I guess each of us individually, will have to decide when enough time has elapsed, to write this off as another Doral.
Of course you assume it won't work. How typical.
-
-
The fact remains the heat output of the QX was measured properly by water calorimetry and I expect the heat output of the SK to be clear too.
This is not a "fact". There is no evidence to support that the "QX was measured properly by water calorimetry" at all, other than Rossisays.
It's absurd babbling mis-statements like this in addition to your refusal to engage the mountains of evidence of Rossi's ignorance and intentional deceptions that annihilate your credibility.
Maybe try looking in the mirror before emitting more fact-void pablum and baseless insults.
-
Yes there is enough information to replicate.
We have the rough electrode geometry.
We have the fuel that is claimed to be LiAlH4.
We know it is producing a self generating oscillation due to the oscilloscope traces.
What exactly does Rossi’s control box contain?
The fuel is LiALH4, and nothing else? No special gasses, metals, etc? In what proportions?
How does the oscilloscope pattern demonstrate a self-generating oscillation, rather than one impressed on the circuit solely by the control box?
-
think that the only way we will ever find out if the QX works is through replication. Rossi is not about to provide any information that would conclusively or even somewhat conclusively prove that the device produces excess energy.
No. If it works we will find that out from one of his customers.
In the process of doing so, he would attract far too much attention which would result in a dozen parties attempting to replicate.
More likely a dozen competitors rather than replicators.
Why do you keep on about the QX when that is not being made and the SK is?
-
Wrong. The energy comes from the reduction in mass of the fuel, apparently from changing the isotope or changing to lighter elements.
Then please, please explain your Guru Rossi simple things like how to correctly calculate the mass-energy equivalence (using correct units).
Usually, his is 3 orders of magnitutes off.
QuoteAndrea Rossi
August 15th, 2015 at 8:47 AM
Steven N. Karels, Arnie:
Cm’on: 1 g of matter entirely converted into energy gives 25 MWh of energy (from Einstein equation).
...
Quite scary when you believe that this genius has developed a nuclear reactor and calculates the amount of fuel to be charged, isn’t it?
-
You went on for pages about the errors in spectra measurement. The fact remains the heat output of the QX was measured properly by water calorimetry and I expect the heat output of the SK to be clear too.
Maybe so, but then why would Rossi, who has many decent measuring devices, decide to do such a useless input power measurement? After nearly a decade of demos, he must know the importance of this part.
-
This is not a "fact". There is no evidence to support that the "QX was measured properly by water calorimetry" at all, other than Rossisays.
Good grief. Look at the video of the demo and tell me what was wrong about the OUTPUT measurement.
-
AA you sure to twist Jed's words (among most other people's as well) Jed's saying that people would not operating within 50 miles of an inhabited area is NOT the same as you what you said : risk it could destroy everything in a 50 or 100 mile radius!
Please stop the babble and lies
-
Then please, please explain your Guru Rossi simple things like how to correctly calculate the mass-energy equivalence (using correct units).
Usually, his is 3 orders of magnitutes off.
Quite scary when you believe that this genius has developed a nuclear reactor and calculates the amount of fuel to be charged, isn’t it?
He does not have a reactor, that can do a full "annihilation" -> mass to energy...
Nobody has that. Even nuclear bombs only convert a fraction of matter to energy.
Nuclear fission reactors are also only converting some percent of the "fuel".
-
You went on for pages about the errors in spectra measurement. The fact remains the heat output of the QX was measured properly by water calorimetry and I expect the heat output of the SK to be clear too.
Yes AA: but the input to the QX was not measured at all, so that is hardly relevant!
My point about dubious assumptions from spectral measurements comes from one of the Rossi/Gulstrom papers where he uses this method (and a non-measured input power) to claim a high COP. A combination of the last two methods on my table
I reiterated it because of a Rossi self-question about it.
Rossi + any sort of radiative power measurement = large error
-
Good grief. Look at the video of the demo and tell me what was wrong about the OUTPUT measurement.
Surely you cannot be this dense. There was no proper INPUT measurement demonstrated, merely Rossisays.
Therefore your statement that the "QX was properly measured" is not a "fact" but is actually factually incorrect, and it's material to even your own statements that Rossi's demo was not proof that the QX works. If the INPUT had been properly measured, you would surely be making the point that Rossi's QX was objectively shown to be working.
And furthermore, we don't (and can't) know that the OUTPUT was properly measured by water calorimetry, because Rossi did not allow any independent verification.
Are you now changing your position to be that Rossi's QX demo objectively showed that the QX worked?
-
No. If it works we will find that out from one of his customers.
More likely a dozen competitors rather than replicators.
Why do you keep on about the QX when that is not being made and the SK is?
The QX and the SK are more or less the same device. I'm tired of the long string of names when we don't know the exact differences. I'm going to use the name QX.
We will NEVER find out anything from his customers. They will be puny little companies that will not be able to defned themselves when Rossi's enemies frantically rush to the phone and start calling every alphabet agency they can to try and get Rossi and his customer's plant shut down.
-
What exactly does Rossi’s control box contain?
The fuel is LiALH4, and nothing else? No special gasses, metals, etc? In what proportions?
How does the oscilloscope pattern demonstrate a self-generating oscillation, rather than one impressed on the circuit solely by the control box?
If someone utilizes the information that is online about how to create self generating discharges with pulsed DC using the negative resistance zone, utilizes what we know about the reactor, utilizes what we know about the probable elements, and produces significant excess heat it will be a replication. We don't need to know every little detail of Rossi's system to replicate.
-
@Adrian Ashfield
Of course you assume it won't work. How
typicalreasonable considering absolutely nothing Rossi made ever worked.TIFIFY
-
Surely you cannot be this dense. There was no proper INPUT measurement demonstrated, merely Rossisays.
You said the output power measurement was wrong. It wasn't. You were wrong.
I noted the problem with the input power measurement the day after the demo, noting that the missing measurement was easy to do and any customer would make it..
It is you who is being dense.
-
You said the output power measurement was wrong. It wasn't. You were wrong.
I noted the problem with the input power measurement the day after the demo, noting that the missing measurement was easy to do and any customer would make it..
It is you who is being dense.
Any customer would make it, but Rossi will not if at all possible.
In Stockholm, Rossi did not “miss” measuring the input power properly, he intentionally made a misleading measurement that was complained about in the first Gullstrom paper with QX comments, and for all the months between then, the Nov 24 Display, and since.
-
The QX and the SK are more or less the same device.
Sure it is, The SK only produces two magnitudes more power and is being manufactured.
We will NEVER find out anything from his customers.
How do you know that? Jed's crystal ball?
-
Sure it is, The SK only produces two magnitudes more power and is being manufactured.
How do you know that? Jed's crystal ball?
Rossi screwed up with the whole Doral incident, and no large company will ever fund him without access to his IP. The only companies that might have something to do with him are small ones that would not have the legal support to fight off the alphabet agencies that Rossi's enemies would call when they discovered the location of his reactors.
-
Rossi screwed up with the whole Doral incident, and no large company will ever fund him without access to his IP. The only companies that might have something to do with him are small ones
Rossi has clearly stated the customer is a large company "of the highest echelons". What you say indicates to me you think he is lying about this. Since you think he is lying about this, why do you believe any other of his statements which you find convenient to support your argument? I can't understand how people ignore his history of outright lies.
-
Sure it is, The SK only produces two magnitudes more power and is being manufactured.
How do you know that? Jed's crystal ball?
How do you know, your crystal ball?
