Demonstration of the E-Cat QX - 24 November - Summary thread

  • The only thing about tyhe ni

    You can't get away with games like that. You inserted the output of the QX into the equation and pretend ohm's law still applies

    And why not? The "official" evaluator thinks that the power of the 1 ohm resistor is the "input" to the system for calculating "COP" -- and that a resistive network describes the Qx.

    I just used v = i*r (ohm's law) and w = i^2*r (electrical power law)

  • corrected in red.

    not that now it makes more sense but it's what he said.


    From my understanding the control system does not output the same votage/waveform because it does not detect that the QX is in the "on" state after the plasma-generating impulse.

  • Someone I work with told me there is a specific population of people "who believes in their own lies".

    He was considering the possibility on Rossi... Today, we ignore that controversy. He have more useful to prepare. Me, I'm tired. why not just ignore?

    I guess Bruce H. is too modest to re-post his ECW comment from today, s..

    I disagree with this. One of the conclusions surrounding Mr Rossi's activities over the years is that the possibility of him simply misinterpreting his own results has become rather small. Of the 3 possibilities -- he has something, he is deluding himself, he is purposely fooling others -- the middle one has pretty much disappeared leaving the other 2 as the only real considerations.

    ...

  • SOOO?? the only smart guy that downloaded the first release disappeared and deleted his posts??


    Interesting...what happened to Ahlfors btw? Obviously he went back from the end in this thread and carefully deleted all his previous posts, easy to spot based on the time of deletion... ?? Seems he's gone completely quiet...

  • Someone I work with told me there is a specific population of people "who believes in their own lies".

    He was considering the possibility on Rossi... Today, we ignore that controversy. He have more useful to prepare. Me, I'm tired. why not just ignore?


    Not really credible. At least Fabiani seems to know almost equally much about the inner workings of the E-Cat QX control box. Also, what is much much more common (everyone of us affected, both sides of the fence) is cognitive biases and motivation connected to them.

  • Interesting...what happened to Ahlfors btw? Obviously he went back from the end in this thread and carefully deleted all his previous posts, easy to spot based on the time of deletion... ?? Seems he's gone completely quiet...


    Ahlfors got offended that Rends (LENR-Forum admin) amended one of his comments that included a snide remark in Italian, which Google Translate incorrectly translated as an insult, and deleted his previous posts in protest.

  • From my understanding the control system does not output the same votage/waveform because it does not detect that the QX ...

    That’s why the entire idea of a “dummy run” with 0 Ohm and a 800 Ohm resistor is complete nonsense. - It doesn’t proof anything, even when Rossi wouln’t be caught red handed flipping some switches.


    Any electronic hobbyist can build a power supply which checks the type of load on it, and changes it’s mode automatically according to the load.

  • A pity, if the original youtube video of the "conference" with the full audio coverage was lost! This could have been a good source for better understanding what happened in Stockholm, but maybe also another nail to Rossis QX coffin? There is a plan why the first video was removed, edited and re-uploaded, now without audio for most of its parts...

  • A pity, if the original youtube video of the "conference" with the full audio coverage was lost! This could have been a good source for better understanding what happened in Stockholm, but maybe also another nail to Rossis QX coffin? There is a plan why the first video was removed, edited and re-uploaded, now without audio for most of its parts...

    You have seen too much - “Look right here”:


    I’m wondering if Rossi was aware before the demo, that there will not only be a camera in front of the center of the stage capturing the show, but also a fixed camera from the side.

    When Rossi messed with the PUS/Control switch, Fabiani was coincidently covering the scene from the center camera.

  • There were at least 3 cameras, and 2 camera operators. I think AR might have noticed, especially as he paid for them to be there. BTW, I have 200 megs of video - about 10 minutes shot from the front row before I hit battery problems. When I get it downloaded it may prove to be of interest.



  • But, but. but .....................



    according to you One of many demos

    Quote

    Rossi has said that this demo is the first of many to be staged all over the world.

  • Good for you. You actually make a lot of sense here. I guess you simply fell into a cognitive bias trap investing so much time and effort in your position. Hard to quit I guess.


    To draw your unbiased, clear-sighted conclusion about the cognitive bias in my conclusions, we must set aside information acquired from watching Rossi do the same thing over and over in different forms. Usually the way it works is that the more information that one can draw upon, the more informed the conclusions.


    Your flip responses give me the impression that you're here with the specific purpose of debating.

  • No, I said it wasn't proven. Penon is highly educated and said it worked. IH didn't (have) want to pay $900 million. It is possible they thought they could get Rossi's IP, develop it further themselves and postpone the need to pay for a successful test. Who knows?

    Highly educated!?! If Penon believes his report he is a nitwit. If he does not believe it he is a criminal fraud.


    "Who knows" is anyone with an ounce of sense. It is obviously fake.


    You still have not answered my logical question. What could Rossi possibly gain demonstrating a reactor that didn't work.

    I did answer. You don't like my answer, but I answered. Rossi's goal in demonstrating a reactor that does not work is to defraud very foolish people who think it does work. He makes the fraud obvious to sensible people, in order to filter those people out. That leaves only very gullible people. The same technique is used by spam scammers who pretend they are from Nigeria. They are "deliberately implausible." See:


    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec…berately-implausible.html


    https://www.microsoft.com/en-u…ay-they-are-from-nigeria/

  • To draw your unbiased, clear-sighted conclusion about the cognitive bias in my conclusions, we must set aside information acquired from watching Rossi do the same thing over and over in different forms. Usually the way it works is that the more information that one can draw upon, the more informed the conclusions.


    Your flip responses give me the impression that you're here with the specific purpose of debating.


    I did not state my opinion was unbiased. You did. However if you state yours is unbiased I (as I said) don't believe you.


    I suppose the socratic method of dialogue can both be called debating and a path to the finding the truth, don't you agree?

  • Anyways, just to summarize the reported radiant power (since this was getting mixed up here and elsewhere earlier), Rossi says at 2:27:00 or so, that the area of the reactor is 0.6 cm x 0.08 cm * 2 * pi and the temperature of 2036 K (not so well measured perhaps).


    That makes 48.7 W, and the radius of the plasma/reactor to be 0.08 cm, or a diameter of 0.16 cm (1.6 mm)

    (48.971 W if I don't skimp on all the decimal places in the area)


    I eventually gave a look at the indicated time. I think Rossi jumbled because the spectrometer didn't work as he wanted and he was getting irritated:


    Quote

    [2:26:21] [Rossi] So I repeat: once we had obtained with the Wien equation the temperature of 2636 K at this point we go to the Boltzmann equation where watts are equal to sigma * epsilon * T^4 * area, wherein by substitution it becomes 5.67 * 10^-8 that becomes -12 because later we will consider the area in square centimeters and not in square meters; * 1, that is the epsilon, is the emissivity; * 2036^4 becomes 4.8 *10^13 and then * the area of the reactor that is 0.08 * 2 * Pi * 0.6. Believe me: the final result will be about… between 70-71 watts, which is higher than the energy that has been calculated by calorimetry, but this is obvious because in the case of the spectrometer we go to see the real energy and 100% of the real energy that is inside the plasma, while here with calorimetry we have only, we have been able to measure only the thermal energy that has been exchanged between the reactor and the heat exchanger, so the heat passed from the plasma through the wall of the heat exchanger through the water and then we had obviously have losses here etc etc, so the efficiency of the calorimeter is enormously minor than the energy measured directly by spectrometry, but in any case even with a high efficiency heat exchanger it is impossible to reach an efficiency equal to the… to get all the energy that is inside the plasma.

    [2:29:05] [Rossi] Sorry for the very approximative… I just wanted to try to do something but unfortunately we did not have the dark and so we did not have a spectrometry. I have described to you what I have discovered. That anyway does not affect in any measure the calorimetry that we made before. Well.


    Compare with this from earlier on (which was consistent with what he said in Italian with Lewan in the lost audio section):




    But maybe he's not measuring just the area of the plasma?

  • I did not deal in absolutes. I said it is in the industrial partner interest to keep an information advantage as long as possible. I believe that argument makes sense, don't you?

    No, it does not make a nanogram of sense, and the strategy could not work, in any case. Thousands of people, including me, know more about cold fusion than any "industrial partner" would. If Rossi's results were even partially credible, we would know. I know about the other attempts to do Ni cold fusion. Keeping this secret would be like trying to keep a project to develop self-driving cars secret. Everyone who knows about that technology knows who is developing it and what they have accomplished.


    Cold fusion is still at the level of fundamental physics research. You cannot develop that sort of thing in secret. If it ever starts to become practically useful, I along with hundreds of other people will hear about that within weeks. Who do you think these "industrial partners" would turn to for expertise? Who knows about this subject other than the people who have been working on it all these years? They are academic scientists. They do not keep secrets. Why do you think they gather at ICCF conferences for, other than to trade information?

  • I did not state my opinion was unbiased. You did. However if you state yours is unbiased I (as I said) don't believe you.


    My stating that your conclusion was unbiased and clear-sighted was a subtle way of highlighting that it might not be unbiased or clear-sighted. I will admit to my biases; but biases informed by long experience are different from biases informed by other things.


    I suppose the socratic method of dialogue can both be called debating and a path to the finding the truth, don't you agree?


    The socratic method is indeed a good path to truth. What you're doing doesn't really feel like the socratic method. You're selectively replying to secondary details while omitting to rebut or acknowledge primary points that are made. Finding any little thing to quibble with is something different than the socratic method.


    My apologies to the thread for letting this get so meta.

  • *Have you never heard of a steam meter?

    Or sparging, which costs nothing. As far as I can tell from Penon's schematic, there was no valve to vent the stream (or hot water) from Doral setup, so you couldn't even do that.


    The only place in the loop you could see the water was in the translucent reservoir tank it flowed back into. It was liquid water by the time it reached that stage. Given the temperature of the fluid between the reactor and the radiator, I think it must have been liquid everywhere in the circuit, but there was never any way to confirm that. Ridiculous!

  • Exactly. Due to the measuring method, it can't be known whether it was 100% steam or 100% liquid. Entirely useless, and a total waste of time. And obviously so, too - That's what annoys me the most.


    But fitting one of the many types of steam meter to a pipe has to be easier (and less dangerous) than sparging that much alledged steam!

  • What are you talking about? I believe everyone agrees that one of the goals for the demo was Rossi showing the tech and getting in touch with potential investors and/or industrial partners, right? And don't you agree that a potential industrial partner would value some information advantage? And do you agree that in order for an industrial partner to build a factory with Rossi it is reasonable to assume they will certify that the technology works as claimed?


    I believe everyone agrees that one of the goals for the demo was Rossi showing the tech

    He did not show the tech in any meaningful sense since what he showed did not have input power measured and could therefore have been anything. Actually what he did is what he is good at, creating a lot of internet interest.


    And don't you agree that a potential industrial partner would value some information advantage?

    I don't know what you mean by that in this case. How does a demo that shows nothing give anyone an information advantage? Rossi pretended he measured the input power, and generated pretend COP. So presumably that info is OK. So why not measure input properly. At such high COP as Rossi claims it is completely irrelevant whether 20, 100, or 1000 for purposes of industrial usage. What Rossi has obscured is the information about whether his stuff works or not. Is that what you meant? Because I think an investor would normally be Ok with public disclosure that the technology they invested in was real.


    And do you agree that in order for an industrial partner to build a factory with Rossi it is reasonable to assume they will certify that the technology works as claimed?

    Only if they are (a) existent (b) reputable and (c) not foolish. These qualifications are needed because so far all of of Rossi's partners have been non-existent (see court info), not reputable (Defkalion), or foolish (IH).

  • But fitting one of the many types of steam meter to a pipe has to be easier (and less dangerous) than sparging that much alledged steam!

    Yes, of course.


    I believe there was a gadget to separate steam from water, but Rossi removed it.


    I think a a valve of some sort is often included in a large industrial boiler. I have seen one in a Hydrodynamics gadget installation. I do not mean a valve that would vent all of the fluid (steam or water). That would be extremely dangerous! I mean a heavy hose attached to the outlet pipe with a spring loaded valve that looks like an oversized garden hose sprayer. You squeeze the handle and steam comes shooting out. Not all of the steam from the whole pipe! Just a sample, to check the steam quality.


    If there had been something like this in the Doral circuit, I expect a stream of hot water would have come out, instead of steam.


  • I guess we do not FEEL the same then, but 'll settle on it depending on different biases.

  • Exactly. Due to the measuring method, it can't be known whether it was 100% steam or 100% liquid. Entirely useless, and a total waste of time. And obviously so, too - That's what annoys me the most.


    But fitting one of the many types of steam meter to a pipe has to be easier (and less dangerous) than sparging that much alledged steam!


    Barry West was debriefed by Murray in July 2015 while the 1-year test was ongoing. In a memo he wrote following the debriefing, Murray said "It was indicated that there was a steam flow sensor installed in the system by Dr. Penon. This sensor was located in the steam line between the source and the sink but the device "burned out" at some point and therefore no mass or volume flow is readily available". (235-11 page 32).


    Source and sink refer to the ECat plant and the JMP plant, respectively.


    Other things burnt out at the Doral plant too. By the beginning of the official 1-year test on Feb 23 2015, the configuration of the ECat plant that Penon had visited only days before had radically altered due to burnouts. I assume that steam flow sensor was one of the casualties.


    The final item in Murray's memo reads in part "BW noted that Dr. Rossi and Dr. Penon have heated arguments in Italian when he is present at the facility."*.


    I'll bet!


    * "BW" is Barry West.


  • I interpret that as more or less an agreement although with some caveats? We can argue what the word "show" means etc but basically I base my assumptions on the fact that there were several potential investors and partners present at the demo.

  • Barry West was debriefed by Murray in July 2015 while the 1-year test was ongoing. In a memo he wrote following the debriefing, Murray said "It was indicated that there was a steam flow sensor installed in the system by Dr. Penon. This sensor was located in the steam line between the source and the sink but the device "burned out" at some point and therefore no mass or volume flow is readily available"

    Cheers Bruce, I hadn't known that. Perhaps Penon does deserve some credit.


    One does wonder how it's possible to "burn out" a steam meter though. All I know is that most would stop working when flooded with excessive amounts of water...

  • Well then, if we go back to mm from cm the output is miniscule.

    The majority of the math he used is straight from the Gullstrom-Rossi report, including the conversion of the Stefan-Boltzmann equation to suit cm2 instead of m2.


    And then we have a few orders of magnitude problem with the fluid heating demonstration. Perhaps his reactors simply prefer to heat liquids uber alles.

  • ... in a brief short: What were the results of Rossi's presentation ?


    - He was telling us, that the e-cat can generate heat.

    - He was telling us, that the e-cat can generate energy.

    - He was telling us, that the e-cat can generate thrust.

    - He was telling us, that the quartk-x presentation last year could not be made, because of a failure, which they appearently fixed immediately

    - He was telling us, that they want to improve COP / efficiency.

    - He was telling us, sigma5 is reached


    ... and now ?


    => Water heated from 20 to 40 degrees ? Not much of a "efficiency", if this his way to "improve efficiency".

    => A pump was given to Mats, so he can check, if the water was not fake-heated by another device inside the pump ?

    => A controller, which shall control "overheating", consumes quite a lot of power to control the quark-x.


    => Is there anything, that seems to allow the conclusion, that something seems to work as stated by this Rossi ?


    Besides the name "quark-x", which tends to indicate, that the guy wants to use high-fashion-scifi-stuff to make his device sound like "wow"...

    what do we have now ?


    ... at least there was not another cancellation/delay, and, that is quite surprising.


    But what do we really now know ?