10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:42 pm

It is easy enough to do steam calorimetry to the accuracy required for a demo. It is not as if you are looking for milli watts.
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@es ... 51797.html
(view the video there)

As I wrote earlier, I think anomalous heat was produced, but the exact quantity is not yet known. Presumably, the customer for the 1 MW plant will do it better as he has money on the line.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 4:21 pm

The 2011 Cold Fusion Colloquium Report Published

This June 11th and 12th, the 2011 "Cold Fusion - Lattice Assisted Nuclear Reactions Colloquium" was held at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. At the meeting twenty three presentations were made, and a report has been issued detailing what took place.

by Hank Mills
Pure Energy Systems News

Cold Fusion is a topic that inspires hope in some individuals, and skepticism in others. Since the year 1989, the fact that nuclear reactions can take place at low temperatures has been suppressed by the mainstream scientific community. To protect the status quo of mainstream science, and to preserve the thousands of jobs provided by billion dollar "hot fusion" research projects, many scientists have tried to discredit cold fusion research all together. However, cold fusion has overcome the forces that have fought to silence it, and the evidence in support of its existence is now overwhelming. Evidence in support of cold fusion was presented at the 2011 Cold Fusion Colloquium.

read the rest http://pesn.com/2011/09/25/9501919_2011 ... Published/

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:48 pm

parallel wrote:It is easy enough to do steam calorimetry to the accuracy required for a demo. It is not as if you are looking for milli watts.
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@es ... 51797.html
(view the video there)

As I wrote earlier, I think anomalous heat was produced, but the exact quantity is not yet known. Presumably, the customer for the 1 MW plant will do it better as he has money on the line.

Yes, it is very easy to do proper calorimetry. But that has not been done. If you are about this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHvnpYgg ... e=youtu.be , I see only jumping picture, someone swinging a hose, hose letting some steam, origin of which is unknown, bucket being on scales and measurement of temperature by the hand.
Do you seriously mean that in such manner people get evidences and prove world class discoveries? For your education read something more for example how Millikan conducted his oil drop experiment.

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 8:47 pm

Sure. Another example of perfect science. Millikan neglected to show a large sample of drops that didn't match up with his theory. But you are only too keen to show problems with Rossi's first order demos, where the measurements weren't even carried out by him. Somehow you miss the more important fact that excess heat was generated.

Millikan's experiment and cargo cult science

In a commencement address given at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) in 1974 (and reprinted in Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!), physicist Richard Feynman noted:

We have learned a lot from experience about how to handle some of the ways we fool ourselves. One example: Millikan measured the charge on an electron by an experiment with falling oil drops, and got an answer which we now know not to be quite right. It's a little bit off because he had the incorrect value for the viscosity of air. It's interesting to look at the history of measurements of the charge of an electron, after Millikan. If you plot them as a function of time, you find that one is a little bit bigger than Millikan's, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, and the next one's a little bit bigger than that, until finally they settle down to a number which is higher.

Why didn't they discover the new number was higher right away? It's a thing that scientists are ashamed of - this history - because it's apparent that people did things like this: When they got a number that was too high above Millikan's, they thought something must be wrong - and they would look for and find a reason why something might be wrong. When they got a number close to Millikan's value they didn't look so hard. And so they eliminated the numbers that were too far off, and did other things like that...[6][7]

As of 2008, the accepted value for the elementary charge is 1.602176487(40)×10−19 C,[8] where the 40 indicates the uncertainty of the last two decimal places. In his Nobel lecture, Millikan gave his measurement as 4.774(5)×10−10 statC,[9] which equals 1.5924(17)×10−19 C. The difference is less than one percent, but it is more than five times greater than Millikan's standard error, so the disagreement is significant.

ref http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment

Luzr · Post by **Luzr** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 9:51 pm

parallel wrote:Sounds like the 1 MW plant demo is still on schedule.

Well, "1MW plant demo" is one thing that makes me thing Rossi is scam.

Could you please explain me what is this demo good for?

All data could have been obtained by _proper_ testing of single unit. Why 1MW demo? Just because it sounds good to attract money? Because it is easier to fudge results when you have a lot of units doing something?

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:23 pm

Luzr,
A little homework and all would be clear.

1. There will be a detailed test of just one unit. Not just at the upcoming 1 MW demo, but also at Upssala U. using a closed loop for the working fluid.
2. 1 MW is a commercial size. It has been sold pending verification of the output. The energy it generates will be used for something by the customer.
4. 1 megawatt is a little hard to brush off as experimental error.
4. If Rossi blew his nose you would probably conclude he was having a nervous breakdown.

Carl White · Post by **Carl White** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:16 am

The latest news is that Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson will test an e-Cat module on October 6th.

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@es ... 51813.html

http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/09/tes ... on-il.html

On October 6 we will have the opportunity to make a long (more then 12 hours) test of one of the modules of the Rossi 1 MW generator. The module will be opened to us and we will have the opportunity to verify volumes and weights of the internal components. Heat measurements will be done condensing all the steam produced in heat exchanger and a secondary circuit where no water will be vaporized.

This is NOT an official test of the University of Bologna because the contract is not active yet.

The measurement of energy will not therefore be made on the steam, to avoid all the issues concerning the quality of the steam, but the measurements of energy will be made on the delta T of the water of the secondary circuit heated by the steam! This way, the amount of energy produced will be calculated in an undisputable way. The steam runs in a primary circuit, which is a closed loop, where the steam is condensed after exchanging heat with the water of the secondary circuit, which will never evaporate. Therefore, the energy is calculated on the base of the delta T of the heated water and its flow rate, indipendently from the temperature of the steam, that does not enter in the energy calculation parameters.

If this test is unsatisfactory, maybe people on this board could decide on a definitive test and email it as a suggestion to him.

ScottL · Post by **ScottL** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 3:57 am

If this test is unsatisfactory, maybe people on this board could decide on a definitive test and email it as a suggestion to him.

This has been done several times on his blog. The requests are rejected and we're inevitably directed to a post of his saying he's not out to prove his device, but to make a commercial product. If you read through all the pages of the previous thread, you can see what I'm talking about.

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:07 am

parallel wrote:Millikan neglected to show a large sample of drops that didn't match up with his theory.

Wrong. Millikan has excluded any effects bringing errors in his experiment. E.g. when he saw that water evaporation brings errors in that conditions he began to use oil and designed special "atomizator" producing very small drops from oil despite on its bigger viscosity.
He has neglected nothing significant having influence on experiment purity.
This is the main difference between Millikan and Rossi. As Rossi can neglect not arranging him results. And Millikan - not.

Water evaporation (phase transition) brings error in heat measurement in Rossi's case too. As in this case before the beginning of experiment we should make sure that jacket is full. As only in that case liquid water's mass flow will be equal to steam's flow. Rossi has not showed that. Etc.

parallel wrote:Somehow you miss the more important fact that excess heat was generated.

No, I see that some heat is being produced. I have missed another - namely on the basis of what Rossi asserts that heat made by his device exceeds that should be made in the sum of two processes:
• electric heating
• chemical reaction of formation of hydride of nickel.
And only proper calorimetry for this purpose is required
And that calorimetry was not done

Luzr · Post by **Luzr** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 8:21 am

parallel wrote:Luzr,
A little homework and all would be clear.

1. There will be a detailed test of just one unit. Not just at the upcoming 1 MW demo, but also at Upssala U. using a closed loop for the working fluid.
2. 1 MW is a commercial size. It has been sold pending verification of the output. The energy it generates will be used for something by the customer.

Well, but first it was to be shipped to Greece, now it is in U.S. ... I doubt it is really meant to be 'commercial'

4. 1 megawatt is a little hard to brush off as experimental error.

Actually, much easier to scam with that. Too much energy going in and out to do any simple measurement.

You know, with current parameters, such 'plant' will consume in about 100kw of electrical power. It would produce big amount of steam just from this power.

If Rossi refuses to allow any basic measurements of 5kW machine for 'security concerns', do you think going 1MW will make it any easier?

parallel · Post by **parallel** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 11:45 am

Luzr,

If Rossi refuses to allow any basic measurements of 5kW machine for 'security concerns', do you think going 1MW will make it any easier?

Why don't you read my post and that of Cart White above, both of which say individual units will be tested?

olivier · Post by **olivier** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:07 pm

Carl White wrote:The latest news is that Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson will test an e-Cat module on October 6th.

Is he this Nobel Laureate with an interest in parapsychology?

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:58 pm

olivier wrote:
Carl White wrote:The latest news is that Nobel Laureate Brian Josephson will test an e-Cat module on October 6th.
Is he this Nobel Laureate with an interest in parapsychology?

He of "Josephson Junction" fame seems to believe that unexplaned phenomena should be studied scientifically rather than dismissed authoritatively. OMG a charlatan thru and thru!

Joseph Chikva · Post by **Joseph Chikva** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 2:59 pm

parallel wrote:Luzr,
Why don't you read my post and that of Cart White above, both of which say individual units will be tested?

Will be tested

Why was not tested before?
Where is the heat origin of which can not be explained?
Is 5kW power difficult for measurement?

Not interesting why I mentioned Millikan?
Because he having very weak tooling could measure extremely small charge of electron. And that was not a trivial task.
Unlike Rossi living in modern era and, so, having access to modern tooling and having very trivial task to measure not small 5kW. Or not trivial?

KitemanSA · Post by **KitemanSA** » Mon Sep 26, 2011 3:03 pm

Joe:

Millikan = scientist
Rossi = business man.
Different reasons for testing. NOT comparable.