One Mega Watt E-Cat Cold Fusion Device Test Successful!

reply to post by mbkennel


Well, that wouldnt be to hard...

USE your frikkin imagination....


Everyone else is......

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Nano-particles are useful for all sorts of things, but that is not what you were claiming - you were claiming that the"underlying principles" that allow Rossi's machine to generate this energy are well known. And AFAIK that is simply not true at all.

Rossi is using a nickel nanoparticle matrix + hydrogen gas + low power RF emitter + conventional electrical resistor based system (supplying heat). That is the idea being sold, that's what you see in the patent applications. That's what you see in the work of related researchers (Brian Ahern is really worth a look), and those are the features in the discussions by well-informed commenters online. If you disagree about the reality of those aspects of the design, then that's up to you. All of those design features can be assessed on their own merits, irrespective of Rossi's units.

You are claiming that I said something about the underlying principles being 'known to be useful in energy generation' but you must be deliberately twisting my words if you believe I said that. If I were claiming nanoparticles were known to be useful in energy generation, why would I have written:

"It is the job of science to explore and clarify the parameters of observed phenomena - and there is a definitely vacuum of this work when it comes to potential practical energy production based on this phenomena."

There is little work, afaik, showing comprehensive analysis of large-scale nanoparticle based heat engines (be they liquid or gas based). But there is *mountains* of work done proving that electromagnetically stimulated nanoparticles can do all sorts of amazing things on smaller scales. If you don't think it is worth investigating the potential of this, well, again, that's up to you. I personally am pretty glad to see someone putting $5 mil into this and related research.

I think Focardi's work on small scale energy amplification in solid-bar nickel hydrogen gas heat engines is also worthy of further investigation, especially if the solid bar is a swapped for a powdered emitter. This is all cheap stuff to investigate. At least it has the potential to be scalable (unlike the massively expensive hot fusion research).

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
" to use your rifle analogy".. "I didn't say it was your analogy "..

^ lolwut.

Originally posted by mbkennel

Nano particles doing remarkable stuff, yes. All chemical reactions.

Nanoparticles catalyzing nuclear reactions at a macroscopic rate which still do not emit any ionizing radiation? Never.

As a semantic point - when you do the calculations for a chemical reaction, what do you think those 'charges' being exchanged are? Hollow variables? Fairy dust? No, charge is electromagnetic phenomena. The separation between chemical and EM exchanges is in no way absolute.

Even if you want to ignore charge - "Nano particles doing remarkable stuff, yes. All chemical reactions" is a pretty silly statement. That would be to deny the existence of most of the existing research work?

A primary usage for nanoparticles is in catalysts - by definition, catalysts are not 'used up', they assist in reactions without changing (much). So, no, that isn't a standard chemical reaction.

Another primary piece of nanoparticle materials science is EM induction. Whether by radio waves, magnetic induction, photon induction. Those are definitely not standard chemical reactions.

Google scholar and search for:

nanoparticle induction heating
nanoparticle photon
nanoparticle plasmon resonance
nanoparticle hyperthermic heating
nanoparticle radio frequency
nanoparticle infra red
nanoparticle memory device

^not chemical

Originally posted by mbkennel
Nanoparticles catalyzing nuclear reactions at a macroscopic rate which still do not emit any ionizing radiation? Never.

Your argument is faulty. Rossi claims his reactor does produce neutrons (and presumably gammas?), but that these can be shielded from exiting the reactor core via thin lead shielding.

You are also assuming that Rossi, his supporters, or anyone else, actually knows what they are talking about when it comes to electromagnetic quantum interactions. I doubt they do. It's perfectly possible to be engineering this stuff via heuristics (if it is real). Although according to Dr Ahern, Enrico Fermi suggested the possibility of nanofusion back in the 50's.

Originally posted by samkent
Lets see here. I have a stock F-150 that will break the sound barrier in the quarter mile.
Should I have to prove my claim or should some one else have to prove me wrong?

Oh, it's a truck? Guns or trucks, had to be one of the two

Dick Smith to Work With Defkalion to Arrange Testing of the Hyperion Reactor

E-CatWorld.com reports on the Smith offer.

February 17, 2012 .

Australian entrepreneur Dick Smith has indicated on Ecatnews that he is willing work out a testing procedure with Defkalion Green Technologies. DGT had said recently that they would be willing to accept the challenge to successfully demonstrate LENR in return for $1 million from Smith — an offer that Andrea Rossi turned down.

Smith is insisting that respected members of the scientific community be involved in any testing, and states openly that he does not expect DGT to meet his testing requirements. He says, “unfortunately I am convinced that the offer will end up like my offer to Rossi. They will find some excuse to delay or back out . I have seen it all before!” .

With Defkalion willing to step up the plate now there will likely be a flurry of activity and negotiation between them and Smith. DGT have said that testing is to commence on Feb 24, and Dick Smith may want to be one of the first to take a look at their Hyperion reactors in action, and publish the results. Smith is even talking about having the whole event televised live.

Seems too simple to actually play out as Smith imagines, testing could take longer than Smith expects. Rossi will both suffer and gain if Defkalion passes a test. Defkalions technology is similar to the E-Cat, so a positive outcome for one could help the other.

Until 3rd parties are allowed to test this device under controlled circumstances and alone and all the results are corroborated, im not buying that it works. Sorry. This looks like one big hoax right now.

Originally posted by 3danimator
Until 3rd parties are allowed to test this device under controlled circumstances and alone and all the results are corroborated, im not buying that it works. Sorry. This looks like one big hoax right now.

Which device?

Originally posted by yampa

Originally posted by 3danimator
Until 3rd parties are allowed to test this device under controlled circumstances and alone and all the results are corroborated, im not buying that it works. Sorry. This looks like one big hoax right now.

Which device?

Any of the devices in question. I want to see multiple, independent verification before i believe its working. I hope it does, don't get me wrong. But i will remain skeptical till i see otherwise.

Originally posted by 3danimator

Originally posted by yampa

Originally posted by 3danimator
Until 3rd parties are allowed to test this device under controlled circumstances and alone and all the results are corroborated, im not buying that it works. Sorry. This looks like one big hoax right now.

Which device?

Any of the devices in question. I want to see multiple, independent verification before i believe its working. I hope it does, don't get me wrong. But i will remain skeptical till i see otherwise.

Why not question the theory of operation first? Then you wouldn't be dependent on the whims of eccentric inventors?

It looks like Rossi is aiming for 'you will have your proof when you can buy it'. Which could be a long way away. The theory of operation will remain the same, regardless.

Originally posted by yampa

As a semantic point - when you do the calculations for a chemical reaction, what do you think those 'charges' being exchanged are? Hollow variables? Fairy dust? No, charge is electromagnetic phenomena. The separation between chemical and EM exchanges is in no way absolute.

Chemistry is all ABOUT charge. All chemical reactions affect are the electron orbitals. Not the nucleus.

Even if you want to ignore charge - "Nano particles doing remarkable stuff, yes. All chemical reactions" is a pretty silly statement. That would be to deny the existence of most of the existing research work?

Not at all. You simply have to understand the basics of chemistry.

A primary usage for nanoparticles is in catalysts - by definition, catalysts are not 'used up', they assist in reactions without changing (much). So, no, that isn't a standard chemical reaction.

By common definition, a catalyst lowers the activation energy of a chemical reaction. There are nuclear processes that use bystander elements in a sort of catalysis as well (Bethe cycle).

Google scholar and search for...

None of these are nuclear in nature.

Your argument is faulty. Rossi claims his reactor does produce neutrons (and presumably gammas?), but that these can be shielded from exiting the reactor core via thin lead shielding.

That's sort of odd. You wouldn't normally use lead for neutron shielding - its neutron cross section is quite small. That's why you use lead for a tamper in neutron bombs. And "thin lead" just isn't much of a gamma shield. So a thin lead shield wouldn't be appropriate for what he says is emitted. Although it fit a common meme about lead shielding and nuclear reaction.

Originally posted by Bedlam

Chemistry is all ABOUT charge. All chemical reactions affect are the electron orbitals. Not the nucleus.

Not at all. You simply have to understand the basics of chemistry.

By common definition, a catalyst lowers the activation energy of a chemical reaction. There are nuclear processes that use bystander elements in a sort of catalysis as well (Bethe cycle).

None of these are nuclear in nature.

That's sort of odd. You wouldn't normally use lead for neutron shielding - its neutron cross section is quite small. That's why you use lead for a tamper in neutron bombs. And "thin lead" just isn't much of a gamma shield. So a thin lead shield wouldn't be appropriate for what he says is emitted. Although it fit a common meme about lead shielding and nuclear reaction.

Not quite sure why have you attempted to address several of my points as if you are correcting something I have said? Nothing I have said there about chemistry or catalysts is incorrect. But you comments prove mbkennel's argument was not a good one.

I have made no claims about nuclear processes. I have no idea if 'nanofusion' is a true nuclear process or not (whatever that really means). I doubt anyone else does either, because it hasn't been properly researched. And as I said, just because Rossi or his supporters have come up with some supposed theoretical model, that doesn't mean it's correct, even if the results are positive.

re lead: ok, lead for gammas, water for neutrons?

"During the running we used the rightmost one of the devices, figure 4, which is surrounded by a 2 cm thick lead shield, as stated by Rossi, and wrapped with insulation, figure 5."

So, not so thin lead, in this supposed demo.

Originally posted by yampa
Not quite sure why have you attempted to address several of my points as if you are correcting something I have said? Nothing I have said there about chemistry or catalysts is incorrect. But you comments prove mbkennel's argument was not a good one..

You seem to be trying to draw a distinction between chemical reactions and "EM interaction". Chemistry's nothing BUT that, and Rossi's insistence that it is a catalyst of some sort would seem to define his energy output as being the end result of a chemical reaction, not "nanofusion", whatever that might be.

It'll be interesting to see if his "e-cat" units actually produce heat in tests he doesn't have a hand in, and if so, if they continue to do so long enough to obviate a simple chemical reaction as the source of the heat.

Didn't Patterson have something very similar years back? LENR out of thin-film nickel and palladium in light water, with a few trace elements thrown in?

While it would be nice if it were real, what'll happen instead is that you'll see that the thing doesn't work if it's not under Rossi's control, then there will be a TDAMH moment for the grand finale.

Dick Smith ID Confirmed: Makes Offer To Defkalion CEO

EcatNews Reports that Dick Smith has been contacted, and the EcatNews.com site owner spoke with him in person.

February 17, 2012

I have now spoken to Dick Smith and confident as I can be that he and his offer are genuine.

Dick Smith commented in the Blogs Forum, saying;

You heard it here first,. I have emailed the CEO of Defkalion extending the $1m offer providing a testing protocol can be agreed on.

I have stated I only require a six hour test period and I am suspicious of their proposed 96 hour period as no person can remain awake that long!

I have said I only require measurements of the input and output power and asked what COP they can achieve. I have also asked what their test input power would be.

Obviously the type of power output and gain must be similar to what Rossi claimed.- not low output that is not commercially viable.

I will be away from my office until Tuesday so finalization of an agreement will have to wait until then.

Interesting times!!

I have also asked the date they would like to do the test.

In other news, from Italy, A CONVERSATION WITH DR. Francesco Celani- Google Translate Link
Event may already be over because of Global time, and it will be in Italian language only, Saturday, February 18, FROM 17:30 LIVE STREAMING FROM ROME

Originally posted by Bedlam

You seem to be trying to draw a distinction between chemical reactions and "EM interaction".

Then you have misunderstood what I said. Not sure why you would think I was trying to draw a hard distinction between chemical and EM interactions - otherwise I wouldn't have written this, would I?:

Originally posted by yampa
charge is electromagnetic phenomena. The separation between chemical and EM exchanges is in no way absolute.

You say:

Originally posted by Bedlam
Chemistry's nothing BUT that, and Rossi's insistence that it is a catalyst of some sort would seem to define his energy output as being the end result of a chemical reaction, not "nanofusion", whatever that might be.

What does 'Rossi's insistence that it is a catalyst' mean? I don't think he has insisted anything of the sort when it comes to the nickel powder. Afaik he considers the nickel powder to be fuel. The 'catalyst' is most likely the low energy radio frequency transmitter which is supposedly found in each reactor. The idea is that the RF beam induces something in the nanoparticle electrode.

I'd be happy to classify something as a chemical reaction, except it is not clear what could be chemically reacting (in a system which supposedly only contains nickel and hydrogen). I don't know, I don't really care what you want to classify it as. All I want to know is if the underlying phenomena here are genuinely capable of trivial amplification?

"nanofusion" is what Dr Brian Ahern was calling his system in the 2003 NASA document "Advanced Energetics for Aeronautical Applications". He deals with colloidal nanoparticle heat engines in that document, but Ahern has recently filed a patent for a nanoparticle + hydrogen gas + heaters system which looks almost identical to Rossi's.

NASA pdf(long):
www.scribd.com...

Originally posted by yampaThe 'catalyst' is most likely the low energy radio frequency transmitter which is supposedly found in each reactor. The idea is that the RF beam induces something in the nanoparticle electrode.

One can only imagine what. Unless it's emitting hard gamma instead of RF, it's not going to be of a wavelength to have direct nuclear effects. If the power was fairly high, it might change things by ending up with a hydrogen plasma, but you said it was low energy.

"nanofusion" is what Dr Brian Ahern was calling his system in the 2003 NASA document "Advanced Energetics for Aeronautical Applications". He deals with colloidal nanoparticle heat engines in that document, but Ahern has recently filed a patent for a nanoparticle + hydrogen gas + heaters system which looks almost identical to Rossi's.

Well, the Navy's been fiddling around with nickel-hydrogen and nickel-deuterium with and without palladium since Pons and Fleischmann. Sometimes they get results, sometimes not. It will be interesting if it works once it's out of Rossi's hands and in an environment he can't control during the test. That will tell the tale.

Originally posted by Miccey
reply to post by mbkennel

 

Well, that wouldnt be to hard...

USE your frikkin imagination....

Everyone else is......

I Want To Believe but actually knowing physics is getting in the way.

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by Miccey
reply to post by mbkennel

 

Well, that wouldnt be to hard...

USE your frikkin imagination....

Everyone else is......

I Want To Believe but actually knowing physics is getting in the way.

Yea i feel sorry for you actually..
Sure you know physics, but do you
REALLY KNOW?!?

How old is the modern science, how old are you.
Now, think about it for a while and the be true to
yourself..I dont care WHAT you know..But really,
DO YOU...?!?

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by Miccey
reply to post by mbkennel

 

Well, that wouldnt be to hard...

USE your frikkin imagination....

Everyone else is......

I Want To Believe but actually knowing physics is getting in the way.

We update our technology every so often these days, just look at cell phones. I think it will only be a matter of time before we have to rethink our understanding of physics. I really don't think humans are as smart or infallible as we believe we are. The chances we have learned all there is to know about physics are smaller than winning the lottery.

There is always room for improvement.

Originally posted by cconn487
We update our technology every so often these days, just look at cell phones.

Cell phones didn't require really big leaps in physics, it was more material science and semiconductor fab advances.

This is more like waking up tomorrow and finding that Apple's latest software upgrade to the iPhone 3gs is that it can now do an appendectomy. Sort of hard to visualize.

Don't get me wrong, it would be a real game changer, but it's the sort of thing you see once or twice a century. Maybe. It would make me happy if it WAS replicable and no hoodoo involved. I just don't think it will be real. Steorn part II.

Steven Krivit of NewEnergyTimes:

National Instruments does not work with Rossi anymore

National Instruments Denies Relationship With Rossi
Posted on February 18, 2012 by Steven B. Krivit

Today, an author who is working on a book about Rossi contacted Julia Betts, the corporate communications and investor relations manager for National Instruments, to inquire about its relationship with Rossi.

According to e-mails the author received from Betts, National Instruments is not working with Rossi.

“Leonardo Corporation/Andrea Rossi is currently not a customer, partner or distributor of National Instruments,” Betts wrote.

The author sent Betts another e-mail asking about a variety of possible relationships her company might have with Rossi or his company.

“Per our previous [news release] from November,” Betts wrote, “we were only in discussions with the Leonardo Corporation regarding the use of National Instruments’ engineering tools. Currently, Leonardo Corporation/Andrea Rossi is not a customer of National Instruments.”

Steven Krivit has been investigating Rossi for fraud, this piece is the latest in a series of negative articles published on his blog.

A response from Julia Betts – National Instruments, as found on Krivits blog in the comment section.

Steven B. Krivit says: February 19, 2012 at 11:06

Anybody wannna call up Julia Betts and ask her about the validity of her quote that our mystery author obtained? Anybody?

Subject: Re: Need info please – Please just one more question. Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 13:05:42 -0600 From: Julia Betts To: [Mystery Author]

Per our previous statement from November, we were only in discussions with the Leonardo Corporation regarding the use of National Instruments engineering tools. Currently Leonardo Corporation/Andrea Rossi is not a customer of National Instruments.

NI platforms can be used for Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) applications, particularly the National Instruments Reconfigurable I/O (RIO) platform that is based on FPGA (field programmable gate array) technology for the control and monitoring needs. The FPGAs are programmable integrated circuits that offer true parallelism, high-speed analysis of data and a high level of reliability needed for control and monitoring applications.

We do think the field of LENR is a very intriguing research area that has potential to impact the energy crisis that is facing the world. NI believes in providing the right tools and platforms to enable engineers and scientists to focus on innovation and solving the grand engineering challenges such as energy from fusion, cancer therapy in the field of medicine and smart grids for better urban infrastructure, to name a few. We are working with Universities and Research Centers around the world to empower researchers and scientists who are working on magnetic confined fusion, inertial confined fusion and Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (some times called “cold fusion”)

Hope this clarifies.

Julia Betts – Corporate Communications and Investor Relations Manager – National Instruments

Very interesting communication from Julia Betts, stating outright that they have solutions for LENR Cold Fusion applications.



February 19, 2012
Report from E-Cat World
Rossi Confirms Leonardo Corp. No Longer Working With National Instruments — New Supplier Involved

Rossi says, "As I said already, Leonardo Corporation is structurally changed in these last weeks, and the Trust to which now Leonardo Corporation belongs has chosen other suppliers. Also our Customer has chosen other suppliers. We will remain always grateful to NI for what they teached to our people and we will ask in future proposals also to them. Personally, I am convinced that sooner or later we will buy also their systems."

Rossi confirms that they are no longer using National Instruments products, but National Instruments Julia Betts confirms that they are working with LENR/Cold Fusion systems.