​New E-Cat QX Picture and New Rossi-Gullstrom Paper (Very high COP reported with Calorimetry)​


  • Unusual (High energetic) beta-decay is not my conjecture. My conjecture was direct conversion of energy to mesons through hadronization.


    Search the posts on this site for posts by me using the keyword hadronization for an extensive overview of that process.

  • Holmlid is high energy physics! on a small space.


    Disregarding that he's using nanosecond pulse lasers of specifications not too different than those of the lasers used for example for tattoo removal, in his lapsed patent application he's suggested that other kinds of irradiation or impulses, as long as they have sufficiently energy, can trigger the effects he's observing. If still this is high energy physics, many other LENR claims are high energy physics too.


    https://www.google.com/patents/EP2680271A1?cl=en


    Quote

    When the carrier 3 has reached the irradiation location 9, the ultradense hydrogen H(-1) at the fuel collection portion 16 of the carrier 3 is irradiated in step 103. The ultra-dense hydrogen may be irradiated using, for example, a laser beam provided by the laser 7, but other types of irradiation may be used instead of laser irradiation. For example, the ultra-dense hydrogen may be irradiated using one or several ion beams or X-ray beams. To reach break-even, the irradiation should have sufficient energy.

  • That's the thing Para. The assertions you guys make are always based on faulty assumptions. Like, for example, that Rossi would insert the thermocouple into the center of the reacting fuel. This would make another great bet on the Augur prediction market: Did Rossi insert the thermocouple into the center of the plasma reaction of the QuarkX. Would you take that bet with me?


    IHFB


    That's the thing IHFB, the assertions you make are usually based on faulty assumptions. In this case the surface temperature of the reactor was higher than MP of the thermocouples. The control thermocouple for the Lugano device was embedded in the reactor - which bit does not matter. As P has pointed out the reactor design was clever with pretty constant temperature across the reactor body.

  • Disregarding that he's using nanosecond pulse lasers of specifications not too different than those of the lasers used for example for tattoo removal, in his lapsed patent application he's suggested that other kinds of irradiation or impulses, as long as they have sufficiently energy, can trigger the effects he's observing.


    can : Holmlid additionally uses a focussing lens to concentrate the light on a very small spot (some square microns) . Usually an electron absorbing a photon is more or less immediately releasing it again, based on the transition rate formula - proportional to the power/energy - of the state.

    The amount of photons sent to the area under discussion is much larger than the electrons that can consume it, which results in an unnatural saturated state. The physics of such an excited state must be strange, because in a coupled system it should be forbidden to multiply populate the same orbits(m,l,s).


    The only guess I can made is, that the overloaded orbits cannot deliver the excess energy to a neighbor electron and thus the orbit degenerates to a cyclotron like pattern commonly associated with a higher J quantum number. This could explain, that the energy finally couples with the nucleus, that causes the seen reaction results.

  • That's the thing Para. The assertions you guys make are always based on faulty assumptions. Like, for example, that Rossi would insert the thermocouple into the center of the reacting fuel. This would make another great bet on the Augur prediction market: Did Rossi insert the thermocouple into the center of the plasma reaction of the QuarkX. Would you take that bet with me?

    The thermocouple was stuck into the fuel hole, in the center of a device which supposedly had a 1410 C surface (where convection and radiation is cooling the device). That is already hotter than a thin wire type K TC can take. Now how hot was the inside of that device, especially near where fuel was poured in, if the outside was 1410 C ?


    Funny thing is, since there is no convection possible inside the potting and alumina tube construction of device, a purely radiating cylinder of the diameter of the inside area in question is a good approximation of the internal temperature.

  • IHFB


    That's the thing IHFB, the assertions you make are usually based on faulty assumptions. In this case the surface temperature of the reactor was higher than MP of the thermocouples. The control thermocouple for the Lugano device was embedded in the reactor - which bit does not matter. As P has pointed out the reactor design was clever with pretty constant temperature across the reactor body.

    Good. It looks like I have a candidate to take the other side of this wager with then.

  • The thermocouple was stuck into the fuel hole, in the center of a device which supposedly had a 1410 C surface (where convection and radiation is cooling the device). That is already hotter than a thin wire type K TC can take. Now how hot was the inside of that device, especially near where fuel was poured in, if the outside was 1410 C ?


    Funny thing is, since there is no convection possible inside the potting and alumina tube construction of device, a purely radiating cylinder of the diameter of the inside area in question is a good approximation of the internal temperature.

    I said the QuarkX, not the Lugano device. We don't know how the thermocouple was embedded, insulated, positioned, or with what it was in contact with, within the Lugano device. You're speculating. The innards of the Lugano device were never revealed.

  • I said the QuarkX, not the Lugano device. We don't know how the thermocouple was embedded, insulated, positioned, or with what it was in contact with, within the Lugano device. You're speculating. The innards of the Lugano device were never revealed.

    And I was talking about the Lugano device.


    The innards are exposed in the Patent application, from which I made a scale drawing in CAD years ago. Since the original images were from photos, the entire ensemble can be re-assembled, once digitized, and they all fit together like a glove without re-scaling any individual part.

  • Good. It looks like I have a candidate to take the other side of this wager with then.


    I've earnt a few $1000 from internet wagers and will happily do them, with an honourable counterpart, but I will need decent odds, otherwise the hassle is not worth it. It can take a while to work out fair and agreed arbitration terms.


    If, for example, all your advocacy here is to argue for something you believe only 10% likely, and hence gives 20:1 odds on, it is hardly an incentive for anyone else unless the terms can be made very clear-cut. Even then it is tying up $20,000 for several years for a $1000 return. So I'd not take part in long odds bets. I'd also want to be sure that losing would not harm my opponent (and would not bet if losing harmed me). That way the matter can be conducted in a sporting way.


    Still, from your strong arguments here I'd expect you had a much higher confidence in something that can be reliably measured? I'll happily make a wide varietyof bets at even odds and maybe go up to 5 : 1.

  • And I was talking about the Lugano device.


    The innards are exposed in the Patent application, from which I made a scale drawing in CAD years ago. Since the original images were from photos, the entire ensemble can be re-assembled, once digitized, and they all fit together like a glove without re-scaling any individual part.

    I went back and took a look at the patent application, and you are right, there are some diagrams of the innards, so I retract that. My memory was of the Lugano report itself, which just had the exterior photographs.


    Having admitted that, the patent application states that: "A thermocouple inserted into one of the caps allows the control system to manage power supply to the resistors by [indirectly] measuring the internal temperature of the reactor." (emphasis added; clarification in brackets added.) And as we know, the end caps were of a lower temperature than the reactor.


    Table 6:



    So, once again, Para/THH FUD debunked.

  • Quote

    If, for example, all your advocacy here is to argue for something you believe only 10% likely, and hence gives 20:1 odds on, it is hardly an incentive for anyone else unless the terms can be made very clear-cut. Even then it is tying up $20,000 for several years for a $1000 return. So I'd not take part in long odds bets. I'd also want to be sure that losing would not harm my opponent (and would not bet if losing harmed me). That way the matter can be conducted in a sporting way.

    Yup. My view also. No long odds bets even though I am sure the real odds against Rossi are astronomical.

  • Well, not exactly, Allan. If you are sure Rossi has the goods, I will bet you at even odds that he will not have a product featuring ecat energy production that I can buy from a commercial concern within as many years as you like and the bet can be as big as you like within some reasonable limit. The above would have to be refined to be sure it didn't rely on a third party opinion (what idiotic abbreviation did Rossi use for his supposed referee?). Also that it couldn't include someone selling a kit or model which didn't work and was maybe for "training purposes" or for use as a prop. Woodworker or another attorney could help with the wording. WW seems very good at that sort of thing. So how about it? Start with $10K, you and me perhaps?

  • No, IHFB. I just don't want to lose money because someone can weasel. The wording should make it clear that if Rossi is selling a useful ecat product that people really want, and which gets energy in a clearly anomalous way, I lose the bet. What more would you want?

  • It uses 'THE FORCE' geez Shane D. duh.


    Here is my question, does he design his stuff after coming up with a way make the foolery more plausible? Or does he make something and then spends his time on how to fool it for the verifiers ? There is method somewhere, I think.

  • Mary, I can get better odds than you offer for betting on an Asteroid Strike or DT starting a Nuclear War. And with people who use their real names. You are just grandstanding, as usual. Spend your $10k on some LENR education.

  • Mary, I can get better odds than you offer for betting on an Asteroid Strike or DT starting a Nuclear War. And with people who use their real names. You are just grandstanding, as usual. Spend your $10k on some LENR education.

    Alan I am legitimately puzzled and curious. I honestly cannot figure MY's motivation here. If it were not for the fact that I've seen posts here which seem to credit him/her with at least some scientific credentials I would have written him/her off months ago as a paid astroturfer. If not, then Rossi must have done something exceptionally personal and especially agregious to him/her at sometime in the past, for him/her to hate him so much. The only other person here who even comes close is Jed Rothwell and I at least know who he is.

  • Quote

    Mary, I can get better odds than you offer for betting on an Asteroid Strike or DT starting a Nuclear War. And with people who use their real names. You are just grandstanding, as usual. Spend your $10k on some LENR education.

    Alan I am legitimately puzzled and curious. I honestly cannot figure MY's motivation here. If it were not for the fact that I've seen posts here which seem to credit him/her with at least some scientific credentials I would have written him/her off months ago as a paid astroturfer. If not, then Rossi must have done something exceptionally personal and especially agregious to him/her at sometime in the past, for him/her to hate him so much. The only other person here who even comes close is Jed Rothwell and I at least know who he is.


    Believers think if they know "who someone is", somehow, magically, their critiques will be disarmed. That is really weird. As far as Allan is concerned, I might contact him as myself if he made a large bet... or there are sites that allow the betting to be anonymous, My motivation (with Sniffex, Defkalion, Steorn and now Rossi) is that I hate frauds. I especially hate and am equipped to deal with high tech energy frauds and detection frauds. Frauds take time, money and other resources from legitimate researchers who actually make a contribution. Criminals, like Rossi, who do this are every bit the same as financial criminals like Bernard Madoff. Rossi is on more of a pissant scale but he still did significant harm to LENR research funding and he probably made it less likely that any young people will consider the field worth studying.


    I don't hate Rossi personally-- I never met him and don't know him. I hate what he did and what he does. He's a sociopath and there is little to like about sociopaths.


    "Paid astroturfer"? I wish! I wish someone paid me for my insights about fraud in scientific and tech research and claims. That statement, BTW, is classical believer paranoid bullsh*t. It makes people saying it sound like those who promote psychic mediums who talk to the dead and similar riffraff. Those people rip off grieving folks. Rossi rips off legitimate research. Nothing much to like there.


    BTW, rionrlty, how do you feel about Defkalion now? How did you feel about it way back in 2011, when I also called them out as frauds? And if you know about Steorn and Sniffex and Papp for that matter, still believe those crooks and nuts?