Posted on 11/10/2011 12:35:57 PM PST by Johnny B.
According to a slide presentation given by NASA engineer Michael A. Nelson, which New Energy Times obtained under a FOIA request, “Energy Catalyzer” inventor Andrea Rossi failed to conclusively show that his device produced excess heat from a nuclear energy source.
According to Nelson, a NASA engineer who investigates low-energy nuclear reactions and space applications, Rossi did not run his demonstration long enough to prove his extraordinary claim.
At the Sept. 22, 2011 LENR Workshop at NASA Glenn Research Center, Nelson explained that Rossi “would need to run [his experiment] for eight hours or more with a small E-Cat and much longer for an Ottoman [Fat-Cat] to rule out a chemical reaction.”
According to Nelson, it would take “three or more days for a small E-Cat, two or more weeks for an Ottoman [Fat-Cat] E-Cat and several months for a 1 MW plant.”
Brian Ahern, a researcher with expertise in LENR, wrote to New Energy Times with a concise summary of the recent Oct. 28 Rossi demo:
“Rossi has been clever enough to change the trick on each successive demo. Using a secret customer is a great way to allow him to fulfill his promise to demo the 1 MW unit in October. He then evaded conducting the demo transparently by saying that the customer demanded the demo conditions. The “customer’ signed off when Rossi gave him the wink and he shut things down without any measurements by anyone except the shill.
“Occam’s Razor, on the other hand, says that 12 inconclusive demos in succession are not random. It is well planned and orchestrated. He has used the journalists like a team of puppets.”
Thanks for the ping.
The Cold Fusion Ping List
Reading up on the claims, trying to understand the situation before jumping in and commenting.
This is actually an important question since an LENR bomb would probably not have the same sort of Nuclear Fallout problem we have with the other kind.
That would mean you could use the things to blow up the Iranian buried nuke facilities without POing the Russians down wind!
Yes, I guess I’m thinking that all of this controversy could be quickly put to rest with a defined test. Have scientist get together and create a test condition that does not require a look inside the box. The closed loop water thing sounded like a good test.
Hand the requirements over to Rossi and say, come back to us when you can pass the test in your lab and then we will put together a test in a public demonstration / lab.
Till that happens, it seems to me like a lot of wasted effort.
Perhaps that test could be used as a standard for any cold fusion experiment? Perhaps some kind of prize?
Cheers!
What *are* the different isotopes of copper and nickel, and what are their decay paths, and the half-life of each isotope? What are the by-products of decay at each step? Can these be detected and linked to that step of decay with specificity?
Cheers!
We might want to keep this in mind when we consider the quality of the "expert" speaking so enthusiastically about Rossi's E-Cat.
What's the problem? Is he claiming Obama infringed on Kucinich's territory, or Ron Paul's?
Cheers!
If all you're doing is stuffing a single proton in there you ought to get some other result.
So, tell us how you are going to do it ~ 1 low velocity proton, or maybe even a neutron, into one nickel atom, or maybe 10,000 protons bearing down on a single atom ~ somewhere in there.
I'm just guessing that if it's one proton, one nucleus and go we should have a simple result.
Gosh, no, I’m a retired postal worker, unlike muawiyah that has spent his life working in science.
Andrea Rossi
September 29th, 2011 at 3:53 AMWARNING:
THE SNAKE HAS WRITTEN IN HIS BLOG THAT NASA MADE A NOT POSITIVE TEST WITH US. THIS IS TOTALLY FALSE. I AM BOUND FROM A CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT AND I CANNOT GIVE DETAILED INFORMATION, BUT I CAN SAY THAT:
1- WE ARE IN CONTACT WITH NASA, WHO WANTS TO TEST OUR ECATS TO TEST THE POSSIBILITY TO MAKE THEM USEFUL FOR THEIR PURPOSES
2- NASA’S DENNIS.M.BUSHNELL HAS SAID PUBILCLY THAT NASA WILL BUY AN E-CAT AS SOON AS IT WILL BE POSSIBLE TO TEST IT
3- OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH NASA IS TOTALLY POSITIVEIN A SEPARATE STATEMENT, A SNAKE’S ACCOLITE WROTE THAT THE TEST WE ARE GOING TO DO ON THE 6TH OF OCTOBER WILL BE ALWAYS MADE WITH STEAM. UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN YOU SPEAK WITH THIS PEOPLE YOU DEAL WITH PERSONS THAT HAVE REAL DIFFICULTIES TO UNDERSTAND A TITLE OF A NEWSPAPER IF THEY ARE AT THE SAME TIME CHEWING A GUM, BUT, JUST TO AVOID CONFUSION I REPEAT THAT:
THE MEASUREMENTS WILL BE MADE ON LIQUID WATER. WE WILL HAVE THE STEAM PRODUCED FROM THE REACTOR THAT WILL WORK IN A CLOSED LOOP, WHICH IS THE PRIMARY CIRCUIT, AND THE STEAM ITSELF EXCHANGES HEAT WITH THE LIQUID WATER IN A SECONDARY CLOSED LOOP, SO THAT THE WATER IS HEATED BY THE STEAM THROUGH THE WALLS OF A HEAT EXCHANGER. WE WILL MEASURE THE ENERGY TAKING THE DELTA T OF THE WATER, THE WATER, THE WATER, NOT OF THE STEAM NOT OF THE STEAM, NOT OF THE STEAM, THEREFORE THE ISSUE OF THE QUALITY OF THE STEAM HAS ABSOLUTELY NOT IMPORTANCE, BECAUSE WE DO NOT MEASURE THE ENERGY FROM THE STEAM !!!!!!! WE COULD PUT IN THE PRIMARY CIRCUIT STEAM DIATHERMIC OIL, GLYCOLE, COCA COLA: IT IS ABSOLUTELY IRRILEVANT WHICH IS THE FLUID IN THE PRIMARY CIRCUIT AS FOR CONCERNS THE MEASUREMENT OF THE ENERGY BECAUSE WE MEASURE THE ENERGY ONLY MULTIPLYING THE CUBIC METERS OF WATER FLOWING THROUGH THE SECONDARY CIRCUIT IN ONE HOUR BY THE DELTA T OBTAINED SUBTRACTING, FROM THE TEMPERATURE OF THE WATER (LIQUID) OF THE SECONDARY CIRCUIT AT THE EXIT FROM THE HEAT EXCHANGER, THE TEMPERATURE OF THE SAME LIQUID WATER AT THE INPUT OF THE SAME HEAT EXCHANGER.
ANDREA ROSSI
Cheers!
these guys are just jealous of Rossi...their own scam, Global Warming, has been proven a flim-flam...
What mechanism is there for converting a proton into a neutron, and then slamming *THAT* into the copper or nickel or Dennis Kucinich? (Like, nuclear physics, not chemistry, eh?)I would have assumed that Dennis Kucinich was the decay product of Ron Paul.
Or vise versa.
My sarcasm was intended to bank off of you and hit NASA for its (implicit) claims that running hot fission reactors is sufficient expertise to critique allegations of cold fusion on "in the know" grounds (failing egregious violations of the first law of Thermodynamics, etc. on the part of Rossi).
Cheers!
I’ve been saying for a while that the real damage from the AGW Warmist Extremists is the damage they have done to Science.
Perfect! lol
An atom bomb is conceptually pretty simple. Handling the fissionable materials is the problem.
That's why I'm thinking the North Koreans may have come up with an LENR bomb. It's fairly powerful ~ sort of thing you could dig a new Panama Canal with. At the same time it has no dangerous fallout. That way you could pummel another country with LENR bombs without upsetting the folks in a different nearby country.
You could turn them into TACTICAL NUKES for use on the battlefield.
This may well have been the problem the Japanese encountered ~ they went whole hog down the avenue of research into Heavy Water and came up with an LENR bomb that little more than scattered all their otherwise useless enriched uranium.
There's no doubt the AEC and Department of Defense are watching these developments closely. I'd imagine the Chinese, Russian, etc. governments are also keeping their eyes on the situation.
I'd like to suggest that Rossi's closest competitor is actually the North Korean government and they know it.
Rossi’s tirades are so entertaining, especially with caps lock on. I guess he prefers snakes to seagulls.
Not enough hydrogen. And no zirconia. Rossi uses nickel.
toad: NASA uses fission for its deep space probe power. LENR produces and uses no radioactive isotopes.
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.