LENR Calender Member
  • Member since May 23rd 2015
  • Last Activity:

Posts by LENR Calender

    Perhaps the reason for this obvious nitpicking is different from an accountant's

    An accountant is accountable for what they write.. and there is some small remuneration involved.

    However neither THHnew or Ascoli are accountable... although there may be some peanuts

    I won't get into motivations or psychology. Ascoli just seems to have a skill that involves being able to pay attention to detail and digging into things that most would overlook.

    It takes a lot of wasted energy to get upset at Ascoli's "nitpicking".

    It would be much more productive for Jed to take a quick look at the most recent data and see if input power is still being calculated in a different manner for control and actual run. If yes, I would really wonder why.

    I believe that digging into those sort of issues is important. For the same reason that an accountant will dig into the data if there is a 1 cent discrepancy. It could be fine, or it could be a much bigger issue.

    Why compute input power differently for the active and control tests? If it was Rossi we would be accusing him of trying to pull a trick.

    Since it's Mizuno, it's probably not a big deal, but it would be unfortunate to dismiss it as some skeptopathic fantasy.

    Do we have similar data available for the more recent runs?

    You did not read Mizuno’s paper then. As magicsound pointed out, Deneum is working completely outside the low pressure range that Mizuno said is critical to achieve success.

    My understanding is that they did run it at low pressure (300 Pa), except at the very end where they injected 30, then 100mbar. So they worked outside the low pressure range but only after getting a null result.

    They also said that the temp went up 30 deg C suddenly. Even though they replaced the thermocouple and got the same temp, it could be some weird issue with the TC moving or failing (or even things moving inside the reactor) I think this shows again the issues with relying solely on thermocouples.

    I'm not a physicist, but I've been saying since the Gullstrom paper that the second issue with the experimental setup is that the reactor's resistance might not be constant.

    So, nothing new, but you did phrase it better than me.

    1) We need actual input power to the reactor

    2) We need it for the entire duration of the experiment

    Again, I am not a physicist, but how does the reactor even receive any energy if R=0? Hint: R varies with temperature.

    To me this isn't a successful demo. And it's not because we don't have a ready product, not dependent on what I think of Rossi. I wasn't expecting third party measurement or anything like that.

    To me a successful demo would have been one that actually measures input and output power in a direct and simple manner. I would have given Rossi the benefit of the doubt that he's not pulling some hidden magic tricks (and waited for a replication/third party verification for later)

    Heck, I would just be happy with a paper by Gullstrom where he describes an experiment where he is actually measuring input power.

    Here is how Mats thinks about the event:


    I believe it is an excellent summary!



    At the demo, as seen in the video recording, Rossi was adjusting something inside the control system just before making the dummy measurements. Obviously, someone could wonder if he was changing the system in order to obtain a desired measured value.

    His own answer was that he was opening an air intake after two hours of operation since the active cooling was not operating when the system was turned off.

    Clearly this comes down to a question of trust, and personally, discussing this detail with Rossi for some time, I have come to the conclusion that his explanation is reasonable and trustworthy.

    However, as I stated above, if I were an investor considering to invest in this technology, I would require further private tests being made with accurate measurements made by third-party experts, specifically regarding the electrical input power, making such tests in a way that these experts would consider to be relevant.

    Obviously Mats knows he has to be diplomatic with Rossi, and that if he were to show doubt to what Rossi says, it would be the end of their collaboration.

    Mats' comment:


    Didn’t notice this. Not good.

    I discussed the dummy tests with Rossi two months before the demo. Shortly before the demo Rossi only wanted to do the short circuit test, not the 800 ohm, since the waveform would be altered in a way that would reveal sensible information, he said. I told him that in that case it was meaningless to do the test at all. He came back a few days later and said he would do it.

    Whatever adjustment he did before the dummy test, legitimate or not, it’s a serious problem. The input measurement was already weak as it was. Now I suppose the only conclusive test would be to repeat the measurements when he has a developed control system that doesn’t need cooling so you can measure COP of the whole system.

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Also I wonder if the box is open when Fabiani reaches with his left hand or if he is reaching under the box (@27s)

    This comment from ECW (Leonard Weinstein) reflects my thoughts. No need to divulge IP to measure input power.


    The test protocol was very poor. The fan could have been powered with a separate power cord and avoid the fan power issue. Then the input power to the power supply box measured with a power meter. The fact that the power supply got hot indicates it had a significant added power use which has to be made small before any real progress can be claimed. The OUTPUT from the power supply could be measured with an rms power meter, so the true COP could be found without giving up any secrets. The COP has to be corrected for the 1 Ohm resistor power use.

    Maybe someone would be able to replicate Rossi's results using this kind of setup?

    Looks like we'll have to wait at least til tomorrow for the video publication to be sorted out...