Posted on 11/28/2011 9:18:01 PM PST by Kevmo
Rossi... visited the State House last week ...
Andrea Rossi made the trip at the invitation of the Senate’s minority leader, Bruce Tarr, a Republican from Gloucester, and met on Tuesday with representatives from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Northeastern University, and the University of Massachusetts.
....
At this point, however, the E-Cat is widely considered to be unproven. Tests have been scarce and secretive, perhaps because Rossi has said that his technology is still unpatented.
Andrea Rossi was invited to Massachusetts by the Senate’s minority leader, Bruce Tarr (left), a Republican from Gloucester. ‘‘If it works, I want this technology to be developed and manufactured in Massachusetts,’’ Tarr said of cold fusion.
... Last month, he conducted a test of a small cold fusion power plant in Bologna, Italy, for an unnamed customer, who he said was impressed enough to purchase the unit.
Rossi said he has received orders from 12 more customers.
Tarr, who is active in alternative energy legislation, said he invited Rossi to put the state in line for hosting any prospective development of cold fusion.
“Knowing the reputation of cold fusion, I went in with a very healthy level of skepticism,’’ he said.
....
Tamarin said the meeting was mostly used to discuss the possibility of setting up manufacturing, rather than the validity of the science.
“Rossi said he was not ready for a full academic investigation of his technology because he doesn’t yet have full patent protection,’’ Tamarin said. “That’s consistent with it not working, but it’s also consistent with it working very well.’’
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
You are such a putz. So, what is it like to look into the mirror in the morning and see a coward looking back, what is that like?
Are the nightmares getting better or do you still dream of being picked on in school?
Then you come here, an anonymous place and strut around and posture like the keyboard commando you are even to the point that you think you can tell who can and cannot post on these threads.
At least the Tokomak has produced something and it's used for more than fusion production. Your logic makes no sense. The Tokomak hasn't broken even so let's see if we can get gas from water??
Nytek?? A player I'm not familiar with. I know there is an on-line Swedish science magazine with similar name. I know Brillouin Energy made similar comments, but this is a new one on me.
"There is even a DIY site that says they use copper, iron, nickel, some metal hydrides plus a frequency generator and have a working device."
Again, one I've not heard of. I know a guy calling himself "Chan" has claimed replication on Vortex-L. I'd be interested in more info.
"Rossi better hurry those sales along, that heat he feels ain't no e-cat.
Well, Defkalion is supposed to make their big announcement tomorrow. If it turns out to be true that there is a formula that will let anybody with a couple of pieces of pipe and a cartridge heater replicate the results, the "hot physics" types and the Vortex-L naysayers are going to look REALLY BAD.
That’s a pretty cowardly response to moonman62, but you should be used to that.
Isn't 100MJ equal to less than a barrel of oil? 1GJ is equal to the energy in one barrel of oil.1
Where do you get these numbers?
1: Thanks to Wiki...
I think Ny Teknik was quoting Defkalion. From Free Energy Truth:
“Excerpt of Ny Teknik’s conversation with Alexandros Xanthoulis (Defkalion Spokesman) August 5, 2011
“Let’s say I have the formula of Rossi, but I’m not saying it officially. My scientists found a way to make it. They need three months, but I’m not going to play game behind Rossi. I’m not a cheater. We started together and if he has to be paid, he will. But his problem is scientifically solved by us.”
My comment wasn’t clear on that.
The DIY site is the Chan site, Buildthecat or buildcat.com something like that.
Ah! That makes much more sense! Thanks for the clarification.
Anyway the gist of Defkalion’s comments were that they had solved Rossi’s short run time problem, knew exactly what formula he was using but wouldn't say.
Defkalion spokesman jabbed at Rossi by saying, ‘I'm no cheater’.
The Word War continues.
I see that "replicated over 14,000 times" claim a lot, but cannot find any reliable documentation of successful replication claims. Surely, if cold fusion occurred and was replicatable, there would be publications in peer-reviewed journals reporting these replications. Instead, cold fusion seems to fall into the "pathological science" category--where a handful of scientists/aficionados just cannot bear to let go of a hypothesis, no matter how little evidence there is in support of the hypothesis.
Physical law indicates that there is a very high energy barrier to fusion, which is why it must take place at such high temperatures. Cold fusion would be a godsend--a way to achieve energy-producing fusion, while having only to worry about the radioactive emissions (which we have a lot of collective experience in shielding), and not about attempting to contain a reaction occurring at thousands of degrees would be great.
You are wrong - NDA’s are signed all the time in Venture Capital deals. Else the business could not be done. There are tons of scientific consultants and laboratories, and they sign NDA agreements all the time and they evaluate thousands of products, processes and catalysts - pre-patent!
The IP is still a red herring for evaluation. Get over it.
“Surely, if cold fusion occurred and was replicatable, there would be publications in peer-reviewed journals reporting these replications. Instead, cold fusion seems to fall into the “pathological science” category—where a handful of scientists/aficionados just cannot bear to let go of a hypothesis, no matter how little evidence there is in support of the hypothesis.”
Go here:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/LibFrame1.html
“Physical law indicates that there is a very high energy barrier to fusion, which is why it must take place at such high temperatures. Cold fusion would be a godsend—a way to achieve energy-producing fusion, while having only to worry about the radioactive emissions (which we have a lot of collective experience in shielding), and not about attempting to contain a reaction occurring at thousands of degrees would be great.”
Don’t look now, but it’s been done. Latest indications are that the theory is finally falling into place as to how the Coulomb barrier is circumvented.
There’s a PDF about the ICCF-16 proceedings that has much detail. Also see stuff on the net by George Miley, and Brian Ahern’s patent.
Does that also explain why it needs to warm up for four or five hours? I guess we can forget about the six month refueling cycle too.
I suspect the warm up period is to see what’s going to happen to the reactor. Will it go unstable? Will it work at all? Or should everyone run for the nearest exit?
Six month’s fuel? Hmmm....With how much use?
I repeat, it is not asking for perfection to have the unit running free of 500 kw generators. You say “not true” to this. That’s not even a proper answer to that statement. It either IS asking for perfection or it IS NOT asking for perfection. I believe it’s not. I’m coming out right now and saying I don’t think that is too much to ask for. If these units cannot work without 500 KW generators always present, running at whatever load, even for safety concerns, that’s something that has to be considered as a real cost, and factored into the efficiency of these units.
The article I read about the test never made any mention that the unit was able to generate 1 MW of power at any time. If you have an article that shows it ran at 1 MW for awhile, I’ll certainly read it.
What I did gather from what I have read about the test was that the generators connected all during the test had the capacity to generate 500 KW of power, and the e-cat generated 480 KW of power during the 5 1/2-6 hr test run.
If you want to give me other sources that are independent I’d be happy to read them.
All I am saying is the test would appear to be more convincing if he could run the e-cat unit in all its modes for a good number of hours, without a power source potentially larger than the output of the e-cat itself. You may believe that such a test would not more convincing, but I believe most people - and particularly this group you refer to as skeptics - would see that as very good evidence it works.
IIRC the Kevmo moniker has been tied to a California LENR advocacy group, which at one point had whimsical “cats” in a group of persons forming a headline in a paper.
This is way more than “information” to a “ping list.” If the advocacy stopped at the lead article it would be one matter. But! This Kevmo is argufying for more US governmental largesse (basically, making the argument that since America has long subsidized Tokamak research, it has an obligation to subsidize Rossi e-Cats too, just because they claim to sometimes put out more power than Tokamaks do). It falls on deaf ears that many would want to see Tokamaks go private too.
I was a mere skeptic about what Rossi has supposedly found, but this kicks the action into a whole nother plane, a US subsidy one. If this is not grounds for Freepers to say Enough, what is?
I already knew that there have been several cold fusion conferences, especially in the first few years after (the now discredited) Fleischmann–Pons report.
I wasn't very convinced when I downloaded JOURNAL OF CONDENSED MATTER NUCLEAR SCIENCE, Vol. 4, Feb 2011 from that LENR website, started skimming through it, and quickly found "In the recent past, Focardi and Rossi have reported spectacular energy gains in the range from 80 to somewhat over 400 from Ni–H experiments [30]" (p. 13, para. 1).
Scammers aside, this topic has all the appearance of a pathological science.
If you want to convince me and the other skeptics, you need to show the evidence. A good bit of evidence would be articles in a variety of peer-reviewed physics/chemistry journals, describing replicable experiments.
You will NEVER see the E-cat running without being hooked up to a rather substantial source of electric power, whether that be "mains power" from a dedicated hookup, or generator power as used in the 28 Oct. test. Reason....the E-cat requires a significant "startup energy". Why did Rossi use a genset. More than likely because he didn't want to pay for the installation of a dedicated power circuit in a rented facility. Understand...the 1MW E-cat is designed to be "field installed" to a single dedicated starting circuit, and is undoubtedly wired up that way in the shipping container. So, Rossi did what any GOOD engineer would have done....he rented a generator for the one-use demo. It would have taken a significant effort (wasted) to separate the "startup circuit" wiring from the "parasitic power" circuit (pumps, instrumentation, etc.).
This is PRECISELY the situation you have in your car. A serious (but short term) current is needed to "get cranked up", and you also still need to generate a lesser current to run your cars "parasitic loads" (and to re-charge the source of your startup energy).
"The article I read about the test never made any mention that the unit was able to generate 1 MW of power at any time. If you have an article that shows it ran at 1 MW for awhile, I’ll certainly read it."
I suggest you read more articles. No single article will ever have all the details available. As to my leading you around by the nose to the data...not gonna happen. I research subjects to educate myself, and don't keep a "stock" of links to argue points. Life is too short and I've got better things to do. Believe me or don't. I neither lie nor exaggerate. The data is there as I have stated.
"What I did gather from what I have read about the test was that the generators connected all during the test had the capacity to generate 500 KW of power, and the e-cat generated 480 KW of power during the 5 1/2-6 hr test run.
Which is the SPECULATION of the skeptics. They have no evidence that the power output was that low OR that the input power was coming from the genset. They are ASSUMING, with no justification other than their "it's a scam" viewpoint, that the genset was providing all the power.
"If you want to give me other sources that are independent I’d be happy to read them."
See above about not chasing down data I've already looked at.
"All I am saying is the test would appear to be more convincing if he could run the e-cat unit in all its modes for a good number of hours, without a power source potentially larger than the output of the e-cat itself. You may believe that such a test would not more convincing, but I believe most people - and particularly this group you refer to as skeptics - would see that as very good evidence it works."
If that's all you want, go look up the 18-hour no-steam "single E-Cat" test results. You can find them summarized at the LENR-CANR.org website. There's plenty of evidence. The naysayers either find an imaginary reason that it has to be wrong, or they simply ignore it.
Since your last post I looked around at about a dozen other articles and none of them ever reported the unit ever ran at 1 MW.
They reported that a “glitch” was found (none explaining what the glitch was), and that the customer had to make a decision to run it either 1 MW in powered mode or half-power in self-sustain mode. They had to make the choice before it started up, and they chose to do the self-sustain at half power.
As far as I can find it never ran 1 MW at all. they had to pick either 1 MW/powered or half power/self-sustain.
So, Madoff was instrumental in creating NASDAQ ~ Hmm.
Also if it was you running the test, and your half-power output is about 500 kw, if you had to have outside generator power powering a cooling system, wouldn’t you do your best to pick a generator not capable of producing equal or greater power than your supposed output power of what you’re testing is? So that nobody could ever raise the spectre of the generator possibly being wired in to produce the output results?
In the articles I found it was mentione that the cooling pumps were not running at full capacity, maybe a third of their capacity. Sounds like he might have gotten by using a smaller ‘genset’ as you called it. If a 150 kw or 200 kw genset could have supplied the necessary power to the pumps but the output of the e-cat was still 480 kw, that would be a lot harder to argue with.
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.