10KW LENR Demonstrator?

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

parallel
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:24 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Post by parallel »

Enginerd

Why didn’t I think of that? They are all so stupid compared to the critics from Talk-Polywell, they would never notice 3 tons of batteries when then went to pick up the device. Likewise, you can rely on none of them having any sense of smell when the water was collected for measurement. As for the products of combustion, they simply wouldn’t notice that much exhaust in a closed room. Probably think someone had farted.

As for your the further suggestions, words fail me.

Enginerd
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:29 am

Post by Enginerd »

parallel wrote:Why didn’t I think of that? They are all so stupid compared to the critics from Talk-Polywell, they would never notice 3 tons of batteries when then went to pick up the device. Likewise, you can rely on none of them having any sense of smell when the water was collected for measurement. As for the products of combustion, they simply wouldn’t notice that much exhaust in a closed room. Probably think someone had farted.
As I stated, clearly there is no possible way they could be hiding the required amount of batteries within the device. That alone however is not sufficient to rule out fraud. The device might be the real thing -- but it could easily be a clever fraud. As for the sense of smell -- ever smelled the combustion products from burning hydrogen or burning acetylene?

It would be easy for Rossi et al to create a demonstration that would rule out most forms of fraud, and I sincerely hope they do just that.
parallel wrote:As for your the further suggestions, words fail me.
Which is odd, since here we are on a thread where folks have managed to wax eloquent for page after page on this thread speculating about low energy nuclear reactions that somebody said that their sister's uncle's cousin saw on some zero-point energy website, etc. Before I am willing to consider such things, I'd rather see more conventional mechanisms ruled out. That is what science is all about -- create a falsifiable premise and then try like the dickens to falsify it. With respect to the Rossi device, I think it is reasonable to start with the premise that something conventional is happening. So I am postulating obvious conventional sources of heat. Then I would want to try like to dickens to falsify those premises. Premise: perhaps the heat is chemical? So set up tests to falsify that premise. Perhaps the heat is electrical? So set up tests to falsify that premise. etc.

As Sherlock Holmes said in The Sign of the Four, "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"

KitemanSA
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

Enginerd wrote: As Sherlock Holmes said in The Sign of the Four, "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"
Since you can't rule out HEAT PUMP technology yet... Or did I miss something?

parallel
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:24 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Post by parallel »

Enginerd wrote
It would be easy for Rossi et al to create a demonstration that would rule out most forms of fraud, and I sincerely hope they do just that.
It won't be "easy."

His next demonstration is supposed to be a 1 megawatt commercial unit. If that happens, I much doubt the critics here will be satisfied by that.
Run in his own premises? Too easy to fake it. Georgio would find it more difficult to discount that some heat was generated though.

I know it comes as a surprise, but Rossi isn't interested in setting up a demo just for the critics. Why should he waste time and money on that?

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Post by Axil »

Proof through installation…

For most cynics, a believable demo will not be the operation of a single Rossi reactor in an industrial environment under a performance payment warranty. So cynics might then say, “It’s only working in just one factory”.

When it is installed in 100 factories, there will be fewer cynics but there will still be a large number of diehard cynics remaining. The cynics will say “These customers are being scammed; A fool and his money is soon parted”

After it is installed as a preferred power source in 90% of the worlds industrial base, a few CEO’s of coal mines and gas wells (T Boone Pickens?) will say “Believe ME, don’t believe your lying eyes, it just can’t work”… and so it goes.

Luzr
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 8:23 pm

Post by Luzr »

Axil wrote: After it is installed as a preferred power source in 90% of the worlds industrial base, a few CEO’s of coal mines and gas wells (T Boone Pickens?) will say “Believe ME, don’t believe your lying eyes, it just can’t work”… and so it goes.
Well, at 90%, it becomes "conspiracy"...

(Without saying anything about whether this is for real or not.)

Giorgio
Posts: 3061
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

parallel wrote:His next demonstration is supposed to be a 1 megawatt commercial unit. If that happens, I much doubt the critics here will be satisfied by that.
Run in his own premises? Too easy to fake it. Georgio would find it more difficult to discount that some heat was generated though.
It will actually depend on what type of setup they will show and what type of info they will disclose.
No one is really caring to know what is inside their reactor. As long as they stick to a decent experimental setup people will switch from being skeptics to be interested to get more info.

parallel wrote:I know it comes as a surprise, but Rossi isn't interested in setting up a demo just for the critics. Why should he waste time and money on that?
If you want to sell your tech and make money than you have to play the game and convince the critics that you really have something new. That's the way the world works for now.

Giorgio
Posts: 3061
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

Axil wrote:Proof through installation…

For most cynics, a believable demo will not be the operation of a single Rossi reactor in an industrial environment under a performance payment warranty. So cynics might then say, “It’s only working in just one factory”.
A single demo is enough if well executed.

- Install the reactors on a steel frame 50 cm from the ground, open beneath.

- Have a single pipeline to bring water to the reactor, placing a 100 USD flowmeter and a 20 USD thermocouple in line before the distribution pipe.

- Have only one cable of 2x0.75 mm2 section copper connected to each single reactor (more than enough to supply the starting and working power according the disclosed data).
All cables start from a single distribution box with a power meter on the main line.

- Connect a single hydrogen bottle (with a pressure indicator) to supply hydrogen to all the reactors.

- Just warm water from ambient temperature to 80'C +/- 2'C

- Place a flowmeter and a thermocouple at the exit line of the reactor.

- Place a webcam to be able to monitor 24H/Day the room.

- Leave the reactor running for 2 weeks.

This is all you need to make the demo reactor test a skeptic proof assembly, using off the shelf parts and without need to have fancy equipment or huge costs.


Axil wrote:When it is installed in 100 factories, there will be fewer cynics but there will still be a large number of diehard cynics remaining. The cynics will say “These customers are being scammed; A fool and his money is soon parted”
Nonsense. After 20 years dealing with industrial companies I can tell you that if there is a tech that is making a company save 1$ on manufacturing costs than all the other companies in the same field will adopt it in a blink of an eye.

parallel
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:24 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Post by parallel »

Here is a link to the Rossi-Focardi paper A new energy source from nuclear fusion dated 22 March 2010
http://www.scribd.com/doc/46920826/Rossi-Focardi-Paper

I noticed the paper stated that DOE and DOD witnessed trials in November 2009. No surprise that DOE did not report this: in fact there is a risk that getting DOE involved would be fatal to the whole endeavor. One of their highest scientist’s main claim to fame was debunking cold fusion.
….that similar results have been obtained in the factory of EON in Bondeno (Ferrara, Italy) in a test performed with ENEL (spa) on June, 25th 2009 and in another series of tests made in Bedford, New Hampshire (USA) in a lab of LTI with the assistance of the DOE (November 19 2009) and of the DOD (November 20 2009).

Kahuna
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: CA

Post by Kahuna »

Rossi Answers some more questions here:

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 126617.ece

Some new material and some clarifications are included.

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Post by Axil »

Kahuna wrote:Rossi Answers some more questions here:

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 126617.ece

Some new material and some clarifications are included.
Kahuna: thanks for the post, it is much appreciated.
Akre: Are there any precious metals the E-Cat?

Rossi: No
Interesting!!!

How can Rossi load the hydrogen (turn H2 into H+) onto the surface of the nickel without some sort of precious metal? This is VERY perplexing.
Jonas L: Will your company supply with the nickel powder that is needed or will there be many different suppliers ?

Rossi: We will supply, because the Ni has to be treated in a proprietary way.
I take this to mean that the surface of the powder must tightly conform to some optimum crystal stature (perhaps (111) cubic centric).

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

How can Rossi load the hydrogen (turn H2 into H+) onto the surface of the nickel without some sort of precious metal? This is VERY perplexing.
My guess? Because he cant and this is simply a scam...
Seems the most logical explanation.

parallel
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:24 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Post by parallel »

Skipjack
My guess? Because he cant and this is simply a scam...
Seems the most logical explanation.
Rather than admit the simple truth, you don't have a clue, you invent a reverse Ponzi scheme where Rossi gives away his money.

Your brilliant logic lights up the board.

Torulf2
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: Swedem

Post by Torulf2 »

Maybe he sett something up and hope for some big money shall give him a fine offer.
And then its not works, Rossi say its do but the big money say not because they
buy it for kill it and save the col/oil-industry.
Or maybe it works and the big money buy it and say it not works.

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

There are so many way that he could be making money out of a fraud like this. The key to a successful fraud is that people dont figure out that they are being frauded...

Post Reply