I did read it. And I don't accept it. If you can't be bothered to read my earlier debunking of that claim, then there is not much point in you participating in this thread.parallel wrote:If you can't be bothered to read the links before posting there is not much point in having a discussion. Are you trying to become a professional debunker or something?
10KW LENR Demonstrator?
The first order of business: thanks parallel, you are proving to be a great source of info on this stuff. If nobody else on this site appreciates it, at least I do.
What does the control box manipulate to regulate the reaction? It’s got to be a magnetic field.
This separation is not how catalysts work. The catalyst, its promoters and its inhibiters most all be combined together in a unified admixture.
One liter of space is such a small volume to hide anything other than the nano-powder. Considering that small volume about the size of a large beer can, some sort of radio frequency mechanism to produce electrostatic stimulation does not look possible.This time I opened the control unit (and examined the interior), as someone said that it could contain a hidden battery. And I can swear in court that the box was empty, except for the control electronics – five very simple PLCs – and it weighed about seven kilograms,” said Levi.
“I have also seen inside the reactor device itself – most of the volume is isolation, and most of the weight of about 30 kg is due to lead.”
He confirmed that the reactor chamber, supposedly containing nickel powder, the secret catalysts and hydrogen gas, had a volume of around one liter. The reactor chamber was the only part he could not inspect.
With this small power input, a small magnetic coil might be possible but that power input is really low for anything meaningful.According to Levi, the input electrical power to 'ignite' the device was about 1250 watts for five to ten minutes. It was then reduced to about 80 watts, equivalent to the power consumption of the control unit.
What does the control box manipulate to regulate the reaction? It’s got to be a magnetic field.
Take note, the magic nano-powder is referred as two separate items: “nickel powder, the secret catalysts”. This must be an artifact of the language translation process somewhere down the line.He confirmed that the reactor chamber, supposedly containing nickel powder, the secret catalysts and hydrogen gas, had a volume of around one liter. The reactor chamber was the only part he could not inspect.
This separation is not how catalysts work. The catalyst, its promoters and its inhibiters most all be combined together in a unified admixture.
From what I gather, there was no steam produced in the second experiment.What needed to be done is the steam released should have been re-condensed to demonstrate the quantity of water heated.
Water was allegedly simply heated from 15 degrees C to 20 degrees C at a flow- rate of 3000 litres/hour (3 cubic meters/hour).
So no steam.
I dont understand why you keep insisting on there being steam.
The first experiment had steam involved, but it seems to be a lot less representative to me, even though more people were watching it. The experimental setup in the first experiment was bull, as we all know.
The second experiment, while not perfect was a lot better in this regard.
To me this only leaves fraud or a real phenomenon as an explanation. Fraud being the more likely one.
A magnetic field that varies in strength as time (months?) passes must be how the control box compensates for the buildup over time of an inhibiting ash product; say manganese for example.
Piantelli provided New Energy Times with a set of miscellaneous graphs and images. One of them is what I assume is a spectra of some waste product from his nickel rod. You can see the element symbol Mn there. Assuming that Rossi is using piantelli's fomulation, I think that this points to one of the ash products as Manganese, Symbol: Mn. Atomic number: 25
Chromium was also seen in this documentation. It was also mentioned in the Piantelli patent (50% Chromium, 50% nickel). I believe that Chromium is (a …or… the) catalytic promoter.
Piantelli provided New Energy Times with a set of miscellaneous graphs and images. One of them is what I assume is a spectra of some waste product from his nickel rod. You can see the element symbol Mn there. Assuming that Rossi is using piantelli's fomulation, I think that this points to one of the ash products as Manganese, Symbol: Mn. Atomic number: 25
Chromium was also seen in this documentation. It was also mentioned in the Piantelli patent (50% Chromium, 50% nickel). I believe that Chromium is (a …or… the) catalytic promoter.
Last edited by Axil on Sun Feb 27, 2011 6:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Because in the 'witnessed' experiment, the 'heating process' was a phase change of water.Skipjack wrote:I dont understand why you keep insisting on there being steam.
In the new experiment, it is by one person, with no peer review on it whatsoever.
My issue is that it is all NOT-SCIENTIFIC. It is NOT-SCIENCE.
My preference would be that different cooling fluids are tried out. How about some transformer oil?
In industry there exists a stage in the procurement process called a “capability determination (or demonstration)”. The intent of this stage in the procurement process is not to demonstrate science but to convince the customer that the product is able to do the job that the customer requires.
As an example of this acquisition process see the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_Secr ... _Logistics
As an example of this acquisition process see the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_Secr ... _Logistics
Why don't they do that, then? It involves asking those to whom the information is given what they would expect to see, for them to accept that capability has been determined.Axil wrote:In industry there exists a stage in the procurement process called a “capability determination (or demonstration)”.
OK .4g = 3.5950e+13 joules say 3.6E13 joulesparallel wrote:chrismbFrom http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 108242.eceCan someone please DEFINITIVELY explain to me why, even if everything is absolutely true about the demonstrations, this is sooo much more likely an unknown nuclear reaction, as opposed to an unknown chemical reaction ?
So it is either out and out fraud and all the participants are liars, or it is not a chemical reaction.“The second thing is that this time we loaded the unit with hydrogen at the beginning, and then the bottle was closed. It then worked for 18 hours with the bottle closed. Quite impressive.”
“I weighed container before and after charging, and including the gas we let out to empty the tube of air, the consumption of hydrogen was 0.4 grams. That’s nothing!”
“Minimum power was 15 kilowatts, and that’s a conservative value. I calculated it several times. At night we did a measurement and the device then worked very stable and produced 20 kilowatts.”
“Now that I have seen the device work for so many hours, in my view all chemical energy sources are excluded,” said Giuseppe Levi.
20 KW = 2E4 joules /sec
2E4 j/s * 6.48E4 s = 1.3E9 joules. 4 orders of magnitude low.
The actual energy output is not even a rounding error in the mass conversion equation.
Something doesn't multiply out.
The numbers aren't hard to run and I used this dandy little widget to help:
http://www.1728.com/einstein.htm
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Exactly:chrismb wrote:Why don't they do that, then? It involves asking those to whom the information is given what they would expect to see, for them to accept that capability has been determined.Axil wrote:In industry there exists a stage in the procurement process called a “capability determination (or demonstration)”.
What Rossi should negotiate with the patent office is a “demonstration requirement document” that defines what he needs to show as a demonstration for his patent to be granted.
The formulation of this magic powder could be included in the patent application as a “SECRET” addendum to be made public when the patent is granted.
Rossi needs to pack hydrogen in the magic powder before this reaction can be preformed. This hydrogen packing could be incomplete when the reaction begins and only asymptotically approaches 100% (but never really gets there) over an extended timeframe.MSimon wrote:So I want an explanation of all the energy they aren't getting.
The mass loss: from an apparatus that weighs as little as 4 Kg you would need to measure on the order of 4E-5 grams. i.e. on the order of a fingerprint's worth or less.
40 micrograms out of 4Kg? well maybe. But not in any table to lab set up. You have to be very careful to do that.
Say did I mention EEStor?
40 micrograms out of 4Kg? well maybe. But not in any table to lab set up. You have to be very careful to do that.
Say did I mention EEStor?
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
OK so where did the mass that didn't turn into energy go? Hidden in the magic powder as a photon flux? Or maybe they need to set up a neutrino detector.Axil wrote:Rossi needs to pack hydrogen in the magic powder before this reaction can be preformed. This hydrogen packing could be incomplete when the reaction begins and only asymptotically approaches 100% (but never really gets there) over an extended timeframe.MSimon wrote:So I want an explanation of all the energy they aren't getting.
I suspect Link Wrays myself.
Last edited by MSimon on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
That is what I said more clearly than you. You think it, I say it:In the new experiment, it is by one person, with no peer review on it whatsoever.
Unless the effect is real, it has to be a fraud.
There are only these two possibilities. There can not be a misinterpretation, or some accident.
So either Rossi and Levi are both liers and scammers, or they are for real.
I do not have enough information to say which of the two possibilities is actually the case. I would tend to guess that it is a fraud, but I would not bet my life on it either.
It is a difference between not buying into something and actually accusing someone of fraud. As I only have the choice between buying it, or accusing them of fraud, I am not going to set myself on a verdict yet.
There definitely is no chemical reaction that I can think of, that would do that.
IIRC, Rossi claims that they are only actually using up a fraction of the "fuel". The rest is lost due to inefficiencies.So I want an explanation of all the energy they aren't getting.
That may explain that. 0.4 grams is a very low amount. I would assume that there are some tolerances involved here as well, if the device works are advertised (e.g. it needs to have a base- load to fill up empty space in it, or something like that).
Again, my problem is that the second test was only done with one guy, Levi present. Levi is also close with Rossi.
I honestly dont know what to make of all that. My instincts cry "fraud and foul play", but then Italy is not China, a former eastern block country and definitely not Nigeria and some of the people involved are at least associtated with a university. All that speaks against a fraud and it is the only reason why I have decided on this being a fraud yet.
Right now, to many things still dont add up for this to be believable. Yet for the fraud theory, a lot of things dont add up 100% either.
I still think it can go both ways, though if I had to make a choice, I would call it a fraud.