Fabiani COP vs ERV COP
There is a good agreement apart some points around 99. For being conservative I would consider always the lower of the two.
Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]
- barty
- Closed
-
-
And the Swedish professors ? And Volvo ? I presume that you are also selecting people.....
The Swedish professors clammed up tighter than a hedgehog ever since the first substantive critiques of their methodology appeared - unable to defend their contribution to this story. So I cannot evaluate their level of trust in Rossi.
Volvo? I did not know that car companies had beliefs.
Quoteif a person trust Rossi he is not capable to process information according to you.
That is correct: have you looked at the Court documents?
-
Is it just me or does it seem strange---- If Rossi really had and did what he claimed and if he was going to attack a multimillion dollar company, that he would do things like:
...
More than that, one things that Rossi could do is organize a test that works, following advise of IH, and if it works (and if he have a real technology, even having exaggerated and committed fraud, it will) he will be forgiven.
This is where I dumped any Defkalion support, when they refused to answer the questions of Luca Gamberale.
Luca, Jed, Smith, may be wrong in analysing data, but sure Rossi or Defkalion could have cleared the doubts.
Given the stakes, I have no doubt they simply have nothing to answer.
It is sad, but this is as real as F&P excess heat.
-
Even if the case went to trial tomorrow and Rossi wins, the appeals process could go on for years. This won't just be over and be back to business as usual. Expect more, longer delays in either scenario , Rossi wins or loses.
kenko1
-
More than that, one things that Rossi could do is organize a test that works, following advise of IH, and if it works (and if he have a real technology, even having exaggerated and committed fraud, it will) he will be forgiven.
This is where I dumped any Defkalion support, when they refused to answer the questions of Luca Gamberale.
Luca, Jed, Smith, may be wrong in analysing data, but sure Rossi or Defkalion could have cleared the doubts.
Of course, we all know that pseudo-skeptics are 100% honest and are always satisfied by answers and tests protocols. They never move goalposts nor ask for the same thing a thousand times in a thousand different ways, so it's really surprising the Lugano scientists don't want to address Calorimetry Internet Savants. I mean, why would anyone refuse to debate with people who never use the hypercritical method to try and debunk whatever does not float their boat?
-
Aha very smart. This test was run by Rossi because the reactor was his own and he was the only person really able to run it.
IH had make profit from that test rising million of dollars from investors.
If you say that only he could run it, then you must admit that he did not transfer the IP as he was required to.
-
I'm going to wager that the "pseudoskeptics" aren't even following the Rossi story closely anymore, given how incredible it's become. What we're seeing now are genuine skeptics and longtime LENR folks watching the story in disbelief. I've seen nary a peep from the committed, hardcore debunkers for weeks.
-
For the remaining Rossi believers, it seems as if being a "pseudoskeptic" is defined by how many impossible facts, outright lies, or logical fallacies one is willing to totally ignore. If the answer is less than all of them, apparently you are a pseudoskeptic. The remaining Rossi believers are people who can only see the tiny islets of reality floating in a giant ocean of fiction. Special folks they are.
-
But if you want to convince me that the return condensate pipe was connected to the steam riser, I'll need to see a photograph.
I am sure the I.H. lawyers realize that rigorous photographic proof is needed. They are not going to risk the loss $267 million dollars because they did not bother to take some photos!
But you should read what you just wrote, and think for a moment. Why are you convinced that Rossi put a condenser in the mezzanine? Why do you consider that even possible? He has not given you any photos. In fact, all of the photos you have seen show nothing like that. No pipes going up. No sign that any equipment was installed in the mezzanine. Why do you believe Rossi without proof, while you demand similar proof from I.H.?
-
so it's really surprising the Lugano scientists don't want to address Calorimetry Internet Savants.
Would those people include Mike McKubre? One of the questions the Lugano scientists did not address was from me. It was: What color was the reactor incandescent glow? Red, or white? Are you saying this question was too difficult to address, or too obscure, or that the color makes no difference?
You seem to making excuses for sloppy research.
-
-
Meaning, it is probably real.
While you can't actually prove a negative, beyond a reasonable doubt, the F&P apparent excess heat was not real.
-
No sign that any equipment was installed in the mezzanine. Why do you believe Rossi without proof, while you demand similar proof from I.H.?
We have far more evidence that the heat exchanger was likely in the mezzanine than we do that the return condensate pipe was connected to the steam riser. For example, we have the photograph that Smith included in his report (you know, the one where he drew big bold red arrows to all sorts of things except the two missing panes in the window). Seems Smith is okay with misdirection. Then we have Smith's image grab from a video, which he uses as "proof" that no steam pipe was going up to the mezzanine, even though the view of the bottom of the doorway is conveniently obstructed by the wall. We have what is apparently Smith's two "halves" of the innards of the JMP container, conveniently leaving out the bypass piping, to which Rossi kept referring to in his deposition. Smith fit together the two "halves" as if they went together, but there is clearly something missing in-between. Why would he do that?
We have a photograph of the threshold of the door showing a distinct and abrupt clean area about the size of a steam pipe. We have what looks to be a filled in hole in the floor of the mezzanine. There appears to be markings on the floor of the mezzanine that would correspond to a large box resting on the floor. We have Rossi's testimony that there is an accounting of the purchases made from Home Depot and elsewhere. Sure, we haven't seen those, or a direct photograph of the heat exchanger, but as we previously agreed: there is likely much evidence we haven't seen, and may never get to see.
-
There is a good agreement apart some points around 99. For being conservative I would consider always the lower of the two.
When the two lines disagree by more than just a little, it is because the L water used for calculations is very different. (The small differences between lines are accounted for by tank temperature differences.)
How or why would two people read the water meter thousands of L different for the same day?
-
It is sad, but this is as real as F&P excess heat.
Just for clarification, are you stating that you do not believe F&P ever detected excess heat in any of their tests?
I am not desiring to start a discussion on F&P, I just wanted to insure I understood you statement correctly.
Thanks!
-
Even if the case went to trial tomorrow and Rossi wins, the appeals process could go on for years. This won't just be over and be back to business as usual. Expect more, longer delays in either scenario , Rossi wins or loses.
kenko1
Oh dear, Rossi has put the Ecat and QuarkX on hold while the legal process, that he kicked off, is running.
So looks like no Ecat or QuarkX for many years till all the appeals processes complete.
Maybe Rossi wins either way.
He doesn't have to produce the QuarkX and gets to blame IH.
-
....we have the photograph that Smith included in his report (you know, the one where he drew big bold red arrows to all sorts of things except the two missing panes in the window). Seems Smith is okay with misdirection........
a. Why on earth would he neglect to draw arrows to missing panes ?
b. I also notice in the outside photos, that he neglected to draw an arrow
to the planet Nibiru in the sky.
c. And that there are no arrows to the herd of pink unicorns in the parking lot.
The factual answer to a. is the same answer for b. and c.
Pete
-
There is not much new facts anymore to dig from court documents. Re-circling around pipe diameter (it was first claimed to be 5" , remember), pressure and window frame paints and reflections, marks on the floor etc. is waste of time at this point. There is no clear evidence did Rossis container produce extra heat or not no matter how much we dig photo details and stains on floor.
What instead has been shown plain clear in documents is that:
-Ross become suspicious on IH:s agenda, and is now proven, for a good reason.-IH was trying to rule LENR markets by trying to capture all relevant LENR IPR. IH business plan is so revealing and clear on this.
-Funding rest of the researchers they tried to control how LENR comes to market - if ever. (any research community members want to speak up?)
-It become as big surprise to IH that Mr Rossi choose rather to fall with IH in court than let them steal and control the LENR market. For example mr Weaver learnd about problems just late February just before IH published their press release. Until that he was going full ahead on expanding IH:s smelly reach.
-Hiring israeli partners to do the dirty work to invalidate test report by seemingly unethical means - no matter was court sealing the doc or not. The proof is there in black on white,
- Mr Weaver sending very nasty mail to Swedish professors should be glowing warning sign for any current and future business partners to stay far away from any IH-initiatives. I'm very delighted to see that Swedish companies are much more far sighting.-Not signing amendment paper is just lawyer juggling and spells out loud and clear real IH skin.
-Big resources of Planet IH here is repeatedly and consistently redirecting discussion to some irrelevant details every time some one tries to touch some relevant subject. That is so clear pattern that this thread is very fruitful source for lots of manipulation studies to come. (see what happens quickly after this posting)- Have you ever wondered that IH was not willing to arrange test customers.
-Have you ever wondered why IH is not willing to give back the license if they think that Rossis conainer is expensive water boiler with COP of 1.
Disclaimer: No I don't believe Rossi had anything produced in 'customer' container nor that ERV would be reliable, but I'm thankful for him to reveal true colors of IH:s LENR job. Someone will it as viable technology and LENR now escapes from IH:s hands - for the better of us all.
PS. Just wish me356 has taken a good read on this case and keep cool and stay far away of such business partners.
-
(you know, the one where he drew big bold red arrows to all sorts of things except the two missing panes in the window).
You and your star child are the only ones who see that in the photo! I am sure that if the panes were missing, Smith would have said so. I am sure that if there had been massive fans and ducts in that window, someone would have noticed.
I should add that two panes would not be enough. The whole window is not enough; it is much smaller than the fans used to cool 1 MW heat sources. If you set up one of these fans, it would immediately blow out the other two panes. Also, you have to separate the inlet and outlet air sources.
-
You and your star child are the only ones who see that in the photo! I am sure that if the panes were missing, Smith would have said so. I am sure that if there had been massive fans and ducts in that window, someone would have noticed.
I should add that two panes would not be enough. The whole window is not enough; it is much smaller than the fans used to cool 1 MW heat sources. If you set up one of these fans, it would immediately blow out the other two panes. Also, you have to separate the inlet and outlet air sources.
Jed, this type of argument is not my favourite. Unsubstantiated. You can try to substantiate it and in doing so make a more precise point, but maybe not what you say above. I'm going to do it for the fans Rossi claims he used (which could not cool 1MW with the Rossi piping - but that is a separate argument).
14m^3/s from the two fans (50,000 m^3/hour). And BTW this gives you only 100kW cooling - a factor of 10 adrift.
We need to estimate the size of one of those two window panes - shall we say 70cm X 70cm? That would make the whole window 1.4m X 1.4m. Maybe somone could get a better estimate from some of the photos? This scales all the calculations below, so it is quite critical.
For exhaust through one pane, and inlet through the other, We can have ducting as required. But the air speed through the pane frame will be v = 14m^3/s / 0.5m^2 = 28m/s
That is high, but not impossibly high. With ducting it would work. Jed's intuition is sort of right. A 70cmX70cm window with 60mph wind blowing through it is a pretty big airflow! Very noticeable. Ans anyway Jed was referring to what would actually dissipate 1MW given Rossi's rubbish heat exchanger, much more than this.
One way to see how much force it puts on the structure is to look at the power required to accelerate air to that speed at that flow rate. We measure flow rate as mass/s and state it as Qm = 16kg/s or volume flow Qv = 14m^3/s.
Power = deltaP * Qv
deltaP = dynamic pressure change required to accelerate air = v^2 * rho / 2 (where rho is the density of air 1.2kg/m^3)
where v = air velocity 28m/s in our case.
so deltaP = 500 Pascals (0.005 bar)
And the fan output power is then 7kW, or electrical input of 14kW assuming 50% total (mechanical + electrical) fan efficiency.
The actual power needed will be higher due to ducting losses. We know there must be ducting because Rossi replaces the glass of the window pain (presumably removing the ducting) when the google cameras come by.
That electrical power is too high to be possible most of the time given the FPL data and Penon supply data. So this is not possible, unless Rossi had an additional unknown electricity supply. But I don't think we have any evidence that flow rate would blow out a window pane if properly ducted, though maybe the fans needed to blow the air through the window opening would use too much power.
