10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[bk78]

I don't. Indeed, I am increasingly sceptical myself. But when people use "scientific" reasons to "support" their skepticism, I ask for the science (or in one case the statistics).

So you are asking for a "scientific" reason why the coffe cup does not exist.

When people make final judgements based on fallacy (or lack of real data) I question their reasoning.

For some strange reason, you do so only for people who are sceptic.

I can think of several ways to massively reduce the content of Ni58 in a sample of natural Ni without spending the bank.

No, you can't.

Mind reader are you? Know what I can think of do you? That is a rare gift. You shouldn't waste it here. Go forth unto the world and read minds. Make millions on outsider trading.

If I was wrong, you could easily disproof me, but like Rossi you chose not to do so. I guess, you want to sell your enrichment machine, not please the critics. I do not believe in extraterrestric coffe cups, and i do not believe you know a cheap method for enrichment. Sorry.

After you did that, I suggest, you check the istope spectrum from before and after the powder was in the reactor (you find it somewhere on krivits site). While you are at it, explain why there is more copper in the "after" spectrum than there was nickel in the original powder, and why the spectrum is mainly iron and almost no nickel at all.

You know, I've seen claims of isotope evaluations. I've never seen one on the Rossi output. I've seen traces from Piantelli's work that has been attributed to Rossi, but none of his stuff. Link please?

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/ ... ixd4.shtml

About 90% iron and ca. 0.01% Nickel in both probes (Argon is probably carrier gas).
Copper before about 0.1%, after 10%.
Note: If you put piece of iron in a ionic copper solution, the copper will stick to the iron.
Any comments?

No, some third-world country dude shows what he is able to do cheaply and it suggests the requirements are not as difficult as you make them out to be.

Cheaply? Where was that shown?

Not shown, opined.

It was not opined either, except by you.

But the no one has shown the contrary either.

Coffe cup.
I guess those thousands of scientists who were thinking of new methods for enrichment for decades are all morons compared to Rossi. Who now can't even do highschool physics anymore.

The only thing I've seen is the cost of 5 or 6 nines fine 58Ni. That stuff is expensive. But this is not the same thing at all.

Kiteman, EITHER you claim that Rossi only has to deenrich Ni58 to, let's say, a few percent. Then your claim that Rossi does this to reduce gamma emmissions makes no sense, because if it was not deenriched, it would still not be harmful. OR you say, it will emit harmful levels of gamma if it was natural nickel, then you will have to deenrich it to ppm level so that no more radiation is detected. Between "harmful" and "nothing above background detected" there is a difference of at least 4 orders of magnitude. If you had thought about my earlier question for numbers instead of evading it, you might have noticed that yourself.

[icarus]

Piantelli's hypothesis:

"The process involves molecular hydrogen (H2) being adsorbed onto the surface of a crystalline transition metal that has a partially-filled electron shell. Under the right conditions the H2 molecules dissociate and pick up valence electrons from the metal, becoming hydrogen anions (H−), also known as hydrides. The H− ion consists of a proton with two electrons. As protons and electrons have equal and opposite charges, the H− ion has a net negative charge.

According to Piantelli’s hypothesis, under the right conditions a H− ion can replace an electron of a transition metal atom, just as a muon replaces an electron in muon-catalyzed fusion. Due to its relatively large mass, the H− ion continually falls to lower electron levels, causing the emission of X-rays and Auger electrons. As it has a net negative charge, there is no Coulomb repulsion to hinder its progress toward the transition metal nucleus. At the lowest level the H− ion is close enough to be captured by the nucleus. After capturing the H− ion, the unstable nucleus releases energy and eventually expels the anion in the form of a proton."

http://coldfusionnow.wordpress.com/2011 ... ypothesis/

"anion capture" or "anion-catalyzed LENR" ... interesting, no?

[MSimon]

Excellent we agree. Now you can stop pretending that the demonstrations are evidence of fraud.

Evidently you missed my nuance.

You are as nuanced as a container truck full of rancid olive oil.

I guess we didn't agree after all.

[MSimon]

According to Piantelli’s hypothesis, under the right conditions a H− ion can replace an electron of a transition metal atom, just as a muon replaces an electron in muon-catalyzed fusion. Due to its relatively large mass, the H− ion continually falls to lower electron levels, causing the emission of X-rays and Auger electrons. As it has a net negative charge, there is no Coulomb repulsion to hinder its progress toward the transition metal nucleus. At the lowest level the H− ion is close enough to be captured by the nucleus. After capturing the H− ion, the unstable nucleus releases energy and eventually expels the anion in the form of a proton."

The problem is that the H- ion has an electron attached and the attachment is rather far from the nucleus. Unlike the muon where the charge is intrinsic (or at least bound "inside" the muon). Now how exactly can a weakly bound electron (ev) do this little magic trick?

All that is needed is the "right conditions". And the secret sauce.

BTW has the X-ray emission been confirmed? A piece of photo film should be sufficient for general confirmation. Or you could use an X-ray detector.

But then you are back to radiation hazard. Of which there supposedly is none.

[Crawdaddy]

Evidently you missed my nuance.

You are as nuanced as a container truck full of rancid olive oil.

I guess we didn't agree after all.

Happily, one day we will agree. I look forward to that day.

[MSimon]

You are as nuanced as a container truck full of rancid olive oil.

I guess we didn't agree after all.

Happily, one day we will agree. I look forward to that day.

More likely (if my EEStor experience is anything to go by) you will either slink away or never bring up the subject. Fine by me. I don't believe you were here at the time but I made a really bone headed mistake on this board and kept it up for a week or 10 days. I was so good that I almost had my "opponents" convinced. And then I woke up. And publish my error on all my major blogs. Just to keep myself from being too "fat headed".

[Crawdaddy]

I guess we didn't agree after all.

Happily, one day we will agree. I look forward to that day.

More likely (if my EEStor experience is anything to go by) you will either slink away or never bring up the subject. Fine by me. I don't believe you were here at the time but I made a really bone headed mistake on this board and kept it up for a week or 10 days. I was so good that I almost had my "opponents" convinced. And then I woke up. And publish my error on all my major blogs. Just to keep myself from being too "fat headed".

Ha. If and when the exact mechanism of fraud is found, I will take great pleasure in pointing out how none of the skeptics on this board correctly predicted how it was done.

It is extremely easy to exclaim with absolute certainty that this device does not work. It's like me predicting that it is not 11:50:50 right now where you live without looking at a watch. I prefer to glance at my "watch" since I am a materials scientist and well equipped to understand the existing literature.

[MSimon]

Ha. If and when the exact mechanism of fraud is found, I will take great pleasure in pointing out how none of the skeptics on this board correctly predicted how it was done.

How is it possible to predict a fraud in all details? And who cares? Just knowing it is a fraud is sufficient for protection. Assuming you wish to be protected.

And besides the EEStor story has yet to be fully revealed. There are a few faithful still waiting.

I expect that in 6 to 9 months you will either be gone or avoid bringing up the subject. My observation is that very few have the courage to admit stupidity in public.

[icarus]

Piantelli's patent:

http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/ ... i&maxRec=1

"A method and a generator to produce energy from nuclear reactions between hydrogen and a metal, comprising the steps of a) production of a determined quantity of micro/nanometric clusters of a transition metal, b) bringing hydrogen into contact with said clusters and controlling its pressure and speed, preferably after applying vacuum cycles of at least 10-9 bar between 35° and 500°C for degassing the clusters; c) creating an active core for the reactions by heating the clusters up to a temperature that is higher than the Debye temperature TD of the metal, preferably a temperature close to a temperature at which a sliding of reticular planes occurs, in order to adsorb in the clusters the hydrogen as H- ions; d) triggering the reactions by a mechanical, thermal, ultrasonic, electric or magnetic impulse on the active core, causing the atoms of the metal to capture the hydrogen ions, with liberation of heat, preferably in the presence of a gradient of temperature on the active core; e)removing the heat maintaining the temperature above TD, preferably in the presence of a magnetic and/or electric field of predetermined intensity. The active core can comprise a sintered material of micro/nanometric clusters, or a clusters powder collected in a container, or a deposit of clusters onto a substrate of predetermined volume and shape, with at least 109 clusters per square centimetre of surface, obtainable by means of methods such as sputtering, spraying evaporation and condensation of metal, epitaxial deposition, by heating up to approaching the melting point and then slow cooling, such methods followed by quick cooling for freezing the cluster structure."

Debye temperature:
"In Debye theory, the Debye temperature is the temperature of a crystal's highest normal mode of vibration, i.e., the highest temperature that can be achieved due to a single normal vibration."
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics ... ature.html

[icarus]

According to Piantelli’s hypothesis, under the right conditions a H− ion can replace an electron of a transition metal atom, just as a muon replaces an electron in muon-catalyzed fusion. Due to its relatively large mass, the H− ion continually falls to lower electron levels, causing the emission of X-rays and Auger electrons. As it has a net negative charge, there is no Coulomb repulsion to hinder its progress toward the transition metal nucleus. At the lowest level the H− ion is close enough to be captured by the nucleus. After capturing the H− ion, the unstable nucleus releases energy and eventually expels the anion in the form of a proton."

The problem is that the H- ion has an electron attached and the attachment is rather far from the nucleus. Unlike the muon where the charge is intrinsic (or at least bound "inside" the muon). Now how exactly can a weakly bound electron (ev) do this little magic trick?

All that is needed is the "right conditions". And the secret sauce.

BTW has the X-ray emission been confirmed? A piece of photo film should be sufficient for general confirmation. Or you could use an X-ray detector.

But then you are back to radiation hazard. Of which there supposedly is none.

Oh please do keep up ... this is Piantelli we are referencing now, he has stated there definitely is radiation emitted (possible hazard) ... and no secret sauce needed!

(i.e., you can put your rancid olive oil away)

[sparkyy0007]

=

Happily, one day we will agree. I look forward to that day.

More likely (if my EEStor experience is anything to go by) you will either slink away or never bring up the subject. Fine by me. I don't believe you were here at the time but I made a really bone headed mistake on this board and kept it up for a week or 10 days. I was so good that I almost had my "opponents" convinced. And then I woke up. And publish my error on all my major blogs. Just to keep myself from being too "fat headed".

Ha. If and when the exact mechanism of fraud is found, I will take great pleasure in pointing out how none of the skeptics on this board correctly predicted how it was done.

It is extremely easy to exclaim with absolute certainty that this device does not work. It's like me predicting that it is not 11:50:50 right now where you live without looking at a watch. I prefer to glance at my "watch" since I am a materials scientist and well equipped to understand the existing literature.

=
Sorry, its just such a cool recursive pattern.... couldn't help myself.

[Crawdaddy]

Ha. If and when the exact mechanism of fraud is found, I will take great pleasure in pointing out how none of the skeptics on this board correctly predicted how it was done.

How is it possible to predict a fraud in all details? And who cares? Just knowing it is a fraud is sufficient for protection. Assuming you wish to be protected.

And besides the EEStor story has yet to be fully revealed. There are a few faithful still waiting.

I expect that in 6 to 9 months you will either be gone or avoid bringing up the subject. My observation is that very few have the courage to admit stupidity in public.

I think you suffer from a lack of reading comprehension.

I do not and have never predicted that the ecat is legitimate.

All I have done is point out flaws in the reasoning of those who postulated possible mechanisms of fraud.

If a mechanism of fraud is discovered I will acknowledge it with grace.

With regard to ee stor. I never felt the need to post in that forum, since there was no credible science behind it, and no experiments have ever overcome the obvious barriers to device performance (Quantum digital batteries seem interesting however). This device is very much different from eestor, since it cannot possibly be self delusion or a classic case of failing to reach technological milestones (predictably because of material limitations) this device must be deliberate fraud or it must be legitimate

[KitemanSA]

I don't. Indeed, I am increasingly sceptical myself. But when people use "scientific" reasons to "support" their skepticism, I ask for the science (or in one case the statistics).

So you are asking for a "scientific" reason why the coffe cup does not exist.

If someone states that it is scientifically impossible for it to exist, despite the photos of it, I ask for their "science".

When people make final judgements based on fallacy (or lack of real data) I question their reasoning.

For some strange reason, you do so only for people who are sceptic.

This is VERY TRUE, and I've explained that several times. For true believers, this is religion, and I don't argue religion with true believers. With people who claim science, I expect more rigor from their argument, and prod to find it when it seems lacking. The fact that I correspond with you simply means that whereas you may in fact be an idiot at times, I don't necessarily believe it to be a congenital condition. You MAY learn.

No, you can't.

Mind reader are you? Know what I can think of do you? That is a rare gift. You shouldn't waste it here. Go forth unto the world and read minds. Make millions on outsider trading.

If I was wrong, you could easily disproof me, but like Rossi you chose not to do so. I guess, you want to sell your enrichment machine, not please the critics. I do not believe in extraterrestric coffe cups, and i do not believe you know a cheap method for enrichment. Sorry.

I have mentioned two that I believe will be "cheap". Not free, but certainly not megabucks per kilo. That is as far as I am willing to go. I can think of them. But that is my opinion. I did NOT say I KNOW of one nor that none can exist. Only opinion.
If you had stated that you did not believe me when I said I could think of several ways, then I would have acknowledged your opinon and stopped, but you made a declarative statement based on no obvious reasoning, so I teased you about it.
Really, if you disabuse yourself of the mistaken notion that I "believe" Rossi and read thru my prior postings you will find that I have simply been seeking hard data one way or another. So far... none.

[ScottL]

Piantelli's patent:

http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/ ... i&maxRec=1

"A method and a generator to produce energy from nuclear reactions between hydrogen and a metal, comprising the steps of a) production of a determined quantity of micro/nanometric clusters of a transition metal, b) bringing hydrogen into contact with said clusters and controlling its pressure and speed, preferably after applying vacuum cycles of at least 10-9 bar between 35° and 500°C for degassing the clusters; c) creating an active core for the reactions by heating the clusters up to a temperature that is higher than the Debye temperature TD of the metal, preferably a temperature close to a temperature at which a sliding of reticular planes occurs, in order to adsorb in the clusters the hydrogen as H- ions; d) triggering the reactions by a mechanical, thermal, ultrasonic, electric or magnetic impulse on the active core, causing the atoms of the metal to capture the hydrogen ions, with liberation of heat, preferably in the presence of a gradient of temperature on the active core; e)removing the heat maintaining the temperature above TD, preferably in the presence of a magnetic and/or electric field of predetermined intensity. The active core can comprise a sintered material of micro/nanometric clusters, or a clusters powder collected in a container, or a deposit of clusters onto a substrate of predetermined volume and shape, with at least 109 clusters per square centimetre of surface, obtainable by means of methods such as sputtering, spraying evaporation and condensation of metal, epitaxial deposition, by heating up to approaching the melting point and then slow cooling, such methods followed by quick cooling for freezing the cluster structure."

Debye temperature:
"In Debye theory, the Debye temperature is the temperature of a crystal's highest normal mode of vibration, i.e., the highest temperature that can be achieved due to a single normal vibration."
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics ... ature.html

Icarus, may I ask your area of expertise and level of education in said area? I'm confused as to some of your posting and the connection between links.

[Helius]

Seriously, though, plausible explanations for what we’ve seen are getting harder to come by

I dunno. 470 KW out. 500 KW generator. What happened to the missing 30 KW? Could this be a new source of unlimited energy? Some one should start looking for that 30 KW. It could mean the end of oil.

Do I sound confused? It is intentional.

Dark Energy?