Posted on 04/28/2012 9:44:57 PM PDT by Kevmo
I’m assuming the horrendous description of whatever they were doing is the fault of the translation.
In any case, it sounds like they were doing an exothermic chemical reaction. I guess merging the electron orbitals of two separate atoms into a covalent bond counts as fusion...
Well, if Ugo Abundo said it, that’s good enough for me.
I think I've figured out where the heat is coming from.
A mountain of bad data is no better than a molehill of bad data.
Warning....the book is NOT cheap (almost a hundred bucks).
There's more than one way to run a cold fusion scam.
It appears then that the delivery date of the Rossi Miracle Water Heater will be pushed over that bottomless pit called “The Future” wherein lies the realization of Hype and Hope.
oh well, it beats those foaming volcanoes.
Since you obstinately refuse to look at any of it, how could you possibly know whether it is good, bad, or indifferent?? Your continuing refusal to do so points up your intellectual dishonesty.
That’s because all you do is refer people to a huge list of crap. It’s not worth anyone’s time, since 99% of cold fusion is hype and scams (look at the garbage Kevmo has copy and pasted to this thread from an Ecat blog). The USPTO bans this nonsense for a valid reason. All you have to do is post some quality information with a short write up of why you think it’s quality and worth someone’s time.
bttp
for tomorrow
Yes, a COP (coefficient of performance) over 100% is technically impossible (an IC engine will be 25%-50%, electric around 80%). That’s not what they really mean. Every science has its own language. In LENR the input is chemical energy and the output is “unknown” but presumably nuclear fusion occurring at low energy levels. So outputs are often quoted from 4 to 20 times the inputs, or COP 4-20.
Thank you.
400 per cent of what? Doesn’t anybody proofread before posting anymore?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It’s not a proof read problem. It’s the terminology in LENR. Every science has its own language. In LENR the input is chemical energy and the output is “unknown” but presumably nuclear fusion occurring at low energy levels. So outputs are often quoted from 4 to 20 times the inputs, or COP 4-20.
What do they mean by “free” and “patented?” It seems contradictory.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Free means it’s available for use, as opposed to “bound.” Examples would be, free-radicals, free-electrons, free-thyroid hormone, etc.
You could swallow a ball-bearing, but your body wouldn’t get iron from it, because the iron isn’t “free.”
When one of these things shoots its wad, that’s it. It has to be rebuilt. It’s more like a battery than a nuke plant.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It’s like a nuke plant in 3 ways. It’s output is far greater than can be explained by a chemical reaction, some of the copper transmutates into silver, and it’s similar to a nuke too in that the duty cycles are long. Rossi claims 6 months continuous output between “charges.”
So do con games. LENR is supposed to be a part of physics. There's no need for special conventions.
Sounds more like a chemical reaction of some type. Not battery, more like an exothermic chemical reaction.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You’re right, we’ll see. A lot isn’t known, but 2 things say nuclear. The total output energy per volume is far greater than can be explained by any known chemical reaction (like driving 10,000 miles on a “tank of gas” in your car. Something else is going on), and some of the nickel transmutates into copper.
Sorry . . .Brain fade in my previous post. Some of the nickel transmutates into copper.
I Googled ‘free nanopowders’ and that does seem to be a strange usage of the term, but like you say, every con game has its own language.
I Googled ‘free nanopowders’ and that does seem to be a strange usage of the term, but like you say, every con game has its own language.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Seems you know very little, but have strong opinions. I have no desire to discuss anything with a person such as that. Good day.
I thought energy could not be created or destroyed, only transferred.
According to Wiki, COP is a measure applied to heat pumps. Are these scam contraptions heat pumps?
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.