Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Finally! Independent Testing Of Rossi's E-Cat Cold Fusion Device
Vortex-L via Forbes ^ | May 21, 2013 | Mark Gibbs

Posted on 05/21/2013 7:44:36 AM PDT by Kevmo

Finally! Independent Testing Of Rossi's E-Cat Cold Fusion Device: Maybe The World Will Change After All

Back in October 2011 I first wrote about Italian engineer, Andrea Rossi, and his E-Cat project, a device that produces heat through a process called a Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR).

Very briefly, LENR, otherwise called cold fusion, is a technique that generates energy through low temperature (far lower than hot fusion temperatures which are in the range of tens off thousands of degrees) reactions that are not chemical. Most importantly, LENR is, theoretically, much safer, much simpler, and many orders of magnitude cheaper than hot fusion. Rather than explaining LENR in detail here please see my original posting for a more complete explanation.

My next post on this topic was here on Forbes a few days later and, as the labyrinthine and occasionally ridiculous saga developed, I tried to sort fact from fiction in a series of posts (see the list at the end of this posting) which covered everything from unconvincing demos, through an Australian businessman offering Rossi $1 million to show independently tested proof, to other players in the LENR market showing interesting results.

I haven’t posted about Rossi and his E-Cat since last August simply because there wasn’t much to report other than more of Rossi’s unsupported and infuriating claims that included building large-scale automated factories to churn out millions of E-Cats (the factories still have no sign of actually existing) through to unsubstantiated performance claims that sounded far too good to be true.

What everyone wanted was something that Rossi has been promising was about to happen for months: An independent test by third parties who were credible. This report was delayed several times to the point where many were wondering whether it was all nothing more than what we have come to see as Rossi’s usual “jam tomorrow” promises. But much to my, and I suspect many other people’s surprise, a report by credible, independent third parties is exactly what we got.

Published on May 16, the paper titled “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device” would appear to deliver what we wanted.

The paper was authored by Giuseppe Levi of Bologna University, Bologna, Italy; Evelyn Foschi, Bologna, Italy; Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér of Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; and Hanno Essén, of the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. While some of these people have previously been public in their support of Rossi and the E-Cat they are all serious academics with reputations to loose and the paper is detailed and thorough.

The actual test reactor, called the E-Cat HT, was described by the testers as:

“ … a high temperature development of the original apparatus which has also undergone many construction changes in the last two years – is the latest product manufactured by Leonardo Corporation: it is a device allegedly capable of producing heat from some type of reaction the origin of which is unknown.

They described the E-Cat HT as:

“ … a cylinder having a silicon nitride ceramic outer shell, 33 cm in length, and 10 cm in diameter. A second cylinder made of a different ceramic material (corundum) was located within the shell, and housed three delta-connected spiral-wire resistor coils. Resistors were laid out horizontally, parallel to and equidistant from the cylinder axis, and were as long as the cylinder itself. They were fed by a TRIAC power regulator device which interrupted each phase periodically, in order to modulate power input with an industrial trade secret waveform. This procedure, needed to properly activate the E-Cat HT charge, had no bearing whatsoever on the power consumption of the device, which remained constant throughout the test. The most important element of the E-Cat HT was lodged inside the structure. It consisted of an AISI 310 steel cylinder, 3 mm thick and 33 mm in diameter, housing the powder charges. Two AISI 316 steel cone-shaped caps were hot-hammered in the cylinder, sealing it hermetically.

Here’s a picture of the E-Cat HT during one of the tests:

There were two test runs of the E-Cat HT (the emphasis is mine):

“ The present report describes the results obtained from evaluations of the operation of the E-Cat HT in two test runs. The first test experiment, lasting 96 hours (from Dec. 13th 2012, to Dec. 17th 2012), was carried out by the two first authors of this paper, Levi and Foschi, while the second experiment, lasting for 116 hours (from March 18th 2013, to March 23rd 2013), was carried out by all authors.

The authors also note various assumptions they made about the test and that they weren’t in control of all of the aspects of the process but they apparently didn’t consider any of these to be egregious enough to be showstoppers.

And now, the big reveal … the authors’ conclusions are (again, the emphasis is mine):

“ … if we consider the whole volume of the reactor core and the most conservative figures on energy production, we still get a value of (7.93 ± 0.8) 102 MJ/Liter that is one order of magnitude higher than any conventional source.

To put that in perspective, the following graph plots the peak power of various energy sources against their specific energy (energy per unit mass). As you can see, gasoline is way out in front in terms of how much energy is available and how much power can be delivered but if this paper is correct, you can make that “gasoline was way out in front” because, as can be seen, the E-Cat has roughly four orders of magnitude more specific energy and three orders of magnitude greater peak power than gasoline!

Graph courtesy of Alan Fletcher

While a few commentators have raised criticisms concerning how the measurements were made and sources of error others have argued that the energy produced is so significant even knocking off an order of magnitude on either axis still portrays a process with insanely valuable output.

This is not, of course, the last word or even one anywhere near the end of this story but unless this is one of the most elaborate hoaxes in scientific history it looks like the world may well be about to change. How quick will depend solely on Rossi.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; History; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: cmns; coldfusion; ecat; lenr

1 posted on 05/21/2013 7:44:36 AM PDT by Kevmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc; citizen; Liberty1970; Red Badger; Wonder Warthog; PA Engineer; glock rocks; free_life; ..

The Cold Fusion/LENR Ping List

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/coldfusion/index?tab=articles


http://lenr-canr.org/


2 posted on 05/21/2013 7:45:41 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Where do you want me to send my money? [NOT]


3 posted on 05/21/2013 7:47:34 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; y'all; et al; Lurker

Jed Rothwell points out how conservative the assumptions are in this paper.

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex- href=”mailto:l@eskimo.com”>l@eskimo.com/msg80411.html

Jed Rothwell Mon, 20 May 2013 19:10:00 -0700

I just read this paper for the third time. This is a gem. These people
think and write like engineers rather than scientists. That is a complement
coming from me. They dot every i and cross every t. I can’t think of a
single thing I wish they had checked but did not.
In ever instance, their assumptions are conservative. Where there is any
chance of mismeasuring something, they assume the lowest possible value for
output, and the highest value for input. They assume emissivity is 1 even
though it is obviously lower (and therefore output is higher). The add in
every possible source of input, whereas any factor that might increase
output but which cannot be measured exactly is ignored. For example, they
know that emissivity from the sides of the cylinder close to 90 degrees
away from the camera is undermeasured (because it is at an angle), but
rather than try to take that into account, they do the calculation as if
all surfaces are at 0 degrees, flat in front of the camera. In the first
set of tests they know that the support frame blocks the IR camera partly,
casting a shadow and reducing output, but they do not try to take than into
account.

Furthermore, this is a pure black box test, exactly what the skeptics and
others have been crying out for. They make no assumptions about the nature
of the reaction or the content of the cylinder. They make no adjustments
for it; the heat is measured the same way you would measure an electrically
heated cylinder or a cylinder with a gas flame inside it. It is hands-off
in the literal sense, with only the thermocouples touching the cell, and
the rest at a distance, including the clamp on ammeter which placed below
the power supply. You do not have to know anything about the reaction to be
sure these measurements are right. There is nothing Rossi could possibly do
to fool these instruments, which the authors brought with them. They left a
video camera on the instruments at all times to ensure there was no
hanky-panky. They wrote:

“The clamp ammeters were connected upstream from the control box to ensure
the trustworthiness of the measurements performed, and to produce a
nonfalsifiable document (the video recording) of the measurements
themselves.”

They estimate the extent to which the heat exceeds the limits of chemistry
by both the mass of the cell and the volume of the cell. In the first test,
they use the entire weight of the inside cell as the starting point, rather
than just the powder, as if stainless steel might be the reactant. In the
second test they determine that the powder weighs ~0.3 g but they round
that up to 1 g.

They use Martin Fleischmann’s favorite method of looking at the heat decay
curves when the power cycles off. Plot 5 clearly shows that the heat does
not decay according to Newton’s law of cooling. There must be a heat
producing reaction in addition to the electric heater.


4 posted on 05/21/2013 7:49:10 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

I believe there is something significant occurring in the process termed “cold fusion.” I also believe Rossi has not got it. It is too long since he presented his device and supposedly sold one to a producer of something or other. It is plenty of time for progress reports and/or profitable results. Nothing.


5 posted on 05/21/2013 7:50:33 AM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex- href=”mailto:l@eskimo.com”>l@eskimo.com/msg79875.html

[Vo]:News about Rossi from PESN
Jed Rothwell Fri, 10 May 2013 06:37:23 -0700

For what it’s worth:

http://pesn.com/2013/05/09/9602311_LENR-to-Market_Weekly_May9/
http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Whats-Happened-to-Andrea-Rossi-and-his-E-Cat.html

QUOTE from latter:

“What Rossi and the enthusiasts have learned is it’s a very long path from
the lab demonstration unit to production. Mr. Rossi’s credibility has
taken quite hit from observers without familiarity in making such a jump.
Every little glitch in the scaling that fails has to be worked back,
discovered, redesigned or engineered and then the process starts in again.

To build the 1-megawatt unit takes 106 reactors, so getting each one built
is quite an undertaking for a startup. Meanwhile the company is well,
starting up, getting located, equipped, supplied, staffed and all the
myriad details to build something. Days means weeks and weeks could be
months adding up to years.”

I could have told them that.

- Jed


6 posted on 05/21/2013 8:02:50 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

7 posted on 05/21/2013 8:14:03 AM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Oh geez, you’re still here and back at this again? Did you see the young-Earth proof thread earlier?


8 posted on 05/21/2013 8:28:19 AM PDT by lefty-lie-spy (Stay metal. For the Horde \m/("_")\m/ - via iPhone from Tokyo.g)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Picture

http://b-i.forbesimg.com/markgibbs/files/2013/05/Screen-Shot-2013-05-20-at-6.16.20-PM.png


9 posted on 05/21/2013 8:33:12 AM PDT by toast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

More guys on bikes behind the curtain....?
More car batteries under the floorboards....?


10 posted on 05/21/2013 8:36:54 AM PDT by procrustes (You make Free Republic look bad!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

I’d love to see it happen but am not terribly optimistic.


11 posted on 05/21/2013 8:39:02 AM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

I concur and believe there is something there. However, when people make statements such as: “They were fed by a TRIAC power regulator device which interrupted each phase periodically, in order to modulate power input with an industrial trade secret waveform. This procedure, needed to properly activate the E-Cat HT charge, had no bearing whatsoever on the power consumption of the device, which remained constant throughout the test”, in their independent tests it makes it difficult to believe everything else they are stating.

E=hf. Where E (energy), h (planck’s constant), and f (frequency). As f is the inverse of wavelength then the waveform does have a direct impact on the power consumption. That said if the power consumption is constant then it either 1) isn’t being measured to the precision or speed needed to see the fluctuation caused by the waveform and is being assumed constant, 2) they are wrong, or 3) averaged out it really has no impact (which if true is what they should have said - Pavg? or Prms?)

The remainder I thought was a good explanation of the setup though I didn’t spend a lot of time on it - this just screamed out at me.

If Rossi really wants to do this - he needs to patent the design in as many countries as he can to protect his investment and then release all the details for scientists to recreate from scratch without interference or the use of only his units.

Einstein’s theories weren’t supported by many until multiple scientists independently confirmed them. He can’t expect anything different. If he won’t release the details then either he’s a sham or killing his chance for real fame and fortune with his paranoia.


12 posted on 05/21/2013 8:45:50 AM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

So is it just proton absorption?

I know neutron absorption is something that easily happens due to neutron having a neutra charge, a bit harder to do with a proton, but not impossible...


13 posted on 05/21/2013 9:21:06 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: reed13k
I do believe he has something. I believed Ponds and Fleishman. I'm sorry about the spelling mistake of these two great scientests. These were great and humble men who want only to give their discovery to the world.

E-Cat is not to be “given” to the world but “sold” to the world. It is hard to show something that is a secret and not give away the secret and I believe that is all that is going on. I have read too many reports from experimenters who suddenly had a great burst of energy that even exploded their apparatus. A new world order is about to take place because of Rossie and others like him.

14 posted on 05/21/2013 9:29:53 AM PDT by JAKraig (Surely my religion is at least as good as yours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

That’s what I think and Rossi looks more like a huckster the longer he doesn’t act this way.


15 posted on 05/21/2013 9:30:01 AM PDT by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

It could be. When Steven Krivit was interviewing Rossi, he asked about some particular detail which would have meant that the Widom-Larson theory was on the right track. Rossi let it slip that it was more like proton capture going on. From that point on, Krivit was very antagonistic towards Rossi. It’s even on video somewhere.

In terms of theory, I’ll just wait & see, but I doubt Widom/Larson have it right. My bet would be on Y.E.Kim’s Bose-Einstein Condensate theory or K.P.Sinha’s theory.


16 posted on 05/21/2013 9:47:08 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

If Rossi really wants to do this - he needs to patent the design in as many countries
***Hard to do when the patent offices won’t grant a patent for it, like — ummm — here, in America.


17 posted on 05/21/2013 9:48:30 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

“They were fed by a TRIAC power regulator device which interrupted each phase periodically, in order to modulate power input with an industrial trade secret waveform. This procedure, needed to properly activate the E-Cat HT charge, had NO BEARING WHATSOEVER on the power consumption of the device, which remained constant throughout the test.”

- Barack Obama


18 posted on 05/21/2013 9:53:51 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JAKraig

E-Cat is not to be “given” to the world but “sold” to the world. It is hard to show something that is a secret and not give away the secret and I believe that is all that is going on.
***It will be stolen, no doubt. The Wright brothers went up against this same dark aspect of human nature, and their friendship with Octave Chanute suffered because of it. Langley took out the long knives & teamed up with Glen Curtiss to attempt to besmirch them; it was the darkest episode in the history of the Smithsonian.


19 posted on 05/21/2013 10:05:25 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
they are all serious academics with reputations to loose

Nothing more dangerous to the general public than a loose reputation!
20 posted on 05/21/2013 10:06:36 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

One would think a professional journalist would know the difference between losing a reputation and having a loose reputation. But that’s a bit too much to ask in this day & age.


21 posted on 05/21/2013 10:08:04 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
One would think a professional journalist would know the difference between losing a reputation and having a loose reputation. But that’s a bit too much to ask in this day & age.

But it, like, made it through the spell checker.
22 posted on 05/21/2013 10:15:09 AM PDT by Dr. Sivana (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Sivana

I don’t see how it would make it through a grammar checker. I don’t use spell checkers nor grammar checkers.


23 posted on 05/21/2013 10:20:16 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

Hadn’t heard this Kevmo, as with JAKraig I believe Ponds and Fleishman got the institutional shaft.

If the patents were denied they were required to provide a basis - are you aware what that may have been? In the past they have provided patents for non-functioning devices so I would be suprised if they rejected the patent unless it was due to incomplete documentation, being overly vague as to the unique nature, or trying to patent a concept instead of a design/process.

Of course the other idea could be that the govt (I’ve seen NASA is supposedly working on it in some of your other threads)does not want to prevent their own developments from going forward and locking it in for themselves - with everything else going on it wouldn’t be too far fetched to imagine.


24 posted on 05/21/2013 10:29:27 AM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

It’s a long, sordid and ugly story. At Cold Fusion Times, they call it “HeavyWatergate”.

http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html

Help End “Heavywatergate” and the 24 YEAR USPTO Coverup

HEAVYWATERGATE continues at the US Patent Office led by a corrupt group of individuals who routinely mischaracterize facts about cold fusion on federal documents. Why?

The US Patent Office has claimed falsely that there is “no utility” to cold fusion. Really? Does anyone believe that lie? Clean, efficient energy production has no use? Despite past open demonstrations, and hundreds of peer-reviewed publications, they claim falsely that there is no operability. There have been months of open demonstrations of cold fusion at MIT to which the USPTO Examiners were invited. They did not care; did not come; and continued to lie. But YOU do, don’t you!!!!


25 posted on 05/21/2013 10:35:02 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: JAKraig

And the whole purpose of a patent is intended to protect those “sales” for the inventor. However, as I noted to Kevmo when he said the US wouldn’t issue, there may be other issues involved.

Still doesn’t make sense - he’d be world renowned if he came out with the exact details - that alone will gain him wealth if that is what he wants....wealth, fame...only leaves power, but then his device provides all of that he needs (badump bump - sorry couldn’t resist).


26 posted on 05/21/2013 10:35:36 AM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: All; y'all; et al; Lurker; no one in particular

Professor Stremmenos weighs in. Translated from Italian.

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=it&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fprometeon.it%2Fnews.php

18/5/13 - The direct testimony of Professor. Stremmenos

For the first time in a long time, Christos Stremmenos, a physicist who worked on the development of the ‘E-Cat and retired professor at the Department of Physical Chemistry, University of Bologna, he returned to public speaking LENR, and made at a conference on Energy Savings held in Bologna on 18 May, organized by the local Lions Club, with a popular talk entitled ‘cold fusion or LENR: cheap energy and no environmental impact. “

The intervention of prof. Stremmenos, estimated physical and former Ambassador of Greece to Italy in 1982-87.

(© Prometeon Ltd - Prohibited the use of the site without quote)

Professor Stremmenos briefly touched many engineers to present his personal experience with Eng. Rossi and with the ‘E-Cat, which is the first test to subsequent developments, emphasizing the complete reproducibility of the phenomenon LENR below, the high stability of the reaction, the COP always greater than 6, the total absence of neutrons or radioactive waste, the intrinsic safety of the machine, as well as the very low cost of the thermal energy produced by it: less than 0.01 € / kWh.

Perhaps the most interesting of the intervention was to his testimony, unusual for the general public, on a test of an entirely different nature from the previous Eng. Rossi has made himself available to perform. In a reactor built by Stremmenos with a geometry and a technique different from those reactors Rossi, have been used “dust” normally used by ‘E-Cat. The results have been very positive, and this was a further confirmation of the validity of the process.

Some slides taken after surgery. Download the conference program on energy savings from here .

(© Christos Stremmenos - No use without mentioning the author)

26/3/13 - successfully concluded third-party testing

We are happy to announce that, as announced in preview Eng. Andrea Rossi, in the week just ended saw the conclusion of the tests for ‘H ot Cat performed by independent third parties, whose specific aim was to ascertain, beyond a reasonable doubt, to be in the presence of a non-traditional source of energy COP and the actual equipment. Therefore, in the long validation phase, been going on for months with repeated tests on the three reactors made available by Leonardo Corp, accurate measurements were carried out by 11 between physics professors and experts from four universities in different countries.

(© Prometeon Ltd - Prohibited the use of the site without quote)

Independent validators have had the opportunity to perform, in recent months, any kind of measurement wanted to reactors at their disposal: the only limitation was that it would open the reactors themselves, that contains trade secrets, and these were tested to the normal regime of power provided to the customers, ie not pushed to the maximum. They worked in complete autonomy, neither Rossi nor any person outside the group of validators participated in their briefing and planning of their measurements, and they wanted to pay for itself all the various travel expenses, room and board.

The test results will be published and made known in the next few months, but it is Rossi himself to leak the first rumors on his blog: “The validators have told me that the last test lasted 120 hours uninterrupted went well and that the ‘ effect is real beyond a reasonable doubt. “ He added Aldo Proia, commercial director of Prometeon: “The validation of an independent third party has a scientific purpose, but if you confirm what has been previously measured by Rossi is not difficult to imagine that it could soon have a major impact on both the energy world that on its financial markets. “


27 posted on 05/21/2013 10:46:20 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

uh oh, high energy jokes

here’s what I could find

Back in the late 50s there was a new guided missile being developed called the “Snark.” The USAF wanted to launch them quickly and to demonstrate this capabilitiy, they arranged for a show to the media of this new capability. The Snark was interesting for launching, because it had a small solid rocket motor that would initiate the launch, following by the ignition of the main engine.

When the time came, news media people from all over showed up. The first launch looked good, as the SRM shot the rocket off the pad and over the Atlantic. However, the main engine failed to ignite, and the SNARK went into the water. They had a 30-mins turn around time, so a half-hour later, a second Snark rose up into the air, pushed skyward by its SRM. As you can already guess, the main engine failed and the missile went into the drink. Thirty minutes later, the same episode was replayed a third time.

The New York Times reporter led his article off with this statement:

If you are going on vacation to Florida, stay away from Cocoa Beach; because they now have Snark-infested waters! lol


28 posted on 05/21/2013 10:49:51 AM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
While some of these people have previously been public in their support of Rossi and the E-Cat

Which means this test wasn't independent.

they are all serious academics with reputations to loose and the paper is detailed and thorough.

That's blogger Gibbs uninformed opinion. (loosed???)

29 posted on 05/21/2013 12:35:32 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
E-Cat is not to be “given” to the world but “sold” to the world.

Rossi isn't selling Ecats, he's selling distribution rights. Obviously a tactic to help him avoid jail again.

30 posted on 05/21/2013 12:38:40 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
It could be. When Steven Krivit was interviewing Rossi, he asked about some particular detail which would have meant that the Widom-Larson theory was on the right track. Rossi let it slip that it was more like proton capture going on.

It was more than that. Krivit caught Rossi cheating. Rossi also offered Krivit financial compensation which Krivit refused.

http://news.newenergytimes.net/2012/12/27/kullander-and-essens-unscientific-behavior-on-swedish-television/

31 posted on 05/21/2013 12:42:41 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo
Is Rossi still claiming to be performing nuclear experiments in this apartment where his corporation is registered and the ONLY address it uses? ROTFLMAO! Nope, not a scam, people, just an old man in his apartment in Miami.


32 posted on 05/21/2013 12:50:51 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off. -786 +969)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reed13k
"“They were fed by a TRIAC power regulator device which interrupted each phase periodically, in order to modulate power input with an industrial trade secret waveform. This procedure, needed to properly activate the E-Cat HT charge, had no bearing whatsoever on the power consumption of the device, which remained constant throughout the test”, in their independent tests it makes it difficult to believe everything else they are stating."

Dude, they were measuring the electrical power going INTO the control box. What the box does to the wave-form is irrelevant. You can't get more power out of an electrical circuit than you put into it, no matter what the output waveform is.

33 posted on 05/21/2013 3:07:40 PM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

They were measuring the power going in, while power is current x voltage it matters if the are talking avg, instantaneous etc in the calculations. If as they said the measured power directly then the waveform has an impact on the measurement.


34 posted on 05/21/2013 5:03:04 PM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19


35 posted on 05/21/2013 9:09:33 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19


36 posted on 05/21/2013 9:10:01 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

I believe this is the first time I’ve ever thought that what you wrote was worth pursuing — at least for someone else. Have at it. If you’re right, then Ross would go to jail and belongs there.

But I doubt what you say is true.

T4BTT


37 posted on 05/21/2013 9:12:03 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19


38 posted on 05/21/2013 9:12:28 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

The only thing that important about the trade secret waveforms generated by the SCR’s is they take the power factor of the unit outside the valid range 0.5-1.0 for the power meter used for the test

here is the manufacturer link note the power factor restrictions

http://www.industrial-needs.com/technical-data/power-anlayser-PCE-830.htm

Yes it’s SCR’s firing into large inductive coils and dragging the power factor to a really low value sending the meter into error <3

The physicists don’t understand electrical engineering it’s really basic what he is doing the LENR is just distraction.

This thing is a scam ... surely the having to keep it plugged into the mains makes you more than a little suspicious.

The LENR rubbish is a simple distraction the scam is in the electrical setup.


39 posted on 05/22/2013 8:22:45 AM PDT by LdB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kevmo

I’ll confess I don’t know much about LENR gadgets, and that I’m very skeptical about all claims cats can deviate from the standard model and produce excess energy, but back in the 1950s I was a Snark launch crew member, so I know a lot about Snarks. The phrase “Snark infested waters” was indeed sometimes used, but not for the reason you describe.

Snark was a big, long-range, 3.8 MT warhead, subsonic, SAC stealth cruise missile, powered by a slightly modified Pratt J-57 turbojet engine; basically the same engine powered the numerous F-100 fighters and B-52 bombers. At launch, the Snark main engine was always running at full stable power, just as though it were in a F-100 beginning its runway takeoff roll. In fact, the booster rockets were inhibited from firing until the main J-57 engine was developing full and stable thrust. Main engine failures were no more common in Snark than in F-100 Super Sabers. Very rare in Snark. Snark was deployed on mobile launch trailers. Two giant JATO solid rockets blasted the Snark off the launch trailer and boosted it to a speed where aerodynamic lift prevailed, then the rocket boosters fell away. Launch failures were relatively rare. But Snark had serious problems with its vacuum tube flight control and guidance systems. The shock of launch played hob on the tubes, and often within only a few minutes of launch, flight control and guidance system failures would set in resulting in eventual big disappointing down-range splashes. Snark’s extended range mission requirement, which dictated that the aerodynamic drag be as low as possible, compounded the problem. To reduce drag and extend range, Snark had no rudder or horizontal stabilizer and only minimal area elevon flight control surfaces. That is to say, stable flight required a fully functioning flight control system; in way too many instances Snark just didn’t have that.

Most launches resulted in Snark flying several hundred, or maybe even several thousand, miles down range before crashing. But the problem was almost always the vacuum tubes failing. Had large-scale solid-state integrated circuits been available back then to implement reliable guidance and flight control systems, the Snark program would have been technically highly successful. Ironically, the higher powers were fed-up with the many test flight failures, and wrote-off the multi billion dollar Snark program just about the time perfectly reliable solid-state circuits became available.


40 posted on 05/28/2013 9:06:32 PM PDT by Niccolo5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Niccolo5

thanks for your snarky story


41 posted on 05/28/2013 9:35:19 PM PDT by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson