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.”
I find that truly remarkable. Could explain canceling the Shuttle, and some other stuff.
So, what's NASA got up its sleeves?
Apparently, he is also now talking about selling shares to the public.
http://cold-fusion.us/rossi-floats-idea-of-selling-shares-in-the-e-cat-126100
Let’s hear the excuses directly from NASA. They claim superior knowledge in this field ~ so tell us all. We’re taxpayers. We can take it!
The 1 MW units he is selling won’t even produce electricity. They produce heat (assuming they work as advertised) but not enough temperature to create steam.
So the complaint is that it did not run 8 hrs (it only ran 5 1/2 hrs). So what are we going to be able to tell in the additonal 1 1/2 hrs that we were not able to tell by running it 5 1/2 hrs. I dont understand the logic here. Is 8 hrs some kind of break point that would eliminate a certain technology? If so, what?They can calculate, based on the size of the device and how much heat is added to the device (Rossi spends hours heating up the device at the beginning of each test, supposedly to make the nuclear reactions work) how long it can produce heat once the heat is removed. None of Rossi's public tests have conclusively excluded the possibility of error or fraud. Rossi has a habit of promising more than his tests actually deliver.
Rossi claims that he's heated his factory for 6 months using his E-Cat, but he has show no evidence of doing so (not even his utility bills). The fact that his claims are so much more impressive than what he has actually shown anyone makes many people suspicious.
That being the case, there should be a finite solution here. Which chemical reactions are capable of being stored in such a small space? And capable of producing that much heat? And able to sustain that production rate for 5 1/2 hrs.
My guts are telling me that there cant be a whole lot of known chemical reactions that would meet the criteria. If there is no known chemical reaction that meets that time line / curve ... then we should give the guy a bit more opportunity to present his evidence. But, once he can prove he is outside the curve, then he has either invented a new means of extracting energy (a plus) or he has created a new chemical reaction (also a plus) or it is a type of process that is outside of the chemical realm (also a plus). But with all of these tests constantly coming up inconclusive and then being required to meet another goal post seems to be a bit disingenuous to both sides.
Andrea Rossi has said no more public tests.
http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/2011/11/rossi-no-more-ecat-public-tests.html
That being the case, there should be a finite solution here. Which chemical reactions are capable of being stored in such a small space? And capable of producing that much heat? And able to sustain that production rate for 5 1/2 hrs.Rossi won't let anyone examine the device. Rossi controlled every public test. Rossi installed and calibrated the test equipment, and refused to do some basic testing that would eliminate much of the doubt.
Most of the doubts come from the question of whether the E-Cat is really turning all the water into steam. There is an enormous difference in the amount of energy needed to heat water to just below boiling, and to actually boil that same water. If Rossi is just boiling a little water, his device are only producing about 1/7th the heat needed to boil all the water. And Rossi has consistently refused to allow anyone to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that all the water is, in fact, being boiled away.
ping
What about the thousands of gallons of "water" he's pumping through the device?
You don’t need proof to get investors, you need believers. He’s got plenty of those. During the .com boom there was a “software” company trading for over 100 bucks a share that not only didn’t have a product they didn’t even have a spec. But they had believers.
It seems like it could be tested by taking a sample from the device before it ran and another sample after it ran and compared their element/isotope ratios.Rossi did exactly that. His "before" sample contained Nickel, and his "after" sample contained Nickel, Copper and Iron. But they were all identical to naturally-occuring elements, with no signs of nuclear processes having occurred.
From Wikipedia:
As Ny Teknik reports, Peter Ekström, lecturer at the Department of Nuclear Physics at Lund University in Sweden, concluded in May 2011, "I am convinced that the whole story is one big scam, and that it will be revealed in less than one year."[22][23] He cites the unlikelihood of a chemical reaction being strong enough to overcome the Coulomb barrier, the lack of gamma rays, the lack of explanation for the origin of the extra energy, the lack of the expected radioactivity after fusing a proton with 58Ni, the unexplained occurrence of 11% iron in the spent fuel, the 10% copper in the spent fuel strangely having the same isotopic ratios as natural copper, and the lack of any unstable copper isotope in the spent fuel as if the reactor only produced stable isotopes.[22] Kjell Aleklett, physics professor at Uppsala University, said the percentage of copper was too high for any known reaction of nickel, and the copper had the same isotopic ratio as natural copper. He also stated, "Known chemical reactions cannot explain the amount of energy measured. A nuclear reaction can explain the amount of energy, but the knowledge we have today says that this reaction cannot take place."[24][23]A recent paper by Miley (PowerPoint) showed that their LENR experiments are producing 39 non-natural isotopes. Rossi's device is producing 0 such isotopes.
Where’s KevMo on this?
“If it’s a scam I can’t see how he expects to cash in.”
How does any scam artist, like Rossi, expect to cash in?
Unfortunately for large cash suckers the money is gone even if the criminal is behind bars. Look at Madoff. He suckered billions of dollars for years.
” They claim superior knowledge in this field”
“claim”? Don’t know much about NASA, do you? Two of their nuclear plants are still operating after 34 years and at the edge of the outermost layer of the heliosphere (That means ‘outer space’ to you). Seems NASA has plenty of experience building small nuclear power plants, even if not Rossi’s BS “cold fusion” device.
Even if he wont allow someone in to examine the internals, there should be several things that could be eliminated. For instance, the volume of LPG able to be contained inside of the size should only be able to produce a specific amount of energy.
I guess I’m thinking that the process of elimination should rule out quite a few chemical reactions. The ones that are left should be a fairly small number and should be able to be “removed” by meeting certain criteria.
To prove that something new is going on here, all you have to do is eliminate the old as being an option.
No, NASA claimed superior knowledge regarding how an LENR device should work.
Those little fission devices are not LENR devices ~ they clearly depend on decay processes typical of those you find in STRONG NUCLEAR FORCE reactions.
One more time ~ there are FOUR FUNDAMENTAL FORCES. They are Gravity, Electro-Magnetic, Weak Nuclear, and Strong Nuclear.
Read up on all four and you can get into this discussion.
All discussions must assume that Weak Nuclear force could be at play, as could StrongNuclear force.
Understanding that when NASA says, "Hey, you gots' to do it this way" just ask yourself how it is guys at NASA are familiar enough with LENR to know what a test for Weak Nuclear force involvement ought to show.
To prove that something new is going on here, all you have to do is eliminate the old as being an option.The problem with that is that Rossi refuses to perform the tests that would eliminate honest error and fraud. (Actually, given some of Rossi's statements, I think we can rule out honest error. No honest error could allow Rossi to think that he heated his factory for 6 months with an E-Cat device and a single "fueling".)
At best, he's extremely paranoid. At worst, he's a con artist. He won't let anyone do the work necessary to tell which.
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.