Rossi-Blog Comment Discussion

Alan,

again gammas are not much interest for businesses. They may help people how do not believe in LENR that something is happening, but that is not what most business want. They want to do due diligence to verify a working and useable device.

I suppose it goes without saying that Adrian will always believe anything Rossi says.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

Considering the collective qualifications and credentials of these scientists and observers, I always found this very hard to understand. It was and still is weird!

Could this helps?

Quote

Simple calorimetry and electrical measurement and examination of internal thermocouples without opening the fuel portion of the reactor could have revealed nothing other than errors or fraud on the part of the inventor.

It depends on the scopes of the examiners.

The alleged 12 kW output, they computed after the January 2011 demo, came from a well recognizable set of fake experimental data, which were under their direct control and responsibility.

Quote

One exception again was JedRothwell who with others tried hard to persuade Rossi to agree to let them do correct testing of his reactors back in 2011.

Come on, you can't be so naïve. He did suggest one of those fake data, one of the most important.

Quote from Alan Smith

I'm surprised you don't get it. The gammas are proof of a nuclear reaction and also provide a clear signal of what the fuel is composed of and what reactions are important. If you want to sell the heat you need to be sure you can produce flames, and the gammas are the smoke. Now, what sensible business man would not want to be sure of that?

I don't think that gammas are required for all nuclear events. Again, the verification that commercial interests are interested in is heat not the production of gammas. Something can produce gammas with little heat but it would not be a reasonable commercial product. They will want proof of a saleable product not of a nuclear event. Just try to sale gammas.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

Glad to hear that Allan. I haven't seen Walker around here for a while.

I fear it may be too late though. Soon you will be reduced to just Sam. From where I sit the forum should be renamed the lenr fraud forum. The only "skill" most members appear to have is making up stories to show Rossi n a bad light. For example, the post above by Zoroud, implies that I should have known about Johnson, so can't be taken seriously. The question I was asked was did I know what other companies he was director of. I never said I hadn't heard of him. They just get things wrong so often it is had to imagine it is just ignorance and not made up on purpose.

A forum on LENR should be discussing that, nit just going on about how results could have been faked and Rossi is a fraud. Should Rossi come up with a working reactor it seems few will have anything useful to add and the forum may well die. Those interested in the subject have been driven away.

AA, you are engaging in some selective recollection to make your case. The question was not just what company was Johnson President of.

Question: "Just out of curiosity Adrian; do you know who Henry Johnson is, and what other company he was President of?"

Answer by AA: "No I don't."

As to the forum dying because Rossi succeeds, I wouldn't hold my breath.

As to your threats to leave, you keep on threatening, have previously announced you were leaving and yet . . .

And as to making up stories to put Rossi in a bad light, no need to make up stories, just tell the truth.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

@Adrian Ashfield

Me bite tongue hard.

OK. So Andrea Rossi, a man who has not a single proven accomplishment in his entire life, a man who purchased his PhD degree from a diploma mill, a man who took $11.5 million from IH based on lies and non-working apparatus, a man who has never registered or licensed anything with UL, CE, or any non-self-certifying body, that man is now going to build a world-wide network of heat supplying nuclear fusion reactors. Right.

woodworker

Zeus46 wrote:

Are you able to take a wild guess at what IH might have forked out for Jones Day's services during the pretrial phase of Rossi Vs IH vs Rossi? Just from the volume of depositions and motions and jury selection maybe? What do you think a three week jury trial, which never happened, might have added? I mean Zeus46 is right when he presumes I was simply speculating without any knowledge of what JD might have charged. I read somewhere they are pretty expensive.

Display More

I didn't start following until a short while before trial, after the discovery had been largely completed. I didn't focus on the pre-trial motion activity or any disputes relating to compliance with discovery. Having covered my rear end, Jones Day is a very well regarded, extremely qualified mega-firm and their fees are commensurate. I would imagine that the partners involved, if not giving a blended rate, were billing north of $700 an hour, with senior associates in the $500 range. I don't know and won't try to guess how much the total bill was but I would not be surprised to see it in the $2-4 million range.

Quote from Zeus46

Complete guess, but $1mil should (more than) cover it? 6 lawyers, 6 months full time ? $1000 a day?

Quote from Zeus46

Quote from Zeus46

 

Quote from Zeus46

Complete guess, but $1mil should (more than) cover it? 6 lawyers, 6 months full time ? $1000 a day?

I don't know if they staffed 6 attorneys on it, but for $1,000 a day maybe you get Michael Cohen, you don't get Jones Day. Mid-level partners probably bill at around $700 an hour and the weeks before trial are not 8 hour days, think closer to 15 or 16, 7 days a week. Throw in expert witnesses, who get paid for their report, whether or not they testify, hotel accommodations near the court house, meals, travel to depose people, the cost of the depositions (your attorneys and the court reporter and, if not done at your own office, the cost of renting a conference room for the day), the cost of prepping witnesses, a jury consultant, maybe even a mock trial to look for weak points -- if they had 6 attorneys full time for six months, think 5-6 million.

Quote from Alan Smith

I'm surprised you don't get it. The gammas are proof of a nuclear reaction and also provide a clear signal of what the fuel is composed of and what reactions are important. If you want to sell the heat you need to be sure you can produce flames, and the gammas are the smoke. Now, what sensible business man would not want to be sure of that?

Alan.

That is smoke.

Reliably detected strong gammas => LENR. Yes

No gammas does not mean no LENR.

One-off non-replicable bursts (for example from Rossi-induced e-m bursts, gamma guns, non-Rossi GCRs, or many other things), and irregular changes in background (for example from drafts carrying radon decay chain products, or many other things), do not mean LENR.

So given we can be pretty sure no-one has replicable gammas, or it would be big news, this resolves nothing.

In LENR fusion, the fusing of two protons which is the first step of the proton-proton cycle created great problems for early theorists because they recognized that the interior temperature of the sun (then 20,000,000C, but now assumed to be some 14 million Kelvins) would not provide nearly enough energy to overcome the coulomb barrier of electric repulsion between two protons.

With the development of quantum mechanics, it was realized that on this scale the protons must be considered to have wave properties and that there was the possibility of tunneling through the coulomb barrier.

Arthur Eddington thought that nuclear processes must be involved to account for the radiant energy of the sun, but was criticized because the temperature was seen to be not hot enough when considered by classical physics alone. His tongue-in-cheek reply to his critics: "I am aware that many critics consider the stars are not hot enough. The critics lay themselves open to an obvious retort; we tell them to go and find a hotter place."

Even so, it was unclear how proton–proton fusion might proceed, because the most obvious product, helium-2 (proton), is unstable and almost instantly dissociates back into two protons. In 1939, Hans Bethe proposed that one of the protons could decay by beta emission into a neutron via the weak interaction during the brief moment of fusion, making deuterium a vital product in the chain.

Most of the time, when two protons collide together, they simply do just that: collide, and bounce off one another. But under just the right conditions, with high enough temperatures and densities, they can fuse together to form a state of helium you’ve probably never heard of: a diproton, made up of two protons and no neutrons.

The overwhelming majority of the time, the diproton — an incredibly unstable configuration — simply decays back into two protons.

But every rare once-in-a-while, less than 0.01% of the time, this diproton will undergo beta-plus decay, where it emits a positron (the electron’s antiparticle), a neutrino, and where the proton transmutes into a neutron.

While it takes on the average 10 billion years for two protons in the core of the Sun to fuse together into deuterium, it takes only about a second for deuterium to fuse with a proton and become helium-3.

This diproton idea was part of the body of work in stellar nucleosynthesis for which Bethe won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1967.

In a LENR reactor that uses a 1/10 of a gram of fuel to produce the LENR reaction, how can PP fusion be occurring?

If the core of the sun cannot overcome the coulomb barrier, how can hydrogen in a metal lattice produce pp fusion?

Solar observational science has improved greatly in just the last few years. So rethinking about solar nuclear reactions are now in order. Recently through analysis of the solar wind, the magnetic ropes that generate mass coronal ejections generate 10,000 times more He3 than the ambient solar concentration of that helium isotope. And that isotope is transmuted in just an hour or two, even through the temperatures produced in the magnetic ropes are just 10,000,000C. Something is wrong with the solar model that has been generally accepted and is now in place.

Quote from woodworker

maybe you get Michael Cohen

Fair enough. Fortunately I’ve had little need to spend money on lawyers in my life.

(I’m not sure if things work the same in the US, but in the UK there are certain advantages to going it alone in court - eg. One gets a lot of leeway with disclosure rules as it’s assumed (in the lower courts) that your layperson-esque ‘mistakes’ were unintentional...)

Quote from oldguy

I would suggest measure DC into an inverter for the input of what ever device is required - possibly from a battery array - much harder to trick a DC measurement. And pump water from and into a large pool/ or tank and the measure heat rise as a function of time while mixing. Yes there will be loss, but at his claimed COP that should not be a problem. This should be done by setting up, turning on and then leaving the device to run on its own. It should run for over 100 times any known chemical events possible calculated from the device's mass.

If he has on demand, on/off and a robust system, that shouldn't be a problem. If the device does require constant "adjustments" by Rossi then it is not ready for commercialization. Turn it on, stand back and watch for a few days. You can calibrate with an electric pool heater if needed.

In short, heat a "bucket" of water with a battery sourced device for a length of time while the device is left untouched.

Quote from Shane D.

Good news/bad news, over on JONP. Rossi is "trembling" over the latest (good) test results, but nothing will be presented in 2018. For those that think LF won't survive once he is proven right...looks like we have another year at least before the day of reckoning.

Quote from Shane D.

CW,

Who knows? Like you, after Doral, I follow his followers, not him. That said, his one "successful" product...the LT Ecats bundled into 1MW, within a shipping container, which obtained an average COP 83 over a 1 year period, is no longer on the market. Understandably, his customers no longer wanted it, opting instead to wait years more for the QX.

oldguy,

This, (along with myriad other solutions),

has been suggested for years.

Rossi COULD comply,

but will not because he cannot

for reasons obvious to all but a select few that remain at the Rossi altar.

The issue for Rossi and Mills is not about their reactions anymore, but it is about how to extract commercial levels of energy from those reactions. the energy densities generated by plasma based LENR reactions is so high that the old water based energy extraction methods are no longer workable. These plasma based systems need nuclear fission reactor based energy extraction systems like liquid metal energy heat exchangers or turbine electrical generation. Water is no longer viable as a heat exchange medium.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

I'm not surprised. The babblers keep on repeating there is no proof the E-Cat ever worked, so the last thing they want is proof that is impossible to fake that it did.

Alan et al will be having a very hard time identifying the specific nuclear reactions that are occurring in the LFH experiment even though he will have lots of high quality spectrum's of those gammas to look at.