Jojo,
maybe I missed that.

but in my humble opinion carbon-nanostructures are hypothetical conceptual 
vehicles, which nobody in the field ever investigated.
I don not want to say that such structures could not exist, but I do not see 
any evidence in the literature known to me.

This would be a deep research-issue, I suspect, to bring it into reality, and 
is an OPEN TOPIC.

Question: do You think that Rossi solved that, with a little help of some 
Chinese wizards, who promise everything and deliver something of questionable 
value, if you only pay., eg Android 4.0 devices for $80.
Pay a Chinese (sorry folks) 1million to detect the Higgs Boson, they faithfully 
deliver it via UPS, tax-free in four weeks.

Excuse my sarcasm.

Guenter






________________________________
 Von: Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com>
An: Vortex <Vortex-l@eskimo.com> 
Gesendet: 6:41 Montag, 9.Juli 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]: ECAT 600 C Operations
 

Guenter, once again I believe you missed the 
point.  I thought I did a good job in explaining in the last post, but 
apparently I did not.  So let me try again.
 
You only have the 400C recrystallization issue or 
the Curie Point issue or any other temp-limiting issue if your NAE is Nickel 
Lattice or some other transistion metal (with the exception of possibly 
Tungsten).  If your NAE is cracks, or patches, or unusual geometry on the 
Nickel lattice, then you have this temp limitation and higher temper it s will 
destroy 
these environments.
 
But if your NAE is Carbon Nanostructures, you do 
not have an NAE that is easily destroyed by temperatures.  Carbon 
Nanostructures like nanotubes and graphene can easily resist higher 
temperatures 
without its structure being destroyed.  You can host higher temps on Carbon 
Nanostructures NAE.  Carbon Nanostructures have demonstrated higher 
temperature resistance.
 
 
Jojo
 
----- Original Message ----- 
>>From: Guenter  Wildgruber 
>>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
>>Sent: Monday, July 09, 2012 12:19  AM
>>Subject: Re: [Vo]: ECAT 600 C  Operations
>>
>>
>>Jojo,
>>
>>
>>Maybe, maybe not.
>>Count me in the doubter's camp.
>>As I tried to explain: 400++ degC is a domain where  recrystallization 
>>occurs. this is not your comfortable  home-temperature.
>>
>>See 'the laws of recrystallization', subtopic  -- Laws of  recrystallization 
>>--
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recrystallization_(metallurgy)
>>
>>
>>It is ONE thing to question ONE law, but a different thing to  question quite 
>>a bunch of them simultaneously,.
>>
>>
>>As an engineer with some philosophical leanings (quite rare) I  tell You that 
>>I am not quite ready to put Rossi into the alltime hall of  fame of the  
>>likes of Plato, Aristoteles or Einstein.
>>My guess is, that he is more like a Karl May character, who pretended  to 
>>have visited distant lands, without ever experiencing them, or messing  
>>things up, doing a disservice to us all.
>>
>>
>>
>>Sorry.
>>Guenter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>> Von: Jojo Jaro  <jth...@hotmail.com>
>>An: Vortex <Vortex-l@eskimo.com> 
>>Gesendet: 17:31 Sonntag,  8.Juli 2012
>>Betreff: Re:  [Vo]: ECAT 600 C Operations
>>
>>
>> 
>>Yes, 600c seems like an overstretch only  because we do not understand what's 
>>going on.  Just like how Huzienga  and Parks would think of Cold Fusion.  
>>They don't understand it, so it  is an overstretch.
>> 
>>However, Axil seems to have done a good job in  stitching together a probable 
>>explanation that can easily explain this  600C.  This result is entirely 
>>probable in the context of Carbon  Nanostructure-based LENR.  Carbon 
>>Nanostructure-based LENR can be more  consistent and controllable so I do not 
>>see a problem with 600C, or even  1000C reaction temps.
>> 
>>Many seems to have recognized the  possibility of Carbon Nanostructure-based 
>>LENR paradigm, most  notable of which may include both Ed Storms and W&L.
>> 
>>I have speculated repeatedly in the past that  one of the reason why Rossi 
>>changed to a flat design was due to the need to  deliver more consistent 
>>Sparking/arc discharge.  Now, evidence is  mounting that such an environment 
>>is consistent with Carbon  Nanosturcture-based LENR, as these Carbon 
>>Nanostructures are easily created  in such an electric discharge 
>>environment.   In fact, I would  go one step further and speculate that I 
>>believe Rossi's new flat  design may be a hybrid Arc Discharge/CVD reactor 
>>that creates abundant  Carbon Nanostructures that appear to be critical to 
>>increased power  density.   
>> 
>>We know that Carbon Nanotubes are good NAE  candidates.  In Lou's post of W&L 
>>slides, W&L presents  compelling evidence of the possibility of Graphene as a 
>>possible  NAE.  Both of these Nanosturcutures appear to be good platforms  
>>for the Nuclear Active Environment.  If one recognizes  the possibility of 
>>these Carbon Nanostructures as the NAE, one will not have  too much problems 
>>believing the Rossi 600C stable operating  temps.
>> 
>>Jojo
>> 
>> 
>>  
>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>>From: Guenter  Wildgruber 
>>>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
>>>Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2012 10:50  PM
>>>Subject: Re: [Vo]: ECAT 600 C  Operations
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Rossi, the sparrow does a good job of concealing his hand, in poker  speech.
>>>And endlessly promises. Bids up his hand to 600degC, knowing that  1000degC 
>>>would give him a good laugh, even from the most friendly of his  friends.
>>>
>>>
>>>What I tried to do, is argue, that 600degC is already an overstretch  of the 
>>>poker-hand from both sides: Rossi AND DGT.
>>>Maybe I am wrong. 
>>>
>>>Actually I hope so, because the planet would be safe for another  couple of 
>>>hundred years, and could heal from human folly.
>>>
>>>
>>>Guenter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Guenter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>________________________________
>>> Von: Jojo Jaro  <jth...@hotmail.com>
>>>An: Vortex  <Vortex-l@eskimo.com> 
>>>Gesendet: 15:25 Sonntag, 8.Juli  2012
>>>Betreff: Re: [Vo]:  ECAT 600 C Operations
>>>
>>>...The 
      assumption undergriding a pseudo-skeptics attitude is that he understands 
      everything there is to understand about the subject, therefore whatever 
he 
      does not understand must be false. 
>>> 
>>>This of course is the sad state of attitude  prevailing in modern science 
>>>nowadays.  
>>>Jojo
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>

Reply via email to