Talk-Polywell.org

ladajao -

While I agree that the use of w-hr/hr is dumb, I have to argue that it is not (quite) nonsensical. Presumably input power is electrical, and measured by an integrating power meter with an output selectable between w-hr and kw-hr, with readings taken every hour. In this case, an increment of 0.5 between hourly readings would be expressible as 0.5 w-hr/hr. It's not what I'd call smart, but it's about what I'd expect from a guy with a master's in philosophy who's trying to pass himself off as a scientist/engineer. Of course, he then has to bugger his thermal and optical measurements to convert them to the same units, but this is certainly feasible (although full of possible errors). He quite casually discusses converting lumens to watts here http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/06/15/e- ... mpilation/ Of course, this implies a fairly detailed second-by-second monitoring to the Quark-X's power levels in order to convert a supposed optical measurement to effective power, which would require the continuous use of a wide-band spectrometer, but this sort of inconsistency has never stopped Rossi before.

Of course, Rossi himself clearly indicates that this generous appraisal is wrong. From the same compilation we see

What was the longest period of self sustain in which the output remained steady or increased with zero input power? zero seconds. Always fed half Wh/h

which clearly implies that the input power was fixed at a constant 1/2 watt. Oh well.

I agree with your points. But again assert that when you put a time component on energy, you get power... thus taking the readings in fractions of a time component, while mathematically sound ( as you noted), still represents power.

Meh. As I said, I don't disagree with you.

The natural elements Ni and Li were found in the sample. Their isotope composition is given in the table together with the natural composition. The numbers refer to percent.

Isotope............58Ni__60Ni__61Ni __ 62Ni__64Ni........6Li ___ 7Li
Natural comp....68.1__26.2 __1. 14__ 3.63__0.93.......7.59___ 92.4
Rossi sample.....14.2__ 6.3 __0.3 ____78.5__ 0.7........86.5___ 13.5
See the comments too.
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/07/08/do ... nverified/

I added some dots to try and preserve the spacing when posted. If these numbers are correct it would mean Rossi's 1 MW plant probably worked as claimed.
Obviously the trolls will make idiotic comments but this unproven info is for the other readers who are interested in following news of the program.

I did sent the text to Andrea Rossi and asked him if it was legitimate.

He gave me this response: “No comment.I did not publish any analysis and cannot give any imformation anout it. I want not to comment in positive or in negative.”

I'll bite (though I know I probably shouldn't bother):

What is it about that supposed report that allows you to consider it to have any validity? The article you link (that I admit to not bothering to read, based on the title) flat out says its an unverified report, which to me says it doesn't even measure up to the level of hearsay.

parallel wrote:The natural elements Ni and Li were found in the sample.

Dubious significance without a before vs. after analysis of the sample.

Apropos the title of this thread, this video is interesting. An interview with Melvin Miles on old research showing high correlation between excess heat and excess Helium 4, quantitatively consistent with d+d->He4 fusion with no gamma production.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM82RW7_II4

R.

Postby krenshala » Sat Jul 09, 2016 12:19 pm
"I'll bite (though I know I probably shouldn't bother):

What is it about that supposed report that allows you to consider it to have any validity? The article you link (that I admit to not bothering to read, based on the title) flat out says its an unverified report, which to me says it doesn't even measure up to the level of hearsay."

Who the hell cares what an anonymous blogger thinks? You can't be bothered to read the paper/comments and find out what the source was, but just waste space with useless blather. This site is infested with trolls.

RERT » Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:44 am
"Apropos the title of this thread, this video is interesting. An interview with Melvin Miles on old research showing high correlation between excess heat and excess Helium 4, quantitatively consistent with d+d->He4 fusion with no gamma production."

Yes, a good effort by Ruby Carat to put this video together. It confirms Pons & Fleischmann beyond all reasonable doubt

Excess power was measured in 28 out of 94 electrochemical experiments conducted using palladium or palladium alloy cathodes in heavy water. Reproducibility continues to be the major problem in this controversial research area.
This was a statement from miles book.

paperburn1
Until the mechanisms are understood, yes, there will be many failed attempts. It looks like there are several mechanisms involved, including the reaction with Lithium that has also been proved and can generates heat without neutron emissions. Several mechanisms make finding a theory more difficult.

The general point remains though, there have been too many experiments and replications to doubt that anomalous heat can be generated by LENR and that P & F have been vindicated.

parallel wrote: The general point remains though, there have been too many experiments and replications to doubt that anomalous heat can be generated by LENR and that P & F have been vindicated.

I've heard this said by CF enthusiasts and was part of the OPs main point in opening the thread. I think would be good to have some qualitative analysis on that before stating that something is vindicated. Or are you saying that from what you have learned, it is just good enough for your own personal view that CF is indeed "real?"

parallel wrote: The general point remains though, there have been too many experiments and replications to doubt that anomalous heat can be generated by LENR and that P & F have been vindicated.

With enough experiments you get enough false positives to continue your research. Succeeding consistently with double blind tests is harder. You don't need to understand why anomalous heat or transmutations happen, but it should occur all the time with the specified conditions.

I have not seen the Hiroshima and Nagasaki of LENR where you can repeat your plausible experiment when you decide to do so.

This is like UFO research. A lot of observations but not single alien in Fox News interview.

A fascinating part of the video was Miles saying that he had a electrode which consistently produced excess heat, changed it, and it took him nearly a year to get excess heat again. If I was a skeptic, under pressure to confirm the known laws of physics, I might not have spent the year. I believe that's what happened with many F&P replications. It was just hard to do. F&P were Nobel standard experimental physicists, and their work shouldn't be casually dismissed because some attempts at replication failed.

Miles said that the odds of getting his results at random were over 700,000 to 1. That's not a simple 5% probable false positive. His excess heat output gases were measuring (IIRC) 9-11 units of Helium 4 with an accuracy of 0.1 units, when without excess heat he measured 2-3.

Also, note the comment from Miles: the most convincing demonstration of excess Helium was from McKubre at SRI. There he recycled the output gases and raised the concentration of Helium 4 above the background level in air. Harder to argue that was He4 leaking in.

I think LENR is real, but it would be much better if experiment and theory were properly funded so that we actually gained some understanding of what was going on.

CherryPick "With enough experiments you get enough false positives to continue your research."

You used to be able to take a course on LENR at MIT and see it for yourself. I don't know if the course is still running http://coldfusionnow.org/mit-iap-cold-f ... run-again/