Abd ul-Rahman: » I have seen no peer-reviewed criticisms that manage to
impeach the *correlation* of heat with helium.»
If I have understood correctly, the correlation is meaningless, because
there are orders of magnitude too tiny amounts of helium compared to
observed heat. Therefore there is
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
If I have understood correctly, the correlation is meaningless,
because there are orders of magnitude too tiny amounts of helium
compared to observed heat.
You do not understand correctly. The amounts of helium are right what
they should be compared to observed heat.
How's that? According to what theory?
On Dec 27, 2011, at 11:01, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Jouni Valkonen wrote:
If I have understood correctly, the correlation is meaningless, because
there are orders of magnitude too tiny amounts of helium compared to
observed heat.
On Dec 26, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
However, in open cells, the oxygen leaves the cell as it is
generated, and in closed cells, excess oxygen is still vented, my
understanding (otherwise the pressure would rise very high, as
oxygen isn't loaded into palladium. Some of
At 01:03 AM 12/27/2011, Rich Murray wrote:
Hi Abd Lomax,
I'm glad to see you posting a lot now, and expressing strong doubts
about Rossi.
Are you continuing to develop your low cost tiny CF kits for
electrolytic codeposition of Pd in deuterium heavy water electrolyte,
using plastic to record
At 01:35 AM 12/27/2011, Charles Hope wrote:
On Dec 26, 2011, at 22:10, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Then there is that pesky Coulomb barrier. What I found, though,
was that there was ample opinion among quantum physicists that it
was possible that the unexplored
It is not theory, it is experimental result. Go to:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/
and enter Miles helium and McKubre helium.
On Dec 27, 2011, at 8:00 AM, Charles Hope wrote:
How's that? According to what theory?
On Dec 27, 2011, at 11:01, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Jouni
I'm reading his papers and I don't understand one thing:
1.What triggers the 4D/TSC? It looks like an ordinary configuration of D in
palladium...
2.Why does he use a value that is so precise 1.4007fs to the 4D/TSC reach
the minimum state. His calculations are approximations and even if they
At 03:53 AM 12/27/2011, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman: » I have seen no peer-reviewed
criticisms that manage to impeach the *correlation* of heat with helium.»
If I have understood correctly, the correlation
is meaningless, because there are orders of
magnitude too tiny amounts of
McKubre now acknowledges his 23.8 KeV was in error.
Harry
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
It is not theory, it is experimental result. Go to:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/
and enter Miles helium and McKubre helium.
On Dec 27, 2011, at 8:00 AM,
After some calculations, I think it is better to use the MPG-D751. See
below.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote:
The 2.5 x 2.5 mm device has a max power output of approx 0.8 mW at 10 deg
K differential. Assuming 1 Watt excess with a COP 5 yields
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Alberto De Souza
alberto.investi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a new member of the list, but I'm reading the posts since January. I'm
addicted...
If we have a large COP (10-100), I believe we can use thin film
thermogenerators
After thinking a little bit about the calculations I did (see below) and
considering what I have learned from this year reading vortex, I came to
the conclusion that the engineering approach proposed by Aussie Guy (and
also Rossi) is the best approach forward in the LERN field... If one
manages to
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
SNIPIt's been called fusion confusion. Look, Aussie Guy is anonymous,
what he writes is next to meaningless. Don't mix this up with the huge
corpus of work from hundreds of scientists around the world.
Hi Abd,
If the helium levels are what they should be compared to the heat, that
assumes some theory that correlates them. Which theory is that?
On Dec 27, 2011, at 12:24, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
It is not theory, it is experimental result. Go to:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote:
If the helium levels are what they should be compared to the heat, that
assumes some theory that correlates them. Which theory is that?
Not a theory. It is an observation that deuterium is converted to helium to
produce heat in the same ratio as
On 11-12-26 05:16 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com mailto:maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Cells running heat after death have closed the loop. Apart from
them, no laboratory scale device can produce electricity.The
implication is clear. The cells can produce
Excuse me. I didn't realize your level of understanding.
Mass and energy are related by E = m c^2. If the inputs and outputs
have a mass difference, then that mass is converted to energy, in
kinetic form, radiant form, or both.
This is the basis of most all nuclear reaction energy
On 11-12-26 10:24 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 05:31 PM 12/26/2011, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Jed Rothwell
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.comjedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Arata ran a small motor with one heated by a self-sustaining
gas-loaded cell.
Cool! Did
I wrote: The heavy lattice atoms are closer to absorbed hydrogen
than hydrogen in adjacent lattices.
That should say: Absorbed hydrogen nuclei are closer to adjacent
heavy lattice atom nuclei than to hydrogen nuclei in adjacent lattice
sites.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
Arata ran a small motor with one heated by a self-sustaining gas-loaded
cell.
Jed, could you possibly give a URL for the paper (if Arata published one
and if it's been uploaded anywhere)?
I do not think he ever published that. It was just
On 11-12-26 11:12 PM, Alberto De Souza wrote:
I'm a new member of the list, but I'm reading the posts since January.
I'm addicted...
If we have a large COP (10-100), I believe we can use thin film
thermogenerators (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoelectricity) such
as these
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote:
The conventional D+D fusion reaction, using mass differences, is:
D + D -- 4He + 23.847 MeV
OK, I get it. Am I correct that the conventional theory says this reaction
doesn't really occur (it's either 3He + n,
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
At 01:35 AM 12/27/2011, Charles Hope wrote:
On Dec 26, 2011, at 22:10, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
wrote:
Then there is that pesky Coulomb barrier. What I found, though, was
that there was
On Dec 27, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Charles HOPE wrote:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Horace Heffner
hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
The conventional D+D fusion reaction, using mass differences, is:
D + D -- 4He + 23.847 MeV
OK, I get it. Am I correct that the conventional theory says
At 01:07 PM 12/27/2011, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
SNIPIt's been called fusion confusion. Look, Aussie Guy is
anonymous, what he writes is next to meaningless. Don't mix this up
with the huge
At 03:28 PM 12/27/2011, Charles Hope wrote:
If the helium levels are what they should be compared to the heat,
that assumes some theory that correlates them. Which theory is that?
This is an experimental observation, and what you are asking was
stated. Helium is produced in PdD cells, when
At 05:13 PM 12/27/2011, Charles HOPE wrote:
As to the opinion of quantum physicists on the possibility of there
being unknown effects in the solid state, there was a recent
revision of a textbook on solid state nuclear models, and it has a
section on LENR, and it turns out that the author had
Hello Mary Yugo,
I've looked at all of your posts for months, and appreciate your
candor, spunk, restraint, keenness, patience and persistence -- it
seems that the desire for a major game changing breakthrough since
1989 leads to premature big gambles that so far always fail -- so the
whole
I'm going through Takahashi this week. How could a BEC exist at room
temperature?
On Dec 27, 2011, at 22:41, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Bose-Einstein Condensate
That is the plan. With the help of Jed's archives, other private emails,
the loan cell supplier and our local uni, we are confident to produce a
simple FPE demo device that can be supplied to a wide market.
AG
On 12/26/2011 5:13 PM, Peter Gluck wrote:
...The history of demo cells in CF is
I take you do not read what I have written on this subject? We were
ready to do a deal for the 1 MW thermal plant but Rossi suggested we
wait as he is not ready to sell us a high temp thermal oil 1 MW E-Cat
plant. Why? Because the plant is still in RD and the necessary
technical specifications
Hi Aussie,
I expect what Rossi will offer us is a complete package,
including the 330 Ac kW gen set, all tied up with a
nicely integrated NI thermal kW and Ac kW control system.
That would be nice. When Rossi is ready to offer the
system to us, we are ready to evaluate his offering.
Do you
This could be extremely valuable for the field, and profitable for AG. It
would be great to bring these to ICCF-17.
Measuring ~1 W is not difficult. I recommend a Seebeck calorimeter. It
simplifies matters and it has a large s/n ratio compared to other types, in
this range of power. At ~10 W or
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
wrote:
I take you do not read what I have written on this subject?
I try but sometimes my email client hiccups. Last I remember, you had
sealed a deal with Rossi and getting a whatever-watt plant was just around
the
Here's what Rossi wrote today (good old Rossi -- always worth a laugh):
1. Andrea Rossi
December 26th, 2011 at 11:39
AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=563cpage=7#comment-157154
Dear Francesco Fiorenzani: I hope within 2012. We must have a production
of 1 million
MaryYugo Wrote:
Want respect, not mention tons of fame and fortune? Close the
loop and make them self running except for (rare) refueling.
You'd be the first. That's for sure.
I wonder why the people AG bought the gadgets from did not close
the loop, or why the high school students who made
On 2011-12-26 19:23, Mary Yugo wrote:
Want respect, not mention tons of fame and fortune? Close the loop and
make them self running except for (rare) refueling. You'd be the
first. That's for sure.
With a small thermal excess power it's not trivial to close the loop in
my opinion. It
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com
wrote:
With a small thermal excess power it's not trivial to close the loop in my
opinion.
Agreed it's not trivial. But I was addressing Aussie Guy who said his
devices have a COP of 5 in the range of watts and
MaryYugo Wrote:
Want respect, not mention tons of fame and fortune? Close the
loop and make them self running except for (rare) refueling.
You'd be the first. That's for sure.
I wonder why the people AG bought the gadgets from did not close
the loop, or why the high school
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:53 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
Nobody ever closes the loop.
I think the majority of the Vort Collective understands the fact that Vorl
and MY believe most CF/LENR claims are nothing more than horse manure.
I
On 11-12-26 01:51 PM, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
On 2011-12-26 19:23, Mary Yugo wrote:
Want respect, not mention tons of fame and fortune? Close the loop and
make them self running except for (rare) refueling. You'd be the
first. That's for sure.
With a small thermal excess power it's not
Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
Nobody ever closes the loop.
That is incorrect. Many people have closed the loop, starting with
Fleischmann and Pons. In cold fusion jargon, closing the loop is called
running in heat after death mode. Fleischmann once called it fully
ignited, borrowing
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
Nobody ever closes the loop.
That is incorrect. Many people have closed the loop, starting with
Fleischmann and Pons. In cold fusion jargon, closing the loop is called
running
Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
Nobody ever closes the loop.
That is incorrect. Many people have closed the loop, starting
with Fleischmann and Pons. In cold fusion jargon, closing the
loop is called running in heat after death mode. Fleischmann
once called it fully ignited,
On 11-12-26 02:57 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
Try responding to a real argument: if the claim, as Aussie Guy made
it, is for a device with a COP of 5 over an input measured in watts,
then why not close the loop? What COP would you need? 10? 100?
what? Defkalion, by the way, claims 35x.
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
On 11-12-26 02:57 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
Try responding to a real argument: if the claim, as Aussie Guy made it,
is for a device with a COP of 5 over an input measured in watts, then why
not close the loop? What
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
In practice the requirement to close the loop with a wet CF cell is likely
to be more stringent than that.
I understand but, not to drive this into the ground, why is it necessarily
so? Is there nothing you can do to such a cell to get a higher delta
On 11-12-26 03:26 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
On 11-12-26 02:57 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
Try responding to a real argument: if the claim, as Aussie
Guy made it, is for a
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
Now, to take up your second question, should it be possible to build a wet
CF cell which gives enough thermal boost due to the PF effect so that you
can get something useful out of it? Jed and Ed Storms have, IIRC, both
alleged that it should be
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
I suggest you stop guessing and read the literature.
I suggest you stop referring vaguely to some amorphous literature and
answer the question -- see below for a clarification.
Cells running heat after death have
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
hey figure that people who do not believe calorimetry would not believe
this demonstration either. They have a good point. If someone revealed a
device of this nature, Mary Yugo would surely say it must be fake, with
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest you stop guessing and read the literature.
I suggest you stop referring vaguely to some amorphous literature and
answer the question . . .
No can do. I learned years ago there is no point to spoon feeding
information to skeptics. First they
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd believe almost anything, including most particularly Defkalion and
Rossi claims, if they were properly tested, the tests were independently
and properly replicated and someone or some organization I trusted did them.
No you will not believe almost
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest you stop guessing and read the literature.
I suggest you stop referring vaguely to some amorphous literature and
answer the question . . .
No can do. I learned
On Dec 26, 2011, at 16:57, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
With Rossi and Defkalion truly acting and writing like clowns, it's not hard
to see why there is no major press coverage or much of anything else going
on, a full year after the original announcement and hoopla. And Aussie
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Cells running heat after death have closed the loop. Apart from them, no
laboratory scale device can produce electricity.The implication is
clear. The cells can produce electricity. If that isn't what you meant,
just say so.
Obviously I mean they
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Arata ran a small motor with one heated by a self-sustaining gas-loaded
cell.
Cool! Did anyone verify this or replicate it? And how long did it run and
at what output level?
Why is it that specific questions as to
We need to generate electricity. To do that we need more than 120 deg C
steam. So we wait for the high temp thermal oil E-Cat. The fame belongs
to FP. I'm nothing more than a system integrator. As for closing the
loop with a thermal FPE device, you do understand the Carnot cycle? If
not,
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
It must do more than barely exceed the limits of chemistry, what ever
exactly that is.
The first report in the literature showed it exceeding the limits by a
factor of 1,700. That's not barely; that is a lot. Like a person pole
vaulting 10 km high.
If you
I know he is very busy. I see getting the NI control system working very
well is his current priority. I agree with that. I do know electricity
generation is a high priority. He needs to show this before Defkalion
does. The first to show electricity generation from their device will
gain high
MaryYugo asks:
Why is it that specific questions as to power output and duration are, to
some cold fusion advocates, like sunshine to vampires?
And Mary, the same could be said for your ANONYMOUS modeler. When asked in
a very polite, respectful manner some specific questions by Dave
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint
zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
MaryYugo asks:
“Why is it that specific questions as to power output and duration are, to
some cold fusion advocates, like sunshine to vampires?”
** **
And Mary, the same could be said for your
This pretty much sums it up.
If there is anything I have learned from the pathoskeps over the past year
is that intellectual and well-reasoned arguments are not really necessary to
get your point across, and that annoying repetition can be effective.
-m
Your assuming their pay check allows them to change their opinion. MY
and others put in so much time that I feel they have a stake in the game
and it is not about FPE devices being accepted as real.
AG
On 12/27/2011 10:00 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote:
This pretty much sums it up…
“If
http://i.imgur.com/YdetE.png
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
http://i.imgur.com/YdetE.png
That was a response by Aber0der to this Alsetalokin remark:
I'll buy a Mac when you can pour water in one end and make espresso with
the steam from the internal iEcat out the other end.
Here:
-Original Message-
From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Dec 26, 2011 6:19 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:We have FPE cells
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
wrote:
MaryYugo asks:
“Why is it that specific questions
At 07:32 PM 12/25/2011, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
I can't discuss the cell technology yet. I can say I consider a Ni-H
cell as a FPE device.
You can call a pig an eagle, but that won't make it fly.
Seriously, the term Fleischman-Pons effect is taken. It usually
refers to the Fleischman-Pons
I say DDSLA, Different Dog, Same Leg Action. Until it is proven what
causes the FPE is not what causes the Ni-H effect, I'll continue to
refer to ALL such devices as FPE devices. I will not stand by and see
FP denied the right to the effect they discovered. To go further, after
we start
At 03:14 PM 12/26/2011, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Jed Rothwell
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.comjedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Vorl Bek mailto:vorl@antichef.comvorl@antichef.com wrote:
Nobody ever closes the loop.
That is incorrect. Many people have closed the
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 5:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Mary,
I would like very much to work with your acquaintance to see how his
model compares to some of the in dept analysis I completed upon the October
6 test data.
I totally understand how his model must work and
At 03:19 PM 12/26/2011, Vorl Bek wrote:
Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
Nobody ever closes the loop.
That is incorrect. Many people have closed the loop, starting
with Fleischmann and Pons. In cold fusion jargon, closing the
loop is called running in heat after death mode.
At 04:27 PM 12/26/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Mary Yugo mailto:maryyu...@gmail.commaryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest you stop guessing and read the literature.
I suggest you stop referring vaguely to some amorphous literature
and answer the question . . .
No can do. I learned years ago
At 04:52 PM 12/26/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Mary Yugo mailto:maryyu...@gmail.commaryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd believe almost anything, including most particularly Defkalion
and Rossi claims, if they were properly tested, the tests were
independently and properly replicated and someone or
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
You have not even bothered to look at most, and the few that you claim you
read you say make no sense and are poorly written.
Jed, that's really unfair. You are mixing up two very different
situations, the Rossi/Defkalion issue, and the full
At 05:31 PM 12/26/2011, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Jed Rothwell
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.comjedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Arata ran a small motor with one heated by a self-sustaining gas-loaded cell.
Cool! Did anyone verify this or replicate it? And how long did it
I'm a new member of the list, but I'm reading the posts since January. I'm
addicted...
If we have a large COP (10-100), I believe we can use thin film
thermogenerators (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoelectricity) such as
these http://www.micropelt.com/down/datasheet_mpg_d651_d751.pdf to make
The 2.5 x 2.5 mm device has a max power output of approx 0.8 mW at 10
deg K differential. Assuming 1 Watt excess with a COP 5 yields 200 mW
input. Would need around 300 of the MPG-D615 devices with fitted finned
heat sinks to each device's COLD side to get good thermal transfer into
the air.
Hi Abd Lomax,
I'm glad to see you posting a lot now, and expressing strong doubts about Rossi.
Are you continuing to develop your low cost tiny CF kits for
electrolytic codeposition of Pd in deuterium heavy water electrolyte,
using plastic to record the impacts of any generated neutrons,
On Dec 26, 2011, at 22:10, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Then there is that pesky Coulomb barrier. What I found, though, was that
there was ample opinion among quantum physicists that it was possible that
the unexplored conditions of condensed matter just might provide
Greetings Aussie, and a Merry Down-Under X-Mass to you.
I've taken advantage of a brief respite between family obligations by
sneaking over to my home office for some covert posting.
Despite MY's self-defensive tactic of hoping to remain passively ignorant of
the issues by demanding you
We will be working with a local university to get the cells operational
and then to build our own. We will go public when our cells are
operational and we have the uni endorsed results. Please understand
these are not commercial cells. They are to show, to potential clients
and financial
The 2 cells were obtained from an Asian source. They are on loan for 3
months. The source will work remotely with our local uni to get them
operational. They output greater than 1 watt with a COP greater than 5.
We are funding the work at the local uni. The uni can publish the
results from the
Oh, so you will let MY personally do any test she desires with your cells?
2011/12/25 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
The 2 cells were obtained from an Asian source. They are on loan for 3
months. The source will work remotely with our local uni to get them
operational. They output
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote:
They output greater than 1 watt with a COP greater than 5.
Thermal or electrical? And if they output 5x input at a watt level, it
should be almost trivial to run them on their own output. A long run
without any
That's thermal...
2011/12/25 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
They output greater than 1 watt with a COP greater than 5.
Thermal or electrical? And if they output 5x input at a watt level, it
should be
We don't own any cells at present. When we finish the replicant stage
and we are ready to provide cells to others, MY or anyone else can
purchase them. Then MY can do whatever MY desires with the cells MY
purchases.
AG
On 12/26/2011 10:14 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Oh, so you will let MY
Why don't you develop it open source? Like RepRap:
http://reprap.org/wiki/RepRap
2011/12/25 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
We don't own any cells at present. When we finish the replicant stage and
we are ready to provide cells to others, MY or anyone else can purchase
them. Then
They are simple thermal electrochemical cells. We plan to trial various
ideas to link a small external heat exchanger so you can flow water in
the secondary circuit and do delta temp measurements.
AG
On 12/26/2011 10:16 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Aussie Guy
We are moving into this field to make money. We have already invested
over $100k to secure the first loan cells and to do the uni work. We
expect to recover some those funds from the sale of the FPE replicant
cells and other services. We will create a web site and discussion forum
where FPE
On 11-12-25 07:03 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
They are simple thermal electrochemical cells. We plan to trial
various ideas to link a small external heat exchanger so you can flow
water in the secondary circuit and do delta temp measurements.
I don't understand. That would provide you
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
We are moving into this field to make money. We have already invested over
$100k to secure the first loan cells and to do the uni work. We expect to
recover some those funds from the sale of the FPE replicant
So, your aim is not to convince skeptics. That is something secondary in
this plan and this is what we would expect from Rossi, DGT anyway. So, you
won't get a better result in convincing any skeptics since we will have to
wait mcuh longer since you are in a much earlier stage of development.
If
I saw over 1 Watt of excess heat generated with a COP of greater than 5.
That needs to be confirmed by our local uni before they can draw down
the funding.
AG
On 12/26/2011 10:53 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-12-25 07:03 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
They are simple thermal
I can't discuss the cell technology yet. I can say I consider a Ni-H
cell as a FPE device.
AG
On 12/26/2011 10:53 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
We are moving into this field to make money. We have already invested
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't discuss the cell technology yet. I can say I consider a Ni-H cell as
a FPE device.
But it is not. The reaction is likely unrelated to PdD.
T
It depends on the theory. The solar process can yield deuterium from
protons.
2011/12/25 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't discuss the cell technology yet. I can say I consider a Ni-H
cell as
a FPE
At this moment in time all I have are 2 loan cells. They will be tested
at a local uni, which claims to have the necessary people and equipment
to do a proper evaluation and to produce a report. When I and others see
the uni report, showing the cells have repeated what I saw a few weeks
ago,
I support McKubre's Conservation of Miracles or as I put it,
Different Dog, Same Leg Action ;)
AG
On 12/26/2011 11:04 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
I can't discuss the cell technology yet. I can say I consider a
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
