raphael wrote:Dear Jed Rothwell:
I am not going to give more information about this issue. Just can say we have invented a process of ours to enrich Ni without relevant costs. To elaborate Ni powders along classic processes is the invention of the hot water. It is as invent and patent the sputtering in 2010…
Warm regards,
A.R.
He's claiming more than enrichment, he's claiming separation.
As you know, adding a proton to Ni58 gives Cu59, which will decay to Ni59, which has a half-life of 7400 years. And that, from the point of view of a Rossi converter, is a Bad Thing.
From Rossi's site:
Daniel de França MTd2
April 29th, 2011 at 2:09 PM
Dr Mr. Rossi,
Concerning the Nickel input in the experiment, do you deplete it of Ni58?
Best,
Daniel.
Andrea Rossi
April 29th, 2011 at 2:47 PM
Dear Mr Daniel De Francia:
Yes
Warm regards,
A.R.
1 m^3 full of water (density = 1 by definition) = 1 metric ton.
3 X 2 X 2 = 12 m^3 or 12 metric tons density = 1. Getting 2 tons of stuff in such a container is going to be tough.
/sarc
Assuming 2/3 of the weight is lead shielding this means 3.8 cu.ft of lead.
Rossi's blog site used to have a question/answer in which Rossi claimed 50 kg of lead shielding per E-cat. That question seems to have disappeared.
330 E-cats x 50 kg gives 16.5 metric tons.
Assuming 2 metric tons of lead, 2 cm thick, configured as a common shield, you can enclose a volune of just about a 2 meter dia sphere.
Stuffing 330 E-cats into this volume, each with the ability to modulate its own hydrogen pressure (not flow rate), and its own coolant flow rate, not to mention the plumbing to distribute both water and hydrogen, seems, shall we say, distinctly unlikely.
I linked to a diagrammatic representation of the 1 MW plant earlier. It shows an oval sectioned pressure vessel for the reactors. It would be cheaper to line that with lead than have each individual reactor sheathed. Plenty of opportunity here for the skeptics to say "we can't see inside it so it must be a scam." I assume that this whole assembly is the container to which Rossi referred, not some shipping box you can rent or buy off the shelf.
Earlier Rossi stated that E-Cats would not be made available to the two universities until after the demo of the 1 MW plant. So anything earlier is a bonus. He also stated they would be free to test it anyway they wanted, so no time limit on the length of each run, as suggested here earlier.
According to Rossi, the reason for the change to the 50cc reactor was that is was more stable during the start and stop procedures. Remember the 1 liter reactor used for the first demos reached 130kW for a period. Remember too that he said some of the earlier experimental reactors had melted and some exploded. He has also stated that the rate of heat output "can be modulated."
Obviously higher temperatures and pressures will be required for electricity generation. Rossi has stated 300 -550C and 50 bars would be possible. One presumes with steel rather than copper pipes.
As before, with no new news expected for 5 months, most of what will be written here is just idle speculation.
Aside from criticisms about possible fraudulent manipulations of water flow pathways within the machine, percent conversion to steam, disguising actual input power, etc. another pertinent question is what is the hydrogen gas flow into the machine and what happens to it? Several thousands watts of fusion output would not consume much hydrogen. What happens to the rest of it? Does it flow out the drainage tube? The hydrogen flow needs to be accounted for.
There have been arguments that there is not enough fuel- nickel, or what ever in the can to power the output for the claimed long durations. Even if the power is ~ 1/3 to 1/2 that claimed, there is not enough internal fuel. But, this ignores the hydrogen gas. If the flow is great enough it could easily provide the heating power. The problem is that you also need to provide air/ oxygen.
I can see two ways to do this. One is to have a hydrogen oxygen mix in the tank- not a particularly safe arrangement.
The second way is to have a venturi port in the water stream somewhere. Air would be sucked in. The air could enter through hidden plumbing within the exhaust tube. The nickel would thus be serving as a catalyst- a chemical catalyst, not nuclear catalyst. Essentially a fuel cell. The initial heating may be necessary to start the combustion within the nickel powder, subsequently the can would remain hot under the fuel cell heating.
This scam could be ruled out through careful inspection of the plumbing going into and out of the can. Any secrets within the can need not be exposed. Also, measurement of the hydrogen tank flow (and effluent tank gas composition) could determine if quantities would be sufficient to support a fuel cell heat source.
In short, there are a number of possible tricks that need to be eliminated as possibilities. This elimination process need not endanger any real or claimed secrete ingredients or processes within the can. Once/ if these issues are addressed, then indeed some serious head scratching is warranted.
According to the test report, the "flow" of H2 was ~0.4 grams. Why do you care where that goes? In one case the H2 cylinder was actually disconnected after the initial charge to show more was not being introduced.
MSimon wrote:
Suppose the device is chemical and can deliver "excess heat" for 6 hours.
The university will be allowed to test it for only 4. To maintain the secret.
Ekstrom's comments make it clear that the testing is to be undertaken on a no-restrictions basis.
Ekstrom has also said he'll be looking for heat production that's basically "otherworldly" (my term, not his) in both intensity and duration.
A huge challenge to be sure but one that, for the moment, Rossi seems prepared to accept.
I don't think he can be said to accept it until such time as 3rd parties have an e-cat. As far as I know all he has said is this will not be before some given time.
A cynic would say he will wait until he has completed his current round of funding. He gets good PR from the promise with no bad PR from measurements.
tomclarke wrote:
I don't think he can be said to accept it until such time as 3rd parties have an e-cat. As far as I know all he has said is this will not be before some given time.
A cynic would say he will wait until he has completed his current round of funding. He gets good PR from the promise with no bad PR from measurements.
Agreed; until he hands one over (either to Uppsala or some other legit institution) he hasn't accepted. In his favor is the fact that Ekstrom will be involved and that "no-holds-barred" access has been promised. Ditto for the fact that the NyTeknik demo, and the prior ones, have not been chopped liver. Ditto for the fact that what he's asserting is of such a magnitude that "difficulty of detection" is a complete non-issue.
The time lag (June, or maybe a lot later?) is definitely a detrimental factor. If/once RossiFusion is deemed, in scientifically kosher fashion, genuine, the accolades, etc., will come fast and furiously. What's not to like about that?
Last edited by raphael on Mon May 23, 2011 1:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
"As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden." Chauncey Gardiner
Now you are talking out your butt. Giorgio is critical, apparentally a lost skill these days. What you base your personal attack on is beyond me, and also not warranted.
ladajo wrote:Now you are talking out your butt. Giorgio is critical, apparentally a lost skill these days. What you base your personal attack on is beyond me, and also not warranted.
Giorgio has characterized me, falsely, as a blind/100% believer in RossiFusion. Of this there can be no debate.
That, however, had nothing to do with my last post which was a jest based on my, accurate I believe, presumption that Betruger did not intend to name Giorgio in HIS last post. Duh.
"As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden." Chauncey Gardiner
Having met him a couple of times, I am completely convinced by his honesty. Of all the possible interpretations, this is NOT a scam....I have every sympathy with people who see this as yet another free energy scam. Thermodynamics-violating free energy scams annoy me more than most, probably because I studied, researched and taught quantum physics at Oxford University from 1978-1999. However, for a number of reasons that I find compelling, ... I remain convinced that: Its Different This Time.
And the above speaks what about your position?
And for 20 plus pages of posts in this thread I see nothing where Giorgio has said what you claim. I do see where he has repeatedly stated he is willing to believe given real proof involving scientific method. I have not seem where he has dismissed it out of hand. I also have not seen where Rossi has publically tabled a scientific method proof.
I hold a similar position as Giorgio, it may be true, but not enough clarity has been provided to prove it as such. Maybe I am more on the "Rossi has something side", but I remain unconvinced.
Ladajo, the words you quote aren't mine. Not even close.
(So much for the value of your "research" regarding who said what.)
As for Giorgio's position, it's not nearly as reasonable as that. He's got an "arrogant-attack-chihuahua" mode that he gets into which is damned obnoxious (and untruthful).
This is a fact and I'm not the only one who has pointed this out.
Last edited by raphael on Mon May 23, 2011 2:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
"As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden." Chauncey Gardiner