Haha, how perfect is that? Time for utter secrecy!
Prepare for the collapse of this scam.
You still have time to cancel that down payment check.
dinodino, you are absolutely correct.
E-Cat going undercover? What a shame. What will fanboy KevMo do? What tragedy!!!!
I always wanted to be in the front row to see closely how such delusional schemes terminate themselves. I learned about the Hydrino/(Randell Mills) scheme a little late in the game so I missed out on the twists and turns of that delusional set-up.
Blacklight Power (Randell Mill’s hydrino company) have preceded Rossi’s Ni/H scheme by more than 2 years and it amounted to nothing. It is quite revealing that fanboy Kevmo never referred to the hydrino scheme.
The so-called “proof” by Rossi’s fanboys that the process in Rossi’s reactors is LENR by comparing the energy output per unit mass of hydrogen with comparable chemical reactions has been used by the hydrino fanboys about 2 years ago. And Rossi’s fanboys never acknowledged their stealing their “proof” from the hydrino fanboys.
What the fanboys of Rossi and Mills overlooked was that the Ni/H reactors had not 1 but 2 chemical reactions, one of them was never referenced in their “proof”. This second chemical reaction is -strictly being- a physico-chemical process whose dynamics do not follow the conventional chemical reaction. What is this physico-chemical process? That is the homework for the Rossi/Mills fanboys who seem intellectually lazy.
I am very sure that - at least in the beginning - Mills and Rossi were very sincere.
When a freshly-made reactor was used, the initial - keyword: initial - energy output per unit mass of hydrogen is about 20 to 60 times the energy output of a typical chemical reaction.
What excitement!!! This 20 to 60 ratio was the basis of the fanboys’ “proof” that what one is seeing is indeed LENR.
Now is where the sense of dread kicks in for the fanboys: as more hydrogen is fed into the reactor, the energy output per unit mass of hydrogen decreases eventually to 1 time the energy output of a typical chemical reaction. If one sum up the total energy output of the Rossi/Mills reactor, the average energy output per unit mass of hydrogen is about 2 times that of 1 typical chemical reaction. Rossi’s fanboys are not divulging everything and they need to - somehow - account to whoever is/are the investor(s). Mills’ fanboys have been a little bit more honest.
Although I believe that Free Republic is a conservative website, KevMo acts like a Liberal/Progressive: keep repeating the same nonsense, hoping that people will buy.
Posting “scientific” blogs every day for the past 3 months overlooks one thing: all the mechanisms proposed to explain Rossi/Mills Ni/H reactor can be applied to any other chemical reactor (Fe-based, Cu-based, whatever). The very same mechanisms imply a very different geological behavior of planet Earth and one is not seeing experimentally these phenomena since the conditions of the Rossi/Mills Ni/H reactor are very mild geologically speaking: higher pressure and higher temperature will only increase the rate of the LENR reactions and it is not just not showing up in the geological records.
The overall efficiency of the Rossi/Mills Ni/H reactor to produce electrical energy - keyword: electrical - is less than that of the common Ni/H battery. The Rossi/Mills Ni/H reactor needs to convert the thermal energy into electric energy which brings much inefficiency (via Carnot’s law); the common Ni/H battery converts chemical energy directly into electric energy.