Jack Cole said:
"This is easily disproved. Look at the temperature output graph. How does
you notion of constant power instead of a 33% duty cycle explain the dips
as rises indicative of a 33% duty cycle in the output corresponding with
the measured power on cycles."
I'm not saying anything of t
Jack Cole said:
Alan,
I guess I'm not making myself clear. There is no need for a "DC bias" of the
power input.
The "wire trick" (simply running a complete second circuit with both conductors
hidden in a single "wire"), uses only the normal A/C voltage supplied by the
mains.
It isn't the voltage that is rig
d Rothwell
To: John Milstone
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: About the March test
John Milstone wrote:
There is nothing in the report that describes the testers performing "surgery"
on the power lines.
Please rephrase this. The report clearly states that they che
Jed Rothwell said:
"Anyone who glances at voltmeter probe connected to a wire will see there
is one conductor only, and not a second, insulated one under it."
The second "cheese" video shows that this isn't true. He measures the voltage
of his rigged power cord at about 10:30 into the video:
The wire trick puts both sides of the circuit in the same "wire". It's nothing
more than using a lamp cord masquerading as a single conductor wire (only using
wires that don't make it obvious that there are actually two conductors in the
same insulation.
It doesn't require a "coaxial" cable, a
FWIW, I put together a new version of "Plot 8" from the original report,
showing the full Y axis and adding the power-in if the wire trick were being
used.
As you can see, the relationship between power in and power out is unchanged.
The only difference is that the E-Cat now gives a very good
ontinuous power input is not consistent with any of the data.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: John Milstone
To: vortex-l
Sent: Fri, Jun 21, 2013 1:47 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: About the March test
Nice attempt by Benne, Storms (I'm surprised that he piled on), and Roberson to
deflect
Ed,
Nothing I've said here makes any reference to the topic of LENR. It is
entirely possible that LENR is real and Rossi is a fraud.
John
From: Edmund Storms
To: John Milstone
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 1:58 PM
Subject: Re
e applied because EVERYTHING believed by science
can be rejected by a determined skeptic. We would still be in the
Dark Ages if rational limits to skepticism had not been agreed to and
applied in science. Why is so hard to do now with LENR? Ed
On Jun 21, 2013, at 10:42 AM, Jones Beene wrot
David Roberson said:
"You missed the point. I was only discussing the output power in this
section and not referring to the input at all. That is a different
issue."
"Do you suggest that there is no doubt about the claim of the Higgs being
discovered?
"You missed the point here. A higher COP
David Roberson said:
"The problem is that the bar can always be raised higher when one is seeking
proof of a system. Maybe I am wrong, but I have a strong suspicion
that there is virtually no test that Rossi could perform which would not afford
those who seek misconduct an avenue of attack.
I'll summarize the multiple emails, since I certainly don't want to "flood" the
channel by responding to each email individually.
Regarding the meter: Both the instruction manual and Mats Lewan (through an
email from the manufacturer) verifies that the meter DOES NOT measure DC
current. There
Alan,
Have you tried your model with what I think is the most likely method of fraud:
running full current through the supposedly "dead" 3rd phase wire?
This would change the power input from an an average of 266 Watts (800 Watts *
0.33) to 666 Watts (800 Watts * 0.33 + 400 Watts * 1.0).
This
Since Jed decided to debate me in absentia here on the Vortex, I thought I'd
respond.
Rothwell said:
"No, as Ian Walker already pointed out to you, it says in the Appendix they
checked for it. Also they told me they did. Figure 1 shows a direct
connection to each of the 3 wires (for voltage) in"
al Message-
From: Jed Rothwell
To: John Milstone
Sent: Sun, Jan 22, 2012 5:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
John Milstone wrote:
If the water was at 5 to 10 bars, it could easily be heated to 150 - 180 C. in
the preheating process. At that po
r anonymous "experts" and "secret" tests mean nothing.
____
From: Jed Rothwell
To: John Milstone
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 5:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
John Milstone wrote:
If the
like crazy.
From: Jed Rothwell
To: John Milstone
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 4:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
It was above 100 deg C but that does not prove the heat came from joule
heating. It came
E-cat question asked on Rossi blog
John Milstone wrote:
It would also explain the long, forceful jet of water/steam coming out of the
E-Cat then the high-pressure side was opened at the end of the video. Rossi
would have to hide the fact that the system is actually holding a temperature
m
that the forum was closed. They are a cancer and a barrier to progress
because of their own egos.
These people include Mary Yugo, Axil Axil, John Milstone, Eff Wivakeef and
others. You know who you are. If you will not stop this childish nonsense, I
ask you to shut up and go away. I ask Bill
At the risk of confusing the issue, is it possible that Rossi is trying to
*reduce* the apparent temperature of the system?
After seeing the video of the September test, and reading Eff Wiavkeef's
comments here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg61747.html
it seems obvious tha
Wow! What blind faith.
It really doesn't occur to you that the reason for all the fraud by Rossi (and
pals) is because he don't have anything real.
I'll make a counter prediction: Rossi will *NEVER* allow a truly independent
test of his gadget by a reputable organization. He will *NEVER* be
I'll take one of each, please!
From: Alain Sepeda
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Paradox
what about fame and sex.
University of Bologna,
I guess it's just a reasonable to assume that he lied about conducting TE tests
at the University of New Hampshire!
From: Mary Yugo
To: John Milstone
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container i
If Rossi's relationship with Sterling D. Allan didn't make this point, I don't
know what could!
For what it's worth, here's a link to an article by Allan, touting the
wonderful Tilley perpetual motion electric car!
http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Tilley/tilley_article.pdf
_
Perhaps. I don't see what this theory offers that makes it more likely than
Rossi is a con man.
Since you mention his TE... In the Army report, it says that Rossi returned to
Italy to continue working on it. What that report doesn't say is that Rossi
had every intention of returning to the U
OK. Have a nice day.
From: Daniel Rocha
To: John Milstone
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
Rossi installed the other box at the customer's site, he even supervise it.
Probably he
Yes, I remember reading Horace Hefner's analysis.
As I recall, he (as well as some others) have repeatedly questioned the very
stability you mention. It seems unlikely that the core can "know" how much
energy to produce to keep the device exactly at the right temperature to just
barely keep th
buying. Either the secret customer hauled off an
untested BBB, or the October 28th test was nothing more than a publicity stunt
by Rossi.
From: Daniel Rocha
To: John Milstone
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not f
that *the* box
was gone, and that he had a new box he was constructing.
From: Daniel Rocha
To: John Milstone
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from old footage.
That's his sandbox! While the customer g
nd that he is
working on a second box (lie, unless he's building the second box at a
different location).
____
From: John Milstone
To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com"
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The 1MW container is not from
took delivery of the new box.
But Rossi admitted recently that he's working on the old box to make it ready
for the secret customer, who you claim has a different, previously unknown box.
Sure! That makes perfect sense.
____
From: Daniel Rocha
To: John Mil
Very interesting!
It's obvious that the water being released at the end of the video is at a
*MUCH* higher pressure than the water/steam coming out of the rubber hose. I
guess that means that there are two separate containers of water. According to
Mats Lewan, that high-pressure stream contin
Do you have any evidence that Rossi said it had not been delivered to the
secret customer from *before* this issue blew up?
The only actual statement about the location of the BBB that I know of is from
October 30, when Rossi answered both of these questions "1. Is the 1MW
container gone? 2. H
That might have some value if Lewan mentioned it *before* this issue blew up in
Rossi's face.
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 8:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ni-64 enrichment
Shaun Taylor wrote:
Rossi lied about the
The most reasonable answer to why he signed the contract was to gain borrow the
credibility of the University. Note that is was commonly reported that at
least some of his tests were conducted *at* the U of B, which as far as I know
is false. Note that Rossi waited until after the "big finale"
Rossi got just short of a year's worth of borrowed credibility from his lies
about involvement with the University of Bologna. I documented at least three
times (the earliest was last January) when Rossi claimed he was *currently*
working with the U of B. I've read numerous statements by Rossi
ey are usually based on nothing more than
"argument by authority".
John
____
From: Jed Rothwell
To: John Milstone
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ni-64 enrichment
John Milstone wrote:
So, you're saying that Jed Rothwell
Ew! We are all being PUNished.
Anyone who understands these references needs to see the "Mystery Science
Theater 3000" movie, which poked fun at "This Island Earth".
From: Terry Blanton
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 7:01 PM
Sub
rtex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 2:45 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ni-64 enrichment
From: John Milstone
* I have yet to hear of any enrichment method that is within several
orders of magnitude of what Rossi *must* have, if he's really selling 100g
of "fuel" for
of Copper, can they?
To end up with an "ash" containing 30% Copper in its natural isotope ratio (as
has been reported), you must start out with the companion Nickel isotopes
greatly enriched from their natural isotope ratios.
From: Daniel Rocha
To:
Do you know of any way to enrich Nickel, or any other metal, for a few pennies
per gram? Either there is some known way to do this, or Rossi has made a major
breakthrough (with really, really dangerous WMD overtones), or Rossi is lying.
I have yet to hear of any enrichment method that is within
ems
low for any processing of this sort.
____
From: Daniel Rocha
To: John Milstone
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ni-64 enrichment
Why to 0.04$? To 100$ would be a great thing too.
or
something on the order of $1 (since he said a refueling will cost about $10,
and the cost of enriching the fuel adds about 10% to the cost).
Reducing the cost of a gram of 64Ni from $30,000 to $0.04 is quite an
achievement!
From: Daniel Rocha
To:
The trouble is, if only 64Ni is converted into Copper (and/or Iron?), and the
ash is 30% Copper, then wouldn't there have to be 30% 64Ni in the fuel?
Otherwise, where is the Copper coming from?
And if Rossi can convert less than 1% 64Ni into at least 30%, and 64Ni is going
for $30,000/g, I thi
Do either of these methods of transmutation work with the various isotopes of
Nickel?
Are either of them able to produce the kilogram quantities, for pennies a gram,
that Rossi would require?
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 21
Thanks for reposting that information.
So, if the fuel or ash from an E-Cat contained excess 64-Ni, that would be
compelling evidence that he really does have a new and revolutionary means of
enriching Nickel isotopes, since it seems unlikely that he would have the
resources to "spike" his samp
n
Craigslist, the NSA calls your Mother!"
____
From: Daniel Rocha
To: John Milstone
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I`ll just leave this here
In the specific case of Rossi, he wants to exclude nickel below 62, but purity
is not a necessity, but an optimazation
ld finally convince the nay-sayers.
From: Daniel Rocha
To: John Milstone
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:I`ll just leave this here
Just Levi and the AP reporter, which were the only ones that were present in
the day but not tog
Just because GM is selling a real electric car doesn't mean that Tilley was
legitimate. (http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Tilley/)
Just because there are real companies selling real solar power systems doesn't
mean that Greg Watson (apparently AKA Aussie Guy E-Cat) and his Sun Cube was
legit.
Have any of these people reported any signs of the E-Cat actually working
during the October 28th test? Or did they simply accept the write-up produced
by Rossi and the unknown consultant for the secret company.
I find it interesting that with all the intense interest in this story, it
appears
being able to do this exact
process with Uranium. If there is any chance that the process can be adapted
for something other than Nickel, then it would have, um, explosive consequences
should it fall into unfriendly hands.
____
From: Daniel Rocha
To: John Milstone
If you trust Rossi, then you might as well accept the numbers presented by the
unknown consultant of the secret company.
If you don't trust Rossi, then there is absolutely nothing from the October
28th test to indicate that the "MegaWatt" E-Cat even got slightly warm (AFAIK),
with or without th
luding Krivit's water boiler. You need to go high
pressures and high steam velocities in order to produce stable wet steam. So
please, at least you should get the basic physics right.
—Jouni
On Jan 21, 2012 1:25 PM, "Shaun Taylor" wrote:
On 21/01/2012 9:28 PM, John Milstone wrote
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 22:34:07, thorium breeder said:
> Can rossi achieve "do it yourself isotopic separation"?
That ties in to the missing "detailed isotopic analysis" that Sven Kullander
promised "before Christmas".
I've been trying to find prices for specific Nickel isotopes, and no one seems
For what it's worth, here are the relevant links I have on Rossi's claims of
having been working with the University of Bologna...
January 21, 2011, Rossi says, "We made an important test with the University of
Bologna, with whom we are going to make a 1 year research program also."
(http://www
Testing... 1, 2, 3. Is this any better?
(Sorry for the trouble!)
From: OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
To: vortex-l
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi often says things he does not mean
...
> ... I'm sending them to
> "vortex-
vortex-l@eskimo.com". Is that not correct?
John
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi often says things he does not mean
John Milstone wrote:
I haven't seen or heard of a
Maybe they just got tired of the hundreds, if not thousands of annoying emails
and phone calls from Rossi's fans, demanding a detailed accounting of just how
great Rossi's invention really is?
It isn't at all unusual for a company to release a statement on an issue that
is generating more than
I haven't seen or heard of any reports by credible witnesses to either of
these. Are they buried somewhere in the LENR library?
In the case of Ampenergo, at least, I'm not overly impressed with a company
that consists of nothing but a one-page, content-free web site and an rental
office that j
Jed Rothwell said:
>It is also because he thrives on controversy. He loves confusing and
>outwitting people,
Jed Rothwell also said:
>He never fools me. He does not seem to be trying to fool me.
How fortunate that you appear to be the only person who isn't being bamboozled
by Rossi.
Is "for all we know" the new standard for judging evidence?
From: Energy Liberator
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Interesting new video from ecat.com
For all we know NI have a couple of fat cats sitting
And yet, you insist that he COULDN'T have confused and outwitted the people
attending his demonstrations?
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Interesting new video from ecat.com
He loves co
I wonder if Rossi would allow someone to come in and see/photograph the state
of his warehouse today? That might clear up a lot of confusion.
John
If this container looks like the same container, in the exact same spot, and it
is unlikely that they would go to the trouble of repeatedly placing different
containers (or the same container multiple times) in the exact spot, doesn't
that mean that the original 1-MW container has never left Ros
Hi everyone!
Last November, Sven Kullander promised a "detailed isotopic analysis" of the
ash from Rossi's E-Cat "by Christmas". (http://ecatnews.com/?p=1416)
It's now well past Christmas, and I haven't seen any signs of this report.
Does anyone know what happened to it?
John
66 matches
Mail list logo
