Posted on 07/07/2012 7:25:43 AM PDT by Kevmo
Sure, H202 is great stuff, other than the fact that the input water was already tested.
Over & over again, you ignore that fact.
Maybe you can show me where it was tested?
***Hah hah hah, I KNEW you would eventually ask that, because you do not want to do the homework. Recall that in this thread it was YOU who are supposed to PROVE the fraud. So prove it, LOL boy. If it was so easy to LOL about, why have you gone through such contortions to avoid proving it? PROVE IT.
Dude. You seem to be quoting from a thread that only took place in your imagination. It’s easy to argue against imagined comments — that’s called straw argumentation. But you seem to be taking this to a whole new, surreal and creepy level.
put... down... the ... bong...
You're just mad because I proved very dilute H2O2 has MORE THAN ENOUGH energy to produce the claimed results.
No rocket fuels needed.
Orders of magnitude......man, that's a classic.
Are you a math major?
You blithely ignore that the input water was TESTED. It did not have H202 in it, it was simply water. So how is it you can produce that kind of excess heat with just water? You won’t answer this question, because the answer proves my point that the available energy from water alone is nowhere near enough to produce the excess heat observed. By orders of Magnitude. You know it, that’s why you keep avoiding it.
Water alone has no energy, of course.
Man, you should just stop digging.
I’m supposed to prove the fraud? LOL!
***Yes.I claimed that Rossi has not yet been proven to be a fraud. You claimed that Rossi was proven to be a fraud, upthread, followed by the vehemence of the LOL bowlsheet (so then proving it should be all that much easier). So prove it. But you won’t, because you can’t.
That’s your PROOF? Agreeing with me?
WOW, you’re simply incredible! I’ve never seen anyone back away from such a claim so fast!
Wow, you anti-LENR Luddites are amazing to behold.
Except, of course, decomposing 0.196 M H2O2. LOL!
I've never claimed he could produce energy with water, silly.
I have shown how a fraudster could produce enough energy using very dilute H2O2. It's so simple, a high school chemistry student could show you.
Man, if I had claimed you'd need "orders of magnitude" more energy than could be produced in any known chemical reaction, I'd be pretty embarrassed right about now. LOL!
I’ve never claimed he could produce energy with water, silly.
***Then we agree. The energy coming from typical LENR experiments is several orders of magnitude higher than what can come from water.
So, LOLboy, go ahead and prove fraud. Prove that it wasn’t water at the input of Rossi’s device. Go on, prove it. After all, you said it was proven, “LOL”. If it’s so obvious that you would write LOL then just produce the proof.
The reason you do not is that you cannot. You’re the fraud here.
It’s so simple,
***Then PROVE IT, as you claim to be able to do, LOL, HAHAHAH and all the rest. The input water was tested. PROVE that it was NOT tested, and that it was H202.
You do not because you can not.
Except, of course, decomposing 0.196 M H2O2. LOL!
***Prove it, LOLboy. The input water was tested. Even then, prove that it’s been H202 all along, on EVERY LENR experiment... My comment wasn’t intended for Rossi’s experiment, it was intended for LENR in general.
So PROVE it. You keep posting “LOL” like it should be incredibly easy to prove. How do you get so much energy from such a LENR system when it’s ONLY Water in and water out? You’ve already said that water does not have the energy. Your whole position has been disproven, because the input water is tested on so many LENR experiments. Even if Rossi is an outlier — go ahead and throw out his experiments.
George Miley didn't use water, but he made a claim he couldn't back up by at least one order of magnitude.
Please stop stalking me.
If you'd read the damned reports, you would know this. Kevmo is right.....you haven't done your homework. You skeptopaths are all alike....won't ever actually read the involved science for yourselves, but want other people to do so and provide you with a digest of some sort. The data is there. Look it up yourself.
I did. Rossi didn't even have to use concentrated H2O2 to produce his "excess energy".
Orders of magnitude! Let's talk about not doing your home work. LOL!
Check your assumptions. Your calculations are in error by a factor of ~20.
Also, these data are from an experiment in which the possibility of introducing H2O2 is nil, as the coolant was drawn directly from the building water pipes.
I can admit the POSSIBILITY that a liquid chemical fake for those setups where the coolant was contained in a tank, but even there the likelihood is very low.
Kevmo is correct in that you MUST consider the specific experimental setup to draw proper conclusions. Simply doing an enthalpy calculation for a single experiment and trying to use that to draw conclusions for ALL experiments is ridiculous.
Really? Show me.
I can admit the POSSIBILITY that a liquid chemical fake for those setups where the coolant was contained in a tank,
Excellent! Some people have claimed, even some here, that no chemical reaction could possibly release enough energy, by orders of magnitude! I'm glad you don't agree with that claim.
Simply doing an enthalpy calculation for a single experiment and trying to use that to draw conclusions for ALL experiments is ridiculous.
The purpose of my enthalpy calculation was simply to show that a chemical fake was possible.
Sure. The actual energy output was 233KWH, not 16. The 16KW ran for 18 hours. Now, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you actually intended to type KW instead of KWH, and didn't make the sophomoric mistake of using the wrong units.
"Excellent! Some people have claimed, even some here, that no chemical reaction could possibly release enough energy, by orders of magnitude! I'm glad you don't agree with that claim."
In all cases, this statement MUST be related to the specific experiment/demonstration under discussion. I have yet to see a PLAUSIBLE "chemical fake" proposed.
"The purpose of my enthalpy calculation was simply to show that a chemical fake was possible."
Your choice of experiments was pretty much misleading, as this experiment is the ONLY one in which an H2O2 "fake" will work. I have to wonder if that choice was deliberate.
Re-do your calculations for the other demonstrations. I think you will find that H2O2 WILL NOT WORK for the tank-fed experiments (4.9 g/s flow instead of 833 g/s, outputs of 12kW and 16kW respectively).
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.