Rossi's product development strategy seems confused. He designed the QX to produce very little energy and limited power density to avoid the power density and reliability issues that had plagued him in this past development. But then the SK come onto the scene and all these power density issues reappeared full blown. This is the reason that I beleive that someone other than Rossi invented the SK, because the SK does not make any business sense if product release is a priority.
-
-
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.
Personally no. One of the world's foremost experts is taking a look.
-
, I know you have been provoked
That's putting it mildly.
Either there is a statement that misquotes me or it is calling me an idiot for not seeing that some piece of ancient history is proof positive Rossi is a fraud and no E-Cat ever worked.
-
Axil, I understand where you are coming from and think that large an increase is power in one step will make things difficult. He was working on a 10 kW version too and must have been encourage by the progress on the SK.
The bottom line is that the XQ is really too small for large industrial use.
-
The bottom line is that the XQ is really too small for large industrial use.
Then, we must be forced to recognize that Rossi must have made a major screw-up where the product he invented does not fulfill the purpose it was designed for.
-
Personally no. One of the world's foremost experts is taking a look.
It is quite possible that the more that an expert understands the current ways and means of the production of radiation, the more confusing that that expert will be when he is confronted by the LFH radiation spectrum's. I would like to be a fly on the wall when those spectrum's are analyzed.
If any element equal to or heaver than iron is transmuted in the LFH experiment, then those reactions would have absorbed energy rather than create energy.
Of course, you'll will not have checked your insulation for transmutations of those heavy elements because you'll would have assumed that those sorts of reactions are impossible.
Your unfounded assumptions will serve to confuse you'll hopelessly, and a touch of quantum entanglement will also add to the fun.
-
Your unfounded assumptions will serve to confuse you'll hopelessly, and a touch of quantum entanglement will also add to the fun.
Yours have confused you already.
-
Yours have confused you already.
We will see...
-
Maybe You have already read about Rossis statement:
Quote....highest echelons....
As long as You consider "P&G" and Nestle to be part of them, I can assure, that he is NOT in contact with those two.
... what a farce this became.... -
We should not forget to mention his crazy business plan to "sell heat" from isolated locked blackbox stations at his customers, that require the full plumbing package, a back-up (!!) heat or steam source, in case the internet is down or hacked , and electric power for his blackbox with the controler of the many little QX sticks. and this for significant lower costs vs the energy from the grid...
I do hope his final echelons are doing their due diligence to not run into trouble with getting back their invested money in all his robots, warehouses, goods, supply chain, service and sales network etc.... -
THHuxley.
You need to talk with some serious Nuclear Scientists, preferably someone who works on the bomb program. They will bring you up to speed on gammas and LENR
We had a great example here of somone measuring, repeatably, 10X higher ionising radiation when their LENR device was on as when it was off.
The solution (suggested by me and later found correct) was that the convection currents caused by the hot reactor were blowing radioactive dust from radon decay into the path of the GC.
This guy was doing his experiments in an unventilated cellar in a house built on radon-heavy granite rocks. Scary.
-
I remember that. Doesn't make any difference though, just means one experimenter made a mistake, and I and my colleagues are well aware of Radon Fleas and how they hop around, we have around 50 years experience collectively of handling radiaoactive substances and measuring instruments. We don't begin to claim we know everything, but we know enough to avoid elementary errors.
-
Celani and other Rossi contemporaries in his early days seem to have failed to require him to run blank calibrations
Celani and other scientists were never in a position to "require" him to do anything, any more than I was. They (and I) made suggestions which he ignored. We all stopped paying attention to him after a while. We started paying attention again when we learned that I.H. was involved.
-
Then, we must be forced to recognize that Rossi must have made a major screw-up where the product he invented does not fulfill the purpose it was designed for.
That is unfair Axil. The QX was developed slowly in the early days working in the dark. There is no accepted theory or design manual to guide in the design. Seems to me that if it works it is quite an achievement.
What Rossi wanted was a reactor that would work reliably for a ling time. He had discovered with the earlier series that they were not reliable and had control problems. Even something as small as that would have a lot of uses. Then as his business plan developed , deciding to sell heat, either he had to mount hundreds of QXs or develop something larger.
-
As long as You consider "P&G" and Nestle to be part of them, I can assure, that he is NOT in contact with those two
It is very unlike that an anonymous blogger would have access to the higher echelons of both those companies, so how do you know?
-
An advantage of having digitized the data from that old January 2011 test is being able to perform cumulative energy in and out calculations, which I attempted out of curiosity, but I don't guarantee that everything is correct (either way, see the attached graph
Can, my eyesight is no longer good enough (macular degeneration) to read the key headings on your graph. Your conclusions would be appreciated.
-
To the mods. Given the importance of the first public demo, and since it has nothing to do with the current comments on Rossi-Blog, I would suggest to move this topic (starting from *can* comment #4849) in a specific new thread devoted to discuss the "January 14, 2011 demo on the Ecat, and other early tests".
Shane and I are happy to leave things as they are. Too many Rossi threads spoil the forum.
-
practice even as much as twice the rated rate when the pump operates with a slightly negative backpressure.
So if the system generated steam under pressure why wouldn't there be a backpressure.
-
Was it under pressure?
-
o if the system generated steam under pressure why wouldn't there be a backpressure
If the steam was condensed.
