Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Alan, thanks for your comment: Anybody or any company who issues their CE conformity for a product to their notified body does this based on their own quality and safety regulation system. In the end but it will be important who is the one that is responsible in case something may happen with the product, or the product caused damage involving humans or environment. It is the one who declared conformity and who is listed on the product label (in this case Andrea Rossi and/or his company?).

The authorities may suspend the market clearance for that product until the reason is clear what caused the problem or damage. Such a decision will of course also include a recall which means shutting down all units that have been sold until then and until the manufacturer has resolved the problem and did provide new evidence of safety. Therefor a CE for such a product will require very careful preparation and intense safety testing.

kits built at home changes things if its a path available to everyone.

How is the output measured? How is the temp measured? Does he assume blackbody radiation?

How is the device isolate to be assured there are no hidden wires or use of supports to carry current?

Quote from IH Fanboy

Quote from THH: No, you cannot. V^2/R has in that case no relation to E2 = Pin (as on the whiteboard). V^2/R bears no relation to the quark-x input power, and therefore to the COP (which Rossi seems to think worth calculating, and calculates with this incorrect method).

V^2/R in that case would approximate the PSU power, but not the quark-X input power.

But it is also highly unlikely a bench PSU would be operated at 0.1V in that way. They don't like such conditions and there is no reason at all not to have a larger series resistor. The reason for a small resistor is as a current measuring device, not a current determining device.

Yes you can. It is in fact a conservative approximation of the input power (assuming Rossi's assertion about the cell itself having effectively a zero resistance is true). Think of it this way: if the cell has effectively zero resistance when in operation, then you can consider it as a good conductor (such as a wire) as an approximation. How would you measure the power in that case? By doing as Rossi has done. So why didn't Rossi just take the voltage reading across both the resistor and the cell and use both resistances in the calculation? Because he wanted to keep the specific values related to the cell a trade secret. Is this ideal for the peanut gallery? No. Is it what happened and does it make sense in that context? Yes.

Display More

IHFB. This is incorrect in two distinct ways.

(1) This is at best an upper bound on the input power, not, as you said, a good approximation to the input power. It cannot be used to determine COP (if that is what you want to so).

(2) It is not in fact an upper bound on power. It would be this if (as would be very easy to do) Rossi took the supply voltage Vs and the current through the resistor V1/R to get the total supply power: Vs*V1/R. if what you say is true, then the power from this method would be very similar to the power Rossi actually calculated: V1^2/R. If, however, the quark voltage is larger than 0.1V your bound fails whereas this bound remains correct, and does not disclose trade secrets. We have no info from Rossi about how low was the quark voltage - certainly no measurement (for example viewing the PSU voltage - easily done) that would let us estimate it.

What you suggest is in any case not what Rossi said he did in the paper, nor the whiteboard, nor originally in response to further questioning.

It is possible, just as anything is possible. But the stretch here is so large, and the obvious gap (no measurement of the PSU voltage hence no bound on quark-x input power) so relevant that to argue as you do is IMHO improper. You might as well say that COP is a trade secret therefore Rossi will not release it, nor a measured lower bound on it, (allowing it to be 1)!

We have also this rumour above on thjis thread that the PSU voltage was 12 or 24 V. No idea if it is true, but that would be a normal voltage range for a bench PSU and if so your assumption is proven false, instead of anyway being both unlikely, contrary to what Rossi said contemporaneously. and unproven.

Quote from Seiber Troutman

kits built at home changes things if its a path available to everyone.

I disagree - are you really convinced, that a "nuclear driven" device (I can hardly imagine that the QuarkX or whatever the marketing and the product name may convey, will come to market without mentioning the nature of the heat / electricity generation, which is for sure part of the IFU) will be available for do-it-yourself tinkerers who are keen in building their own home-made-kits? Never - from a safety and regulatory perspective. Modifying a device with a specific intended use to a non-specified non-tested and non-released use of course will always be possible but on your own full risk, unless the product or kit is already designed for that purpose. In that case it must cover potential risks resulting in described modifications anyway (forseeable misuse by manufacturer...)

If you burn down your home due to a failed "modified on your own" QuarkX, you are done. No one will cover your costs/damage...not sure if this will help to promote the device.

I am emphasizing this topic, because it seems that not many here are aware of what it requires to qualify such a new groundbreaking technology/device. It is NOT a simple electrical heater anymore, esp. if it as claimed can run for hours, days and months in SSM. BTW - would you buy a device which energy or heat producing internal system is unknown. It cannot be unknown, since it needs a heavy global marketing campaign. How else can somebody sell millions of heaters or ligth/energy generators from his robotized factories?

Quote from Alan Smith

Obtaining UL certification (where I presume UL is 'Underwriters Laboratory) is in contrast, I have been told, an expensive and highly formalised process

Yes, it is Underwriters Laboratory, and yes it is formalized and it costs a fortune.

UL is a corporate entity, with no governmental authority, but it has de facto authority. It is an insurance company consortium. No insurance company will issue a policy to ensure the safety of equipment not certified by UL. No store or equipment supplier in the U.S. would think of selling a machine not certified by UL. If something went wrong and there was an injury, death, or property damage, the store would be sued to a fare-thee-well.

I doubt UL would work with Rossi as an individual. He would have to have a company, a factory and employees. See:

https://www.ul.com/aboutul/what-we-do/whom-we-work-with/

If another company had a contract to manufacture his devices, they could have the product certified. They would have to provide UL with every single detail about the product, including the vendors of the faceplate screws, and with several working prototypes the same in every detail with the final commercial product. Needless to say, there is no such company or prototype.

I am pretty sure that in course of doing this, UL would measure the efficiency. They do with things like air conditioners and boilers. Assuming the thing works, they would find it is "over unity," meaning it produces energy out of nowhere, or with unknown nuclear reactions. That would bring the approval process to a halt. No corporate regulator would consider approving a machine that works by unknown principles. That would be insane. Rossi would first have to wait for the National Laboratories and the academic establishment to figure out how and why the thing works. That would take years and cost billions of dollars. I am sure it would be done, and it would be worth billions of dollars, but anyway, I am sure you cannot sell nuclear reactors that work by unknown principles anywhere in the world.

Assuming the thing does not work -- which I am sure is the case -- UL would not approve it because it does not work. Unlike the Patent Office, they are in the business of confirming that equipment does what it is claimed to do in the specifications.

All you really need is a proven formula and pre made pattern, maybe from a 3D printer. The formula. The "Pixie dust" will never stay a secret~ its already within this forum.

If a pre made formula that will meltdown the unit in the event of a runaway should be all thats needed. but that discussion should be in another thread. Peace

Some vertical clamps, some washing machine hose, a nice DC power supply, a 1 ohm 25 W resistor, an automotive HID ballast, and an Xenon short arc bulb (handle carefully), some spare lamp cord, some alligator clamps, a couple DVMs, a few solder-less connectors, a few crimp clamps and hose clamps, an orbit irrigation coupler, some electrical tape, a bit of mineral oil, a digital thermometer, small blister pack of stove bolts, a spare piece of 2x4, a couple of project boxes or rat traps....

Quote from axil

The term "hero" comes from the ancient Greeks. For them, a hero was a mortal who had done something so far beyond the scope of human effort. The hero left an immortal memory behind him when he was no more. The hero was worshiped like the gods. He joined them in their pantheon. The hero is a great benefactor of humankind: Hercules, the monster killer; Asclepius, the first doctor; Dionysus, the creator of Greek fraternities. Heroes were always extraordinary; to be a hero was to expand people's sense of what was possible for a human being.

Today, we still call heroes those whom we admire and wish to emulate. But still the concept retains that original link to possibility. We need heroes first and foremost because our heroes help define the limits of our aspirations. We largely define our ideals by the heroes we choose, and our ideals -- things like courage, honor, and accomplishment -- largely define us. Our heroes are symbols for us of all the qualities we would like to possess and all the ambitions we would like to satisfy. A person can choose Martin Luther King or Susan B. Anthony. Our heros still embrace human excellence. And because the ideals to which we aspire do so much to determine the ways in which we behave, we all have a vested interest in each person having heroes, and in the choice of heroes each of us makes.

LENR needs a hero, someone to be emulated and act a template for excellence, accomplisment and caring. We need Rossi as our hero.

Yeah, well. You shouldn't quote without attribution; and you missed out a bit, to wit " But people who had committed unthinkable crimes were also called heroes; Oedipus and Medea, for example, received divine worship after their deaths as well."

Who can say that LENR gets energy from nuclear processes. It could be extracting energy from the vacuum , or from axions, or from dark energy or dark matter or from magnetic resonance. The Quark may function in the same way that the quantum computer functions using anions. The solid state product business is replete with products that use quantum effects that are not yet understood. Does every law of nature require full understanding before a product that uses them can be sold?

"It could be extracting energy from the vacuum , or from axions, or from dark energy or dark matter or from magnetic resonance"....

,,,,the more no one in industry would start selling or approving such a product, if it would work, because there is no chance to argue to authorities what the hell this thing does, or more important: no clue what it could do. At the end of the day it creates a black hole?

Thats why you test very carefully