Re: [Vo]:Self Running Free Energy
OK Thanks. I find the geometry and orientation of the magnets appealling. It is reminds me of my all mechanical concept for a self powering machine. The design is based on my philosophy of motion which is inspired by the curling motion of a curling stone on ice. Harry From: John Berry aethe...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, May 14, 2011 3:47:05 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Self Running Free Energy The plans incase you have not found the other thread: http://www.scene.org/~esa/merlib/romerouk/selfrunning_free_energy_device_muller_motor_generator_romerouk_version1_1.pdf On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote: the designer now says: it was all a fake...someone came to visit...the device has probably been destroyed... http://pesn.com/2011/05/11/9501823_Romeros_Self-Sustaining_Muller_Dynamo_Drama The same old story. Harry From: John Berry aethe...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, May 8, 2011 8:13:28 PM Subject: [Vo]:Self Running Free Energy A Muller inspired Motor/Generator powering it's self suspended in air... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iNrjKFSLu4
Re: [Vo]:Rossi beat all the scientists because . . .
Its money; the profit motive. The difference between science and engineering is the pursuit of money. The pursuit of money made the internet what it is today. Science goes slow because only ego is at stake. If science developed the internet, it would still be two cans and a string. On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Andrea Selva andreagiuseppe.se...@gmail.com wrote: But, over all, is he an 'engineer' ?
Re: [Vo]: Why did the engineer Rossi beat all the scientists? WAS: Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
about the ideas of this thread: An analogy: Why lowly apples have obtained such wonderful results in genetic engineering, while oranges despite of billions of $ of funding had not achieved a single usable result? The answer a bit tautologic is - because apples are apples and oranges are oranges. Some things in common but huge differences. I think it is outrigth logical fallacy to compare Mills' hyperchemistry to Rossi's nuclear jiu-jitsu. Mills has told me that his process has nothing to do with Rossi's and he is not interested in what Ross has done. If somebody knows more about Mills's theory and results than Mills himself- the best is to discuss wit the authors (that's the function of literary critics too to explain to everybody, including the author what has he wanted to say in his opus) On the other hand nor Piantelli (who knows what happens) nor Rossi - who made it to happen at an industrial level) are not interested in Randy's ideas not relevant for them. There are two other more general problems here: a) the relationship between theory and practice; e.g. Pd-D LENR has wonderfully bright theories- bold mental constructs- but does not achieve practical intensity, reproducibility, continuity... b) the way from a scientific principle to a practical technological application is sometimes very difficult, full of obstacles and long. The mission of the Engineer (I am a chemical one) is to work out those practical steps that make science to work- science is Know What, technology is Know How, Know Who. Know Why is usually science based but the more important Know- Why- Not has lots of empirical elements too -see please the case of Pd based cold fusion- my poisoning effect was rejected with hostility, contempt and certainty that it cannot be relevant- and it seems that deep degassing is a sine qua non condition for Ni-H (see the patent WO 2010/58288) I have used my practical experience in development of industrial processes to establish a set of problem solving rules: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/03/my-rules-of-problem-solving.html http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/03/my-rules-of-problem-solving.htmlFor this case Rules 2, 4, 5, and 6 are especially relevant- please see that Mills' real problems are not connected directly to his theory. He has to develop a continuous process with rather irreversible reactions. Lot's of disturbing secondary phenomena. Rossi has a high intensity process- he has to work a lot at controllabilty (ideal is zero input!), safety (I smell risks nd danger more than he says!) , scale-up (modular scaleup is NOT good engineering, we need lions and tigers not kittens!), has to produce electric energy- but the learning process has started...let's hope the best. I consider that the two technologies have specific problems cannot be compared directly and..scientific soundness i only a necessary (?) not a sufficient condition for a technology. Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 6:24 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 15 May 2011 19:24:54 -0400: Hi, [snip] I think it is more likely that he is using the spillover catalyst effect to strip electrons which provide work and recombine when the H+ hydride ions pass through the membrane to be oxidized. Now maybe the free electrons are made free-er as a hydrino-hydride. This would mean that they would not really recombine as water but as an oxidized hydrino-hydride. And WTF would that be? Would you drink it? Maybe with a single malt as a mixer, eh? T I think he is just using Hydrino formation as a powerful oxidant that strips lots of electrons from his catalyst. The overly positive catalyst ions then act as the fuel source which drives the chemical reactions. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Yoshiaki Arata's experiment shows the Rossi process mechanism.
Yes, dear Axil- Piantelli has also emphasized this aspect. On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I think the distinction involves the fermion-boson nature of the negative hydrogen ion between deuterium and protium. Because protium can form a clustered negative hydrogen ion as a fermion, the ion can mimic the behavior of the electron. Since deuterium can only form a negative hydrogen ion with integer spin, it is denied the same mechanism that allows fusion of large volumes of protium atoms. It is the size of these ion clusters that make the “Rossi” reaction so powerful and productive. And palladium cannot produce clustered negative hydrogen ions so the reaction is very weak. The Bose-Einstein condensate is the most probable mechanism for deuterium cold fusion. But the hydride compression mechanism is the most likely common cold fusion factor between the two isotopes in a transition metal. The detection of helium in the Arata experiment shows that fusion of deuterium is happening. On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.comwrote: Thank you- but pycno-hydrogen was used only for comparison with pycno-deuterium and never works (no fusion). By the way, what is your impression about the many Arata style experiments? How reliable are they as intensity, reproducibility etc. ? I think a positive nanoeffect is fighting with the inadequate electronic structure of palladium- summa summarum usability remains low. Plus in many cases the degassing of the active nanosurfaces is insufficient. Your opinion? Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 7:26 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I provided the link to the experiment at the top of the first post. All the info is there. Kind Regards Axil On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:20 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.comwrote: Probably I don't remember well- but has Arata worked with hydrogen too- not only deuterium? Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:22 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The experiments of Yoshiaki Arata and Yue Chang Zhang show that there is nothing important provided by the enrichment of the nickel isotope Ni62 to the H- reaction. On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ArataYdevelopmena.pdf The experiments of Yoshiaki Arata and Yue Chang Zhang, Piantelli, and Rossi all confirm the nuclear nature of negative hydrogen ion (H-) reactions in transitions metals. There is a common thread here. For example in the experiment of Arata, platinum provides the spill over generation of H- into both zirconium oxide and nickel oxide. Fisrt the long incubation period first provides atomic holes in the transition metal lattice through the action of hydrogen erosion. Next, H- is loaded into these holes in the transition metal under the spill over effect provided by Pd. Finally, a shock starts the nuclear reorganization. A chain reaction catalyzed and spread by the reactions own heat completes the process. * * -- 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
[Vo]:OT was:Rossi beat all the scientists because . . .
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, May 16, 2011 2:01:29 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi beat all the scientists because . . . Its money; the profit motive. The difference between science and engineering is the pursuit of money. The pursuit of money made the internet what it is today. Science goes slow because only ego is at stake. If science developed the internet, it would still be two cans and a string. Speaking of going slow... This sloth sets out to cross a busy road. http://www.wimp.com/slothcrossing/ What is the sloth thinking? Does he really lack an appreciation of the danger, or does he hope that a human will help him somehow? Harry
Re: [Vo]:Rossi beat all the scientists because . . .
money is the difference between science and entrepreneurship, engineeering is about technology engineering is not only schooling- some essential things (for life and for professions) are not taught at school- as realistic, critical, creative thinking and you learn much more from errors, failures, blunders than from successes- this is one f the strengths of Rossi Peter and greed is good between certain limits On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Its money; the profit motive. The difference between science and engineering is the pursuit of money. The pursuit of money made the internet what it is today. Science goes slow because only ego is at stake. If science developed the internet, it would still be two cans and a string. On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Andrea Selva andreagiuseppe.se...@gmail.com wrote: But, over all, is he an 'engineer' ? -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:OT was:Rossi beat all the scientists because . . .
Nice, will use it in the next issue of the next issue,of INFORMAVORE's SUNDAY with thanks to you, Harry Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, May 16, 2011 2:01:29 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi beat all the scientists because . . . Its money; the profit motive. The difference between science and engineering is the pursuit of money. The pursuit of money made the internet what it is today. Science goes slow because only ego is at stake. If science developed the internet, it would still be two cans and a string. Speaking of going slow... This sloth sets out to cross a busy road. http://www.wimp.com/slothcrossing/ What is the sloth thinking? Does he really lack an appreciation of the danger, or does he hope that a human will help him somehow? Harry -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
Dear Robin. in more practical terms- in your understanding how much energy can be squeezed out of. say, a gram of hydrogen? Compared to burning, or to what Rossi has suceeded to obtain in the February demo at Bologna? Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:57 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to mix...@bigpond.com's message of Mon, 16 May 2011 07:38:22 +1000: Hi, Oops, clicked on wrong button in spell checker! That should have been:- (The square of the fine structure constant times the mass energy of the electron is exactly equal to 1 Hartree). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Activated graphite
Rossi has declared: My process has NOTHING to do with the process of Piantelli. The proof is that I have operating reactors and he not. He has not said - for example I made an radical improvement of the existing system- and brought energy from the tens of Watts to the kilowatts level. No, he made something entirelly different! For a patent now he has the obligation to show that his technology is different. Maybe it is, maybe not. Focardi has told again he does not know what the secret catalyst is- however if I remember correctly -he spoke about ADDITIVES (more plausble but not so impressive as a catalyst- white magic). But this is again a risky and clumsy statement- why not: surely i know it well, I have seen it tested, optimized, working long term. Rosssi found it. But neither Rossi, nor I will not say- it's secret, basta! He is in a bad position with claiming ignorance. On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-05-15 21:44, Axil Axil wrote: [...] Levi reply: Please note that he is professor Sergio Focardi, not Levi. Cheers, S.A. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:asking my friends
Let's be realistic- the Internet- as Reiigion for example- is just a new Amplifier- makes smart people smarter and stupid ones\ more dumb. (informed people better informed, disinformed ones more and more confused). As almost always- the negative effect is much stronger than the positive one; I wrote many essays about this fundamental idea. Peter On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 9:26 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Peter, Sunday's Sermon Following up on Mr. Beene's comment, I have often subscribed to a belief that the development of the Internet may very well be ushering in the first stages of a new sentient species that may soon dominate our planet within a mere couple of thousand years, a species known as Homo Sapiens Goup-Mindus. When we think of experiencing or engaging in group mind activity Star Trek's terrifying BORG civilization often comes to mind. Group mind existence is often described as a horrifying condition particularly because TV storylines, such as the BORG, are conveniently written in such a manner that such a state-of-existence is constantly being forced upon us. I suspect our species worked very hard over many millions of years to evolve a state of consciousness that explores concepts such as separateness, of individuality, and an acute awareness of our seeming temporal permanence as perceived out in the external environment. We're not about to give up such interesting perceptions, not without thinking long and hard about the ramifications. Helping us sort out the ramifications a are few luddites sprinkled here and there in every society, and that's probably a good thing. Meanwhile, there are those who occasionally voice their suspicions (or belief) that assuming we are separate temporal souls is a somewhat contrived concept. Sometimes we listen to their views and actually ponder the ramifications. Typically however, we simply file such odd views away in our sub consciousness. It would seem that most prefer to hurry back to playing the separateness game. At other times we get annoyed with such philosophical perceptions and end up crucifying the perpetrators of such blasphemy. As for me, I've come to the personal conclusion that experiencing consciousness in the form of existential separateness is both intriguing and terrifying. It's certainly an interesting game to play, perhaps over and over. If so, make sure you have plenty of quarters. ;-) /Sunday's Sermon Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Self Running Free Energy
Lidmotor is romeroUK'ing too: Muller Dynamo--- my kitchen table learning tool.ASFhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mniWYLz8AV4 my Muller Dynamo with all the coils.ASFhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZAIfk_ppoA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZAIfk_ppoAMuller Dynamo with electronic circuit.ASF http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdDFVUfX5jg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdDFVUfX5jgLidmotor is good at replicating various things! Also someone called Piengo is working on a RomeroUK/Muller rebuild: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pHLKPciCGM Would love to see any comments from this list on the Lidmotor builds! :) On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote: Ok, I'll wait for the replications. It seems CLaNZer is building one and Skycollection has something similiar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdxMbCU7O8c Harry *From:* John Berry aethe...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Fri, May 13, 2011 7:22:05 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Self Running Free Energy He had large offers he turned down, it is pretty transparent that he was scared off. The claim that he faked it does n't agree with the evidence. On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote: the designer now says: it was all a fake...someone came to visit...the device has probably been destroyed... http://pesn.com/2011/05/11/9501823_Romeros_Self-Sustaining_Muller_Dynamo_Drama The same old story. Harry *From:* John Berry aethe...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Sun, May 8, 2011 8:13:28 PM *Subject:* [Vo]:Self Running Free Energy A Muller inspired Motor/Generator powering it's self suspended in air... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iNrjKFSLu4
[Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3179019.ece
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation
Original-Nachricht Datum: Sun, 15 May 2011 18:21:23 -0400 Von: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: By pulsating the hydrogen pressure in the Rossi reaction vessel, Rossi is varying the size of the negative hydrogen ions (in terms of atom count of hydrogen atoms confined within the ion) he produces oscillating from small to/from large. How is he pulsing the hydrogen? Thermally? T It was Piantelli who first talked about pulsating hydrogen pressure. It was not Andrea Rossi. Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation
I wonder how pulsating hydrogen pressure got into Rossi's patent? On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.dewrote: Original-Nachricht Datum: Sun, 15 May 2011 18:21:23 -0400 Von: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: By pulsating the hydrogen pressure in the Rossi reaction vessel, Rossi is varying the size of the negative hydrogen ions (in terms of atom count of hydrogen atoms confined within the ion) he produces oscillating from small to/from large. How is he pulsing the hydrogen? Thermally? T It was Piantelli who first talked about pulsating hydrogen pressure. It was not Andrea Rossi. Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
Re: [Vo]:Activated graphite
Peter Gluck wrote: Rossi has declared: My process has NOTHING to do with the process of Piantelli. The proof is that I have operating reactors and he not. He has not said - for example I made an radical improvement of the existing system . . . Well, it does not matter what he claims, or even what he himself believes. Either this is the same process as Piantelli's or it isn't. That's a matter of fact, not opinion. I think it is extremely unlikely there are many different and unrelated newly discovered methods of getting massive amounts of non-chemical energy from nickel hydrides, and these methods have no connection to the Pd-D effect. I find that so unlikely, I dismiss that possibility. If Rossi means that Piantelli's speculation about the mechanism is wrong, and the two effects are the same but Rossi's own explanation is superior, that's another matter. Rossi has some difficulty expressing himself in English, and that might be what he has in mind. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Self Running Free Energy
From: Esa Ruoho * Would love to see any comments from this list on the Lidmotor builds! :) My bet is on skycollection. His handiwork is superb going back many years. However, there is so little theoretical way to harness ZPE with this type of device that a self-runner seems unlikely. Of course, experiment rules. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Original-Nachricht Datum: Mon, 16 May 2011 08:51:34 -0400 Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: [Vo]:Rossi\'s U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3179019.ece citation: How much do you pay for the agreement? Cassarino: Unfortunately that’s confidential. Have you paid anything to Rossi yet? Cassarino: Yes we have. How much? Cassarino: Let’s put it like this, it was an important piece of the equation Cui bono? Rossi is paid. This explains much imho... -- NEU: FreePhone - kostenlos mobil telefonieren und surfen! Jetzt informieren: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freephone
Re: [Vo]:Activated graphite
I agree- the essence is that the process works- at high intensity- and very probably all the other conditions will be solved - we will see with what price. The difference between the Piantelli and the Rossi process is the possible basis of patenting. As I see the future developments rather soon we will see many competing Ni-H energy sources. A strong patent umbrelll type, just could slow down this process. This week it is better to abstain from predictions. Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Peter Gluck wrote: Rossi has declared: My process has NOTHING to do with the process of Piantelli. The proof is that I have operating reactors and he not. He has not said - for example I made an radical improvement of the existing system . . . Well, it does not matter what he claims, or even what he himself believes. Either this is the same process as Piantelli's or it isn't. That's a matter of fact, not opinion. I think it is extremely unlikely there are many different and unrelated newly discovered methods of getting massive amounts of non-chemical energy from nickel hydrides, and these methods have no connection to the Pd-D effect. I find that so unlikely, I dismiss that possibility. If Rossi means that Piantelli's speculation about the mechanism is wrong, and the two effects are the same but Rossi's own explanation is superior, that's another matter. Rossi has some difficulty expressing himself in English, and that might be what he has in mind. - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation
-Original Message- From: Angela Kemmler It was Piantelli who first talked about pulsating hydrogen pressure. It was not Andrea Rossi. Are you certain Piantelli was first for gas phase ? The more general topic of 'pulsation' in LENR goes back many years to sonoluminescence (sonofusion). Perhaps before that. Of course, that was in the liquid state. Then, there is definite audible levels in glow discharge experiments. Much higher frequencies can be involved, but that is plasma phase. I think it is important to determine the first instance of pulsation in gas phase. It is probably not patentable due to prior art. Hagelstein, among others, apparently has claimed that the pulsation is critical to success in the Rossi device, and perhaps sine qua non. He is well positioned to know this. BTW - this does not in any way mean that the inventor himself is aware of it - if the pulsation frequency is so high that it is far beyond audible, even with lower harmonics. As to how ... pulsation can happen in a way that the inventor is unaware or only mildly aware, and assuming that we are not bound to strict definitions of sound - then the most likely mechanism is via phonons at nano-geometry, i.e. IR (infrared) anomalous vibration excursion levels due to nanopowder properties, or excitons. This may be a new instance of excitons in a thermal application. This too goes back a long way in itself. Often the descriptor which is used is 'anharmonic vibration'. The effective pressure is much higher than what is seen in sonoluminescence. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Comet Coincidence?
In reply to Mauro Lacy's message of Sun, 15 May 2011 19:02:45 -0300: Hi, [snip] On 05/15/2011 06:14 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Mauro Lacy's message of Sat, 14 May 2011 15:49:13 -0300: Hi, [snip] Most probably, the reason is comets are charged bodies. The electric field of the comet interacts with the electric field of the Sun, and a CME occurs. The electric interaction is also the reason for cometary tails, by the way. The level of denial the academic community is in regard to this, is simply astounding. This feels intuitively wrong. If the charge were high enough to cause such havoc, and were repulsive (as the direction of the tail would imply), then the whole comet should never get anywhere near the Sun. If gravitational attraction is greater than electrical repulsion, the overall effect will still be attraction. An attractive inverse square law plus another (smaller) repulsive inverse square law, will still be an attractive inverse square law. ...but the tail blows away from the Sun, implying that it is carrying the charge. As it blows away it should leave the rest of the comet neutral (the comets charge should be on it's surface). Especially as it gets really close to the Sun where the surface is heated enough to evaporate easily. IOW the charge should all boil off, on the first pass, leaving none for subsequent passes. Not if the comet charges itself again in its next excursion to the cold and distant reaches of the solar system. I wonder if you get solar flares with every cometary impact, or only with some of them? I wonder the same. And what about asteroids (so called sungrazers) impacts? This is a very interesting subject. Look at this movie, by example: http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/pickoftheweek/CME_May11_zoom.mpg Taken from http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/pickoftheweek/ By the way, according to what is said there the academics seem to be changing their discourse. They morphed it from no connection to unknown connection. This is logical: scientists only want to talk about what they know. They also don't like to be seen saying silly, too speculative, or outright erroneous things. Take into account also that in the previous page it's said: In fact, analysis of this CME using images from the Solar Dynamics Observatory shows that the CME erupted before the comet came close enough to the solar surface to interact with strong magnetic fields. This seems to rule out Horace's kinetic energy explanation. And by the way, also an electric/electromagnetic explanation? Not so fast, William. Here's a possible mechanism for cometary caused CMEs: - The solar surface is in a state of very unstable equilibrium. - CMEs are the rupture of that equilibrium for some area of the surface. Sunspots are the opposite to CMEs, by the way, a rupure of the equilibrium but in the opposite direction. - When the comet is close, its *gravitational* field attracts parts of the solar surface, which separates from the rest. When these parts are elevated in relation to the surface, they enter the zone of the solar corona where the solar wind is formed, and they are quickly absorbed and dispersed by the coronal process, and ejected then as part of the solar wind. The high temperatures of the solar corona are a mystery too, and they can probably be explained taking into account phenomena of electrical nature. The sun is at the same time a gravitational sink, and an electromagnetic emitter embedded in an electric field. The solar surface represents the zone of equilibrium between those two modes. Any small disturbance caused a restoring of equilibrium, in the form of a CME if the equilibrium is disturbed preponderantly outwards, or in the form of a sunspot, if it's disturbed preponderantely inwards. There you have it. The power of group mind? (BTW I don't think I should have entered into this discussion at all.) Regards, Why not? fringe science gets you the chills?
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Yes this was not all that mysterious, as I predicted over a month ago. It was discernible from the public record, if you dig deep enough (I did misspell it back then as 'Ampenerco', instead of 'Ampenergo' but the principal people involved were all known for some time. http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg44511.html . and this situation still reeks now as it did then - strong odor of insider information and inappropriate use of taxpayer funding and political connections. Another prediction: there could be an investigation at the highest levels, especially if this turn$ into a bonanza for a few well-placed DoE insiders and former officials - who may have used taxpayer funding to develop the device (off the books) lack of honest reporting, and privileged political connections to get into a supposedly free-market opportunity at a level denied to others. greed, greed, greed. is Gordon Gekko really correct that it 'greed is good'? Jones From: Jed Rothwell See: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3179019.ece http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3179019.ece
Re: [Vo]: Why did the engineer Rossi beat all the scientists? WAS: Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
From Peter: ... I think it is outrigth logical fallacy to compare Mills' hyperchemistry to Rossi's nuclear jiu-jitsu. Why not? The fact that both processes appear to use nickel powder, hydrogen, a mystery catalyst, and heat certainly suggests there may very well exist linkage. Mills has told me that his process has nothing to do with Rossi's and he is not interested in what Ross has done. I hope Mills' said that mostly for tactical reasons, perhaps as a matter for public consumption. (...and perhaps to appease his financial backers.) If that truly is his opinion then Mills reveals as much curiosity inquisitiveness towards the work of potential competitors as ITER physicists and scientist have shown towards his own work. The statement strikes me as being narrow-minded, incredibly arrogant, and hypocritical. Let me put it this way: I'd sure be looking at Rossi's work, and taking as many notes as I can. If somebody knows more about Mills's theory and results than Mills himself- the best is to discuss wit the authors (that's the function of literary critics too to explain to everybody, including the author what has he wanted to say in his opus) Agreed. Mills certainly has every right to defend the merits of his theories, just as his critics have every right to questions it. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation
FYI- Piantelli's process is called: FASEC i.e. *fusione anarmonica stimolata con emisione di calore.* Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: -Original Message- From: Angela Kemmler It was Piantelli who first talked about pulsating hydrogen pressure. It was not Andrea Rossi. Are you certain Piantelli was first for gas phase ? The more general topic of 'pulsation' in LENR goes back many years to sonoluminescence (sonofusion). Perhaps before that. Of course, that was in the liquid state. Then, there is definite audible levels in glow discharge experiments. Much higher frequencies can be involved, but that is plasma phase. I think it is important to determine the first instance of pulsation in gas phase. It is probably not patentable due to prior art. Hagelstein, among others, apparently has claimed that the pulsation is critical to success in the Rossi device, and perhaps sine qua non. He is well positioned to know this. BTW - this does not in any way mean that the inventor himself is aware of it - if the pulsation frequency is so high that it is far beyond audible, even with lower harmonics. As to how ... pulsation can happen in a way that the inventor is unaware or only mildly aware, and assuming that we are not bound to strict definitions of sound - then the most likely mechanism is via phonons at nano-geometry, i.e. IR (infrared) anomalous vibration excursion levels due to nanopowder properties, or excitons. This may be a new instance of excitons in a thermal application. This too goes back a long way in itself. Often the descriptor which is used is 'anharmonic vibration'. The effective pressure is much higher than what is seen in sonoluminescence. Jones -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]: Why did the engineer Rossi beat all the scientists? WAS: Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
1- as far I know Ni is not a reactant in the Catalyst Induced hydrino Transition Process. In judging Mills reaction to the E-cat we have to consider how busy is he now- and that in this stage he has to solve many engineering not scientific problems. The proof is in the...CIHT, it works this year OK, delay -= problems. Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:47 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: From Peter: ... I think it is outrigth logical fallacy to compare Mills' hyperchemistry to Rossi's nuclear jiu-jitsu. Why not? The fact that both processes appear to use nickel powder, hydrogen, a mystery catalyst, and heat certainly suggests there may very well exist linkage. Mills has told me that his process has nothing to do with Rossi's and he is not interested in what Ross has done. I hope Mills' said that mostly for tactical reasons, perhaps as a matter for public consumption. (...and perhaps to appease his financial backers.) If that truly is his opinion then Mills reveals as much curiosity inquisitiveness towards the work of potential competitors as ITER physicists and scientist have shown towards his own work. The statement strikes me as being narrow-minded, incredibly arrogant, and hypocritical. Let me put it this way: I'd sure be looking at Rossi's work, and taking as many notes as I can. If somebody knows more about Mills's theory and results than Mills himself- the best is to discuss wit the authors (that's the function of literary critics too to explain to everybody, including the author what has he wanted to say in his opus) Agreed. Mills certainly has every right to defend the merits of his theories, just as his critics have every right to questions it. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Regarding: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3179019.ece Excerpts: Do you have any doubt that this doesn’t work in the end? Cassarino: We did three demonstrations here in the US, and these were non public. We did have a group of scientists here that understood exactly what was going on, and we helped actually set up the demonstrations. Obviously we still don’t understand what’s going on inside, but he has something, and we believe that. ... Why have you kept silent? Cassarino: We wanted to make sure that everything was in place, that we weren’t just putting spins on things. Because this is huge and we don’t want to just go out there right now and tell the world. We want to be prepared for this. And strategically it’s really partnering with the right companies. You know it’s not just about money, it’s not just about technology, it’s not just about companies and their capacities, it’s try to understand how all those pieces fit together. Ok... Some have speculated that such talk is indicative of a pump dump operation. Or, perhaps, maybe they are doing exactly what they need to do in order to position themselves optimally in the market. In the end. Pick your poison. I wait for further developments. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: greed, greed, greed… is Gordon Gekko really correct that it ‘greed is good’? Hell, yes. I already bought ampenerego.us (someone beat me to com org etc); but, .biz is still available if you want it, Jones. eg T
Re: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: As to how ... pulsation can happen in a way that the inventor is unaware or only mildly aware, and assuming that we are not bound to strict definitions of sound - then the most likely mechanism is via phonons at nano-geometry, i.e. IR (infrared) anomalous vibration excursion levels due to nanopowder properties, or excitons. There will be a pressure pulse with a pulsed heater filament; however, it will be minuscule. T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Jones Beene wrote: greed, greed, greed... is Gordon Gekko really correct that it 'greed is good'? If you are asking seriously, the answer is yes, of course greed is good. You can't have capitalism without it, and without capitalism wealth would hardly exist. Greed is good when it is harnessed and controlled by ethics, laws, and conscience. Greed as manifested by responsible people is good for society. Greed as manifested by the Mafia is bad. The foolish greed on Wall Street that led to Enron, and the investment shenanigans and bankrupted AIG and other major institutions in 2008, and the TARP bailout, is bad. Sometimes it is difficult for an outsider to know whether greed is doing a good job or a bad job. Overall it is good. Condemning greed because it sometimes gets out of hand, or it is sometimes unrestrained by morality, is like condemning sexuality because it sometimes leads to rape. - Jed
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation
Terry, Miniscule displacement yes, BUT at Casimir geometries those miniscule displacements effect force at 1/a^4 -so where change in plate separation is concerned miniscule displacement can result in huge changes in Casimir force. This could put so much stress on a covalent bond that it disassociates at a discounted lower temperature - where these changes in energy density might slowly repel a molecule these sudden changes may boost the molecules over the disassociation threshold before the molecule has a chance to give back the discount by repelling away from the opposition. Fran -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 10:33 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:hydrogen pressure pulsation On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: As to how ... pulsation can happen in a way that the inventor is unaware or only mildly aware, and assuming that we are not bound to strict definitions of sound - then the most likely mechanism is via phonons at nano-geometry, i.e. IR (infrared) anomalous vibration excursion levels due to nanopowder properties, or excitons. There will be a pressure pulse with a pulsed heater filament; however, it will be minuscule. T
[Vo]:Applet for anharmonic vibration
http://people.uncw.edu/moyerc/QMTools/live_documents/prob_11.16.htm This is only half the story (or less) for anomalous energy from hydrogen. Some time ago, a paper turned up on a particular alloy for spillover catalysis (Romanowski) in which a catalyst was identified in a simulation which can supply over 3 eV of the ~4.5 eV necessary to split the hydrogen bond of the molecule. Anharmonic vibration can supply the rest. As we speak, this catalyst is being tested. BTW this ~3 eV is far more than nickel or palladium can supply as a spillover catalyst, either of which are at the level of a fractional eV. OK, despite appearances of instant OU - this can be only a transitory phenomena in itself, since CoE quickly comes into play and catalysis is never gainful alone ... unless there is some kind of an asymmetry, coupled with a way to supply energy input from outside the thermal system. Well - QM 'time-shifting' can cover some of the necessary energy depletion of asymmetric chemistry - in the sense of: borrowed in advance as it were. The rest must come from something like the zero point field - if the M.O. of anomalous heat gain is to be asymmetric chemistry instead of nuclear. IOW There must be an energy flow into the system, and if it is not nuclear, then it must related to only a few possibilities, like dark energy, etc - of which ZPE is the most likely to be the source. ZPE is being used in its broadest sweep to cover the Dirac sea of negative energy. The suspected quanta of energy being brought in is 6.8 eV, which is the ionization potential of positronium and is also a whole fraction of the Hartree energy. IMHO - this explanation best fits the totality of the evidence so far, instead of nuclear transmutation, or the fractional ground state (hydrino) . Jones attachment: winmail.dat
RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Applet for anharmonic vibration
Jones, Well said, I agree totally with the door remaining open for subsequent nuclear effects once the energy is derived from asymmetric chemistry. Regards Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 11:12 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Applet for anharmonic vibration http://people.uncw.edu/moyerc/QMTools/live_documents/prob_11.16.htm This is only half the story (or less) for anomalous energy from hydrogen. Some time ago, a paper turned up on a particular alloy for spillover catalysis (Romanowski) in which a catalyst was identified in a simulation which can supply over 3 eV of the ~4.5 eV necessary to split the hydrogen bond of the molecule. Anharmonic vibration can supply the rest. As we speak, this catalyst is being tested. BTW this ~3 eV is far more than nickel or palladium can supply as a spillover catalyst, either of which are at the level of a fractional eV. OK, despite appearances of instant OU - this can be only a transitory phenomena in itself, since CoE quickly comes into play and catalysis is never gainful alone ... unless there is some kind of an asymmetry, coupled with a way to supply energy input from outside the thermal system. Well - QM 'time-shifting' can cover some of the necessary energy depletion of asymmetric chemistry - in the sense of: borrowed in advance as it were. The rest must come from something like the zero point field - if the M.O. of anomalous heat gain is to be asymmetric chemistry instead of nuclear. IOW There must be an energy flow into the system, and if it is not nuclear, then it must related to only a few possibilities, like dark energy, etc - of which ZPE is the most likely to be the source. ZPE is being used in its broadest sweep to cover the Dirac sea of negative energy. The suspected quanta of energy being brought in is 6.8 eV, which is the ionization potential of positronium and is also a whole fraction of the Hartree energy. IMHO - this explanation best fits the totality of the evidence so far, instead of nuclear transmutation, or the fractional ground state (hydrino) . Jones
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: greed, greed, greed… is Gordon Gekko really correct that it ‘greed is good’? Hell, yes. I already bought ampenerego.us (someone beat me to com org etc); but, .biz is still available if you want it, Jones. Ampenegro will be an excellent domain with which to catch typos.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
If you are asking seriously, the answer is yes, of course greed is good. In my opinion, this is not the main question. The question is: why does he want us to believe something else? He said several time, that he did not receive money so far, that he financed everything himself and that he wants to wait until november, lets say until a real commercial success in late 2011. He repeated it for the last time on april 18, after his agreement with Ampenergo. -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
[Vo]:All 330 Greek 1MW eCATS Complete
Joseph Fine May 16th, 2011 at 5:45 AM Dr. Rossi, 1) How many E-Cats are operating now? AR: 1- We have completed all the 330 modules of the 1 MW plant. 2) If you have a number of E-Cats operating together in a power plant and want to turn some of them on or off, can you do that remotely ( almost certainly ) or do you have to do it manually (turning valves and throwing switches)? Can you control the E-Cats individually or only in groups or sections? AR: 2- Remotely- Singularly 3) Can you refuel a module after several months without completely removing it for service, that is, by pouring Nickel (kitty food) into the device. That is, you dont have to ship it back to the factory by Federal Express. (That would make it easier to use in Ships, for example.) AR: 3- No, we have to change the modules, eventually refueling them at home (so far). Ships do not stay away from ports more than 6 mo.
Re: [Vo]:All 330 Greek 1MW eCATS Complete
I'd love to see a picture at least of one of them. Just to see if they looks like the drunk plumbing job as in the last demo. :) 2011/5/16 Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com Joseph Fine May 16th, 2011 at 5:45 AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=473cpage=10#comment-39284 Dr. Rossi, 1) How many E-Cats are operating now? AR: 1- We have completed all the 330 modules of the 1 MW plant. 2) If you have a number of E-Cats operating together in a power plant and want to turn some of them on or off, can you do that remotely ( almost certainly ) or do you have to do it manually (turning valves and throwing switches)? Can you control the E-Cats individually or only in groups or sections? AR: 2- Remotely- Singularly 3) Can you refuel a module after several months without completely removing it for service, that is, by pouring Nickel (kitty food) into the device. That is, you don’t have to ship it back to the factory by Federal Express. (That would make it easier to use in Ships, for example.) AR: 3- No, we have to change the modules, eventually refueling them at home (so far). Ships do not stay away from ports more than 6 mo.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de wrote: In my opinion, this is not the main question. The question is: why does he [Rossi] want us to believe something else? He said several time, that he did not receive money so far, that he financed everything himself and that he wants to wait until november . . . He said that with regard to Defkalion in Greece, and I have heard that is the arrangement. He never said anything about the U.S. contract, as far as I know. He never said he would not be paid up front. He has never denied that he is motivated by money. On the contrary, he often says he *is* motivated by money, and he thinks that is a good thing. I agree. When people are motivated by other things, such as academic rivalry, that often causes problems. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
The original comment was not made clear enough, it seems - and it was not intended as criticism for Rossi. Greed is a perfectly acceptable motivation for an inventor. No problem there. However, the situation is far different when you are from top management of the Department of Energy, and have used taxpayer money and inside political connections for gain. This can happen in bid-free contracts and in many other ways involving lack of full disclosure. 'Greed' only works well for society, as a motivator, when there is a level playing field. In the case of inside connections, just as in the recent conviction of Rajaratnam for Wall Street cheating - greed tends to merge far closer to fraud than when it is motivation for a poor inventor in the private sector. I hope they throw the book at him and the other pigs responsible for the recent financial collapse. Jones -Original Message- From: Angela Kemmler If you are asking seriously, the answer is yes, of course greed is good. In my opinion, this is not the main question. The question is: why does he want us to believe something else? He said several time, that he did not receive money so far, that he financed everything himself and that he wants to wait until November, let's say until a real commercial success in late 2011. He repeated it for the last time on April 18, after his agreement with Ampenergo. --
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
FWIW: As of Monday morning googling Ampenegro does not bring up any relevant links. The link to the State of Ohio certificate is interesting, however. Perhaps even promising. See: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3179056.ece/BINARY/Ampenergo+Certificate+of+Organization--.pdf Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Jones Beene wrote: However, the situation is far different when you are from top management of the Department of Energy, and have used taxpayer money and inside political connections for gain. . . . Sure. It that is what happened, it is another example of what we saw at Enron. Unethical and illegal behavior. Greed unrestrained by morality. My impression is that the 2008 market crash, AIG and so on was caused more by stupidity than illegal behavior, but I know little about it. Unfortunately, it is the way of the world that large, lucrative projects of this nature are often steeped in unethical greed. The Transcontinental Railroad was a classic example. It was a triumph of technology and spirit, paid for by Uncle Sam. The money was paid back, with interest, within a generation. Unfortunately it was also rife with corruption with huge sums being paid to members of Congress, or siphoned off into the pockets of insiders, in the Credit Mobilier scandal and others. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Agree with Jones' statement that greed can be good for society when there's a level playing field, and I wouldn't doubt if that's part of the impetus for this quote: Without morality in our actions, there is no hope for mankind. A.Einstein Unfortunately, the motivation to gain some kind of advantage over competitors is quite strong, and without morality and integrity (and laws) to keep things in check, quickly degrades into what we see now-a-days (e.g., Madoff, Enron, insider trading, political 'favors', etc.). -Mark -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 10:36 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik [snip] 'Greed' only works well for society, as a motivator, when there is a level playing field. [snip Jones
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Will this event start a greed epidemics? Tens of teams working seriously for Ni-H LENR? The stampede predicted by Ed Storms? Will mainstream media write about this contract? Positively about Ni-H LENR? For the time given, no reaction at Google News or Bing News only Yahoo News gives one hit re Ny Teknik. Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Agree with Jones' statement that greed can be good for society when there's a level playing field, and I wouldn't doubt if that's part of the impetus for this quote: Without morality in our actions, there is no hope for mankind. A.Einstein Unfortunately, the motivation to gain some kind of advantage over competitors is quite strong, and without morality and integrity (and laws) to keep things in check, quickly degrades into what we see now-a-days (e.g., Madoff, Enron, insider trading, political 'favors', etc.). -Mark -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 10:36 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik [snip] 'Greed' only works well for society, as a motivator, when there is a level playing field. [snip Jones -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
I forgot: Google BLOG Search for Ampenergo gives 4 hits. I think these numbers will increase fast. When will New York Times, Wall Street Journal Washington Post and Christian Science Monitor write about AMPENERGO? I will try to convince one of my favorites, FastCompany to publish something. And now I will let Bob Park to know about the deal Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: I do not know whether these people have corrupt connections with government. I do not know what that is in reference to. I do not consider Rossi's previous research with thermoelectric chips to be in any way corrupt, or even unusual. That's a value judgement in which Beene and I cannot disagree more. Corrupt or not, I do know a few things about these people, and one is that they are not stupid. They are not gullible. I have heard they did test the machines carefully. More extensively than Levi or EK, needless to say. I have also heard they paid Rossi a lot of money. I do not know how much, and it is none of my business, but it is millions of dollars. He deserves every penny. So, if you are looking for more of what might be called legalistic, or circumstantial non-experimental proof that Rossi is no scammer, this is it. I myself prefer quantitative experimental evidence. You can be sure that people like this do not hand over millions of dollars without careful testing. Rossi's claims are not nebulous. They are not theory-based like Mills'. He says he inputs ~100 W and output ~10,000 W continuing for weeks. That isn't hard to verify. You can be darn sure these people did verify it. - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Peter Gluck wrote: And now I will let Bob Park to know about the deal I predict he will say nothing. I also predict there will be no mainstream mass media coverage. At this point, I do not think it matters. These events have become, in the jargon of cold fusion, a self-sustaining reaction. We don't need the mass media anymore. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Bob will not answer now I think. But I also think that the mass media will embrace NI-H LENR, soon. Let's see. It matters for John Jane Doe who have problems with energy, lack of, price, scarry news from the ecologists, wars Fukushima etc. Peter On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Peter Gluck wrote: And now I will let Bob Park to know about the deal I predict he will say nothing. I also predict there will be no mainstream mass media coverage. At this point, I do not think it matters. These events have become, in the jargon of cold fusion, a self-sustaining reaction. We don't need the mass media anymore. - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
When this deal was signed, to the best of my knowledge there was no intellectual property protection to protect the investments of the systems integrator. Is anyone at risk here in any way? On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I do not know whether these people have corrupt connections with government. I do not know what that is in reference to. I do not consider Rossi's previous research with thermoelectric chips to be in any way corrupt, or even unusual. That's a value judgement in which Beene and I cannot disagree more. Corrupt or not, I do know a few things about these people, and one is that they are not stupid. They are not gullible. I have heard they did test the machines carefully. More extensively than Levi or EK, needless to say. I have also heard they paid Rossi a lot of money. I do not know how much, and it is none of my business, but it is millions of dollars. He deserves every penny. So, if you are looking for more of what might be called legalistic, or circumstantial non-experimental proof that Rossi is no scammer, this is it. I myself prefer quantitative experimental evidence. You can be sure that people like this do not hand over millions of dollars without careful testing. Rossi's claims are not nebulous. They are not theory-based like Mills'. He says he inputs ~100 W and output ~10,000 W continuing for weeks. That isn't hard to verify. You can be darn sure these people did verify it. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Peter Gluck wrote: Bob will not answer now I think. But I also think that the mass media will embrace NI-H LENR, soon. Let's see. It matters for John Jane Doe who have problems with energy, lack of, price, scarry news from the ecologists, wars Fukushima etc. I do not think so. Again borrowing cold fusion jargon, the Coulomb barrier of disbelief is too high. Most people, and most mainstream reporters simply cannot believe it is true. It sounds too much like one of these energy scams or perpetual motion machine claims. They will say it is too good to be true. and extraordinary claims call for blah, blah blah. Fortunately, it no longer matters what they say. It no longer matters whether this is covered in the mass media or not. Frankly, mass media reports are usually so distorted, it is just as well they don't cover it. As I have often said, I do not think there is a conspiracy against cold fusion. Not in academia, and not in the mass media either. If there is a conspiracy they don't invite me to their meetings. Obviously, someone pulled strings to cancel the recent ACS proceedings, so there is surreptitious opposition. There are dirty tricks and stuff like that. But it isn't from a conspiracy, or powerful vested interests. Our problem is on display in Wikipedia: ignorance, irrational opposition, stupidity. The truth is drowned out by braying crowds of mindless anti-intellectual fools. That sort of thing has happened many times throughout history, and it is likely to happen in the future. It is our primate nature. People are marvelous creatures in many ways, noble in reasoning, infinite in faculty. But we are not evolved to be rational or to live in a world governed by ideas and facts, rather than direct exposure to natural forces. Most people are barely capable of living the way we do. Most people can no more think objectively than I can play the violin. We do our best. You have to cut us some slack. Things often end badly with wars or poverty or wonderful inventions lost. But sometimes things end well. Given all that we have accomplished despite our limitations, it is foolish to predict gloom and defeat. That is as foolish as Panglossian optimism. There is always hope. As Obama says, while we breathe, we hope. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
Axil Axil wrote: When this deal was signed, to the best of my knowledge there was no intellectual property protection to protect the investments of the systems integrator. I expect the investors took this into account. I suppose that in their judgment, robust intellectual property protection is likely to come. A business agreement is a private contract. It is not subject to the kinds of laws that are supposed to protect investors in public markets, or consumers buying goods in the store. Anyone can agree to pay anyone else any sum of money the parties agree to, no matter how high the risks may be. Is anyone at risk here in any way? There is more risk than you can imagine. On the other hand, the potential payoff is one of the largest in the history of business. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
As of 4:25 PM Monday Morning (Central Standard Time) googling Ampenergo is now beginning to point me to links that seem more relevant, such as: E-Cat World Getting Ready for the Rossi Energy Catalyzer - A Low Energy Nuclear Reactor http://www.e-catworld.com/tag/ampenergo/ May 16 2011 Interview with Energy Catalyzer Partner Ampenergo in the United States http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/05/interview-with-energy-catalyzers.html New Hampshire - Corporate Division Date 5/16/2011 File Documents ... https://www.sos.nh.gov/corporate/soskb/Corp.asp?1114558 Is Storms' stampede preparing to exit the starting gate? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]: Why did the engineer Rossi beat all the scientists? WAS: Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Mon, 16 May 2011 09:11:34 +0300: Hi, [snip] I think it is outrigth logical fallacy to compare Mills' hyperchemistry to Rossi's nuclear jiu-jitsu. Mills has told me that his process has nothing to do with Rossi's and he is not interested in what Ross has done. If somebody knows more about Mills's theory and results than Mills himself- the best is to discuss wit the authors (that's the function of literary critics too to explain to everybody, including the author what has he wanted to say in his opus) On the other hand nor Piantelli (who knows what happens) nor Rossi - who made it to happen at an industrial level) are not interested in Randy's ideas not relevant for them. [snip] Of course Mills thinks it's irrelevant, he believes what Rossi says when he claims that it's nuclear, and Mills doesn't think that Hydrinos are involved in nuclear processes. Rossi OTOH probably suspects it may be Mills related, but dare not go down that road because he might be infringing Mills patent(s), so for both parties it is in their interest that the two not be related. However nature doesn't give a hoot who's interest it's in. It works (or not) the way it works. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's U.S. partner revealed in NyTeknik
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:57 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: The link to the State of Ohio certificate is interesting, however. Perhaps even promising.. Filed in 2009? T
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
At 03:51 PM 5/16/2011, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: One other point bears mentioning. The output was much too low for a pure fusion reaction. That implies that Hydrogen was consumed while generating less energy that from a fusion reaction, or perhaps it was just absorbed by the Ni, and never reacted, or perhaps the uncertainty in the 0.11 gm is much larger than has been implied. I doubt that much of the 0.11g of hydrogen was 'consumed' -- that's the amount that gets into the reactor chamber. Only a very small amount would be anywhere near the nickel (assuming it's on the wall : approx area of wall * diameter of a nickel particle / volume of reactor) , only part of that would get into the lattice (or whatever), and only part of THAT would react.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
On 11-05-11 07:12 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 9 May 2011 16:25:38 -0700: Hi, [snip] Rossi has clearly lost that bet. There is NO SUCH THING as stable copper-62 !! Obviously another typo. Indeed -- if you add a proton to nickel-62, don't you get copper-63 (which is stable)? Or did I miss something vital here? [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi bets the farm on Ni62?
Thank you, Robin. It seems we have to wait for reallly reliable analytical data in order to know what happens. And an answer to the great question- does CIHT work and what are the performances. Peter On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 03:51 PM 5/16/2011, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: One other point bears mentioning. The output was much too low for a pure fusion reaction. That implies that Hydrogen was consumed while generating less energy that from a fusion reaction, or perhaps it was just absorbed by the Ni, and never reacted, or perhaps the uncertainty in the 0.11 gm is much larger than has been implied. I doubt that much of the 0.11g of hydrogen was 'consumed' -- that's the amount that gets into the reactor chamber. Only a very small amount would be anywhere near the nickel (assuming it's on the wall : approx area of wall * diameter of a nickel particle / volume of reactor) , only part of that would get into the lattice (or whatever), and only part of THAT would react. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
