Validation of Randell Mills GUTCP - a call for action

  • You just don't get it I'm afraid. This is not high-level physics, but 'Electricity 101'. You cannot create a high-voltage plasma between two electrodes inside -and very very close to the surface of- a conducting metal tube. The electricity will flow through the metal of the tube and nowhere else.

  • You just don't get it I'm afraid. This is not high-level physics, but 'Electricity 101'. You cannot create a high-voltage plasma between two electrodes inside -and very very close to the surface of- a conducting metal tube. The electricity will flow through the metal of the tube and nowhere else.


    Rossi's patent describes a two step process where the first step is the application of a heater that produces the plasma, the next step is the application of the electrostatic field. Rossi never says that he used a flow of current to produce the plasma.




    The heat to produce the plasma could be applied using gas combustion as an alternative to an electric heater.

  • There is probably an error, either inadvertent or intentional, in the patent excerpt above by the way. How can electrons be accelerated up to 100 keV at a pressure of 3-6 bars?

  • Can said " I jumbled up"


    Still your point about the 100,000 volts is valid,

    Rossi needs something to generate that... if he doesn't use ignition coils


    What does he use?


    The technical details released by Rossi are minimal

    Those released by Mills since his last paper are also minimal except for some videos.

    That is to protect the technology from competitors, while it is being patented, I guess

    The information is likely to remain minimal until 2018/and/or/commercialisation.


    Apparently Mills is writing a new paper. 1-2-6 months? anyone's guess.


    My bet is that it relates to the liquid silver technology

  • From:

    Nucleon polarizability and long range strong

    force from I=2 meson exchange potential

    Carl-Oscar Gullström, Andrea Rossi




    The electrostatic high voltage field had induced a input current of .105V through the plasma whose resistance was determined to be 1 Ohm.


    The voltage of the electrostatic field is under that required to produce a spark.


    The length of the QuarkX reactor can be figured by calculating the length of the gas column needed to support the production of a plasma in high temperature gas in that N centimeters length of high pressure hydrogen/aluminum/lithium pre plasma gas.

  • Quote

    The electrostatic high voltage field had induced a input current of .105V through the plasma whose resistance was determined to be 1 Ohm.


    What the unit .105V is supposed to mean? Can you calculate the current induced with 100 keV through the plasma whose resistance was determined to be 1 Ohm?


  • With reference to post #172 on this thread, how can a plasma be induced through the application of the input voltage and resistance described by Carl-Oscar Gullström in Rossi's latest theory paper?

  • 1. Axil said "the electrostatic high voltage field had induced a input current of .105V "


    Do you mean "induced an input current of 0.105 Amperes"?

    Currents are not measured in volts but in amps


    I think what is stated in the paper (as quoted by Axil) is that they measured a drop of 0.105 volts across a 1 ohm series resistor. This corresponds to a current of 0.105 amperes. If the steady-state voltage across the cell is really 100 kV, the input power would thus be about 10 kilowatts.


    So I strongly suspect that the high voltage is applied to a third electrode, to start the plasma. Once the plasma becomes conductive it could be thermally maintained by a much lower voltage, perhaps 500 v.d.c 0.105 amperes or ~50 watts of input.


    This is a fairly common engineering trick. See for example:

    https://www.google.com/patents/US9288887



  • From


    http://www.e-catworld.com/2017…ent-calculated-cop-22000/


    The point of contention between Alan and Axil was to show Alan that the QuarkX reactor passed very little input power through the core structure which contained the plasma. That input power happens to be 0.01102 Watts (.105 x .105).


    The EMF stimulation was not produced by a large flow of electrons through the plasma. The plasma is not stimulated by a large electron flow but instead by a very high voltage electrostatic potential as stated in the Rossi patent.

  • The point of contention between Alan and Axil was to show Alan that the QuarkX reactor passed very little input power through the core structure which contained the plasma. That input power happens to be 0.01102 Watts (.105 x .105).


    In which case you misunderstand me. My point is that you cannot create a high voltage plasma inside a conducting metal capillary tube. I refer to current flow, because that is what it is normally described as - I too read and understood the Rossi/Gullstrom paper and understand perfectly well we are talking high voltage low current. The idea that you could make that happen inside a lumbar puncture needle is (sorry to say it) just daft.


    You could make a plasma inside a very large metal tube of course, or a Tokamak. But there you need some neat tricks to keep plasma and metal walls apart. Do you think AR has fitted some superconducting magnets into the Quark? :)


    Further to this, you could not measure the plasma temperature inside such a tube (even if you could by some miracle make the plasma inside it) because all you would be measuring is the skin temperature of the metal containment.

  • In which case you misunderstand me. My point is that you cannot create a high voltage plasma inside a conducting metal capillary tube. I refer to current flow, because that is what it is normally described as - I too read and understood the Rossi/Gullstrom paper and understand perfectly well we are talking high voltage low current. The idea that you could make that happen inside a lumbar puncture needle is (sorry to say it) just daft.


    You could make a plasma inside a very large metal tube of course, or a Tokamak. But there you need some neat tricks to keep plasma and metal walls apart. Do you think AR has fitted some superconducting magnets into the Quark? :)


    Further to this, you could not measure the plasma temperature inside such a tube (even if you could by some miracle make the plasma inside it) because all you would be measuring is the skin temperature of the metal containment.



    Insulators become conductors at high temperatures and metals become insulators at high temperatures. See:


    fig1.gif





    At 2700C the nature of the electrical resistance of the structure of the reactor core could be completely reversed.