Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Alan J Fletcher]

http://lenr.qumbu.com/fake_rossi_ecat_v314.php
Preliminary Conclusion:
Because the horizontal arm was NOT inspected
"unwrapped", we have to assume it contained FAKE
material. The 6 hour test was NOT long enough to eliminate all of
the fakes.

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jed Rothwell]

Alan J Fletcher  wrote:



> Because the horizontal arm was *NOT* inspected "unwrapped", we have to
> assume it contained *FAKE* material. The 6 hour test was *NOT* long enough
> to eliminate all of the fakes.
>

What on *EARTH* is *THAT* supposed to mean? The horizontal arm contains a
mini-Rossi device. What do you think it contains? Chopped liver?!? (I guess
I should make that "Ravioli?!?")

How do know it was not unwrapped and inspected? This reminds me of the
assertion that professors are blindly inserting thermocouples into
they-know-now where. Do you know any professors who would do that? We are
talking about chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society!

I will grant, he has deceived himself into thinking Fleischmann and Pons
were a "flop" but I do not think he would be neglect to find out what is
inside the lower arm.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 03:34 PM 4/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Alan J Fletcher
 wrote:
 


Because the horizontal arm was NOT inspected
"unwrapped", we have to assume it contained FAKE material.
The 6 hour test was NOT long enough to eliminate all of the
fakes.


What on EARTH is THAT supposed to mean? The horizontal arm
contains a mini-Rossi device. What do you think it contains? Chopped
liver?!? (I guess I should make that "Ravioli?!?") 
How do know it was not unwrapped and inspected? This reminds me of the
assertion that professors are blindly inserting thermocouples into
they-know-now where. Do you know any professors who would do that? We are
talking about chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society!

...   which is surrounded by a 2 cm thick lead shield, as
stated by Rossi, and wrapped with insulation ..
I read "As stated by Rossi" as "He said so and
we believed him" -- not that "he previously stated it
but we inspected it"
They only show pictures of the Vertical arm unwrapped.  
I will grant, he has deceived
himself into thinking Fleischmann and Pons were a "flop" but I
do not think he would be neglect to find out what is inside the lower
arm.
ps -- Rossi says :
Andrea Rossi 

April 6th, 2011 at 5:50 AM 
Dear Mr Goran Crafte:
We all have been honoured from the attention to our work of Prof. Sven
Kullander and Prof. Hanno Essen. They displayed a strong knowledge of the
matter and we learnt from them: there was really much to learn, and we
did.
Their report is very interesting, I repeat the link:

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

Warm Regards,
Andrea Rossi

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 03:34 PM 4/6/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Alan J Fletcher
 wrote:
 
 


Because the horizontal arm was NOT inspected
"unwrapped", we have to assume it contained FAKE material.
The 6 hour test was NOT long enough to eliminate all of the
fakes.


What on EARTH is THAT supposed to mean? The horizontal arm
contains a mini-Rossi device. What do you think it contains? Chopped
liver?!? (I guess I should make that "Ravioli?!?") 
How do know it was not unwrapped and inspected? This reminds me of
the assertion that professors are blindly inserting thermocouples into
they-know-now where. Do you know any professors who would do that? We are
talking about chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society!

They SAY SO :


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

Discussion.

Since we do not have access to the internal design of the central fuel
container and no information on the external lead shielding and the
cooling water system we can only make very general comments.

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jed Rothwell]

Alan J Fletcher  wrote:


> *Discussion. * Since we do not have access to the internal design of the
> central fuel container and no information on the external lead shielding and
> the cooling water system we can only make very general comments.
>

I believe they "had access" to the external lead shielding. It only takes a
moment to remove it. In their report, they said:

"We had free access to the heater electric supply, to the inlet water hose,
to the outlet steam valve and water hose, and to the hydrogen gas feed
pipe."

That covers everything but the inner sancta sanctorum cell.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Alan J Fletcher]

At 11:43 AM 4/8/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Alan J Fletcher
 wrote:
 


Discussion.
Since we
do not have access to the internal design of the central fuel container
and no
information on the external lead shielding and the cooling water
system we can
only make very general comments. 


I believe they "had access" to the external lead shielding. It
only takes a moment to remove it. In their report, they said:
"We had free access to the heater electric supply, to the inlet
water hose, to the outlet steam valve and water hose, and to the hydrogen
gas feed pipe."
That covers everything but the inner sancta sanctorum
cell.
What part of NO INFORMATION did I misinterpret?
Latest version is at : 

http://lenr.qumbu.com/fake_rossi_ecat_v315.php
v314 got a mention on Randi : 
<
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=7064459&postcount=470
>
Here is another interesting text on the experiment:

http://lenr.qumbu.com/fake_rossi_ecat_v314.php 
H ... since they don't believe it. maybe I could act as Rossi's agent
to collect $1M . 

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jed Rothwell]

Alan J Fletcher  wrote:


> I believe they "had access" to the external lead shielding. It only takes a
> moment to remove it. In their report, they said:
> "We had free access to the heater electric supply, to the inlet water hose,
> to the outlet steam valve and water hose, and to the hydrogen gas feed
> pipe."
> That covers everything but the inner sancta sanctorum cell.
>
>
>
> What part of NO INFORMATION did I misinterpret?
>

You misinterpret "information" to mean "access" or "sight of."

They say they had free access to the inlet water hose and so on. Look at the
photo of the device. The components on that list includes everything but 50
ml inner cell. So your analysis should assume that hidden fuel has to fit
into that 50 ml. They had free access to everything else.

They say they have no "information" on two things: the lead shield, and the
cooling water system. The cooling water system is hidden in there with the
cell, under that copper bulge. It is the heat exchanger. "Information" on
the lead shield would be, I suppose, the mass of it or the purpose of it.

Even if we assume the shield was not removed, I can see practically
everything in Fig. 2 with the lead shield in place. I can estimate the
thickness of the insulation. And Fig. 4 shows the whole thing with the
shielding removed. So I not see what you are talking about.

I refer to the figures here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EssenHexperiment.pdf

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jed Rothwell]

Just to reiterate a little, the report says:

"Figures 1 and 2 below depict the insulated device used for the experiment
together with three spare devices."

It is obvious from Fig. 2 how big the pipes under the insulation are. You
can peek and see most of them where the H2 valve comes out.

Fig. 4 shows the insulated device with the top insulation removed. I do not
know if they went ahead and unwrapped the whole thing, but that does not
matter. You can see most of it from this photo. You can tell from the
thickness of the insulation and the size of the pipes going into the
remaining insulation, and the parts of the lower section uncovered, that
this is same kind of gadget as the other three spares. It
is conceivable that Rossi hid ~100 ml under there instead of 50 ml, but that
would have effect on the conclusions.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jed Rothwell]

. . . not AFFECT the conclusions.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Alan Fletcher]

A new version is up at 

http://lenr.qumbu.com/fake_rossi_ecat_frames_v316.php 

a) I added the new Swedish interview -comments link 
b) I added some new fake methods -- particularly Peter van Noorden's "water 
bypass" and a couple of quibbles from the Randi forum 
c) I've reorganized to use frames, with an index panel. 

RE: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jones Beene]

Alan Fletcher wrote:


> H ... since they don't believe it. maybe I could act as Rossi's agent
to collect $1M . 

 

Alan - I think someone should actually try this (arrange to be an Agent for
Rossi - to collect Randi's prize) . really. 

 

 

On a more sodden note, here is the best "Fake" alert dreamt-up yet, in terms
of the ease of pulling it off - for situation where the E-cat is cooled by a
direct connection to the building's water supply, as in Feb.

 

http://my.firedoglake.com/ruthcalvo/2010/12/09/big-downside-to-fracking-flam
mable-water/

 

IOW - all it would take for a dedicated scammer in the Feb testing, in
Rossi's factory building, would be to have a remote control switch to a
valve connected to the water line from a gas line (it could be far removed
from the experiment) such that once Levi gets the device started, and water
flowing - the culprit hits the 'remote' allowing a combustible gas into the
water. This could be triggered with a cell phone too.

 

The best choice of gas is not methane as seen in the above image but the
typical HHO gas from an electrolysis cell which can be hidden a long
distance away. It turns to steam but that is where the "chimney" comes in
handy.

 

In your "chimney" you need to condense all the steam from the HHO with a
colder water reflux raising the water temperature to what is seen. About 20
kW electric into one of the Epoch commercial HHO welders would make enough
HHO to produce 16 kW thermal heating. Here is where you can order one.

 

http://www.oxy-hydrogen.com/manufacturer/12460/12460.html

 

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene wrote:

On a more sodden note, here is the best "Fake" alert dreamt-up yet, in 
terms of the ease of pulling it off - for situation where the E-cat is 
cooled by a direct connection to the building's water supply, as in Feb.




Explain how this would work in the systems being sent to Uppsala and 
Stockholm Universities, and the 1 MW unit he will send to Defkalion. Do 
you think Rossi will send in a crew to secretly install the equipment 
needed to add gas to the cell the night before the e-Cats arrive? If he 
does not do this, his trick will be discovered. So what is the point?



The best choice of gas is not methane as seen in the above image but 
the typical HHO gas from an electrolysis cell which can be hidden a 
long distance away. It turns to steam but that is where the "chimney" 
comes in handy.




You do realize that the people testing the system looked into the 
chimney. The burners and valves required to generate 16 kW would be 
quite visible. We won't discuss the likelihood of generating 130 kW, 
since it may cause you to accuse yourself of horrible misbehavior again.


- Jed

RE: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jones Beene]

From: Jed Rothwell 
On a more sodden note, here is the best "Fake" alert dreamt-up yet, in terms
of the ease of pulling it off - for situation where the E-cat is cooled by a
direct connection to the building's water supply, as in Feb.
JR: Explain how this would work in the systems being sent to Uppsala and
Stockholm Universities, 
Who said it would? At best, it only indicates the Feb "test"  is a non-test.

JR: Do you think Rossi will send in a crew to secretly install the equipment
needed to add gas to the cell the night before the e-Cats arrive? 

No, I think they will find a COP of about 10 instead of triple that - AS I
HAVE STATED FOR THE NTH TIME

Jones
<>

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Peter Gluck]

Before going to sleep- I want to ask you, Jones what's  "non-test"?
I have made many tests, few successful many great failures- but not a single
"non-test"
Please define- and tell what has happened? My scenario is that they had a
great initial heat peak (not expected( and they had to quench the system
with plenty of water. And a small temperature difference. These peaks are a
problem. it's an industrial test not a scientific test- such things happen.
Surprise! A tube leaked and we were in room with some 500 grams of liquid
phosgene, free.. Good stuff for nightmares.
Peter

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> From: Jed Rothwell
> On a more sodden note, here is the best "Fake" alert dreamt-up yet, in
> terms
> of the ease of pulling it off - for situation where the E-cat is cooled by
> a
> direct connection to the building's water supply, as in Feb.
> JR: Explain how this would work in the systems being sent to Uppsala and
> Stockholm Universities,
> Who said it would? At best, it only indicates the Feb "test"  is a
> non-test.
>
> JR: Do you think Rossi will send in a crew to secretly install the
> equipment
> needed to add gas to the cell the night before the e-Cats arrive?
>
> No, I think they will find a COP of about 10 instead of triple that - AS I
> HAVE STATED FOR THE NTH TIME
>
> Jones
>



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

RE: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jones Beene]

From: Peter 

 

Before going to sleep- I want to ask you, Jones what's  "non-test"?

 

Simply - it is not reliable.

 

This is because it was closed to all but a few chosen viewers and there is a
credible way to fake it.

 

Even if you believe it was not faked, it supplies no credible evidence to a
physicist (skeptic), therefore it is a "non-test"

Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Peter Gluck]

Lots of energy, for many hours- not bad.
Peak of energy after start, adds to realism.
He cannot and will not make demonstration
in a soccer arena before 50,000 fans.
He has a source of energy, he has some
technical and other problems (patenting,
reverseengineeringphobia) he makes smart
moves and blunders- it is  a quite normal
process of development.
Peter



On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>  *From:* Peter
>
>
>
> Before going to sleep- I want to ask you, Jones what's  "non-test"?
>
>
>
> Simply – it is not reliable.
>
>
>
> This is because it was closed to all but a few chosen viewers and there is
> a credible way to fake it.
>
>
>
> Even if you believe it was not faked, it supplies no credible evidence to a
> physicist (skeptic), therefore it is a “non-test”
>



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

RE: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

[Jones Beene]

I agree with you. It appears real.

 

We still must remain open to the fact in the "subject heading" that fakes
have not yet been eliminated.

 

From: Peter Gluck 

Subject: Re: [Vo]:FAKES NOT ALL ELIMINATED : Swedish physicists on the
E-cat: "It's a nuclear reaction"

 

Lots of energy, for many hours- not bad.

Peak of energy after start, adds to realism.

He cannot and will not make demonstration

in a soccer arena before 50,000 fans.

He has a source of energy, he has some 

technical and other problems (patenting,

reverseengineeringphobia) he makes smart

moves and blunders- it is  a quite normal

process of development.

Peter

 

 

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

From: Peter 

 

Before going to sleep- I want to ask you, Jones what's  "non-test"?

 

Simply - it is not reliable.

 

This is because it was closed to all but a few chosen viewers and there is a
credible way to fake it.

 

Even if you believe it was not faked, it supplies no credible evidence to a
physicist (skeptic), therefore it is a "non-test"




-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck

Cluj, Romania

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com