Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Does your psychoanalyst know what you are doing on the internet? Are you currently institutionalized? Do you still see you analyst? I hope so. If you are not seeing your analyst I think you should. Because you should tell him how it makes you feel to mimic him when he whispers into his littlte re

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Keep going Lomax. You are in over your head, and far out classed. When I arrived at Vortex-L you were stumbling around in the dark stuck on a humidity meter. On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 04:06 PM 7/26/2011, Damon Craig wrote: > >> Try to keep up. >> > > Try no

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > > At 04:11 PM 7/22/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: >> It would be more accurate to say the reaction depends on a temperature > difference between the reactor and the water rather than on the temperature > of > the reactor. >> >> No? > > Probably not true. The reactio

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 04:06 PM 7/26/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Try to keep up. Try not to fill this list with posts with no new content except useless statements plus what's been copied from before. However, to provide some utility here, I will reproduce part of a multiplication table, in case Damon needs it fo

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Try to keep up. On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 07:22 AM 7/26/2011, Damon Craig wrote: > > The "by mass" and the "by volume" jargon that has evolved here--or where >> ever--to describe steam quality is a bit screwy. >> > > Not when you know what you are talking

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 07:22 AM 7/26/2011, Damon Craig wrote: The "by mass" and the "by volume" jargon that has evolved here--or where ever--to describe steam quality is a bit screwy. Not when you know what you are talking about. Each way of expressing steam quality has its value. In each case a volume is exam

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Corrections: "by mass" units: int(m dX^3) / int(MdX^3) = unitless "by volume" units: int(dx^3)/int(dX^3) = unitless We can't just drop the integral out of the units equations and examine the characteristic vectors. This would be a little pretensious dividing a tensor by a tensor to get a scalar. O

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

The "by mass" and the "by volume" jargon that has evolved here--or where ever--to describe steam quality is a bit screwy. In each case a volume is examined and "by mass" and "by volume" are both unitless values. "by mass" units: m/dx^3 / MdX^3 "by volume" units: dx^3/dX^3. In no manner will ther

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 10:55 AM 7/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Damon Craig <decra...@gmail.com> wrote: The key word is boyancy. What is the densest thing you have ever seen floating in a vapor of steam, Joshua? I'll answer that, I've never seen anythi

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Very well said. There is no obvective measuring stick to measure burden. I was attempting to reveil the hidden hypocracy in the "burden of proof" argument. On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > Essentially, "burden" is a social construct, it doesn't exist aside from > hu

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Joshua Cude, and other astute observerse: We could model an exothermic reactions with unlimited (over the course of the experiment) heat generation as a simple bump function. A simple bump function for this is p = p_o / {1+[(T-T_o)/T_w]^2 }. At T=T_o the power, p is maximal. T_w is the half-wid

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Yeah, your right. What was I thinking?? My boyancy argument is just wrong. Thank's for straightening that out to me. (And, darn it, don't I look stupid.) As such, I can't see any way to solidly determine if the bulk of the liquid water exits the device suspended in vapor, or simply pours out the

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Josh: "I don't think you read what I wrote." Maybe I didn't get it, Josh. I'll try to get back. My poor brain is too fried at this time. On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Damon Craig wrote: > >> I think I'll have to take this one step at

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Yeah, maybe i'm confused. When I get my brain back I'll be capable of thinking about it--maybe. the fucks im working for are working me to death. On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Damon Craig wrote: > >> I think I'll have to take this on

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > It's like opening a can of spaghetti and finding that half of the pasta is > actually worms. "Gee, it looked like pasta to me!" Hey, that's an insult to us pastafarians! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster T

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

gt; > >From: Joshua Cude >>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >>Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 1:11:59 PM >>Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement >> >> >> >> >> >>On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax >>

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement > > > > > >On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax >wrote: > >At 04:06 AM 7/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: >> >> >> >>>I don't get that. If it takes one unit of power to bring

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

2011/7/22 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax : > Essentially, "burden" is a social construct, it doesn't exist aside from > human conventions. There is no "burden meter." > Again you are on a roll! This burden of proof argument is silly and widely spread pseudoargument. Usually it works, because if Alice tells

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 04:06 AM 7/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: > > >> I don't get that. If it takes one unit of power to bring the temperature >> up to the ignition threshold, and then the thing generates 6 or more units >> of power on its own, I can't see

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

2011/7/22 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax : > However, claims that the data is contradictory, on the basis of steam > pressure calculations, seem to fail. > Thanks for these calculations – they sound reasonable. For me it seems that E-Cat worked properly only in Mats Lewan's hands where power output was compa

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 07:48 AM 7/22/2011, Damon Craig wrote: "the burden of proof lies with the claimant" it does? 1) prove it. 2) in having made the burden-of-proof argument, are you obligated to me to prove it? 3) what is your burden/penalty if you decide not to oblige me? Arguments like this assume absol

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 07:48 AM 7/22/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote: Damon, little two sec googling with cell phone gave me this link: http://brewery.org/library/SteInjCS1295.html It says that all boiling chambers produces about 98% dry steam. Therefore wetness measureme

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 07:24 AM 7/22/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote: Craig, indeed that is true, liquid water does not contribute to the pressure at all, because water does not gently flow out of the E-Cat, but is spilled due to rather violent boiling at kW range in closed container. No, that's an error. The E-Cat

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 06:59 AM 7/22/2011, Damon Craig wrote: The steam temperature is not measure at the location of evolution but futher along in the device toward the exit. For those of us adhering to the Water Flow-though Hypothesis, the thermometer is further toward the water surface at the height of the ou

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 06:48 AM 7/22/2011, Damon Craig wrote: I think I'll have to take this one step at a time. Do you all realize that you could swim up into the sky in steam containing 90% by mass water? Absolutly not. You are thinking, Damon, of 90% by volume.

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 04:06 AM 7/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: It's plausible as a control method, depending on the temperature response of the active material. The active material will presumably have

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Damon Craig wrote: > It is not a part of our life experiences to have witnessed steam at anytime > having this anywhere near this liquid water content. > It depends on your life experience. It is certainly part of Mitra et al's experience as documented in IEEE Se

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

: Joe Catania To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement Yes its not measured but it follows that it must be higher due to the increased pressure. - Original Message - From: Damon Craig

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Yes its not measured but it follows that it must be higher due to the increased pressure. - Original Message - From: Damon Craig To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 6:59 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement The steam

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Damon Craig wrote: > I think I'll have to take this one step at a time. > > Do you all realize that you could swim up into the sky in > steam containing 90% by mass water? > I don't think you read what I wrote. The density of water vapor at 100C is 1700 times low

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

"the burden of proof lies with the claimant" it does? 1) prove it. 2) in having made the burden-of-proof argument, are you obligated to me to prove it? 3) what is your burden/penalty if you decide not to oblige me? On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 20

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Damon, little two sec googling with cell phone gave me this link: http://brewery.org/library/SteInjCS1295.html It says that all boiling chambers produces about 98% dry steam. Therefore wetness measurement that was 1.4-1.2% feels very reliable. I think that wetness depens slightly on temperature d

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Do you have an online reference or text reference to the 1-2% value for typical wetness of steam? I would like to have a reference source. On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 4:24 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > It was well established that wetness of the steam was something in order of > 1-2% that is typical fo

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

I don't know how to visually estimate the wetness of steam. Why do you think it's less than 5%? On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote: > Damon, > > This is what I tried to explain before. Discussing about wetness of > the steam is a moot point. The mass of liquid in any of those vi

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Craig, indeed that is true, liquid water does not contribute to the pressure at all, because water does not gently flow out of the E-Cat, but is spilled due to rather violent boiling at kW range in closed container. Only thing that contributes for the pressure is steam flow pressure out of the E-C

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 1:06 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > I don't get that. If it takes one unit of power to bring the temperature up > to the ignition threshold, and then the thing generates 6 or more units of > power on its own, I can't see how removing the first one could possibly > bring the temp

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

The steam temperature is not measure at the location of evolution but futher along in the device toward the exit. For those of us adhering to the Water Flow-though Hypothesis, the thermometer is further toward the water surface at the height of the outlet where the pressure is less than that where

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

I think I'll have to take this one step at a time. Do you all realize that you could swim up into the sky in steam containing 90% by mass water? It is not a part of our life experiences to have witnessed steam at anytime having this anywhere near this liquid water content. Keep the eyes open to w

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 11:58 AM 7/21/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Damon Craig < >> de**cra...@gmail.com > wrote: >> Cude, Lomax: >> >> To you two, and myself, its fairly obvious this device do

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 07:56 AM 7/21/2011, Damon Craig wrote: > >> Cude, Lomax: >> >> To you two, and myself, its fairly obvious this device doesn't do what it >> is reported to do, but we have no solid, unrefutable evidence--yet. >> >> One presumption is

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

I was under the presumption that there a few here that understood elementry physics. Good Grief! On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:55 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Damon Craig wrote: > >> Look, guys. If no one is pursuing the "really wet steam" theory anymore >> the ste

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

meter. - Original Message - From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" To: ; Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 2:53 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement At 06:22 AM 7/21/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Look, guys. If no one is pursuing the "really wet steam"

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

meter. - Original Message - From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" To: ; Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 2:53 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement At 06:22 AM 7/21/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Look, guys. If no one is pursuing the "really wet steam"

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 11:58 AM 7/21/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Damon Craig <decra...@gmail.com> wrote: Cude, Lomax: To you two, and myself, its fairly obvious this device doesn't do what it is reported to do, but we have no solid, unrefutable evidence--y

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 11:55 AM 7/21/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Damon Craig <decra...@gmail.com> wrote: Originally, you may recall, numbers caste about were as high as 97% liquid by mass. This is dense enough a chunk of oak would float in it. Please.

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 07:56 AM 7/21/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Cude, Lomax: To you two, and myself, its fairly obvious this device doesn't do what it is reported to do, but we have no solid, unrefutable evidence--yet. One presumption is that an auxillary source of heat energy, such as resistive heating, is capab

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 06:22 AM 7/21/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Look, guys. If no one is pursuing the "really wet steam" theory anymore the steam wetness issue is pretty much moot. Sorry if I didn't realize that. I have to say that "really wet steam" is not implausible, Joshua has made a decent case for it. Howev

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote: > The mass of liquid in any of those video > is visually less 5%, if that much. You should get a job working for turbine manufacturers. They go to a lot of trouble to evaluate steam quality, when all they need is for you to look at it. > B

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Damon Craig wrote: > Cude, Lomax: > > To you two, and myself, its fairly obvious this device doesn't do what it > is reported to do, but we have no solid, unrefutable evidence--yet. > Evidence is the responsibility of the guy making the claim. > > One presumptio

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Damon Craig wrote: > Look, guys. If no one is pursuing the "really wet steam" theory anymore the > steam wetness issue is pretty much moot. Sorry if I didn't realize that. > What gives you that idea? To my mind, really wet steam is still the most likely explanati

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Wherever the input power resistor is, its gradual surface deterioration and fractal cracking will accelerate the flow of electric current along the outside of the resistor, increasing the direct transfer of heat energy into the input cooling water, 2 cc/sec into a perhaps 200 cc interior volume, so

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Damon, This is what I tried to explain before. Discussing about wetness of the steam is a moot point. The mass of liquid in any of those video is visually less 5%, if that much. More than that, the liquid hose would pour bubbles. But forget about it, people won't listen to this. It seems they for

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Cude, Lomax: To you two, and myself, its fairly obvious this device doesn't do what it is reported to do, but we have no solid, unrefutable evidence--yet. One presumption is that an auxillary source of heat energy, such as resistive heating, is capable of controlling an exothermic reaction having

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

OK. Excuse my caution. I am simply not comfortable helping witch hunters hunt witches. On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 04:55 PM 7/19/2011, Damon Craig wrote: > >> In my more-or-less last communication with Krivit, I told him the wet >> steam hypothesis, inspired

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Look, guys. If no one is pursuing the "really wet steam" theory anymore the steam wetness issue is pretty much moot. Sorry if I didn't realize that. Originally, you may recall, numbers caste about were as high as 97% liquid by mass. This is dense enough a chunk of oak would float in it. Even 10%

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > The overall question is "How much of the water is actually vaporized?" And > there isn't an answer. No steps were taken to demonstrate this critical > aspect of the demonstrations. > On this, we are in complete agreement.

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 10:50 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: I wouldn't call it an overflow issue, but a lot of people were wise to only a small fraction of the water being vaporized a long time ago. I certainly didn't invent that idea. You could be correct with your idea that there would be a lot of "froth." Wh

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

If all you had were small bits of various density styrofoam and various means to boil water, I think some of you could eventially come up with the answer to: "how wet does steam get under conditions X?" On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Damon Craig wrote: > Or, to ask a little more precisely: How

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Or, to ask a little more precisely: How wet does steam get? I don't know the answer to this. However, it takes energy to overcome volumetic tension (commonly called surface tension). How much water will break off a boiling surface into small suspendable droplets, and how many of these will be fro

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > > This is probably correct analysis. I think that this is possible to > calculate fairly accurately, if we know the diameter of opening for the > hose. As boiling point of water inside E-Cat is what is measured with the > probe, then we can

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

thermal electrochemical corrosion of the electric input power heating resistor in the Rossi device: Rich Murray 2011.07.19 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2011_07_01_archive.htm Tuesday, July 19, 2011 [ at end of each long page, click on Older Posts ] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/astrodeep/message/90

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Abd ul-Rahman wrote: "My conclusion is that there is very likely *some* overflow water, but it might be small. I have no way of telling how much there is, the demonstrations were not set up to make it possible to tell." This is probably correct analysis. I think that this is possible to calculate

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > > Sure, if you sufficiently obstruct the flow, you could lift styrofoam > easily. I was referring to a *piece* of styrofoam, presumably small. And the > question was about bouyancy, not about flow. You can support a whole person > with

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 05:42 PM 7/19/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see if it will float over a boiling pot of water. Extra question answ

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 04:55 PM 7/19/2011, Damon Craig wrote: In my more-or-less last communication with Krivit, I told him the wet steam hypothesis, inspired by an abused humidity meter, was "a red herring", and the water was simply flowing through it. Then you turn up using the same phrase. I've been using it

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > > Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see if it >> will float over a boiling pot of water. >> > > Extra question answered, free of charge. I won't bother trying it, because > it won't float, because the st

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I expect it is well mixed from the heat alone. There are gradients in a pot > of hot water and it is hot near the bottom, but the water moves around > pretty quickly. > There are gradients in pure water, sure. Always below or at the bp. Th

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

In my more-or-less last communication with Krivit, I told him the wet steam hypothesis, inspired by an abused humidity meter, was "a red herring", and the water was simply flowing through it. Then you turn up using the same phrase. Krivit has his wall of shame on his blog--a trophie wall of photos

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 08:24 AM 7/19/2011, Damon Craig wrote: Here's a bone for you and Krivit, Lomax. Arrggh. Classified with Krivit! Ah, well, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. This is once for me, I still get to be right once more Do you believe a cork will float on stream saturated with water

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Here's a bone for you and Krivit, Lomax. Do you believe a cork will float on stream saturated with water vapor? Thinking about it sorta makes the saturated steam theory look stupid, doesn't it? Why don't you find a piece of cheap, light styrofoam packing and see if it will float over a boiling po

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 09:29 PM 7/18/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Well, Rossi is changing the power when he twiddles the controls. Maybe he is trying to keep it stable. But anyway if it overflows I am pretty sure he turns up the power. How does he know when it overflows? You've been assuming that the temperature wi

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > Mmmm... this gets pretty complicated. Water at the inlet would obviously be > cooler, much cooler. So there would be a temperature gradient in the E-Cat, > with cooler water near the inlet and hotter water near the outlet. > > Only water rising to the outlet pipe wou

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 10:46 AM 7/18/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Jed, this is dead wrong. This is obvious. Suppose you have *almost* full vaporization, not all the water is boiling, so water level in the E-Cat will rise. Almost full vaporization is a degree or two below boiling. That's m

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > > Jed, this is dead wrong. This is obvious. Suppose you have *almost* full >> vaporization, not all the water is boiling, so water level in the E-Cat will >> rise. >> > Almost full vaporization is a degree or two

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Jed, this is dead wrong. This is obvious. Suppose you have *almost* full vaporization, not all the water is boiling, so water level in the E-Cat will rise. Almost full vaporization is a degree or two below boiling. That's my point. Eventually, some will spill out.

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: >> >> I do not argue with ghosts. > > I don't blame you, after the pathetic "wet steam is not possible" salvo. Ah yes, those ghosts which grab splashy droplets and lift them out of th

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > > I do not argue with ghosts. I don't blame you, after the pathetic "wet steam is not possible" salvo.

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> Jed, it's important to read statements from critics like Cude very >> carefully. > > > No can do. He is in my kill file. I only see snippets when other people > quote him. Life is too short to read such blather and nonsense. > I prefer it

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > > Cude may be making an obvious error, assuming power figures from one test > apply to another. No. I'm objecting to Rothwell making exactly that assumption. I have no problem with Rothwell arguing that the 18-hour test proves the

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 08:54 PM 7/17/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: However, "just right" in terms of exact full vaporization is difficult to reach, from an engineering perspective . . . Naa. It is a piece of cake. Just listen to the boil

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: >> Jed, it's important to read statements from critics like Cude very >> carefully. > > No can do. He is in my kill file. I only see snippets when other people > quote him. Life is too short to read such blather an

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > Cude may be making an obvious error, assuming power figures from one test > apply to another. He is. Partly my fault, since I quoted 17 kW without specifying which test I meant. People should look here for the numbers: http://lenr-canr.org/News.htm > Cude is co

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 03:13 PM 7/17/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Joshua apparently wrote: > Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mistaken. > Rossi uses a pump designed to maintain a constant flow, and all > his calculations (including Krivit's video of him calculating > the power) assume constant flow

RE: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

>From Jed: > No, he adjusts the power. Same thing then. The key point being Rossi was constantly monitoring and manually adjusting the power according to current conditions. (Seat-of-the-pants adjusting, that is.) 100.1 C steam output could then still be possible without violating the laws of the

RE: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 02:10 PM 7/17/2011, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: From Joshua: >> OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson; >> My perception on the reactor core has always implied that the >> volume of water entering the reactor core could vary. > Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mist

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:10 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson < orionwo...@charter.net> wrote: > > From my POV it is conceivable that Rossi, while monitoring the January > demonstration, might have occasionally adjusted water inflow to help > maintain a consistent volume of water within the

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua apparently wrote: > > >> > Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mistaken. >> > Rossi uses a pump designed to maintain a constant flow, and all >> > his calculations (including Krivit's video of him calculating >> > the

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Joshua apparently wrote: > > Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mistaken. > > Rossi uses a pump designed to maintain a constant flow, and all > > his calculations (including Krivit's video of him calculating > > the power) assume constant flow rate. And if the flow is constant >

RE: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

>From Joshua: >> OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson; >> My perception on the reactor core has always implied that the >> volume of water entering the reactor core could vary. > Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mistaken. > Rossi uses a pump designed to maintain a constant flow, an

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 4:50 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson < svj.orionwo...@gmail.com> wrote: > My perception on the reactor core has always implied that the volume > of water entering the reactor core could vary. Well, that's the difference then. But I think you're mistaken. Rossi uses a pu

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Pure steam, hotter than 100C, is a stable effluent: If the power output varies a little bit, you'll still be making pure steam at some temperature above 100C. Pure steam, at 100C, is *not* stable: If the output power varies just a little, you'll either be making

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Joshua, Stephen, I have no desire to incessantly argue my POV - till I'm blue in the face. As I've stated many times in the past, I might be wrong. In any case I think I now understand where our mutual misunderstanding might lie. There appears to be a semantics problem, one that may have obfuscat

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Orionworks wrote: Joshua, I waited in anticipation to see if you could help explain to me the errors I might have made in my reasoning. I was astonished to discover that the jest of your replies struck me as being just as much of a "seat-of-the-pants" explanation as you apparently accuse me of d

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 2:15 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson < svj.orionwo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Joshua, > > I waited in anticipation to see if you could help explain to me the > errors I might have made in my reasoning. And yet you responded to everything except the part where I explained th

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

Joshua, I waited in anticipation to see if you could help explain to me the errors I might have made in my reasoning. I was astonished to discover that the jest of your replies struck me as being just as much of a "seat-of-the-pants" explanation as you apparently accuse me of doing. For example:

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 10:32 AM 7/15/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: It is all nonsense and bullshit. The 18-hour tests with flowing water proved that the large cell is producing ~17 kW. If it did, then the ste

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

At 09:53 AM 7/15/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: And this has been said to you many times, Jed, and you keep repeating that this is "nonsense." It is all nonsense and bullshit. Sure, with proper specification of the "it." Nice to be able to agree. The 18-hour tests wi

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Mark Iverson wrote: > ** > JC stated: > "...and the heated walls are at a higher temperature. So, it must get > hotter." > > What makes you think that the walls of the vertical section (i.e., the > 'chimney') are at a higher temperature than the walls of the horiz

RE: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

JC stated: "...and the heated walls are at a higher temperature. So, it must get hotter." What makes you think that the walls of the vertical section (i.e., the 'chimney') are at a higher temperature than the walls of the horizontal section that has water at a much lower temperature entering, a

Re: [Vo]:Uppsala University Denies Rossi Research Agreement

[ duplicate from parallel discussion } Well, since now it is pretty clear to many of us that none of the demos provide proof of excess heat, then the judgement call is whether to decide that there is no Rossi excess heat. I came up intuitively, out of my sensitive vapors, with the scenario that R

  1   2   >