Posted on 07/09/2011 8:43:04 AM PDT by Kevmo
Yes, I'm saying precisely that. I've studied the data from the various tests, including what can be garnered from the videos, and the demonstrations are nowhere nearly as flawed as the "antis" are selling them to be.
I spent twenty years designing instruments for one of the worlds largest chemical companies (when there was no commercially available instrumentation capable of making the measurement, I was one of the guys that had to "bend" an existing instrument, or develop one "from scratch" that would do so). So I've used a great deal of equipment VERY similar to what Rossi's demonstrations do to make measurements on small-scale reactors, again, very similar to what Rossi is showing.
In virtually every demonstration, the necessary variables were measured by multiple different approaches, and yet the "antis" claim is "no, they didn't measure that". In the current "wet steam/dry steam" controversy, one of the observers of the first test pointed out the possibility of entrained water drops giving an erroneous "high" output, so the VERY NEXT TEST that was done avoided that by upping the internal water flow rate so NO STEAM AT ALL was generated. Said experiment was run for 18 hours. But the "antis" simply ignore that experiment because it doesn't "fit" their argument.
And it is obvious that most of them have NOT even slightly studied the evidence, because they constantly claim things as "not done" that are specifically pointed out to have been done by the original observers. Again, in the case of "wet steam/dry steam", all you REALLY need to know whether the steam is "dry" is an accurate temperature measurement, a measurement of the local barometric pressure, and a reference handbook. It was pointed out that the barometric pressure measure WAS MADE, yet the "anti's" claim it wasn't, and therefore "the data is suspect".
There is absolutely no other reason for a barometric pressure reading to be done other than to correct the temperature measurement of the steam dryness. Which also implies that the observers know exactly what they were doing, and what really needed to be measured.
It is still possible that this is deliberate fraud, but if that is the case, then a lot of highly qualified professional scientists had to have been fooled or been "bought off". The observers of the different demos are very much highly qualified technical experts, from several different disciplines and several different places. I don't see how all of them could possibly have been either fooled or subverted.
But the arguments drone on and on and on. Rossi's Greek partner company started up a company website, and they were good enough to include an open forum where anyone could ask questions. It was invaded by a small group of "antis", who repeatedly posted the same stuff over, and over, and over, and so overloaded to forum that they had to shut that part of the website down.
So I've decided not even bother trying to answer all the knee-jerk "it's a scam" posters. Your question indicates you aren't one of those, hence my rather long-winded reply. I'll wait 'til late October/early November, and let Rossi's devices speak for themselves.
They're being too careful for it to be deliberate fraud - sounds on the 'up and up' to me. Thanks for taking the time to explain.
By the way, it’s our current secretary of energy, Steven Chu, who got a nobel price in physics for coming up with the idea.
***That might explain this...
Energy Secretary Chu “looking” at LANR/CF.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2736603/posts
Saturday, June 18, 2011 11:06:02 AM · by Kevmo · 16 replies
Cold Fusion Times ^ | June 13 2011 | Swartz, M.
Here’s the thing that bothers me. If this breaks out during the Obama administration, he takes all the credit.
If you go to the next step, he explains the concept.
*** KP Sinha’s Laser experiment in LENR led to his later theory which is my favorite.
Laser stimulation of low-energy nuclear
reactions in deuterated palladium
http://www.ias.ac.in/currsci/oct102006/907.pdf
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-
Vo]:Axil’s alternative to Kim
Axil Axil
Sun, 10 Jul 2011 20:22:21 -0700
As an alternative to professor Kims offering, I humbly offer this
alternative explanation to the origin and possible functionality
characterized by the atomic coherence that is required if radiation from the
nuclear reactions that makeup the Rossi process are to be suppressed.
First off, the formation of Rydberg matter begins with the production of
highly excited alkaline atoms (HEAA) when hydrogen, lithium and/or potassium
are heated to high temperatures and pressures enclosed within a gaseous
envelope composed primarily of hydrogen gas. Yes, lithium or potassium is
the most probable secret element additives that catalyze the formation of
Rydberg matter.
In all methods currently known to successfully form Rydberg matter; an
adjacent surface removes the excess energy released by the condensation of
these HEAA. The most efficient process to form this condensate of Rydberg
matter clusters so far has been desorption (evaporation) from a solid
surface as they seek to minimize their energy, which means that the excess
bond energy is deposited in the surface.
In more detail, like bosons that can be condensed to form Bose-Einstein
condensates, Rydberg matter can be condensed, but not in the same way as
bosons. The reason for this is that Rydberg matter behaves like a gas where
it cannot be condensed without removing the condensation energy. If this
heat removal is not done, ionization of the component atoms occurs. All
solutions to this problem so far involve using an adjacent surface in some
way, the best being evaporating the atoms of which the Rydberg matter is to
be formed from and leaving the condensation energy on the surface.
However in the Rossi reactor, the absorption of energy from HEAA is done
onto the cold walls of the reaction vessel. This formation of Rydberg
condensate matter is a change of state process that will cause Rydberg
matter to first form and then to hover very near to the surface of the
reaction vessel walls through an electrostatic attraction at the point on
the electrostatically grounded reaction vessel wall where it was formed.
This condensate then acts to catalyze the Rossi process.
Highly excited atoms of lithium or potassium form a condensation template or
seed that excited hydrogen atoms use to condense around at the surface of
the reaction vessel. Oftentimes, these lithium or potassium atoms might
combine and intermix with hydrogen to form a multi- alkaline -element
complex variety of Rydberg matter condensate.
In the final step of the Rossi process, the coherent wave forms of these
many Rydberg atoms that comprise the Rydberg condensate will work in concert
through a quantum mechanical summation process to form a combined, entangled
and coherent de-Broglie wave form whose wavelengths become sufficiently
large to overlap with those of the neighboring nickel quantum wave forms
composing the rugged nano-powder coated surface walls of the reaction
vessel. The condensate then participates in nuclear fusion reactions at or
very near the surface of the reaction vessel of the Rossi reactor. Because
of its very large coherent de-Broglie wave form, the effective quantum
mechanical range at which this condensate operates may be anywhere up to a
few hundred nano-meters centered upon the location of its formation.
[Vo]:Axil’s alternative to Kim Axil
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.