Re: [Vo]:Krivit could be correct on Rossi
Nope On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:54 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 05:57 AM 7/18/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Tell me Lomax. Would you destroy the reputations of others to advance your own. I risk my reputation with everything I write, since I'm a known person. And you, Damon Craig? Care to tell us who you are? Which Damon Craig?
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat open source replication
I hope your piping is better than class 150, and your fittings better than schedule 40. Preferably you would want to use class 3000 pipe and schedule 80 fittings of 316/316L stainless steal. The strength of stainless steal decreases rapidly with an increase in temperature. I imaging, the same is true of steel. There's no convincing evidence that Rossi's pressure vessels operate above ~110 C nominal. Therefore you could be running with materials more weakened by temperature than Rossi's. You might google stainless steel yield strength vs temp if interested. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:13 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I have been trying to replicate the E-Cat transmutations in an open-source kind of way and I'm ready to start asking the community for suggestions on how to proceed. I have two identical reactors that I can pressurize with hydrogen up to 20 bars and heat to 300C. I can measure, graph, and log the temperatures of the two units as they are heated in parallel. One unit contains Ni powder, the other sand, and I am trying to replicate the transmutation of the nickel. (My whole setup is $2K) - Brad
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat open source replication
It took me nearly 2 months to reverse enineer it, and come up with a parts list. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: It took Rossi 15 years and hundreds of tests to figure out how to make this work. Highly experienced experts are trying to replicate him, with some success, but nowhere near the high input to output ratios he reports. I do not think there is enough information publicly available to support an open source replication because it is not open source. It is secret. That is unfortunate but it is mainly the fault of the Patent Office. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On 11-07-18 03:15 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Rossi wrote: I received him to get those suggestions, curious to know about what he had to suggest. I was working in my Bologna lab when I received him and he saw one E-Cat under test for no more that 30 seconds, after which I invited him to exit. He made no tests, he saw nothing, he just has taken a 30 seconds glance at a totally closed box. I believe this is meant to be 30 minutes, not 30 seconds. Brown observed the machine for longer than 30 seconds. Meant to be by who? Certainly not Rossi -- his English isn't that bad: Looking at something for 30 minutes isn't a glance ! He said 30 seconds and it's quite clear he meant 30 seconds. This is pretty obviously a plain old lie. Frankly, it's pointless to try to explain away all of Rossi's lies as mistakes and translation errors; there are too many of them.
[Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
From the ISP Users Group for Vortex: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/EskimoNorthUsers/message/1599 More bad news... someone levied all of Eskimo's bank accounts dry, in fact it even over drafted one of them by 238 bucks! The bank of course didn't tell me who in their notice, so I'm going to call tomorrow to find out what the hell is going on this time. I wasn't able to pay our vendor as a result, there may be yet another interruption in services now. -Carl Dinse http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/EskimoNorthUsers/message/1608 Well I'd be nice if I had some kind of Lawyer to help with some of this stuff, but all things that cost money. I'm waiting to hear back from our accountant. We have at least until the 25th before anything would go down, thats how long Integra has given me. Carl Dinse Eskimo North Inc. end Carl has a plan to keep the site up which brought to mind the word 'kite'. I don't know how long the site could be down if the provider-provider shuts down Eskimo but there is the alternative during that period: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vortex-l-backup Yahoo group mail service is slow but free and beats nothing in the event of a blackout. T
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
Here's a bone for you and Krivit, Lomax. Do you believe a cork will float on stream saturated with water vapor? Thinking about it sorta makes the saturated steam theory look stupid, doesn't it? Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see if it will float over a boiling pot of water. Rossi's steam is very dry by the wet-steam-argument standards. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 09:29 PM 7/18/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Well, Rossi is changing the power when he twiddles the controls. Maybe he is trying to keep it stable. But anyway if it overflows I am pretty sure he turns up the power. How does he know when it overflows? You've been assuming that the temperature will drop. No. Not unless boiling ceases.
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
The discussion lists on Yahoo never had a slow response time to me... I am ok with that.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
I agree. I hadn't considered the submersion depth of the probe for additional pressure head. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 12:20 PM 7/18/2011, P.J van Noorden wrote: To conventionally explain the boilingpoint of 100.5 degrC the backpressure in the Ecat must have been 30mbar (for a boilingpoint of 99.6degC) and 20mbar for a boilingpoint of 99.9degC. This compares to resp 30.6 cm and 20.4cm water and this is about the hight of the chimney. The difference in temperature of the steam can ofcourse only be explained if the chimney of the ecat is almost completely filled with water. This is ofcourse the big question. That's brilliant, actually.
[Vo]:FWIW
President Alexandros Xanthoulis sez At the end of September there will be a public demonstration of the final product (the Hyperion) , the power output of the device would be 35KW/h. from the website e-cat world attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:FWIW
On 2011-07-19 14:48, Jones Beene wrote: President Alexandros Xanthoulis sez At the end of September there will be a public demonstration of the final product (the Hyperion) , the power output of the device would be 35KW/h. That's interesting information. Here's the link and the text: http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/07/19/more-details-from-defkalion-gt-president-alexandros-xanthoulis/ More Details From Defkalion GT President Alexandros Xanthoulis (UPDATED) by Frank (admin) Thanks to the kindness of a reader, we have a better translation of the interview that XanthiPress conducted yesterday with Defkalion GT President Alexandros Xanthoulis that we reported about yesterday which provides a clearer picture than could be gleaned from the Google translation. The new translation is as follows: At the first 2 weeks of August a core team of 12 scientists from the Xanthi area will start working, there will be a separate company lab (for RD i presume) the building for this lab has been found. At the end of September there will be a public demonstration of the final product (the Hyperion) , the power output of the device would be 35KW/h. Concerning the safety of the factory Xanthoulis said that they don’t building a nuclear plant (there were concerns from the locals) however they give the matter of safety the required attention mainly as a precaution. Concerning the skepticism and the negative comments from people (they say that the e-cat is too good to be true) Xanthoulis said that people should look into the matter more closely before they form an opinion, he also said that the device produces no radiation , and that the way it works is a mystery to everybody , and that the device is protected by a patent and that patent will be open in 9 years. Job applications are being accepted right now through the DGT web site, and when the company settles in the Xanthi area they will merge the 3 factories into one bigger one , the factory will occupy an area of 20.000 square meters. The RD department would be in a different location, 30 people will work there, at the factory the estimate that they’ll need 250-350 people. This is the first time I have heard mention of a demonstration at the end of September — perhaps that was just misreported as Rossi and his associates have consistently been reporting the end of October for the unveiling of the first E-Cat plant. Many thanks to our Greek speaking reader! UPDATE: Our kind translator has added more translation from the video interview on the XanthiPress site: The 1MW plant is nearly ready, but they will do many tests in order to make sure that everything works perfect. They will not build 3 factories as they previously said, there will be a big one with 3 separate units, also xanthoulis said that they will outsource some components of the devices to other factories like the hyperion casing. They will receive the licence to sell their products in greece in september, however xanthoulis said that in another country the licence is already acquired (he didn’t said witch one) They have made deals with car companies in the RD sector in order to research the application of the e-cat in cars, also the same applies for ships. He also said that they made a deal with a very big company , but they will not announce that yet. They have deals with 47 countries in order to supply them with the reactor core , the rest of the device would be build locally in each country. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:FWIW
This looks like a Brazilian soap opera! LOL! :D
[Vo]:1MW plant to work mostly without input energy (probably)
...or so says Rossi in one of his latest messages on JONP. That looks like a big improvement since the previous input electrical energy will be 1/6 of the output thermal energy claim: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=2#comment-54414 Andrea Rossi July 19th, 2011 at 7:57 AM Dear Alessandro Casali: This photo has been taken during the stress test of a sery of E-Cats a couple of weeks ago, together with the Greek Scientist Christos Stremmenos. They are some of the E-Cats that will compound the 1 MW plant. In that phase the E-Cats were working making steam WITHOUT energy input. This is why you see us so focused (me and Stremmenos). The 1 MW plant, probably will work mostly without energy input, I suppose, because we are resolving the safety issues connected. The 4 red spots are pumps, the E-Cat clusters are hidden. The three characters in the photo are Prof. Sergio Focardi , Prof. Christos Stremmenos and me. Warm Regards, A.R. The photo he is referring about is this one: http://www.evworld.com/images/rossi_focardi_Stremmenos.jpg Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
On 2011-07-19 14:19, Terry Blanton wrote: Carl has a plan to keep the site up which brought to mind the word 'kite'. I don't know how long the site could be down if the provider-provider shuts down Eskimo but there is the alternative during that period: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vortex-l-backup Yahoo group mail service is slow but free and beats nothing in the event of a blackout. Is there anything against the creation of a Google Group instead? Anyway, this is going either way to hugely affect the public reach of the vortex-l discussion group. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
What about a forum instead of a discussion list?
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
Robert Leguillon wrote: I made the comment about someone flushing the toilet to demonstrate that some of the momentary power spikes could be caused by correlating drops in water pressure. I do not see how this could cause a 20-minute event. There was no continuous monitoring of flow rate, and this was not a fixed-displacement pump. They told me the flow rate was continuously monitored with a video camera. The meter keeps track of total consumption, as I said. There was no pump; just water pressure from the tap. That is very reliable. Water pressure does not change measurably at 1 L/s for 20 minutes when someone flushes a toilet. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
Jed sez: They told me the flow rate was continuously monitored with a video camera. The meter keeps track of total consumption, as I said. There was no pump; just water pressure from the tap. That is very reliable. Water pressure does not change measurably at 1 L/s for 20 minutes when someone flushes a toilet. Maybe a couple taking a shower. 20 minutes probably isn't enough time. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
Is there anything against the creation of a Google Group instead? Anyway, this is going either way to hugely affect the public reach of the vortex-l discussion group. Google groups are the old Usenet, right? Yahoo offers file folders, piccys, etc. Anyway, I created a google group too. http://groups.google.com/group/vortex-l-backup Youse guys can decide which you would prefer in the event of failure here. T
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
I realize it's not that important in the big scheme of things, but I wish you hadn't put 'backup' in the name. :) Craig On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 10:36 -0400, Terry Blanton wrote: Is there anything against the creation of a Google Group instead? Anyway, this is going either way to hugely affect the public reach of the vortex-l discussion group. Google groups are the old Usenet, right? Yahoo offers file folders, piccys, etc. Anyway, I created a google group too. http://groups.google.com/group/vortex-l-backup Youse guys can decide which you would prefer in the event of failure here. T
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
Is there anything against the creation of a Google Group instead? Anyway, this is going either way to hugely affect the public reach of the vortex-l discussion group. Google groups are the old Usenet, right? Yahoo offers file folders, piccys, etc. Anyway, I created a google group too. http://groups.google.com/group/vortex-l-backup Youse guys can decide which you would prefer in the event of failure here. Who decides? I'm not trying to be flippant. if we determine it might be wise to migrate, exactly who makes the decision... the final determination. Do we vote on it? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]: e-Cat patent sealed for 9 years!
This from Akira's quoting of Xanthoulis in the Subject thread, FWIW, started by Jones: ...and that the device is protected by a patent and that patent will be open in 9 years. Hmmm, so someone in Defkalion, with close Greek government ties (gee, who might that be?), got the Greek government to 'seal' the patent for 9 years! That probably gives them just enough time to pay down their sovereign debt! If they aren't forclosed on before that... All the political talking heads are saying that Greek will default and that foreclosure is certain. Here's another scenario which, given human greed and the political/financial situation, is reasonable to consider... Sometime between now and Sept, the Creditors meet with the Greek Parliament and threaten to foreclose unless they get a controlling percentage in Defkalion. They can't let the demo happen, because if the Oct demo is a success, then the govt has considerable leverage to go to other lenders to get the money to handle the foreclosing creditors... That, or Rossi is being severely pressured to do a 'convincing' demo so the Greek govt can gain some leverage as soon as possible. Oh, gee, perhaps that's why the 'progress' toward a self-sustaining E-Cat... What a coincidence! Interesting times indeed... -Mark Iverson http://www.linkedin.com/pub/mark-iverson/6/915/409
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:47 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: Who decides? I'm not trying to be flippant. if we determine it might be wise to migrate, exactly who makes the decision... the final determination. Do we vote on it? Run some test messages through both. It looks like google is a speed demon; but, yahoo has more features and really is slow. I ran a couple of messages through it and it took several minutes to show up. Google takes seconds. I like Yahoo because sometimes we want to upload images I don't think you can do that on Google groups, eh? T
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
While I agree with you, this has been argued to DEATH and back. Of course, I'd be willing to set up a Vortex Fan Page on Facebook if anyone else here uses it. On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: What about a forum instead of a discussion list?
RE: [Vo]: e-Cat patent sealed for 9 years!
I guess that statement could also be interpreted as... ... The patent will EXPIRE in 9 years But that doesn't add up since that means it was granted over 11 years ago (20 year term?)... Any other interpretations for that statement??? -Mark -Original Message- From: Mark Iverson [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 8:21 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: e-Cat patent sealed for 9 years! This from Akira's quoting of Xanthoulis in the Subject thread, FWIW, started by Jones: ...and that the device is protected by a patent and that patent will be open in 9 years. Hmmm, so someone in Defkalion, with close Greek government ties (gee, who might that be?), got the Greek government to 'seal' the patent for 9 years! That probably gives them just enough time to pay down their sovereign debt! If they aren't forclosed on before that... All the political talking heads are saying that Greek will default and that foreclosure is certain. Here's another scenario which, given human greed and the political/financial situation, is reasonable to consider... Sometime between now and Sept, the Creditors meet with the Greek Parliament and threaten to foreclose unless they get a controlling percentage in Defkalion. They can't let the demo happen, because if the Oct demo is a success, then the govt has considerable leverage to go to other lenders to get the money to handle the foreclosing creditors... That, or Rossi is being severely pressured to do a 'convincing' demo so the Greek govt can gain some leverage as soon as possible. Oh, gee, perhaps that's why the 'progress' toward a self-sustaining E-Cat... What a coincidence! Interesting times indeed... -Mark Iverson http://www.linkedin.com/pub/mark-iverson/6/915/409
RE: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
I'm all in favor of moving to a more modern venue as well since there are times when I've wanted to upload files or photos and am frustrated that we're operating with such limitations... As far as 'Who decides'? I think most of the 'regulars' and ol' Timers would agree that, out of respect for the founder, the decision should be done by Mr. Beaty himself... -Mark -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 8:25 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:47 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: Who decides? I'm not trying to be flippant. if we determine it might be wise to migrate, exactly who makes the decision... the final determination. Do we vote on it? Run some test messages through both. It looks like google is a speed demon; but, yahoo has more features and really is slow. I ran a couple of messages through it and it took several minutes to show up. Google takes seconds. I like Yahoo because sometimes we want to upload images I don't think you can do that on Google groups, eh? T
Re: [Vo]: e-Cat patent sealed for 9 years!
20 year from the day the patent was filled in... But Rossi's was in 2009, so, that's more 18 years...
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
At 08:24 AM 7/19/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Here's a bone for you and Krivit, Lomax. Arrggh. Classified with Krivit! Ah, well, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. This is once for me, I still get to be right once more Do you believe a cork will float on stream saturated with water vapor? Thinking about it sorta makes the saturated steam theory look stupid, doesn't it? Depends on the steam quality. On dry steam, of course not, the density is too low. But 100% wet steam is, in fact, pure liquid water, so a cork would float on it. Very wet steam, though, probably isn't stable, the water droplets will coalesce and fall. There is a semantic issue here Next stupid question? Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see if it will float over a boiling pot of water. Extra question answered, free of charge. I won't bother trying it, because it won't float, because the steam coming off a pot of boiling water will probably be well under 5% wet. Craig seems to think that I consider wet steam a big problem here. I don't. I think the steam is probably no more than a few percent wet, by mass percentage, it's a huge red herring, Krivit fell for this. The elephant in the living room is overflow water, which will be at the boiling point, but which will not have vaporized, leading to a miscalculation of power on the idea that this water was vaporized, when it wasn't. Rossi's steam is very dry by the wet-steam-argument standards. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: At 09:29 PM 7/18/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Well, Rossi is changing the power when he twiddles the controls. Maybe he is trying to keep it stable. But anyway if it overflows I am pretty sure he turns up the power. How does he know when it overflows? You've been assuming that the temperature will drop. No. Not unless boiling ceases. Did Craig's questions relate somehow to the response he quoted?
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
No, not critics. The director of those Swedish physicists denied there was a contract, Rossi also denied that, and in fact what will happen is a collaboration of the professors of Bologna and Uppsal to develop the e-cat.
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
Original-Nachricht Datum: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:54:26 -0300 Von: Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic? No, not critics. The director of those Swedish physicists denied there was a contract, Rossi also denied that, and in fact what will happen is a collaboration of the professors of Bologna and Uppsal to develop the e-cat. sorry Daniel, did you read the article of Ugo Bardi? Did you understand it? Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
Not really, but it refers to a post of Krivit. We discussed that last week :)
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote: I think most of the 'regulars' and ol' Timers would agree that, out of respect for the founder, the decision should be done by Mr. Beaty himself... Well, I never intended a permanent relocation. The list belongs to Bill and he pays the, er, bills. I'm sure Eskimo is economical and few people make the annual donation. BTW, it was moved from another ISP once before; so, if you (global 'you') want the list permanently relocated, we might have to make our donations more often. T
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
This is what he writes: In realtà, sembra che a Uppsala ci stiano nettamente ripensando. Io stesso avevo scritto la settimana scorsa ai miei colleghi di Uppsala per sentire come andavano le cose. Avevo sentito parlare di un accordo con Rossi per fare un test di uno degli E-cat, ma i colleghi mi hanno risposto che non c’era nessun accordo, nessun E-cat era sottoposto a dei test a Upssala e che il prof. Kullander era stato fortemente criticato per la leggerezza con la quale aveva approvato il lavoro di Rossi e Focardi senza dati sufficienti in proposito. Sembrerebbe che Kullander, in privato, abbia avuto un netto ripensamento. Using all my efforts to translate it into dirty english: in reality, it seems that in Uppsala they are changing minds. I, myself, wrote an email to my collegues last week in order to know what was happening there. I heard about a contract [accordo] with Rossi to perform a test with an Ecat, but my collegues answered to me that there is no contract at all and that no test was done in Uppsala and that prof. Kullander was sverly critizised for his flippancy with which he approved Rossis and Focardis work without having enough data. It looks as if Kullander, in a private way, changed mind. citation from: http://www.ecoblog.it/post/12879/e-cat-fusione-fredda-secondo-ugo-bardi-aspo-non-ce-alcun-accordo-tra-rossi-e-luniversita-di-uppsala -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
This is not very different from what Krivit did...
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Alexander Hollins alexander.holl...@gmail.com wrote: While I agree with you, this has been argued to DEATH and back. Really? When? Of course, I'd be willing to set up a Vortex Fan Page on Facebook if anyone else here uses it. Many organizations (including mine) block Facebook access during office hours. T
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
On 2011-07-19 16:36, Terry Blanton wrote: Anyway, I created a google group too. http://groups.google.com/group/vortex-l-backup Youse guys can decide which you would prefer in the event of failure here. Google Groups looks and feels great; I'd stick with it, personally. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
Angela, The article does not say much. As a matter of fact Bardi does not give any scientific fact to confirm what he has written, just rumors hence just blather on which he bases his bufala (scam) assumption. You can find him on some rainews interviews posted earlier on this list. The guy is never to the point actually he seems to know very little about LENR... As side note it seem that the blog where Bardi writes is sponsored by renewable energy companies whose interest conflicts with even the chance that a new energy source appears. Could be maketing FUD technique? Mic Il giorno 19/lug/2011 17:59, Angela Kemmler angela.kemm...@gmx.de ha scritto: Original-Nachricht Datum: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:54:26 -0300 Von: Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Betreff: Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic? No, not critics. The director of those Swedish physicists denied there was a contract, Rossi also denied that, and in fact what will happen is a collaboration of the professors of Bologna and Uppsal to develop the e-cat. sorry Daniel, did you read the article of Ugo Bardi? Did you understand it? Angela -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
+1 for Google groups http://groups-beta.google.com/googlegroups/tour3/index.html Il giorno 19/lug/2011 18:16, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com ha scritto: On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Alexander Hollins alexander.holl...@gmail.com wrote: While I agree with you, this has been argued to DEATH and back. Really? When? Of course, I'd be willing to set up a Vortex Fan Page on Facebook if anyone else here uses it. Many organizations (including mine) block Facebook access during office hours. T
Re: [Vo]:FWIW
Guess what Rossi says ... :-) Andrea Rossi July 19th, 2011at 9:22AM Dear Carlo: Probably there has been a misunderstanding, no 35 kW reactors will be demonstrated anywhere in public. In October will be put in operation our 1 MW plant. I continue to work on it 16 hours perday,and so far we are prefectly in time. Warm Regards, A.R. Carlo July 19th, 2011at 9:12AM Dear Andrea Rossi in a recent interviewDefkalion GT President Alexandros Xanthoulis stated that a 35KW Hyperion will be demonstrated at the end of September. Should we consider this an error meaning he was talking about the 1MW module at the endofOctober or can we really expect to see a 35KW module at the end of September? You can find the transcriptionofthe inteviewat http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/07/19/more-details-from-defkalion-gt-president-alexandros-xanthoulis/ Il giorno 19/lug/2011 15:01, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com ha scritto: This looks like a Brazilian soap opera! LOL! :D
Re: [Vo]:FWIW
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Michele Comitini michele.comit...@gmail.com wrote: Guess what Rossi says ... :-) Andrea Rossi July 19th, 2011at 9:22AM Dear Carlo: Probably there has been a misunderstanding, no 35 kW reactors will be demonstrated anywhere in public. I guess it boils down to (intended) what Rossi means by Public. I think Defkalion is intending those demonstrations for potential partners and certain scientists. Also, I don't think the shared intellectual properties between Rossi and Defkalion is a two-way street. T
Re: [Vo]:Is the itty-bitty photo visible?
I did the same, using a water cooker, and got about 90% efficiency assuming textbook heat to vaporize water. I am a little worried though, about: 1) The, to my feeling, rather slow rate of vapor/steam escaping Rossi's hose as seen in Krivits video My water cooker is 1.5kW, Rossi's water cooker is 15kW. But my water cooker seemed to have a more vibrant cook to it. Maybe the water condenses while traveling through the rubber hose? BTW steam is not invisible, just transparant. Like glas is not invisible but transparant. 2) Air humidifiers being able to do just that: make mist On the other hand, according to Kullander-Essen, water wouldn't exceed 60C if there wasn't some effect. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Peter Gluck wrote: It is perfectly visible. But let's measure the enthalpy of the steam not any other characteristic I am calibrating thermocouples. Is that not allowed? More calibrations and more specific information about temperatures, duration, the mass of metal and the mass of cooling water would enhance this discussion. To paraphrase the monster in Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein: Calibrations, good. Heat, go-o-o-od. Blather, bad. Unfounded speculation, bad. I measured the approximate enthalpy of steam a couple of months ago, with an electric frying pan. I did not observe the miraculous event that skeptics believe is so common, wherein the water disappeared at 7, or 20 or 1000 times the textbook rate. Due to inefficiencies and the frying pan heating the room air, I found it took considerably more energy to boil away the water than the textbooks indicate. No surprise. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote: 2011/7/18 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com: P.J van Noorden wrote: It is very important to notice that water boils at 100.5 C when the outside air pressure is 1030 mBar, which can be the case when a high pressure system is covering Italy . . . In the April 28 tests, Lewan reported: we calibrated the probe by immersing it in a pot with boiling water, and the measured value was then 99.6 degrees centigrade. Later during the test they measured vapor at about 100.5 degrees centigrade. There is no doubt that was vapor, since it is substantially hotter than the boiling water, plus you can see steam coming out of the pipe. I expect that backpressure is minimal with this system. Oh, I have constantly talked that the measured boiling point of water is 99.7°C. Apparently my memory did error as I meant that boiling point according thermometer is 99.6°C! Notice that absolute accuracy of thermometer is ±0.4°C. Although it's relative accuracy is ±0.1°C. This alone proofs that there is considerable amount of pressure build up and pressure can only be build up if there is lots of dry steam present. You're just guessing. The pressure at 30 cm of water is enough to raise the bp by about a degree. The chimney height can explain it.
Re: [Vo]:Vortex Could Go Down July 25th
At 12:06 PM 7/19/2011, Terry Blanton wrote: On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote: I think most of the 'regulars' and ol' Timers would agree that, out of respect for the founder, the decision should be done by Mr. Beaty himself... Well, I never intended a permanent relocation. The list belongs to Bill and he pays the, er, bills. I'm sure Eskimo is economical and few people make the annual donation. BTW, it was moved from another ISP once before; so, if you (global 'you') want the list permanently relocated, we might have to make our donations more often. Yahoogroups are free, so are googlegroups. Used to be you could pay and get advertising-free groups, on yahoo. I don't know if they still do that and I found the advertising sufficiently unobtrusive to not be worth paying to eliminate it Having moderated both yahoogroups and googlegroups, I find that yahoogroups has better tools. We should have multiple moderators. No problem with making Beatty the owner, and there should be at least two owners. I've seen a lot of groups go down the tubes because a sole owner disappears. My sense is that owners, as such, need do practically nothing, just be available to name new moderators if needed, or a new owner if one disappears.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:20 AM, P.J van Noorden pjvannoor...@caiway.nlwrote: To conventionally explain the boilingpoint of 100.5 degrC the backpressure in the Ecat must have been 30mbar (for a boilingpoint of 99.6degC) and 20mbar for a boilingpoint of 99.9degC. This compares to resp 30.6 cm and 20.4cm water and this is about the hight of the chimney. The difference in temperature of the steam can ofcourse only be explained if the chimney of the ecat is almost completely filled with water. This is ofcourse the big question. But if it is steam, then it has a much larger volume, and moves much faster and then fittings, expanders, reducers, elbows all produce significant losses, and cause pressure increase. The K-factor for various fittings is tabulated, and the pressure in steam-flow is very sensitive to this factor. There's quite a useful calculator at http://www.pipeflowcalculations.com/pressuredrop/. It takes a little while to get all the data, but for steam flow, pressure is most sensitive to K, and using reasonable estimates based on visible plumbing, it is quite easy to get a pressure increase of 50 or even 100 mbar.
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
At 12:49 PM 7/19/2011, Michele Comitini wrote: Angela, The article does not say much.  As a matter of fact Bardi does not give any scientific fact to confirm what he has written, just rumors hence just blather on which he bases his bufala (scam) assumption. You can find him on some rainews interviews posted earlier on this list. The guy is never to the point actually he seems to know very little about LENR... As side note it seem that the blog where Bardi writes is sponsored by renewable energy companies whose interest conflicts with even the chance that a new energy source appears. Could be maketing FUD technique? The report claims private conversation with Kullander, who has been strangely silent on the Rossi affair for quite some time. It's plausible, but obviously proof of nothing. In my opinion, Kullander made some mistakes, and he should simply acknowledge them and move on. Simple, clean and clear. He reported what he saw and based some speculations on that, without having thoroughly investigated, that's all. However, his name is being used, directly or hidden under Swedish professors, and I really do think it's his obligation to either back up and back out, or stand firmly behind what he wrote and said. What I'm aware of as problems are the steam quality measurement that wasn't, a minor thing, probably, but more importantly the lack of any verification of the assertion that all water was vaporized. There are minor details about water flow, etc., and, given the situation, more stringent qualification of what he saw, because there are possible fraud scenarios that were absolutely not ruled out. What I've come to is that what Kullander and Essen reported in their published report was inadequate to establish the claimed power. There are reasons, in that report, to suspect some level of generated power, that's about it. Even that could possibly be an error, it's inferred, not soundly established as would be the case by actually measuring the enthalpy of outlet water/steam.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: P.J van Noorden wrote: It is very important to notice that water boils at 100.5 C when the outside air pressure is 1030 mBar, which can be the case when a high pressure system is covering Italy . . . In the April 28 tests, Lewan reported: we calibrated the probe by immersing it in a pot with boiling water, and the measured value was then 99.6 degrees centigrade. Later during the test they measured vapor at about 100.5 degrees centigrade. There is no doubt that was vapor, since it is substantially hotter than the boiling water, plus you can see steam coming out of the pipe. Only a little steam comes out of the pipe. The flat temperature indicates a mixture of steam and vapor at the bp. The reason for the elevated bp is increased pressure, either because of water depth, or the need to push a high volume of steam through a labyrinth of fillings. I expect that backpressure is minimal with this system. Check http://www.pipeflowcalculations.com/pressuredrop/ to change your expectations. Be sure to look at the calculator of K-factors and to set the pressure calculator for gas flow at the right conditions.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: P.J van Noorden wrote: the airpressure on April 28th 2011 was 1011 mbar, so the boilingpoint must have been 99.9 degC. The difference in boilingtemperature can be explained by the accuracy of the thermometer (+/- 0.4 degrC). At these temperatures with boiling water I doubt the water temperature was uniform. I have recently been calibrating some thermocouples and thermometers at various temperatures. I have seen considerable non-uniformity. That's a pot, and your thermometer is placed in pure water. In the ecat, the power is high enough to raise all the water to the bp, and convert some to steam before it exits. This mixture of liquid and gas will be at the bp. There is no mixer inside the eCat. It is producing gas at many times the volume of the liquid in a confined volume. That will produce a great deal of mixing.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 12:55 AM 7/18/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto: a...@lomaxdesign.coma**b...@lomaxdesign.com a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: At 09:14 PM 7/17/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote: So most of the time he now performs stress tests on his modules in self-sustaining mode, apparently. That's an amazing claim! Just demonstrating one of those running for a reasonable amount of time would have rendered pointless most of the discussions and criticisms on steam issues made so far, even Julian Brown's. Now consider this possibility: Rossi wanted this exact situation, that he'd look like a complete scammer. He need to make the demo for some reason, whether it was personal for Focardi, or whatever, it doesn't matter, but he had a contrary need, to throw others off track, to inhibit attempts to replicate what he's doing. If he looks like a fraud and a scammer, that will seriously impact the ability of others to get funding to try to figure out what he's doing. The only problem with this theory is that it doesn't explain his boast about running the ecat without input, or for that matter, getting 120 kW in the 18-hour test. No theory explains everything, it is an intrinsic limitation of all theories. However, we know that Rossi is, shall we say, enthusiastic, and not terribly careful about what he says. The 18-hour test allegedly showed a transient temperature phenomenon that has been interpreted as 120 kW. Just for starters, that might be explained, for example, by some scale whacking the flow drastically for a short time. Or it might be that the thing actually produced 120 kW for a short time, which would make me really worried about putting one of these in my basement! It is possible to have too much of a good thing! The 120 kW excursion makes the 18-hr test less credible to me. It means that during that excursion the delta T between the ecat walls and the water would have to increase by an order of magnitude. If ordinary operation is at 300C or 400C, this would cause the metal to melt.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote: How do you take a 30 minute glance? Well, Brown said in his report that Rossi showed him heat after death for about 2 minutes. (He also told me this.) That's more than 30 seconds. Perhaps Rossi just means for a short while. I do not think he means 30 seconds in the literal sense. It is a shame Rossi gets bent out of shape so easily. - Jed It's a shame that every time Rossi says something, no one knows what he said.
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: In my opinion, Kullander made some mistakes, and he should simply acknowledge them and move on. Where, in his report, are these mistakes? Someone here claimed that he did not measure input power, when the report clearly states he did. Simple, clean and clear. He reported what he saw and based some speculations on that, without having thoroughly investigated, that's all. I see no evidence for that. What I'm aware of as problems are the steam quality measurement that wasn't, a minor thing, probably . . An imaginary thing. You believe it, he doesn't. Don't blame him because he disagrees with you, and do not assume he is wrong. You and others here have convinced yourselves there are problems where no problems exist. First you dream up something that might be wrong. Then you assume it is wrong. Then you assume EK did not address it -- when in most cases their report shows they did. You get carried away by your own imagination, in a dialog with yourself, the way Groucho Marx as president of Freedonia went to war: http://www.anyclip.com/movies/duck-soup/right-hand-of-good-fellowship/ *Rufus T. Firefly http://www.imdb.com/name/nm050/*: I'd be unworthy of the high trust that's been placed in me if I didn't do everything in my power to keep our beloved Freedonia in peace with the world. I'd be only too happy to meet with Ambassador Trentino, and offer him on behalf of my country the right hand of good fellowship. And I feel sure he will accept this gesture in the spirit of which it is offered. But suppose he doesn't. A fine thing that'll be. I hold out my hand and he refuses to accept. That'll add a lot to my prestige, won't it? Me, the head of a country, snubbed by a foreign ambassador. Who does he think he is, that he can come here, and make a sap of me in front of all my people? Think of it - I hold out my hand and that hyena refuses to accept. Why, the cheap four-flushing swine, he'll never get away with it I tell you, he'll never get away with it. [/Trentino enters/] *Rufus T. Firefly http://www.imdb.com/name/nm050/*: So, you refuse to shake hands with me, eh? [/slaps Trentino with his glove/] - Jed
[Vo]:Huge Solar Explosion
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/dark-fireworks.html On June 7, 2011, Earth-orbiting satellites detected a flash of X-rays coming from the western edge of the solar disk. Registering only M (for medium) on the Richter scale of solar flares, the blast at first appeared to be a run-of-the-mill eruption--that is, until researchers looked at the movies. We'd never seen anything like it, says Alex Young, a solar physicist at the Goddard Space Flight Center. Half of the sun appeared to be blowing itself to bits. more Impressive vids! T
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Abd wrote: Whatever is the cause, that the temperature is nailed shows that there is steam and water in equilibrium. It's only been recently that Rossi admits to achieving completely dry steam, The claim is implicit in the power calculation from the very first demo. and from Kullander's report we can estimate that the steam has less than 2% liquid content (1.4% from his report). How you ask??? If the Relative Humidity is below saturation, the one can use that and the temperature and pressure to give you the mass of water vapor per volume of steam. But Rossi doesn't measure the volume of the steam, so you still don't know the mass of the steam. And if you assume that all the water is converted to steam to get the steam volume, then you're arguing in a circle. Again. I know this is beating that dead horse again, but the absolute certainty with which some argue the opposite point is, in my opinion, not justified. If the steam is nearing saturation (95% RH) then I might agree that its use is seriously questionable. I don't remember seeing any figures for the RH when the Testo probe was used inside the chimney... If it was over 95% then I would concede the skeptic's point. Steam at the boiling point is 100% saturated by definition. What else could you have other than water vapor? So you should concede. I found a paper on measuring steam quality. It's a tricky (and important) business, but the classical method is to use calorimetry. That is, determine the heat content and deduce the liquid content. Rossi is using the liquid content to get the heat content. But how does he get it. If a testo probe was effective, why would others bother with calorimetry. Newer methods use optical and microwave techniques. There is no mention of capacitive methods. Nor does the literature on the probe itself claim to be able to determine steam quality. The paper is Mitra et al. ...Steam Quality Measurement ..., IEEE Sensors Journal 11 (2011) 1214. Here's a snippet from the intro: Various methods for determining the steam quality (wetness fraction) and the enthalpy of the partially condensed steam at the last stages of a turbine have been under development for over many years. Several types of calorimetry probes based on extraction and analysis of wet steam from the main flow exist [6]. In order to carry out an accurate measurement process and analysis, the sampling procedure should be iso-kinematical. Iso-kinematical sampling in the running turbines is extremely difficult due to unsteady flow in the last stages, and the local thermodynamic and aerodynamic parameters are also disturbed. Also, the probe must be well heat insulated to achieve accurate results. Every measurement takes several hours as full thermal equilibrium of the whole probe body should be established from one operating condition to another. This results in the probe missing the transient data of the turbine during a startup and shutdown condition. Thus, a calorimetry probe is mostly used to make measurements well beyond the last stage of a turbine. [...] Recently, some work has been done on the development of optical methods, primarily based on light scattering techniques and microwave resonant cavities [7]–[9]. The optical techniques mentioned in the above-mentioned references provide informa- tion of the size of the water droplets, render fast measurements, and enable measurement between the different stages in a tur- bine. They also do not disturb the local thermodynamic pa- rameters. However, the estimation of steam quality with these technique depends on the droplet size classification. Individual monochromatic light sources of different wavelengths are used in the measurement. Hence, the measurement accuracy for the steam quality is highly dependent on the water droplet size dis- tribution which can be reliably measured only with appropriate wavelengths being used to probe the steam. One wonders why they would go to all that trouble if a testo probe could be used. In the paper they show how their technique can measure steam quality to within a few per cent between 5% and 80%. 5% corresponds to 5 % steam by mass, and yes, that means 95% liquid by mass. So not only is very wet steam with 95% liquid by mass possible, but there are ways to measure it accurately. Not with an RH probe, though.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote: In all the talk about the start up slope and thermal mass, one can almost forget the metals. Here are the specific heats for most of the materials that make up the majority of the e-Cat: - Hydrogen (gas) 14.30 J/g*K - Water (liquid) 4.18 J/g*K - Stainless0.5 J/g*K - Nickel 0.46 J/g*K - Copper 0.39 J/g*K - Lead 0.13 J/g*K The only thing that has any real heat capacity is the water and hydrogen... But the water is flowing. It is always replaced at the same temperature, so it is not involved in the warm up. It's the thermal mass of the ecat that causes it to take time to warm up at the beginning, and to cool off at the end. The hydrogen may have a high heat capacity, but it makes little contribution because its mass is so small. In addition, the rubber hose has about HALF the heat capacity of water, so it can absorb a considerable amount of heat before it changes temperature... That's not how heat capacity works. Any change in heat causes a change in temperature; it's only a matter of how much. But there is a way to absorb heat without changing temperature: when the phase changes. That's why the temperature is not varying by even a small amount. Any fluctuation in the power is absorbed by variation in the steam wetness without any change in the temperature. That's why the flat temperature is such good evidence that the steam is wet.
RE: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
So not only is very wet steam with 95% liquid by mass possible, but there are ways to measure it accurately. Not with an RH probe, though.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: So not only is very wet steam with 95% liquid by mass possible, but there are ways to measure it accurately. Not with an RH probe, though. Sorry, but some people seem to think that horse is still winning the Preakness. I will not rest until it is buried.
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: In my opinion, Kullander made some mistakes, and he should simply acknowledge them and move on. Where, in his report, are these mistakes? Someone here claimed that he did not measure input power, when the report clearly states he did. He measured it at the beginning. He didn't check it after that, as far as we know. Simple, clean and clear. He reported what he saw and based some speculations on that, without having thoroughly investigated, that's all. I see no evidence for that. He said the steam was dry by visual inspection. That's not a thorough investigation. And a RH measurement is worse than a joke. What I'm aware of as problems are the steam quality measurement that wasn't, a minor thing, probably . . An imaginary thing. You believe it, he doesn't. You mean he didn't. I would not presume to suggest he has not since been educated by many embarrassed Swedes.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
At 03:15 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: The 120 kW excursion makes the 18-hr test less credible to me. It means that during that excursion the delta T between the ecat walls and the water would have to increase by an order of magnitude. If ordinary operation is at 300C or 400C, this would cause the metal to melt. Yeah, my thinking is along these lines also. This tends to indicate that there is some unidentified artifact operating. It does call into question the more moderate results. For example, suppose there was some problem with the temperature sensor placement, suppose it is somehow picking up increased heat It could be any of millions of things. Those of us working with cold fusion really have to be aware, there are millions of ways to get it wrong. That works in the other direction, by the way. That we can show reasons to be skeptical doesn't prove that there wasn't any excess heat. To do that would require work that hasn't taken place, that Rossi has not allowed. Jed Rothwell has pointed this out, and so have many others. Joshua, you are quite right to remain skeptical on Rossi's demonstrations. I think you've erred with respect to other things in this field, but we can look at that later. I am not the authority on Truth, and anyone who thinks they are is probably in deep doo-doo, intellectually. Looking at the Rossi demonstrations, I'm inclined to think that there is *some level* of excess heat here. But, then again, I do accept other LENR excess heat findings, lots of them. I can easily understand why someone who thinks those other findings as not conclusive would find Rossi even less conclusive. For starters, no independent verification, basic criterion. And we'll just have to wait for that, unless, say, Brian Ahern hits gold. There are people digging, one of them may strike the mother lode. I love the people who look, instead of just sitting and pontificating. If nothing else, they give us far more interesting stuff to pontificate about! In fact, though, these people are responsible for most breakthroughs in science. Behind them are phalanxes of people who do more boring work, replicating and measuring and nailing things down
Re: [Vo]:Calibrating a pair of K-type thermocouples
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: 1 minute after turn off, boiling was mostly stopped. T1 99.7 ~ 99.8°C (marginally hotter than before turn off, because the metal pot was still hot). T2 98.7°C 2 minutes after turn off. T1 99.3°C, T2 97.7°C 7 minutes after turn off. T1 97.0°C, T2 94.1°C 13 minutes after turn off. T1 94.2°C, T2 91.0°C As you see, 2 minutes after turn off, the temperature was already measurably and consistently lower than with boiling. I mentioned that Julian Brown reported the temperature of the eCat remained at boiling for about 2 minutes with the power turned off. Let us assume the thermal mass of the eCat metal is roughly the same as the 1.6 kg pot. As you see from these numbers, it is a little hard to judge a 2-minute heat-after-death test. If there was no power going into the cell and no anomalous power, I expect it would have stopped boiling, but the temperature may not have fallen enough to confirm this with confidence. If it stayed at boiling temperatures for 5 minutes with no input power you could be certain there is anomalous heat. So many mistakes so little time. It is nice that you take the time to do experiments, but you should consider doing some that are relevant. Set up a little cell with an electric heater and pump water through it with power 2 or 3 times the boiling threshold power, and then turn it off and see how long it takes to go below boiling. Make sure the warming up gradient is similar so you know you have a similar thermal mass, and wrap it in insulation, just like Rossi. You may have to go to the hardware store, and do some plumbing, but at least the results will mean something. The problem with a pot is that to maintain boiling, you need only enough power to cover the losses. And if you are epsilon above that threshold, then it would take no time to stop boiling when you shut the power down. In an ecat, to maintain boiling you similarly have to cover the losses (which in this case include the water being poured down the sink. If you are epsilon above the power necessary to start boiling, then again, it would take no time to stop boiling when the power shut down. But in the ecat, before he does his heat-after-death illusion, he gooses the power. So, if the ecat is at 150C to just maintain boiling, he might goose it to 300C. Now, it has to cool back to 150C before boiling stops. According to his and your claim, the power is 7 times the boiling threshold, which would require much higher temperature still. Judging from how long it takes to cool from 100C to ambient when the ecat is shut down, this could easily take several tens of minutes. In the pot, since water is not pumped through, the power required to maintain boiling is much lower, and increasing it by a factor of 2 or 3 would not take as big a temperature change (of the pot), if you could even identify when that was. That is to say, increasing the power would go into an increased outflow in the pot (but not in the ecat), and so the temperature doesn't increase as much, and it would therefore cool off faster. More importantly, there is no indication you even tried to increase the power above the level required to maintain boiling, so the experiment means nothing. And finally, the ecat is heavily insulated; not so the pot, which will therefore cool off by convection. As much as you like to boil water on a stove, it is not the same as an ecat, and your experiment is irrelevant.
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
In my more-or-less last communication with Krivit, I told him the wet steam hypothesis, inspired by an abused humidity meter, was a red herring, and the water was simply flowing through it. Then you turn up using the same phrase. Krivit has his wall of shame on his blog--a trophie wall of photos, all set-up and ready to go in the hopes he will be the one to blow this story wide open. Are you helping him? On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 08:24 AM 7/19/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Here's a bone for you and Krivit, Lomax
Re: [Vo]:Calibrating a pair of K-type thermocouples
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I forgot to mention there were ~2 L of water in the pot. I wrote: 3 Omega GT-736590 thermometers, red liquid, total immersion, -10 to 100°C, marked in 1°C increments Correction: -10 to 110°C Regarding the heat-after-death event that Brown observed, I am assuming -- or pretending, really -- that the power measurement was drastically wrong and there was enough input power to make the thing boil. That is not actually possible. Power meters are reliable. In both the Brown and Krivit demos, the input power is not high enough to allow boiling because much of the power goes to heat the eCat metal which radiates into the room, even with that insulation. In the Krivit demo the boiling threshold was exceeded by 200W. There is simply no way 200W radiates through that insulation. You are dreaming. You are making things up to cling to your belief. In real life, the temperatures close to boiling alone prove that there is anomalous heat, but to humor the skeptics we will pretend you can heat water inside a metal container without losses. I didn't see the details of the Brown demo, but Brown says he goosed the power first. So that would have produced boiling with just the electricity. Anyway the pretend scenario is that a couple of kilowatts of heat go into the cell because the input power is mismeasured. It boils. The power is turned off to demonstrate heat after death. Brown is not sure how long; roughly 2 minutes. Either because there is anomalous heat, or because there is so much heat left in the metal, the temperature does not fall significantly. Or, at least, Brown did not notice a persistently lower temperature. This may or may not indicate anomalous heat. As I said, it is a shame Brown did not write down temperatures, duration, the change in the mass of cooling water shown on the weight scale and other observations, and it is a shame he did not think to ask Rossi to leave the cell in heat-after-death mode for 5 minutes. Well, if it was 2 kW, 5 minutes would not have been enough for a convincing demo. It has to cool from whatever ecat temperature corresponds to 2 kW back to the ecat temp corresponding to 600W before the water temperature starts to drop. Judging by the rate of heating and cooling in the little data we've been privy to, 5 minutes would not be nearly enough, regardless of your gas stove and pot nonsense experiments.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
2011/7/19 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com: At 03:15 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: The 120 kW excursion makes the 18-hr test less credible to me. It means that during that excursion the delta T between the ecat walls and the water would have to increase by an order of magnitude. If ordinary operation is at 300C or 400C, this would cause the metal to melt. Yeah, my thinking is along these lines also. I am stunned. I thought that you, Abd ul-Rahman had somewhat sense along with your reasoning ability, but instead you fell such a simple false argument! Sorry, but I just fail with words to describe how utterly your credibility went down the sink here. –Jouni Ps. you still have however a chance to apologize your error that you concurred Joshua! Perhaps you just misread something. . .
Re: [Vo]: Prof. Kullander now an Ecat critic?
At 03:26 PM 7/19/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: In my opinion, Kullander made some mistakes, and he should simply acknowledge them and move on. Where, in his report, are these mistakes? Someone here claimed that he did not measure input power, when the report clearly states he did. He measured input power at one point, he did not measure it continously. You know an odd thing? Jed actually claims that Rossi adjusts the input power, in order to match boiloff, so that the E-cat neither overflows nor runs dry. Really? Input power is being varied? Then ... how do we know what it is if we don't measure it for the whole demonstration? So that we are talking about the same thing, here's the report in question: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3144960.ece/BINARY/Download+the+report+by+Kullander+and+Ess%C3%A9n+%28pdf%29. This report only mentions measuring input power at turn-on. Not later. Small point, but an important one. Some unstated assumptions are being made. Simple, clean and clear. He reported what he saw and based some speculations on that, without having thoroughly investigated, that's all. I see no evidence for that. What I'm aware of as problems are the steam quality measurement that wasn't, a minor thing, probably . . An imaginary thing. You believe it, he doesn't. Don't blame him because he disagrees with you, and do not assume he is wrong. He has not disagreed with me. Jed, you have disagreed with me, he has not. He made a statement, I'll quote it. I disagree with it, as to what it implies. I am, thus, disagreeing with his statement, not exactly with him. He has not responded to this criticism of his statement. Therefore he cannot be said to have disagreed with it. You've confused your own intepretations with the truth. Mistake. Here is what he wrote about steam quality: Between 11:00 and 12:00 oclock, control measurements were done on how much water that had not evaporated. The system to measure the non-evaporated water was a certified Testo System, Testo 650, with a probe guaranteed to resist up to 550°C. The measurements showed that at 11:15 1.4% of the water was non-vaporized, at 11:30 1.3% and at 11:45 1.2% of the water was non-vaporized. The energy produced inside the device is calculated to be (1.000-0.013)(16:30-10:45)4.39 =25 kWh. I'll repeat the issue. A Testo System, as described, cannot measure the non-evaporated water, apparently. Lots of people have pointed out the problem. That's a relative humidity meter, and measuring steam quality is complex and difficult. The meter has a scale that will read g/m^3 for water vapor, but this is, apparently, reading the content of the vapor, and there is no way to relate this to steam quality; that is, steam of any quality, at a certain temperature and pressure, will read the same. It's a calculated value. So my first question for Kullander, Exactly how did you use the Testo device, which does not have a steam quality function, a function that will express total quantity of unevaporated water (how could it?), to determine the quantity of non-evaporated water. The second problem with this is that it would completely miss any liquid water runoff. We know, from the other tests (such as the Krivit video and the Mats Lewan report), that there is water in the hose. Is this condensed water (representing evaporated water later condensed) or is this runoff water? To the extent that there is any runoff water, overflow, the calculation of energy produced will be erroneous, overestimating the energy. I see no sign that the two forms of outlet water have been discriminated, therefore we have no information (or incomplete information) on how much water ... had not evaporated. Jed, I see no sign that Kullander has responded to this anywhere. That means that there is no basis for your claim that he disagrees. The recent blog post quoted here actually provides a rumor that he is privately backing off. That *is* just a rumor, but there is more basis for it, in fact, than your statement that Kullander disagrees. Have you spoken to him, do you have information to pass along like that? You and others here have convinced yourselves there are problems where no problems exist. First you dream up something that might be wrong. Then you assume it is wrong. Then you assume EK did not address it -- when in most cases their report shows they did. You get carried away by your own imagination, in a dialog with yourself, the way Groucho Marx as president of Freedonia went to war: Cool. I love Groucho Marx, I'm glad to be like him in some way. EK did not address the issues in the report. If they did, I've missed it. There may have been an opportunity to address the issues in the brief interview with Krivit, but Krivit didn't ask the necessary questions, instead getting stuck on this silly volume thing, a total red herring. If EK did
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
At 03:58 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: In the paper they show how their technique can measure steam quality to within a few per cent between 5% and 80%. 5% corresponds to 5 % steam by mass, and yes, that means 95% liquid by mass. That seems to be the official definition of steam quality: mass of vapor divided by total mass. So 0% quality means pure liquid, 100% would be pure vapor, high-quality steam. However, people have been referring to the inverse, the percentage of steam that is liquid, creating, possibly, come confusion. Dry steam is 0% liquid by mass.
Re: [Vo]:How can we make sure that 1MW e-cat is true?
On 2011-07-18 06:04, Daniel Rocha wrote: How can we make sure that 1MW e-cat is true during a presentation? It is certainly not hard to emulate the e-cat performance at home with 600W, 1KW or maybe a laboratory with a 5KW source to heat water. But for a fake e-cat, it would be required 140KW to 1MW to emulate the big e-cat. Regarding the input power of the 1MW power plant, today Rossi added this: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=3#comment-54536 Dear Marcia: The maths of your question are quite messy, so let me make it simple: in the worst case, we consume 170 kW to produce 1 MW. In the best case we consume nothing to make 1 MW. The average is 85 kW to produce 1 MW. Warm regards, A.R. Perhaps the best way to make sure that the 1MW plant is true would be to measure the output energy while the input is zero. 1 MW of heat in such conditions would be quite hard to fake (the test would have to run long enough, ie more than a few seconds - possibly minutes - without a noticeable drop in output heat. Of course one would have to pay attention to possible external sources of power or heat). Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Calibrating a pair of K-type thermocouples
200W from the hose and 200W from the e cat structure, at lest. 100Watt to heat the water 0.3g/s. So, if the output looked like a 800W steam from a stove, we have 500W of excess power. Could be more, but probably Rossi didn't want to harm Krivit, just show that steam was being made.
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I expect it is well mixed from the heat alone. There are gradients in a pot of hot water and it is hot near the bottom, but the water moves around pretty quickly. There are gradients in pure water, sure. Always below or at the bp. There are also gradients in pure dry steam. Always at or above the bp. But there are no temperature gradients in a mixture of steam and liquid water, as long as there are no pressure gradients. A homogenous mixture (smallish drops) will be at the boiling point, and such a mixture is to be expected when you produce a gas orders of magnitude more voluminous than the liquid in a confined volume. I meant only that when it is fulling up, the cold water cools it somewhat, but when it is full, not only does the cold water cool it, but a nearly equal volume of hot water leaves. And when it is boiling an equal mass of steam leaves. If flow rate is 5 ml/s, it is as if you add 5 ml of cold water and then remove another 5 ml of hot. Perhaps this does not make much difference, depending on the total volume. It's the power balance. It's how Rossi and you and everyone else calculates the power. The rate of cold coming in, hot water and/or steam going out. At the bp, a slight change in power is simply accommodated by a change in the ratio of steam and water. Well, Rossi is changing the power when he twiddles the controls. Maybe he is trying to keep it stable. But anyway if it overflows I am pretty sure he turns up the power. Pretty sure he is dishonest then. Because he certainly claims not to in all but the January demo. If we both agree he's dishonest, then there is no reason to believe he has invented a cold fusion device.
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see if it will float over a boiling pot of water. Extra question answered, free of charge. I won't bother trying it, because it won't float, because the steam coming off a pot of boiling water will probably be well under 5% wet. But the steam has upward momentum. Enough power in the pot with the steam going through a small enough hole, and you could float styrofoam. You can float a ping pong ball with a hair drier, and it is more dense than air. (It doesn't even have to be vertical, thanks to Bernoulli.) [And no, I'm not saying the principle only existed after he identified it.] Craig seems to think that I consider wet steam a big problem here. I don't. I think the steam is probably no more than a few percent wet, by mass percentage, it's a huge red herring, You've said this several times. But you have not supported it. Why can't the steam be wet; i.e. a mist of droplets entrained in water vapor? Your idea of a filled chimney with water overflowing makes no sense to me when you think that steam many times more voluminous and/or faster has to get through this standing water. Lazily bubbling through would not cut it.
Re: [Vo]:How can we make sure that 1MW e-cat is true?
From Akira ... Perhaps the best way to make sure that the 1MW plant is true would be to measure the output energy while the input is zero. 1 MW of heat in such conditions would be quite hard to fake (the test would have to run long enough, ie more than a few seconds - possibly minutes - without a noticeable drop in output heat. Of course one would have to pay attention to possible external sources of power or heat). Admittedly, I could be naive on this point but I find myself still willing to accept the premise that Rossi's eCats probably produce a fair amount excess heat... probably well beyond what's being fed into them. What I remain less certain about, however, is just how much and how stable the generated heat might be. It would not surprise me if Rossi is concerned about the stability of his eCats as well. The apparent fact that he kept changing the size of his eCats WELL after the initial January demo suggests to me that Rossi may still be performing a lot more RD work that we might assume is the case, as compared to finalizing the engineering specs for the scheduled October dog pony show. Alas, we speculate... we worry. Worry produces excessive thinking of the speculative kind. Fertile speculation produces more worry, and on and on it goes. I'm reminded of a famous phrase from a popular song: Don't worry, be happy. The song made that artist a ton of money. ;-) Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Calibrating a pair of K-type thermocouples
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: 200W from the hose Maybe. and 200W from the e cat structure, at lest. I don't believe it. Rossi never claims it, and this 200W would figure in his power calculation (the losses in the hose don't), and he never takes account of it. I'll go with 50 W tops from the ecat. 100Watt to heat the water 0.3g/s. Rossi claimed 2 g/s, corresponding to 600W. But I also suspect that was misrepresented, although maybe not by that much So, if the output looked like a 800W steam from a stove This is a pretty lame observation to base such a revolutionary claim on. The visual estimate of power in steam is very subjective. I would say, what comes out of that hose is consistent with much less power than that; maybe 200 - 300 W. we have 500W of excess power. There is enough wiggle room in all those estimates to get zero, and anyway 500W is pretty weak soup after Rossi announced 10 kW reactors.
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 03:58 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: In the paper they show how their technique can measure steam quality to within a few per cent between 5% and 80%. 5% corresponds to 5 % steam by mass, and yes, that means 95% liquid by mass. That seems to be the official definition of steam quality: mass of vapor divided by total mass. So 0% quality means pure liquid, 100% would be pure vapor, high-quality steam. However, people have been referring to the inverse, the percentage of steam that is liquid, creating, possibly, come confusion. Dry steam is 0% liquid by mass. Right. Wetness and dryness are different. The point is that wet steam can most definitely be 95% or more liquid by mass. It's produced and measured experimentally. It is completely plausible that such wet steam is produced in the ecat. It makes much more sense than liquid water filling the chimney, and steam at 10 or more times the volume somehow passing through it. Wet steam is not a red herring.
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
At 04:55 PM 7/19/2011, Damon Craig wrote: In my more-or-less last communication with Krivit, I told him the wet steam hypothesis, inspired by an abused humidity meter, was a red herring, and the water was simply flowing through it. Then you turn up using the same phrase. I've been using it for some time. I'm not looking back, though. What I see is that the issue of steam quality successfully distracted a lot of people. Krivit has his wall of shame on his blog--a trophie wall of photos, all set-up and ready to go in the hopes he will be the one to blow this story wide open. Are you helping him? If he reads my stuff, he might get some ideas that will help him, but historically, he's been pretty upset by what I write, since I've criticised his journalism. Long story. Krivit does what he does, he's good at certain things, not so good at others. Most of us are like that, right?
Re: [Vo]:European Patent Office observer criticizes Rossi's E-Cat
At 05:06 PM 7/19/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote: 2011/7/19 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com: At 03:15 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: The 120 kW excursion makes the 18-hr test less credible to me. It means that during that excursion the delta T between the ecat walls and the water would have to increase by an order of magnitude. If ordinary operation is at 300C or 400C, this would cause the metal to melt. Yeah, my thinking is along these lines also. I am stunned. I thought that you, Abd ul-Rahman had somewhat sense along with your reasoning ability, but instead you fell such a simple false argument! Sorry, but I just fail with words to describe how utterly your credibility went down the sink here. Along with a lot of cooling water, eh? Look, there is a simple technique which would have addressed so many of these problems: gravity feed of water, with the source at a level where water would not flow through, but only in, to the E-Cat. Combine this with continuous examination of steam quality, with no liquid flow possible, it would be iced. Not done. As to Cude's suggestion, Jouni, I don't think you've understood what Cude was pointing out. It's not a proof, it's an inference. Can you understand the basis for that inference. Give it a try. Hint: it has to do with what is likely thermal resistance between the reaction chamber and the cooling water. Give it a try! Jouni Ps. you still have however a chance to apologize your error that you concurred Joshua! Perhaps you just misread something. . . I'm not seeing any error being pointed out. What error? By the way, my comment wasn't validating specifics of Cude's statement, just the line of approach. Think about it! Indications have been that the reactor temperature is quite a bit higher than the coolant water would allow if they were in intimate contact. From what I've read about this, it takes something over 400 degrees C for the reaction to start up. If the reaction can start at 60 degrees, all bets are off! The thinking would be incorrect. What do you think?
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
At 05:42 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see if it will float over a boiling pot of water. Extra question answered, free of charge. I won't bother trying it, because it won't float, because the steam coming off a pot of boiling water will probably be well under 5% wet. But the steam has upward momentum. Enough power in the pot with the steam going through a small enough hole, and you could float styrofoam. You can float a ping pong ball with a hair drier, and it is more dense than air. (It doesn't even have to be vertical, thanks to Bernoulli.) [And no, I'm not saying the principle only existed after he identified it.] Sure, if you sufficiently obstruct the flow, you could lift styrofoam easily. I was referring to a *piece* of styrofoam, presumably small. And the question was about bouyancy, not about flow. You can support a whole person with air flow, all you have to do is get the air flow running at roughly 90 mph, i.e., terminal velocity. So? Craig seems to think that I consider wet steam a big problem here. I don't. I think the steam is probably no more than a few percent wet, by mass percentage, it's a huge red herring, You've said this several times. But you have not supported it. Why can't the steam be wet; The steam is wet. that's why the question is a red herring! It's wet, but *probably* not very wet, i.e., enough to have a major impact on energy calculations. i.e. a mist of droplets entrained in water vapor? Wet steam is the norm, unless special measures are employed to stop that. It's not necessarily easy, and Rossi had no motive to even try. Your idea of a filled chimney with water overflowing makes no sense to me when you think that steam many times more voluminous and/or faster has to get through this standing water. Lazily bubbling through would not cut it. Okay, Joshua, apparently I need to explain this to you, too. The E-cat starts with water running through, the entire pumped flow is running out the hose. It's turned on and the water starts to heat. What happens? First of all, what's happening before boiling starts? Here is my thinking: water is at the level of the opening to the outlet hose, so it is spilling into the hose. There is air above the water, initially. The opening to the hose never fills entirely with water. Rather water runs out in a trickle matching the pump rate, runs down into the hose, and accumulates there until it reaches the drain level, and then it runs out the drain. If siphoning doesn't occur, this will be, steady state, water running down into the hose, and the same rate of water flowing out the drain. There is air space remaining, all the way down into the hose to the level of the drain. Below that there is water. When steam generation starts, pressure will develop in the E-cat and the hose, steam will start to flow out above the water. This pressure will force the water in the hose out. Steam will be cooled in the hose, though, and the water accumulated in the hose may be a bit cooler than boiling. Some amount of steam, however, will bubble up through water in the end of the hose at the drain. The exact balance is very difficult to predict, the exact behavior. However, what we will have at the E-Cat end is quite simple, as long as the flow rate isn't so low that the E-Cat boils away more than is coming in. Water will continue to flow out the drain as before, reduced in volume by whatever water has boiled. The water vapor from boiling will be ordinary steam. If it's frothy, that's from turbulence inside. I rather doubt it's frothy, as such. Rather, this is steam bubbling up from the cooling chamber through water to the level of the outlet hose opening. It then escapes above the flowing liquid water. The water level will drop below the outlet opening only if the input flow is below the steam generation rate. The steam is wet because steam generated from boiling like this is practically always wet unless special devices are used to separate the water from the vapor. So there are three outflows: liquid water, as a mass of water, flowing as water, water vapor, and entrained liquid water as mist. All of these are at the same temperature as they leave the E-Cat. That's the characteristic temperature of boiling water, at the pressure present inside. At any point here, once boiling is established, open the steam valve at the top of the chimney, and what do you see? You see steam, quite possibly live as to what it looks like. (That is, very low mist content, so it's quite invisible until it cools from air contact.) If you drain the hose and look at the end, held up, you will see mist and maybe some live steam coming out, depending on the cooling that's taking place in the host itself. It will be
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: Sure, if you sufficiently obstruct the flow, you could lift styrofoam easily. I was referring to a *piece* of styrofoam, presumably small. And the question was about bouyancy, not about flow. You can support a whole person with air flow, all you have to do is get the air flow running at roughly 90 mph, i.e., terminal velocity. So? Well, he did say float it over a pot of boiling water, in which case the steam flows upward. He didn't mention buoyancy, and floating can be used to describe a person supported with air flow. In fact, the ping pong ball demo is usually called the floating ping pong ball. Floating is routinely used to describe astronauts floating weightless, which has nothing to do with buoyancy. But I have no idea of the relevance of any of this to the ecat. You've said this several times. But you have not supported it. Why can't the steam be wet; The steam is wet. that's why the question is a red herring! It's wet, but *probably* not very wet, i.e., enough to have a major impact on energy calculations. What I meant was, why shouldn't it be very wet? The E-cat starts with water running through, the entire pumped flow is running out the hose. It's turned on and the water starts to heat. What happens? First of all, what's happening before boiling starts? Here is my thinking: water is at the level of the opening to the outlet hose, so it is spilling into the hose. There is air above the water, initially. The opening to the hose never fills entirely with water. Rather water runs out in a trickle matching the pump rate, runs down into the hose, and accumulates there until it reaches the drain level, and then it runs out the drain. If siphoning doesn't occur, this will be, steady state, water running down into the hose, and the same rate of water flowing out the drain. There is air space remaining, all the way down into the hose to the level of the drain. Below that there is water. When steam generation starts, pressure will develop in the E-cat and the hose, steam will start to flow out above the water. Stop there. The steam is formed in the ecat. It has to get through a small diameter pipe and then the chimney which is (initially) filled with water. The steam takes up much more volume than the water. As it passes through the water, there will be violent churning. If the steam occupies more volume than the water, you no longer have a chimney filled with water. If the steam occupies 10 or 100 times the volume, then the picture of a chimney filled with water and the water trickling into the hose just doesn't fit. Water will continue to flow out the drain as before, reduced in volume by whatever water has boiled. The water vapor from boiling will be ordinary steam. If it's frothy, that's from turbulence inside. I rather doubt it's frothy, as such. Rather, this is steam bubbling up from the cooling chamber through water to the level of the outlet hose opening. It then escapes above the flowing liquid water. The water level will drop below the outlet opening only if the input flow is below the steam generation rate. It's this bubbling that bothers me. Bubbling somehow refers to the gas rising, governed by buoyancy. But that simply isn't fast enough to get the steam out in time. The volume of steam is probably more than 10 times that of the water. Depending on how much faster it moves than the water, it will in fact occupy a much larger fraction of the chimney volume than the water. When the gas volume exceeds the liquid volume by an appreciable amount, I don't think you can call that bubbling any more. The bubbles will merge leaving liquid bubbles (droplets) within the mainly gaseous flow, as well as some liquid along the walls. I think this sort of volume of steam will basically push everything in front of it through as a mist or aside against the walls, and the turbulence will form some kind of very wet steam. The literature on 2-phase flow is pretty clear on what you get when you force two phases through a conduit of known diameter. The problem is we don't know the conduit diameter, or if the chimney has a nozzle, or a coil of small diameter tube, which will produce a mist. There is a real benefit to Rossi in producing entrained mist in the ecat, because it will be easily mistaken for steam, and it will not be collected as a liquid if anyone happens to examine the output. The steam is wet because steam generated from boiling like this is practically always wet unless special devices are used to separate the water from the vapor. So there are three outflows: liquid water, as a mass of water, flowing as water, water vapor, and entrained liquid water as mist. Right, but in ordinary boiling, the entrained mist comes from what really is bubbles formed near the element rising due to buoyancy and breaking at the surface in a volume of water much larger than the volume of
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
Abd ul-Rahman wrote: My conclusion is that there is very likely *some* overflow water, but it might be small. I have no way of telling how much there is, the demonstrations were not set up to make it possible to tell. This is probably correct analysis. I think that this is possible to calculate fairly accurately, if we know the diameter of opening for the hose. As boiling point of water inside E-Cat is what is measured with the probe, then we can deduce the pressure inside E-Cat, because steam pressure contributes mostly for total pressure, because backpressure in the hose is essentially zero due to gravitational downhill (at least with Lewan's E-Cat where water went to the blue bucket at the floor.) We need some 600 wats for heating water inflow to boiling point. Then we can calculate how much power we need to increase pressure inside E-Cat to explain elevated boiling point. My gut feeling says that we need extra power some kilowatts, so there is clearly extra heat present. This clearly falsifies Krivit's criticism by one order of magnitude as he assumes that there is just few hundred wats for generating steam and elevating the pressure. To confirm this hypothesis on E-Cat, we should have strong correlation between alleged power output and measured boiling point (we have the same hose in all demonstrations). That is, because pressure is directly proportional to amount of generated steam. Overall, I think that Rossi has adjusted the water inflow such a way that more than 60% of water goes through phase change. Here I again refer to Lewan's famous blue bucket and estimation that condensation is quite significant, because steam keeps water in the bucket at 99.9°C for a 3 hours, so lots of cooling will occur there during the test. —Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement
thermal electrochemical corrosion of the electric input power heating resistor in the Rossi device: Rich Murray 2011.07.19 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2011_07_01_archive.htm Tuesday, July 19, 2011 [ at end of each long page, click on Older Posts ] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/90 [ you may have to Copy and Paste URLs into your browser ] https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?hl=enshva=1#drafts/1311fbb2b67e473f [Vo]: Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement Vortex-L@eskimo.com discussion group Thanks, Joshua Cude, for your clear, earnest interpretations. What is known about the heating resistor -- manufacturer, shape, mass, construction, electric conductors, insulating ceramics, exact dimensions, location within the device, exact descriptions of the electric power cables to it, exposure to water flow or H2 gas? What are the exact dimensions, shapes, and composition of the device, insulation, inlet, outlet, Pb shielding, Cu walls, stainless steel walls, Ni micropowder, etc.? I imagine that the catalyst is a real red herring, with no actual effects. I imagine that the resistor ceramic is susceptible to cracking from thermal stress due to uneven heating and cooling in space and time, expansion of the conductors with increasing electric power and resulting temperatures, and cooling at the resistor leads along the thick electrical conductors. These cracks open the devil's door within the witch's cauldron. The city water becomes rapidly more electrically conducting, as evaporation at hot spots concentrates ordinary minerals as dissolved ions, which readily plate out as ordinary boiler scale. The network of cracks evolves quickly, tending to grow as trees from each input electrode end to the other, as the 230 volt AC becomes applied across a smaller and smaller separation -- all of this, most likely, along the surface of the resistor, where layers of print and enamel will facilitate the initial cracking, where mineral ions from the input water flow will keep increasing in concentration and thus increase the electrical conductivity in complex positive feedback chaotic processes. The complex network of surface cracks causes the electrolysis of water into H2 and O2 as nano to micro bubbles, free to recombine or to combine with other chemicals anywhere in the water volume of the device. Recombination of H2 and O2 on the metal thermister or thermometer could release local heat that would give misleading readings. Meanwhile as temperature rises within the resistor, its metallic conductors will respond with increasing resistance, while at the same time the tree-like networks of conducting surface cracks are growing in overall fractal volume and closer to each other, increasing the effective available electric potential for their nano to micro scale growing tips -- so more and more of the applied electric power will be flowing into this network of rapidly growing, rapidly heating surface nano to micro cracks -- thus heating the frothing water and leading to complex hot flows of H2O gas, along with H2 and O2, which could result in higher temperature readings for a thermometer that happens to be in a hot spot in the device. This surface electrochemical corrosion scenario could explain the start of overall rise in measured water temperature with constant input electric power at the 60-70 deg C level -- the input heating resistor being O ring weak point in the Rossi device. Once conducting cracks directly link the two electrodes, shorting and arcing will explode the resistor, perhaps subverting the ability of the constant power electric supply to limit extreme transient flows, while also releasing chemical energy from complex chemical reactions, and also promply melting and disrupting the stainless steel container and its 50 gm Ni micropowder, catalyst, and absorbed H gas, creating explosive reactions among many chemicals. This scenario may also apply as a conventional explanation for many types of CF or LENR devices. However, claims of transmutations, isotopic shifts, and radiations have been made for similar processes in high voltage power cables. So, it is possible that electrochemical corrosion can perhaps create nano to micro scale reaction regions that sustain CF or LENR anomalies. self-organizing networks can develop simple test kits for metal isotope anomalies in 'water tree' corrosion of thin polyethylene films, re T Kumazawa 2005 -- 2008 Japan: Rich Murray 2011.06.03 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2011_06_01_archive.htm Friday, June 3, 2011 [ at end of each long page, click on Older Posts ] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/86 [ you may have to Copy and Paste URLs into your browser ] reactive gas micro and nano bubbles complicate Widom-Larsen theory re electrolytic cells -- metal isotope anomalies in 'water tree' corrosion of power cable polyethylene insulation, T Kumazawa et al 2005 -- 2008 Japan: Rich Murray 2011.06.02
