To: mad_as_he$$
Well, it can't very well be 517 tons of oil equivalency from 1 gram of nickel(Rossi)
and
2 barrels from 1 gram of nickel (PapaBear3625) - see #142.
To: badgerlandjim
Like I said some assumptions on are part are needed to understand Rossi’s claims. I expect that a significant part of the reaction does not come from the nickel changing to copper but from the poorly understood neutron release.(which seems crazy on the face). There is a chart of the process sequence, posted around FR, that seems to cover the entire reaction. Many classical physicists dispute that it is functional. I am not prepared to say that he cannot get 517 tons equivalent. I will say I am skeptical of that number - but condemning it at this point is futile. I want to see the 1MW test in October (no delays) and then we will know if this is real or a pipe dream. BTW the fact that reaction gets “unsafe” in units bigger than the 14kw one is a clue that the neutron emission may be something other than what we have thought it to be.
164 posted on
05/25/2011 9:07:38 AM PDT by
mad_as_he$$
("Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." A. C. Clarke)
To: badgerlandjim
Previously you had to use platinum or palladium to carry the cold fusion. Kinda cool that nickel is in the same periodic table grouping as those two. So nickel is somewhat like them. The poor man’s palladium ...for cold fusion at least
platinum group metals
168 posted on
05/25/2011 9:33:42 AM PDT by
dennisw
(NZT - "works better if you're already smart")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson