Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[albedo5]

Wouldn't any pussy (cat) on this list be named Schrödinger?  :)

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 7:21 AM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:

> 
> hope we can also manage to reverse engineer these hot felines along the
> way.
>
>

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[.:.gotjosh]

I guess that makes comments like this one:
"It is a little unusual to see someone viciously attack himself." even more
meta-bizarre...

complex crew around here... guess its gonna take me some time to learn the
ropes...
;)

hope we can also manage to reverse engineer these hot felines along the way.

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 14:06, Terry Blanton  wrote:

> Jed and Jones are
> alter egos of Robert Park who frequently argues with himself on this
> list.
>
>

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson]

>From gotjosh:

> Its really entertaining and all, but do you two really have to
> pollute every single thread with this stuff? are you twin brothers
> from a former life who just bicker constantly as a way of
> showing love?

Adding to Terry's "Kommentary" Jones and Rothwell have been known to
spar with each other on occasion. (This is nothing new! I suspect they
simply rub each other the wrong way, and there's nothing much we can
do about that other than not get between them!  ;-) ) I personally
perceive this particular incident as having gotten, perhaps, a little
more heated than usual, but not unduly so. Heated or not, I tend to
learn interesting stuff digesting the POVs expressed from both sides
of the fence. Keep in mind the fact there really was no character
assassination going on here, the hallmark of a flame war. The only
items being assassinated here were the other person's opinions and
personal perceptions concerning the accumulation of "scientific
evidence" (or more precisely the alleged lack of it). As one can see,
opinions on such matters can occasionally get passionate within the
Vort Collective.

Personally, I didn't perceive this latest exchange as "pollution".
More like an unstable but interesting warm front. ;-) Speaking of warm
fronts, we could use one in the Midwest. There's snow on the ground in
Madison, Wisconsin. I thought we were done with this white stuff!

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

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:49 AM, .:.gotjosh  wrote:
> Its really entertaining and all, but do you two really have to pollute every
> single thread with this stuff? are you twin brothers from a former life who
> just bicker constantly as a way of showing love?

Being a newcomer, you probably do not realize that Jed and Jones are
alter egos of Robert Park who frequently argues with himself on this
list.

Warm regards,

Terry

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[.:.gotjosh]

Its really entertaining and all, but do you two really have to pollute every
single thread with this stuff? are you twin brothers from a former life who
just bicker constantly as a way of showing love?

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 02:25, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>
>> Still great but at a level which is consistent of my predicted COP in the
>> Swedish testing of COP of 10.
>>
>
> Get your story straight! Your prediction was "at least 1000:1" not 10.
> Right here:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg45088.html
>
>
>
>
>> Again – before the flood of denials, character assassination and finger
>> pointing . . .
>>
>
> You are assassinating your own character! First you say 1000:1, then you
> angrily say that your own assertion is "insane slander with no basis in
> fact." That is correct: it is insane slander. But you yourself said it. It
> is a little unusual to see someone viciously attack himself.
>
> You could retract, I suppose.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[.:.gotjosh]

It might talk a bit longer.  They don't actually *have* and ECat yet.
I would be surprised if they get one any time soon.


I concur.

Erik Furberg
April 17th, 2011 at 7:19
AM

Dear Mr. Rossi,

Its nice to hear that you will deliver your devices to University of Uppsala
and to the University of Stockolm. When will you deliver to them and do you
know if it is possible to go there and see the device in action?

Andrea Rossi
April 17th, 2011 at 8:39
AM

Dear Mr Erik Furberg:
We are organizing. I suppose it will be at the same time when we will
deliver the 1 MW plant in Greece.
Warm regards,
A.R.

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:


> Still great but at a level which is consistent of my predicted COP in the
> Swedish testing of COP of 10.
>

Get your story straight! Your prediction was "at least 1000:1" not 10. Right
here:

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg45088.html




> Again – before the flood of denials, character assassination and finger
> pointing . . .
>

You are assassinating your own character! First you say 1000:1, then you
angrily say that your own assertion is "insane slander with no basis in
fact." That is correct: it is insane slander. But you yourself said it. It
is a little unusual to see someone viciously attack himself.

You could retract, I suppose.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[Terry Blanton]

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Again – before the flood of denials, character assassination and finger
> pointing – let’s wait a couple of days for the Swedish results, please.

It might talk a bit longer.  They don't actually *have* and ECat yet.

I would be surprised if they get one any time soon.

T

RE: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[Mark Iverson]

RE: reference for the 50 reactors at 20kW...
>From the very recent posting of "Rossi's Hints" on peswiki that Jed and 
>several others have
contributed to...
http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_A._Rossi_Cold_Fusion_Generator:Rossi's_Hints
 
I have to take issue with your insistence that even the Feb test was only about 
3kW... but it really
doesn't matter at this point... I think it was more but he was operating it at 
the edge of what the
heat exchange rate could xfer rendering it a bit unstable.  Given a good 
thermodynamics engineer,
there's no doubt that reactor designs could be built with more than adequate 
heat exchange
performance to scale it back up.
 
Regardless of who's 'right' about the details, I think things are moving along 
way faster than any
of us would have anticipated since we've seen true frauds out there that drag 
the spectacle out for
years!  Thanks to Rossi's willingness to entrust some units to others to test, 
which can't be an
easy thing to do, the establishment of the reality of the technology is really 
picking up steam!
;-) 
 
Meow,

-Mark

  _  

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 4:24 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]: shrinking felines



Mark - For future reference - when did he mention 50 reactors at 20 kW ?

 

Moving on. Awkshully, and in complete candor - as for the rest of it - this 
appears to be consistent
with what we would expect from the same identical reactor as in the Jan demo, 
but with a present
realization (or reappraisal) that the initial output was exaggerated by 
incorrect testing (the junk
data that I have been referring too, with little support from other vorticians) 
. and that in point
of fact, the large units were never much more than 3 kW to being with. Not 16, 
15, 12, or 10 but 3.

 

Still great but at a level which is consistent of my predicted COP in the 
Swedish testing of COP of
10.

 

I have made it abundantly clear by now, that the assertion (which I do not take 
credit for, but
which seems accurate): that wet steam gives the appearance of triple or more - 
the actual thermal
content of dry steam, is in fact the case here.

 

Again - before the flood of denials, character assassination and finger 
pointing - let's wait a
couple of days for the Swedish results, please.

 

Jones

 

From: Mark Iverson 

 

So Rossi has gone from:

 

  50 modules of 20 kW each  

130   "  10 kW units 

300   "3 kW each

 

or more poetically stated, from bobcat, to tom-cat, to kitty-cat!  :-)

 

So Steven Vincent Johnson's comment may prove insightful:



"However, there is a subtle point that might have been overlooked here.  
Consider the flip side. As
overall volume decreases excess surface area becomes LESS critical because what 
volume exists can
more easily escape - since all "volume" is relatively close to a surface area.  
Therefore... it IS
conceivable, from my POV, that Rossi's smaller e-kittins might be able to more 
efficiently transfer
heat due to their inherent smaller volume as compared to the bigger sisters, 
the e-cat."



 

Perhaps this is why the "production" units have been shrinking in size and 
power output... more
stability because heat exchanger has more room for excursions before going into 
steam flashing mode
(unstable).  Perhaps Rossi hasn't found a solution to the heat-exchanger issue 
-- or more likely,
hasn't had time since he's wasted hundreds of hours politely answering blog 
questions and doing
interviews!  So right now the simple solution is e-kittens.

 

-Mark

 

RE: [Vo]: shrinking felines

[Jones Beene]

Mark - For future reference - when did he mention 50 reactors at 20 kW ?

 

Moving on. Awkshully, and in complete candor - as for the rest of it - this
appears to be consistent with what we would expect from the same identical
reactor as in the Jan demo, but with a present realization (or reappraisal)
that the initial output was exaggerated by incorrect testing (the junk data
that I have been referring too, with little support from other vorticians) .
and that in point of fact, the large units were never much more than 3 kW to
being with. Not 16, 15, 12, or 10 but 3.

 

Still great but at a level which is consistent of my predicted COP in the
Swedish testing of COP of 10.

 

I have made it abundantly clear by now, that the assertion (which I do not
take credit for, but which seems accurate): that wet steam gives the
appearance of triple or more - the actual thermal content of dry steam, is
in fact the case here.

 

Again - before the flood of denials, character assassination and finger
pointing - let's wait a couple of days for the Swedish results, please.

 

Jones

 

From: Mark Iverson 

 

So Rossi has gone from:

 

  50 modules of 20 kW each  

130   "  10 kW units 

300   "3 kW each

 

or more poetically stated, from bobcat, to tom-cat, to kitty-cat!  :-)

 

So Steven Vincent Johnson's comment may prove insightful:



"However, there is a subtle point that might have been overlooked here.
Consider the flip side. As overall volume decreases excess surface area
becomes LESS critical because what volume exists can more easily escape -
since all "volume" is relatively close to a surface area.  Therefore... it
IS conceivable, from my POV, that Rossi's smaller e-kittins might be able to
more efficiently transfer heat due to their inherent smaller volume as
compared to the bigger sisters, the e-cat."



 

Perhaps this is why the "production" units have been shrinking in size and
power output... more stability because heat exchanger has more room for
excursions before going into steam flashing mode (unstable).  Perhaps Rossi
hasn't found a solution to the heat-exchanger issue -- or more likely,
hasn't had time since he's wasted hundreds of hours politely answering blog
questions and doing interviews!  So right now the simple solution is
e-kittens.

 

-Mark

 

[Vo]: shrinking felines

[Mark Iverson]

So Rossi has gone from:
 
  50 modules of 20 kW each  
130   "  10 kW units 
300   "3 kW each
 
or more poetically stated, from bobcat, to tom-cat, to kitty-cat!  :-)
 
So Steven Vincent Johnson's comment may prove insightful:

"However, there is a subtle point that might have been overlooked here.  
Consider the flip side. As
overall volume decreases excess surface area becomes LESS critical because what 
volume exists can
more easily escape - since all "volume" is relatively close to a surface area.  
Therefore... it IS
conceivable, from my POV, that Rossi's smaller e-kittins might be able to more 
efficiently transfer
heat due to their inherent smaller volume as compared to the bigger sisters, 
the e-cat."

 
Perhaps this is why the "production" units have been shrinking in size and 
power output... more
stability because heat exchanger has more room for excursions before going into 
steam flashing mode
(unstable).  Perhaps Rossi hasn't found a solution to the heat-exchanger issue 
-- or more likely,
hasn't had time since he's wasted hundreds of hours politely answering blog 
questions and doing
interviews!  So right now the simple solution is e-kittens.
 
-Mark