Posted on 05/24/2013 6:35:28 PM PDT by Kevmo
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1563 ... ity-of-gas
Cold fusion reactor independently verified, has 10,000 times the energy density of gas By Sebastian Anthony on May 21, 2013 at 12:43 pm 338 Comments
Share This article
110 inShare.
Against all probability, a device that purports to use cold fusion to generate vast amounts of power has been verified by a panel of independent scientists. The research paper, which hasn’t yet undergone peer review, seems to confirm both the existence of cold fusion, and its potency: The cold fusion device being tested has roughly 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline. Even allowing for a massively conservative margin of error, the scientists say that the cold fusion device they tested is 10 times more powerful than gasoline — which is currently the best fuel readily available to mankind.
The device being tested, which is called the Energy Catalyzer (E-Cat for short), was created by Andrea Rossi. Rossi has been claiming for the past two years that he had finally cracked cold fusion, but much to the chagrin of the scientific community he hasn’t allowed anyone to independently analyze the device — until now. While it sounds like the scientists had a fairly free rein while testing the E-Cat, we should stress that they still don’t know exactly what’s going on inside the sealed steel cylinder reactor. Still, the seven scientists, all from good European universities, obviously felt confident enough with their findings to publish the research paper.
As for what’s happening inside the cold fusion reactor, Andrea Rossi and his colleague Sergio Focardi have previously said their device works by infusing hydrogen into nickel, transmuting the nickel into copper and releasing a large amount of heat. While Rossi hasn’t provided much in the way of details — he’s a very secretive man, it seems — we can infer some knowledge from NASA’s own research into cold fusion. Basically, hydrogen ions (single protons) are sucked into a nickel lattice (pictured right); the nickel’s electrons are forced into the hydrogen to produce neutrons; the nickel nuclei absorb these neutrons; the neutrons are stripped of their electrons to become protons; and thus the nickel goes up in atomic number from 28 to 29, becoming copper.
This process, like the “conventional” fusion of hydrogen atoms into helium, produces a lot of heat. (See: 500MW from half a gram of hydrogen: The hunt for fusion power heats up.) The main difference, though, is that the cold fusion process (also known as LENR, or low energy nuclear reaction) produces very slow moving neutrons which don’t create ionizing radiation or radioactive waste. Real fusion, on the other hand, produces fast neutrons that decimate everything in their path. In short, LENR is fairly safe — safe enough that NASA dreams of one day putting a cold fusion reactor in every home, car, and plane. Nickel and hydrogen, incidentally, are much cheaper and cleaner fuels than gasoline.
As far as we can tell, the main barrier to cold fusion — as with normal fusion — is producing more energy than you put in. In NASA’s tests, it takes a lot more energy to fuse the nickel and hydrogen than is produced by the reaction. Rossi, it would seem, has discovered a secret sauce that significantly reduces the amount of energy required to start the reaction. As for what the secret sauce is, no one knows — in the research paper, the independent scientists simply refer to it as “unknown additives.” All told, the E-Cat seems to have a power density of 4.4×105 W/kg, and an energy density of 5.1×107 Wh/kg.
If Rossi and Focardi’s cold fusion technology turns out to be real — if the E-Cat really has 10,000 times the energy density and 1,000 times the power density of gasoline — then the world will change, very, very quickly. Stay tuned; we’ll let you know when — or if — the E-Cat passes peer review.
Now read: Nuclear power is our only hope, or, the greatest environmentalist hypocrisy of all time
Research paper: arXiv:1305.3913 - “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device”
LOL! You're wound up so tight that you ticked off someone trying to help you.
So you claim, but you don't act like one or have provided any proof.
Yet in 15 years they haven't been able to do anything with it.
Yet you won't give any specifics or defend them.
time to take the mod’s advice and ignore you
Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19
time to take the mod’s advice and ignore you
Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19
My bet is that he never does....and simply continues down this path asking for investment capital.
***He’s not asking for investment capital. One of the freepers on this board approached him 10 years ago and was politely turned down. His claim is that he’s shipping units to 1 or 2 customers. It is no longer a stretch to accept that customers would buy something that has been independently verified as having 10,000 times the energy density of gasoline.
For the extraordinary claims made these seven should have been skeptical, ruthlessly so yet I've suggested just the most obvious questions that could have been and should have been asked but weren't.
If the argument is that it was a simple power in, power out test they couldn't know the answer to either without a full examination of the e-cat and it's parts, something not done or even questioned.
“10,000 times the energy density of gas” is certainly an extraordinary claim but the extraordinary proof isn't there.
“FAR more inspection went on that was included in the written report.”
Since it wasn't in the report it's not part of the claimed verification and therefore not pertinent to the claims made, the report is what is being offered up as proof.
And that goes to the question of independence. It was Rossi’s test not theirs, and why anyone concerned with the integrity of their reputation would any way associate them selves with a convicted con man is beyond understanding.
Here's how Rossi is going to make money off his fraud.
As Rossi’s e-Cat is barely staying alive on life support, and long time friends and bloggers are losing interest, and closing down blogs, Mr. Roger Green is trying to cash in as the e-Cat gasps its last few breaths, to try and recoup his money back, leaving these last few rounds of investors holding the bag.What you will find is that Roger Green and Andrea Rossi have reached a new low. They are selling “shares” in a Japan organization that does not exist yet, to buy a “license” that does not exist yet, and the “license” is for products that do not exist, have never existed, and will never exist.
This article is an update to two articles – here are the links to those articles:
More Legal Fraud in Rossi Farce
The details in the article “More Legal Fraud in Rossi Farce” related to violations of law and the fraudulent use of signatures claiming to be the signature of Mr. Andrea Rossi, when it clearly is/was not. We add another signature to that article.
E-Cat Australia Roger Green
The article “E-Cat Australia Roger Green” was a shining light on the details of how Mr. Green and Mr. Rossi carried on their fraud and scam including the posting of over 100 emails. We have emails from Mr. Roger Green on this update also but the documents speak for themselves so posting the emails is not required.
time to take the mod’s advice and ignore you
Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19
If the argument is that it was a simple power in, power out test they couldn’t know the answer to either without a full examination of the e-cat and it’s parts,
***100% hogwash. You measure power at the input, and power at the output. Power In , Power Out. You do not have to know the internal contents any more than you need to know the internal contents of a simple resistor. You just measure it.
something not done or even questioned.
***Because it is not needed.
“10,000 times the energy density of gas” is certainly an extraordinary claim but the extraordinary proof isn’t there.
***Then run through the energy density calculations yourself. If you measure a resistor and it’s 1Wattin, 28 degreesC out, compared to another resistor that’s 1WattIn, 280degreesC out, then the 2nd resistor has 10X the energy density of the first. Similar if you measure a volume of White Phosphorous or any other chemical. Pick the highest energy-density chemical and compare it to these 7 scientists’ results.
It was Rossi’s test not theirs,
***Rossi wasn’t even there for the bulk of the tests.
and why anyone concerned with the integrity of their reputation would any way associate them selves with a convicted con man is beyond understanding.
***The source of the problem is also the source of the solution. Rossi obviously has character issues, and these 7 scientists knew that going in. So they were extra careful with triple-checking their results. Wouldn’t you?
If some device is going to change the world on the cheap then every possible means of deception should be given priority not every possible verification.
Of course they knew Ross’s reputation and background, the question is why they would associate their positions with him and thereby lend some credence to him.
They also knew of his claims that the heat came from nickle forming copper but no one asks for an analysis of the contents of the inner container. No one asks to open the larger container, no one, even the two supposed skeptics, asks to see this device constructed.
Evidently such questions were off limits. Some independence!
Rossi’s test it was. I want to know what and who is behind the curtain.
It was still Rossi’s test in every way whether he was physically present or not.
***Baloney. When you test a resistor with your own multimeter and thermometer, it is no longer someone else’s test. You’re just not allowed to rip open the resistor. That’s what black box testing is about.
Of course they knew Ross’s reputation and background, the question is why they would associate their positions with him and thereby lend some credence to him.
***Because they tested & measured the device and, perhaps to their surprise, it generates a great deal of energy.
They also knew of his claims that the heat came from nickle forming copper but no one asks for an analysis of the contents of the inner container. No one asks to open the larger container, no one, even the two supposed skeptics, asks to see this device constructed.
***Everyone asks, and the answer is always “No, I’m not giving you my $100Billion trade secret.”
Evidently such questions were off limits. Some independence!
***Evidently? Horse manure. This is black box testing. There is an industrial trade secret inside the black box.
Rossi’s test it was.
***Rossi’s test it was not. He is not one of the authors of the paper.
I want to know what and who is behind the curtain.
***Everyone wants to know. But until the USPTO issues a patent, Rossi would be stupid to open his kimono right now.
Of course you call any questions “100% hogwash” since even the most basic calls into question the usefulness of the whole three card monte show.
Questions are exactly what is needed and the more probing the better.
Verification of claims made for the e-cat was the purpose of the test. Without knowing the source of the heat then what is being verified?
***The presence of the heat itself, and how much of it there is.
Energy in and out? That’s extraordinary proof?
***It is proof that there’s a certain amount of Energy In, a certain amount of Energy Out. In this case, there was so much energy out that it was 10,000X the energy density of gasoline. If it was 1 or 2X then they would have published their results and sent Rossi to the dustbin of history. Measuring power and temperature is not an extraordinary claim. It is an ordinary claim. The result, the observation, is extraordinary. But the measurement of it is not extraordinary. So, how did these 7 scientists misread their multimeters and thermometers, when they knew that their reputations were on the line? Wouldn’t you have been extra careful? Of course you would.
It’s time to take the mod’s advice and ignore you.
You don’t know the simple and basic requirements of measuring power in and power out. Claiming that you need to open up the box to measure it is incredibly inane. If it were true, we would have to open up every resistor we have ever measured on our multimeters.
Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2965392/posts?page=19#19
No, actually it does not. That statement keeps coming up, but it is simply NOT TRUE. This has been rehashed so many times that it is ludicrous that people keep bringing it up.
"For the extraordinary claims made these seven should have been skeptical, ruthlessly so yet I've suggested just the most obvious questions that could have been and should have been asked but weren't."
No, YOU are assuming that they didn't get asked. That kind of scrutiny is not what shows up in a paper. If you will take the time to read some of the background interviews, you will find that those questions WERE asked, or investigated, or looked into by one or more of the validators.
"If the argument is that it was a simple power in, power out test they couldn't know the answer to either without a full examination of the e-cat and it's parts, something not done or even questioned."
Which was made. The ONLY things they didn't have access to were the inside of the catalyst chamber, and the drive circuit. In the case of the catalyst chamber, the volume is simply too small to contain ANY chemical source that would yield the output energy over the time period tested. In the case of the drive circuitry, the input voltage and current were measured, and with more than one technique.
"“10,000 times the energy density of gas” is certainly an extraordinary claim but the extraordinary proof isn't there."
Again....not so.
"Since it wasn't in the report it's not part of the claimed verification and therefore not pertinent to the claims made, the report is what is being offered up as proof."
The written report covers what they measured. It is not the place where summaries of all the other places and things will be given. And no scientist would put it there.
"And that goes to the question of independence. It was Rossi’s test not theirs, and why anyone concerned with the integrity of their reputation would any way associate them selves with a convicted con man is beyond understanding.
No, the test was the Swedish utility group's. They paid the investigators. They paid the travel. They paid the expenses. None of that was funded by Rossi. The only thing Rossi did was make his device available to them.
$100 billion trade secret? So far a zero trade secret since we have only Rossi’s word that even one e-cat has been sold. What else is needed?
The rationalizations are great fun and amusing but far from convincing to even the most gullible.
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.