http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jczBXmr7yo

This continuous video shows startup of a HHO Hot Cat from room temperature
to 831F

I wonder what electrode that the water clusters of come off of, the
hydrogen electrode, the oxygen electrode or both.


On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGWrJ9J5ffM
>
> This video shows HHO interaction with and without nanoparticle contact
> with the catalytic convertor substrate.
>
> When the water crystals are allied to the catalytic substrate, full heat
> capacity is produced. When the water crystals are filtered out of the HHO
> gas stream by a fibrous pad, reduced heat capacity results.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6OZykbnLQw
>>
>> This demo shows how nanoparticles of water clusters can be reacted into
>> heat in an auto catalectic converter.
>>
>> The HHO is the source of the nanoparticles "mouse"
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The Rossi reactor is currently configured into two functional parts, the
>>> "mouse" whose function it is to produce nanoparticles, and the "Cat" whose
>>> function it is to catalyze these nanoparticles in a LENR reaction.
>>>
>>> We can duplicate these functions by providing a nanoparticle source
>>> (mouse) and a nanoparticle reactor (Cat).
>>>
>>> It is always better to "buy and tie" then to build from scratch.
>>>
>>> Any device that can produce fine nano sized droplets from a liquid
>>> capable of supporting solid nano material will do.  This atomization
>>> function will support the Mouse function.
>>>
>>> I would recommend adding potassium carbonate to the Mouse colloid to
>>> support the "secret sauce" function of Rossi's reactor.
>>>
>>> These possible mouse devices include a nebulizer, electric paint
>>> sprayer, air brush, diesel fuel injector.
>>>
>>> I like the diesel fuel injector because it may produce a cavitation
>>> effect during atomization.
>>>
>>> The Cat function might well be supported using a catalytic converter
>>> from a late modeled car either new or slightly used.
>>>
>>> Engineers are doing some great stuff in the design of modern auto
>>> catalytic converters as follows:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCgQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fphys.org%2Fnews204827696.html&ei=Ea0kU-e-EOWu0AG7qICoBg&usg=AFQjCNEXBT3yWSArLp8LfqHup2wCHoDFwA&sig2=txtrtVqF-Ff1ij4rs7QThw
>>>
>>> Warm the auto catalytic converter to 400C, and inject a stream of
>>> nanoparticles formed by the Mouse into it.
>>>
>>> You may want to use heavy water to support the Mouse colloid as a way to
>>> produce tritium as a LENR tracer which marks the onset of LENR activity.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 4:37 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Edmund Storms 
>>>> <stor...@ix.netcom.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 15, 2014, at 10:30 AM, James Bowery wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) Identify which theories make predictions about modifications to the
>>>>> experimental protocol (establish a range of hypotheses).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I find that all the present accepted theories conflict either with
>>>>> behavior in LENR or with established natural law.  I suggest we need to
>>>>> start over.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Assuming that by "present accepted theories" you refer to the
>>>> hysterical attempts to explain LENR to which we are continually exposed, I
>>>> would suggest that there is a very simple treatment of this disease:
>>>>
>>>> "If your theory doesn't have an explanation for the success of this
>>>> experimental protocol, then its no good.  If your theory does have an
>>>> explanation for the success of this experimental protocol, then there
>>>> should be a range of modifications to the experimental protocol that your
>>>> theory predicts will produce a range of predicted results.  Enumerate said
>>>> modifications in terms of the economy of: 1) Detecting the predicted
>>>> results and 2) The discriminatory power of those results in terms of
>>>> competing theories.  If you cannot so enumerate such modifications, shut
>>>> up."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 4) Based on plausibility and economy, experimentally test as many of
>>>>> these hypotheses as practical.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tests are being run, but they are based on obviously flawed theories.
>>>>>  What next?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 5) Increase understanding of the NAE based on the results of these
>>>>> experiments.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What good are the results from a flawed theory?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have now defined my terms in sufficient operational detail to entail
>>>> answers to these last two questions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to