10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[Joseph Chikva]

This is the first paper in which one group has reported 100% success in multiple cold fusion tests (over 150) in which over unity (Cop = 2) is reported.

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conference ... -Paper.pdf

Very good. But Rissi dead or not yet?

[tomclarke]

This is the first paper in which one group has reported 100% success in multiple cold fusion tests (over 150) in which over unity (Cop = 2) is reported.

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conference ... -Paper.pdf

Glad somone has posted that. It is impressive, and apparently well controlled. But there is one key large source of experimental error not mentioned.

There is a hint to what this is actually in the writeup.

It would be really easy to eliminate it - but they have not done this.

[parallel]

Tom's Law.
No new invention can possibly work. 99% of scientists agree.

Corollary of Tom's Law.
With any new device, all positive evidence should be ignored. Only negative evidence counts.

[ladajo]

I would say there are three types of evidence:

Positive - That which can be accepted by method, reproducability and independant test as supportive of the claims

Negative - That which can be accepted by method, reproducability and independant test as not supportive of the claims

Inconclusive - That which does not meet method, reproducability and independant test and can be viewed as positive or negative based on these issues.

I would also argue that for example, to date, Rossi has produced pretty much only the later two, and none that I have seen of the first.

[ScottL]

Parallel's Law: If someone said it is true, it must be true.

Seriously though, as Ladajo points out, all evidence presented via Rossi have thus far been inconclusive. That in and of it's self does not negate the possibility, but the sheer number of inconclusive results should make any critical thinker leary.

Since we're starting to see evidence, at least for his HotCat, that perhaps his input measurements have been off, that definitely chalks up a negative. I'd like to see more official measurements personally. Time will tell.

[paperburn1]

This is the first paper in which one group has reported 100% success in multiple cold fusion tests (over 150) in which over unity (Cop = 2) is reported.

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conference ... -Paper.pdf

Glad somone has posted that. It is impressive, and apparently well controlled. But there is one key large source of experimental error not mentioned.

There is a hint to what this is actually in the writeup.

It would be really easy to eliminate it - but they have not done this.

I agree the meter setup is wrong , but they have supplied a lot of data to mull over and their problem is simple to fix.

[tomclarke]

This is the first paper in which one group has reported 100% success in multiple cold fusion tests (over 150) in which over unity (Cop = 2) is reported.

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conference ... -Paper.pdf

Glad somone has posted that. It is impressive, and apparently well controlled. But there is one key large source of experimental error not mentioned.

There is a hint to what this is actually in the writeup.

It would be really easy to eliminate it - but they have not done this.

I agree the meter setup is wrong , but they have supplied a lot of data to mull over and their problem is simple to fix.

I would love to discuss this with them.

The issue I see is the electrical interference from the high power Rf pulses to the RTD measurements (DC, low power).

The AC pulses get rectified very easily and will change the DC temp measurements coming from the vessel.

They have not noted this problem, or quantified it.

All they have to do is to switch the RF pulses off for a short time, a few seconds, and see how the temperature measurements respond. If they chnage immediately there is interference of this kind, if not the results are Ok.

To prevent this problem you switch the pulses off for a short period every few seconds and do all the temp measurements in pulse-free environment.

The same problem could affect all the Brilloin results, since high power RF pulses get everywhere.

I also have slight reservations about the input power. They say that they are correctly measureing this with appropriate equipment, and I would normally agree, but it is easy to make mistakes with high power Rf pulses adding power and i would want this carefully checked.

You are right it is simple to fix this issue!

[rcain]

This is the first paper in which one group has reported 100% success in multiple cold fusion tests (over 150) in which over unity (Cop = 2) is reported.

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conference ... -Paper.pdf

Very good. But Rissi dead or not yet?

Rossi is Vampiri - he is both alive and dead and lives off the the blood of young virgins and arseholes.

imho.

[rcain]

ps. re: Brillouin Energy Corp - am i right in recalling, they/their work has been pretty heavily discredited (or should i say 'critiqued') on this very board, some years ago?

they pop up from time to time. make some claims. then disappear again. the world remains unchanged.

or am i missing something?

[Joseph Chikva]

Rossi is Vampiri - he is both alive and dead and lives off the the blood of young virgins and arseholes.

imho.

I think that Rossi is alive only for a few "pathological optimists" like Mr. parallel and Mr. Axil. You say them: "guys, these all contradict to any logic, laws of Nature, the technique of all his “experiments” is extremely unpersuasive and allows to think about very primitive falsification.
As reply they give correspondence of less credible people and conjectures like “large USA military contractor bought Rossi’s plant”, "patent office of USA does not consider LENR", etc.
I can say on base of my experience that patent office of USA considers any application if applicant pays the corresponding fees. But issues patents only on useful device or method.
And neither Rossi nor any other LENR developers could not prove usefulness.

[GIThruster]

ps. re: Brillouin Energy Corp - am i right in recalling, they/their work has been pretty heavily discredited (or should i say 'critiqued') on this very board, some years ago?

McKubre has been slandered pretty badly but I'm not aware of any fair critique done. Perhaps instead of looking for an excuse to ignore the paper you'd want to consider it. Else what is the point of threads like this?

[rcain]

Rossi is Vampiri - he is both alive and dead and lives off the the blood of young virgins and arseholes.

imho.

I think that Rossi is alive only for a few "pathological optimists" like Mr. parallel and Mr. Axil. You say them: "guys, these all contradict to any logic, laws of Nature, the technique of all his “experiments” is extremely unpersuasive and allows to think about very primitive falsification.
As reply they give correspondence of less credible people and conjectures like “large USA military contractor bought Rossi’s plant”, "patent office of USA does not consider LENR", etc.
I can say on base of my experience that patent office of USA considers any application if applicant pays the corresponding fees. But issues patents only on useful device or method.
And neither Rossi nor any other LENR developers could not prove usefulness.

i agree with you wholeheartedly Joe.

but i think Rossi is quite an amusing character, a clown. it will be entertaining to see what pickle he gets himself into next. and who he drags in with him.

re: 'cold fusion' (whatever you want to call it). some 'interesting' anomalous results do exist. it would be interesting to know whether/what real mechanism lies behind them. just maybe/perhaps, make use of it.

[Joseph Chikva]

some 'interesting' anomalous results do exist.

I believe, but I like the sentence (forgot who said that) "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proofs".
But I would a little alter this sentence: "extraordinary claims demand only ordinary proofs". Are not provided yet.

[rcain]

ps. re: Brillouin Energy Corp - am i right in recalling, they/their work has been pretty heavily discredited (or should i say 'critiqued') on this very board, some years ago?

McKubre has been slandered pretty badly but I'm not aware of any fair critique done. Perhaps instead of looking for an excuse to ignore the paper you'd want to consider it. Else what is the point of threads like this?

yes, i have read it.

seemed fair enough. pretty exciting if its all real.

but i must defer to those who have better knowledge and greater experience than myself when it comes to 'assessing' it. so, i suggest should you.

thus, i take Toms points above very seriously, for example. also your own admission, that Brillouin/McKubre has indeed been cast 'under suspicion' in the past, and quite possibly (probably?), for good reason.

[rcain]

some 'interesting' anomalous results do exist.

I believe, but I like the sentence (forgot who said that) "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proofs".
But I would a little alter this sentence: "extraordinary claims demand only ordinary proofs". Are not provided yet.

indeed. (i cannot remember either - actually i think it was (rather unfortunately) Carl Sagan - "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - 'evidence' rather than 'proof' - but same idea).

yes, Rossi is not in the business of 'proof' or 'evidence' - he is in the business of filling has fat pockets, at other peoples expense, according to their 'gullibility, and leaving an expensive mess behind him.

not surprisingly, everything is in his wife's name. i bet she doesn't let him near a cheque book - knows him too well. hence no coffee machine for Rossi.