Re: W.: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Someone wrote: > In previous experiments, however hidden energysources such as fuel > > tanks were not excluded. That is incorrect. A video of a previous test shows the observers lifting up the device, looking under it, and placing it on a weight scale. They also looked inside it. Hidden energy

Re: W.: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

In reply to peter.heck...@arcor.de's message of Thu, 6 Oct 2011 10:04:06 +0200 (CEST): Hi, [snip] >I dont see this as a problem. It would be very fine if there is /repeatable/ >evidence for anomalous heat. >If there is enough excess heat that cannot be explained conventionally then >this is a de

W.: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

- Original Nachricht Von: Jouni Valkonen An: Peter Heckert Datum: 06.10.2011 04:15 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo > It is not about evidence of cold fusion. There are plenty of evidence > for anomalous excess heat. Problem is that there

W.: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

- Original Nachricht Von: peter.heck...@arcor.de An: jounivalko...@gmail.com Datum: 06.10.2011 08:48 Betreff: Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo Yes without doubt this would be discovered sooner or later. It was my thought, that nobody had the idea to test

Aw: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

- Original Nachricht Von: Jed Rothwell An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 05.10.2011 20:20 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo > The correct number was a 40°C temperature difference which indicates a > nominal 130 kW. See: > > http://www

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

I enjoy your truth-full spunk -- my wife and I have read some Eckhart Tolle every day for years -- I let A Course In Miracles work on me daily since August, 1977 -- yes, no evidence possible in any dream, while awareness-being is not dream or even source of dream -- peaceful dreams conveniently al

RE: [Vo]: prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

I think he ought to run it for a few hours and then put it in self-sustain mode, which I assume means no power to the internal resistance heater(s), and then let’s HOPE that it becomes unstable and goes critical! I say, let it melt-down… With no input power, and coolant flowing, there is

RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Ah... I seem to have an overpowering urge to ramble on for a bit. Please feel free skip the following soliloquy if one is easily bored by matters pertaining to the care and feeding of our inner psyches. I've noticed that on more than one occasion commentary attributed to Mr. Murray seems to bring o

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Robert Leguillon wrote: You're absolutely right that residual heat would only result in tempearture > loss and not temperature gain (which briefly appeared in the last demo). > It was not brief. The temperature rose from 22:35 to 22:42, 7 minutes. That's much too long for something like a moment

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Ok, I make a precise prediction: I make a bet with two persons: With person 1 I bet that the e-cat will work. With person 2 I bet that the e-cat will not work. When we have the results, both persons will say, they have won and will want their money.. hehe

RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Again, FWIW, I hope to God this is a conclusive test. As this argument is already raising eyebrows, let me go back to the original predictions that are raising a fuss: 4) Power gains will be relatively small and will be reliant on calculations using a "no input" value during the su

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

I should have said: While the eCat is "warming up," nearly all of the heat that goes in comes right out. Nothing is stored. The heat is balanced. There is no SIGNIFICANT endothermic phase, so there is not MUCH storage. What storage there is, you can measure with confidence. A calorimeter wor

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

At 12:29 PM 10/5/2011, Harry Veeder wrote: The observers should take a thermal imaging camera. That would quickly reveal any sign of preheating. Harry And any exhaust from combustion or a heat-pump. Both way down in the probabilities, but worth doing. Also, Lewan / April : To safely exclude

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

The observers should take a thermal imaging camera. That would quickly reveal any sign of preheating. Harry From: Jed Rothwell >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2011 2:43:52 PM >Subject: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo > > >Robert Leguillon

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Am 05.10.2011 21:08, schrieb Man on Bridges: Hi, On 5-10-2011 21:02, Peter Heckert wrote: They could hide the coil inside the table board and feed the power through the legs or through a distant coil using resonance transformation effects. And you would think that their equipment or other el

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Alan J Fletcher wrote: > That was my report on Lewan's September trial -- when he didn't see > inside. 90L total is correct, which will come down when it's stripped. > Ah, I see what you mean. "Stripped" in this case means opened up and revealed down to the largest single component that cannot

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Hi, On 5-10-2011 21:02, Peter Heckert wrote: They could hide the coil inside the table board and feed the power through the legs or through a distant coil using resonance transformation effects. And you would think that their equipment or other electronic devices are not affected by such lar

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

At 11:55 AM 10/5/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Alan J Fletcher wrote:   Looks like I goofed ... it's now listing 90 liters, so my volume and times are 3* off : back to the source-code   Your calculations should take into account the fact that people will look inside the thing

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Am 05.10.2011 20:51, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Peter Heckert mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de>> wrote: What if they have coils inserted in the table wood board? That is ridiculous. It would take a huge set of coils on both sides -- in the table and in the eCat -- to induce 15 kW. No.

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Alan J Fletcher wrote: > Looks like I goofed ... it's now listing 90 liters, so my volume and times > are 3* off : back to the source-code > Your calculations should take into account the fact that people will look inside the thing and see that it is metal equipment, not a canister of fuel

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

At 11:48 AM 10/5/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 11:26 AM 10/5/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v401.php#fakesbyvolume For Lewan's Fat-Cat test (2kW excess) Compressed Hydrogen/Air : 69 hrs Diesel/Air : 459 hrs Boron/Air : 1697 hrs Hmmm ... I forgot to print t

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Peter Heckert wrote: > What if they have coils inserted in the table wood board? > That is ridiculous. It would take a huge set of coils on both sides -- in the table and in the eCat -- to induce 15 kW. Anyone looking at the device would instantly see what it is. Observers in the past have look

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

At 11:26 AM 10/5/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v401.php#fakesbyvolume For Lewan's Fat-Cat test (2kW excess) Compressed Hydrogen/Air : 69 hrs Diesel/Air : 459 hrs Boron/Air : 1697 hrs Hmmm ... I forgot to print the total fat-ecat volume in the document ... a

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Robert Leguillon wrote: > > I take an old blacksmith's anvil. I warm it in a kiln over two day to > roughly orange-hot (it is going to hold this heat for a LONG time, > especially if well-insulated). > It will be orange hot after about 10 minutes. It will reach the terminal temperature and not

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Am 05.10.2011 20:21, schrieb Man on Bridges: With a Copper resistivity/m of 0.0175 this requires a wire with a thickness of 10.0 mm^2 or a diameter of 3.57 mm (= approx. AWG 7 ! ), which results in a wire of 0.00175 ?. Such wire is VDE approved for a maximum of 66.00 A and with single phase 2

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Hmm, what does it mean for a 15 hour test? Does it mean 15 hours of "fusion" or 14 hours of heating plus 1 of "fusion"?

RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

will still be questionable, and that the "heat after death" scenario is only going to serve to muddy the water. Skeptical not Pseudo-Skeptical, R.L. Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 13:59:33 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: v

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Man on Bridges wrote: With a Copper resistivity/m of 0.0175 this requires a wire with a thickness of 10.0 mm^2 or a diameter of 3.57 mm (= approx. AWG 7 ! ), which results in a wire of 0.00175 ?. Such wire is VDE approved for a maximum of 66.00 A and with single phase 230V AC this results in a

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

At 10:59 AM 10/5/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Better NOT do it that way. I just told them: "The secondary cooling loop should be started before the Rossi device is turned on. You should confirm that the inlet and outlet temperatures are the same. In other words confirm that the inlet and outlet

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

At 10:40 AM 10/5/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: As far as I know it never takes more than 10 or 20 minutes. No one has ever reported that takes longer than this. The test will be at least 12 hours so warm up time is irrelevant. No form of stored chemical energy can power a device of this size at that

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Hi, On 5-10-2011 19:40, Jed Rothwell wrote: Robert Leguillon > wrote: 3) Secondary water flow will be properly measured and regularly recorded, but input primary power measurements will still be inconclusive. i would REALLY like to see Voltage a

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Am 05.10.2011 20:00, schrieb Jouni Valkonen: Very good arguments you presented. Thanks for those. I hope that you are wrong! I hope too, that I'm wrong. My hopes however are very low. It is wishful thinking, nothing more. I want a repeatable key experiment to prove LENR effects. If Rossi cann

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Peter Heckert wrote: > When I first heard about this I did not know much about this. > I have readed that Levi claimed there where energy bursts of 100 or 200 kW > some months ago. > > With my todays knowledge I know, this is impossible, because it is > impossible to measure this amount of energ

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

I wrote: > It never occurred to me anyone would start the secondary loop after the > machine warms up, but I will tell them they better do it that way. > Better NOT do it that way. I just told them: "The secondary cooling loop should be started before the Rossi device is turned on. You should c

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

yes, but what's going on since 1989 is more collective mutual delusion, rather than deliberate lying, in most cases -- as one who has twice failed radically at attempting day trading stocks, I notice that Ponzi schemes in all their variety constitute much of what is still presented as legitimate b

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Hi Peter, FWIW, it's been my experience that the universe seldom conforms to my anticipated calendar of events. She has a mind of her own. I do my best to remember that, particularly when I begin to notice the fact that I seem to be anticipating yet another major event coming down the pipeline.

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Robert Leguillon wrote: > 2) It will take a LONG time for the e-Cat to come up to temperature. > As far as I know it never takes more than 10 or 20 minutes. No one has ever reported that takes longer than this. The test will be at least 12 hours so warm up time is irrelevant. No form of stored

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

I have two souls inside my chest: I want to believe it, but I cannot believe it. My intellectual mind says, no this will not work. They are all lying like mad. When I first heard about this I did not know much about this. I have readed that Levi claimed there where energy bursts of 100 or 200

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Yeah, I predict: FUBAR f* up beyond all reason... Rich Murray

RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

time stamped 5) Sufficient operation time to rule out a conventional reaction Extraneous data will only serve to complicate what should be very straightforward calculations. Donating to the World; Two Cents at a Time, R.L. > Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 16:33:58 +0300 >

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

I predict another inconclusive test. T

RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

I predict a conclusive success or catastrophic failure for Oct 6 test - Rossi has had his fill of getting beat up over inconclusive results and predict he will risk operating the fat cat closer to run-away during this extended test to finally make the numbers overwhelming. Fran From: Peter

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

2011/10/5 Jouni Valkonen : > I think that the thinking goes back to the Pl-D cold fusion reactions, I apologize my silly mistake... Pd-D cold fusion... –Jouni

Re: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

Some thoughts about. I predict that E-Cat when stabilized, it will produce 6-12 kW cyclically, where as average electric heating power is 800 watts, but it will also work cyclically. Therefore COP is 8-15. On average perhaps around 12. 2011/10/5 Peter Gluck : »My impression was that Defkalion had

RE: [Vo]:prediction for the Oct 6 Fat Cat demo

>From Peter: > and make your own predictions if you dare or > it makes fun for you A good dare, Peter! ;-) I think it would be foolish of me to predict. I can only share a personal opinion of my own, an opinion that in the end may turn out to be inaccurate. IMO, because of the caliber of certain