Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

  • The payment of $10m to Rossi in June 2013 may not be much, but I sure could make it last a while.

    Ten mil lasts quite a while, especially when you use that money to buy condos.

    Investment property rents allow you to pay for lots of things, except apparently your contractors that have to sue you for payment.


    INNOVATIVE SERVICE TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT SERVICES VS LEONARDO CORPORATION ET AL

    Local Case Number:2017-012030-CA-01Filing Date:05/19/2017
    State Case Number:132017CA012030000001Judicial Section:CA24
    Consolidated Case No.:N/ACase Type:Contract & Indebtedness
    Case Status:OPEN
  • Quite singular that he’s still well included here and supported at high level.

    Basically AR is creating a light that both plugs into a wall, and needs a battery, as he just posted below. I don’t think he even knows what he has at this point. If he had a breakthrough LED driver of course he could patent it and license it to a dozen large companies. But instead he is choosing the route of making a light himself, and he needs a million preorders first.


    This all makes business sense lol.



    April 28, 2021 at 10:05 PM

    Hi Dr. Rossi,

    In regards to driving an inductive load with the E-cat. Is it possible that the E-cat reaction is fundamentally unable to create electricity capable of driving an inductive load or do you think it is an engineering issue and it will eventually be worked out?


    Andrea Rossi
    April 29, 2021 at 4:06 AM
    Mike Phalen:
    maybe, but the interface with a battery is a solution in most of cases

  • This all makes no sense does it?

    INTRODUCING THE ALL-ELECTRIC

    2023 CADILLAC LYRIQ

    https://www.cadillac.com/electric/lyriq


    Over 300 miles range with a full charge, based on GM testing. Official EPA estimates not yet available. Your actual range may vary based on several factors, including temperature, terrain, battery age, loading, and how you use and maintain your vehicle.

  • Basically AR is creating a light that both plugs into a wall, and needs a battery, as he just posted below.


    As I already wrote and demonstrated by calculation in this my previous comment if it were true that the magician's lamp really makes what he claimed (generating a 5000K white LED light of 10000 lumens, using only 4W) it doesn't need any external battery or grid to get electric energy as power supply because it might produce what it needs (working in a closed loop) by means of PV cells that use the generated light.

    This proves that simply it's another magician’s hoax to feed his gullible fans that still support him.

  • As I already wrote and demonstrated by calculation in this my previous comment if it were true that the magician's lamp really makes what he claimed (generating a 5000K white LED light of 10000 lumens, using only 4W) it doesn't need any external battery or grid to get electric energy as power supply because it might produce what it needs (working in a closed loop) by means of PV cells that use the generated light.

    This proves that simply it's another magician’s hoax to feed his gullible fans that still support him.

    It only needs 0.008 W at the input to the SKL device, so the control is the bottleneck, at 0.2% efficiency (a 100 x improvement from Copenhagen). Luckily the SKLED COP recovers this loss (99.8 % , COP 99.8), plus a few lumens more.

  • It only needs 0.008 W at the input to the SKL device, so the control is the bottleneck, at 0.2% efficiency (a 100 x improvement from Copenhagen). Luckily the SKLED COP recovers this loss (99.8 % , ∴ COP 99.8), plus a few lumens more.

    Me no comprendre.

    I'll assume it's a joke that I don't get. Anyway, Rossi has said (in essence) in reply to posts on his blog that the energy gain of the SKLed is greater than 4 and less than 8. Let's say it is 6. Also, let's say that instead of losing half the energy as heat as a typical LED does, it loses only one sixth of its energy as heat. So the gain has effectively become 5, in terms of lumens. A solar array has an efficiency of roughly 20 percent. 20 percent of 5 is 1, meaning the array will output the same amount of electrical power as the SKLed requires. So : having the SKLed self looping this way looks to be an iffy proposition.

  • Me no comprendre.

    I'll assume it's a joke that I don't get. Anyway, Rossi has said (in essence) in reply to posts on his blog that the energy gain of the SKLed is greater than 4 and less than 8. Let's say it is 6. Also, let's say that instead of losing half the energy as heat as a typical LED does, it loses only one sixth of its energy as heat. So the gain has effectively become 5, in terms of lumens. A solar array has an efficiency of roughly 20 percent. 20 percent of 5 is 1, meaning the array will output the same amount of electrical power as the SKLed requires. So : having the SKLed self looping this way looks to be an iffy proposition.

    from jonp:

    I didn't found any writing where declared what you claim, anyway what you say is denied by the magician because he claimed to need 4W to generate 10000 lumens (0.08W for each 200 lumens) so using PV cells already shown you will get up to 8.9W of electric energy and if his stuff were real a self looping becomes quite simple.

  • Ah so that's where the .08W figure comes from. Your point is taken, but lumens on a PV cell is probably not a reliable way to go about calculating the electrical output of that PV cell.

    Anyway, here's where I obtained the energy gain range between 4 and 8 of the SLKed :


    *****************

    2021-03-18 10:30 Dan Galburt

    Question 3 Is the energy gain of the E-Cat SKLed > 4 watts output (visible light) / watt input (electrical)?


    2021-03-18 10:52 Andrea Rossi

    Dan Gilburt:

    Q 3: yes

    *****************



    *****************

    2021-03-28 15:05 Dan Galburt

    Question 4 .... I expect that the ratio of the overall energy dissipation measured by the heat rise of the cooling water divided by the electrical energy input would be higher than 8. Do you agree?


    2021-03-28 17:12 Andrea Rossi

    Dan Galburt:

    Q4: no

    *****************

  • Ah so that's where the .08W figure comes from. Your point is taken, but lumens on a PV cell is probably not a reliable way to go about calculating the electrical output of that PV cell.

    If you had read my first comment carefully you would note that the calculation considers lux (illuminance, not lumens) in particular the illuminance value relevant to a source of light that illuminates an area of about 11.9 m2, that is the surface under the aperture beam of the lamp declared by magician (60 degrees) when the magician's lamp is located 3.4 m far.

    The relaction between luminous flux per unit area and the corresponding electric power density (in W/m2 or uW/cm2) that a PV cell can supply is known considering that the light spectrum has been defined (5000K white light, spectral range limited to 380-700 nm).

    Hereafter an example about PC for indoor light applications:


    Why do you believe that is not a reliable way about calculation of electrical power available by PV cell? Try to explain.


    Quote

    Anyway, here's where I obtained the energy gain range between 4 and 8 of the SLKed :

    About Q4, it was a very long question based on a lot of hypothesis and Dan's considerations by ending with the question: "do you agree?" to which the magician replied simply with a "no" without to specify what he doesn't agree so your hypothesis about the meaning may be simply a speculation.

  • I still remember a "very reliable" Roland's forecast (a swedish believer of the magician) by replying to the question: "When can it develop into a product?"


    "very near future... I believe... some training, some small modifications perhaps... but it's all almost already product...


    minute 1:14

    It was just ten years ago. :D


    External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

  • Why do you believe that is not a reliable way about calculation of electrical power available by PV cell? Try to explain.

    Because lumens involves human sensitivity to particular light wavelengths and does not strictly reflect the true amount of power.

    About Q4, it was a very long question based on a lot of hypothesis and Dan's considerations by ending with the question: "do you agree?" to which the magician replied simply with a "no" without to specify what he doesn't agree so your hypothesis about the meaning may be simply a speculation.

    Perhaps, but note in the same post that Rossi said he has performed a similar type of calorimetric experiment for the SKLed. This lends some credence to the idea that Rossi is indeed saying the energy gain is less than 8.

  • Because lumens involves human sensitivity to particular light wavelengths and does not strictly reflect the true amount of power.

    Perhaps, but note in the same post that Rossi said he has performed a similar type of calorimetric experiment for the SKLed. This lends some credence to the idea that Rossi is indeed saying the energy gain is less than 8.

    It does not matter because PV cells data (electrical power density out vs illuminance in) I shown to you gives directly the produced electrical energy under that specific spectra. Moreover being the light spectra of we are talking defined, if you want it's possible to calculate the integral (from λmin to λmax) with the weighted function (it's a curve functions of λ) getting an equivalent power density value (W/m2).