Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
OK, nit time. On 04/26/2011 06:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: You can compare a flow calorimeter to a balance weight scale. Such scales have been in use since ancient times. They have utterly transparent operation. No expert can fool one. No expert could have fooled one used in Edo Japan in the marketplace, or in ancient Egypt. Certainly they could. A balance is only as good as the weights you use with it. Using false weights was, in fact, pretty common, IIRC. At some point you want to be sure that the weights used have been marked with the seal of the government inspector, who has confirmed their weight; otherwise you'll be paying for a kilo of flour but only getting two pounds, despite the transparent operation of the scale. Of course depending on certified weights only works if the government is honest and the clerk hasn't grossly violated the law by drilling out the weights after the inspector's mark was put on them; to get around that you really need to bring your own weights -- but then the clerk could claim your weights were false, and were too heavy, and at that point things could get ugly...
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote: transparent operation. No expert can fool one. No expert could have fooled one used in Edo Japan in the marketplace, or in ancient Egypt. Certainly they could. A balance is only as good as the weights you use with it. Using false weights was, in fact, pretty common, IIRC. At some point you want to be sure that the weights used have been marked with the seal of the government inspector, who has confirmed their weight . . . I meant you cannot conceal the fundamental operation. That is to say, if you hand over the scale to an engineer or physics professor, she will quickly determine that the weights are false (by using good ones) or that there is a hidden weight in the arm, or the tick marks on the arm are not where they should be. If the crooked fish vendor is using it, he might be able to do a sleight-of-hand trick that a physics professor would miss. This is analogous to Rossi insisting that observers use only his watt meter. Some devices are fully transparent in their principles and operation. Others are not. Many are in between. A flow calorimeter is on the transparent end of the scale. McKubre has often made this point. Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: I bet experts could, and did. Some were caught and died, I'm also sure. Some were not caught. They would never kill someone in Edo Japan for such a minor offense. Unless he was weighing out government gold or something. - Jed
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
Axil wrote As an engineering imperative, I have a feeling that Rossi decided to centralize control of the reactor in the control box where he can adjust or shut off control power as required. Axil, That is what Pulse Width Modulation [PWM] does - In fact zero ON time is a valid pulse width for a PWM cycle when the feedback indicates the need to greatly reduce the output. Fran
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
*“How confident are you about the tungsten vs nichrome question for element material? is SiC another reasonable possibility? Or is it too dangerous to have any C around?”* * * I have no confidence at all. The construction of the internal heater/cathode is the most intricate and problematic part of the Rossi Cat-E design. It is true that tungsten has been used in designs similar to the Rossi reactor, but the engineering priority is long service life of the internal heater. Very high hydrogen gas pressure complicates the question. The material heating element will deteriorate through erosion in a gas atmosphere so clever design of the internal heater is required to maximize service life. Nichrome serves very well operating in the open air as heating elements in our toasters and ovens, so in an amateur operation like Rossi’s reactor development he may well use Nichrome. An expert cathode developer might well use tungsten, since it is usually found in commercial gas filled tube products. It is my opinion, the six month service life replacement period is not caused by the need to replace the catalyst. It is needed to renew the internal heater. This heater will suffer a high level of erosion because of the high pressure hydrogen atmosphere. In addition, strain placed on the cathode imposed by power on/off cycling will take a toll on the internal heater. A SiC heating element is a possibility. There are a large number of possible heating element materials that can be used. To make reactor control easy, the key design point is to come up with a cathode design that has a linear production characteristic of electron emissions as the driving current is increased. *“Can you further explain the potential benefit of Thorium?”* * * It is critical to keep the surface of the nickel powder scrupulously clean. If the cold fusion reactions are caused by nanometer sized holes in the catalyst, it is important to keep those holes as free of gaseous poisons as possible so that few are clogged up by garbage floating around in the hydrogen atmosphere. When Thorium oxide is coated with a thin layer of carbon, its evaporation rate is low which will help keep the Cold Fusion reaction efficient over the service life of the catalyst. The lack of “secret catalyst” elements found in the Cat-E ash initially confused me. This lack of contamination leads me now to the conclusion that the “secret element” acts at a distance from the surface of the nickel powder and is not found within it or not even very near this surface. This is why Rossi feels safe in giving the ash to outsiders for spectroscopic analysis. The place where the secret catalyst lives is in the heating element of the internal heater. *“Finally, I have a question about the radiation shielding layers... if the reactor is operating between 400 and 600C optimally, how can the lead shielding remain solid? or if the borated water solution is used, won't that vaporize?”* * * The lead shielding must be insolated from the water loop by a layer of air or fiberglass. Doing a lack of coolant accident where the water coolant boils off, when the copper pipes get hot, the lead shielding will be protected from melting by this insulation layer.** To stay operational through an overheat excursion, the copper pipes can get no hotter than the melting point of the solder that fills their connections. * * * * * * * * On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 6:57 AM, .:.gotjosh ene...@begreen.nu wrote: Thanks for this post Axil, i have some comments and questions below... On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 05:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: * * *“With temperature above the set the reactor is automatically stopped”* * * *It the temperature continues to rise above another set point, the control box releases the hydrogen gas into the water loop piping though the controlled opening of an electrically controlled valve. This action vents excess heat to the outside environment and serves to depress the reaction. * ** in my design i will prefer bimetal valves for solid state non-electronic control if possible. eg: http://www.emsclad.com/examples/thermal-controls.html * * *“How much would the temperature of the metal rise?”* * * *The nickel oxide powder will have a substantial amount of hydrogen stored in the lattice interstices at the surface of the nickel oxide powder where the oxygen has been depleted by the erosive action of hydrogen impingement at the surface or into the surface to some depth of the powder. * What do you say the previous question(s) about H2O production between H2 and the O from NiO ? * * * * *When the heat sink of the water coolant is removed, this nuclear reaction in the lattice interstices will continue until the temperature of at the surface of the powder reaches the melting point of nickel. The lattice interstices will begin to close as nickel migrate to these lattice interstices sites displacing
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
As to the question in the subject header, we don't know, without knowing the secrets he's keeping, whether his real reasons are legitimate or not. As I wrote from the beginning on this, there is no limit to human ingenuity, so fraud cannot be ruled out except by the normal process: truly independent examination and probably replication. If Rossi were selling E-Cats, that worked, it would be all over. But he's not, not yet. It is not unlawful for Rossi to lie about what he's doing, as long as he doesn't lie to investors. So it is possible for some provided information to be misleading. At this point, if he's for real, he has strong motives to distract those who *are* trying like crazy to figure out the secret. And there is no particular value to full disclosure. And, of course, if he's not for real, if this is fraud, he has even more reason to present confusing information. What we can rule out, from all the evidence, is experimental artifact, accidental error, mere misinterpretation of results. This is either for real or it is fraud, because all the reasonable error modes are ruled out, it would take seriously active deception. That's about as far as I can go, and I find, from what those I trust have been saying, deception has become pretty unlikely, as to the heat being produced. Unlikely is not impossible. But as to any details, deception is still on the table. He has very good reasons to not disclose, even to mislead or distract. If nothing else, this has smoked out some POV-pushers on Wikipedia, editors who have clearly betrayed their fixed POV, as they push for content that reflects it, on the Energy Catalyzer article.
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
Control of the Rossi reaction is a complicated thing. The energy density pumping mechanism you site may be only one mechanism of many that play into the complicated interplay of many factors in which the Cat-E might be controlled. Rossi’s revelation that the “secret catalyst” makes the Rossi reaction “go” is an argument against your theory being the sole or even the primary controlling factor. He states that without this secret element, nickel powder does not produce a sustained reaction. But he also says that the Reaction can continue without the application of external stimulus being applied. This is where the mechanism you site might come into play. I also think this is a mode that Rossi does not want the Cat-E reaction to enter. I think the “secret catalyst” is a spillover catalyst that turns H2 into H- and forces this H-into the crystal lattice of the nickel powder. In the beginning, this might have been only a “startup” mechanism. But the reactor melted down more than he would have liked where once is too much. I believe that Rossi had to somehow disable energy density pumping to positively control his reactor the way that he wants to. If energy density pumping is full blown, the reactor may sometimes enter an uncontrolled mode where it takes off on its own nickel (pun intended) and melts down. As an engineering imperative, I have a feeling that Rossi decided to centralize control of the reactor in the control box where he can adjust or shut off control power as required. He calls his Cat-E reactor an energy amplifier because the small amount of energy used to control the Cat-E is amplified greatly in the power output of the reactor. * * On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 05:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *“With temperature above the set the reactor is automatically stopped”* Axil, We see the Mill’s powder in the Rowan confirmations totally run-away but yet we get mixed messages about the Rossi reactor which IMHO may reflect the bond state of the gas population. It seems counter-intuitive but instead of just throttling back this Rossi type of reaction we MUST remove heat, not only to store the energy gain but it seems we have to cool the disassociated atoms enough that nature takes over and they reform molecules allowing us to repeat the cycle over and over again. I am not saying the reaction stops without cooling but only that it slows itself down proportional to the population that is in molecular form. The random motion of gas relative to Casimir geometry changes the energy density being experienced by the gas molecules. Atoms are simply reoriented by this change in energy density but those atoms sharing covalent bonds (molecules) are held by the covalent bond in the same orientation they possessed when the molecule formed. This pressure the covalent bond feels when energy density changes discounts the energy needed to disassociate the molecule such that it can occur at a much lower temperature - when these atoms later re-form a new molecule they release the full energy associated with hydrogen atoms dropping to the lower molecular energy state including even the energy contributed in the previous cycle from the combination of gas motion and change in energy density. We are getting a full refund for a purchase discounted by the constant motion of gas. Fran *From:* gotjos...@gmail.com [mailto:gotjos...@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of * .:.gotjosh *Sent:* Monday, April 25, 2011 6:58 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say. Thanks for this post Axil, i have some comments and questions below... On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 05:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *“With temperature above the set the reactor is automatically stopped”* *It the temperature continues to rise above another set point, the control box releases the hydrogen gas into the water loop piping though the controlled opening of an electrically controlled valve. This action vents excess heat to the outside environment and serves to depress the reaction. * in my design i will prefer bimetal valves for solid state non-electronic control if possible. eg: http://www.emsclad.com/examples/thermal-controls.html * * *“How much would the temperature of the metal rise?”* * * *The nickel oxide powder will have a substantial amount of hydrogen stored in the lattice interstices at the surface of the nickel oxide powder where the oxygen has been depleted by the erosive action of hydrogen impingement at the surface or into the surface to some depth of the powder.* What do you say the previous question(s) about H2O production between H2 and the O from NiO ? * * *When the heat sink of the water coolant is removed, this nuclear reaction in the lattice interstices
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: As I wrote from the beginning on this, there is no limit to human ingenuity, so fraud cannot be ruled out except by the normal process: truly independent examination and probably replication. There is another way to rule out fraud. You can allow experts examine the machine closely and look for the physical equipment needed to commit fraud, such as hidden wires and pipes. Rossi has done this. There is only a vanishingly small chance that a fraud might somehow be concealed in the 1 liter cell, and the experts will soon look inside of that, as well. Once they have done that, fraud will be eliminated as decisively as it would be if this were independently replicated 200 times. There is no limit to human ingenuity but there are sharp limits to the laws of physics and methods of adding energy to this system. It is simple, and the performance of it has been well understood for nearly 200 years. Fraud cannot be accomplished except by some physical means, and all such means are easily defined and checked for with this system (although not with other systems). You talk as if fraud is something magical that Rossi could accomplished by some means not known to science. The whole point of fraud is that it is something an experienced scientist or engineer will spot instantly the moment he sees the physical mechanism (the wires or hidden fuel). If Rossi can make this machine produce massive amounts of energy by some mechanism not known to science, that means it is not fraud -- by definition. Or, if he has only managed to make the machine fool conventional flow calorimetry, that is almost as miraculous. No one can do that. Levi, Essen et al. are convinced the machine is real because they understand that there are only a few limited ways to fake a reaction of this nature, and they are certain they have checked all such ways. I wasn't there, so that leaves me all-but-certain. I can't imagine a professional scientist so stupid he does not take elementary precautions such as feeling the hose or checking the performance of the thermocouples. Levi he said he spent weeks calibrating. I have spent weeks calibrating various experiments myself, and I am certain I would have discovered every proposed fraud I have seen discussed, here and elsewhere. I would have discovered these things in the first 5 minutes. Despite assertions here about how easily a scientist or a thermocouple might be fooled by sleight-of-hand techniques, no such techniques exist and there are no examples in the history of science when this was done. the examples that have been given were of tests or demonstrations actually performed by hand, not by machines. If Abd thinks that fraud is a serious possibility, I believe he has made a positive assertion and it requires that he propose a method of committing fraud and a means of falsifying his proposed method as well. In other words, a way of proving that his proposed method could not have happened, such as looking for wires or computing how much energy 1 L of fuel can produce. Arguments without any supporting evidence or a plausible real-world explanation or mechanism are not scientific. Declaring out of the blue that there must be a factor of 1000 error or a factor of 5 error in flow calorimetry, without showing which of the parameters it applies to and how it might apply to them is not a scientific assertion. It is meaningless. It is like saying I am sure that all experimental proof of special relativity must be wrong by a factor of 1000 and just because I say so that proves it's true. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
The engineering game is a difficult place to set up a successful fraud; having said that, con-men are most often the smartest men in the room. They enter banking, the board room, the stock market, hedge funds, the money management industry, The SEC regulators, or even the Federal Reserve. As Bernie Madoffhttp://www.google.com/images?rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS329q=Bernie+madoffum=1ie=UTF-8source=univsa=Xei=2FmGTaKEC-O90QG1-7nRCAved=0CEMQsAQoften purred to his billionaire con-men pals, “and the great whore will suckle us... until we are fat and happy and can suckle no more.” If you want to steal lots of money, you go were the money is. Unrelentingly, with the full throated collusion of government, Big Money remorselessly extracts the meager savings of the common working man, and these poor oblivious marks never even know it or even suspect it. So why fear fraud; it is everywhere, and of all times; it is like an ever-present all encompassing swarm of mosquitoes on the scent for blood. It is simply the cost of doing business in today’s world. Do you remember the Enron affair? Lest we forget, Enron Corporation is an energy trading, natural gas, and electric utilities company based in Houston, Texas con game that employed around 21,000 people by mid-2001, before it went bankrupt. Fraudulent accounting techniques allowed it to be listed as the seventh largest company in the United States, and it was expected to dominate the trading it had virtually invented in communications, power, and weather securities. Instead, it became the largest corporate scandal in history, and became emblematic of institutionalized and well-planned corporate fraud. Enron cynically and knowingly created the phony California electricity crisis of 2000 and 2001. There was never a shortage of power in California. Using tape recordings of Enron traders on the phone with California power plants, the film chillingly overhears them asking plant managers to get a little creative in shutting down plants for repairs. Between 30 percent and 50 percent of California's energy industry was shut down by Enron a great deal of the time, and up to 76 percent at one point, as the company drove the price of electricity higher by nine times. Energy merchants regularly tape trader conversations to keep a record of transactions. In one transcript a trader asks about all the money you guys stole from those poor grandmothers of California. To which the Enron trader responds, Yeah, Grandma Millie, man. But she's the one who couldn't figure out how to (expletive) vote on the butterfly ballot. Yeah, now she wants her (expletive) money back for all the power you've charged right up — jammed right up her (expletive) for (expletive) 250 dollars a megawatt hour, the first trader says. In another, a trader said, The magical word of the day is 'burn, baby, burn,' in reference to a fire in California under a power line that caused a transmission outage, letting Enron take advantage of an increased demand for electricity. Do you pay your taxes; do you put money in the bank; do you have a mortgage, do you give to charity; do you pay your electric bills, do you contribute to church; do you have any money in your wallet? I bet you are being defrauded this very minute; don’t know about it; and are not concerned about it in the least. The only protection we have against fraud is the unceasing application of clear thinking against all the information we can get our hands on. So far from my perspective Rossi is holding up amazingly well to all analytic cynicism out there. But we must never let our guard down; where the strong must always protect the weak; for fraud walks eternal among us. On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: As to the question in the subject header, we don't know, without knowing the secrets he's keeping, whether his real reasons are legitimate or not. As I wrote from the beginning on this, there is no limit to human ingenuity, so fraud cannot be ruled out except by the normal process: truly independent examination and probably replication. If Rossi were selling E-Cats, that worked, it would be all over. But he's not, not yet. It is not unlawful for Rossi to lie about what he's doing, as long as he doesn't lie to investors. So it is possible for some provided information to be misleading. At this point, if he's for real, he has strong motives to distract those who *are* trying like crazy to figure out the secret. And there is no particular value to full disclosure. And, of course, if he's not for real, if this is fraud, he has even more reason to present confusing information. What we can rule out, from all the evidence, is experimental artifact, accidental error, mere misinterpretation of results. This is either for real or it is fraud, because all the reasonable error modes are ruled out, it would take seriously active deception. That's about
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The engineering game is a difficult place to set up a successful fraud; having said that, con-men are most often the smartest men in the room. McKubre is brilliant and he has 22 years of experience working with flow calorimetry, but he could not devise a method of faking a result with a flow calorimeter that I would not spot in the first five minutes. I mean that. The whole point of a calorimeter is to lay bare all energy inputs and output. It is to simplify the equation and narrow down the possibilities so that there can be no significant undetected source of heat. This is done to make the results accurate, but it also has the effect of making the machine very easy to check for legerdemain. A person could design a complex machine with many inputs and outputs, and wires and hoses running every which direction. This machine probably could fool me. It would take me a while to trace down inputs and outputs. I doubt such a thing could fool McKubre or EK, but it could fool me. However, a flow calorimeter DOES NOT HAVE wires and hoses running everywhere. It has ONE input and ONE output and exactly 4 parameters. If there is another input, it stands out like a sore thumb. A calorimeter is as simple as an energy system can be. That is the whole point of it. If they could make it even simpler, and eliminate other possible sources of error (or fraud -- it amounts to the same thing) they would make it simpler. No one is so smart he knows a way to defeat industry standard machines and techniques used worldwide for a century. Do you remember the Enron affair? Lest we forget, Enron Corporation is an energy trading, natural gas, and electric utilities company based in Houston, Texas con game that employed around 21,000 people by mid-2001, before it went bankrupt. Fraudulent accounting techniques allowed it to be listed as the seventh largest company in the United States . . . Accounting techniques and like cannot be compared to a machine such as a calorimeter. Machines must obey the laws of physics. An accounting system can have any value stuffed into memory by the programmer at any stage in the process. For this reason, a computerized voting system is permanently suspect. There is no such thing, even in principle, as a computerized voting system that cannot be corrupted. (Granted, some are a lot easier to corrupt than others. They used to make voting systems with Data General Nova computers, which I used to program. They had zero security. Any programmer who read the manual would know how to sign on via modem, find, and change any number or ASCII value in the 64 KB memory without leaving a trace. They now make them with Microsoft Win-CE, a.k.a. wince, which is like constructing a maximum security prison with nothing more than three feet of chickenwire fencing around the perimeter.) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The engineering game is a difficult place to set up a successful fraud; having said that, con-men are most often the smartest men in the room. Enron http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1016268/ The Smartest Guys in the Room was chump change compared to the mortgage swindle http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/ Inside Job which could take down the world economy still. T
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
I wrote: Levi, Essen et al. are convinced the machine is real because they understand that there are only a few limited ways to fake a reaction of this nature, and they are certain they have checked all such ways. I wasn't there, so that leaves me all-but-certain. I can't imagine a professional scientist so stupid he does not take elementary precautions such as feeling the hose or checking the performance of the thermocouples. Levi he said he spent weeks calibrating. . . . If it turns out Levi is really, really stupid then I can imagine some ways Rossi could commit a fraud. For example, if Levi shows up and Rossi gives him the power meter, thermocouples and other equipment and insists he use that equipment only, not his own, it would be easy to fool him. Or, as I said, when the outlet temperature registers 40°C if Levi did not have the sense to check the outlet hose to see if it is hot, he might be fooled. It is even possible that an innocent thermocouple malfunction could produce spurious data in that instance. An experienced person would know how to spot this sort of thing and eliminate it. Thermocouples are very reliable, in any case. I will grant, I have met a few university professors who were as dumb as a bag of hammers, and might have made mistakes on this scale. I do not get the impression that Levi et al. are stupid. On the contrary, based on their reports they seem to know exactly what they are doing -- better than I would know. But as I said, I wasn't there, I do not have a video or a multipage detailed report describing every action they took. So I cannot be as certain of the results as they themselves are. This stupid professor hypothesis can only be ruled out by having dozens of professors examine the machine or better yet replicate it from scratch. But replication is not quite as essential as it is for small devices. This is quite a lot like watching the Wright brothers fly in 1908. People who understood the problems of aviation, such as Bleriot and Archdecon, instantly saw that this was controlled fight, not a circus trick like a man shot out of a cannon, or a machine hanging from hidden wires. By the way, I have said repeatedly that I could spot a fake in 5 minutes. I am not boasting at how wonderfully skilled I am at spotting fakes. That is not the point. Anyone reading these messages could probably spot a fake as easily as I could. As I said, this ability in inherent to what a flow calorimeter is, and what it does, and what its purpose is. It is a machine designed to be easily understood. The function is designed to be transparent. It resembles a middle-school laboratory demonstration of a machine such as a lever, balance weight scale, a worm-gear, or a bimetallic strip that bends in response to heat. To be exact, it is designed to eliminate all inputs and outputs but one, and the way it accomplishes this is to make it supremely simple. There are calorimeter types such as the Seebeck which accomplish this goal of isolating inputs and outputs not with inherent simplicity, but with high performance, high tech electronic components. It would easy for Rossi to set up a fake demonstration with a Seebeck calorimeter, as long as it was his calorimeter, and not one that belongs to U. Bologna and remains under Levi's control. You can compare a flow calorimeter to a balance weight scale. Such scales have been in use since ancient times. They have utterly transparent operation. No expert can fool one. No expert could have fooled one used in Edo Japan in the marketplace, or in ancient Egypt. A Seebeck is comparable to an electronic weight scale, with hidden, black-box components and programming. An expert could fool one of these by replacing parts or reprogramming. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
Here are some Edo-period hanging marketplace weight scales: http://www4.airnet.ne.jp/sakura/hakari/hakari_fr07.html They are ingenious and perhaps more complicated than you might think. I have seen people use them in recent times. Naturally there were ways to hide weights in these things to cheat customers. My point is, if you handed one of these over to a modern professor of physics, not only would she understand how it works, she would quickly find it is loaded. The last sentence of this essay says that even though there were strict weights and measures laws during the Edo period, the reliability of the scales was poor. - Jed
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 13:14 Axil wrote Control of the Rossi reaction is a complicated thing. The energy density pumping mechanism you site may be only one mechanism of many that play into the complicated interplay of many factors in which the Cat-E might be controlled. Reply --Agreed and it may be only a small fraction but I am convinced it is the INITIATING mechanism for otherwise improbable reactions./// Rossi's revelation that the secret catalyst makes the Rossi reaction go is an argument against your theory being the sole or even the primary controlling factor. He states that without this secret element, nickel powder does not produce a sustained reaction. Reply --- It is complicated but the secret catalyst whether spill over or an ultrafine back fill that simply divides the nano cavities into even smaller more powerful geometries doesn't negate the need to control the movement of the gas population above and below the disassociation threshold, it just gives you more opportunity on a larger scale where fractional molecules are spread over a larger volume or loading into ever smaller relativistic fractional states down to 1/137 - my point is the covalent bond can act like a rectifier when gas motion pushes the molecule too far from the fractional value at which it formed in either direction like going from 1/60 h2 to a geometry that wants to reform the atoms of the molecule to a 1/70 th or a 1/50 th fractional state -if the atoms are cool enough to reform a molecule they will do so at whatever fractional level the geometry dictates with no stress on the new covalent bond until gas motion pushes it to a different Casimir geometry./// But he also says that the Reaction can continue without the application of external stimulus being applied. This is where the mechanism you site might come into play. I also think this is a mode that Rossi does not want the Cat-E reaction to enter. Reply --- OK if you wish to call lack of control a mode vs the PWM controlled mode but it is the same initial process before we get into any possible nuclear reactions. I think the danger is that the cooling loop slowly builds an army of fractionalized molecules as the system is spun up which are ready to run away and melt down the geometry in an instant like we saw with Mills powder in the Rowan confirmations but the quantity of fractionalized gas would be at a far more dangerous level./// I think the secret catalyst is a spillover catalyst that turns H2 into H- and forces this H-into the crystal lattice of the nickel powder. In the beginning, this might have been only a startup mechanism. Reply --- I think loading is always an ongoing requirement or the reaction will die. But the reactor melted down more than he would have liked where once is too much. I believe that Rossi had to somehow disable energy density pumping to positively control his reactor the way that he wants to. REPLY --- I would disagree, He certainly has to throttle it but not disable it./// If energy density pumping is full blown, the reactor may sometimes enter an uncontrolled mode where it takes off on its own nickel (pun intended) and melts down. REPLY---Agreed!// As an engineering imperative, I have a feeling that Rossi decided to centralize control of the reactor in the control box where he can adjust or shut off control power as required. He calls his Cat-E reactor an energy amplifier because the small amount of energy used to control the Cat-E is amplified greatly in the power output of the reactor.
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
At 04:46 PM 4/26/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: There is another way to rule out fraud. You can allow experts examine the machine closely and look for the physical equipment needed to commit fraud, such as hidden wires and pipes. Rossi has done this. There is only a vanishingly small chance that a fraud might somehow be concealed in the 1 liter cell, and the experts will soon look inside of that, as well. Once they have done that, fraud will be eliminated as decisively as it would be if this were independently replicated 200 times. Depends. Jed. Look, fraud is *extremely unlikely,* my opinion. However, if any group of people should be suspicious of impossibility proofs for unknown mechanism, it should be those familiar with cold fusion. Impossibility proofs are all suspect. And that includes a proof that fraud by unknown mechanism is impossible. How many experts does it take, doing an examination like that? Suppose that it's possible to walk off with a few hundred million euros with a sophisticated fraud? Would it be impossible to buy an expert who looks the other way, he can later say, Gee, I didn't think of *that* possibility! Don't mistake this for an accusation of anyone. Like I said, I think fraud is extremely unlikely. There are possible mechanisms. Each one is highly unlikely, but highly unlikely does not mean impossible. *How many mechanisms are possible?* There isn't any particular limit, Jed. But once there is serious and multiply-independent examination, and especially full internal examination, it does become very, very ridiculously impossible. Quite simply, it's not there yet, it's not beyond the point of some very sophisticated fraud, unknown mechanism, with or without some kind of collusion from apparently independent experts. But what is really ludicrous at this point is the skeptics -- say, on Wikipedia -- quite ready to confidently pronounced that this is, indeed, bogus, that they expect, any day now, to hear that Rossi isn't going to meet his deadline. That, in fact, is quite possible even if Rossi is fully and completely legitimate. What strikes me is the *belief* behond this. They believe in their old, very tired, and clearly bogus impossibility proof, cold fusion is, for them, simply impossible, *therefore no matter what you say or do, they are certain it's error or fraud.* Doesn't matter what evidence exists. Now, will they be convinced by a commercial product? Probably eventually, but certainly not immediately. They will hold on to whatever shred of pseudo-skeptical reserve they can muster. It's not about science at all. It's about *belief*. Almost the opposite of science. There is no limit to human ingenuity but there are sharp limits to the laws of physics and methods of adding energy to this system. It is simple, and the performance of it has been well understood for nearly 200 years. Jed, you are making exactly the error the skeptics made in 1989. You just contradicted yourself. There are, indeed, limits to the laws of physics, but suppose this: Suppose Rossi has discovered a way to create a short term appearance of lots of heat, perhaps a really extreme chemical reaction, not previously known. Perhaps he figures out how to conceal fuel, but suppose this is basically useless for some reason, say, it's not practical, it's too expansive, etc. But could he do something with it? Sure. Use it for a demonstration, capture investment money, and then disappear. Perhaps a combination of methods are used, each one contributing energy. Several suggestions have been made that might manage part of it. What would someone do for a few hundred million euros? You've stated no limit, but then you supposed that you could understand the sharp limits to the laws of physics, and this is exactly the argument that was made against cold fusion. It was a failure of the imagination, a belief that we already understood what was possible, and therefore what was not; the belief was that if there was a nuclear reaction in palladium deuteride, it must be d-d fusion, and since that reaction was believed *for very good reasons* to produce neutrons and tritium, copiously, yet they were not observed, or not observed at anything like the necessary levels to explain the heat, and since the rare helium branch *for very good reasons* must produce a gamma, they thought they had it nailed. Impossible. And if it's impossible, then the obvious conclusion: there *must* be some error, even if we don't know what it is. Fraud cannot be accomplished except by some physical means, and all such means are easily defined and checked for with this system (although not with other systems). There are many kinds of fraud, Jed, fraud can exist through very sophisticated ways of fooling observers, stuff that wouldn't be called physical. Instruments can be substituted, and I've heard quite a number of such suggestions. Proposed as it must be this,
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
At 05:31 PM 4/26/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: McKubre is brilliant and he has 22 years of experience working with flow calorimetry, but he could not devise a method of faking a result with a flow calorimeter that I would not spot in the first five minutes. I mean that. I know you mean it, but I also am quite sure that he could, if he wanted to. He doesn't, I'm sure. That's what protects you against being fooled by him, not your brilliant, incisive, and completely understanding of all possible frauds. You've seen the digital oscilloscope displays showing all relevant parameters, right? That is a computer display, and it could show anything that a fraud wanted it to show. So could any kind of meter. If the fraud has reasonably close control of the environment and what is brought into a test, it could be done. The whole point of a calorimeter is to lay bare all energy inputs and output. That's a real calorimeter, Jed. What if it isn't a real calorimeter, but something carefully constructed to resemble one? It is to simplify the equation and narrow down the possibilities so that there can be no significant undetected source of heat. This is done to make the results accurate, but it also has the effect of making the machine very easy to check for legerdemain. You say so. Proof? More to the point -- since flow calorimetry is indeed pretty simple -- that most imagined legerdemain could be easily seen, close up, this does not prove that all forms would be so. A person could design a complex machine with many inputs and outputs, and wires and hoses running every which direction. This machine probably could fool me. It would take me a while to trace down inputs and outputs. I doubt such a thing could fool McKubre or EK, but it could fool me. However, a flow calorimeter DOES NOT HAVE wires and hoses running everywhere. It has ONE input and ONE output and exactly 4 parameters. If there is another input, it stands out like a sore thumb. Tube concealed within a tube. You would not see it. Wires within wires, carrying high voltage, that look like wires that could not carry high power, because you assume the voltage is line voltage. Etc. It may well be that any given fraud mechanism can be ruled out, but, Jed, there is no limit to the number of possible mechanisms. A calorimeter is as simple as an energy system can be. You are assuming it's a calorimeter! Further, any temperature measurement can be fooled. You tried to make these arguments, when others advanced them, into an argument that thermometers did not work! No, they work, but, first of all, is it really a thermometer, and, second, what is it measuring. It might appear to be measuring the outlet water temperature, but be, in fact, measuring a confined stream, arranged to preferentially heat the thermometer. Again, likely? No. My position rapidly become on this that this was either real or it was a *very* sophisticated fraud. Not an error. All the arguments you have given do, heavily, militate against error. That is the whole point of it. If they could make it even simpler, and eliminate other possible sources of error (or fraud -- it amounts to the same thing) they would make it simpler. But nothing would be simpler than a fat payoff. No one is so smart he knows a way to defeat industry standard machines and techniques used worldwide for a century. You assume these machines run themselves, that they produce the results. Jed, that's naive. You are probably right, in this case, i.e., this is very unlikely to be fraud. But that's like someone who believes he can't lose, and the proof is that he didn't lose in this or that case. You know, there is this scheme for making money with roulette. You double your bet each time, if you lose. People who believe this trick actually do make money. Most of the time. A little money. Then they lose their shirts. Maybe. It's unlikely enough that they might go on for a long time, making a small amount of money. Then the amount they need to bet turns out to be more than they can raise. Or if they raise it, they lose it. The odds don't change. Fraudulent accounting techniques allowed it to be listed as the seventh largest company in the United States . . . Accounting techniques and like cannot be compared to a machine such as a calorimeter. Jed, you are completely missing the point. Machines don't set up measurements and report them, people do. Fool or corrupt the people, you can report anything. People believed that a fraud on the scale of Enron was impossible, surely it would be noticed, how could the numbers in accounting reports be wrong, surely someone would blow the whistle? Machines must obey the laws of physics. that's what they said about cold fusion. An accounting system can have any value stuffed into memory by the programmer at any stage in the process. For this reason, a computerized voting system is permanently suspect.
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
At 06:29 PM 4/26/2011, you wrote: If it turns out Levi is really, really stupid then I can imagine some ways Rossi could commit a fraud. For example, if Levi shows up and Rossi gives him the power meter, thermocouples and other equipment and insists he use that equipment only, not his own, it would be easy to fool him. Sure. But once you realize that any human being might possibly be, for enough money, corrupted, it's very simple. [...] You can compare a flow calorimeter to a balance weight scale. Such scales have been in use since ancient times. They have utterly transparent operation. No expert can fool one. No expert could have fooled one used in Edo Japan in the marketplace, or in ancient Egypt. I bet experts could, and did. Some were caught and died, I'm also sure. Some were not caught. Jed, it's not the scale that would be fooled, but the customer, who is supposedly observing the weighing process. Perhaps an extra weight is palmed, can be added surreptitiously. The details would depend on the transaction. Magicians are highly skilled at this kind of thing, creating a false appearance, and con artists can use the same kinds of tricks.
Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
Thanks for this post Axil, i have some comments and questions below... On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 05:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: * * *“With temperature above the set the reactor is automatically stopped”* * * *It the temperature continues to rise above another set point, the control box releases the hydrogen gas into the water loop piping though the controlled opening of an electrically controlled valve. This action vents excess heat to the outside environment and serves to depress the reaction. * ** in my design i will prefer bimetal valves for solid state non-electronic control if possible. eg: http://www.emsclad.com/examples/thermal-controls.html * * *“How much would the temperature of the metal rise?”* * * *The nickel oxide powder will have a substantial amount of hydrogen stored in the lattice interstices at the surface of the nickel oxide powder where the oxygen has been depleted by the erosive action of hydrogen impingement at the surface or into the surface to some depth of the powder.* What do you say the previous question(s) about H2O production between H2 and the O from NiO ? * * * * *When the heat sink of the water coolant is removed, this nuclear reaction in the lattice interstices will continue until the temperature of at the surface of the powder reaches the melting point of nickel. The lattice interstices will begin to close as nickel migrate to these lattice interstices sites displacing the absorbed hydrogen gas. * * * *“Will the nuclear reaction stop due to high temperatures or will it be enhanced?”*** * * *With some number of these heat producing sites disabled, the temperature at the surface of the reaction vessel will stabilize and slowly begin to fall.* So you think it is totally self regulating in a melt down situation? and the electronically controlled valves are only to prevent the meltdown? * * *This leaves open the possibility for the use of thorium in the internal heater. Thorium has been used in vacuum tubes for many years with no radiation danger.* How confident are you about the tungsten vs nichrome question for element material? is SiC another reasonable possibility? Or is it too dangerous to have any C around? Can you further explain the potential benefit of Thorium? Finally, I have a question about the radiation shielding layers... if the reactor is operating between 400 and 600C optimally, how can the lead shielding remain solid? or if the borated water solution is used, won't that vaporize? thanks to you all for your insightful contributions and engagement. * *
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say.
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 05:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.commailto:janap...@gmail.com wrote: “With temperature above the set the reactor is automatically stopped” Axil, We see the Mill’s powder in the Rowan confirmations totally run-away but yet we get mixed messages about the Rossi reactor which IMHO may reflect the bond state of the gas population. It seems counter-intuitive but instead of just throttling back this Rossi type of reaction we MUST remove heat, not only to store the energy gain but it seems we have to cool the disassociated atoms enough that nature takes over and they reform molecules allowing us to repeat the cycle over and over again. I am not saying the reaction stops without cooling but only that it slows itself down proportional to the population that is in molecular form. The random motion of gas relative to Casimir geometry changes the energy density being experienced by the gas molecules. Atoms are simply reoriented by this change in energy density but those atoms sharing covalent bonds (molecules) are held by the covalent bond in the same orientation they possessed when the molecule formed. This pressure the covalent bond feels when energy density changes discounts the energy needed to disassociate the molecule such that it can occur at a much lower temperature - when these atoms later re-form a new molecule they release the full energy associated with hydrogen atoms dropping to the lower molecular energy state including even the energy contributed in the previous cycle from the combination of gas motion and change in energy density. We are getting a full refund for a purchase discounted by the constant motion of gas. Fran From: gotjos...@gmail.com [mailto:gotjos...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of .:.gotjosh Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 6:58 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:If Rossi could speak freely, what would he say. Thanks for this post Axil, i have some comments and questions below... On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 05:25, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.commailto:janap...@gmail.com wrote: “With temperature above the set the reactor is automatically stopped” It the temperature continues to rise above another set point, the control box releases the hydrogen gas into the water loop piping though the controlled opening of an electrically controlled valve. This action vents excess heat to the outside environment and serves to depress the reaction. in my design i will prefer bimetal valves for solid state non-electronic control if possible. eg: http://www.emsclad.com/examples/thermal-controls.html “How much would the temperature of the metal rise?” The nickel oxide powder will have a substantial amount of hydrogen stored in the lattice interstices at the surface of the nickel oxide powder where the oxygen has been depleted by the erosive action of hydrogen impingement at the surface or into the surface to some depth of the powder. What do you say the previous question(s) about H2O production between H2 and the O from NiO ? When the heat sink of the water coolant is removed, this nuclear reaction in the lattice interstices will continue until the temperature of at the surface of the powder reaches the melting point of nickel. The lattice interstices will begin to close as nickel migrate to these lattice interstices sites displacing the absorbed hydrogen gas. “Will the nuclear reaction stop due to high temperatures or will it be enhanced?” With some number of these heat producing sites disabled, the temperature at the surface of the reaction vessel will stabilize and slowly begin to fall. So you think it is totally self regulating in a melt down situation? and the electronically controlled valves are only to prevent the meltdown? This leaves open the possibility for the use of thorium in the internal heater. Thorium has been used in vacuum tubes for many years with no radiation danger. How confident are you about the tungsten vs nichrome question for element material? is SiC another reasonable possibility? Or is it too dangerous to have any C around? Can you further explain the potential benefit of Thorium? Finally, I have a question about the radiation shielding layers... if the reactor is operating between 400 and 600C optimally, how can the lead shielding remain solid? or if the borated water solution is used, won't that vaporize? thanks to you all for your insightful contributions and engagement.
