from:"Robert"



Jed,

Rossi has said that he spent most of the time in 
the "Computer Container", which was a 9m X 2.5m X 
2.5m container separate from the "Reactor Container".


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:50 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Axil Axil <<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

Where did the spin come from that Rossi would 
have been cooked if Â Rossi lived in the reactor container?



This is based on elementary knowledge of 
heaters. Mats Lewan, the people from NASA and 
many others observed that these heaters radiate 
a great deal of heat, even though they are 
wrapped in insulation. A video shows that a 
person who brushed up against one was burned and 
jumped back in pain. There are 52 of them. If 
they really are producing a megawatt of heat 
there is no doubt several hundred kilowatts are 
being radiated into the box, making it a large 
hot oven. This would also make the whole room 
too hot to survive in, and even with two overhead 1 m vent fans.


Furthermore, much of the heat is retained by the 
reactor. This is confirmed in the latest latest 
interview. Rossi says the water comes back at 
60Â°C. It is not vented as steam by the customer.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test




Jed,

They had two fans over the production area and two fans over the reactor area.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:19 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:

I have seen pictures of the roof and there were two industrial type 
fans on the roof where the production was taking place.



Actually, sources tell me those are over the reactor, not the production area.

You would need ventilation over both.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test



Jed,

All I was saying was that you don't need anything 
being produced to confirm that the proper amount 
of heat was being produced. Obviously it made 
I.H. feel better that something was being made 
with the heat. Why they didn't enter the 
production side I don't know. I would be 
surprised if they were actually prevented from 
entering the premises, but maybe they were. They 
approved the manufacturer according to the 
contract so they knew what was being produced. 
I'm sure we will find out when it gets to court.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:06 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
Get real, the proof is in the flow rates and the 
temperature delta. That is all that is required.



So you would pay $89 million without doing the 
most obvious test imaginable? Without the most 
elementary reality check? Even though it is 
obvious from the floor plan, the outward 
appearance of the building, overhead photos, 
local zoning regulations, and much else that 
there cannot possibly be industrial equipment 
next door using this much heat. You would just 
ignore all that and write a check?


Even if you want to stick to flow rates and 
temperatures, you would be risking your life to 
believe Rossi. He has demonstrated on many 
occasions that he is incapable of measuring flow 
rates and temperatures correctly. He almost 
killed the people from NASA doing that wrong. I 
would not go into the room where he is 
conducting an experiment if all I had was his 
measurements of flow and temperature.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test




Axil,

I have seen pictures of the roof and there were 
two industrial type fans on the roof where the production was taking place.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:10 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:
Can you get a photo of the top of the factory 
building that shows no fan driven ventilation on 
the rood or the factory building?


On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Jed Rothwell 
<<mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
Get real, the proof is in the flow rates and the 
temperature delta. That is all that is required.



So you would pay $89 million without doing the 
most obvious test imaginable? Without the most 
elementary reality check? Even though it is 
obvious from the floor plan, the outward 
appearance of the building, overhead photos, 
local zoning regulations, and much else that 
there cannot possibly be industrial equipment 
next door using this much heat. You would just 
ignore all that and write a check?


Even if you want to stick to flow rates and 
temperatures, you would be risking your life to 
believe Rossi. He has demonstrated on many 
occasions that he is incapable of measuring flow 
rates and temperatures correctly. He almost 
killed the people from NASA doing that wrong. I 
would not go into the room where he is 
conducting an experiment if all I had was his 
measurements of flow and temperature.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test



Jed,

Get real, the proof is in the flow rates and the temperature delta. 
That is all that is required.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 12:51 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:

Jed,

Heat is heat. It makes no difference if the heat (water/steam) was 
used to make chemicals or whether it was used to heat the air in the 
room next door.



Robert, for goodness sake, get real! If they were only releasing the 
heat in the air in the next room, you still need proof of that. You 
need to see the ventilation equipment. Anyone making a serious 
evaluation of this claim cannot simply take it for granted that some 
mysterious entity in the next room is getting and using an 
extraordinary amount of process heat -- enough to run a factory. 
That claim by itself is preposterous. It is, as I said, prima facie 
evidence of fraud.


In 6,500 sq. ft?!? Have you seen industrial equipment that uses this 
much process heat?


Do you really think anyone would pay $89 million without confirming 
every aspect of this claim, by every possible means? What kind of 
insane person would accept this claim without seeing the equipment 
next door; without talking with the dozens of people operating that 
equipment day and night; and without examining whatever industrial 
product they are producing by the ton? You need to confirm that X 
tons of Widgets per week really does call for a steady stream of 1 
MW of process heat.


This is an elementary step in the verification of the claim, at the 
most basic level.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test




Jed,

Heat is heat. It makes no difference if the heat 
(water/steam) was used to make chemicals or 
whether it was used to heat the air in the room 
next door. To say it has to produce some form of 
physical process (although just heating air is 
considered work) is irrelevant and wrong.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR




At 12:17 PM 5/16/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
Why would it matter what the person using the 
heat does with it. All you should be concerned 
with is the temperature of the out flowing 
fluid/steam and it's rate of flow and the 
temperature of the incoming water and it's rate of flow. . . .



You are joking. That has to be joke. No? You mean it??

It matters because seeing the equipment would 
prove there really is 1 MW of process heat being 
used. You could look at the nameplate of the 
equipment and see the capacity. You could watch 
the process. You could see that dozens of people 
are using the equipment night and day, 7 days a 
week. Because if they are not using all the 
heat, all the time, the heat returns to reactor, 
and the calorimetry is invalid. Or the reactor explodes.


It matters because it is quite impossible to fit 
industrial equipment using this much process 
heat into a 6,500 sq. ft. facility, and the 
claim itself is prima facie proof of fraud. It is preposterous.


If by some miracle you find this equipment 
there, in use, and running at a production level 
that consumes 1 MW, you would also observe 
ventilation equipment and other proof of this heat release.


Okay?

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Validity of E-Cat 1 MW plant test




Jed,


Why would it matter what the person using the heat does with it. All 
you should be concerned with is the temperature of the out flowing 
fluid/steam and it's rate of flow and the temperature of the incoming 
water and it's rate of flow. You could have a wall with two holes and 
two pipes in it, one out going hole /pipe and one incoming hole/pipe 
and not give a damn what is happening on the other side of the wall. 
The results will be the same.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

Jed,

They may have been 20KW. I found a link that indicates that he did
indeed switch from the smaller e-cats to the 250KW units. The URL is
"http://hydrofusion.com/news/e-cat-third-quarter-developments-2015;

The main quote is:

"Built-in Redundancy

In the first week of August, 2015, Rossi officially announced that
the 1MW plant had built-in redundancy. The original E-Cat system is
combined with the four 250 KW reactors he had perfected earlier in
the year. This increases the safety margins significantly, and will
figure greatly in the successful long-term test that is scheduled to
end sometime in the first quarter of 2016. The large E-Cats, which
Rossi calls Tigers, are the main source of power, and the smaller
versions are for backup. Rossi gives a great deal of detail about the
plant, stating that it is designed to continue running even if one of
the main units is offline for maintenance, without having to resort
to using the backup power. This provides, in effect, a double back-up
for the production of power."

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 01:17 PM 5/15/2016, you wrote:

Okay, here are the specs for these boilers:

file:///home/chronos/u-1160197d37ec1500e70f021620dd3bae3f09f41c/Downloads/DR_Electric%20Steam%20Boiler_Nov10.pdf

The models S242 and CR242 are both 420 kW.

The dimensions for both are listed in inches: 43" L x 58" W x 78" H

That's 1 m x 1.5 m x 2 m

I think you could fit two of these in the shipping container.
However, if you fired them both up, the heat would be intolerable. I
expect the heat transfer efficiency of these units is better than
the small square boxes in Rossi's device, so there would be less waste heat.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat



Jed,

Didn't Rossi switch from the small square 10kw boxes you refer to, to 
4 250kw units.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 01:17 PM 5/15/2016, you wrote:

Okay, here are the specs for these boilers:

file:///home/chronos/u-1160197d37ec1500e70f021620dd3bae3f09f41c/Downloads/DR_Electric%20Steam%20Boiler_Nov10.pdf

The models S242 and CR242 are both 420 kW.

The dimensions for both are listed in inches: 43" L x 58" W x 78" H

That's 1 m x 1.5 m x 2 m

I think you could fit two of these in the shipping container. 
However, if you fired them both up, the heat would be intolerable. I 
expect the heat transfer efficiency of these units is better than 
the small square boxes in Rossi's device, so there would be less waste heat.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat

I just don't see why it is so difficult
determining the COP of such a large system. As
far as I can see you have to make a few
measurements to get a very good idea of a thermal
plants performance. 1) temperature of water going
in, 2) temperature or water going out, 3) water
flow rate, 4) the difference in temperature of
the incoming and outgoing water, 5) energy
required to produce the temperature difference,
6) and the energy consumed from the A.C. mains.
The difference between the energy required to
produce the temperature rise and the energy
consumed from the A.C. Mains is the COP. I am not
taking into account any losses, but with
a system this large and a COP of 50 who gives a damn.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 06:00 AM 5/15/2016, you wrote:
Stephen Cooke
<<mailto:stephen_coo...@hotmail.com>stephen_coo...@hotmail.com> wrote:

This is probably a naive question on my part, so
I apologize for that. But in the interest of
clarity I wonder if the definition of "excess
heat" and "heat balance" is the same for all
parties. I strongly expect it is of course.

As far as I know it is! I have not hear that
Rossi has redefined this. It is the ratio of
output to input power. Suppose 20 kW of
electricity goes in, 1,000 kW comes out. That
would be COP of 50, which is what Rossi claims.
The I.H. people say that less than 20 kW is coming out, because of heat losses.

In any conventional electrical or combustion
heater, the COP is always less than 1, because
there are heat losses. In a heat pump, the COP
can be higher than 1, but that is not actually a
violation of the laws of thermodynamics (as some
people imagine) because the surroundings outside
the building grow colder. The heat is moved, not generated.

Â
It seems from what you said that the technicians
measured heat from the device but apparently
observed no excess heat due to LENR?

No excess heat from anything.
Â
Â
Is the heat balance the continuous heat provided
by the plant regardless of input? External power
or LENR? I.e balance over time?

I am not sure what you mean, but anyway, heat
out always balances heat it. It is just an
electric heater, as far as anyone can tell. (Anyone other than Rossi.)

Was 1MW heat power ever provided from external power alone?

No, that would not be possible. That takes a
huge power supply transformer, such as what you
see behind a shopping mall. A 1 MW transformer
is the size of a pickup truck. This is just an ordinary warehouse facility.

I believe this is an image of a 1 MW transformer:

<http://image.slidesharecdn.com/workshoponenergyandgridconnectionbasicssalford26-140115050535-phpapp02/95/workshop-on-energy-and-grid-connection-basics-salford-260613-72-638.jpg?cb=1389762849>http://image.slidesharecdn.com/workshoponenergyandgridconnectionbasicssalford26-140115050535-phpapp02/95/workshop-on-energy-and-grid-connection-basics-salford-260613-72-638.jpg?cb=1389762849

Â
If so was 1MW thermal heat output from the
plant? Regardless of the energy source?Â

Based on the data I have seen and the overall
size and shape of the machine, there is no way
this thing could be putting out 1 MW.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR and the feline nature of the E-Cat



Jed,

Since you are in communication with someone that 
is linked to I.H. maybe you can answer a few questions.


1) Is I.H.'s finding that the 1 MW e-cat plant 
produced no heat (COP <1) based on the very same 
data set that Rossi used to determine that the 
COP was greater than 50? Is the COP error a 
direct miscalculation of the data or is the error 
based on how the data was obtained, i.e., the 
wrong type of sensors, placement of the sensors, etc.


2) Were any of I.H.'s  COP findings based on 
sensor readings that Rossi didn't use or have access to?


3) Did I.H. receive a communication every 3 
months regarding the operation and performance, as Rossi has indicated?


4) If they did indeed receive the 3 month 
communications, when did I.H. determine that something was amiss?


5) Reading the contract it says that I.H. can 
make suggestions about the performance and 
operation of the plant, did I.H. ever make any 
comment to Rossi that the plant wasn't performing 
as required and ask him to make changes?


6) How well do you know the person(s) that have 
provided the information from I.H.? I only ask in 
that you seem very sure that the information that 
you have seen is accurate. If they are someone 
that you don't know very well, can you be certain 
that the information being given you is indeed accurate?


Thanks,

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 08:35 PM 5/14/2016, you wrote:

Axil Axil <<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
Â
Jed or another could negotiate the COP down but 
by how much is the question. 50 is really high to come down from.Â



I cannot negotiate anything. I have no standing 
in this and no role. I am not a professional 
HVAC engineer licensed in Florida, so no lawyer 
and no court would ask my opinion. If anyone 
did, that is all I would say: "I am not a 
professional HVAC engineer licensed in Florida."


Putting aside all of that, the COP is less than 
1. The machine produces no excess heat. That is 
what I.H. experts concluded. The COP is not 50, 
not 6, not 4, not 1.1. It is less than 1. There 
is no heat. That is why I.H. said it was not 
"substantiated." That's all there is to it.


If the court accepts the judgment of 
professional experts who say there is no excess 
heat, then the case will be thrown out of court. 
End of story. That is what lawyers have told me. 
Mr. Pretend Lawyer Axil disagrees, but that is what actual lawyers say.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:great paper by Ed Storms, quarrel, a bit of info

2016-04-24 Thread Robert Dorr



A good paper, especially for those interested in the PdD aspect of 
LENR. I like Ed Stroms approach of the PdD reaction.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 09:56 AM 4/24/2016, you wrote:

<http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-24-2016-lenr-great-paper-by-ed.html>http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-24-2016-lenr-great-paper-by-ed.html

cannot abandon independent thinking or just thinking

All the best,
peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
<http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com>http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:More from Goat-guy

2016-04-11 Thread Robert Dorr



Does taking measurements constitute "running" a boiler? As far as I know 
no one has ever said that they ran the boiler. (Penon, etc)


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


On 4/11/2016 8:14 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


In answer to those who claim that Rossi's friends and countrymen - 
Penon and Fabiani are qualified engineers, even though neither has 
professional certification in this country and both were admittedly 
illegally operating a boiler within the City of Miami in violation of 
municipal codes, there is the following... from the goatster.


BTW... the Leonardo complaint - alone can probably be used to prove 
both of these fine "engineers" are subject to immediate deportation 
for committing numerous misdemeanors and violations of other US laws 
while on a work visa ...


Goat-guy has this to say:

"There were absolutely competent engineers and nuclear experts working 
at the Chernobyl nuclear plant for years. And it went 'boom'. There 
were hundreds of completely competent engineers, physicists and 
designers overseeing the construction of the Japanese coastal nuclear 
power plants. Fukushima demonstrated that they hadn't considered the 
consequence of a natural disaster. Engineers, for all their 
earnestness aren't particularly good at being either curious enough -- 
or more-delicately, are not inclined to say anything bad about their 
employer's machinery" END of quote.


If Penon did not know about the clever way Rossi designed the test, 
which allowed data to be easily faked, then he might escape the legal 
consequences. If he knew, and said nothing, then it could cost him 
much more than Rossi has paid him.


Deportation would be a blessing.

Industrial Heat - should petition the Court to depose the two of them 
ASAP so they are on record before disappearing into Tuscany. However, 
Rossi is probably smart enough to have sent them packing already.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/12011 - Release Date: 04/11/16

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-08 Thread Robert Dorr



I stand corrected. Rossi said, just today, that I.H built the E-Cat for 
the Lugano test and that they even signed it.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


On 4/7/2016 7:11 PM, Robert Dorr wrote:



You will notice it says that Rossi and I.H. provided an E-Cat for "a" 
test measurement (I read as a singular measurment) not necessarily for 
the Lugano Test. Possibly to verify any ionizing radiation. So many 
possible ways to read all of this rapidly developing information.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 06:56 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <rod...@comcast.net <mailto:rod...@comcast.net>> wrote:
Â

I keep seeing that supposedlyÂ  I.H. was the one that built the
e-cat used in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is
completely untrue.


I.H. is mentioned in the Lugano paper three times:


In the course of the year following the previous tests, the 
E-CatâEUR^(TM)s technology was transferred to Industrial Heat LLC, 
United States, where it was replicated and improved. . . .


The authors gratefully acknowledge Andrea Rossi and Industrial Heat 
LLC for providing us with the E-cat reactor to perform an independent 
test measurement. . . .


Lastly, our thanks to Industrial Heat LLC (USA) for providing 
financial support for the measurements performed for radiation 
protection purposes.


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11988 - Release Date: 04/08/16

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

2016-04-07 Thread Robert Lynn

*De-lurks*

Ridiculous to assert that IH have not acting in good faith - if the demo
worked they would be the happiest people in the world and would be on track
to make vast amounts of money even if they had to hand over 90million they
would be doing so with a big smile on their face.  The very simple truth is
that Rossi has made big claims and has (as usual) failed to deliver.
Almost certainly IH will have their hands tied due to confidentiality
agreements, so will be prevented from revealing in detail just how
bad/unconvincing things are and how ridiculous Rossi's usual dissembling
shenanigans have been.

Looking back through all his demos he has never done one that has
unequivocally proven that it works - always potential errors greater than
claimed outputs.  I note also that attempted replications by those using
high standards of practice like MFMP have not managed to get LENR
unequivocally working - accepting that reality and yet believing that Rossi
has through incredible luck and bad experimental practices succeeded with
different configurations, different temperature regimes and different
ignition methods and approaches with massive power outputs and high COPs
where all others have failed is several bridges too far in the level of
credulity required.  I am no longer willing to give Rossi the benefit of
the doubt - he is transparently just playing for time and more money, and
with his track record you would need to be a mug or the king of wishful
thinking to keep believing in him.

The only vague question left in my mind is whether he truly believes he has
cracked the LENR nut.  I could be convinced that he does, and is fooling
himself, but think it most likely he does not given how long his circus has
been going on.

On 8 April 2016 at 12:10, Frank Znidarsic  wrote:

> It is Rossi that says that the test was OK. According to IH, it was not OK,
> > because IH says three years without success, not merely 1 year. So, the
> > money is still in the escrow.
>
>
> Maybe we should ask Steven Krivit.  He seems to have the heads up on a
> lot of this stuff.
>

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Robert Dorr




You will notice it says that Rossi and I.H. 
provided an E-Cat for "a" test measurement (I 
read as a singular measurment) not necessarily 
for the Lugano Test. Possibly to verify any 
ionizing radiation. So many possible ways to read 
all of this rapidly developing information.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 06:56 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
I keep seeing that supposedlyÂ  I.H. was the one 
that built the e-cat used in the Lugano test. As 
far as I can see that is completely untrue.



I.H. is mentioned in the Lugano paper three times:


In the course of the year following the previous 
tests, the E-Catâs technology was transferred 
to Industrial Heat LLC, United States, where it 
was replicated and improved. . . .


The authors gratefully acknowledge Andrea Rossi 
and Industrial Heat LLC for providing us with 
the E-cat reactor to perform an independent test measurement. . . .


Lastly, our thanks to Industrial Heat LLC (USA) 
for providing financial support for the 
measurements performed for radiation protection purposes.

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

2016-04-07 Thread Robert Dorr



It wasn't a month long test, it was a 24 hour 
test performed in Ferrara  Italy. I keep seeing 
that supposedly  I.H. was the one that built the 
e-cat used in the Lugano test. As far as I can see that is completely untrue.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 03:55 PM 4/7/2016, you wrote:
They also paid Rossi $10 million dollars after 
validating that the device was working for a month.


Craig

On 04/07/2016 06:54 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
"Industrial Heat has worked for over three 
years to substantiate the results claimed by 
Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat technology  all without success".


It seems imply that Rossi did not generate any 
extra heat. I don't think they they'd say 
"without success" if any COP>1 was found, since 
the claim also include cold fusion and(with) COP>=6

Re: [Vo]:I.H. press release responding to Rossi

2016-04-07 Thread Robert Dorr

Good old "Tit for Tat". I.H. is obviously disputing the results of the
year long test based on lack of scientific rigor. One of these years
maybe we will find out who has the better lawyer.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

On 4/7/2016 12:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

See:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/industrial-heat-statement-on-meritless-litigation-from-leonardo-corporation-and-andrea-rossi-300248066.html?tc=eml_cleartime

Here is the complete text:

Industrial Heat Statement on Meritless Litigation from Leonardo
Corporation and Andrea Rossi

15:15 ET from Industrial Heat, LLC

RESEARCH TRIANGLE, N.C., April 7, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- We are aware of
the lawsuit filed by Andrea Rossi and Leonardo Corporation against
Industrial Heat. Industrial Heat rejects the claims in the suit. They
are without merit and we are prepared to vigorously defend ourselves
against this action. Industrial Heat has worked for over three years
to substantiate the results claimed by Mr. Rossi from the E-Cat
technology – all without success. Leonardo Corporation and Mr. Rossi
also have repeatedly breached their agreements. At the conclusion of
these proceedings we are confident that the claims of Mr. Rossi and
Leonardo Corporation will be rejected.

Industrial Heat continues to be focused on a scientifically rigorous
approach that includes thorough, robust and accurate testing of
promising LENR technologies. Our goal remains to deliver clean, safe
and affordable energy.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11981 - Release Date: 04/07/16

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer



They do have an office at 7900 Glades Rd., Boca 
Raton, FL. The building is definitely large enough to use a 1MW plant.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


At 07:48 PM 4/6/2016, you wrote:

Robert Dorr <<mailto:rod...@comcast.net>rod...@comcast.net> wrote:
Â
It could be their business office and they have 
another building/warehouse at a different location.



Good point. However, I looked them up in various 
places and this is the only address listed. They 
are categorized as chemical distributors. I 
expect if they had a production facility 
somewhere large enough to need 1 MW of steam, it 
would have be listed in in Florida government business directories.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer



It could be their business office and they have another 
building/warehouse at a different location.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR



At 07:32 PM 4/6/2016, you wrote:

One of the legal documents lists Rossi's customer:

<http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdf>http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Rossi_et_al_v_Darden_et_al__flsdce-16-21199__0001.2.pdf

p. 25

JM Chemical Products
7861 NW 46th St,
Doral, FL 33166

Just offhand, it does not look like the kind of building that needs 
1 MW of steam:


<https://www.google.com/maps/place/7861+NW+46th+St,+Doral,+FL+33166/@25.8152581,-80.3245231,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqBcXXFAoaY11yYhfOzC59Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x88d9bbd5b1e1203d:0x5e338a9c2e7f100d?hl=en>https://www.google.com/maps/place/7861+NW+46th+St,+Doral,+FL+33166/@25.8152581,-80.3245231,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqBcXXFAoaY11yYhfOzC59Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x88d9bbd5b1e1203d:0x5e338a9c2e7f100d?hl=en

I see lots of small companies in the building. If you were to put 1 
MW of steam into one of those offices, in a radiator or as live 
steam for an industrial application, you would cook the occupants. I 
mean that literally; that section of the building would get hot 
enough to kill and cook anyone inside.


This street view photo was taken in Feb. 2014.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Copy of Rossi's civil complaint




I think that Rossi feels that he has been deeply 
wronged in the past and for some reason I.H. 
is/was trying to string him along on the payment 
of the 89 million dollars owed him and he wasn't 
going to wait for any excuses and filed as soon 
as he felt he might never see the money/profit he 
feels he is due. He just wasn't going to be taken 
again. Obviously, just my own take on what's going on.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR




At 06:27 PM 4/6/2016, you wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Blaze Spinnaker 
<<mailto:blazespinna...@gmail.com>blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote:


I am actually hopeful. Â 50x is pretty 
high.Â  It was installed in a customer site. 
Â  That's some crazy attempt at fraud.



I have a bad feeling about the lawsuit.Â  It 
does not make me any more confident in Rossi's 
account.Â  But I agree that if there is fraud, 
Rossi is now shooting for the moon.


Eric

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor Sues Industrial Heat, LLC.




In the court filing it says that the average COP was in excess of 50 
and sometimes in excess of 60. All I can say is WOW! I hope it holds 
true. A lot of grist for the mill.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR



At 04:55 PM 4/6/2016, you wrote:
I have a feeling that Mr. Fulvio Fabiani has contributed to the 
development of the E-Cat in a big way and now that he is an IH 
employee, his status as a E-Cat developer gives IH a reason to claim 
a part of Rossi's IP. Rossi has always said that his team is a major 
part of E-Cat development. Maybe, that team, the members of the team 
and the company that these people work for should get a part of that IP.


Rossi has often said that he couldn't have done it without his team 
(he may regret saying such things) then they may rightly be co-inventors.

Re: [Vo]:has this document been saved to the LENR library?

2016-04-05 Thread Robert Dorr



Nicely done presentation. Well worth giving a look.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR


On 4/4/2016 12:30 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t=j==s=web=1=rja=8=0ahUKEwiapIem2vXLAhVD5xoKHQXPBH8QFggeMAA=http%3A%2F%2Ftempid.altervista.org%2FSRI.pdf=AFQjCNHGSrVCJe9dIt-onShZbvLMIpg6cA=eA09bTdq_XpreFmHMhcTpQ 
<https://www.google.com/url?sa=t=j==s=web=1=rja=8=0ahUKEwiapIem2vXLAhVD5xoKHQXPBH8QFggeMAA=http%3A%2F%2Ftempid.altervista.org%2FSRI.pdf=AFQjCNHGSrVCJe9dIt-onShZbvLMIpg6cA=eA09bTdq_XpreFmHMhcTpQ>


Somebody has makwared the original SRI link.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11957 - Release Date: 04/04/16

Re: [Vo]:Rossi and IH have received the ERV Report

2016-03-29 Thread Robert Dorr



They made the statement ". . . Embracing failure as well as success 
is important, because we learn from both. . . ." , before the ERV's 
report was out. They didn't know what the ERV was going to say. My 
take on this statement was that they were trying to mitigate negative 
public reaction to a less than favorable report and possibly even a 
"failure" finding by the ERV. It came out positive instead of 
negative, wonderful! I think people are reading a lot into the IH 
statement that is unfounded.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR




It will be an absurd charade unless Industrial Heat signs off on it.


As far as I can tell, they have already repudiated it in their March 
10 statement:


<http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?p=1741>http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?p=1741

". . . Embracing failure as well as success is important, because we 
learn from both. . . .

Re: [Vo]:British Aero- Project GREENGLOW- Gravity Control..BBC March 23,2016

2016-03-24 Thread Robert Dorr



A very well done program, regarding the search for anti-gravity, as are 
most if not all of the BBC's Horizon series.


Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR



On 3/24/2016 6:10 AM, Ron Kita wrote:

Greetings Vortex-L,
Nick Cook of Janes Defence Weekly covered Project GreenGlow for years. 
Here is an update by the BBC. Rob Chambers of BAE a friend of mine was 
born in his ancestral town of Chambers-burg, PA and one of the PGG 
members: 
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/03/23/story-on-gravity-control-emdrive-on-bbc-2-today-2016-03-23-8-pm-utc/


Ad astra,
Ron Kita, Chiralex
Doylestown, PA120 miles East of Chambersburg/

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2016.0.7497 / Virus Database: 4545/11875 - Release Date: 03/24/16

Re: [Vo]:Statement from Industrial Heat

2016-03-11 Thread Robert Dorr

I think they are just doing a cover your ass statement to their 
investors, knowing that Rossi is about to release his results and 
they want to make sure that their investors know that the information 
is not coming from official IH sources just in case there is a 
problem a bit further down the road with the interpretation of the 
Rossi results. Simple fiduciary resposibility.

Robert Dorr
WA7ZQR

At 09:11 AM 3/11/2016, you wrote:

One possibility is that Rossi is doing something that rankles IH, and
IH does not like it one bit. It goes like this: IH was all set to sell
the 1 MW plant, but Rossi discovered a better LENR tech. Rossi decides
to go with the new tech that requires more time to perfect. IH now
must keep their investors happy with the delay of a year or more.
Rossi says that he is in charge and this Quark is the way to go. IH
says, we what to sell now, delay is causing us a boatload of trouble
with customers, investors, defense, and the government, Rossi says,
too bad, deal with it, I got to do what I got to do.

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Ok, they want a bit more discipline- but have you idea what viable LENR
>> technology they could have beyond Rossi's ?
>
>
> I wouldn't know about other technology. Based on the Lugano 
report, I do not

> think Rossi's technology is viable. I have not seen more recent reports
> about it.
>
> The first Levi study seeming promising, but the Lugano report showed no
> excess heat, as far as I can tell. Granted, it was poorly done, so it is
> hard to judge.
>
> "Viable" is a slippery word. Many cold fusion experiments are 
promising, but

> none (other than Rossi) are claimed to be remotely close to a practical or
> viable source of energy. They can be compared to nuclear fission in 1939.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

2016-02-24 Thread Robert Dorr



If the burst was from Rn-222 then I would expect various Radon daughters 
to show up on the gamma spectrum. Rn-222 is an alpha emitter.


Bob
WA7ZQR


On 2/24/2016 9:03 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


*From:* Daniel Rocha

In figure 7 (compare with figure 6),  it seems that the signal is 
above the background, in the region of 10-50kev by up to 100. So, that 
like >10 sigma. There is definitely something there.


There is of course “something” there. But not necessarily LENR.

The signal is entirely consistent with the increased Radon levels of 
this particular area. Read the fourth paragraph here about Santa Cruz 
– triple the national average:


http://patch.com/california/cupertino/santa-clara-countys-cancerous-radon-level-b948f150

Jones

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 2016.0.7442 / Virus Database: 4537/11689 - Release Date: 02/24/16

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

2016-02-24 Thread Robert Dorr



I may be wrong, but I'm under the impression that they have repeated 
this several times and there is more information to be released today.


Bob
WA7ZQR

On 2/24/2016 6:43 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


Where is the big surprise?

I woke this morning with anticipation - expecting to see proof from 
MFMP of a 5 hour self-sustained reaction. Instead, we get graphs of 
modest gain at the noise level and radiation counts peaking in the few 
hundred per second -- when we need to seeing a million times more - if 
the radiation does indeed relate to excess heat at kilowatt level. 
Yawn. Let's hope there is much more forthcoming than this.


What am I missing?

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 2016.0.7357 / Virus Database: 4537/11688 - Release Date: 02/24/16

[Vo]:Something big is happening

2016-02-23 Thread Robert Dorr




Watch the MFMP site (Quantumheat.org). It looks like a major 
announcement shortly.


Bob
WA7ZQR

Re: [Vo]:New research describes newly-identified electron spin-coupling with angular electromagnetic moments

2015-10-14 Thread robert lindsay

available on research gate
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/281685821_Relativistic_interaction_Hamiltonian_coupling_the_angular_momentum_of_light_and_the_electron_spin?enrichId=rgreq-456fa5a9-d2b5-4b90-9c00-5bb2d63f520b=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4MTY4NTgyMTtBUzoyNzI5MTE4MTQ2MjMyMzZAMTQ0MjA3ODY1NTUzNw%3D%3D=1_x_2

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Robert Ellefson <vortex-h...@e2ke.com>
wrote:

>
>
> Dear Vorticians,
>
>
>
> I just came across this reference to some new research showing
> previously-undescribed electron spin-coupling modes that I thought folks
> here might find interesting.  I don’t have access to the full article yet,
> but I did find some related work by the first author.
>
>
>
> Newest paper:
> http://phys.org/news/2015-10-physicists-electromagnetic-interaction-dirac-equation.html
>
> Previous work: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.07915.pdf
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> -Bob
>
>
>



-- 


*profile
<http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-lindsay/9/511/a49>available for
innovation*

[Vo]:New research describes newly-identified electron spin-coupling with angular electromagnetic moments

2015-10-12 Thread Robert Ellefson

 

Dear Vorticians,

 

I just came across this reference to some new research showing
previously-undescribed electron spin-coupling modes that I thought folks
here might find interesting.  I don't have access to the full article yet,
but I did find some related work by the first author.

 

Newest paper:
http://phys.org/news/2015-10-physicists-electromagnetic-interaction-dirac-eq
uation.html

Previous work: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.07915.pdf

 

Best wishes,

-Bob

RE: [Vo]:Subject: off topic android

2015-09-03 Thread Robert Ellefson

 

 

From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2015 
9:20 AM



FORTH is an interesting RPN (Reverse Polish Notation) programming language. 
Quite primitive, but deceptively powerful once you get a handle of it.

 

I already liked RPN from using and programming my HP 11c calculator, but when I 
started working on hardware design at Sun in the early 90’s I really fell in 
love with Forth, since their boot monitor was implemented with it.  For 
hardware debug, this was great, because I could write all kinds of hardware 
diagnostics and stimulus loops with very little effort, and I didn’t need to 
boot the OS to get a lot of lab work done.  Working on hardware without a 
decent, programmable boot monitor has never been the same for me since.

 

-Bob

[Vo]:New research reveals undescribed coupling between photons and magnons

2015-08-25 Thread Robert Ellefson


I thought the spinsters in this crowd would find the following article
rather interesting:
 
http://phys.org/news/2015-08-magnon-phonon-magnetoelastic-magnetic-photoexci
tation.html

They describe anomalies involving interactions of spin-domain boundaries and
photonic energy.  
Here is a relevant quote from the phys.org overview article:

The scientists also observed a transition from spin wave to

magnetoelastic wave excitations by increasing excitation
intensity,
 a process which Ogawa acknowledges is not entirely understood at
present.
It's the first time that this effect has been observed -
but it seems very 
plausible that the coupling of light to matter and the
energy transfer of 
the light to the magnetoelastic waves involve some
non-linear processes.

I'd love to hear further interpretation of these findings from this group.

Best wishes,
-Bob Ellefson

Re: [Vo]:Jiang reports successful Lugano replication

2015-05-30 Thread Robert Lynn

I skimmed through it, one thing that struck me was that they hit 1372°C for
10 minutes.  I have serious doubts that their stainless steel vessel could
have survived such a temperature (barely bellow melting) - which makes me
suspicious of an error somewhere, this is above where k-type thermocouples
would typically be expected to be accurate or reliable.  Also melting point
depression would have melted nickel powder at such temps destroying (what I
thought was important) nickel surface morphology.

They seem to have good resources so hoping they do better calorimetry in
future.

On 31 May 2015 at 04:19, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com wrote:

 Type B thermocouples are expensive; even for fine wire, short, uninsulated
 couples, because they are made from platinum.  They may be 10x more
 expensive than type-K and extension wires are just as expensive.
 Additionally the signal level is smaller with type-B which means more noise
 in the measurement.


 On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:

  Beats me why they don't use type S or type B thermocouples that are
 common in the glass industry.


 That probably would be better. You should suggest it to Jiang. (His
 e-mail in the slides. He is a good guy.)

 The K-type thermocouple maxed out.

 They have to replace the inner thermocouple (T3) in any case.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: Am I the only one..

2015-03-20 Thread Robert Lynn

*delurks*

Frustrating that with COP's 2 and output powers of 100's to 1000's of
watts that simple calorimetry cannot be used to remove doubt, instead we
have 5-10 equivocal demonstrations from Rossi over last 4 years,
(supposedly a genius, yet not competent or willing to do this relatively
minor part right, and endless excuses and supporter rationalisations about
why he doesn't need to do it well - which stink).  Still awaiting combined
big COP+bullet proof calorimetry from newer replications.  At these outputs
simple 20% error flow calorimetry setup is probably only $1-200 in parts
and 1-2 days in build time (aquarium pump, couple of buckets and
thermocouples).

Might it be that when better calorimetry is applied good news disappears
(eg MFMP)? In which case sloppier calorimetry would be more rewarding and
get more traction given the illusion of success.

I've given up on Rossi (Lugano sunk him in my eyes), and my hope for others
will probably not last into 2016 without some good results.  Looking
forward to better demos and calorimetry from multiple sources.

*relurks*

On 20 March 2015 at 10:40, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:

 For that matter, without the calorimetry we don't really know if it's 3
 COP.   It could be  1 COP and the run without the fuel was just  1/3 COP.

 On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
  wrote:

 That being said, is it possible that the the first run just burned up the
 shell of the tube / insulation and is now radiating heat more easily.

 At some point Alexander is going to have to remove the fuel and re-run
 the test.

 On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Blaze Spinnaker 
 blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:

 .. that wants the replication to be real so that the global energy /
 scientific revolution starts in some old fringe Russian scientist's living
 room??

RE: [Vo]:melted alumina tube

2015-03-17 Thread Robert Ellefson

Jack,

 

Fantastic!  I’m really stoked to hear of your progress.  I think your powder 
recipe sounds very interesting, and I would love to know more about the details 
of the reactants.  It sounds like you’ve come up with a mixture which may 
contain one or more key ingredients not yet identified as being of primary 
significance to the high-gain modes of these systems.  

 

If I may fire away:

What size Fe2O3 and TiH2 grains were present?  

Is this mixture generally not hygroscopic, and therefore is curing the 
reactor’s sealant a simple matter as compared to LAH?
Are you tumbling or milling these reactants, or performing any other notable 
processing steps, prior to putting them into the reactors?

 

Thanks for sharing, and keep up the great work!

 

-Bob

 

 

From: Jack Cole [mailto:jcol...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 1:08 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:melted alumina tube

 

Bob,

 

The input power was ~260W.  I don't know what the R value of the insulation is. 
 I had the cell surrounded by high purity alumina powder and covered with a 
thin sheet of ceramic insulation.  I used standard 120V AC 60hz with a triac 
type dimmer switch (chops the waves starting at V=0).  I'll have to check with 
the manufacturer to see what the remaining 5% of the tube is.  The heating 
element was Kanthal A1.  It's strange that the heating element was able to 
completely melt at points.  In the past, it has always failed before melting.

 

I was using INCO type 255 nickel, TiH2, LiOh, KOH, aluminum powder, and Fe2O3.  
Good idea on the small amount of fuel which should cause some localized melting.

 

The fact that the fuel was a small diameter cylinder seems to suggest that it 
was fully expanded in the tube and shrunk down.

 

Jack

 

 

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com 
mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com  wrote:

Jack--

 

It looks like you had a pretty good reaction.  

 

What was the input power?  What is the R value of the insulation on the outside 
of the electric coils?  What was the nature of the electrical input--frequency 
etc?  And what is the electrical heating element material?   If you have an 
acetylene torch, see if you can melt a piece of the tube that melted.

 

The tube may have had glass fibers incorporated in order to improve strength.  
You indicated it was 95% pure.  What was the other 5%?  

 

What was you fuel mixture?  You may want to try a small fuel loading and see if 
the same intense reaction happens--all else the same.  

 

Try the test with a iron core instead of a fuel load and determine if there is 
an apparent magnetic field which would hold the iron core in position when 
direct current is applied to the heating coil.  An alternating current would of 
course change the magnetic field and may make for null reaction conditions. 

 

 Try 2 or 3 t/c's if you can--one inside and two outside to get a measure of 
the temperature gradient along the tube.  Also another easy way to determine 
temperatures is the use of thermal sticks on accessible surfaces.  Welders use 
these to determine preheating temperatures.  They may provide a cheap 
temperature measure for you.  

 

Keep it shielded--good luck.  

 

Bob

- Original Message - 

From: Jack Cole mailto:jcol...@gmail.com  

To: vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com  

Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 9:39 AM

Subject: Re: [Vo]:melted alumina tube

 

To add a couple of more details.  The agglomerated piece of material is 
extremely hard.  I tried to break it off with pliers, but it seemed like it 
would take more force than to break the entire cell.  The resistance wire is 
extremely difficult to separate from the cell. I plan to open the cell with a 
diamond blade later today to see if more can be learned about what took place 
(e.g., evidence of melting on the inside of tube).  I was able to get one piece 
of the resistance wire pried from the tube.  There were indentations in the 
cell. 

 

As a follow-up experiment, I need to run it without the fuel to the same power 
levels to see if the same effects occur.

 

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com 
mailto:jcol...@gmail.com  wrote:

I had an interesting experiment yesterday.  This was my first time using a 
triac to regulate input power and sealing the tube with a compression fitting.  
Unfortunately, my thermocouple failed.

 

Take a look at the alumina tube and the evidence for melting.  The furnace 
sealant which I coated it with completely melted and agglomerated to the bottom 
of the cell (also appears to be mixed with melted alumina).

 

http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IMG_20150317_084823_361.jpg

 

The tube was purchased from China and is purportedly 95% pure.  It was supposed 
to have a continuous operating temperature of 1500C.  

 

Any opinions?

 

Jack

[Vo]:Grand Unified Field Theory Phe:CSC Conic Splitting Via 0.78615 : 0.70711

2015-02-25 Thread Robert Collier

2014-11-02-vortexspace-package.ziphttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/2014-11-02-vortexspace-package.zip
Please review the attached package on schematics for the solution to the 
curvature of space-time and the solution of a tested and working overunity 
Tokamak Reactor without the need for any re-inforcing or supporting external 
magnets.
(The final resolution in 3D to Gravity to Neile’s parabola 
http://www.2dcurves.com/cubic/cubicn.html)
You are asked to re-publish the information in your own name, and take credit 
for expanding its applications.This is the solution of “worm-hole science”.
As solved by 0.70711 : 0.78615 Horizontal : Vertical Fractal Splitting Ratio 
From a 2:1 Width:Height Cone(And a Re-Derivation of Pi).
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/Circle-Square-Circle%20Horizontal%20Ratio%20(VortexSpace%202014-11-02).pdfhttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/Closed-Form-Derivation%20of%20Pi%20from%20Phi%20(VortexSpace%202014-11-02).pdfhttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/Fundamental%20Constants%20(VortexSpace%202014-11-02).pdfhttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/Gravitons%20and%20Wave-Particle%20Duality%20(VortexSpace%202014-11-02).pdfhttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/Manifold%20Conduits%20For%20Vacuum%20Drawing%20and%20Charging%20CO2%20Under%202%20Bar%20Pressure%202014-11-02.pdfhttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/Phe%20-%20Universal%20Curvature%20Constant%20(VortexSpace%202014-11-02).pdfhttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/raftridinggravitydownward-lightningandtornadocombined-crop.jpghttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/showingstands-heightsandwidthslabelled-1286x610px.gifhttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/southpole-northpole-worldmap3d.pnghttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/Universe%20Height-Width%20Ratio%20(VortexSpace%202014-11-02).pdfhttps://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/102617070/2014-11-02-vortexspace-package.zip

RE: [Vo]:About iron and cobalt in Rossi's fuel

2014-11-12 Thread Robert Ellefson

(Cross-posted from e-catworld )

 

Axil,


Although some aspects of this reaction may be occurring, I suspect that the 
large crystal sizes for both the iron and lithium aluminum hydrate suggest that 
this fuel does not have sufficiently dispersed nano-scale reactants, which this 
article discusses as a distinguishing feature. Instead, I suspect that the iron 
is a large grain of fractured electrical steel which is used in bulk form to 
modulate the induced EMF stimulation into locally-enhanced gradients and 
spectral distributions, for SPP pumping. That is certainly how it appears in 
the fuel photograph, (particle 3, pages 43-44) at about 150x200 microns in 
size, with no apparent abrasions from ball milling or similar processes.

The LiAlH4 also appears to be (particle 2, pages 43-44) a solid grain of 50x100 
microns, and shows yield fractures and signs of being cut from a compressed 
form, which I believe is the tablet version of LiAlH4, rather than the powdered 
version. The tablet form is known to be much more stable in air than the 
powder. Sigma-Aldrich carries the tablets as product #323403. I suspect that 
1-5 micron carbonyl-process nickel grains were tumbled with partially crushed 
or cut tablet grains, such as particle 2 shows, to prep for reactor startup. 
Ultrasonic stimulation of the nickel particles is known to promote clustering 
as well, and I suspect this may be a part of the fuel preparation process also.

I suspect that Rochelle Salt (aka Potassium Sodium Tartrate) is being used as 
to bind the AlH4 ligands during startup, which may be a source of some of the 
potassium and sodium observed. The unlabeled particles that appear in Figure 3a 
on page 44, just below and touching the label box for particle 1, both exhibit 
a similar morphology that is distinct from that of particles 1, 2 and 3. I 
suspect these particles could be Rochelle Salt.

As Bob Higgins pointed out previously, the role of other chemical getters, such 
as used in vacuum tube manufacturing and other controlled-atmosphere reactions, 
seems likely, and could be a source for other fuel elements not yet attributed 
to specific reactants.

 

Best wishes,

-Bob Ellefson

 

 

 

From: Axil Axil   Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 9:35 AM
Subject: [Vo]:About iron and cobalt in Rossi's fuel

This might explain why iron and cobalt was found in the Rossi fuel charge.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, the dehydrogenation properties of LiAlH4 doped
with Fe2O3 and nanoparticles exhibit a dramatic
improvement compared with that of as-received LiAlH4.

[Vo]:Change in the air

2014-11-06 Thread Robert Dorr




Since the publication of the Rossi independent third party report on 
the ecat, I have noticed a distinct change in the attacks on Rossi 
and in more to the point, LENR in general. There has been a continual 
flood of ideas and papers regarding various aspects of LENR (and its 
various iterations) operation. I think that there is a general mood 
of acceptance that even though no one knows for sure the LENR 
mechanism, the mechanism exists. I see a rapidly increasing interest 
and very exciting times ahead. The floodgates have developed a crack, 
and the waters are rising.




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8518 - Release Date: 11/05/14

Re: [Vo]:Machined Part in NASA Mars photo found

2014-11-02 Thread Robert Dorr




As much as I would like to find evidence of life or prior life on 
Mars, I have to agree that the object shown in the picture is just an 
impression of one of the Mars Curiosity Rover instruments. If you 
look you will see that the big rock in the picture has been moved as 
if something pushed against it and the soil looks to be of a sandy 
nature, perfect for the making of an impression. I agree that it 
looks like the head of a Phillips screw.


Robert Dorr




At 08:36 AM 11/2/2014, you wrote:
That looks a lot like the impression left from a Philips screw head 
that has been pressed into the soil, since the image is from the 
Microscopic Imager it would be helpful to know the scale of the 
impression, if the artifact is in the 2 to 8 mm range, I would guess 
that part of the instrumentation used to position the Microscopic 
Imager was moved into contact with the surface leaving the mark of the screw.


Nixter




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8495 - Release Date: 11/02/14

RE: [Vo]:OT: Boyd Bushman discusses aliens and offers photographic proof

2014-11-01 Thread Robert Dorr


At 07:34 PM 10/31/2014, you wrote:



Another YouTube link to the same 
video,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZTXHw1mZD4.


If that's missing just to a search on YouTube for Boyd Bushman 
Deathbed Confession.


Kind of interesting.





The You Tube link doesn't work for me. Looks like there has been a 
copyright violation and YT took it off-line. Bummer.




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5315 / Virus Database: 4189/8491 - Release Date: 11/01/14

RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?

2014-10-29 Thread Robert Ellefson

There was some discussion last week about these reactions, based on 
newly-released papers, on this thread:

“[Vo]:Is the E-Cat reaction a plasmon-driven instance of a 
metastable innershell molecular state (MIMS) mediated neutron exchange?”

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98968.html

 

The recent MIMS papers by Young K Bae are linked in that first message, and 
they are well-worth a read.

 

-Bob

 

 

From: H Veeder Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metastable_Innershell_Molecular_State
 
Metastable Innershell Molecular State (MIMS) is a class of ultra-high-energy 
short-lived molecules have the binding energy up to 1,000 times

RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?

2014-10-28 Thread Robert Ellefson

I agree that the reactions I am proposing are extremely unlikely to occur in
an unconstrained system, such as a gas or plasma in three-space.

However, you must consider that these reactions are occurring in the midst
of *intense* interactions driven by EMF, SPP, and phonon energies that are
presumed to be driven into resonant modes.   Stare at that nickel ash
morphology for a while and think about whether that this system is highly
dynamic or not, from multiple physical aspects.  How would you explain that
particular ash morphology, considering the shape of the nickel fuel grain
clusters?  At the same time, how would you explain the evolving COP that
appeared to be accelerating as the experiment ended?

Consider a Pharnsworth Fusor, or any other accelerated-particle fusion
system: they require confinement by interacting fields.  The intersection of
two fields will produce a minima surface, and when you add a third
constraint such as the curving surface of a metal dipole resonator, then
suddenly you find that the solution space for where these particles are to
be found is vastly reduced.  In addition, *because of the coherence* of the
system, multiple particles are likely to experience in-phase acceleration
forces, such as two lithium ions being individually accelerated by coherent
modes located some distance apart, travelling under the constraints of
interacting fields until they arrive at a boundary condition, such as a
nickel particle sitting in the middle of a node of the interacting fields. 

In any case, I really do not wield the depth of knowledge in chemistry or
physics to proclaim particular reactions as being correct or not, I am
simply trying to apply match what may be possible with what has been
observed.  I think the unusual and dynamic nature of this system requires
that we consider reaction pathways that lie outside of
previously-characterized reaction domains.  For me, a prime example of this
is the recently-released work from YK Bae on MIMS. 

Thanks for your considered comments,
-Bob Ellefson

 From: mixent Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 2:02 PM
 In reply to  Robert Ellefson's message of Sat, 25 Oct 2014 17:53:02 -0700:

 ...these are three particle reactions, which are very rare. Furthermore 
 these reactions require that two neutrons transfer simultaneously, 
 which is also highly unlikely. In the reactions I provided only
 a single neutron need hop.

  From: Robert  Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 5:29 PM
  I believe that a continuous neutron-exchange reaction cycle is taking
 place

RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?

2014-10-28 Thread Robert Ellefson

This seems apropos, although I do not have access to the full article yet.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131113125839.htm

Tossed on the waves: Charting the path of ejected particles

Fusion energy requires confining high energy particles, both those
produced from fusion reactions and others injected by megawatt beams used to
heat the plasma to fusion temperatures. New experiments are shedding light
on one of the major mechanisms by which fast ions can be ejected from
plasma.



-Bob


 From: Robert Ellefson  Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 2:25 PM
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?
 
 ...snip...In addition, *because of the coherence* of the
 system, multiple particles are likely to experience in-phase acceleration
 forces, such as two lithium ions being individually accelerated by
coherent
 modes located some distance apart, travelling under the constraints of
 interacting fields until they arrive at a boundary condition, such as a
 nickel particle sitting in the middle of a node of the interacting fields.
 
  From: mixent Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 2:02 PM
  In reply to  Robert Ellefson's message of Sat, 25 Oct 2014 17:53:02
-0700:
 
  ...these are three particle reactions, which are very rare. Furthermore
  these reactions require that two neutrons transfer simultaneously,
  which is also highly unlikely. In the reactions I provided only
  a single neutron need hop.
 
   From: Robert  Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 5:29 PM
   I believe that a continuous neutron-exchange reaction cycle is taking
  place

Re: [Vo]:MFMP interviews spokesman from WILLIAMSON

2014-10-26 Thread Robert Dorr

I read the report you linked to. Their main argument is that CCDs
response at the temperature the ecat is operating at has a low
reaction curve, i.e. the reaction to temperature change flattens out
so it's harder to get an accurate reading with a change in
temperature. The method that Williamson is using is a Spot
Pyrometer which uses emissivity or for a better word reflectance,
that's why they are concerned with the transparency of the object
they are measuring at IR wavelengths. Williamson says they have
looked at alumina at various temperatures and have included it's
varying emissivity into an algorithm to give accurate temperature
readings. Since alumina is opaque at the temperature of the ecat and
the wavelengths they were measuring in the Lugano report, were of
between 7.5u and 13u, they chose the appropriate IR cameras. The only
thing that someone might have a question with in regards to the IR
cameras and Rossi's ecat is, Were the cameras calibrated properly?,
and they say on page 4 of the report that the cameras were calibrated
by the respective manufacturers laboratories.

Robert Dorr

At 10:16 PM 10/25/2014, you wrote:
Hank Mills transcript :
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WNDVQVEhmUjJ4ek0/viewhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WNDVQVEhmUjJ4ek0/view

But it's still not clear whether they should use 8-14u or 2.5u

In any case, their spot pyrometer is most likely more accurate.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8454 - Release Date: 10/25/14

-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8454 - Release Date: 10/25/14

Re: [Vo]:MFMP interviews spokesman from WILLIAMSON

2014-10-26 Thread Robert Dorr



As to whether a spot pyrometer is more accurate than an IR camera, I 
think depends on their use. For small area or pin point measurement I 
agree that a spot pyrometer may be more accurate, but for large or 
gross measurement I think the IR camera would be just as accurate if 
not more so. I think that there is no problem using the IR cameras 
for accurate measurement of the temperature of the Rossi ecat as long 
as the cameras were calibrated properly.


Robert Dorr


At 10:16 PM 10/25/2014, you wrote:
Hank Mills transcript : 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WNDVQVEhmUjJ4ek0/viewhttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WNDVQVEhmUjJ4ek0/view


But it's still not clear whether they should use 8-14u or 2.5u

In any case, their spot pyrometer is most likely more accurate.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8454 - Release Date: 10/25/14




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8454 - Release Date: 10/25/14

RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?

2014-10-26 Thread Robert Ellefson


Occam's Razor is a tool used by enfeebled minds to construct paper houses out 
of tree bark shavings.
Real thinkers use chain saws and portable lumber mills to build their houses.

-Bob


 -Original Message-
 From: Kevin O'Malley [mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2014 5:16 PM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?
 
 This conjecture aligns with Occham's Razor.  If it's true, Rossi has
 painted himself into a corner.
 
 On 10/26/14, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
  Bob,
 
  The overwhelming probability is that the Levi sample was salted - which
  is
  to say that it was compromised by the addition of a pure isotope. Show me
  one US nuclear physicist who would believe otherwise - and fully back Rossi
  on the issue of in situ manufacture of pure (99.3%) Ni62.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Robert  Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 5:29 PM
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  Subject: RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?
 
  I believe that a continuous neutron-exchange reaction cycle is taking
  place
  between lithium and nickel, which includes the following reactions:

RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?

2014-10-25 Thread Robert Ellefson

 From: Roarty, Francis X   Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 6:18 AM 
 are you implying this reaction can occur without gas loading? If your
theory
 does require gas atoms what function do you assign them?


Dear Fran, Bob Cook, and vortex-l,

My interpretation of the evidence is that the primary gain mechanism is
active both when the nickel is in solid phase at lower reactor temperatures,
and when it is in liquid phase at high reactor temperatures.  The Lugano
nickel ash grain displays a high degree of sintering, if not a full liquid
state, IMHO.Because of the liquid phase Ni activity, I suspect that bulk
gas loading is not required in order for the gainful reaction to occur, so
long as sufficient SPP and phonon resonances are possible.  Note that
enhanced evaporation near the melting point of nickel could create an
effective triple-point in the state phase diagram, which may imply a region
of stability which supports the persistence of the unique, actively-driven
nickel morphology despite it being in a liquid state.  The reactor control
system may be tuned to avoid exceeding this stable operating point, perhaps
even overriding the input control knob presented to the experimenters.

It may be a unique aspect of the Pd/D electrolytic process that requires
high loading, or perhaps high loading is required less for reactant
availability than for a conditioning regime involving morphological changes
to the electrode which enable phonon and SPP resonant coupling modes to
evolve sufficiently for LENR reactions to take place.  

Because of the high degree of correspondence between the thermal behaviors
of LENR reactions and MIMS reactions, I have been particularly focusing my
thoughts on the implications of this unusual polychromatic superradiance
that has been observed with MIMS, particularly the abundant soft x-rays in
the 75-100 eV range that are rapidly emitted.  

As a working model, I am picturing available monoatomic nickel atoms being
in a near-surface vapor phase, induced by SPP and/or phonon-enhanced
evaporation or sublimation that occurs at rates outside the ordinary
equilibrium vapor pressure regime.  I presume the lithium is also in a
monoatomic gas phase resulting from the reactor temperature.  Both of these
reactants are then coupled to the surface SPP and phonon activity via
electrostatics/EM, at similar distances above the surface.  Although a
three-body collision of high-speed gas particles is inherently rather
improbable, I suspect that EM field alignments are providing a
greatly-enhanced probability of Li-Ni-Li collisions.  The heavy nickel atoms
will tend to find stationary nodes, while the light lithium atoms are more
likely to be at high velocities driven by plasmon and phonon acceleration.
The simultaneous arrival of two lithium atoms at a nickel target atom from
opposite directions has an enhanced probability of occurring because of the
coherence of the acceleration applied by the system to the lithium.

I believe that a continuous neutron-exchange reaction cycle is taking place
between lithium and nickel, which includes the following reactions:

Li-7 + Ni-58 + Li-7 + stimulus - 2Li-6 + Ni-58 + sr-gammas
Li-7 + Ni-60 + Li-7 + stimulus - 2Li-6 + Ni-62 + sr-gammas
Li-7 + Ni-61 + Li-6 + stimulus - 2Li-6 + Ni-62 + sr-gammas
Li-7 + Ni-62 + Li-7 + stimulus - 2Li-7 + Ni-62 + enhanced sr-gammas (no
neutrons exchanged)
Li-6 + Ni-62 + Li-6 + enhanced stimulus - 2Li-7 + Ni-60 + sr-gammas
Li-6 + Ni-64 + Li-6 + stimulus - 2Li-7 + Ni-62 + sr-gammas
Li-6 + Ni-60 + Li-6 + stimulus - 2Li-7 + Ni-58 + sr-gammas

There is a decay mode inherent to the reaction cycle which apparently
requires periodic SPP pumping to maintain equilibrium, which is the key
control parameter which prevents runaway.  The physical design of the
reactor system must also maintain operating conditions which enable this
inherent decay mode, or else runaway will result.  What I find remarkable is
how long the reactor can operate in self-sustain mode after the control is
stopped, which implies a very small decay coefficient in the reaction
feedback loop.  There are two potential sources for this small decay bias
that I am currently considering.  The first possible direction to catch my
eye is the small discrepancy in binding energies between Li-6 and Li-7,
which could create a bias in the cycle which drives it into shutdown without
external stimulus.  The other possibility is an asymmetry in the
superradiant output for various stages of the reaction cycle.  The answer
will be difficult to evaluate with the current state of
experimentally-derived data from MIMS phenomena.

As for the neutron-exchange reaction, I am currently investigating the
photodisintegration process, in which neutrons are released via photon
stimulation.  Observed instances of this phenomena have been the result of
much higher energy photon sources than we see in this system, however, I
suspect that the poorly-studied superradiance phenomena which I believe

RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?

2014-10-25 Thread Robert Ellefson

Oops, I see at least one significant typo in the reaction table.

The first line should read:

Li-7 + Ni-58 + Li-7 + stimulus - 2Li-6 + Ni-60 + sr-gammas

This is the first step of the enrichment cycle.

-Bob


 -Original Message-
 From: Robert  Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2014 5:29 PM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:A new type of laser is born?
 
 I believe that a continuous neutron-exchange reaction cycle is taking
place
 between lithium and nickel, which includes the following reactions:
 
 Li-7 + Ni-58 + Li-7 + stimulus - 2Li-6 + Ni-58 + sr-gammas
 Li-7 + Ni-60 + Li-7 + stimulus - 2Li-6 + Ni-62 + sr-gammas
 Li-7 + Ni-61 + Li-6 + stimulus - 2Li-6 + Ni-62 + sr-gammas
 Li-7 + Ni-62 + Li-7 + stimulus - 2Li-7 + Ni-62 + enhanced sr-gammas (no
 neutrons exchanged)
 Li-6 + Ni-62 + Li-6 + enhanced stimulus - 2Li-7 + Ni-60 + sr-gammas
 Li-6 + Ni-64 + Li-6 + stimulus - 2Li-7 + Ni-62 + sr-gammas
 Li-6 + Ni-60 + Li-6 + stimulus - 2Li-7 + Ni-58 + sr-gammas

Re: [Vo]:MFMP interviews spokesman from WILLIAMSON

2014-10-24 Thread Robert Dorr




If you measured at 2.5u you would be dealing with IR directly emitted 
from the interior of the hot cat because at that wavelength the 
alumina would be somewhat transparent to IR. Measuring at the 
wavelengths they did the IR cameras were only reading the surface 
temperature because of aluminas's opaqueness at wavelengths above 
approximately 3.5u. Almost everyone gets hung up on the visible 
wavelength pictures that were published in the report. They bear 
almost no relation to what the IR cameras were observing.


Robert Dorr


At 04:51 PM 10/24/2014, you wrote:

Worth listening to, but they were talking at cross-purposes at times.

3-way complication between reflectance, emission and transmission. 
Said that wires could cause shadows. (But not, by my analysis from a 
diffuse source. unless the wire is very close to the surface).


Their system can be used to *determine* the emissivity.

I *think* they said it would be better to measure Alumina at a lower 
wavelength (2.5u?) and not in the IR band (8-14)?


So far, I see no reason to budge from my initial evaluation of 
inconclusive. But just one more nail in the coffin and I might 
downgrade that to failed. (But a failed experiment doesn't 
necessarily mean the ecat doesn't work).


In short, they were nuts to stick with the hotcat/IR calorimetry, 
and should have asked for a fatcat with water (non-steam) calorimetry.


ps : I have a black body / emissivity simulator under construction. 
But will it rescue or kill the results?


--
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 2:50:05 PM

MFMP interviews a spokesman for the company Williamson which 
specializes in non-contact temperature measurement. They discuss the 
problem of measuring the temperature of Alumina at higher temperatures.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3O3bSu6N7vwcDJUWGl1Y0pmTWs/edit?pli=1https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3O3bSu6N7vwcDJUWGl1Y0pmTWs/edit?pli=1
(15 min. audio only must be downloaded to listen)

Harry

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comwww.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8448 - Release Date: 10/24/14




-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8448 - Release Date: 10/24/14

[Vo]:A new type of laser is born?

2014-10-21 Thread Robert Ellefson


Dear Vortex-L,

Stimulated by Jones Beene's thoughts on a coherent lasing system based on a
Dynamical Casimir Effect (DCE) from his postings earlier today, I hope to
encourage further discussion along these lines of thought.

In reference to the characteristic morphology of the nickel ash grain
(particle 1, figure 2, page 43) that I described in this posting:
 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg98350.html

I believe that the abundant 2-micron protrusions in the nickel ash represent
dipole oscillators which have literally evolved from the initial nickel fuel
grain clusters during the startup and then operation of reactor.   These
oscillators form a coupled, complex, highly non-linear system that could be
described as a LENR-driven LASER analog, much like the SPASER systems that
are emerging in laboratories right now in the nanoscale, except these
structures are micron-scale.  One interesting paper which provides a
potential analog is:
  http://arxiv.org/pdf/1001.0422v3.pdf (Plasmon-mediated
superradiance near metal nanostructures)   

It is my contention that the observed microstructures in the nickel ash
grain are _directly homologous_ to the Eigen-modes of this coherent system.
I believe that Ni-Li neutron exchange reactions are being stimulated by SPP
and phonon interactions on the protruding structures, and are producing a
form of polychromatic superradiance such as that observed during reactions
involving Metastable Innershell Molecular States (MIMS, aka ballotechnics).
I suspect the energy gain comes from the vacuum during the LENR reaction,
which I currently picture as a high-velocity collision of Li-Ni-Li that
produces a MIMS reaction which also (hand-waving here) exchanges neutrons
between lithium and nickel. This emits only intense photon and phonon
energy, some of which couples back into the system to drive further
reactions, while the rest is thermalized in the reactor shell.

If this is true, then only the EMF stimulation is needed to control the
reactor via SPP pumping once a certain operating temperature threshold has
been reached by external heating.  Rossi could simplify his control by
separating these two functions of heating and EMF stimulation, I suspect.
This separation may be the primary function of the mouse/cat reactor
configuration, where the mouse emits primarily photons as the cat's
controlling input, once a minimum temperature is reached throughout the
system.

Using only EMF pumping to control the reaction would also greatly improve
the COP, which may be part of the reason why the systems that Rossi
demonstrates still have combined heating and RF control inputs.

I suspect that if you were to construct a good approximation of the nickel
ash grain morphology with natural nickel, combined it with lithium and large
iron grains, and stimulated it with EMF while at a high enough temperature,
that you would see this system become active and gainful.  A high-resolution
3-d printer could do this, as could a plethora of extant micro-fabrication
techniques.  Then again, given that Rossi's systems evolve in-situ from
powdered fuel, why bother with fabricating machines?  The main purpose I can
think of for a designed and manufactured fuel morphology would be to
optimize the potential for electrical output while minimizing thermal
output. 

I hope these ideas are able to inspire further insights into this system.

-Bob Ellefson

Re: [Vo]:Why doesn't Rossi makes a self feeding Hot Cat and ends the controversy.

2014-10-18 Thread Robert Lynn

There are at least 5-10 different kinds of old and new stirling engines
available with 30-40% efficiency using 7-800°C input temperatures. They
range from 100W-30kW in capacity.  So no problem doing a self-driven system
with LENR COP of 3.2
Qenergy probably easiest to get a hold of (around 33%, using recently
bankrupt Infinia's 3.5kW output design of which they built a fairly
sizeable stirling solar dish field, so while not advertised they probably
have 10's-100's of engines available now.
Or could go for larger V4-90 of united sun systems (also about 32%
efficient) at about 10-25kW output:
http://www.unitedsunsystems.com/the-v4-90-stirling-engine/
They probably have several hundred motors sitting around from when they
bought out bankrupted Stirling Energy Systems 2 years ago (they had a 75
dish field of stirling solar dishes in Maricopa AZ.
Also Mahle Powertrain:
http://www.mahle-powertrain.com/C1257126002DFC22/vwContentByUNID/D06710E71F58400DC1257A8B0038FDEA/$FILE/MAHLE%20Solar%20Stirling%20Engine%20Development%20(Abs).pdf
40.5% at 25kW

On 18 October 2014 13:42, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 I wrote:

 In another sense, it would be no more overunity than a fission reactor,
 since the energy would be coming from the conversion of mass via nuclear
 reactions.


 The obvious objection to the above is that the release of energy always
 involves a mass deficit.  The idea was that cold fusion doesn't need to
 involve a violation of CoE, and so a cold fusion device would not really be
 an overunity device.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:Why doesn't Rossi makes a self feeding Hot Cat and ends the controversy.

2014-10-18 Thread Robert Lynn

Brushless generators can be designed to do 97% efficiency. Not a
significant loss.

On 18 October 2014 17:17, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

Yes, but then you need to convert the physical energy into electrical
which will cause some extra loss.

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Robert Lynn
robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

There are at least 5-10 different kinds of old and new stirling engines
available with 30-40% efficiency using 7-800°C input temperatures. They
range from 100W-30kW in capacity. So no problem doing a self-driven system
with LENR COP of 3.2
Qenergy probably easiest to get a hold of (around 33%, using recently
bankrupt Infinia's 3.5kW output design of which they built a fairly
sizeable stirling solar dish field, so while not advertised they probably
have 10's-100's of engines available now.
Or could go for larger V4-90 of united sun systems (also about 32%
efficient) at about 10-25kW output:
http://www.unitedsunsystems.com/the-v4-90-stirling-engine/
They probably have several hundred motors sitting around from when they
bought out bankrupted Stirling Energy Systems 2 years ago (they had a 75
dish field of stirling solar dishes in Maricopa AZ.
Also Mahle Powertrain:

http://www.mahle-powertrain.com/C1257126002DFC22/vwContentByUNID/D06710E71F58400DC1257A8B0038FDEA/$FILE/MAHLE%20Solar%20Stirling%20Engine%20Development%20(Abs).pdf
40.5% at 25kW

On 18 October 2014 13:42, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

I wrote:

In another sense, it would be no more overunity than a fission reactor,
since the energy would be coming from the conversion of mass via nuclear
reactions.

The obvious objection to the above is that the release of energy always
involves a mass deficit. The idea was that cold fusion doesn't need to
involve a violation of CoE, and so a cold fusion device would not really be
an overunity device.

Eric

[Vo]:Is the E-Cat reaction a plasmon-driven instance of a metastable innershell molecular state (MIMS) mediated neutron exchange?

2014-10-17 Thread Robert Ellefson

Dear Vortex-l,

I found these papers from Young K. Bae, published recently in Physics
Letters A and Results in Physics, to be of tremendous interest and potential
relevance to the phenomena we are witnessing in the E-Cat and possibly other
LENR reactions.

(I note that these whole papers can be downloaded without charge currently)
MIMS-III, Oct2014:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375960114009256  
MIMS-II, Sept2014:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211379714000515
MIMS, July2008:http://ykbcorp.com/downloads/MIMS%20PLA17931.pdf

Note that he is claiming to prove that innershell molecular states, (a
neo-fusion state, if you will) can exist between *any* two elements!
Although his work is based on high-kinetics shock-induced reactions, I find
the behaviors listed for this class of reactions (MIMS), notably the
anomalous thermal behavior, to be of particular interest in light of
observed cold fusion reactions.

Thanks for the tip-off, Jones Beene.  Your mention of ballotechnic reactions
caught my eye because of the thermal behavior you mentioned, but searches
for that only seemed to land me in conspiracy pages, NSA honeypots, and
spy-fiction references, until I found yet another posting from Jones Beene
on vortex in 2009 that cross-referenced the new name for this class of
reactions (MIMS:ballotechnics::LENR:cold fusion).  Then I found this latest
set of papers, and my buzzword-matching Bayesian filter output pegged at
11+!  

Although I do (yet) not have any references to indicate that this type of
reaction is known to be capable of occurring in the conditions of the
reactors we are working with, given the scarcely-explored nano-scale nature
of plasmonics interactions, it doesn't seem too far of a stretch that we
could be seeing this type of reaction occurring in cold fusion systems.
The works of Hagelstein, Violante, Vysotskii, and Karabut immediately leap
to mind here, but I have not yet read their works in enough detail to know
what level of correlation their investigations have already uncovered
between MIMS and cold fusion.

While reading Mats Lewan's book, his mention of Rossi's repeated musings on
the hammer-and-anvil theme stood out.  Although the notion of fusion
naturally correlates to a hammer-and-anvil theme, something suggests to me
that perhaps Rossi was musing on shock-induced reactions such as MIMS in
particular.  I'll note that the important 2008 paper was published around
the time that Rossi was first developing the E-Cat technology.

There is a nifty animation of a MIMS reaction recently put out by Bae on
youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbdESIKd56U

The author's web pages:
http://ykbcorp.com/

I hope this inspires productive thinking!
-Bob Ellefson

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

(Dave, my granddad is Bob, I'm Robert :) ), I would be over the moon if we
had incontrovertible evidence of COP, but with a strong grounding in and
respect for the scientific method you cannot and should not ever give bold
assertions a free ride without vigorous critical review the skeptics of the
world won't go any easier on him than I will.  Which is what I am trying to
provide, and unfortunately the harder I have looked at it and the more
issues I have analysed the more likely it seems that the gain = 1
hypothesis is as strong as gain 1.

Occams razor would then favour gain=1 rather than a collection of
miraculously fortuitous LENR characteristics that include numerous
transmutation pathways (fission and fusion of Ni and Li) without ionising
radiation, or change in reaction rate as it goes from natural isotope
ratios to essentially all Li6+Ni2,  But my suspicions really shot through
the roof after reading that Rossi bought 99% Ni62 from a commercial
supplier at one point - and that is why I decided to look so hard at the
physical attributes of the device (thermodynamics/hightemp materials are my
forte) - to see whether it was thermodynamically unabiguous that there was
gain 1.

The needless ambiguity of the test raises my ire, that the power input is
so clumsily measured when it would be so easy to use series resistors,
triac switched single phase AC, PWM DC power supply or etc with the same
electromagnetic effects within the reactor.  Rossi with his resources could
get someone to make such an unambiguous power supply/meter in a day - but
as usual he has chosen the dark path of deliberate obfuscation.  Likewise
with the lack of thermocouples or proper flow calorimetry - so easy when
the COP and power output are large.

But back to the physical problems:
-The major red flag is that of inconel heating wire temp being necessarily
1300-1350°C (and realistically probably lower) while thermography is
claiming 1412°C surface temps screams out that there is a massive error in
the calorimetry, rendering the claims of gain meaningless unless or until
that error can be explained satisfactorily.  Hopeful theories about
refractories wires etc just don't stand up to practical considerations
(joining them to inconel that will anyway be melted at joint, forming these
horribly brittle materials, keeping them away from air).
-Knowing that the alumina is translucent also opens up so many
possibilities for errors - and the translucence is unknown and unquantified
for the material used over the range of temperatures and for the range of
wavelengths of emitted light created by hot embedded wires - claims of it
not being a problem don't hold water due to the above demonstrated/known
error in the reactor temperature.  We have no idea how much porosity it
has, how thin it is, or what surface impurities might accumulate during
long term high temperature operation to alter emissivity/translucence etc.
-That I have identified a likely construction for the reactor that gives
the visual results seen during testing (glowing wires wrapped around inner
tube, but with minimal and variable contact quenching bought on by
differential thermal expansion), all encased in outer shell), with no
reactor gain only increases the strength of the gain=0 hypothesis.

This could all be fixed easily by Rossi releasing more details of
construction - even photos of cut-open reactor or just doing a proper
independent black box test with good calorimetry.  But as ever he is
playing games due to paranoia, perverseness or worse motives.  He could
have made billions by now and the world would be massively better off if he
wasn't persisting in his school-boy intrigues.

On 16 October 2014 12:25, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Bob, you appear to be too convinced that the gain is unity and are going
 to great lengths to obtain that result.  The testers are well respected
 scientists and no one should assume that they are so easily misslead.
 Besides, there are several measurements that support the fact that the COP
 is greater than unity which you seem to brush off.

 I wonder about whether or not the actual temperature is correct as well,
 but am in no position to prove one way or the other.  The most important
 observation that supports the elevated COP is the slope of output power
 versus input power that they measure about their chosen operating point.  I
 can think of no way to fake that measurement without a dose of true magic.
 And then it would be extremely difficult to understand why the measured
 behavior tends to follow what my simulation predicts.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Wed, Oct 15, 2014 11:53 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

  Nullis in verba. :)  I believe my eyes more than others words.  In
 finding so many potential faults with so little published information (they
 had a month to investigate!!) I can

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

Well I can argue that there is no excess heat - The thermography is proven
to be wrong (inconel resistance wires melt at 1300-1350°C  1412°C surface
reactor temp claimed, and wires would have to be much hotter than reactor
surface).  If there is little to no conductive contact between non-melting
wires and outer shell then the outer shell is only around 1000°C and there
is no excess heat - a sensible physical model given what we can see in
photos, with cameras perhaps 'seeing' or being badly skewed by the
radiative output+ different emissivity of the wires rather than the
translucent alumina of unknown thickness, porosity and transmissivity in
the wavelengths of interest.

So with the thermography proven to be massively in error how do you know
there was any excess heat?  (There is also problems with the convective
heat transfer, due to sitting above a hot surface though they are smaller
in impact, just as radiative heat transfer might be slightly impacted by
hot frame underneath but probably also minor).

On 16 October 2014 13:02, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 You could explain the glow pattern with those assumptions but you would
 still need to explain away the excess heat.

 Harry

 


 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 Not if it is touching the walls of inner or outer alumina tube in places,
 intermittent contact due to vagaries of original wire winding around inner
 tube and subsequent large differential thermal expansion so that the wire
 is quenched in some places but not in others.  Would explain the variation
 in glow that we see (along with slight translucence of alumina tube), and
 would change as the wire gets hotter and relaxes pre-existing springiness
 that might otherwise hold the wire in contact with the inner tube - would
 lead to wire temperature increasing faster than power input would suggest -
 ie what we see with supposedly increasing COP.

 Most likely means of construction is winding wires around an inner tube,
 or winding them around a different mandrel and then slipping them over the
 tube.  Bonding them to the inner tube is an extra step that (based on
 inconsistency/variability of surface glow) has likely not been done and for
 which their would be little initial motive anyway. And massive relative
 thermal expansion of the wire (~1%) would likely have cracked any ceramic
 bonding or attempts to rigidly encase the wires or bond them to the inner
 tube anyway.

 Differential thermal expansion means that the internal tube/vessel is
 likely only bonded to the thermocouple end cap, otherwise the external tube
 would be broken by axial stress due to differential thermal expansion of
 higher temperature of inner tube compared to external tube.

 On 16 October 2014 10:58, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


 If the wire inside the reactor was hot enough to glow it should produce
 a more uniform spiral glow along the entire length of the tube.


 Harry

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the
 reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the
 bright wires in the reactor.  Hard to believe it would be colder inside the
 reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to
 radiate to.  I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires
 that are the bright areas.

 On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to
 draw the opposite conclusion.  Confirmation bias on both our parts :)
 I think it is equivocal at best.

 On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the
 the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade.  I am 95%
 confident that is the shadow of the coil.  The light areas change in
 brightness, width, etc.

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 how do you know this?  How do you know the the wire is not the
 brightest area?

 On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because
 they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. 
 However,
 since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the
 temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and
 therefore can't melt.

 Harry

Re: [Vo]:Engineering and materials issues with high temperature hot-cat Lugano demo

If the LENR reaction suffers from thermal runaway then the best means for
cooling is a coolant fluid slightly below the target temperature.  Eg
1180°C coolant and 1200°C running temp so raising temp to 1240°C would then
triple cooling rate, so 'clamping' the temperature.  A lithium heat pipe
would do this really well - vent at a controlled pressure to control the
temp.

The heater wires provide a crude and inefficient version of this for
control purposes.  If an oscillating magnetic field is required for
excitation then that can be provided more efficiently without massive
resistive losses.

At 1200-1400°C a gas turbine would be ideal - with about 45% efficiency
possible in compact device with no cooling water.  Or 55+% with steam
bottoming or CO2 or Helium recuperated Gas Turbine that are much more
expensive.

On 16 October 2014 13:32, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I believe the large tubes on the end to be thermally insulating supports
 for the hot central 2 cm tube.


 A question that came to me was whether the alumina endcaps could be
 replaced with metal endcaps of a suitable alloy in the context of a larger
 array of devices, in order to provide a suitable path out for the heat to
 be used to generate steam.  Another question I have is how much thermal
 load one of these devices can handle.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

All fair points of view Dave.  Though with regard to 3 phase, at 900W input
there is obviously no need, adds a lot of mechanical complexity (3 heater
wires rather than 1) and a little more electrical complexity and would
still get impulsive waveform using rectified DC + half H bridge to provide
an ac pwm output - really simple linear power control that is dead simple
to measure and control power output of, with much greater scope for
variation of pulse frequency and duration.  I doubt you or any other
engineer or electrician would choose to do it the crude and restrictive way
he has.

Haven't tackled the electrical side of things much; but as an EE would you
agree that conceptually it would be possible to hide a 10kHz AC signal
superimposed on the grid supplied 3phase with amplitude a little less than
the AC so as not to trigger the Triac turn off?  (Hardware pretty simple,
just 50% duty cycle driven half-H bridge of phase added to the 50Hz signal
by means of a series transformer).  My rough calculation suggest that could
allow 3x the power to be delivered to the reactor without showing up on the
PCE meter or having any DC component.  Not that I think it likely (far too
much potential for getting caught by someone with a multimeter or
oscilloscope), but if the power meters were known to have a max frequency
threshold then could this allow you to deliver more power without it being
easily spotted?

On 16 October 2014 16:12, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Sorry Robert, I will make every attempt to use your correct name in the
 future.  Thanks for clarifying your reasons for exhibiting the strong
 critical position against the report.

 I admit that I harbor questions about the accuracy of the temperature
 measurements for many of the reasons that you point out.  To me the slope
 in COP with temperature and the particle analysis are strong indicators
 that the device is generating some type of nuclear power within its core.
 I can not honestly believe that Rossi would be attempting a scam as you
 seem to think...he risks far too much.  One tiny slip and he is toast.

 I recall reading in his blog that Ni62 was the active element from a
 couple of years back.  At that time he was talking of developing a process
 that enriched the raw material in order to achieve that goal.  Could that
 have been what he thought was happening within his reactor at the time?
 That would explain why he bought some of that isotope for research.  I give
 him the benefit of the doubt.

 The 3 phase power concern just does not hold water to me.  Remember the
 device tested is not normally used in isolation, but instead is a part of a
 much larger system.  Phase balancing is quite common when a large amount of
 power is required and I would likely have done exactly the same thing as
 Rossi.

 There are other reasons that I believe the test proves that power is
 generated within the core that I have covered previously and will not
 repeat at this time since it is late here.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Thu, Oct 16, 2014 2:20 am
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

  (Dave, my granddad is Bob, I'm Robert :) ), I would be over the moon if
 we had incontrovertible evidence of COP, but with a strong grounding in
 and respect for the scientific method you cannot and should not ever give
 bold assertions a free ride without vigorous critical review the skeptics
 of the world won't go any easier on him than I will.  Which is what I am
 trying to provide, and unfortunately the harder I have looked at it and the
 more issues I have analysed the more likely it seems that the gain = 1
 hypothesis is as strong as gain 1.

  Occams razor would then favour gain=1 rather than a collection of
 miraculously fortuitous LENR characteristics that include numerous
 transmutation pathways (fission and fusion of Ni and Li) without ionising
 radiation, or change in reaction rate as it goes from natural isotope
 ratios to essentially all Li6+Ni2,  But my suspicions really shot through
 the roof after reading that Rossi bought 99% Ni62 from a commercial
 supplier at one point - and that is why I decided to look so hard at the
 physical attributes of the device (thermodynamics/hightemp materials are my
 forte) - to see whether it was thermodynamically unabiguous that there was
 gain 1.

  The needless ambiguity of the test raises my ire, that the power input
 is so clumsily measured when it would be so easy to use series resistors,
 triac switched single phase AC, PWM DC power supply or etc with the same
 electromagnetic effects within the reactor.  Rossi with his resources could
 get someone to make such an unambiguous power supply/meter in a day - but
 as usual he has chosen the dark path of deliberate obfuscation.  Likewise
 with the lack of thermocouples or proper flow calorimetry - so easy when
 the COP and power output

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

how do you know this?  How do you know the the wire is not the brightest
area?

On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they
 are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However,
 since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the
 temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and
 therefore can't melt.

 Harry

Re: [Vo]:Engineering and materials issues with high temperature hot-cat Lugano demo

Highly doubtful.  Above curie temperture of Nickel so no ferromagnetism,
and powder too microscopic hot resistivity too high, and AC frequency,
current and number of windings too low for strong magnetic fields or
significant eddy currents to form and give push via lenzs law.

On 15 October 2014 14:05, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 I wrote:

 The following is a bit speculative, but perhaps someone can correct any
 misstatements I make -- if there is a magnetic field being created by the
 cables coiling around the tube [1], I believe the field would point along
 the axis of the tube, creating a theta pinch, even if only momentarily.


 It now occurs to me that such a field will itself create quite a bit of
 acceleration of the metal particles in the tube.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw
the opposite conclusion.  Confirmation bias on both our parts :)
I think it is equivocal at best.

On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the
 dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade.  I am 95% confident
 that is the shadow of the coil.  The light areas change in brightness,
 width, etc.

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 how do you know this?  How do you know the the wire is not the brightest
 area?

 On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because they
 are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However,
 since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the
 temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and
 therefore can't melt.

 Harry

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the reactor
sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the bright
wires in the reactor.  Hard to believe it would be colder inside the
reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to
radiate to.  I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires
that are the bright areas.

On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw
 the opposite conclusion.  Confirmation bias on both our parts :)
 I think it is equivocal at best.

 On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the
 dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade.  I am 95% confident
 that is the shadow of the coil.  The light areas change in brightness,
 width, etc.

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 how do you know this?  How do you know the the wire is not the brightest
 area?

 On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because
 they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. However,
 since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the
 temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and
 therefore can't melt.

 Harry

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

Not lying, but perhaps again confirmation bias, based on wrong assumptions.

How can the inconel wire in Fig 12b be hotter/brighter in the cooler
external environment outside the end of the reactor than it is in the
hotter internal environment inside the reactor?

On 15 October 2014 21:12, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:

 They specifically say in the report the coils are the dark areas.   I
 doubt they're lying about that.

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 6:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:



 *From:* ChemE Stewart



 If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the the
 dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade.



 If this is 3-phase 50-cycle, then the photo should be showing the gap of
 the odd phase at any instant, which gap moves in one direction or the
 other, which is the marquee-effect of 3-phase (effective directionality).
 Thus one expects non-uniform width and continuity of the conductors … this
 is really 3-phase, no?

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

But the wire cannot be tungsten outside of the reactor where it is exposed
to air!  Only inconel will survive air exposure at such temperatures for a
month, and it maxes out at about 1300-1350°C (even that is pushing it).

And that wire (Fig 12b) is visibly brighter than the wire lines in the
reactor (or brightest surface areas of reactor), hence hotter.  So QED the
reactor surface is 1400°C.  The thermography is flat out wrong for
reasons unknown, and knowing that it is wrong you have to set aside all the
conclusions that are based on it!

The wire in the reactor in an insulated environment is necessarily hotter
than the wire outside the reactor, and while everyone might want to believe
that they must therefore be using exotic refractory wires that cannot be
the case:  There is no way to joining the inconel wire to a refractory
metal at a temperature above the melting point of inconel within the
insulated and even higher temperature of an oxygen-free sealed environment
within the reactor.

The only conclusion that makes sense is that the wires in the reactor are
at or below the melting temperature of inconel, and in such circumstances
the only way that they do not melt and fail is if the reactor surface
temperature is at least 2-300°C lower as I have previously shown.

As to growing belief in gain, I started out that way, but more I have
looked at the thermal physics in play and the inconsistencies it creates
the less believable it has become, the pictures and heat transfer physics
at play make it a strong possibility that there was no gain.

On 15 October 2014 21:40, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

   *From:* Robert Lynn



 How can the Inconel wire in Fig 12b be hotter/brighter in the cooler
 external environment outside the end of the reactor than it is in the
 hotter internal environment inside the reactor?



 In FWIW department, here is the grade of Inconel often used for resistor
 wire

 Inconel 600. As you can see, it is rated to less than 540 C.




 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nickel-600-Inconel-Wire-041-1-04mm-x-10-3m-/320676194894?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2hash=item4aa9ca6a4e



 As Eric suggests, given the impossibility of Inconel - they must be using
 something else besides Inconel. I agree. Tungsten comes to mind.



 This goes along with a growing belief that there is gain here and it could
 be more than they claim or less … since they did not calibrate - but there
 is also intentional deception, meaning that this is not a scientific
 report, but one designed to look that way using  cast of PhDs who were
 essentially asleep at the wheel.

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

2014-10-15 Thread Robert Dorr

I've been thinking of tungsten for a while now. Do they make an alloy
with tungsten that operates at high temps in an oxygen atmosphere. I ask
because, although the tungsten that is embedded in the reactor would be
protected from oxygen by the aluminum oxide coating, you have to connect
it to power somewhere outside the reactor that would be exposed to air
and the wire, if pure tungsten, would decompose rapidly. Also, I think
that you continue to use the word deception without proof that Rossi has
deceived anyone in this experiment. I realize that all the data goes
against current knowledge, but do you think that we know absolutely
everything there is to know about reactions at the nuclear level? I
think not. I think that there is a reaction that is going on that does
not follow our current knowledge and it may be determined that it is not
nuclear in the common sense but it is indeed a novel reaction and it
needs to be studied and not scoffed at.

Robert Dorr

On 10/15/2014 6:40 AM, Jones Beene wrote:

*From:* Robert Lynn

How can the Inconel wire in Fig 12b be hotter/brighter in the cooler
external environment outside the end of the reactor than it is in the
hotter internal environment inside the reactor?

In FWIW department, here is the grade of Inconel often used for
resistor wire

Inconel 600. As you can see, it is rated to less than 540 C.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nickel-600-Inconel-Wire-041-1-04mm-x-10-3m-/320676194894?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2hash=item4aa9ca6a4e
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nickel-600-Inconel-Wire-041-1-04mm-x-10-3m-/320676194894?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_2hash=item4aa9ca6a4e

As Eric suggests, given the impossibility of Inconel - they must be
using something else besides Inconel. I agree. Tungsten comes to mind.

This goes along with a growing belief that there is gain here and it
could be more than they claim or less … since they did not calibrate -
but there is also intentional deception, meaning that this is not a
scientific report, but one designed to look that way using cast of
PhDs who were essentially asleep at the wheel.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8393 - Release Date: 10/15/14

Re: [Vo]:Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project - Yahoo News

2014-10-15 Thread Robert Dorr



Makes you wonder if this is LENR related. 100 megawatts from a reactor 
that fits on a truck, and no radioactive waste!!! Hmmm


Robert Dorr


On 10/15/2014 8:19 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project - Yahoo News

WHOA !

http://news.yahoo.com/lockheed-says-makes-breakthrough-fusion-energy-project-123840986--finance.html

Get this:

“Ultra-dense deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, is found in the 
earth's oceans….


I am wondering if this is simply a naïve reporter (most likely) or it 
this truly ultra-dense in the context of f/H?


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8393 - Release Date: 10/15/14

Re: [Vo]:Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project - Yahoo News

2014-10-15 Thread Robert Dorr



Watching the video makes me a bit suspicious of the no radiation claim. 
High temperature fusion, magnetically bottled in a small container. 
Seems to me the container will eventually become radioactive.


Robert Dorr


On 10/15/2014 9:17 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


The video is pretty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embeddedv=UlYClniDFkM 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embeddedv=UlYClniDFkM


but sparse technical details. Looks a lot like they added magnetic 
coils to the Farnsworth Fusor.


I want to know about the ultra-dense deuterium…

*From:* Robert Dorr [mailto:rod...@comcast.net]
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 15, 2014 8:38 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy 
project - Yahoo News



Makes you wonder if this is LENR related. 100 megawatts from a reactor 
that fits on a truck, and no radioactive waste!!! Hmmm


Robert Dorr


On 10/15/2014 8:19 AM, Jones Beene wrote:

Lockheed says makes breakthrough on fusion energy project - Yahoo News

WHOA !

http://news.yahoo.com/lockheed-says-makes-breakthrough-fusion-energy-project-123840986--finance.html

Get this:

“Ultra-dense deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, is found in the 
earth's oceans….


I am wondering if this is simply a naïve reporter (most likely) or it 
this truly ultra-dense in the context of f/H?


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8393 - Release Date: 10/15/14

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8394 - Release Date: 10/15/14

RE: [Vo]:Testing fuels without a reactor

2014-10-15 Thread Robert Ellefson

Ok, after escalating from random-questions-embedded-in-a-long-posting to
open-conjecture-with-direct-questions and getting nowhere, I went with the
shakily-supported-but-loudly-declared-claim-of-fact route so popular on the
internet, and that elicited a couple of responses from kind and
knowledgeable researchers (Merci!).  Although I did not resolve all of the
questions which formed the basis of my conjecture about a potential signal
hidden within the noise of the peak-69 artifacts, I am able to infer and
presume the following:

1) Although not directly specified, the sputter-cleaning ion source
was most likely also isotopically-pure Ga-69.  This and many other models of
ToF-SIMS analyzers are apparently capable of performing sputter-cleaning and
SIMS-scanning with a variety of ion sources, using either the same or
different sources, notably including cesium, argon, oxygen, and gold.  In
this case, given only a single ion source specified, common practice implies
that they are both performed with Ga69.
2) The high variability of residual Ga69 in different
post-sputtering sample spectra (particularly figure 11b) is apparently
within the normal variance range for different sample substances.  

So, if there is something interesting to be found regarding a mass-69
species, it will need to be discovered using an analytic method that does
not employ Ga-69 such as this one does.  I hope that other analytic results
will be published soon!  Unless and until then, I'll just presume this to be
artifact.

-Bob

 From: Robert Ellefson 
 Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 5:29 PM
 Subject: [Vo]:Testing fuels without a reactor
 
 Given the results of the SIMS analysis from the Lugano report,
particularly
 as detailed in this posting:
   http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98596.html
 
 I believe that it is possible to evaluate the nuclear activity of
candidate
 fuel samples simply by sputter-cleaning them as part of a ToF-SIMS
analysis.
 If researchers with access to such analytic equipment were willing to run
 the experiment, I believe that a successful replication of Rossi's
reaction
 can be observed occurring with before-and-after spectra of the fuel.
 
 So, skip the reactors, start evaluating powders in the SEM itself!

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up,
breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube
in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact -
prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to
the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than
contact-conduction.  This is the likely what makes it appear that there is
a gain above 1.

On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

 New version with embedded wires.

 http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php

 Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather
 than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal
 contact with the Alumina.

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

It has nothing to do with measuring of the wire power, except that as the
wire heats up, increase the thermal resistance of the heat flow between
wire and reactor body (by reducing number of points of physical contact)
and of course the wire temperature will go up (given same input power)  - I
suggest you think a bit longer about it.

On 16 October 2014 08:33, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Since they are measuring the input energy to the wire that makes no sense

 On Wednesday, October 15, 2014, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up,
 breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube
 in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact -
 prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to
 the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than
 contact-conduction.  This is the likely what makes it appear that there is
 a gain above 1.

 On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

 New version with embedded wires.

 http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php

 Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather
 than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal
 contact with the Alumina.

Re: [Vo]:Engineering and materials issues with high temperature hot-cat Lugano demo

such units are not made as 3 phase helically wound assemblies, MoSi2 is
non-ductile/brittle and very difficult to make and even worse to bond to,
and there is still the unanswered problem of how do you bond inconel wire
that can survive only to 1350°C to an insulated heating element that is
supposed to be at higher temperature?

On 16 October 2014 08:40, John Page johnp...@comcast.net wrote:

   These might be pretty similar to Rossi's setup. (Google Superthal smu)
 Superthal heating modules

 Prefabricated heating modules consisting of vacuum-formed ceramic fibre
 with an integral Kanthal Super molybdenum-disilicide (MoSi2) heating
 element for up to 1750°C (3180°F) element temperature.

 Geometries
 Superthal heating modules are available in a variety of geometries and
 standard sizes. Tailor-made modules can be supplied to optimize the design
 and function of the particular application.
 Muffles
 Cylinders
 Half cylinders
 Radiating panels
 High-power reflectors

 On October 15, 2014 2:23:03 PM Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

 *From: *ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com
 *Sent: *Wednesday, October 15, 2014 11:08:42 AM

  Me too, good job. Tube in a tube reminds of the model rockets I used to
 build.  Fin supports between tubes might explain the wider dark band seen
 as a spiral?.  Do you think a lot of the heat might be discharged in a
 space between tubes and out the ends?  Or are the ends completely
 sealed?

 The fins are too fine to be a source of the bands. And the ends are
 completely sealed, so the temperature and heat-loss will taper off at the
 ends.

 But your .. and your, and your ... guess on the structure and the banding
 is as good as mine. Very frustrating.

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

So how do you imagine it inductively heats the powder given low AC
frequency, weak solenoid magnetic field, tiny cross section area powder,
and high resistivity of nickel near its melting point?

The physics + mathematics to estimate the magnetic field strength and eddy
currents induced are high-school /freshman physics level (estimate wire
turns, solenoid inductance = applied voltage gives current rate of change,
= solenoid magnetic field strength rate of change = eddy currents induced
in particles of given diameter - power dissipation, so you could very
quickly do some calculation to confirm or disprove your theory, and numbers
would at least give foundation to your hope.

On 16 October 2014 09:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Does this not indicate that the wire must be producing inductive heating
 in the powder?

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 the resistor wire expands with respect to the alumina as it heats up,
 breaking any bonding contact, or lifting the wire of the inner alumina tube
 in more and more places and leading to less and less conductive contact -
 prompting the wire to heat up as more as more of the energy it transmits to
 the reactor must be via radiation and conduction through gas rather than
 contact-conduction.  This is the likely what makes it appear that there is
 a gain above 1.

 On 16 October 2014 01:13, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

 New version with embedded wires.

 http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014b.php

 Here I've also assumed that the wires are a simple single strand, rather
 than the spiral form used in the earlier tests, and are in good thermal
 contact with the Alumina.

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

Not if it is touching the walls of inner or outer alumina tube in places,
intermittent contact due to vagaries of original wire winding around inner
tube and subsequent large differential thermal expansion so that the wire
is quenched in some places but not in others.  Would explain the variation
in glow that we see (along with slight translucence of alumina tube), and
would change as the wire gets hotter and relaxes pre-existing springiness
that might otherwise hold the wire in contact with the inner tube - would
lead to wire temperature increasing faster than power input would suggest -
ie what we see with supposedly increasing COP.

Most likely means of construction is winding wires around an inner tube, or
winding them around a different mandrel and then slipping them over the
tube.  Bonding them to the inner tube is an extra step that (based on
inconsistency/variability of surface glow) has likely not been done and for
which their would be little initial motive anyway. And massive relative
thermal expansion of the wire (~1%) would likely have cracked any ceramic
bonding or attempts to rigidly encase the wires or bond them to the inner
tube anyway.

Differential thermal expansion means that the internal tube/vessel is
likely only bonded to the thermocouple end cap, otherwise the external tube
would be broken by axial stress due to differential thermal expansion of
higher temperature of inner tube compared to external tube.

On 16 October 2014 10:58, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


 If the wire inside the reactor was hot enough to glow it should produce a
 more uniform spiral glow along the entire length of the tube.


 Harry

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 Additionally, look at the darkened photo, the wire exterior to the
 reactor sourrounded by cooler materials to radiate to are brighter than the
 bright wires in the reactor.  Hard to believe it would be colder inside the
 reactor surrounded by relatively hotter materials that are harder to
 radiate to.  I think that is pretty strong indication that it is the wires
 that are the bright areas.

 On 15 October 2014 20:14, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I am looking at high zoom at the same photos and finding it easy to draw
 the opposite conclusion.  Confirmation bias on both our parts :)
 I think it is equivocal at best.

 On 15 October 2014 19:52, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 If you zoom in very closely on the hot reactor photos you can see the
 the dark lines are of uniform width, continuity and shade.  I am 95%
 confident that is the shadow of the coil.  The light areas change in
 brightness, width, etc.

 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:56 AM, Robert Lynn 
 robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:

 how do you know this?  How do you know the the wire is not the
 brightest area?

 On 15 October 2014 15:06, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Some people suspect that the resistor wire can't be Inconel because
 they are predicted to melt at the reactor's operating temperature. 
 However,
 since we know the resistor wire casts a shadow in the alumina, the
 temperature of the wire remains below the operating temperature and
 therefore can't melt.

 Harry

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

Nullis in verba. :)  I believe my eyes more than others words.  In finding
so many potential faults with so little published information (they had a
month to investigate!!) I can only say that I am unimpressed by the
critical observational skills of the testers.  If they had approached this
demo with a more critical mindset I might be more inclined to believe them.

On 16 October 2014 11:41, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks for posting your ideas.
 I hadn't seen that picture of the march 2013 reactor sitting on the scale
 with heating coils visible.

 Why don't we just accept that the authors of the 2014 test also know
 enough about the construction of the reactor to say that the dark bands
 align with the wires?

 Harry


 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

 I wrote up my analysis of the banding :  (Draft -- I'll rename it
 later).

 http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014a.php

 Short answer : we don't even know whether the bright bands line up with
 the wires, or the gaps between them.

 There are multiple explanations, which depend on the structure used to
 hold the wires, and on the properties of everything.

 Insufficient data !

Re: [Vo]:temperature of the resistor wire.

Nullis in verba. :)  I believe my eyes more than others words.  In finding
so many potential faults with so little published information (they had a
month to investigate!!) I can only say that I am unimpressed by the
critical observational skills or reporting of the testers.  If they had
approached this demo with a more critical mindset I might be more inclined
to believe them.  There is a mountain to climb to convince the world, and
they have not really helped that process.

On 16 October 2014 11:41, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks for posting your ideas.
 I hadn't seen that picture of the march 2013 reactor sitting on the scale
 with heating coils visible.

 Why don't we just accept that the authors of the 2014 test also know
 enough about the construction of the reactor to say that the dark bands
 align with the wires?

 Harry


 On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

 I wrote up my analysis of the banding :  (Draft -- I'll rename it
 later).

 http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_hotcat_oct2014_141014a.php

 Short answer : we don't even know whether the bright bands line up with
 the wires, or the gaps between them.

 There are multiple explanations, which depend on the structure used to
 hold the wires, and on the properties of everything.

 Insufficient data !

RE: [Vo]:E-cat : Minimum COP assuming worst mistakes possible

2014-10-14 Thread Robert Ellefson

McKubre’s point about the value of the implications of the input power step 
response is very important, and I entirely agree.  In terms of systems 
analysis, when you have an input step function, the derivative of that input 
then becomes an approximation of the Dirac delta function, otherwise known as 
an impulse function.   Sending an impulse through a system transfer function 
yields the transfer function itself, which is pretty handy to have.  I’m glad 
that the testers included this step, and I think we all need to pay close 
attention to it.

 

-Bob

 

 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 1:10 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-cat : Minimum COP assuming worst mistakes possible

 

Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com mailto:alain.sep...@gmail.com  wrote: 

*   is there a simple way , with minimal assumption, to be sure that the 
COP1

Look at the color. If it is dull red, it may be around 750°C which is where you 
would expect it to be in a straight line extrapolation calibration up to 800 W. 
If it is white it has to be around 1300°C, which is far higher than the 
calibration indicates it should be. A calibration curve will bend down. It 
never bends up. McKubre pointed this out:

 

On page 7 of the report the authors state: “Subsequent calculation proved that 
increasing the input by roughly 100 watts had caused an increase of about 700 
watts in power emitted.” This is interesting. The shape of the output vs. input 
power curve is observed (or implied) to strongly curve upwards in a manner 
completely inconsistent with the Stefan-Boltzmann law for radiative heat loss. 
It is also inconsistent with simple convective heat transfer but several issues 
need to be addressed before we can claim this as a qualitative or even 
“semi-quantitative” measure of excess heat production . . .

 

Note that incandescent colors are similar for all materials.

 

- Jed

[Vo]:Testing fuels without a reactor

2014-10-14 Thread Robert Ellefson


Given the results of the SIMS analysis from the Lugano report, particularly
as detailed in this posting:
  http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98596.html

I believe that it is possible to evaluate the nuclear activity of candidate
fuel samples simply by sputter-cleaning them as part of a ToF-SIMS analysis.
If researchers with access to such analytic equipment were willing to run
the experiment, I believe that a successful replication of Rossi's reaction
can be observed occurring with before-and-after spectra of the fuel.

So, skip the reactors, start evaluating powders in the SEM itself!

I sure hope this helps,
-Bob Ellefson

Re: [Vo]:E-cat Lugano demo probably had no output.

done, not much point in doing more exhaustive calculations without better
knowledge of construction and dimensions, but the big guess with regard to
wire area doesn't make much if any difference considering nature of black
body cavity receiving surface that is inner wall of finned tube.  I think
the conclusion that the finned wall is only around 1000°C is pretty strong,
so I'll be interested to see what if any response or objections are stacked
up.

I am hugely excited about the prospects of LENR - and actually stand to do
very well commercially from it, but this first-principles evaluation of the
Lugano test makes it look like it was another bust with at best very low
COP :(

A curse upon perpetrators of poor calorimetry!

On 13 October 2014 18:46, Marcus Haber tr...@gmx.de wrote:

 Hello Robert!

 Why dont u go over to
 http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/722-Ask-questions-to-the-Working-Group-ECAT-long-term-test/?postID=1386#post1386
 and tell the professors doing the test about ur concerns regarding the
 temperature measurement?
 But maybe it would be helpful to do some real calculations first. Coming
 with crude ones is probably not enough...

 Regards
 Marcus

  *Gesendet:* Montag, 13. Oktober 2014 um 07:11 Uhr
 *Von:* Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
 *An:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Betreff:* [Vo]:E-cat Lugano demo probably had no output.
  Appears that there was an inner reactor vessel wrapped with helical
 resistance wires (hence shadows) from size of wires and necessary wall
 thicknesses this vessel is likely around 12mm diameter.

 Inner wall area of outer finned tube about Ø18mm, 0.2m long  .0113m²

 Inconel metal resistance wires can only survive a maximum of about 1350°C
 without melting (actually probably lower than that over a month long period)

 From photo 12a/12b the wires appear to be covering less than half of the
 core reactor vessel, giving them an area of (estimate) .005m² (this is only
 a guess)  We know that they dissipate 900W of electricity, and inconel has
 emissivity of around 0.7.

 In order for finned tube inner wall to absorb 900W from the wires at
 1350°C they would need to be around 1000°C.  At that temperature they would
 also transfer approximately 900W to the external environment via radiation
 and convection.

 If the inner reactor was any hotter or adding any heat to the system then
 it would necessarily increase the finned tube wall temperature to increase
 dissipation to environment, that would in turn increase the wire
 temperature greatly, including a further bump from the radiative heat
 transfer from reactor to resistance wires, increasing their temperature to
 far above the point of failure.

 These numbers are only approximate (this is a crude calculation only), but
 I think that quantitatively at least it appears that there is a strong
 possibility that this demo was producing little if any power, based on
 pretty simple physical constraints.  And most certainly not the 3.8 COP
 claimed.

 As to the explanation for the high temp readings - I suspect the IR camera
 was picking up the colour of the resistance wires and inner reactor vessel
 body through the partially transparent alumina to give an artificially high
 temperature reading.

Re: [Vo]:E-cat Lugano demo probably had no output.

I've just realised that if my no-LENR output power conclusion is sound,
then Rossi is in serious trouble trying to explain the Ni62 ash.  Could be
the end of him.

On 13 October 2014 20:11, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
wrote:

 done, not much point in doing more exhaustive calculations without better
 knowledge of construction and dimensions, but the big guess with regard to
 wire area doesn't make much if any difference considering nature of black
 body cavity receiving surface that is inner wall of finned tube.  I think
 the conclusion that the finned wall is only around 1000°C is pretty strong,
 so I'll be interested to see what if any response or objections are stacked
 up.

 I am hugely excited about the prospects of LENR - and actually stand to do
 very well commercially from it, but this first-principles evaluation of the
 Lugano test makes it look like it was another bust with at best very low
 COP :(

 A curse upon perpetrators of poor calorimetry!

 On 13 October 2014 18:46, Marcus Haber tr...@gmx.de wrote:

 Hello Robert!

 Why dont u go over to
 http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/722-Ask-questions-to-the-Working-Group-ECAT-long-term-test/?postID=1386#post1386
 and tell the professors doing the test about ur concerns regarding the
 temperature measurement?
 But maybe it would be helpful to do some real calculations first. Coming
 with crude ones is probably not enough...

 Regards
 Marcus

  *Gesendet:* Montag, 13. Oktober 2014 um 07:11 Uhr
 *Von:* Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
 *An:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Betreff:* [Vo]:E-cat Lugano demo probably had no output.
  Appears that there was an inner reactor vessel wrapped with helical
 resistance wires (hence shadows) from size of wires and necessary wall
 thicknesses this vessel is likely around 12mm diameter.

 Inner wall area of outer finned tube about Ø18mm, 0.2m long  .0113m²

 Inconel metal resistance wires can only survive a maximum of about 1350°C
 without melting (actually probably lower than that over a month long period)

 From photo 12a/12b the wires appear to be covering less than half of the
 core reactor vessel, giving them an area of (estimate) .005m² (this is only
 a guess)  We know that they dissipate 900W of electricity, and inconel has
 emissivity of around 0.7.

 In order for finned tube inner wall to absorb 900W from the wires at
 1350°C they would need to be around 1000°C.  At that temperature they would
 also transfer approximately 900W to the external environment via radiation
 and convection.

 If the inner reactor was any hotter or adding any heat to the system then
 it would necessarily increase the finned tube wall temperature to increase
 dissipation to environment, that would in turn increase the wire
 temperature greatly, including a further bump from the radiative heat
 transfer from reactor to resistance wires, increasing their temperature to
 far above the point of failure.

 These numbers are only approximate (this is a crude calculation only),
 but I think that quantitatively at least it appears that there is a strong
 possibility that this demo was producing little if any power, based on
 pretty simple physical constraints.  And most certainly not the 3.8 COP
 claimed.

 As to the explanation for the high temp readings - I suspect the IR
 camera was picking up the colour of the resistance wires and inner reactor
 vessel body through the partially transparent alumina to give an
 artificially high temperature reading.

Re: [Vo]:Determining the transmittance . . . of semitransparent materials at elevated temperatures

The system is way too complex for thermography to be able to deal with.  I
note that most black-body radiation for 1400°C:
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/131016/ncomms3630/images_article/ncomms3630-f4.jpg
has majority of emission at 4um where the alumina transmittance appears
relatively high in that fig 6

But a key factor is that even with only 10% transmittance if the alumina is
relatively cool - say 1000°C then with 0.4 emissivity the power it is
radiating is only about 2x that of the much higher radiative output 1350°C
inconel wires+core reactor behind it.

Even worse, because the transmittance drops off at longer wavelengths the
power transmitted will be mostly at shorter wavelengths it will make the
resulting spectrum look hotter than it actually is, which will skew the
spectrum seen by the camera sees towards something that looks like a much
higher temperatures.

That is going to produce serious over-reading in temperature.

This is all looking worse and worse the more I see.


On 13 October 2014 22:35, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

 The good news : In fig 6 the transmittance of alumina drops off by 5um,,
 and drops off quicker at higher temperatures.

 The bad news : In fig 7 the emittance varies greatly by wavelength (1.0 to
 0.15), and also  varies by temperature.
 Levi et al do not mention the variation by wavelength, only temperature
 (Fig 6, plot1).

 I don't know whether the IR camera system takes this into account.

 And we still have the problem of a system calibrated at 450C being used at
 1400C
 --
 *From: *Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent: *Monday, October 13, 2014 6:23:11 AM
 *Subject: *[Vo]:Determining the transmittance . . . of semitransparent
 materials at  elevated temperatures


 A corespondent sent me this link:


 http://www.eurotherm2008.tue.nl/Proceedings_Eurotherm2008/papers/Radiation/RAD_6.pdf

 He commented: My interpretation of figure 6 is that the tranmissivity of
 alumina goes down to zero. Hence, this shows the arguments about alumina
 translucency are moot.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Determining the transmittance . . . of semitransparent materials at elevated temperatures

2014-10-13 Thread Robert Dorr



The cameras were already calibrated by their respective manufacturers as 
stated on page 4 of the report, All the instruments used during the 
test are property of the authors of the present paper, and were 
calibrated in their respective manufacturers’ laboratories. Moreover, 
once in Lugano, a further check was made to ensure that the PCEs and the 
IR cameras were not yielding anomalous readings. So I see no reason to 
recalibrate over and over. They checked for anomalous readings and none 
were found.


Robert Dorr



On 10/13/2014 8:19 AM, Jones Beene wrote:


*From:* Jed Rothwell

2) They did not calibrate above 450 C and this was not done ON ORDERS 
FROM ROSSI


JR: It does not say that anywhere.

Please read the report carefully  before making silly rationalizations.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4040/8382 - Release Date: 10/13/14

[Vo]:Does species 69 evolve in-situ during fuel sputter-cleaning within SEM vacuum chamber?

2014-10-13 Thread Robert Ellefson


Looking closely at figures 5-8 of appendix 3 of the Lugano report, I believe
we can see evidence for the evolution of a mass 69 species during
sputter-cleaning of the samples while undergoing ToF-SIMS analysis in a
scanning electron microscope.  

Figure 5 provides what amounts to a control run for these observations, with
only a carbon sticker present.The mass 69 peak in the spectrum is barely
visible, way down in the noise.  My rough estimate from zoomed-in analysis
of the printed graph gives a count of ~530, or 5.3E+2.

Figure 6 shows the mass spectrum for raw fuel grains before
sputter-cleaning, and the mass 69 peak is still way down in the noise,
although in the graph the count is approximately 6.0E+3 - somewhat higher,
but most notably, the 69 peak is a small fraction of the Ni-60 and Ni-58
peaks.

Figure 7 shows the mass spectrum for the same raw fuel grains following 180
seconds of sputter-cleaning.   Besides the absence of (presumed) siloxane
peaks, there is now a robust mass 69 peak, ~3.0E+4, which is nearly equal in
magnitude to the mass 60 peak.  I believe that this peak indicates evolution
of the mass 69 in-situ during sputter-cleaning, likely as an intermediate
product in the nickel-lithium cyclic reaction which is driving the observed
enrichment processes.

Following an additional 16 hours of inactive storage in the SEM vacuum
chamber, figure 8 shows the same sample material now has the siloxane
signature apparent once again, but the mass 69 signal is appearing with the
same relative abundance as the mass 60 peak.

I do not have any direct experience with SEM analysis methods, and I am not
entirely certain what the significance of the ion source enrichment in Ga-69
implies.  However, I have a difficult time reconciling this series of graphs
with the notion that this peak-69 is occurring as purely instrument
artifact, owing to the great variability in abundance.

In addition, I highly suspect that peak 23 represents a reactant, despite
the warnings from the report text that this could be an artifact.  Once
again, I am hoping for further clarification from experts in ToF-SIMS
analysis to help clarify these interpretations.

-Bob Ellefson

RE: [Vo]:Does species 69 evolve in-situ during fuel sputter-cleaning within SEM vacuum chamber?

2014-10-13 Thread Robert Ellefson

I forgot to add in my original message that I believe figure 11 of appendix
3 further demonstrates that the magnitude of the species 69 signal seen in
the spectra in figures 7 and 8 is not the direct byproduct of the
sputter-cleaning process, because it does not show a similar post-sputtering
69 peak.

-Bob


 -Original Message-
 From: Robert Ellefson
 Sent: Monday, October 13, 2014 11:37 AM

 Looking closely at figures 5-8 of appendix 3 of the Lugano report, I
believe
 we can see evidence for the evolution of a mass 69 species during
 sputter-cleaning of the samples while undergoing ToF-SIMS analysis in a
 scanning electron microscope.
 
 Figure 5 provides what amounts to a control run for these observations,
with
 only a carbon sticker present.The mass 69 peak in the spectrum is
barely
 visible, way down in the noise.  My rough estimate from zoomed-in analysis
 of the printed graph gives a count of ~530, or 5.3E+2.
 
 Figure 6 shows the mass spectrum for raw fuel grains before
 sputter-cleaning, and the mass 69 peak is still way down in the noise,
 although in the graph the count is approximately 6.0E+3 - somewhat higher,
 but most notably, the 69 peak is a small fraction of the Ni-60 and Ni-58
 peaks.
 
 Figure 7 shows the mass spectrum for the same raw fuel grains following
180
 seconds of sputter-cleaning.   Besides the absence of (presumed) siloxane
 peaks, there is now a robust mass 69 peak, ~3.0E+4, which is nearly equal
in
 magnitude to the mass 60 peak.  I believe that this peak indicates
evolution
 of the mass 69 in-situ during sputter-cleaning, likely as an intermediate
 product in the nickel-lithium cyclic reaction which is driving the
observed
 enrichment processes.
 
 Following an additional 16 hours of inactive storage in the SEM vacuum
 chamber, figure 8 shows the same sample material now has the siloxane
 signature apparent once again, but the mass 69 signal is appearing with
the
 same relative abundance as the mass 60 peak.
 
 I do not have any direct experience with SEM analysis methods, and I am
not
 entirely certain what the significance of the ion source enrichment in
Ga-69
 implies.  However, I have a difficult time reconciling this series of
graphs
 with the notion that this peak-69 is occurring as purely instrument
 artifact, owing to the great variability in abundance.
 
 In addition, I highly suspect that peak 23 represents a reactant, despite
 the warnings from the report text that this could be an artifact.  Once
 again, I am hoping for further clarification from experts in ToF-SIMS
 analysis to help clarify these interpretations.
 
 -Bob Ellefson

Re: [Vo]:An expert reviewed and approves of this configuration