RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Robert Leguillon]

This is all conjecture, but I thought that it may be a fun exercise.
IF Defkalion's statements are true (that's a big IF):
Defkalion is running ahead of Rossi on this.  In one of the 
post-press-announcement interviews, Defkalion's rep is asked if Rossi is 
building e-Cats for their 1 MW plant.  He makes some statement to the effect of 
(I don't have the quote in front of me, so this is a rough approximation) 
"Rossi says that he is, but we are making all parts, including the reactors, in 
house." He struck me as very dismissive of Rossi's claims that Rossi was 
building anything for Deflkalion. Defkalion has also appeared dismissive of 
Rossi's "public demonstrations."
They are already putting together and testing in megawatts.  Defkalion has 
stated that individual reactors are being driven to 30 KW, and they've used 
alternate coolants.  They are testing microturbines for electricity generation. 
 In that EVWorld article, the photo shows Rossi, Focardi and Stremmenos testing 
what appear to be mass-produced e-Cats (I would guess Defkalions, not Rossi's). 
 

Rossi may be trying to stay relevant here, especially as he's left the American 
and military markets for himself.  If current trajectories prevail, he may be 
importing Hyperions to the US Market, while trying to walk in the lead of a 
speeding locomotive. 

Jed's comment that Rossi and Defkalion need to get their stories straight just 
had me thinking, - if Rossi is in Miami, is Defkalion running ahead without him?

Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 10:21:25 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2
From: jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

I expect this report is exaggerated or confused. NASA is not charged with 
authority to devise a program to make cold fusion "the main energy source for 
the world." That is far beyond their mandate. Heck, they don't even have 
rockets anymore.

I wonder if it was Rossi who claimed that NASA is doing this. It is a little 
unclear from this report who said what.

In this report, Rossi's statements about some technical details differ 
substantially with the statements made by Defkalion on their web site and 
web-site forum. For example, Rossi claims there are 300 cells in a 1 MW 
Defkalion Hyperion reactor. Defkalion says there are 100 cells in a 3 MW 
prototype. I think Rossi and the people at Defkalion should sit down and review 
the designs, and they should publish accurate information in agreement from 
both sides.

- Jed



  

[Vo]:Rossi has lost my trust

[Harry Veeder]

I was not judging Rossi's current claims against his past misdeeds. However, I 
am sorry to say this, but Rossi's current conduct is another matter. His 
aggressive responses to unfavorable criticism, his growing list of inconsistent 
statements and his highly dubious demonstrations have undermined my trust in 
him. Now it is Rossi's turn to persuade me that he is NOT engaging in fraud. 

Harry

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Jouni Valkonen]

Damon, Nasa wants a cheap power source in order to deliver cargo to the
orbit. And power for ion engines that enable fast deep space missions to the
asteroids, Mars and beyond.

E-Cat is perfect power source for aeroplane, but it can be applied also for
launch vehicle.
On Jul 13, 2011 2:14 PM, "Damon Craig"  wrote:
> What does NASA have to say about this?
>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Alan J Fletcher  wrote:
>
>> http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22
>>
>> *The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the
14th
>> July (2011) together with NASA...*
>>

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

[OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson]

>From Harry:

> From the top of the Ny Teknik feb. 23rd article: ”You just have
> to embrace a new technology that might solve the energy problems
> of mankind, at least until it can be rejected,” Swedish professor
> Sven Kullander said in a scientific discussion on the Italian
> ‘energy catalyzer’.
>
> Wouldn't you call that an endorsement?

Not me, personally.

It's just talk. Granted, it's positive talk, but it's still nothing
more than just talk.  Nothing was signed.

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

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Jed Rothwell]

I expect this report is exaggerated or confused. NASA is not charged with
authority to devise a program to make cold fusion "the main energy source
for the world." That is far beyond their mandate. Heck, they don't even have
rockets anymore.

I wonder if it was Rossi who claimed that NASA is doing this. It is a little
unclear from this report who said what.

In this report, Rossi's statements about some technical details differ
substantially with the statements made by Defkalion on their web site and
web-site forum. For example, Rossi claims there are 300 cells in a 1 MW
Defkalion Hyperion reactor. Defkalion says there are 100 cells in a 3 MW
prototype. I think Rossi and the people at Defkalion should sit down and
review the designs, and they should publish accurate information in
agreement from both sides.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Crticism of "black box" thinking

[Harry Veeder]

Damn, I was hoping my post below would not make it to vortex. ;-)
It was my last foolish effort to persuade myself that Rossi is not a scammer.
I was prepared to let Rossi's past misdeeds remain in the past, however Rossi's 
odd behaviour in the present combined with his highly dubious demonstrations 
have undermined my trust in him. Now it is Rossi's turn to persuade me that he 
is NOT enagaging in fraud. 
 
Harry

From: Harry Veeder 
>To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" 
>Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 4:01:19 AM
>Subject: [Vo]:Crticism of "black box" thinking
>
>
>
>
>If we apply the logic of the "block box" to the eCat then it is possible to 
>argue it is a hoax even if the output is only dry steam.
>
>This is based on the assumption that it is theoretically possible to use a 
>600-700 watt resistance heater to transform a water flow of 7 liters/hours 
>(2ml/second) into dry steam if the amount of time the water spends next 
>to the resistance heater is maximised. eg. if the water tube is narrow 
>and forms a tight spiral around the resistance heater.
>
>Harry
>
>
>
>Harry
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Reports of tritium production from Rossi-like experiments

[Michele Comitini]

Interesting... the page has been removed from 22passi!

Mic
Il giorno 12/lug/2011 20:56, "Akira Shirakawa" 
ha scritto:
> Hello group,
>
> It looks like there have been interesting news on the (private) CMNS
> mailing list as of late. Passerini in his latest post on his 22passi
> blog reported one email in particular (probably forwarded by Celani)
> regarding tritium production from Rossi-like Ni-H LENR experiments. I
> assume it's safe to copy and paste an excerpt here as well:
>
>
http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/07/da-nichel-e-idrogeno-nasce-il-trizio.html
>
> * * *
>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Brian Ahern [omissis] wrote:
>
> Dave,
>
> I just spoke with Tom Claytor at Los Alamos NL after I heard a rumor he
> was getting tritium from his Rossi-like experiments.
> I expected that it was a rumor from 20 years ago when his named was
> associated with CF and tritium.
> Surprisingly, that was not the case. He is using nanopowder alloys and
> hydrogen and he was getting 5% excess energy. Now he says he can
> reliably and repeatedly move between 5% and 16% with the 'movement of a
> control'.
> They are writing up patent applications right now, so I could not press
> him for details. The tritium is real, but so low as to provide no health
> or proliferation hazard.
> I asked him about DOE Headquarters and their attitude. He said their
> recent proposal was deemd in the top five for the year, so they are
> getting some funding.
> I asked him if he saw the potential for this becoming useful in a direct
> path. He said that he and his team do indeed see a path for development.
> I hope it is related to voltage triggering. Don't you think Matrix
> Capital should start looking closely at this area? At least to
> correspond with LANL?
>
> * * *
>
> Cheers,
> S.A.
>

[Vo]:Crticism of "black box" thinking

[Harry Veeder]

If we apply the logic of the "block box" to the eCat then it is possible to 
argue it is a hoax even if the output is only dry steam.

This is based on the assumption that it is theoretically possible to use a 
600-700 watt resistance heater to transform a water flow of 7 liters/hours 
(2ml/second) into dry steam if the amount of time the water spends next 
to the resistance heater is maximised. eg. if the water tube is narrow 
and forms a tight spiral around the resistance heater.

Harry



Harry

Re: [Vo]:test

[Peter Gluck]

I also had this problem
Peter

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Roarty, Francis X <
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> wrote:

>  Been unable to post from home or work since Sunday
>
>



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

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Rich Murray]

damnest nonsense I've ever seen -- I still hope that amid the mass
ascension of varied hot air balloons all over, that at least one
reproducible little CF effect emerges, however humble, as the catalyst
for a mass stampede of scientists... but, mostly, expect irredescent
popping bubbles...

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

[OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson]

There is the following from:

http://ecatreport.com/rossi/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-12

Excerpt:

> Andrea Rossi on letting some universities test the E-Cat
> Rossi went to Uppsala, Sweden the 4th to 5th of July 2011 in
> order to enter an agreement with Uppsala University enabling
> them to do research on the physics behind the E-Cat. Because
> nothing has been signed yet, he cannot reveal any details of the
> content other than both Sven Kullander and Hanno Essén
> belong to the small group of researchers selected and trusted
> to perform research on the E-Cat.

The key phrase being: "...because nothing  has been signed yet..."

I got the above link from Krivit's blog:

http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/07/12/uppsala-university-denies-rossi-research-agreement/

Did someone jump the gun?

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

Re: [Vo]:test

[Andrea Selva]

Me too

2011/7/12 Roarty, Francis X 

>  Been unable to post from home or work since Sunday
>
>

[Vo]:Levi's likely attitude

[Jed Rothwell]

People wonder why Levi has not given out more information about the 18-hour
flowing water test. I wish he would publish a detailed report listing the
type of flowmeter and so on. It is annoying to me that he has not.

I expect Levi and the others consider that test irrefutable. So do I. If I
had been there observing that test, I would have glanced at the outlet
thermocouple reading, put my hand on the outlet hose for a moment, and then
I would have been 100% absolutely certain there is massive excess heat. I
would have had zero doubt, to 5 significant digits. No matter how far off
the flow meter or input power meter may be, you could not get a temperature
difference large enough to feel unless there is tremendous excess heat. A
quick glance at the flow rate and the size of the inlet electric wire would
have told me that the temperature difference from input power cannot be more
than 0.1°C no matter what.

I would have dismissed any questions about that result as amateur
foolishness. I expect that is how Levi feels. It would be like this
scenario:

Guy drives car into repair shop. Tells mechanic: "Something is wrong with my
car. It doesn't steer straight."

MECHANIC: "That's 'cause you got a flat tire. Your right front's flat."

GUY: "Are you sure that's the problem?"

MECHANIC: "!@$%## Of course I'm friggin' sure!"

To take another imaginary example, a guy gives me today's weather report in
Japanese, which happens to be:

九州北部地方では、１４日の日中は気温が３５度以上となるところがあるでしょう。熱中症など健康管理に注意してください。

I tell him it is for northern Kyushu and it says beware of heat-stroke.

GUY: "Are you sure this is a weather report and not a love letter or
something about an insurance claim?"

ME: "Of course I'm sure, you nitwit! I was translating stuff like this 20
years before you were born."

Rossi's attitude towards Krivit is similar. In the video, Rossi did a rough
approximation of the heat balance on a paper chart. I am sure that result is
correct as far as it goes. I expect it is no more than 10% or 20% off. That
has no effect on the overall conclusion. This is fundamental physics going
back hundreds of years, long before they invented RH meters. The heat of
vaporization of water at ~1 atm is fixed. That is definitely steam coming
out the end of the pipe. The blabber that Krivit raised and that has been
repeated here about RH meters is irrelevant even if it is is true -- which I
doubt.

Rossi may have over-reacted to the criticism. I could have told you he
would. No one is perfect, and he tends to be thin-skinned. Krivit probably
knows this, and may have provoked him. (Ya' think?) I sympathize with Rossi.
It is irritating when an amateur lectures you about a subject you know far
better than he does. You can be darn sure that Rossi knows more about heat
than Krivit does. Or than I do. He may not know much about RH meters but he
never claimed to. You don't need one to measure enthapy when you are only
aiming to make a rough approximation.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Rich Murray]

"iridescent" -- my phonetic spelling terrible this 24 hours, sitting
beside my wife Sondra in Physicians Medical Center Hospital in Santa
Fe, New Mexico, and for another 48 hours, after her successful R hip
replacement yesterday morning, anterior surgery from the front of the
thigh in less than an hour, with porous titanium ball and socket with
high density polyethylene cup -- she already sat up on the edge of her
bed, dangling her legs -- used to be a flamenco dancer and expert
acupuncturist -- found this via Facebook:

Hildegard von Bingen (1098-1179) - O Jerusalem -- FractAlkemist for
the Ultimate Mandelbrot set travel 9:46 min video with female chorus
chant vocal: Rich Murray 2011.12.13

theprof1958  4,845 videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnkPV5cAV8c&feature=player_embedded#at=50

9:46 minutes with female chorus chant vocal
Uploaded by theprof1958 on May 6, 2010
Ensemble Sequentia
thanks to FractAlkemist for the Ultimate Mandelbrot set travel
http://www.youtube.com/FractAlkemist

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Rich Murray]

http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22

Below follows a stylized E-Cat Q&A section part 2 /2 from the
interview with Andrea Rossi in Stockholm, 5th July 2011

"...Question: Finally, how do you measure the amount of non-vaporized
water in the steam?

Answer: This has unfortunately been a big issue in the media lately,
while at the same time it is a no-brainer in-house. One should never
forget that heat measurements are one of the first things that high
school children learn in physics class and that to inquiry five
different independent physics professors about this is just plain
silly.

The instruments used, measures the water content in grams per cubic
meter and the question whether it is measured by mass or volume should
thereby have been settled once and for all. Next thing to do would be
to question the German manufacturer of the instrument if one wants the
fuzz to continue.

Here is a picture of the label of the German instrument from
manufacturer Testo for anyone who wish to enquire this further..."

JPS = just plain silly...

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Axil Axil]

Rossi is using tubercles to increase the cross-section of his reaction well
over what can be produced in a well ordered nickel lattice. A tubercle is a
mound created on the metal’s surface. Rossi is using these tubercles to
disrupt the regularity of the nickel lattice to increase the strength of the
atomic bonds of the nickel atoms.



When there is a lattice defect on the surface of a lattice, the coordination
number (CN) of the atoms that form the defect decreases. As a result, the
remaining atomic bonds shorten and deform; this increases the strength of
the remaining bonds of the nickel atoms on the walls in and around the
tubercles.



These atomic CN imperfections induce bond contraction and the associated
bond-strength gain deepens the potential well of the trapping in the surface
skin. This CN reduction also produces an increase of charge density, energy,
and mass of the enclosed hydrogen contained in the relaxed surface skin
imperfection. This increased density is far higher than it normally would be
at other sites inside the solid.



Because of this energy densification, surface stress and tension that is in
the dimension of energy density will increase in the relaxed region of the
disruption lattice bonds.



For example, when a phonon wave breaks upon the surface imperfection, it is
amplified by the abrupt discontinuity in the lattice and is concentrated by
the increased bond-order-length-strength (BOLS) of the nickel atoms that
form the walls of the cavity.



This tight coupling allows the thermodynamic feedback mechanism to control
and mediate the reaction. It also amplifies and focuses the compressive
effects that phonons have on the hydrogen contained in the lattice defects.
These defects increase the intensity of the electron screening because of
the increased bond tension inside the defects.



Nano-defects are very tough. This toughness and associated resistance to
melting and stress is conducive to the production of high pressure inside
the defect.



Rossi has stated that his temperature of his nano-powder can reach 1600C
before it melts. Nano-powder usually melts well below the 1350c melting
point of bulk nickel in a regular lattice. This revelation informs us how
much Rossi has increased the strength and available atomic bond tension in
his nano-powder.



The smaller the dimensions of the lattice surface defect, the greater is the
multiplier on the hardness and the resistance to stress compared to the bulk
material.  These multiplier factors can range from 3 to 10 based on the
properties of the bulk material.



Multilayer sites that penetrate down through many lattice layers are more
resilient than surface defects. There toughness is proportional to the
detailed topology and therefore not generally determined.



There is a certain minimum size which one reached reduces the hardness of
the nano-defect site. This size is on the order of less than 10 nanometers.




On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Mark Iverson wrote:

> **
> Smaller is not necessarily better... here's an interesting tidbit from the
> ecatreport.
> **
> *"Andrea Rossi stresses that, although one might first think “the finer
> the better” because the finer the powder the more surface area per volume
> you get, this is not the case. Because in order to reach useful reaction
> rates with hydrogen, the powder needs to processed in a way that leads to 
> amplified
> tubercles on the surface.*
>
> *The tubercles are essential in order for the reaction rate to reach
> levels high enough for the implied total power output per volume or mass to
> reach orders of magnitude kW/kg – this level of power density is required
> for any useful application of the process.*
>
> *Rossi tells that he worked every waking hour for six months straight,
> trying dozens of combinations to find the optimal powder size for the Energy
> Catalyzer, or E-Cat. He further stresses that specific data about the final
> optimal grain size cannot be revealed, but can tell us that the most
> efficient grain size is more in the micrometer range rather than the
> nanometer range."*
>
>
> -Mark**
>
> 
>  --
> *From:* Alan J Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:31 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2
>
>   http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22
>
> *Defkalion GT has hired a separate team of people in order to get this in
> place because of the complexity of the issue. The biggest problem has been
> to find an auto-destruct mechanism that is not harmful while still
> fulfilling its purpose. I am still not sure if the mechanism is fully
> developed as of yet, but Defkalion GT who is responsible for its development
> has told me that all details have been solved and that the E-Cat now has 12
> levels of security.
>
>
> The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 14th
> July (2011) together with NASA for an important d

Re: [Vo]:UFOs Over London

[Terry Blanton]

Are some UFOs organic?  Bova, et al, wrote of sentient atmospheric
beings of Jupiter.  Do they exist here.  This article provides some
evidence:

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2011/07/atmospheric-monsters-attack/

T

[Vo]:Not working again

[Jed Rothwell]

A couple of messages did not go through.

We should give serious consideration to moving this discussion group to a
new ISP.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 08:55 PM 7/12/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

On 2011-07-13 02:31, Alan J Fletcher wrote:

http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22


The following excerpt from the above interview is "wow" news to me. 
Is NASA going to get actively involved with Rossi? Wow again if true:


The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 
14th July (2011) together with NASA for an important discussion 
regarding the research and business development around the E-Cat. 
After the initial meeting with NASA, Defkalion GT and Ampenergo will 
sit down and develop a joint program for the introduction of the 
E-Cat as a main energy source to the world.


People do jump to conclusions, don't they?

Almost certainly, "meeting with NASA" means "meeting with someone 
affiliated with NASA." That might mean practically nothing, or it 
might be significant. As with much about Rossi, we simply cannot tell 
from the verifiable information. Nobody asked Rossi, it seems, the 
obvious question. "Oh, you are meeting with NASA? With whom?"


I can imagine what Rossi would have then said, if asked, "Oh, I can't 
say that, it's confidential, for obvious reasons. Wait until October, 
[etc., etc]. Next question?" 

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 06:26 PM 7/12/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
[KRIVIT] Professors Sven Kullander, retired from 
Uppsala University, and Hanno Essén, with the 
Royal Institute of Technology, endorsed 
Rossi’s claimed technology in a news story on 
Feb. 23, 2011, before they had seen or inspected 
the device. Essén is the chairman of the 
Swedish Skeptics Association, a nonprofit 
education group well-known in academic circles.


Krivit's statement is astounding. It is either 
terribly confused or an outrageous lie. What could he be thinking?!?


Krivit thinks?

Seriously, Krivit is just doing what Krivit has 
long done: do some kind of investigation, form an 
opinion, then report from the perspective of that 
opinion. It can then affect his wording and what 
he says in ways that he might not notice, since he believes his own story.


Jed, it's not "terribly confused," it is just a 
"possible" error. Lots of people have made 
mistakes about Rossi. It's a set-up for making mistakes!


Nevertheless, this report from Kullander and 
Essen could be interpreted quite in line with what Krivit is claiming:


http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article324.ece

The issue would be whether or not this report was an "endorsement."

Some people might claim that E&K did not do 
adequate testing, or that their methods were not 
good enough to support their conclusions. That 
is a legitimate difference of opinion. But it is 
clear that they themselves think these tests are 
sufficient to support the level of endorsement 
they made in NyTeknik. It is 100% clear that 
they did the tests first, then endorsed. Their 
endorsement was not unconditional. They left 
plenty of wiggle room for themselves in case 
Rossi turns out to be wrong. As they should; as any academic scientist would.


What I see is Kullander and Essen believing what 
they were told, and reporting it as fact. It's 
quite possible that they hedged their comments, 
but Lewan didn't report that. The February 23 
article cited can be seen as showing 
"endorsement" prior to their visit March 29.


Scientists are not accustomed to thinking someone 
might be telling them things that are grossly 
distorted. So, for example, the factory is 
reported as a fact, without attribution, "according to"


I'm puzzled by something, by the behavior of 
Kullander, Essen, and Lewen. There have been some 
serious objections to their prior reports, such 
as the apparent assumption that a relative 
humidity meter can be used to measure steam 
quality, and the neglect of the possibility that 
water overflow would be occurring, could actually 
be expected -- unless some feedback mechanism is 
operating, which involves varying power to 
exactly match the allegedly constant water flow 
-- but they have not responded or clarified their 
observations or possible errors.


The silence of Kullander and Essen is then used 
by Rossi, who is claiming that these "university 
professors" have validated his work.


Are they being silent? Or have I just missed more recent comments? 

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 05:25 AM 7/13/2011, Damon Craig wrote:

What does NASA have to say about this?

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Alan J Fletcher 
<a...@well.com> wrote:
http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 



The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 
14th July (2011) together with NASA...


What do you think? I can imagine Krivit calls them up, and someone says this:

"Meeting with Andrea Rossi? Who is that? I have no information about this."

And then Krivit headlines, "NASA denies meeting with Rossi."

Or maybe he won't fall into that trap. Hope springs eternal. 

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

[Alan J Fletcher]

Krivit has modified his statement :
Professors Sven Kullander, retired from Uppsala University, and Hanno
Essén, with the Royal Institute of Technology,

endorsed Rossi’s claimed technology in a news story on Feb. 23, 2011,
before they had seen or inspected the device  <***>  on
March 29.  <***>
But he now has a banner showing the NyTeknik *ENGLISH* Headline :

”You just have to embrace a new technology that might solve the energy
problems of mankind, at least until it can be rejected,” Swedish
professor Sven Kullander said in a scientific discussion on the Italian
‘energy catalyzer’. 
The original Swedish  :
”En nyhet som kanske skulle kunna lösa energiproblematiken för
mänskligheten måste man ju bejaka, i alla fall tills det kan förkastas.”

Online dictionaries seem to think "embrace" is too strong a
word 
eg bejaka :  affirm,consent,recognize ...

http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/Swedish/bejaka?cx=partner-pub-0939450753529744%3Av0qd01-tdlq&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=bejaka&searchtype=Definitions%20Only&doc=1
 

affirm (försäkra, bejaka, jaka, intyga),

consent (samtycka, medgivande, bejaka,
fullmakt).Consider also:


assent (samtycke, bifall, jaka),

say yes (jaka, bejaka),

assent to (bejaka, samtycka till, bifalla). 
K&R Experiment and Report are here,  by the way:

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece


http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3144960.ece/BINARY/Download+the+report+by+Kullander+and+Ess%C3%A9n+%28pdf%29
.

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Harry Veeder]

Didn't you know this contradicts  Sven Kullander's statement that the post 
reaction sample ratio Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 2.24? When asked about this in his 
blog several weeks ago, Rossi said Kullander is right. 
So Rossi continues to supply the media with conflicting  information.
 
Harry

From: Mark Iverson 
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 10:24:19 AM
>Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2
>
>
> 
>Another tidbit, but from 
part 1 of 2... 
>  
>"The post-reaction 
analysis shows a copper isotope ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 1.6, while the natural 
occurrence show a ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 2.24 which is a statistically 
significant difference. That, of course, excludes contamination as an 
explanation of Copper content in the post reaction samples." 
>  
>-Mark   
> From: Alan J Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com] 
>Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:31 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 
2
>
> http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 
>
>Defkalion GT has hired a separate team of people in order to get this 
in place because of the complexity of the issue. The biggest problem has been 
to 
find an auto-destruct mechanism that is not harmful while still fulfilling its 
purpose. I am still not sure if the mechanism is fully developed as of yet, but 
Defkalion GT who is responsible for its development has told me that all 
details 
have been solved and that the E-Cat now has 12 levels of security. 
>
>
>The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 
14th July (2011) together with NASA for an important discussion regarding the 
research and business development around the E-Cat. After the initial meeting 
with NASA, Defkalion GT and Ampenergo will sit down and develop a joint program 
for the introduction of the E-Cat as a main energy source to the world. 
>
>[ and they DID ask the "steam" question. ] 
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Mark Iverson]

Smaller is not necessarily better... here's an interesting tidbit from the 
ecatreport.
 
"Andrea Rossi stresses that, although one might first think "the finer the 
better" because the finer
the powder the more surface area per volume you get, this is not the case. 
Because in order to reach
useful reaction rates with hydrogen, the powder needs to processed in a way 
that leads to amplified
tubercles on the surface.
 
The tubercles are essential in order for the reaction rate to reach levels high 
enough for the
implied total power output per volume or mass to reach orders of magnitude 
kW/kg - this level of
power density is required for any useful application of the process.
 
Rossi tells that he worked every waking hour for six months straight, trying 
dozens of combinations
to find the optimal powder size for the Energy Catalyzer, or E-Cat. He further 
stresses that
specific data about the final optimal grain size cannot be revealed, but can 
tell us that the most
efficient grain size is more in the micrometer range rather than the nanometer 
range."
 

-Mark

  _  

From: Alan J Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:31 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2


http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 

Defkalion GT has hired a separate team of people in order to get this in place 
because of the
complexity of the issue. The biggest problem has been to find an auto-destruct 
mechanism that is not
harmful while still fulfilling its purpose. I am still not sure if the 
mechanism is fully developed
as of yet, but Defkalion GT who is responsible for its development has told me 
that all details have
been solved and that the E-Cat now has 12 levels of security. 


The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 14th July 
(2011) together with
NASA for an important discussion regarding the research and business 
development around the E-Cat.
After the initial meeting with NASA, Defkalion GT and Ampenergo will sit down 
and develop a joint
program for the introduction of the E-Cat as a main energy source to the world. 

[ and they DID ask the "steam" question. ] 

RE: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Mark Iverson]

Another tidbit, but from part 1 of 2...
 
"The post-reaction analysis shows a copper isotope ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 1.6, 
while the natural
occurrence show a ratio of Cu 63/Cu 65 ~ 2.24 which is a statistically 
significant difference. That,
of course, excludes contamination as an explanation of Copper content in the 
post reaction samples."
 

-Mark

  _  

From: Alan J Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:31 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2


http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 

Defkalion GT has hired a separate team of people in order to get this in place 
because of the
complexity of the issue. The biggest problem has been to find an auto-destruct 
mechanism that is not
harmful while still fulfilling its purpose. I am still not sure if the 
mechanism is fully developed
as of yet, but Defkalion GT who is responsible for its development has told me 
that all details have
been solved and that the E-Cat now has 12 levels of security. 


The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 14th July 
(2011) together with
NASA for an important discussion regarding the research and business 
development around the E-Cat.
After the initial meeting with NASA, Defkalion GT and Ampenergo will sit down 
and develop a joint
program for the introduction of the E-Cat as a main energy source to the world. 

[ and they DID ask the "steam" question. ] 

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Jed Rothwell]

Damon Craig wrote:

The plot thickens. It may very well be that the device doesn't have to 
deliver more energy than put into it.


What the heck are you talking about?!? Of course it delivers more than 
you put into it. This is a peculiar thing to say.




It may have a market even if it fails this criterion.


What possible market would it have?



I get odd feeling that Mr. Rossi may not  know the difference.


Of course he knows the difference! He is an engineer, and a self-made 
millionaire from his previous energy-related inventions.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Damon Craig]

What does NASA have to say about this?

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Alan J Fletcher  wrote:

>  http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22
>
> *The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 14th
> July (2011) together with NASA...*
>

Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2

[Damon Craig]

The plot thickens. It may very well be that the device doesn't have to
deliver more energy than put into it. It may have a market even if it fails
this criterion. I get odd feeling that Mr. Rossi may not  know the
difference.

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Akira Shirakawa
wrote:

> On 2011-07-13 02:55, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
>
>> On 2011-07-13 02:31, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
>>
>>> http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/**andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-**part-22
>>>
>>
> Ah, sorry, I just noticed (too late...) that you did actually quote that as
> well. I must be blind to text in italics (as it was rendered on my screen
> from your message).
>
> Cheers,
> S.A.
>
>