Rossi E-Cat SK Demo Discussion

  • It is also significant that Jed says it's weird that Rossi would work so hard, if he's a fake. Rossi came down hard on Celani during a demo when he brought in a Geiger Counter and there was enough Gamma Rays being emitted to start getting worried. An insider such as yourself would know how to use that detector to narrow down exactly what kinds of radiation is being emitted and also perhaps even what elements are being used in the reactor. Rossi was reacting more like someone who doesn't want others to know what is being used in a nuclear reactor than someone who's simply a fraudster.

    Quote


    https://www.mail-archive.com/v…@eskimo.com/msg42665.html

    [ Jed reporting on Celani ]

  • Shane, my comment about Acland was a “low blow” only if you think enabling, cheering for, and banning any real criticism of an obvious con man is providing a valuable service. Ruby and apparently you seem to think so. In most places, that “valuable service” is called being a shill. But I will endeavor not to tarnish his name further.


    How is it that you you feel entitled to push your personal opinion about Rossi so aggressively, and at the same time seem so reluctant to allow differing opinions from others even though much less aggressive?

  • rubycarat

    Quote

    Seven, there is another possibility and that is that AR knew how to make heat early on, then attempted to scale it up, but couldn't. Then he re-designs to make it work again, and then tries to control the reaction as it scales, but can't. The re-design could be the result of trying to engineer by trial-and-error, which pretty much everybody else is doing, too.


    If you have carefully followed the claims and what Rossi passed off as demos, that's impossible. His early ecats had extremely high performance. There was no need to scale them up. They would have been dynamite space and process heaters as they were claimed to be -- 10-20kW out from a tennis ball sized reactor chamber and dry steam temperatures. Supposedly, Dr. Levi measured up to 135kW peak which "scared Rossi." But then,


    Quote

    “Minimum power was 15 kilowatts, and that’s a conservative value. I calculated it several times. At night we did a measurement and the device then worked very stable and produced 20 kilowatts.” ... It then worked for 18 hours with the bottle closed. Quite impressive.”

    https://www.nyteknik.se/energi…cludes-combustion-6421304


    It's world-shaking without scaling up. It's worth billions without scaling up. You have to consider history! It's what Rossi and Levi said. Had they said, yes, we can make a few milliwatts or Watts but we can't scale it up, then I would think you have a point. But how can you say there is a scaling problem when Rossi said in 2011 that he sold multiple megawatt "plants" to military "customers?" Nor did Rossi ever claim a control problem. I am afraid you are putting (very lame) excuses in his mouth. So to speak.


    Quote

    Yes, the key is "experts making their own measurements".

    OK, so why has not Rossi done this? With world-renown testing institutes like UL or Sandia Labs or even as suggested many times in 2011, Puthoff's and Little's Earthtech which is very friendly to new technology ideas? Some say there would be a risk to Rossi's IP but that would not be true if Rossi monitored the tests in person and provided only a black boxed ecat with input wires and an output steam hose. No risk at all. All the rationalization for why Rossi has behaved as he has makes no sense at all and has not made sense from the start in 2011.

  • His early ecats had extremely high performance. There was no need to scale them up. They would have been dynamite space and process heaters as they were claimed to be -- 10-20kW out from a tennis ball sized reactor chamber and dry steam temperatures.


    Assuming the performance was real, he did seem to have problems controlling them. They would not be suitable for commercial use as is. They needed more work. But the (apparent) performance was good enough to attract billions of dollars in funding for R&D.

  • Alan Smith

    Quote

    So let me try a little logic here. If the credibility of LENR is damaged by the willingness of some of the internet's people...

    A misunderstanding methinks. The credibility of LENR is not damaged by people who believe in it as well as in rectal probes from UFO aliens. But the credibility of those people is damaged by their nonsense beliefs. Joseph Papp, a raving lunatic from decades ago with an impossible story. Approval of Rossi after the initial demos and tests were mostly debunked by Krivit and others also leads to loss of credibility. Same with all the discredited free energy schemes, magnet motors, water fueled cars, etc., as IO pointed out.


    LENR is difficult to "believe" because of Coulomb's observations. It is difficult (at least for me and for many others) to follow all the low level heat generation, questionable tritium generation, and wobbly radiation generation reports thus far. The credibility of LENR will not be established by anyone's opinion but by solid, reliable, replicable experiments with strong results. Hopefully, like those you and your team will provide.

  • Now you need to tell me why the scientists gather for the annual conferences and workshops? Do they all have something commercial already?

    This question is non sequitur - or very far off the point that I and Peter were making. Very few issues of science are decided directly in the commercial marketplace. Rossi's current offering will be, and I am suggesting that all we need do is wait a little. If this new device creates market demand, then the product is producing heat more cheaply than the local utility price of electricity. An economic calorimeter with unambiguous results! Rossi has set a course with binary outcome: he fails (and draws as few of us as possible down); he succeeds and drags all of us up.


    I have been doing this long enough to recall that interest in Rossi provided a very significant boost to the LENR community (I think Jed's download statistics support this). But now we are in "fool me twice" territory. The offer (cheap heat) and claim (machines being made for sale) is unambiguous. No room for wiggling. I am also old enough to know that it is (or seems) far wiser to be able to explain the results of an experiment afterwards, than to predict it in advance. Experiments have a way of pricking our hubris (otherwise there would be little point - or fun - in doing them). Rossi's experiment has begun. If it fails it will be his last, at least in public.


    I (obviously) am not going to predict a result but (equally obviously) hope Rossi succeeds. His success would do us all a lot of good, politically, although I have learned very little of real technical value from the Rossi experience. If he fails it will do us very little harm.


    PS thanks to the folks who put together sequenced videos of the plasma spectrum. Very illuminating. A black body this is not.

  • Hi can


    Actually, having the SK video loop once seems OK. We always knew that the video from the customer site was supposed to be prerecorded and I expect this means a video was made that turned out to be shorter than the duration of the live presentation ... so it was looped.


    Can you give the times of the 2 frames you show? -- I mean the times on the "enhanced audio" video that I assume you are working from

  • JedRothwell

    Quote

    Assuming the performance was real, he did seem to have problems controlling them. They would not be suitable for commercial use as is. They needed more work. But the (apparent) performance was good enough to attract billions of dollars in funding for R&D.

    How in the world would you know that? Rossi certainly never complained of it. And because he had no real customers ever, none of those did either. Rossi was claiming to be selling megawatt plants for nearly a decade. You'd think any control problems would have been settled between his supposed (and fictitious) contracts with National Instruments and Siemens and his fantasmagoric robotic factories!


    There would be enough value in a working but not commercially sellable ecat making kilowatts from trivial amounts of fuel to make an army rich for life. Commercial use would be worked out by investors' companies and entrepreneurs. Like with everything else!

  • It is difficult (at least for me and for many others) to follow all the low level heat generation, questionable tritium generation


    Which questionable tritium results do you have in mind? Who reported them?


    Assuming you did not make that up, and there actually are such results, let me suggest you follow the high heat generation and rock solid, irrefutable tritium generation instead. Such as results from Bockris, Storms or Fritz Will. If you don't wish to follow them, you should at least stop misrepresenting the field by imputing there are only "low level" or "questionable" results.

  • Rossi provided a very significant boost to the LENR community (I think Jed's download statistics support this).


    It does seem that he did. This was a mixed blessing. The statistics are here:


    https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1213


    I added the January totals today, and then noted some discouraging things about the graphs, especially the trend line, which is a polynomial, degree 2:



    The trend line in this graph so far is remarkably stable and symmetrical. It peaked after 11 years in 2013. If present trends continue, it will fall close to zero around 2024.


    The bottom graph, Google Trends Interest over time, shows that interest in cold fusion is asymptotically falling to zero.



    Abd did not agree. (That should be a keyboard macro.) I told him that if he does not like my trend line, he should download the numbers and graph it himself. The link to the spreadsheet is shown on the screen:


    https://docs.google.com/spread…k4YYsii0/edit?usp=sharing

  • [Assuming the performance was real, he did seem to have problems controlling them.]

    How in the world would you know that?


    I don't know it. As I said, that is assuming the performance was real, which is far from established. I know that it appeared to be unstable and uncontrolled because:


    1. I saw the data. Or what was claimed to be the data.

    2. People who observed the experiment said so.

    3. Rossi said so (rossisays, which has the lowest confidence coefficient known to science).


    The early experiments were supposedly unstable. One of them suddenly began producing tens of kilowatts, and Rossi reportedly was frightened. Later experiments, especially in Doral, were remarkably stable. Very, remarkably, unnaturally stable to more decimal places than you would think possible with those instruments, as Smith pointed out. We're talking so stable, the gadget continued to produce exactly the same amount of heat every day, even on days when it was turned off and disassembled according to Rossi's log book.



    Rossi certainly never complained of it.


    He did complain about it. As Dewey pointed out, when people asked awkward questions, he sometimes claimed the reaction was going out of control and they needed to evacuate and stop the discussion immediately.

  • Going back to "certification"..


    My understanding is that any device containing logic switching at more than a few kHz (10kHz?) needs FCC certification (Title 47 CFR Part 15). Within that there are class A and class B products. Class A covers industrial products. Class B consumer products.


    You are meant to get this done before the product is "marketed"...


    https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/t…5&rgn=div5#se47.1.15_1101


    Quote:

    Equipment authorization of unintentional radiators.


    (a) Except as otherwise exempted in §§15.23, 15.103, and 15.113, unintentional radiators shall be authorized prior to the initiation of marketing, pursuant to the procedures for certification or Supplier's Declaration of Conformity (SDoC) given in subpart J of part 2 of this chapter, as follows:

    End Quote


    But perhaps this is why Rossi is selling heat not SK reactors.

  • Actually now I've checked the exemptions I've found...


    Quote:


    (b) A digital device used exclusively as an electronic control or power system utilized by a public utility or in an industrial plant. The term public utility includes equipment only to the extent that it is in a dedicated building or large room owned or leased by the utility and does not extend to equipment installed in a subscriber's facility.


    End Quote


    So does a power system include heating systems?

  • Sam - again no opinion, just posting a link...

    you are expecting soon sales and feedback - why don't you help us all to get through to the truth by buying a small unit for your business if you have one or can you help finding someone who is also interested? Aftenposten is eager to following up this story:


    "If some of Aftenposten's readers try to order the heat source, we are very interested in telling about the result."

    I ran into the boss of the division of

    a Company I work for and told him

    about Rossi technology.If I see him

    again sometime I will ask him if he

    looked into it.

  • That's surprisingly good press - but NEVER stop questioning!


    Not sure any press at this point is good. You do not have to scratch the surface very deep to see this presentation uncovered some major red flags about the technology. If it turns out to be another Doral, it will be bad for the field in general. The more positive the press about it beforehand, the worse it will be.


    If I had my say, there would be no press at all until we have some proof this time it is real. The presentation was so bad in every aspect, it really does not deserve any attention other than here in LENR land. No one listens to me though, so all I can do is ask any journalist thinking of doing an article on this, to be more balanced than what has been put out already. Do a short mention of Rossi's history, distance Rossi from the field, and give a word of caution about any irrational exuberance.