10KW LENR Demonstrator?

[Skipjack]

Hmmm
Still not convinced. These are definitely not "hundreds" of people, but it sure is interesting to see so many claims of the like. Why was there never a follow up on these?

[MSimon]

Look at

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/44571

Nobody really knows how nuclear fission really works. That has not stopped the “regulators” from issuing patents for “traditional nuclear reactors”

Rossi should just put out a theory…the most likely… and say “prove me wrong”.

The paper linked here may go a ways towards explaining it:

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... apers.html

[MSimon]

Hmmm
Still not convinced. These are definitely not "hundreds" of people, but it sure is interesting to see so many claims of the like. Why was there never a follow up on these?

Because everyone knows it is not a reputable field. {/sarc}

[Skipjack]

Because everyone knows it is not a reputable field. {/sarc}

That argument would be valid, if it was not for some of the quoted papers predating Pons and Fleischman...

[Axil]

Here is a slide presentation by Larson himself that describes at length the water/carbon experiments (all you ever want to know). At the end, it supports my belief that tiny bubbles are the reason for the Lenr reaction.

The bubbles provide/support enough temperature and time to generate atomic hydrogen.

http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/ ... ept-3-2009

[KitemanSA]

I recall that MANY years ago I read an article reporting a study of welders using electric arc methods who were being poisoned by CO. Since there was no obvious souce of carbon in the process, the report suggested there was some sort of transmutation of elements going on. I remember thinking something along the lines of "what bunk! Everyone knows that transmutation only happens in very high energy fusion/fission processes." Maybe that attitude is prevailant in society?

[MSimon]

Because everyone knows it is not a reputable field. {/sarc}

That argument would be valid, if it was not for some of the quoted papers predating Pons and Fleischman...

You must have missed:


{/sarc}

[Skipjack]

No, I did not miss that

[cgray45]

Hmmm
Still not convinced. These are definitely not "hundreds" of people, but it sure is interesting to see so many claims of the like. Why was there never a follow up on these?

Well mass of papers isn't important by itself-- I mean, I can trot over to any of the Young Earth Creationism groups and finds lots of papers.

That's the problem with saying that main stream scientists aren't "interested" in it-- because most of the time, there's a pretty good reason for that.
They have badly damaged their cause by the way they've handled this, because their demonstration and claims are rife with the potential for fraud, and the way they're talking...not to inspire confidence. (In a lot of frauds, the "we'll be starting production in a year!" often is coupled with "And you want to be on the ground floor of this cure for cancer/new computer/fusion technique.).
They have a very small window to start coming upt with verifiable proof-- and that means a unit that can be handed to someone else, sit in a lab, without Rossi&co anywhere near it, and continue to work even while inputs/outputs are being monitored by skeptical people who are *trying* to prove it won't work.

[Skipjack]

Oh, I actually agree with you cgray45...
Thats what I said earlier. You can write a lot, but that does not mean that everything that has been written is true.

[Axil]

First off, I think what we have here is a case of “an infinite number of highly motivated and shamelessly abused monkeys doing an infinite number of experiments in an extended amount of time eventually making LENR useful”


This current situation harkens back to the good old days of American entrepreneurial vigor when Tomas Edison was foremost among the hordes of American inventors.


Where those old time boys really that smart, I don’t think so. They just worked hard.


Did Tomas Edison really know how electricity worked when he invented the light bulb; I don’t think so but he knew enough to do the job. Was his light bulb perfect: No. But he doggedly ran 10,000 experiments until he eventually made his light bulb useful.


Was Edison interested in making money? I think he was. But he also wanted to make the world a better place.


But we are much smarter today. We go to school for most of our lives and smartest rise to the top to make the important decisions about the world we live in. In are world, the geniuses hold sway.



Geniuses like Tesla: being a genius, Tesla understood electricity better than anybody. He polished up the electrical system that Edison started. But Tesla died a pauper. Yes Tesla was a saintly and altruistic engineer, spending the last days of his life looking at himself in the mirror; a wacko; our kind of guy.


Like what Edison did for electric power, I believe that Rossi wants to force the world into taking LENR seriously and convincing people and institutions to devote some time and money to develop LNER to its full potential, to bring it out of pseudoscience status into the mainstream …and yes like Edison he also wants to make some money.

[tomclarke]

Like what Edison did for electric power, I believe that Rossi wants to force the world into taking LENR seriously and convincing people and institutions to devote some time and money to develop LNER to its full potential, to bring it out of pseudoscience status into the mainstream …and yes like Edison he also wants to make some money.

If he wants this, and he has cold fusion, all he needs is a demo which is:

(1) credible - enough energy out of a black box clearly not to be chemical

(2) observed by independent people (including a skeptic, e.g. randi etc, who without taking the black box apart can check things really carefully). Certainly not an invite-only hand-picked demo reported only by cronies.

These conditions would not be difficult to ensure, and the result would be healines throughout the world instead of a short write-up in PESwiki etc.

Maybe he is just naive, or maybe he does not in fact have a credible black box demo to give.

[tomclarke]

Hmmm
Still not convinced. These are definitely not "hundreds" of people, but it sure is interesting to see so many claims of the like. Why was there never a follow up on these?

Well mass of papers isn't important by itself-- I mean, I can trot over to any of the Young Earth Creationism groups and finds lots of papers.

That's the problem with saying that main stream scientists aren't "interested" in it-- because most of the time, there's a pretty good reason for that.
They have badly damaged their cause by the way they've handled this, because their demonstration and claims are rife with the potential for fraud, and the way they're talking...not to inspire confidence. (In a lot of frauds, the "we'll be starting production in a year!" often is coupled with "And you want to be on the ground floor of this cure for cancer/new computer/fusion technique.).
They have a very small window to start coming upt with verifiable proof-- and that means a unit that can be handed to someone else, sit in a lab, without Rossi&co anywhere near it, and continue to work even while inputs/outputs are being monitored by skeptical people who are *trying* to prove it won't work.

There are always respectable attemts to replicate whenerver a cold fusion result looks robust and unusual. unfortunately when this happens the robust and unusual result either does not happen or is found to have some mundane explanation.

It is a shame. I would like cold fusion to exist. But Couomb is a hard task master.

[happyjack27]

Hmmm
Still not convinced. These are definitely not "hundreds" of people, but it sure is interesting to see so many claims of the like. Why was there never a follow up on these?

Well mass of papers isn't important by itself-- I mean, I can trot over to any of the Young Earth Creationism groups and finds lots of papers.

That's the problem with saying that main stream scientists aren't "interested" in it-- because most of the time, there's a pretty good reason for that.
They have badly damaged their cause by the way they've handled this, because their demonstration and claims are rife with the potential for fraud, and the way they're talking...not to inspire confidence. (In a lot of frauds, the "we'll be starting production in a year!" often is coupled with "And you want to be on the ground floor of this cure for cancer/new computer/fusion technique.).
They have a very small window to start coming upt with verifiable proof-- and that means a unit that can be handed to someone else, sit in a lab, without Rossi&co anywhere near it, and continue to work even while inputs/outputs are being monitored by skeptical people who are *trying* to prove it won't work.

There are always respectable attemts to replicate whenerver a cold fusion result looks robust and unusual. unfortunately when this happens the robust and unusual result either does not happen or is found to have some mundane explanation.

It is a shame. I would like cold fusion to exist. But Couomb is a hard task master.

i haven't heard of any examples of skeptics trying to replicate the experiments and having it not happen or finding a mundane explanation. except for the first pons and fleshman one of course where it didn't happen for all of them, but that's pretty trivial and we all know that one wasn't robust.

and i've done a considerable amount of research. so to be more blunt i think you're saying something that maybe sounds right but you don't really know to be true.

[Axil]

On December 17, 1903, amid the dunes of Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, Wilbur and Orville Wright achieved one of civilized man's fondest dreams - flight. It lasted only twelve seconds, but that brief flight of a manned, heavier-than-air machine ushered in the age of aviation. Ironically, this milestone, which marked one of the greatest advancements in the history of man, was witnessed by only a handful of selected and privileged people and was largely overlooked by the newspapers of the day. But today, we express thanks and gratitude to Orville and Wilbur Wright as the first trail blazers of aviation who took those first shaky and unsure steps. We revere the great sacrifices that were made and admire their genius.


The Wright brothers perfected their design to the point where they could sustain flights of 24 miles in which they could bank, turn and do "figure eights" A technical breakthrough of staggering proportions. And in 1905, the machine was ready. But when the Wright brothers offered their invention to the United States Army, it was rejected without any consideration. How could the Army not understand what this machine can do? Even the patent office was skeptical; how can a man fly, its nor possible; the patent office rejected the idea out of hand, but when the reviewers finally saw the device working, an application filed in 1903 was finally approved and granted in 1906 for a "flying machine."


In 1909, the first great international aviation meet was held in Rheims, France. Sure of victory, the Wright brothers entered three planes in hopes of dominating the event. Weren’t they the best; the first. But a young unknown studied the Wright design and improved upon it. With this improved machine, He won the competition. His name was Glenn Curtiss.


As a result of Glenn Curtiss' early success, and the backing of the Army, the Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Company was born, It became the largest aircraft manufacturer in the world during World War I and went public in 1916 with Curtiss as president. Curtiss had become the world's largest aviation company, employing 18,000 at its Buffalo facility and 3,000 at its Hammondsport, New York location. They produced 10,000 aircraft during World War I, more than 100 in a single week.


Where is the Wright brother’s plant located?