Posts by Alan Smith

Quote from Rionrlty

I concede that in the end it is your forum, and you can have it as biased as you please. So I will heretofore keep my opinion to myself and refrain from posting here at all. I will continue to hit the like button occasionally and trust that you will let me know if that too offends in any way.

@Rionrity. It is, in the end, the members forum, and Eric and Rends and I struggle to keep at least some semblance of balance, generally the end result of this is we always manage to upset somebody. If we shared a uniform view on Rossi, Me356, IH and the most desirable skirt length for a woman in her fifties this would effectively be not a forum but a blog. A forum does not demand a monopolistic viewpoint or in most cases a consensus, except perhaps on matters of courtesy and civility. Remember please, not all members can possibly please all moderators. A fact of life. Going or staying is your choice, but please don't feel you have been driven out, because civil posters are always welcome here.

Forty-Two

I'm certainly not worried about competition for sales! I do suspect that this comment was either an inaccurate quote on the part of Popular Mechanics (likely), or BobG getting overexcited (possible).

While there may be 20 or even 40 independent 'below the radar' researchers/groups working on LENR systerms between Japan and California (going west-about) very few of them seem to be working on Rossi replications. Mavericks to a man (or woman), they are mostly 'doing it their own way'.

Quote from Sherlock Holmes

Am I the only one who remembers that MFMP built 20 reactors as per Parkhomov to give to experimenters, and none was able to replicate?

I certainly don't remember that. Do you have a link?

ETA. Since this view of the future seems to strike a chord with some members, here is a little more on the topic from a position paper I'm writing.

The simple truth is that as already shown, major disruptions are inevitable, the economy as we know now will be unrecognisable within 10 -15 years. That’s because business model innovation is every bit as disruptive as technology innovation. Think Airbnb, think Uber. Try not to think of McDonalds. One huge factor is ‘transport on-demand’, using autonomous electric vehicles. This is not just disruptive to the car industry but has devastating effects amounting to trillions of dollars on the oil industry, car servicing and parking, insurance, car leasing and car dealerships. Like dominoes falling, this change also impacts shipping, logistics, real estate, infrastructure, and the bond and equity markets.

So it is a case of ‘seat-belts on’ since huge disruptions are coming anyway.

https://static1.squarespace.co…ethinkX+Report_051517.pdf

Add in something like17 Bn people by 2100 and markets will be unrecognisable.

Hi Dan.

I suspect that this is a custom-built oscillator. Not amazingly difficult to build, but the total power mentioned - including the direct discharge through the fuel seems to be more like 1kW. So it requires some chunky output transistors.

This also requires a 1MHz 30W US transducer impedance-matched to the output from the oscillator-amplifier. I suspect that this would be difficult to find and difficult to build. Maybe you could ask MFMP or Suhas directly?

Try this one...

http://www.pdhonline.com/courses/m371/m371content.pdf

Quote from Zeus46

read that here too, but I also recall that heat exchangers work similarly for wet steam and 100C water, although I can't find a good reference for that.

The mechanism of heat-transfer is identical, but for all kinds of reasons the effect is not the same. I once rented an old factory with fan-boosted low-pressure steam radiators ( very unusual in the UK) and tried running them on hot water. Admittedly only at 70C. The small x-sectional area of the steam pipes inside the radiators made this a complete waste of time - negligible heat was available from them.

Five posts from this thread were just moved to the Playground thread. Please do keep it civil.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

Wytte - whats with the quick rush to conclusions along with such a judgmental statement? Is MFMP using any of your time or nickels, pence or euros?

While everyone obviously has many more questions than answers that are available right now - I think this effort is pretty cool and that we should all be grateful

for the chance to watch this unfold. It is going to go where it is going to go.

Top marks Dewey. And quite right too., we should indeed be grateful.

Quote from Henry

Why the corresponding INSTANT COP declared is 1.0119 W

COP is not measured in Watts. It is measured in 'Ifs'.

Quote from Eric Walker

The important thing is that the presence of thermal inertia in the calorimeter means that the power output you're seeing at the present moment is the result of something that happened X minutes ago, where "X" is the time constant of the calorimeter. That means you don't really have an instantaneous power-out, which prevents any instantaneous power-out/power-in quasi-COP calculation from being possible. Instead what you end up having is a calculation that combines something a little bit like an instantaneous power-out from X minutes ago with the instantaneous power-in from right now, which is confusing, because the two values are not necessarily closely related.

Wot Eric said.

You can tell from the MFMP logos on their shirts.

Quote from Arnaud

What does "1/14 time" mean for me356 ?

I can only guess- but it sounds like 'one day, not 2 weeks'. Other timescales may apply.

Quote from IH Fanboy

I do hope the Lugano scientists are able to defend their test on the stand. Too much conjecture swirling around.

Very unlikely any will attend.

Quote from stefan

Invented figures usually differs from measured ones in the statistical distribution

I don't think anyone is claiming the figures were invented, but that the measurement protocol was wrong. As this was instrument related, I think statistics would not prove to be a useful tool to determine much at all - because the data would be internally consistent while not necessarily correct.

Quote from Henry

What about yours?

The latest version I have on my bench (described elsewhere in this forum) has an accuracy in terms of comparison of the two separate DC power feeds required to heat thermally separated ports to the same temperature -control and test - of 1W (183W/184W) and 1C at 1000C. And that was 'as carefully built' - without tweaking. After a few hours at high temperature it got better and better due (I suspect) to absorbed moisture drying out of the foamed alumina blocks. I regard this result as 'spookily good' btw, as I never expected it to be so close, and would not expect every one to perform so well. For a $500 device it is remarkable IMHO. He said modestly.

Quote from THHuxleynew

In this case comment here will be quite similar to that of the Jury. We have a lot of the info they will have, together with rather more background than they will be allowed. So if it is of interest to work out, for example, does Rossi's stuff work, all these matters come into play whether this is convenient or not.

Comment is free here, THH. My 'snarky' ones and your earnest chest-beating ones. Very grown up by and large.

Quote from Henry

Do you know and declare the overall measurement error of test kit you/LENR Ltd sell on web?

We show people how to calibrate the reactors themselves. I know the error bars of ones I use myself. What we cannot (and have no wish to) control is exactly what instrumentation people use as back up and what temperature zones people are working in. However, since our reactors are effectively differential calorimeters if used correctly the error bars are accounted for rather precisely.

Quote from Zephir_AWT

copper electrodes don't behave so:

Not so sure about that - it depends very much on the electrolyte used. Copper oxide (for example) is black from memory.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

Alan - why to you autorotate into defensive position for Rossi? Do you know that he was not nervous?

He was nervous as a tick on a car roof in August - he shut down the control run-up in what could be described as a panic move.

An "independent test" with the inventor abruptly shutting down the control run. It should have ended there.

Somebody has to keep some balance. Judge jury and executioner is not this forum's role. I never saw him in action at Lugano, and neither did THH. Maybe you did, in which case I bow to your superior knowledge.