Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Jones Beene wrote: > Defkalion has been burdened with poor management, too few qualified > scientists . . . I do not know how many scientists they have. > - and a flawed business plan. Dumber than dumb. Their business > plan envisioned charging extremely high up-front license fees for every > country. This is/was idiotic without very strong results indicating "ready > for market"... I have to agree. I was assuming they did have "market ready" technology. I think it is clear they got ahead of themselves, and they do not have it. If they had had what they claimed, their plan would have been viable. It would still be grandiose in my opinion. Thus, when it comes to managerial expectation, a COP of less than 3 would > completely ruin their former business plan - which looks already dead in > the > water to everyone else. Well, the low COP is a problem, but the main problem is the thing is a tabletop experimental unit. It does not run reliably. It is far from being market ready. There are rumors they have a market-ready one hidden away. I doubt it, because if they did, why hide it?!? Why not show it to NASA? > But think about this: those who are in it for the science, and many of us > here on vortex, see things differently to the extent that a PROVED result > of > far lower COP- say it was 200 watts-in on average, and say 300 watts out, > on > average, for a COP of half of what they claim - WOW - this would be true > beauty - phenomenal, state-of-the-art really, at least when proved, and > replicated by others! > Proved, reliable anything would be fine with me. 200 watts or 20. However, as I said before, I honestly do not understand this widespread obsession with the so-called COP. As I said it is *not* a COP in the technical sense. There is no "production" or conversion of input to output in any sense. More important: If you have a stable, controlled reaction, you can have any COP you like. There is no doubt cold fusion reactions with no input (an "infinite COP") are possible. Even if periodic input is needed the duty cycle can be set low. If you do *not* have a stable, controlled reaction, it does not matter how high the COP is. Your reactor is still not practical. It has no market value in its present state. Reactors that explode have a very high COP for a fraction of a second, but it does no good. Nobody wants that. In short, the only thing that matters is stability and control. Once you have them, you can get everything else: high power, a high COP, high temperatures, high Carnot efficiency. Test after test has shown that cold fusion reactions can have all these qualities, but without control they are useless. A controlled reaction at a fraction of a watt would be more significant that Rossi's megawatt reactor. When I say "control" I mean the ability to turn on, turn up and down (modulate), and turn off. This ability does not have to be as instantaneous the way it is with an electric light, or a gasoline motor controlled by a throttle. It might have a built-in lag, like the controls at a coal-fired power plant, or even a uranium fission power plant. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Good old dark matter/energy. You know it is working when your device malfunctions. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Wednesday, October 24, 2012, Terry Blanton wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Jones Beene > > > wrote: > > > True, even Celani is not yet > > independently replicated, at least not on the record, but insiders think > the > > first replication will be published soon. > > It looks like HUG might have experienced a "LENR event". > > http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/97-burn-out-event-data > >
RE: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
It's just a "DETACHMENT event". Let's hope them to find something interresting after the ongoing calibration. > -Original Message- > From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] > Sent: mercredi 24 octobre 2012 20:27 > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Jones Beene > wrote: > > > True, even Celani is not yet > > independently replicated, at least not on the record, but insiders > > think the first replication will be published soon. > > It looks like HUG might have experienced a "LENR event". > > http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/97-burn-out-event-data >
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > True, even Celani is not yet > independently replicated, at least not on the record, but insiders think the > first replication will be published soon. It looks like HUG might have experienced a "LENR event". http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/97-burn-out-event-data
RE: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
-Original Message- From: Robert Lynn I can only surmise that Defkalion prevented publication, which would contradict their earlier statements about allowing independent testers to publish. Hiding poor results? Yes - I think they are hiding results, but "poor" in this context, is a bit like "beauty" since it is "in the eye of the beholder"... at least in one sense. In short, they could be hiding decent results. Defkalion has been burdened with poor management, too few qualified scientists - and a flawed business plan. Dumber than dumb. Their business plan envisioned charging extremely high up-front license fees for every country. This is/was idiotic without very strong results indicating "ready for market"... Not to mention the dishonesty of their past claims, such as the Xanthi fiasco. Thus, when it comes to managerial expectation, a COP of less than 3 would completely ruin their former business plan - which looks already dead in the water to everyone else. They thought they could salvage some of that plan, perhaps, with a modest COP over 3, and maybe they had hints of this level at times. But since they are in dire circumstances now - they cannot even afford the move to Canada due to almost all of their investors "going south" so to speak, they had to resort to shoddy practices - once again. But think about this: those who are in it for the science, and many of us here on vortex, see things differently to the extent that a PROVED result of far lower COP- say it was 200 watts-in on average, and say 300 watts out, on average, for a COP of half of what they claim - WOW - this would be true beauty - phenomenal, state-of-the-art really, at least when proved, and replicated by others! At this point in time - when you look at what seems to be defensible proof of operation of any LENR device over 10 watts, for far longer than chemical energy would permit- what is really out-there that one can point to? Celani only. In short, if we demand the kind of proof that professionals like those at N.I. can give, with open replications in progress - then Rossi is out, no proof - likewise Brillouin, Piantelli, the Toyota consortium and the rest are out - so there is really only Celani. True, even Celani is not yet independently replicated, at least not on the record, but insiders think the first replication will be published soon. It is possible DGT "could have" already achieved more than Celani ... but less than what they need to sell absurd licenses. And a DGT with good management should have been proud to present more modest results, if they had it. But yes, if what they can prove is COP of 1.5 (guess) then for them it would be - not just poor results, but a complete deal-breaker, if you are trying to sell a license to someone for $50 million. Jones <>
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Robert Lynn wrote: So if they funded the trip then why didn't they publish any results? > Because they are under NDAs. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
So if they funded the trip then why didn't they publish any results? After all they are a charity that is trying to promote and expand LENR research - and publishing good results would surely help this. I can only surmise that Defkalion prevented publication, which would contradict their earlier statements about allowing independent testers to publish. Hiding poor results? On 23 October 2012 18:59, Akira Shirakawa wrote: > On 2012-10-22 14:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: >> >> Hello group, > > > As a side note, it appears that the entity which funded Michael A. Nelson's > traveling expenses was not the "Free Energy Foundation", but rather the "New > Energy Foundation". This correction comes from Mark Gibbs of Forbes. See [1] > and footnotes on [2]. > > The New Energy Foundation is none other than: > http://www.infinite-energy.com/whoarewe/whoarewe.html > > Cheers, > S.A. > > [1] > http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/10/20/cold-fusion-gets-a-little-more-real/2/ > [2] > http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/10/20/cold-fusion-gets-a-little-more-real/3/ >
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
On 2012-10-22 14:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, As a side note, it appears that the entity which funded Michael A. Nelson's traveling expenses was not the "Free Energy Foundation", but rather the "New Energy Foundation". This correction comes from Mark Gibbs of Forbes. See [1] and footnotes on [2]. The New Energy Foundation is none other than: http://www.infinite-energy.com/whoarewe/whoarewe.html Cheers, S.A. [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/10/20/cold-fusion-gets-a-little-more-real/2/ [2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2012/10/20/cold-fusion-gets-a-little-more-real/3/
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
A theory that might explain how this excess high energy electron charge forms in response to a spark in a pressurized gas is as follows: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_oscillation Plasma oscillations, also known as "Langmuir waves" (after Irving Langmuir), are rapid oscillations of the electron density in conducting media such as plasmas or metals. The oscillations can be described as instability in the dielectric function of a free electron gas. The frequency that the electron cloud oscillates at only depends weakly on the wavelength. The quasiparticle resulting from the quantization of these oscillations is the plasmon. Consider neutral plasma, consisting of a collection of an equal number of positively charged ions and paired negatively charged electrons. If one displaces by a tiny amount all of the electrons with respect to the ions, the Coulomb force pulls back, acting as a restoring force. Therefore, the Coulomb force sets up oscillating electron waves. These electron waves will have a “plasma frequency” proportional to the density of electrons per unit volume. A dense cloud of electrons will oscillate strongly at a high plasma frequency. If the gas is dense and heavy, the free electrons will be some low fraction of the neutral atoms present. The intact electron shells of the neutral atoms will shield the electrons from their associated ions, and the electrons will continue to be shielded from their ions and be continually repelled off the neutral atoms. High gas pressure and/or the presence of heavy gas molecules (potassium) will increase the force of the plasma oscillations which will produce an increased electrostatic repulsive force. In more detail, an atom with a large number of electrons in orbit around its nucleus like potasium and argon will strongly shield and repel a high energy free electron increasing the plasma oscillation. Also, such heavy neutral atoms/molecules/clusters will have a far longer repulsive Coulomb force range than will lighter atoms. Because of the Pauli Exclusion Principle as well as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle , the individual electrons in the oscillating cloud will become degenerate (high energy) becoming more and more energetic as the cloud grows bigger. This will tend to keep the electrons from getting back together with their associated ions because of a quantum orbital energy mismatch. This keeps the cloud ionized indefinitely until the stranded electron charge cloud can find a path to ground as a high energy feedback current. In more detail. because of the Pauli Exclusion Principle as well as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle , the individual electrons in the oscillating electron cloud vibrating in the plasma will become degenerate (increase high energy) becoming more and more energetic as the cloud grows bigger. Electron degeneracy pressure is a particular manifestation of the more general phenomenon of quantum degeneracy pressure. Degenerate matter in physics is a collection of free, non-interacting particles with a pressure and other physical characteristics determined by quantum mechanical effects. It is the counterpart of an ideal gas in classical mechanics. The degenerate state of matter (in the sense of deviant from an ideal gas) arises at extraordinarily high density The Pauli Exclusion Principle disallows two half integer spin particles (fermions) from simultaneously occupying the same quantum state. Two electrons cannot obit an atomic nucleus in the same orbital track. The resulting emergent repulsive force is manifested as a pressure against compression of matter into smaller volumes of space. Likewise, electron degeneracy pressure results from the same underlying mechanism that defines the electron orbital structure of elemental matter. This is similar to the game of musical chairs. In the game of musical chairs, if there are more people marching around the line of chairs while the music is playing, when the music stops, there will be people left standing. The energy levels of these homeless electrons go up as they seek higher electron obits to fill. This will tend to keep the electrons from getting back together with their associated ions because of a quantum orbital energy mismatch. This keeps the cloud ionized indefinitely until the stranded electron charge cloud can find a path to ground as a high energy feedback current. Drilling down on this in a quantum mechanical description, free particles limited to a finite volume may only take a discrete set of energies, called discrete quantum states. The Pauli Exclusion Principle prevents identical fermions from occupying the same quantum state. At lowest total energy (when the thermal energy of the particles is negligible), all the lowest energy quantum states are filled. This state is referred to as full degeneracy. Adding more electrons and/or reducing the number of orbital slots that electrons can fill will force the particles into higher-energy quantum stat
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
I was just looking over the documentation and I saw something that does not make sense. In the step 1 triggering process it is claimed that the separation of diatomic hydrogen into individual atoms is an endothermic process. There is a discussion where it is said that this is done electrically so I wonder why the temperature takes such a large dip during this period? I also observe that the reference unit shows a drop during this region of triggering although less apparent. Are we to assume that energy is also being withdrawn from the interior of the chamber to separate the hydrogen molecules? And one might also ask if there is reason to think that the pressure of the new gas mixture is reduced as well to contribute to the energy requirement? The document states that the reference curve is of a device that does not have nickel powder installed. Are the other ingredients present? It makes me wonder about the behavior of the potassium in this situation. This might be a strange question, but if one takes hydrogen gas and ionizes it completely so that you only have a proton and a free electron, does the proton tend to be attracted to the conductive walls of the chamber and become absorbed? Of course the same question arises about the electrons that are now freed. I ask this question as I seek an explanation for the missing temperature while the device is being triggered. Dave
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
“John Hadjichristos explained that the amount of time the electron of a polarized H atom is close enough to the nucleus to appear to be a virtual neutron (stage 2) is 1 x 10-17 seconds.” This conjecture is not accurate. The excited hydrogen atom would have a quantum number in the neighborhood of 100 more or less. That means that the electron orbit will be near circular. The polycrystalline nature of the nickel micropowder will convert this excited hydrogen to ions(protons) using patch fields. The production of Neutron like hydrogen quasiparticles is an incorrect conjecture. To prove this experimentally, positively bias the nickel powder electrostatically and the DGT reaction will stop because the excited hydrogen will be repelled from the surface of the nickel powder. Also, imposing a positive electrostatic bias on the nickel powder will disrupt the Anderson localization of heavy electrons in the vicinity of the micropowder tubules. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_localization DGT must now feel that their six new patent applications protect them from competitive disadvantage so they now feel free to confirm our speculations about their reaction. Cheers:Axil On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Terry Blanton wrote: > > Nothing we had not surmised.
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Nothing we had not surmised.
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Professionally I'm devastated to see that... Technically very interesting. not much secret hopefully. Most was in their ICCF17 article. Happy to see Potassium confirmed... Human factor comments are very interesting. tell more than the measures. Too bad it is "fruit of the poisonous tree". no pathoskeptic will accept it. 2012/10/22 Jed Rothwell > Every page in this document is marked "Extremely Confidential." Evidently > that does not mean much at Defkalion. > > - Jed > >
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
On 2012-10-22 14:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: The document (I suggest saving a copy in case it gets deleted): http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf Compare the document above with this one: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Nelson-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf They look similar, don't they? I think it was supposed to be a presentation for internal use, probably not something "on behalf of Dr. Michael Melich". Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Old stuff, I think it is proof that this technology is very different from Rossi's. Peter On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Akira Shirakawa wrote: > On 2012-10-22 14:24, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> Every page in this document is marked "Extremely >> Confidential." Evidently that does not mean much at Defkalion. >> > > I don't get all this confidentiality either. > > Cheers, > S.A. > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
On 2012-10-22 14:24, Jed Rothwell wrote: Every page in this document is marked "Extremely Confidential." Evidently that does not mean much at Defkalion. I don't get all this confidentiality either. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
On 2012-10-22 14:14, Akira Shirakawa wrote: The document (I suggest saving a copy in case it gets deleted): http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf By the way, I think it's important to point out that this document is dated March 2012, while the other two currently available for download are from September 2012 (differently than what I assumed in my opening post). On his March visit to DGT labs, Micheal A. Nelson hadn't had yet the chance to witness a DGT reactor demonstration. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Every page in this document is marked "Extremely Confidential." Evidently that does not mean much at Defkalion. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Atomic Hydrogen with potassium as a catalyst? Doesn't this sound an awful lot like Mill's work in the 90s? Craig On 10/22/2012 08:14 AM, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, It appears that the pdf documents with redacted names wasn't the only one which sort of "leaked" from early uploads put on the official Defkalion GT forums and hastily replaced with different ones. Apparently there was another one, formatted as a presentation and signed by Micheal A. Nelson, which describes more in detail his visit do Defkalion GT labs. Congratulations to ecatnews.com blog for the timing in picking this up. http://ecatnews.com/?p=2464 The document (I suggest saving a copy in case it gets deleted): http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:More leaked (?) info from Defkalion GT
Hello group, It appears that the pdf documents with redacted names wasn't the only one which sort of "leaked" from early uploads put on the official Defkalion GT forums and hastily replaced with different ones. Apparently there was another one, formatted as a presentation and signed by Micheal A. Nelson, which describes more in detail his visit do Defkalion GT labs. Congratulations to ecatnews.com blog for the timing in picking this up. http://ecatnews.com/?p=2464 The document (I suggest saving a copy in case it gets deleted): http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf Cheers, S.A.
