Whenever I read about the DGT device I get the impression that it behaves much 
differently than the ECAT.  The main difference I focus upon so far is the 
method of control.  We have discussed the ECAT thermal positive feedback 
control on many occasions and have developed models that appear to explain its 
operation.  The same is not yet true for the DGT beast.

Thermal control such as that used by Rossi seems to have difficulty achieving a 
stable COP of 6 for the basic device excluding electrical power generation and 
feedback.   Of course it is expected that one will be able to use the fed back 
electrical power to drive the device one day and achieve a net COP of infinity. 
 This should become possible fairly soon and Rossi appears to be working hard 
to arrive at a reasonable design.

DGT suggests that they potentially can already obtain a large COP, but I have 
questions about the design since little has been demonstrated in public.  My 
reservations can easily be disposed of by additional information and I 
anxiously await that time.

The spark plug like ignition system of the DGT animal bears little resemblance 
to the thermal operation of Rossi's ECAT.  I have the suspicion that there is 
something important to be learned by the fact that these various devices both 
function.  How can that be?  What is it about the DGT design that appears to 
efficiently use the spark induced reactions while maintaining excellent 
control?  We certainly are not interested in hot fusion products which tend to 
be associated with high voltages such as spark discharges.  If acceleration due 
to high voltage is present then why does this not occur?  Does DGT balance the 
spark magnitude carefully enough to avoid this fate while achieving adequate 
LENR activity?

I want to learn from the DGT device as well as the ECAT.  There appears to be 
an understanding among most of us that some form of NAE is present which allows 
LENR to proceed, but what form does it take?  Is it the same for both designs?  
What does the spark of DGT offer that heat alone seems to neglect in the ECAT?  
It seems as if the ECAT would love to thermally run away without much 
provocation while the DGT device does not seem to exhibit that behavior.  
Perhaps DGT has done a good job of hiding this problem, but they offer 
information that suggests that this is not happening with their design.  I find 
the description that the DGT design can be turned on and off rapidly to 
potentially find applications that are diverse such as transportation, the gold 
standard of mine as evidence.  If thermal run away were a major issue, then the 
rapid control might not be so easy to demonstrate.

>From the information that I have gleaned, both systems appear to offer 
>excellent energy density and good power output.  This is extremely important 
>for future applications.  It will be interesting to witness the race between 
>these two horses in the near future.  Of course, others might enter the fray 
>soon and we all will benefit it that occurs.

I realize that I have touched upon a multitude of interesting issues in this 
post and I hope that some of our esteemed members can add important information 
to the discussion.  And if the answers to some of my questions appear, then 
that would be fantastic.

Dave

Reply via email to