tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post8459492530483773515..comments2024-03-27T21:35:04.988-07:00Comments on EGO OUT: NOV 04, 2016 LENR AND OVER-AMBITIOUS METHODSGeorgina Popescuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04628821029016016988noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-21200636011813133982016-11-08T03:55:46.248-08:002016-11-08T03:55:46.248-08:00E_man - it seems to me that they had no such oppor...E_man - it seems to me that they had no such opportunity at Doral, but that they did test their copies of the reactors (presumably the same as they supplied to Rossi) and found no excess heat. <br /><br />Our opinions on this are likely to be coloured by whether we think IH really wanted to have something working (which seems to me to be the case) or whether we think they were out to steal the technology and not pay for it. <br /><br />For me, looking at the sum of the evidence leads me to think that Rossi's published data is wrong. On the other hand, the sum of evidence from elsewhere leads me to Pd/D LENR being confirmed (if somewhat unreliable) and Ni/H LENR looking pretty hopeful. I hope that Brillouin can prove it, but other methods may turn out to be better. Simon Derricutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15137826634256652580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-62385361381448926022016-11-07T23:09:19.067-08:002016-11-07T23:09:19.067-08:00Agree.
But....
IH had excellent chance to confirm ...Agree.<br />But....<br />IH had excellent chance to confirm or to disprove E-Cat. Just to measure second side of heat exchanger by flowmeter and thermometer keeping temperature below 100°C. <br />I do not believe IH!<br />E_manE_manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14623787877207578188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-26981010401116608512016-11-07T04:08:12.186-08:002016-11-07T04:08:12.186-08:00E_man - no problems. Though I'd like to see Ro...E_man - no problems. Though I'd like to see Rossi succeed, and I still think that he's seen some success, I've set out the logical reasons why the current story doesn't hold together and thus why I don't see Rossi's published methods as a way forward. <br /><br />Of course I could be wrong in my doubts about Rossi, but by stating the available data clearly that does give people the opportunity to agree/disagree on specific points. Some people just believe, but I like evidence that corroborates the assertions. Show me a valid way that the heat could have been dissipated without being seen and I'll accept that, but if people just say "it will be explained later" then that is inadequate.Simon Derricutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15137826634256652580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-80409276961860997252016-11-06T05:34:38.841-08:002016-11-06T05:34:38.841-08:00Sorry Simon. I discussed only to your :"... ...Sorry Simon. I discussed only to your :"... Since so far neither Rossi nor anyone else has come up with a reasonable explanation of how around 980kW of steam heat energy disappeared without leaving a trail of evidence, I remain unconvinced that the heat was there..."<br />E_manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14623787877207578188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-27812985950374330712016-11-06T04:47:39.936-08:002016-11-06T04:47:39.936-08:00E-man - with an input temperature of around 375K a...E-man - with an input temperature of around 375K and an output temperature of around 335K, it's somewhat difficult to speculate on any process absorbing 98% of the heat energy. <br /><br />If we nevertheless say that this is what must have happened, then on an economic argument for J.M.Products we'd expect that whatever was made in the locked room must be worth more than the power bill of around $30k/month. That in turn implies that raw materials should have been delivered and finished materials would have been shipped out, and also that J.M.Products will have a customer for whatever it was was made. The annual accounts for J.M.Products should thus show a sufficient volume of money moving through, also buying materials and selling product to customers. It may be a while before this evidence surfaces, but my prediction is that the company has no employees and that the money in was the same as the money used to pay the electricity bill. There will be no raw material purchases or finished material sales, and J.M.Products is simply a shell company that doesn't actually do anything.<br /><br />Though we can discuss unknown physical/chemical processes without coming to an agreement, the financial side of things can provide clear evidence that whatever heat J.M.Products bought did not result in any real business. <br /><br />The starting-point for this test was that Rossi had a real customer who could use the heat for an industrial process and would thus prove that the heat existed. If instead we see that J.M.Products was set up by Rossi's lawyer, didn't have any employees, didn't buy any raw materials and didn't sell any products, then there is also no proof that the heat existed, except so far as the meter-readings were correctly measured and honestly recorded. If you personally had over $100M resting on those measurements, and your own tests of the duplicate reactors had been total failures with no excess heat measurable, would you pay up the money? Bear in mind that a slight misreading of the temperature by a degree or a fraction of a bar above atmospheric pressure can make a difference by a factor of about 25 in the actual energy calculation. <br />Personally, I'd ask for a bit more evidence of the magnitude of the heat and of where it went.Simon Derricutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15137826634256652580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-28461967503455609562016-11-05T23:29:07.823-07:002016-11-05T23:29:07.823-07:00Simon: "...If I remember my school chemistry...Simon: "...If I remember my school chemistry correctly, the Haber process runs at around 400°C or more and 150bar or more in pressure. The temperature supplied by Rossi would not be enough for that standard process. What you are proposing is thus probably a different process. ..."<br />I'm not skill to discuss it. But this is more then hundred years old technology. I think there are much better (hidden) technologies at present time. Just my opinion.E_manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14623787877207578188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-29921680297494632812016-11-05T10:29:22.177-07:002016-11-05T10:29:22.177-07:00E_man - that's not a reaction I was aware of, ...E_man - that's not a reaction I was aware of, being also more electronics-oriented. What are the conditions needed - temperatures, pressures etc.? I would assume that water would come in from the pipe and N2 from the air, so no material deliveries would be seen. Could this run unattended (since no employees seen) and would the amount of product be worth $30K/month? Since NH3 is very poisonous, I would expect that it would not be allowed to run through a pipe to elsewhere, but would be transferred to a tanker for delivery. As far as I can tell no such collections of product were seen.<br /><br />If I remember my school chemistry correctly, the Haber process runs at around 400°C or more and 150bar or more in pressure. The temperature supplied by Rossi would not be enough for that standard process. What you are proposing is thus probably a different process. <br /><br />This process has to run automatically (limited number of people there and obviously unattended for hours at a time) and the material inflow and finished products need to be easily hidden. It's a reasonable bet that with that much money involved that IH at least watched the outside of the building and saw what went in and went out. <br /><br />With a power-bill of $30k/month, it's hard to see what bulk manufacture would be commercially viable (and the deliveries would be obvious) so the only other option is high-value high-tech materials such as nanomaterials where a bagful could be worth that much - but then that would leave no sink for all that heat that wouldn't leave an evidence trail.<br /><br />I thus still can't see a way that around 98% of the heat input (at 100°C or so) could just disappear. Don't forget that this is not some esoteric process we're talking about here, it's steam heat and we've been experienced in dealing with that for centuries. <br /><br />Peter says he's sure that Rossi will explain where the heat went, but don't forget that Peter is a gifted industrial chemist himself and so far he hasn't given any reasonable speculation himself. Other explanations I've seen are things like a fan-assisted chimney or just open the transit doors, but those would have produced a plume of heat visible to an IR camera - and an IR camera was used (by IH) to look for that. Putting the heat down the drains would use around the same water as 5500 local average houses, which would show on the water-bill and also on the IR survey of the area. <br /><br />Where the heat went is still an unanswered question, or to be more precise the answers proposed are so far unsatisfactory.Simon Derricutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15137826634256652580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-55264690472338850692016-11-05T00:49:17.918-07:002016-11-05T00:49:17.918-07:00Simon:"... Since so far neither Rossi nor an...Simon:"... Since so far neither Rossi nor anyone else has come up with a reasonable explanation of how around 980kW of steam heat energy disappeared without leaving a trail of evidence, I remain unconvinced that the heat was there..."<br /><br />From my point of wiew one possibility is using E-Cat_energy+N2+H20 to create amoniak. It can absorb a lot of energy. By means of relativ small pipe diameter is possible to lead it to nearest save place and daily or weekly take it away. Just electronic opinion not chemist.E_manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14623787877207578188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-9248676733065744942016-11-04T17:14:28.915-07:002016-11-04T17:14:28.915-07:00Anonymous - good comment, and I'd add in the w...Anonymous - good comment, and I'd add in the work from Mitsubishi and Toyota diffusing D through a Pd/CaO sandwich, with maybe some dirty tricks trying to disparage that too.<br /><br />Peter - nice quotes from Pirsig and Heisenberg. When Nature talks you need to listen with as few preconceptions as possible. When other people tell you what they heard, though, you also need to take into account all available data. Since so far neither Rossi nor anyone else has come up with a reasonable explanation of how around 980kW of steam heat energy disappeared without leaving a trail of evidence, I remain unconvinced that the heat was there. I find Brillouin's claimed 10W or so far more believable. <br /><br />Luckily there are a fair number of researchers who are exploring different methods than Rossi says he's using. To me this seems logical, given the uncertainty that anything Rossi says is true, and I hope someone does find a reliable method to get cheap power in the next few years. It may be Ni/H, but could be one of the hot fusion methods or something unexpected.Simon Derricutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15137826634256652580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-41061903354018474452016-11-04T15:55:01.633-07:002016-11-04T15:55:01.633-07:00Well, for some reason, despite Pons and Fleischman...Well, for some reason, despite Pons and Fleischmann's "miscovery" of cold fusion, the researchers at SPAWAR were able to replicate it, and improve on it. Perhaps you should spend less time bitching about P&F and more time reading their research papers. <br /><br />The problems of LENR had zero to do with "miscovery" and everything to do with dirty science politics initiated and continued by the supposed "scientists" of hot fusion who were more worried about competition than they were about actually following the accepted rules and mores of scientific impartiality. <br /><br />Note that NASA initiated and replicated a gas phase Pd/D2 system which had none of the disadvantages of the electrolytic approach, yet that was also ignored for precisely the same reason as the P&F work. How does your "miscovery" theory accommodate that fact??Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-10167009569471412432016-11-04T14:39:19.762-07:002016-11-04T14:39:19.762-07:00Hank Mills
November 4, 2016 at 3:13 AM
Dear Andrea...Hank Mills<br />November 4, 2016 at 3:13 AM<br />Dear Andrea,<br /><br />Do you expect to one day — even if years from now — write a paper about the issues I asked about in regards to the operation of the E-Cat?<br /><br />Even if it is years from now, I think the world needs a written record of your complete, unabridged knowledge of this topic. Perhaps with more vigor than any other individual in the entire history of the LENR community, you’ve performed tireless testing of your systems to gain first hand understanding of the processes and mechanisms involved. No one has built and tested a tenth or even a hundredth of the reactors you have or performed a fraction of the experiments. And, certainly, no one has sat inside of a plant with hundreds of reactor cores operating for an entire year. You’re knowledge and understanding of what’s practically required to induce these reactions is second to none. This knowledge came at significant cost to you: the sacrifice of personal savings, homes, businesses, your health for a period of time (the temporary weight loss), and many years of your life that can never be magically returned.<br /><br />No one else has laid more on the alter of LENR than you have. Obviously, the return has been enormous — that’s plain to see with the long string of various reactors (all capable of self sustaining for hours or longer) that you have built ranging from low temperature, to high temperature, to the ultra high temperature Quark.<br /><br />The nitty gritty details of fuel preparation, temperature cycling, pressure variation, thermal shocking, and electromagnetic stimulation that you have collected are a treasure rivaling the engineering achievements of Nikola Tesla.<br /><br />I sincerely hope you have everything documented in extreme detail, holding nothing back. Even if such a document cannot be released for years, it needs to be ready for review when the situation allows.<br /><br />Thank you for all the work you do.<br /><br />Hank Mills<br /><br />Andrea Rossi<br />November 4, 2016 at 11:39 AM<br />Hank Mills:<br />Thank you for your insight.<br />When the QuarkX will be massively diffused the information you cite will be available.<br />Warm Regards<br />A.R.sam northhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13268558018307793474noreply@blogger.com