Dear Vorticians,
It is claimed that the experiment from Rossi released about 10kW of power.
Suppose that the experiment produced this amount of power during about 2
hours, then a total amount of 72 MJ is produced.
The amount of water that can be heated from 20 to 100 C is about 200
liters.( 20- buckets of water or a large boiler!). It would be easy to see
if this amount of hot water has been produced during the reaction. Did the
water flow away out of the room or did it stay there? If the water was kept
in the room the amount of heat would have make the room a lot hotter and
humid .The room temperature was only 23 C, so I wonder what is going on.
Peter van Noorden
the Netherlands
----- Original Message -----
From: <mix...@bigpond.com>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:real heat wrong theory?
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 15 Jan 2011 18:04:47 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
Robin,
We cannot assume that this is directly comparable to a known hot fusion
reaction, assuming it is real. Why should we? There is every reason to
suspect that LENR is based on previously unknown pathways.
I agree. However I am criticizing their theory, not their experimental
findings.
I simply pointed out that if the theory they propose were the correct one,
then
one would expect to detect lots of gammas even outside the shielding.
However there is a catch. My calculations were based on beta+ decay (as
they
suggest), and EC may be so enhanced during Hydrino fusion that it
completely
swamps beta+ decay (it's usually the other way around). That would
essentially
eliminate most of the annihilation gammas. This could be a truer picture
of
what's going on. The fusion energy would be emitted as kinetic energy of
electrons (& protons?). About 1% of the electrons would create energetic
X-rays,
and a small percentage of these would be bremsstrahlung X-rays with a top
edge
equal to the electron energy (about 3.4 MeV). Even so, only about half of
all
Cu-59 decays go directly to the ground state. Those remaining still emit
gammas
of varying energies, and at least some of these ought to be detected.
The best way to validate the claim is to test a sample of spent fuel for
copper isotope ratio. We can probably expect the heavier 65Cu to be
completely absent. That would constitute almost indisputable proof.
Why wasn't this done?
From one document I got the impression that it was done and a ratio tilted
toward Cu-63 was detected.
Jones
[snip]
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
