The Playground

  • Heat does not work that way. You can't "shield" it with a wire. Try holding a wire in front of an electric heater and you will see. In any case, the entire cell gets hot, and with most calorimeters the heat is measured externally, so it makes no difference where the heat originates or whether some parts of the cell are warmer than others, or magically "shielded" from heat with wires. That's one of the many reasons why your theory is wrong.


    After all the pictures of the eCat we all have seen, you're going to make a statement like this? Really??


    Imagine an Optris looking at this. Heater at distance x. At a little shorter than x is a wire, not heated or not as hot at least. What *I* think I would see is a darker area just the shape of that wire overlaid on the (possibly non-homogeneous) image of the 'heater'.


    In any case, the entire cell gets hot, and with most calorimeters the heat is measured externally, so it makes no difference where the heat originates or whether some parts of the cell are warmer than others, or magically "shielded" from heat with wires. That's one of the many reasons why your theory is wrong.


    No, this is your simplistic understanding of the cell, which is obtained from your CF heroes, who don't ever consider the fact that the cell in fact has hot spots in it. That's why you can never get the CCS issue. You refuse to believe that anything can change in the cell, so in your mind the steady state can never change, and thus the calibration constants can never change. Sorry to disillusion you, but reality is more complex than "everything is a homogeneous lump."

  • After all the pictures of the eCat we all have seen, you're going to make a statement like this? Really??


    Imagine an Optris looking at this. Heater at distance x. At a little shorter than x is a wire, not heated or not as hot at least. What *I* think I would see is a darker area just the shape of that wire overlaid on the (possibly non-homogeneous) image of the 'heater'.

    Oh give me a break. Obviously I was referring to the calorimeter thermocouples used in these studies. No, you cannot stop heat from reaching them by placing a wire in the way. That notion is especially ludicrous with a flow or Seebeck calorimeter. Perhaps you would have a point if the researchers used an Optris and the anode wire was 1 cm in diameter, but they don't, it isn't, so you don't.

  • This is what I wrote before about the claims that all of Rossi's fuel converted to 62Ni in the various blind mice tests. I stand by it today.


    Quote

    As to salting the Lugano reactor, it is the only explanation that makes sense. It is categorically impossible that all the nickel in the reactor would be transmuted precisely to nickel-62 alone and with no radioactivity. It is impossible that a reactor would continue to run when all its fuel (nickel-58) was exhausted. No Ni-58 was found in the ash-- none whatsoever. This is only compatible with Rossi buying Ni-62 and placing it in the ash when nobody was looking. He had ample opportunity because he handled the reactor and the ash repeatedly despite the silly claim that the Lugano runs were independent experiment, free of Rossi's participation. In fact, he participated heavily and repeatedly-- another in a long chain of Rossi lies.


    A longstanding lie Rossi stood by from 2011 is that he "enriches" nickel to contain more Ni-62 "cheaply" in his lab. Really? That alone would be a Nobel prize. Here is more about Ni-62 as fuel, not as ash. Rossi confuses and compounds the entire story of isotopes because he is basically an ignorant, lying con man who assumes his marks have short memories and a low tolerance for complexity. When it comes to CEO's, it turns out he was right.


    Quote

    Eddie Sines identifies serious flaws in Rossi's U.S. patent application.

    Sines: [Rossi] has shown a number of E-Cat devices on various Web sites. In each of these devices, he claims to be using 58g of Ni 62. Here's the glaring problem: Ni 62 is a rare isotope. Rossi's devices would be worth $582,000 each if they truly had 58 grams of highly refined Ni 62 within their case.


    So do ecats use or make Ni-62? Guess you'll have to ask Rossi, ROTFWL! http://newenergytimes.com/v2/n…1/37/3721appendixd3.shtml


    Quote

    Rossi's U.S. Energy Catalyzer patent application states Ni62 is indispensable.

    Rossi application: For clearly understanding the following detailed discussion of the apparatus, it is necessary to at first consider that for allowing nickel to be transformed into stable copper, it is necessary to respect the quantic laws. Accordingly, it is indispensable to use, for the above mentioned exothermal reactions, a nickel isotope having a mass number of 62, to allow it to transform into a stable copper isotope 62. All the other Ni isotopes, on the other hand, will generate unstable Cu, and, accordingly, a beta decay.

    Note: According to Rossi, Ni62 is the only isotope that works because all the other isotopes produce unstable products. Rossi always said that his Energy Catalyzer device produces no unstable products.


    Quote

    University of Padova, Italy performs SIMS analysis on what Rossi claims to be material samples from Energy Catalyzer experiments. Minor changes in many masses. No change in Mass 62. (2009_


    Believers are never put off by grave inconsistencies in scammer's stories.

  • A longstanding lie Rossi stood by from 2011 is that he "enriches" nickel to contain more Ni-62 "cheaply" in his lab. Really? That alone would be a Nobel prize. Here is more about Ni-62 as fuel, not as ash. Rossi confuses and compounds the entire story of isotopes because he is basically an ignorant, lying con man who assumes his marks have short memories and a low tolerance for complexity. When it comes to CEO's, it turns out he was right.

    So do ecats use or make Ni-62? Guess you'll have to ask Rossi, ROTFWL! http://newenergytimes.com/v2/n…1/37/3721appendixd3.shtml


    @MY: By reposting FUD (each if they truly had 58 grams of highly refined Ni 62 within their case) , even after the 100th time it will not be truth.


    This statement has been made by an anonymous poster called

    Ghost Dawg

    October 22, 2011 at 12:23 am


    .....

    May be that's an alias of your's...

  • Last fall, the DOD was directed to brief Congress on LENR developments. We talked about it here, but never heard anything that came of it and the matter forgotten. "Cold Fusion Times" linked to this online FOIA (freedom of info act) website:


    http://www.theblackvault.com/d…rial-department-defense/#


    The owner of the site had this to say:


    "On May 13, 2016, Popular Mechanics published an article entitled, “Congress Is Suddenly Interested in Cold Fusion.” David Hambling wrote:

    “Cold fusion is rising again, thanks to allegedly successful experiments and demonstrations. Now interest in the field, also known as low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), has reached the highest levels, as the House Committee on Armed Services has asked the Secretary of Defense to provide “a briefing on the military utility of recent U.S. industrial base LENR advancements” by September 22.


    The Committee quotes a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment that says if cold fusion works, it would be a disruptive technology that could revolutionize energy production and storage.


    That is putting it mildly. Commercial cold fusion as claimed by Andrea Rossi and others, outlined in our April article, would remove dependence on oil or other fossil fuels, domestic or imported. In military terms, it would enable ships, aircraft, and tanks to continue indefinitely (or at least for months) without refueling, with abundant power for lasers or other directed-energy weapons.”

    Intrigued, on January 16, 2017, I filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for this briefing material cited in the article. On July 6, 2017, I received the material. Included, was the PowerPoint presentation briefing material (converted to a .pdf) along with a few pages of emails concerning the LENR briefing."


    Here is the briefing. Not sure Congress actually got briefed though? Nothing too interesting, as it concludes the same problems LENR had 30 years ago, are still there:


    http://documents.theblackvault…0DOC_02_LENR_Briefing.pdf

  • Scientists (unknown only to you) have tested the reactor that was presented to them and that was at that time the most advanced E-Cat available

    Explain to me by what bizarre criteria the hot cat was superior to, for example, the original ecat which Levi supposedly tested which made almost 10x the average power at almost 10x the *claimed* COP of the hot cat.

    Why are you talking about the HotCat? I was talking about the Lugano test, where scientists did not test a HotCat. Anyway, in Ferrara and Lugano scientists were there to test a reactor, that is, to verify its functioning, and not to evaluate its maximum performance. It was not their intention to study the operating limits of the technology, so they did not "push" to the maximum performance. In the Lugano report this concept has been clearly stated. So the COP declared in that test is not necessarily the maximum obtainable.

  • Quote

    Why are you talking about the HotCat? I was talking about the Lugano test, where scientists did not test a HotCat.

    They didn't? What was it they tested? From their report:


    Quote

    Data were collected during 32 days of running in March 2014. The reactor operating point was set to about 1260 ºC in the


    first half of the run, and at about 1400 °C in the second half. T


    Seems pretty hot to me! http://www.elforsk.se/Global/O…er/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf


    Why even do this test when earlier tests, much easier to evaluate and control, had been found deficient and needed BADLY to be repeated with proper calibrations, controls, and independent replication?

    If the point of increasing operating temperature is not better efficiency (COP and output) what, in your estimation could it be? It was much easier to control and use power from the "Ottoman" ecat with the heat exchanger than the silly kludges Rossi gave the Swedes which did not even have a forced flow cooling system!


    I am simply astounded at these replies!

  • Quote

    I missed the times when you called Rossi a wizard or an illusionist expert ...... your admiration for him is really limitless, considering that you spent the last years of your life studying every movement of his and commenting on it wherever you were allowed to do it. Not even my dog is so faithful ......


    I don't understand why the prissy moderator/admins leave stuff like this. Completely meaningless and noncontributory. But my replies, clear and cogent though they be, are moved or removed. This place is becoming hardly worth the trouble as Shanahan noted (or I think he did).

  • Why are you so squeamish, you have a lot of freedom here, just stand over it!



    Mary I agree with Rends here. Your posts have been getting better; and are more informative and less personal. You are putting more meat in your posts and less insults. People tune the insults out. So please keep with the new Mary. The mods are just here from keeping us all calling each other assholes. They are quite frank about it.


    il_340x270.1171324022_kxpc.jpg



    Be a sailor ;)

  • Oh well another post for tonight. Someone else here posted a link so I followed the post that lead to this mess on ECW so forgive me original poster as I donot remember your name I meant no harm.


    This is going to kill LENR someday. After the Me356 device debacle this is just getting harmful.

    If anyone reads this comment just look at what is happening in the comments. I mean read the comments.


    I hate talking past people. Just read it.



    http://e-catworld.com/2017/07/…al-regarding-ecco-device/

  • @kirkshahan


    Sorry, no play.

    Search "D. Gozzi" on http://www.scopus.com for others papers.


    Yeah, I'm not playing either. If you want me to comment on something, don't expect me to do a global literature search. You do it, and point to what you want to talk about.


    P.S. The prior paper you referenced is actually better presented in J. Electroanalytical Chemistry 452 (1998) 253. They have an actual picture of the x-ray film there, instead of a 3D densitometer bar chart. But, that doesn't change my conclusion that the unpatterned spots could be caused by heat. Think about it. If you hold a lit match about 2 inches from your hand, will you feel any heat?

  • @Kirkshahan


    ... "If you hold a lit match about 2 inches from your hand, will you feel any heat?"


    Too easy. X-rays from triboemission are a better bet. Electrostatics and dielectrics are a neglected world with apparently no link to electrochemistry cauldrons.


    Round about the cauldron go;

    In the poison'd entrails throw.

    Toad, that under cold stone

    Days and nights has thirty-one

    Swelter'd venom sleeping got,

    Boil thou first i' the charmed pot.


    Double, double toil and trouble;

    Fire burn, and cauldron bubble.


    Fillet of a fenny snake,

    In the cauldron boil and bake;

    Eye of newt and toe of frog,

    Wool of bat and tongue of dog,

    Adder's fork and blind-worm's sting,

    Lizard's leg and owlet's wing,

    For a charm of powerful trouble,

    Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.


    Double, double toil and trouble;
    Fire burn and cauldron bubble.

    Scale of dragon, tooth of wolf,
    Witches' mummy, maw and gulf
    Of the ravin'd salt-sea shark,
    Root of hemlock digg'd i' the dark,
    Liver of blaspheming Jew,
    Gall of goat, and slips of yew
    Silver'd in the moon's eclipse,
    Nose of Turk and Tartar's lips,
    Finger of birth-strangled babe
    Ditch-deliver'd by a drab,
    Make the gruel thick and slab:
    Add thereto a tiger's chaudron,
    For the ingredients of our cauldron.


    Double, double toil and trouble;
    Fire burn and cauldron bubble.


    Cool it with a baboon's blood,

    Then the charm is firm and good.


  • I haven't read Sifferkoll's blog post and don't really plan to read it. Let me know if there's anything I should be aware of.


    It's difficult to express it in English for me:

    It's everything he wrote here, but to a absolute under zero maximum ...Sifferkoll³


    Der Kerl hat total einen an der Waffel, das ist mit seinem letzen Blog-Eintrag für mich völlig klar.

    Und er ist ein schlechter Verlierer und nachtragend.


    Sorry for the German writing/wording, whatever...


  • Thx Frst. I lost count of the number of conspiracies Siffer spun into this. The way I read it...Eric is part of a world wide political/religious conspiracy to stymie Rossi and LENR in general. Honestly, I did not think Eric had it in him! He acts so normal, and here we find out he is one of the men manipulating the world.


    Ryan Hunt (MFMP) made a comment to Siffer's piece, that I think sums it up well. Siffer's reply shows there will never be an end to his endless conspiracies...even with a true black box test to resolve the matter:


    Ryan Hunt on 2017/07/17 at 14:09 said:

    This is a lot of stupid drama when a live, open, irrefutable, independent test could settle the uncertainty once and for all. It could be done black box style.

    Reply ↓

    • d76ae672667d37d1e08d55083bb59baf?s=39&d=blank&r=gsifferkollon 2017/07/17 at 20:38 said:

      Unfortunately I do not think so. There is always n+1 fraud scenarios that can be invented to produce FUD. This is the truth about any so called irrefutable independent test as well. There is always the ad-hom aspect on any tester. No one is immune. Basically anyone that even hints of LENR working can be called a fraudster or deceived and will be attacked on ad-hom basis. This has been shown numerous times. Rossi knows this.

  • They didn't? What was it they tested? From their report:

    Quote

    Data were collected during 32 days of running in March 2014. The reactor operating point was set to about 1260 ºC in the first half of the run, and at about 1400 °C in the second half.


    Seems pretty hot to me! http://www.elforsk.se/Global/O…er/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf

    Why even do this test when earlier tests, much easier to evaluate and control, had been found deficient and needed BADLY to be repeated with proper calibrations, controls, and independent replication?

    If the point of increasing operating temperature is not better efficiency (COP and output) what, in your estimation could it be? It was much easier to control and use power from the "Ottoman" ecat with the heat exchanger than the silly kludges Rossi gave the Swedes which did not even have a forced flow cooling system!


    The reactor that was tested in Ferrara was called Hot-Cat, as stated in the report of that test, while Lugano's was a very different model. The fact that even the Lugano reactor could reach high temperatures has nothing to do with the name of the models.


    Scientists were called to test a reactor and they performed the task on what was presented to them. I don't see how they could have asked Rossi to provide them with a different model of E-Cat, as they probably discovered directly in Lugano that the reactor to be tested was different from the previous one. As for Rossi, I find nothing strange about the fact that he wanted the Swedes to analyze his most recent prototype: obviously at that time it was the reactor on which he was rely on.

  • Quote

    As for Rossi, I find nothing strange about the fact that he wanted the Swedes to analyze his most recent prototype: obviously at that time it was the reactor on which he was rely on.


    No, the device switching is to avoid or make less certain the detection of deception. See my discussion of this in the other thread.


  • Shane D. ,


    What if sifferkoll is right? His predictions are better than for example sigmoidal . @IH Fanboy wins the first prize in regards to settlement predictions, but sifferkoll is certainly second.


    The point sifferkoll makes is a valid one. Whether he is right or not does not matter. Eric Walker would have been a "great" moderator to allow a set of diverse opinions. But he is not.


    He bans people that bring interesting opinions to the table, just because how they bring it. It is a personal thing and Eric Walker is a "little" man that finds his own ego more important than a healthy discussion.


    Cheers,


    JB



  • ecg,


    Right about what? Siffer said a lot of things, and I am not sure which right is right?


    And your flaming Eric, after doing the same to Sig is not going to get you anywhere here. Better go back to being one of those polite trolls, or I will simply block you. Will be the first time for me.