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

  • TTM - plan on being among the last too know. One of the nice things about light speed is that comes with a clear rearview mirror.


    hahaha. But it is a bit hard to look outside when travelling at that ludicrous speed ;)



    I think u are confused about the special properties of spacetime when approaching c.


    But interesting what you say about the EVO trace images you have...

  • I don't know why Rossi agreed to give over all of his past, current, and future IP. All I can guess is that for some reason or another he was desparate.


    You are assuming that Rossi's machines can actually produce excess heat. If they are useless, though, the thing explains itself. IH was offering money for useless information. Any contract is good under those conditions

  • TTM - glad to have some more background on your information sources. Makes perfect sense. The EVO images are very interesting and closely match some of the patterns from the published KS research.


    Jed - We were not able to confirm XH in any of the Mizuno reactors tested including ones that we separately instrumented and measured along beside his

    instrumentation / DA set. The 3-8C daily swing in ambient at his lab and airbox solution didn't help. As I'm sure you know, he still has the 50kg reactor running and continues to pursue a breakthrough. We may have made measure mistakes but chances of that are small.


    Having said that, I believe that Dr Mizuno has created / replicated more XH reactions than almost any other researcher - he has to have assembled and run 9+ different reactions in his 28 years of research. I'm confident that at least 3 produced substantial XH way above background of those that I was made aware. He is a good man and being a lone samurai researcher all these years has not been good or helpful in his quest for commercial grade XH.

  • Having said that, I believe that Dr Mizuno has created / replicated more XH reactions than almost any other researcher - he has to have assembled and run 9+ different reactions in his 28 years of research. I'm confident that at least 3 produced substantial XH way above background of those that I was made aware.


    Just to be fair to SRI, I believe they were commissioned by the Navy to test others LENR work. 11 tested and 5 confirmed, or something like that.

  • we_cat_global

    Quote

    We'll see. It seems to me that Rossi is again working on something we can soon bicker about. You probably will be one of the first to start criticizing him. I am looking forward to, while i am reading your posts, envision a motivated older guy with a negative grin, hammering at his keyboard, trying to save the world from Andrea Rossi.


    I am curious, Cat. What has Rossi actually done, as opposed to only saying he has done or will do, which impresses you the most?

  • Quote

    Selected from an old Guardian UK newspaper article... (followed by a list of old bad research and frauds)


    Honest question, not nitpicking... what are you saying here? How does this relate to the problem that mainline science does not take LENR seriously?


    JedRothwell

    Your point that it is sometimes difficult to convince mainline science of new concepts is well taken. In the case of LENR, though, it seems that an experiment that is so obvious and so clear as to convince scientists may still be unavailable. Consider for example, if Rossi had been able to provide IH with a clearly working ecat reactor of some sort which made lots of excess heat in their own testing. Do you think they would have rejected their own findings? Isn't it more likely that they would have paid Rossi in accord with their contract and then gone on to develop LENR products or at least convincing prototypes, based on Rossi's tech?


    What if not Rossi but someone else? IH seems to have an open mind about LENR investing.


    What if Bill Gates (or someone from Musk, Bezos or Google) had been shown a powerful heat source from LENR ? Would he not have invested vast sums to develop and patent it? People like that have few preconceptions about technology. They know better from their own experiences with innovation. Maybe the existing demonstrations are not all that convincing?


    I was remembering this, in 2014. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/…taly-that-bill-gates.html It was a projected billion dollar investment. If it had happened, we'd probably know. If it did not happen, why not?

  • snoopy,


    This is Rossi's answers from JONP the last few days. Pretty obvious he is gearing up for "something we can soon bicker about":


    -Thank you for your hypothesis,

    -Thank you for your attention to our work!

    -I am under NDA about this issue and I cannot answer in positive or in negative.

    -Yes.

    -Thank you for your interesting insight

    -This is confidential

    -Of course! In China there is one billion People that need to heat up with a cheap and environmentally friendly thermal energy: the Ecat is exactly the product that fits their needs.

    -We have already chosen the Robots of ABB, but not yet programmed them.

    -So far we have been a boat, now we must become a carrier. At least, it is what we are thinking of.

  • Your point that it is sometimes difficult to convince mainline science of new concepts is well taken. In the case of LENR, though, it seems that an experiment that is so obvious and so clear as to convince scientists may still be unavailable.

    I think there have been many experiments so obvious and clear that if this were any other scientific claim everyone would agree it is real. For example, I would cite McKubre's excess heat and the tritium results from Bockris and Will:


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHisothermala.pdf


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ChienCConanelectr.pdf


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/WillFGtritiumgen.pdf


    There are many others.


    No one has found any errors in this work and I do not think anyone could find any. The results are far above background and they have been repeated hundreds of times.


    What if Bill Gates (or someone from Musk, Bezos or Google) had been shown a powerful heat source from LENR ? Would he not have invested vast sums to develop and patent it?

    He has been shown moderate heat at Frascati and he is investing moderate amounts. (Moderate by his standards.)


    Many people -- including some scientists who ought to know better -- have said that the results are not convincing because they are not on a large scale. People think that if Rossi's claims of kilowatt level reactions were real that would be more convincing than, say, 3 W shown by McKubre. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of experiments and the history of science. The first heat detected from radioactive materials by the Curies was a fraction of a watt. However it continued far beyond the limits of chemistry, so it was completely convincing. The first nuclear reactor at the University of Chicago produced roughly 1 W but no one had the slightest doubt that it was a nuclear reaction. Granted it also produced gamma rays so it was easy to detect. On the other hand, excess heat and tritium are easy to detect, and tritium has ranged from 50 times background to roughly 10E16 background, so there really is no question it is real. Skeptics have attempted to explain it away by pointing to things like concentration, but these hypotheses make no sense.

  • Honest question, not nitpicking... what are you saying here? How does this relate to the problem that mainline science does not take LENR seriously?


    It relates to various comments in this thread suggesting that mainstream science was always able to apply critical thinking to its own work, and to accept the possibility of fundamental errors. You got to admit there are some pretty big bloopers there.

  • we_cat_global


    I am curious, Cat. What has Rossi actually done, as opposed to only saying he has done or will do, which impresses you the most?

    Dear snoopy ,


    The mere fact that he is still around, even stronger, the implicit hints he is working on a next round of magic, impresses me the most. The guy dances through a cold fusion minefield on Taylor Swift's "shake it off". He shook off the Italian mobsters, jail, the vampires from NC and so on and so forth.


    The beauty is, he has not stopped dancing and i expect some more moves in the coming months.


    Cheers,


    JB

  • Quote

    The 3-8C daily swing in ambient at his lab and airbox solution didn't help.


    I've never quite understood why this should be a problem? The calorimeter is meausuring a temperature rise... exhaust minus ambient equals rise...

  • I've never quite understood why this should be a problem? The calorimeter is meausuring a temperature rise... exhaust minus ambient equals rise...

    The temperature swings were rapid in many cases, so they made a lot of instrument noise. It was difficult to separate a rising ambient temperature from a rising cell temperature.


    The temperature swings were caused by the fact that it was a poorly insulated room in Sapporo. Mizuno reduced them by putting a plastic tent around the equipment.

  • Quote

    The mere fact that he is still around, even stronger, the implicit hints he is working on a next round of magic, impresses me the most. The guy dances through a cold fusion minefield on Taylor Swift's "shake it off". He shook off the Italian mobsters, jail, the vampires from NC and so on and so forth.


    OK, Rossi is impressive because of his longevity? Sort of like Madoff was? By the "vampires from NC," perhaps you mean the venture capitalists at Industrial Heat who gave Rossi $11.5M, no questions asked, and offered him $89M more if he could make work what he said he could? And then they didn't give him the $89M because nothing Rossi did for them and with them actually made excess heat? Nasty vampires those!

  • May I remind the gentlemen that we have agreed to maintain a certain level of discussion here. It is ok to argue hard in the matter and it is also alright to tell the other unmistakably what one thinks of his opinion, but it would be desirable in the sense of a good discussion culture to renounce verbal and personal attacks and pejorative terminology, even if that is sometimes difficult in the heat of discussion. Many Thanks!

  • One thought.


    Those who think LENR is real should build reactors, run tests, or encourage others to do so.


    Those who think or pretend to think LENR is one big mistake, hoax, or scam should get involved with a phenomenon they do believe is real.


    But people on both sides get caught up in the arguments. I have too. This only wastes everyone's time.


  • Those who don't know, and are interested, should continue to weight the evidence. The difficult matter here is that it is usual for a "don't know" to have nevertheless a view. Not one that over-rides new evidence, but one that represents their judgement on evidence so far. That can be "yes - it is very likely" or "no - it is very unlikely" or something in between. I don't think, if people are often, we get the something in between very much.


    the language used, and questions asked, are different for the yes and no views. However, both yes and no can be properly don't know, and willing to be convinced by future evidence.


    I think it is a lot easier to convince the nos than the yesses, because positive evidence in this area is possible, and game-changing, whereas negative evidence never proves anything.

  • Those who think or pretend to think LENR is one big mistake, hoax, or scam should get involved with a phenomenon they do believe is real.


    Director,


    As long as they hope LENR turns out to be real, and do not go overboard on the negativism, I think they provide a good check and balance. Without them, we might start wasting our time seeing things that are not really there.


    That said, I agree with you that if they have already formed the opinion LENR is a hoax, then they should read only, and comment elsewhere.

  • I can say as one who has the impression that there's good if patchy evidence for LENR that should be followed up on scientifically that there have been excellent comments made over the years from circumspect people who do not believe LENR is a thing. The most useful comments I've seen have been about specific details of specific experiments. E.g., was a calibration done in this case? Or, those dots in the thermography video are outside of the range of the camera. Perhaps these people were hanging around because they found the whole topic fascinating at a sociological level. Or perhaps they wondered in the back of their minds whether their general assessment of the science was correct. Regardless, they were more than welcome to hang around in my view as long as they weren't boors.


    Unfortunately the number of people who can provide useful and judicious comments on experiments, whether they consider LENR a serious possibility or are deeply skeptical, is outweighed by the number of people who wish to have a brawl and defeat an enemy. The boors are spread across the spectrum of views and are not only among the skeptics. Being a boor and being skeptical are orthogonal things. Polite skeptics are welcome here.

  • A thought, hopefully judicious if not useful, from a former hot-plasma physicist as to why LENR is so interesting. There are 3 prongs to attaining useful energy...confinement time, plasma density, and temperature (of 10's of keV, to overcome the Coulomb barrier). Now the funny thing is, even back in 1972, we knew very well that metal hydrides already provided the first two prongs for free. Far higher density than in hot plasma, and infinite confinement time. The "Orbitron" vacuum pump that we used to clean out the hydrogen from the vacuum chamber after each "shot" of plasma was based on the ability of titanium to absorb hydrogen very quickly and at very high density, so that made us wonder.


    It was even a joke in the lab that if somehow the temperature thing were not a problem, the metal hydride could be the perfect solution. A joke, because obviously one could not heat solid titanium hydride to 10 keV = 110,000,000 degrees and expect it to remain. But one always had that wonder if just maybe there was a way around the Coulomb barrier that nobody knew about.


    So the results of Pons and Fleischmann, to my mind, were really exciting . It seems to have been replicated too many times by too many people to be imaginary. Yet exactly as Eric says, patchy...hard to find a definite experimental protocol that one can follow and get an unequivocal result...if I have understood what I have read so far. Also the difficulty of finding some sort of theoretical framework that could guide the experimentation. Anyhow, I am looking forward to learning more.

  • A thought, hopefully judicious if not useful, from a former hot-plasma physicist as to why LENR is so interesting. There are 3 prongs to attaining useful energy...confinement time, plasma density, and temperature (of 10's of keV, to overcome the Coulomb barrier). Now the funny thing is, even back in 1972, we knew very well that metal hydrides already provided the first two prongs for free. Far higher density than in hot plasma, and infinite confinement time. The "Orbitron" vacuum pump that we used to clean out the hydrogen from the vacuum chamber after each "shot" of plasma was based on the ability of titanium to absorb hydrogen very quickly and at very high density, so that made us wonder.


    It was even a joke in the lab that if somehow the temperature thing were not a problem, the metal hydride could be the perfect solution. A joke, because obviously one could not heat solid titanium hydride to 10 keV = 110,000,000 degrees and expect it to remain. But one always had that wonder if just maybe there was a way around the Coulomb barrier that nobody knew about.


    So the results of Pons and Fleischmann, to my mind, were really exciting . It seems to have been replicated too many times by too many people to be imaginary. Yet exactly as Eric says, patchy...hard to find a definite experimental protocol that one can follow and get an unequivocal result...if I have understood what I have read so far. Also the difficulty of finding some sort of theoretical framework that could guide the experimentation. Anyhow, I am looking forward to learning more.

    LENR has nothing to do with fusion. This destructive meme is the worst thing that could of happened to the understanding of LENR. There is no Lawson criterion, or Coulomb barrier penetration. LENR is a quantum mechanical based reaction involving the decay of matter under the influence of a special formatting of magnetism. De advised that LENR is occuring inside living cells and has nothing to do with 10 keV = 110,000,000 degrees temperatures.


    The Bob Greenyer's ongoing analysis of the meltdown of the LION reactor has cracked the code on the true nature of the LENR reaction.

  • LENR has nothing to do with fusion. This destructive meme is the worst thing that could of happened to the understanding of LENR. There is no Lawson criterion, or Coulomb barrier penetration. LENR is a quantum mechanical based reaction involving the decay of matter under the influence of a special formatting of magnetism. De advised that LENR is occuring inside living cells and has nothing to do with 10 keV = 110,000,000 degrees temperatures.


    The Bob Greenyer's ongoing analysis of the meltdown of the LION reactor has cracked the code on the true nature of the LENR reaction.


    Axil, I'm sorry but while I leave your speculations alone as too far fetched for me to comment this is dangerous and incorrect certitude.


    You may think what you suppose above to be true. You have not even remotely proven it to be even likely, let alone true.


    It is a valid and interesting observation that metal hydrides have a high deuteron or proton density, and also a high deuteron or proton to metal nucleus adjacency. And that this is maintained continuously.


    While Coulomb barrier could be irrelevant, it could also be very relevant. And, even if irrelevant, the high density of electrons and nuclei in a solid lattice could still be relevant.


    Bocjin's posted literature about theoretical fusion rates in metal hydrides shows that they are not that far from showing useful fusion. while, looking at latest work, that appears to be a dead end as far as useful fusion goes, it is certainly interesting. It is just such "well I know it is not, but it almost could be" things that anyone with sense will pay attention to, because overlooked things can sometimes change assumptions.


  • The proton 21 experiment shows LENR transmutation using just pure copper and an arc. Riddle me that batman.


    Nucleosynthesis+from+Plasmoid+Strikes.jpg

  • The strange thing is that the knowledge is all over the web, serious papers by serious scientists. But it gains little traction sadly. BTW, I agree with you about the IP issue - no patent for something useful would ever survive for long

    Alan,


    Yet no working, replicated, confirmed LENR

    excess heat product exists anywhere that anyone can inspect.

    IP is not an issue, we just agreed on that, so,

    IF the “knowledge is all over the web” and serious scientists are working on it, why hasn’t anything been confirmed, replicated with regards to excess heat?

  • Yet no working, replicated, confirmed LENR

    excess heat product exists anywhere that anyone can inspect.


    There have, but unfortunately right before going public they either die, get fired/demoted and lose their lab privileges, or kidnapped by aliens in LENR powered spaceships. With the exception of Alan, Lion, and MFMP, those wanting to come forward will not, because they fear the same fate.