shit! Busted by Bohm! It was a group effort, with typical group dynamics such as you find in any start-up company today. If Rossi does not have a group, he is doing an inhuman amount of work. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 4 May 2011 18:37:53 -0400: Hi, [snip] I can't imagine he makes 14 a day working by himself! He must have a staff of people at his factory, or outsourced. If the parts are being produced by someone else to his specs, then it's quite possible for him to assemble them himself (as he says he is doing), but I don't rule out that he has help. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I can't imagine he makes 14 a day working by himself! He must have a staff of people at his factory, or outsourced. Whoever it is, they are not very good from the looks of the soldering on the EKits. T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: … (cough, cough) … and you can really believe any of Rossi’s BS ! LOL Well, if he is not doing this, he will not meet the deadline. Why do you find it so hard to believe, and such bullshit, to imagine that a group of people in a small factory may be cranking out 14 objects of this size per day? It would be a huge amount of work for one person, but 5 or 10 could do it easily, with ordinary power tools and fabrication techniques. You can see it does not call for high-precision manufacturing. I have worked in factories without much automation making objects roughly about as complex as this (for X-acto and others). 5 or 10 skilled people could do it. With automated modern equipment, 5 people could make hundreds a day. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Jed asks you not to rub it in - the fact that Rossi's current goal is a lot closer to my estimated COP of 10, than it is to his prediction -- anywhere from 35 to infinity ... It's all about the wet steam :) -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com In reply to Jed Rothwell's message: Hi, If I'm putting in 300 W and getting out a lousy 2.5 kW, how am I ever going to make 300 of these things to play together nicely and produce 1 MW reliably, without blowing off the roof like the Fukushima reactor. ..note that 2.5 kW / 300 W ~= 8, which is what he claims to be aiming for. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
mix...@bigpond.com wrote: If the parts are being produced by someone else to his specs, then it's quite possible for him to assemble them himself (as he says he is doing), but I don't rule out that he has help. Sure. Having the parts delivered and then assembling them is more-or-less the same as having a staff of people fabricate the whole thing. At a bicycle store, one or two people can assemble 4 or 5 bicycles a day, because they come out of the box mostly ready. Making one from scratch takes weeks. (The ones they make from scratch are gorgeous and cost thousands of bucks.) I expect the only problematic ingredient is the nickel catalyst inside the cell. The rest of the parts can be cut and fabricated by many people, fairly easily. It shouldn't cost much. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Jones Beene wrote: Jed asks you not to rub it in - the fact that Rossi's current goal is a lot closer to my estimated COP of 10, than it is to his prediction -- anywhere from 35 to infinity ... You are not rubbing it in because I miss your point. What do you mean current goal? Are you referring to the size or power of the devices? Presently 4 kW. He keeps scaling them down. He says that is safer. At 4 kW he needs 250 for 1 MW, but he is adding 50 more to act as on-line replacement (backup) units. It's all about the wet steam Perhaps you are attempting to rub in your assertion that the input to output ratio is much lower than Rossi claims. He hasn't said that, or admitted it. In the Lewan tests it was very low but the gadget did not seem to be working well that day. In other recent tests it has been as high as ever. Assuming the calorimetry right (which you do not assume -- realize) there is no indication the input to output ratio is degrading. It just varies all over the place. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Mass-to-Energy
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 4 May 2011 12:48:56 -0700: Hi, [snip] When helium is the main ash, and when the strong gamma signature is absent at ~24 MeV (invoking some kind of phonon explanation) then we have essentially an alpha emission, and easily shielded. Therefore, you have to look for the secondary reactions - the bremsstrahlung (braking radiation) which would be way lower in energy. If you did not provide a good instrument for that, then you might miss it at 10 watts but at 100 watts it should show up IMO. If anyone out there knows differently - please speak up. If the energy is carried by alpha particles, then I think these are way too slow and heavy to create significant bremsstrahlung. That being usually associated with fast electrons if I am not mistaken. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Italian transcription: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/05/di-nuovo-lingegner-rossi-mr-kilowat-i.html mic 2011/5/4 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com: Jones Beene wrote: Jed asks you not to rub it in - the fact that Rossi's current goal is a lot closer to my estimated COP of 10, than it is to his prediction -- anywhere from 35 to infinity ... You are not rubbing it in because I miss your point. What do you mean current goal? Are you referring to the size or power of the devices? Presently 4 kW. He keeps scaling them down. He says that is safer. At 4 kW he needs 250 for 1 MW, but he is adding 50 more to act as on-line replacement (backup) units. It's all about the wet steam Perhaps you are attempting to rub in your assertion that the input to output ratio is much lower than Rossi claims. He hasn't said that, or admitted it. In the Lewan tests it was very low but the gadget did not seem to be working well that day. In other recent tests it has been as high as ever. Assuming the calorimetry right (which you do not assume -- realize) there is no indication the input to output ratio is degrading. It just varies all over the place. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Guys. You missed this one. Ivan Mellen May 3rd, 2011 at 6:49 PMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473cpage=7#comment-36613 Mr. Rossi, ……. I have two questions: a) How close to the nickel melting point (1455 C) can reactor temperature be? (This is important for rocket engine efficiency.) b) If output power is significantly reduced, is refueling period extended proportionally? (This has impact on the long term system heating.) Andrea Rossi May 4th, 2011 at 1:05 AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473cpage=7#comment-36670 …….. About your questions: a- the temp inside the reactor reached the 1,600 °C b- yes Warm Regards, A.R. The catalyst can sustain heat beyond the melting point of nickel. He must be using nickel oxide to sustain 1600C. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.comwrote: On 2011-05-05 00:14, Jed Rothwell wrote: 97 some time ago. Not sure when, or how many were in the lab being lined up for the 1 MW reactor. 105 on May 1, 2011 (http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473cpage=6#comment-36179) 147 today, May 4, 2011 Add this. Discrepancy? * * * http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473cpage=7#comment-36695 Andrea Rossi May 4th, 2011 at 5:06 AM Dear Luke Mortensen: 1- up to now we have in operation 170 modules of the 300 that will compound the 1 MW plant. 2- Thank you: You cannot imagine how much in this moment I need moral sustain. Warm regards, A.R. * * * Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: a- the temp inside the reactor reached the 1,600 °C ANOTHER mind-boggling claim. I can understand why Beene gets so worked up by stuff like this. This has to be uppermost limit for an oxide, just before it melts and stops working completely. Whatever else Rossi may be, and whatever it is he is drinking (or smoking), he is the most interesting man in the world. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Nickel(II) oxide(NiO) – melting point 1955C. If the reaction takes place in Relativistic Casimir Cavities, the NiO catalyst would be degraded in terms of performance at 1600C because these Cavities would be annealed (starting to melt over). On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: a- the temp inside the reactor reached the 1,600 °C ANOTHER mind-boggling claim. I can understand why Beene gets so worked up by stuff like this. This has to be uppermost limit for an oxide, just before it melts and stops working completely. Whatever else Rossi may be, and whatever it is he is drinking (or smoking), he is the most interesting man in the world. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
On 2011-05-05 02:43, Jed Rothwell wrote: ANOTHER mind-boggling claim. I can understand why Beene gets so worked up by stuff like this. This has to be uppermost limit for an oxide, just before it melts and stops working completely. Whatever else Rossi may be, and whatever it is he is drinking (or smoking), he is the most interesting man in the world. Hasn't Rossi stated a few times over the past months that his reactors can reach temperatures able to melt nickel? 1,600 °C is most probably the internal temperature reached during a controlled meltdown, anyway. Cheers, S.A.
RE: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
Jed wrote: Whatever else Rossi may be, and whatever it is he is drinking (or smoking), he is the most interesting man in the world. I thought the guy on the Dos Equis commercial was the most interesting man in the world... He's not going to be happy about being #2! Stay Thirsty My Friends? No way, time for a perfect manhattan! -Mark
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
Pantelli uses deuterium to kill the catalytic process. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Alexander Hollins alexander.holl...@gmail.com wrote: I believe the question is, What is canister D2 in the patent? On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:16 AM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
NiEnTe cannot reach 1600C without melting. It is not the catalyst. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:24 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Pantelli uses deuterium to kill the catalytic process. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Alexander Hollins alexander.holl...@gmail.com wrote: I believe the question is, What is canister D2 in the patent? On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:16 AM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
[Vo]:22 Passi Mr. Kilowatt interview transcripts with Celani and Rossi
Celani: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/04/nuova-intervista-di-mr-kilowatt.html Rossi, brought to you before it happens: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/05/di-nuovo-lingegner-rossi-mr-kilowat-i.html (As noted here by Michele Comitini) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
The device was working great. The 50cc units are officially rated at 2.5 kilowatts. He was probably trying to keep them at their official rating for the test. I think it is much harder to keep the power output at the official rating than it is to let the power output spike and go into self sustain mode. From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, May 4, 2011 4:08:58 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA] Jones Beene wrote: Jed asks you not to rub it in - the fact that Rossi's current goal is a lot closer to my estimated COP of 10, than it is to his prediction -- anywhere from 35 to infinity ... You are not rubbing it in because I miss your point. What do you mean current goal? Are you referring to the size or power of the devices? Presently 4 kW. He keeps scaling them down. He says that is safer. At 4 kW he needs 250 for 1 MW, but he is adding 50 more to act as on-line replacement (backup) units. It's all about the wet steam Perhaps you are attempting to rub in your assertion that the input to output ratio is much lower than Rossi claims. He hasn't said that, or admitted it. In the Lewan tests it was very low but the gadget did not seem to be working well that day. In other recent tests it has been as high as ever. Assuming the calorimetry right (which you do not assume -- realize) there is no indication the input to output ratio is degrading. It just varies all over the place. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
LOL !!! If you are into LENR, Rossi is definitely the guy (of the moment) and the most interesting man in the world from our narrow perspective. BTW, I was not aware of this ad campaign, way-cool. But I did live for a while in Mexico, long time ago in San Miguel de Allende ... and can attest that this company does brew the 5-6 out of 10 of the best beers in N. America... with the Canadians having two of the other 4-5 ... good thing we have Sam Adams ... ... not that you asked for another fringe opinion. And BTW I gave up beer about the time Rossi got out of the hoosegow ... Jones From: Mark Iverson Jed wrote: Whatever else Rossi may be, and whatever it is he is drinking (or smoking), he is the most interesting man in the world. I thought the guy on the Dos Equis commercial was the most interesting man in the world... He's not going to be happy about being #2! Stay Thirsty My Friends? No way, time for a perfect manhattan! -Mark attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
316L stainless steel, the material that the reaction vessel is composed of melts at 1400C. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:26 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: NiEnTe cannot reach 1600C without melting. It is not the catalyst. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:24 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Pantelli uses deuterium to kill the catalytic process. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Alexander Hollins alexander.holl...@gmail.com wrote: I believe the question is, What is canister D2 in the patent? On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:16 AM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 4 May 2011 13:48:37 +0300 Von: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister Dear Angela, If you read the patent WO 2010/058288 (co-inventor is Piantelli's daughter, a physicist) and compare it with Rossi's patent you will see why the later has problems. Piantelli's patent has logical coherence- you can understand WHY you have to do what it describes. Peter Yes Peter I read the patent about 2 month ago. The difference is that he has no secret catalyst. A patent must describe all the details an expert needs to replicate an effect and it must explain the best method available at the moment the patent request is made. I don't remember the details of the two Pantelli patents however. Was that your question? Regards, Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
RE: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
With all the challenges that the current economic climate poses, and the frustrations that PhDs can't seem to do at least one test that satisfies all those on Vortex, one has to take time to just have some fun... I'm grateful for all the intellects and souls on this forum... be well, and don't forget to laugh! And yes, thank fav diety for Sam Adams... both of them! Jones: dealing with Jed just might make you take up the brew again! :-) -Mark _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 6:52 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA] LOL !!! If you are into LENR, Rossi is definitely the guy (of the moment) and the most interesting man in the world from our narrow perspective. BTW, I was not aware of this ad campaign, way-cool. But I did live for a while in Mexico, long time ago in San Miguel de Allende ... and can attest that this company does brew the 5-6 out of 10 of the best beers in N. America... with the Canadians having two of the other 4-5 ... good thing we have Sam Adams ... ... not that you asked for another fringe opinion. And BTW I gave up beer about the time Rossi got out of the hoosegow ... Jones From: Mark Iverson Jed wrote: Whatever else Rossi may be, and whatever it is he is drinking (or smoking), he is the most interesting man in the world. I thought the guy on the Dos Equis commercial was the most interesting man in the world... He's not going to be happy about being #2! Stay Thirsty My Friends? No way, time for a perfect manhattan! -Mark attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: 316L stainless steel, the material that the reaction vessel is composed of melts at 1400C. It does seem that most stainless steel melts around this temperature. Where did you see this is 316L? Maybe Rossi is quoting the maximum theoretical limit for the Ni catalyst, rather than an actual observation he has made. Copper melts at 1084 deg C. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:What is the D2 Canister next to the H2 Canister
a catalyst is destroyed NOT by melting- but by the destruction of the active sites- and this takes place before melting, at a lower temperature. As I told, Rossi's words have to be judged with care, between truth(s) and lie(s) it is a grey area- we need a ROSSI-SPEECH to ENGLISH (and/or ITALIAN) DICTIONARY. Other- I will ask Prof. Piantelli what's the meaning/aim of the D2 bottle in his patent. peter On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: 316L stainless steel, the material that the reaction vessel is composed of melts at 1400C. It does seem that most stainless steel melts around this temperature. Where did you see this is 316L? Maybe Rossi is quoting the maximum theoretical limit for the Ni catalyst, rather than an actual observation he has made. Copper melts at 1084 deg C. - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:PA Mosier-Boss still ignors basic physics -- DC voltage on conducting plates external to a dielectric container full of conducting electrolyte leads to no internal electric field within electro
PA Mosier-Boss still ignors basic physics -- DC voltage on conducting plates external to a dielectric container full of conducting electrolyte leads to no internal electric field within electrolyte -- observed changes may be via complex leakage currents: Rich Murray 2011.05.04 The electric field exists within both walls of the cell, as each wall is a capacitor in which one plate is one side and the electrolyte layer in contact with the internal surface of the plastic dilectric wall is the other side -- the only field across the body of the electrolyte is a few volts resulting from minute leakage currents, which result in a DC voltage drop, described by Ohm's Law. Extraordinary Error -- no electric field exists inside a conducting liquid in an insulated box with two external charged metal plates, re work by SPAWAR on cold fusion since 2002 -- also hot spots from H and O microbubbles: Rich Murray 2010.02.22 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2010_02_01_archive.htm Monday, February 22, 2010 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/42 http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol4.pdf 173-187 February, 2011 cmnsedi...@iscmns.org J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. 4 (2011) 173–187 Research Article Review of Twenty Years of LENR Research Using Pd/D Co-deposition Pamela A. Mosier-Boss ∗, Jack Y. Dea and Frank E. Gordon †, SPAWAR Systems Center Pacific, San Diego, CA 92152, USA Lawrence P.G. Forsley, JWK International, Annandale, VA 22003, USA Melvin H. Miles, Dixie State College, St. George, UT 84770, USA Abstract In the Pd/D co-deposition process, working and counter electrodes are immersed in a solution of palladium chloride and lithium chloride in deuterated water. Palladium is then electrochemically reduced onto the surface of the working electrode in the presence of evolving deuterium gas. Electrodes prepared by Pd/D co-deposition exhibit highly expanded surfaces consisting of small spherical nodules. Because of this high surface area and electroplating in the presence of deuterium gas, the incubation time to achieve high D/Pd loadings necessary to initiate LENR is orders of magnitude less than required for bulk electrodes. Besides heat, the following nuclear emanations have been detected using Pd/D co-deposition: X-ray emission, tritium production, transmutation, and particle emission. Experimental details and results obtained over a twenty year period of research are discussed. © 2011 ISCMNS. All rights reserved. Keywords: Nuclear products, Pd/D co-deposition PACS: 14.20.Dh, 78.67.Rb, 68.35.Ct pam.b...@navy.mil
Re: [Vo]:Rossi interviewed on Radio24 [ITA]
A bit of humor: Can we believe that e-cats come from North Pole Santa's factory and are made one by one with the tiny and efficient hands of his little elves ? 2011/5/5 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net *From:* Jed Rothwell I can't imagine he makes 14 a day working by himself! He must have a staff of people at his factory, or outsourced… If Rossi does not have a group, he is doing an inhuman amount of work. … (cough, cough) … and you can really believe any of Rossi’s BS ! LOL It’s all like this.
