The trick that provides control in the latest E Cat designs is to seperate the fuel load and only stimulate a minor fraction of it with EMF. This frction is not capable of a runaway reaction since it can only produce a near unity COP. The major part of the fuel load is stimulated using the coherent heat produced by the minor fraction of the fuel load that was exposed to EMF.
There are many ways that the fuel load can be seperated in order to reduce EMF stimulation below the blowout limit. Summary: Minor fration stimulated by EMF. Major fraction simulated by coherent Infrared produced by the minor fraction. On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Bob Cook <[email protected]> wrote: > The recent Chinese test illustrated the rapid response to transient > power changes—much faster than can be justified by the thermal increases or > decreases of bulk materials. It seems evident that either electric fields > or magnetic fields or both are the stimulating input that allows the > energy releases associated with rapid temperature increases. > > Bob Cook > > *From:* Bob Higgins <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, June 18, 2015 9:37 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Cat stimultion > > Note that in Rossi's HotCat, the fuel chamber is much longer than in the > Parkhomov experiment. It is possible [speculation] that Rossi simply > divides the heater into 2 or more segments (from left to right in a > horizontal HotCat reactor). For example, lets say that there are 3 > segments to the heater. Perhaps the outer heater segments are the mouse > and the inner heater segment is the cat. Initially, all heaters are driven > to bring the HotCat to operating temperature. Then the center segment is > turned OFF and operates in SSM while the 2 outer segments remain heated. > When the SSM begins to wane in the center, the center heater is turned ON > and the outer heaters are turned OFF so that the outer segments operate in > SSM. With the H2 and the liquid metal transferring heat, perhaps each > segment helps support the one adjacent to it in such a configuration. This > seems a little "cat and mouse -ish" to me. > > I think the cat & mouse are probably much less exotic than what has been > proposed in this thread. > > Bob Higgins > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:17 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 18 Jun 2015 16:19:04 -0400: >> Hi, >> [snip] >> >The Hot cat reactor has an alumina shell that is transparent to infrared >> >light in the LENR reactive range. Could the Mouse be producing light that >> >gets through the alumina shell of the Cat to stimulate the Cat? >> > >> I was assuming that the cat and mouse were together in the same tube. Is >> this >> assumption wrong? >> Regards, >> >> Robin van Spaandonk >> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html >> >> >
