Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 24 May 2013 23:46:36 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] Catch me a large number of hydrinos in a jar to measure. Would this be possible in principle? If not, why? Dave Mills used to have photos of the jars on his website. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 25 May 2013 01:53:06 -0400: Hi, http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/may/23/quantum-microscope-peers-into-the-hydrogen-atom Take a picture of a Hydrino for me Why not ask Mills? He has lots of them. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
What happens if the pictures come out wrong? Mills will have to go back to lancing boils and setting bones. From the high priest of the universe to a common sawbones, what a bummer. On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 6:48 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 25 May 2013 01:53:06 -0400: Hi, http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/may/23/quantum-microscope-peers-into-the-hydrogen-atom Take a picture of a Hydrino for me Why not ask Mills? He has lots of them. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling processes, one is exothermic and the other is endothermic. Control requires a balance be created between the two. This balance uses diffusion as the control mechanism. He heats the material to a temperature that allows the heat producing rate in the NAE to start to self-heat. He then turns off the external heat source and the resulting temperature, which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool. This process is repeated. A waveform of applied power is chosen to make this process as efficient as possible. Regardless of which theory a person wishes to apply, this description must be acknowledged because it is based on engineering principles, not on a theory of LENR. Ed Storms
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling processes, one is exothermic and the other is endothermic. Control requires a balance be created between the two. This balance uses diffusion as the control mechanism. He heats the material to a temperature that allows the heat producing rate in the NAE to start to self-heat. He then turns off the external heat source and the resulting temperature, which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool. This process is repeated. A waveform of applied power is chosen to make this process as efficient as possible. Regardless of which theory a person wishes to apply, this description must be acknowledged because it is based on engineering principles, not on a theory of LENR. Ed Storms
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling processes, one is exothermic and the other is endothermic. Control requires a balance be created between the two. This balance uses diffusion as the control mechanism. He heats the material to a temperature that allows the heat producing rate in the NAE to start to self-heat. He then turns off the external heat source and the resulting temperature, which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool. This process is repeated. A waveform of applied power is chosen to make this process as efficient as possible. Regardless of which theory a person wishes to apply, this description must be acknowledged because it is based on engineering principles, not on a theory of LENR. Ed Storms
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling processes, one is exothermic and the other is endothermic. Control requires a balance be created between the two. This balance uses diffusion as the control mechanism. He heats the material to a temperature that allows the heat producing rate in the NAE to start to self-heat. He then turns off the external heat source and the resulting temperature, which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool. This process is repeated. A waveform of applied power is chosen to make this process as efficient as possible. Regardless of which theory a person wishes to apply, this description must be acknowledged because it is based on engineering principles, not on a theory of LENR. Ed Storms
RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
Axil, I doubt the reactor works very long in the liquid state, My guess is a short lived plastic state where the NAE is melting closed allows the runaway to skyrocket briefly- melting the ceramic while itself going molten and then just sitting there radiating away it's heat from a molten surface into the ceramic. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 2:12 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.commailto:c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling processes, one is exothermic and the other is endothermic. Control requires a balance be created between the two. This balance uses diffusion as the control mechanism. He heats the material to a temperature that allows the heat producing rate in the NAE to start to self-heat. He then turns off the external heat source and the resulting temperature, which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool. This process is repeated. A waveform of applied power is chosen to make this process as efficient as possible. Regardless of which theory a person wishes to apply, this description must be acknowledged because it is based on engineering principles, not on a theory of LENR. Ed Storms
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
The temperature difference between the melting point of stainless steel and ceramic is 600 degrees C. To produce this temperature difference beyond the melting point of nickel powder and stainless steel requires a continuing LENR reaction, IMHO. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Axil, I doubt the reactor works very long in the liquid state, My guess is a short lived plastic state where the NAE is melting closed allows the runaway to skyrocket briefly- melting the ceramic while itself going molten and then just sitting there radiating away it’s heat from a molten surface into the ceramic. Fran ** ** *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, May 24, 2013 2:12 PM *To:* vortex-l *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test ** ** The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded.* *** LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. ** ** On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling processes, one is exothermic and the other is endothermic. Control requires a balance be created between the two. This balance uses diffusion as the control mechanism. He heats the material to a temperature that allows the heat producing rate in the NAE to start to self-heat. He then turns off the external heat source and the resulting temperature, which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool. This process is repeated. A waveform of applied power is chosen to make this process as efficient as possible. Regardless of which theory a person wishes to apply, this description must be acknowledged because
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling processes, one is exothermic and the other is endothermic. Control requires a balance be created between the two. This balance uses diffusion as the control mechanism. He heats the material to a temperature that allows the heat producing rate in the NAE to start to self-heat. He then turns off the external heat source and the resulting temperature, which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool. This process is repeated. A waveform of applied power is chosen to make this process as efficient as possible. Regardless of which theory a person wishes to apply, this description
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
LENR can occur in exploding metal foils and electric arks. LENR is a singular process that depends on one basic mechanism. In a reactor meltdown, the mechanism of the LENR reaction transitions from one form supported by and associated state of matter into another state supported by a different collection of matter in a different state. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling processes, one is exothermic and the other is endothermic. Control requires a balance be created between the two. This balance uses diffusion as the control mechanism. He heats
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
There does seem to be a little extra speculation about this particular measurement. Ed, the long term tests reached 800 plus degrees which makes one wonder whether or not the fine powder would melt under those conditions. Do the NEA that you envision keep their active form at that elevated temperature? Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:38 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast and not be subject to control. To effectively solve the control problem, Rossi has maximized thermal contact between the NAE in the Ni and a source of temperature, which is the heaters. He has to apply power because the NAE in the NI has to cool rapidly once the LENR process tries to grow in intensity by getting hotter as a result of its own heat production. In other words, the effect involves two rate controlling
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
But, is there anything that can be gleaned from the anecdotal information of a hotCat melt-down? Something that strikes me is that if the heat was generated as phonons locally at the NAE, then the NAE would be the hottest part of the reactor. If a reactor melted, it would be with the NAE hotter than the melted reactor SS shell. This doesn't sound plausible as the NAE would not have been able to produce enough heat fast enough to cause the melt-down before it destroyed itself. So, evidence of a melt-down suggests to me that the energy transport from the NAE is not carried by phonons. On the other hand, now posit the NAE emitting a low energy photon or particle radiation that would be absorbed by the SS reactor shell. Now, it is possible that the reactor shell itself is hotter than the NAE and it may be possible to melt the reactor shell without necessarily destroying the NAE - at least early in the process. To me, this becomes anecdotal evidence of the energy being transported outside of the NAE and collected in its dense environs. The energy carrier could be low energy photons, beta, or alpha. If beta or alpha, might one expect to measure escaping bremsstrahlung radiation coming from the reactor? On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories.
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
On May 24, 2013, at 12:49 PM, David Roberson wrote: There does seem to be a little extra speculation about this particular measurement. Ed, the long term tests reached 800 plus degrees which makes one wonder whether or not the fine powder would melt under those conditions. Do the NEA that you envision keep their active form at that elevated temperature? David, I would not have expected the gaps to remain stable unless something was keeping them from closing. I now realize, thanks to Rossi, that the Hydroton has to be very stable in order to form and to be the structure in which fusion takes place. His work made the obvious visible. The problem I'm trying to avoid is wild speculation having no relationship to what is reported or to real science. Ed Storms Dave -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:38 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Thanks Fran. It's nice to get an occasional agreement :-) However, how do you propose to make helium and tritium from D and H by a process other than fusion? Of course, the process is not like hot fusion, but this does not remove another process that results in fusion as the mechanism. The W/L mechanism is the only current published theory that does not propose fusion, but this idea is so far from explaining any observation, it can be ignored. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Ed, Good analysis and totally agree with your conclusions except for your description as a fusion process since that remains controversial would just call it an as yet undetermined process. [snip] , which allows the diffusion rate to drop enough to starve the fusion process of reactant and cool[/snip]. Fran -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:55 PM To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test A great deal of discussion has been generated by the Rossi test. I would liker to add my contribution. Rossi has demonstrated two very important behaviors of the effect. First, the effect can be initiated and sustained for a significant time at temperatures above 800° C. This means the NAE once formed is very stable. This degree of stability severely limits the theories that can be applied and eliminates most of the ones presently being explored. Second, he has shown that the effect can be effectively controlled by temperature. This means that one rate-controlling part of the process is endothermic. I have previously proposed that this part involves diffusion of H or D into the NAE. This suggestion is based on simple logic. The rate of the nuclear reaction is determined by how rapidly the reactants can assemble, which would be controlled by diffusion. Of course, once the reactants are assembled, the nucear reaction would be very fast
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
On May 24, 2013, at 1:45 PM, Bob Higgins wrote: But, is there anything that can be gleaned from the anecdotal information of a hotCat melt-down? Something that strikes me is that if the heat was generated as phonons locally at the NAE, then the NAE would be the hottest part of the reactor. If a reactor melted, it would be with the NAE hotter than the melted reactor SS shell. This doesn't sound plausible as the NAE would not have been able to produce enough heat fast enough to cause the melt-down before it destroyed itself. So, evidence of a melt-down suggests to me that the energy transport from the NAE is not carried by phonons. I agree Bob. This is the reason why phonons cannot carry all the energy. In addition, photons are DETECTED. Therefore, they are being produced. Phonons cannot be detected. On the other hand, now posit the NAE emitting a low energy photon or particle radiation that would be absorbed by the SS reactor shell. Now, it is possible that the reactor shell itself is hotter than the NAE and it may be possible to melt the reactor shell without necessarily destroying the NAE - at least early in the process. Yes, photons will be absorbed throughout the apparatus, but most will be absorbed near the source because, on average, they have a short range in matter. To me, this becomes anecdotal evidence of the energy being transported outside of the NAE and collected in its dense environs. The energy carrier could be low energy photons, beta, or alpha. If beta or alpha, might one expect to measure escaping bremsstrahlung radiation coming from the reactor? I suggest further speculation is unwarranted because the required information is not reported. Ed Storms On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories.
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
Would you believe that it is possible to melt tungsten (MP 3422 deg C) using only 10 watts? Try putting 10 watts into a 1 watt flashlight bulb. It will burn out immediately as the tungsten filament melts. No LENR reaction, just straight resistive heating. Power and temperature are not directly related, the temperature also depends on a host of other variables. A 110V plug-in arc welder can produce a plasma temperature of well over 6,000 deg C for only 2kW of power. Duncan On 5/24/2013 11:38 AM, Axil Axil wrote: The temperature difference between the melting point of stainless steel and ceramic is 600 degrees C. To produce this temperature difference beyond the melting point of nickel powder and stainless steel requires a continuing LENR reaction, IMHO.
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
This superfluid heat transfer process is evidence that there exists a state of global Boss-Einstein condensation throughout the Rossi reactor. In the same way as gamma radiation is thermalized and spread out throughout the volume of the reactor, heat is equally shared in the condensate thus making the entire volume of the reactor superfluid. Polariton condensation can exist at temperatures up to 2300C. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.comwrote: But, is there anything that can be gleaned from the anecdotal information of a hotCat melt-down? Something that strikes me is that if the heat was generated as phonons locally at the NAE, then the NAE would be the hottest part of the reactor. If a reactor melted, it would be with the NAE hotter than the melted reactor SS shell. This doesn't sound plausible as the NAE would not have been able to produce enough heat fast enough to cause the melt-down before it destroyed itself. So, evidence of a melt-down suggests to me that the energy transport from the NAE is not carried by phonons. On the other hand, now posit the NAE emitting a low energy photon or particle radiation that would be absorbed by the SS reactor shell. Now, it is possible that the reactor shell itself is hotter than the NAE and it may be possible to melt the reactor shell without necessarily destroying the NAE - at least early in the process. To me, this becomes anecdotal evidence of the energy being transported outside of the NAE and collected in its dense environs. The energy carrier could be low energy photons, beta, or alpha. If beta or alpha, might one expect to measure escaping bremsstrahlung radiation coming from the reactor? On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories.
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid state! Ol' Bab, who was as engineer... On 5/24/2013 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com mailto:janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. SNIP
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
The performance of this device was such that the reactor was destroyed, melting the internal steel cylinder and the surrounding ceramic layers. This info tells me that the inner secure reaction chamber and the surrounding ceramic core melted, but not the outer air cooled surrounding shell. *The reactor was not exposed to the air through a breach in the outer shell. * On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:21 PM, David L Babcock ol...@rochester.rr.comwrote: I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid state! Ol' Bab, who was as engineer... On 5/24/2013 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. SNIP
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
David, have you ever actually heated stainless steel. I suggest you take a spoon from your collection in the kitchen and heat it to red hot. You will find that the spoon will turn black but will not ignite. If you keep heating to a higher temperature, it will soften and bend, but will not ignite. So tell me, why would you suggest the stainless in the Rossi device would ignite? Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 3:21 PM, David L Babcock wrote: I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid state! Ol' Bab, who was as engineer... On 5/24/2013 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. SNIP
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
OK Axil, I presume from this description you assume ALL of the cylinder containing the Ni+H2 melted along with the surrounding ceramic, which in your mind meant the temperature got to and stayed abouve 2000° long enough to completely melt the stainless container and surrounding ceramic. Is this correct? Normally, a device making energy will be hotter in some regions than others. If the temperature gets too hot, the hottest point will melt, which in this case would allow all the H2 to leave. This would immediately stop the source of energy. Once this happens, were does the energy come from to melt the rest of the material? Actually, I expect a small; amount of liquid metal would contact the ceramic, lower its melting point, and produce a small amount of local melt. The description was not detailed enough to properly describe what actually happened. Until we see a picture of the melted region, what is the purpose of your speculation? Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Axil Axil wrote: The performance of this device was such that the reactor was destroyed, melting the internal steel cylinder and the surrounding ceramic layers. This info tells me that the inner secure reaction chamber and the surrounding ceramic core melted, but not the outer air cooled surrounding shell. The reactor was not exposed to the air through a breach in the outer shell. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:21 PM, David L Babcock ol...@rochester.rr.com wrote: I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid state! Ol' Bab, who was as engineer... On 5/24/2013 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. SNIP
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
Well. Okay. I DID say I have no idea.. Maybe AR piped in some liquid oxygen through one of those extra wires? Ol' Bab On 5/24/2013 5:30 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: David, have you ever actually heated stainless steel. I suggest you take a spoon from your collection in the kitchen and heat it to red hot. You will find that the spoon will turn black but will not ignite. If you keep heating to a higher temperature, it will soften and bend, but will not ignite. So tell me, why would you suggest the stainless in the Rossi device would ignite? Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 3:21 PM, David L Babcock wrote: I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid state! Ol' Bab, who was as engineer...
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
Here is some speculation about the cat and the mouse. The inner reaction chamber may well be what Rossi calls the cat. The volume which houses the heating elements may well be what Rossi calls the mouse. The Cat has a high COP due to the fact that it contains nickel Micro/nano powder. But the mouse has a COP just over 1. The mouse must also use hydrogen to produce a small level of reaction which is base solely on hydrogen nano particle formation since there is no nickel present in the volume of the mouse. The hydrogen must react with the bulk metal in and around the mouse. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: In the polariton theory, the hydrogen serves as a dielectric to surround all nano/micro particles (NMP). The spaces between the NMP serve as the nuclear active sites(NAS). NMP formation requires a hot area where vaporization of a material can occur, and a cold zone where the vapor can condense into NMPs. This kind of condensation cycle occurs with cesium between 800K and 1500K in a thermoelectric generator as I have posted before. As long as the hydrogen does not escape the reactor, the NAS can form if a condensation cycle between a hot zone and a cold zone can be maintained. Hydrogen can form NMPs, along with potassium and carbon. Nickel NMS would have become liquid and therefore, removed from the reaction. The Silicon nitride ceramic would not have produced vapor. One question is as follows: what was the gas in the volume between the inner reaction chamber and the outer shell? That gas may have participated in the reaction. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: OK Axil, I presume from this description you assume ALL of the cylinder containing the Ni+H2 melted along with the surrounding ceramic, which in your mind meant the temperature got to and stayed abouve 2000° long enough to completely melt the stainless container and surrounding ceramic. Is this correct? Normally, a device making energy will be hotter in some regions than others. If the temperature gets too hot, the hottest point will melt, which in this case would allow all the H2 to leave. This would immediately stop the source of energy. Once this happens, were does the energy come from to melt the rest of the material? Actually, I expect a small; amount of liquid metal would contact the ceramic, lower its melting point, and produce a small amount of local melt. The description was not detailed enough to properly describe what actually happened. Until we see a picture of the melted region, what is the purpose of your speculation? Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Axil Axil wrote: The performance of this device was such that the reactor was destroyed, melting the internal steel cylinder and the surrounding ceramic layers. This info tells me that the inner secure reaction chamber and the surrounding ceramic core melted, but not the outer air cooled surrounding shell. *The reactor was not exposed to the air through a breach in the outer shell.* On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:21 PM, David L Babcock ol...@rochester.rr.comwrote: I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid state! Ol' Bab, who was as engineer... On 5/24/2013 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR
RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
Axil, unless its described elsewhere, everything that Ive read/pics seen, indicates that the area inside the outer ceramic cylinder, and outside the stainless reactor core, is not hermetically sealed; this is the area that contains the carborundum ceramic which holds the coiled resistance heaters. In an earlier (leaked) photo of the hotcat, the end was open to the external air. Where do you gather that there is H outside the stainless reactor core? -mark From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 3:27 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic Here is some speculation about the cat and the mouse. The inner reaction chamber may well be what Rossi calls the cat. The volume which houses the heating elements may well be what Rossi calls the mouse. The Cat has a high COP due to the fact that it contains nickel Micro/nano powder. But the mouse has a COP just over 1. The mouse must also use hydrogen to produce a small level of reaction which is base solely on hydrogen nano particle formation since there is no nickel present in the volume of the mouse. The hydrogen must react with the bulk metal in and around the mouse. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: In the polariton theory, the hydrogen serves as a dielectric to surround all nano/micro particles (NMP). The spaces between the NMP serve as the nuclear active sites(NAS). NMP formation requires a hot area where vaporization of a material can occur, and a cold zone where the vapor can condense into NMPs. This kind of condensation cycle occurs with cesium between 800K and 1500K in a thermoelectric generator as I have posted before. As long as the hydrogen does not escape the reactor, the NAS can form if a condensation cycle between a hot zone and a cold zone can be maintained. Hydrogen can form NMPs, along with potassium and carbon. Nickel NMS would have become liquid and therefore, removed from the reaction. The Silicon nitride ceramic would not have produced vapor. One question is as follows: what was the gas in the volume between the inner reaction chamber and the outer shell? That gas may have participated in the reaction. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: OK Axil, I presume from this description you assume ALL of the cylinder containing the Ni+H2 melted along with the surrounding ceramic, which in your mind meant the temperature got to and stayed abouve 2000° long enough to completely melt the stainless container and surrounding ceramic. Is this correct? Normally, a device making energy will be hotter in some regions than others. If the temperature gets too hot, the hottest point will melt, which in this case would allow all the H2 to leave. This would immediately stop the source of energy. Once this happens, were does the energy come from to melt the rest of the material? Actually, I expect a small; amount of liquid metal would contact the ceramic, lower its melting point, and produce a small amount of local melt. The description was not detailed enough to properly describe what actually happened. Until we see a picture of the melted region, what is the purpose of your speculation? Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Axil Axil wrote: The performance of this device was such that the reactor was destroyed, melting the internal steel cylinder and the surrounding ceramic layers. This info tells me that the inner secure reaction chamber and the surrounding ceramic core melted, but not the outer air cooled surrounding shell. The reactor was not exposed to the air through a breach in the outer shell. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:21 PM, David L Babcock ol...@rochester.rr.com wrote: I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid state! Ol' Bab, who was as engineer... On 5/24/2013 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
Rossi is a very fast moving target. The timeframe when an earlier (leaked) photo of the hotcat where the end was open to the external air was before Rossi invented the cat and mouse design. At that time he only had the cat. The hydrogen envelope inside the shell is something I will be looking to verify as a way that Rossi has designed the mouse. Would Rossi come up with an entirely new gainful way to execute his reaction without hydrogen? On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:49 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Axil, unless its described elsewhere, everything that I’ve read/pics seen, indicates that the area inside the outer ceramic cylinder, and outside the stainless reactor core, is not hermetically sealed; this is the area that contains the carborundum ceramic which holds the coiled resistance heaters. In an earlier (leaked) photo of the hotcat, the end was open to the external air. Where do you gather that there is H outside the stainless reactor core? -mark ** ** *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Friday, May 24, 2013 3:27 PM *To:* vortex-l *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic ** ** Here is some speculation about the cat and the mouse. The inner reaction chamber may well be what Rossi calls the cat. The volume which houses the heating elements may well be what Rossi calls the mouse. The Cat has a high COP due to the fact that it contains nickel Micro/nano powder. But the mouse has a COP just over 1. The mouse must also use hydrogen to produce a small level of reaction which is base solely on hydrogen nano particle formation since there is no nickel present in the volume of the mouse. The hydrogen must react with the bulk metal in and around the mouse. ** ** On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: In the polariton theory, the hydrogen serves as a dielectric to surround all nano/micro particles (NMP). The spaces between the NMP serve as the nuclear active sites(NAS). NMP formation requires a hot area where vaporization of a material can occur, and a cold zone where the vapor can condense into NMPs. This kind of condensation cycle occurs with cesium between 800K and 1500K in a thermoelectric generator as I have posted before. As long as the hydrogen does not escape the reactor, the NAS can form if a condensation cycle between a hot zone and a cold zone can be maintained. Hydrogen can form NMPs, along with potassium and carbon. Nickel NMS would have become liquid and therefore, removed from the reaction. The Silicon nitride ceramic would not have produced vapor. One question is as follows: what was the gas in the volume between the inner reaction chamber and the outer shell? That gas may have participated in the reaction. ** ** On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:42 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: OK Axil, I presume from this description you assume ALL of the cylinder containing the Ni+H2 melted along with the surrounding ceramic, which in your mind meant the temperature got to and stayed abouve 2000° long enough to completely melt the stainless container and surrounding ceramic. Is this correct? ** ** Normally, a device making energy will be hotter in some regions than others. If the temperature gets too hot, the hottest point will melt, which in this case would allow all the H2 to leave. This would immediately stop the source of energy. Once this happens, were does the energy come from to melt the rest of the material? ** ** Actually, I expect a small; amount of liquid metal would contact the ceramic, lower its melting point, and produce a small amount of local melt. The description was not detailed enough to properly describe what actually happened. Until we see a picture of the melted region, what is the purpose of your speculation? ** ** Ed Storms ** ** On May 24, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Axil Axil wrote: The performance of this device was such that the reactor was destroyed, melting the internal steel cylinder and the surrounding ceramic layers.** ** This info tells me that the inner secure reaction chamber and the surrounding ceramic core melted, but not the outer air cooled surrounding shell. *The reactor was not exposed to the air through a breach in the outer shell.* ** ** On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:21 PM, David L Babcock ol...@rochester.rr.com wrote: I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test -how to melt ceramic
And what of the reagents within the reactor? the hydride or other hydrogen supplying material. These are very combustible/oxidisable in air at high temp, quite likely to the point of melting stainless. On 24 May 2013 22:30, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote: David, have you ever actually heated stainless steel. I suggest you take a spoon from your collection in the kitchen and heat it to red hot. You will find that the spoon will turn black but will not ignite. If you keep heating to a higher temperature, it will soften and bend, but will not ignite. So tell me, why would you suggest the stainless in the Rossi device would ignite? Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 3:21 PM, David L Babcock wrote: I have no idea what it would take to ignite stainless steel, but this may be what happened. A breech occurred, air entered, steel burned. Enough extra heat generated to melt the ceramic. The chemical energy for this short event would be plenty, no need to have NAEs still operable in liquid state! Ol' Bab, who was as engineer... On 5/24/2013 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms wrote: Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support such speculations. Ed Storms On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote: Axil, You pose some interesting questions. If what you suggest is true, then this form of LENR would be a bulk effect. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us important new things about the LENR reaction. When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C. The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range. We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR reaction can melt it. This is exciting. At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has long reached its melting point. The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material must be discarded. LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories. SNIP
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 24 May 2013 14:12:07 -0400: Hi, [snip] LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Hydrinos don't care. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 24 May 2013 14:38:09 -0400: Hi, [snip] The temperature difference between the melting point of stainless steel and ceramic is 600 degrees C. To produce this temperature difference beyond the melting point of nickel powder and stainless steel requires a continuing LENR reaction, IMHO. ..unless the ceramic contains Boron, and is the actual site of the reaction. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
Catch me a large number of hydrinos in a jar to measure. Would this be possible in principle? If not, why? Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 11:16 pm Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 24 May 2013 14:12:07 -0400: Hi, [snip] LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Hydrinos don't care. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/may/23/quantum-microscope-peers-into-the-hydrogen-atom Take a picture of a Hydrino for me On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:16 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 24 May 2013 14:12:07 -0400: Hi, [snip] LENR must function in liquid and vapor. Riddle me that one batman. Hydrinos don't care. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
