Posts by THEDEBATEISUSELESS

    It is standard practice for steam systems. Any proper pipe-fitter would know this, personally I cannot recall seeing a steam-pressure gauge without a condenser loop in the feed pipe. Compressed air, however doesn't require this arrangement.


    Again, Murray is said to have taken lots of pictures during his visit to the plant when the container was being sealed. A photograph of the steam gauge to see how it was setup would be fantastic. I wonder if we'll see one.

    We know from several years of attempts that lithium is corrosive and presents difficulties that must be worked around when building a garage apparatus. Is there any basis other than Lugano and Parkhomov for continuing to use lithium? It is true that hydrogen and nickel by themselves have not shown results, but there are many other possibilities beyond NiH and Ni/H/Li that have not been explored here but still fall within the broad category of nickel-hydrogen systems. For example, there are the "Polonium, Thorium, Uranium, Plutonium, Americium and a transuranic metal in general, or a combination thereof" mentioned in one of Piantelli's patent applications.


    Could it be that lithium is making things unnecessarily difficult?


    ETA: I note that lithium is mentioned in the Piantelli patent application, and it also makes an appearance in the Unified Gravity patent application (arguably unrelated to the kind of apparatus we're discussing here). So this is not to say that there's no basis for exploring lithium. But it also does not appear to be a critical ingredient, and there may be others that are easier to work with.


    Songsheng Jiang used lithium.


    N. Stepanov used lithium.


    A couple other Russian teams (Lens Lab?) used lithium.


    Parkhomov and Rossi are not the only two parties that have claimed results with Ni and LiAlH4.

    I think one problem here is that it seems you have not read the legal documents much if at all. Or at least less than I have. So I'm basing my statements on my reading of the documents, whereas you are basing yours on... I'm not sure what.


    What I've read makes it very clear that Darden et al. were trying to have it both ways: they appear to have deliberately mislead Rossi, leading him and others to believe it was the GPT while trying to make the case in their depositions (poorly, I might add) that they did not view it as such. But the evidence from some of their own personnel indicates that they viewed it as the GPT and Penon as the ERV. Basically, they wanted to have it both ways: "heads I win, tails you lose." (Where heads is 'if the test is positive' and tails is 'test isn't positive'.)


    It's actually an interesting question: they say in their depositions that they didn't view it as the GPT, that the proposed second amendment was not valid and that the time for the GPT had already passed. So I wonder if they would have paid the 89 million if they felt the 1MW test was actually a success. In any case, it's quite clear that they are not innocent victims, even if Rossi is a fraud.


    The longer this goes on the happier I am that the underlying technology is, in my opinion, real. Because the whole story from every angle becomes more and more convoluted. The only true gem here is the E-Cat technology as a whole. Maybe it is tricky and tedious to get to work (if you don't have a great deal of hands on experience), but my confidence in the fundamental reality of the Rossi Effect continues to grow. Just looking at the list of Rossi's provisional patent list is fascinating: he obviously had confidence that his effect enriches nickel in Ni62 and depletes lithium of Li7. Me356 has said the same thing recently: he claims his ash is full of Ni62. Also, the fact Nissan has clammed up about their testing fascinates me -- I may be wrong but I'm guessing they can't fathom what they are witnessing!


    What desperately needs to happen is for someone like Me356 to share their know how to the world.

    Murray thinks the output pipe likely had an internal diameter of DN80. Thus, one huge problem at least partially mitigated.


    He also did testing with identical flow meters at identical slopes/reaches to those at Doral and didn't find obviously huge errors using Penon's reported water flow. Thus another problem at least partially mitigated. Of course, it sure would help if the photograph of the meter would be provided to see if it was positioned higher or lower than the input to the plant.


    Another issue he brought up was the pressure gauge on the output only being rated for 50C and not 103-104C over a year. I wonder if he performed a test to see if such a pressure gauge would fail at such temperatures? Of course a year long test just to determine that would be expensive and complicated. I wonder if the manufacturer of the pressure gauge has any torture test data from subjecting their gauges to high temperatures for long periods?

    Anyone notice in 207-47 the exchange between Rossi and Bass, where Rossi wants him (Bass) to come up with a transformer that converts 5-20 watts, to 5 million Vs?


    Bass expands a bit on that, in 207-48, pg 130.


    My totally wild conjecture is this:


    Andrea Rossi was trying to perform some type of nuclear transmutation or isotopic shifting on the series of substances he "processed" in the JM Products container on the other side of the wall. In fact, in one of the depositions, James Bass states that "energy conversion" was taking place in the trailer via an "endothermic" process. Now, I'm NOT saying that a nuclear process took place in the JM Products container or not -- we have zero evidence of what actually happened to the platinum sponge, nickel, and then the mixture of graphite and industrial diamonds. However, the fact the containers they were put into are referenced as "reactors" (I realize chemical processes can happen in reactors) and the high voltages Rossi was applying make me think he was trying to perform a very unique nuclear process.


    In one part of the deposition of James Bass -- remember that we only got to see the bits and pieces IH desired to present -- he mentions that electric fields are needed for the Rossi Effect. This perfectly matches with my current thinking. My tentative hypothesis is that Rossi was subjecting the substances (platinum sponge, nickel, and then graphite/diamonds) to a combination of heat, perhaps catalysts, and electric fields to induce nuclear changes.


    He was probably hoping to produce either valuable or useful materials from the "reactors" in the JM Products container.

    Forty-Two ,


    COP of 5 and 9 with IH's own reactors: 214-22.


    As for the claimed COP of 11, IH stated: "We tested our plant . . . for four days." Now, you pointed out that the excerpt available in the deposition appeared to be referring to the Ferrara test, although it doesn't state that in the deposition. And the Ferrera test was a 2 day test not a 4 day test. Erik followed your comment stating that important context had been omitted from the excerpt, with which I agree. I then conceded that upon closer inspection, it probably refers to the Ferrara test. The timing of the test is similar, although the 2 and 4 day discrepancy, and the fact that IH (presumably JT Vaughn) states that "we tested our plant" seem a bit curious, don't you think?


    Yep. Another test possibly showing excess heat that I hope we learn more about.

    A few thoughts about the new Quark X.


    Although there may be secondary LENR reactions taking place in the plasma, the primary reaction happens just beneath the nickel surface of the cathode. The protons bombard the electrode, penetrate the surface, and push their way inward into defects, dislocations, cavities, or other nano-scale features. For one reason or another -- either the creation and fusion of exotic ultra dense forms of hydrogen or exposure to exotic quadrapolar magnetic fields -- nuclear reactions take place.


    The first consequence is pretty obvious -- heat. If the nickel cathode reaches a high enough temperature, it will undergo thermionic emission just like a hydrogen thyratron. I've read the argument that the reaction can't happen in the cathode because then all thyratrons would have shown excess heat. This is NOT the case because the cathodes of thyratrons were NOT pre-treated to accept or absorb hydrogen. Instead, they were often doped in the form of nickel oxide or other elements to try and prevent hydrogen absorption. There are obviously important cathode preparation steps that need to take place to produce these nuclear effects.


    The second consequence is one that I think is highly likely -- high energy electrons. Ed Storms has performed glow discharge experiments in which a cathode would be impacted by protons/deuterons. The report is on LENR CANR. He detected very large numbers of high energy (.8 MeV) electrons being emitted. I expect that a similar process takes place in the Quark. These electrons may have far more energy and provide more power than the electrons from pure thermionic emission.


    And of course since a tiny amount of LiAlH4 was used to provide hydrogen (in a sense making this device be covered under the patent FLUID HEATER) the vaporized lithium may also work its way through the surface of the cathode. However, I expect that very little LiAlH4 was used and that the reactor is probably operating at a pretty low pressure. The idea that the tube was filled with LiAlH4 is likely wrong. But the fact there is lithium present could allow for secondary reactions.


    What's so interesting to me is that this version of the technology is a logical extension of his technology. Over and over again, he has incorporated different methods of ionizing or dissociating hydrogen into component atoms and ions. Originally, he likely used reverse spillover catalysts mixed in with the nickel. Then with the one megawatt plant he used radio frequency generators that activated after the reactor cells reached a temperature of several hundred degrees, In various hot cats (although he was able to make them work with just heat) he fed the resistors with "signals" or frequencies. My guess is that at the very high temperatures they operated in even less than optimally applied signals could produce some degree of ionization in the reactor. Then with the one megawatt plant it has been talked about how he applied square wave AC at a frequency that was at resonance with the self capacitance and self inductance of his resistors. This created powerful current spikes. And as we know, since a changing magnetic field produces an electric field, this could have ionized the gas inside the reactor. In the most recent court documents someone (maybe it was Fulvio or Penon) talks about having to install a second network analyzer because of the high currents that the first one couldn't measure.


    So it seems to me that the Quark likely works by a combination of cathode pre-treatment and proton bombardment.


    A nagging question in my mind is if the cathode could be an alloy with a small percentage of Manganese (Mn) since it is mentioned in the paper that Mn could have been a source of nucleons. Mn is a deoxidizer has been used in other LENR experiments. The Mn may help to push out oxygen from the cathode at high temperature.


    These are just my thoughts. I do not claim they are all correct.

    Something had to come of the reactor design that tentatively produced a COP of 5-9. IH had the money to perform all sorts of testing to verify if they were seeing significant excess heat or only false readings. For example, they could have had two reactors and fed the same input power into a "dummy" and see if registered the same temperature as the one including hydrogen with the IR camera. Additionally, they had the money for high temperature "B-type" thermal probes that could be used verify the readings of the IR camera. It would be very interesting to read about what additional tests and methods they used to confirm they were producing no excess heat at all from the reactor -- which has to be the case according to their current stance on excess heat production.

    If you remove Rossi from the LENR story, then it becomes apparent that high energy LENR is going to be complicated, technologically advanced, and not very likely to be something one does in their garage.

    Not really a surprise. If it was easy, the universe might have burned itself up by now.


    That's not true. I think high powered LENR isn't something someone can do in their garage without a LOT of effort and work. But the amount of space they have doesn't really matter. There are high end physicists that have done great work in closets. What matters is the dedication and willingness to work extremely hard on cracking the various parameters that are required. Look at Me356. He tested day after day for months until totally mastering the prep of his fuel. Ninety nine percent of garage based replicators are incapable of doing so due to having families or not having the resources.

    Most people on here cannot separate Rossi's devious tendency to exaggerate or lie about surrounding issues (such as his ridiculous lies about Johnson Matthey) and the fundamental reality of his technology. I'm capable of seeing how Andrea Rossi's technology as a whole is real and has great worth to the planet, while he as a person seems to be downright sneaky.


    What many people on this forum want to do is push the theme that since Andrea Rossi is so horribly awful as a person (in some ways he has indeed shown a lack of ethics and character by intentionally misleading others) there is no way that his technology can work. I don't buy that for a minute. And, in fact, if certain people and parties are intentionally dismissing the E-Cat technology as a whole to push a narrative that better supports IH, they are every bit as despicable as Rossi has demonstrated he can be -- at times.


    If someone looks at the forefathers of the E-Cat (the work of Focardi and Piantelli and others), the various replications that have been made, and all of Rossi's tests and demos as a whole, the logical conclusion is that he has something that's totally real and powerful. For that, I feel we must give him credit. When it comes to other issues such as his lies and deceptions, he deserves scorn. But throwing his technology into the trash just because of his personality and behavior patterns are highly questionable is even worse -- in my opinion -- than telling a lie about a fictitious customer.







    The E-Cat never worked. Lugano never produced a watt above input; the early tests in Italy never produced any excess heat whatsoever. This is because Ni-H is all one giant scam all the way back to the incompetent work of Sergio Focardi and Piantelli Focardi who falsely reported the ability to produce a COP of 2 and all sorts of emissions with just nickel rod/wire. This is why the E-Cat IP has zero value. Pure nickel hydrogen has never produced excess heat and never will produce excess heat. Rossi has nothing because he never had anything.


    With all of this being hard fact, I find it surprising that an IH test -- even tentatively with a big caveat -- measured a COP of 5-9. Even taking the lowest COP in the range (5), the over estimation of the input/output ratio is worse than Lugano. Obviously, the device couldn't have been producing any nuclear reactions: since Rossi's know-how is just the ramblings of an insane know-nothing the true COP had to be no greater than one. The law of conservation of energy must apply to everything. Even devices where the energy is supposed to be coming from E=MC2!


    So go check out document 214-22 page 2 of 5.


    How could such a measurement error take place! The detailed correction made after further testing should be very helpful in proving how all IR systems are useless in measuring temperature from LENR systems. If the reactor was then moved into "The Pig" device -- a setup they used that could produce steam -- the COP had to drop down to one.


    If one doesn't already exist, I think a good scientific paper could be written about how NOT to depend upon IR instrumentation.


    And if at the end some pesky excess heat remains, it is most likely a problem with input measurement.

    Bob,


    My guesses why Ni - LiAlH4 experiments are challenging to reproduce.


    1) Every specific brand/type of nickel probably requires a different degree of pre-processing. A prep routine for brand/type A won't work (or be sub-optimal) for brand/type B or even for the same brand/type that has been exposed to atmosphere (after repeated bottle openings.


    2) Related to number one, it may take a few or even dozens of processing attempts to find the optimum pre-treatment for a sample of nickel powder/wire. Most people probably give up too quickly. Then they switch to another brand/type of nickel or add an extra additive before figuring out how to pre-treat the original fuel. Eventually, they may produce significant excess heat by mostly luck but they won't have a solid understanding of the parameters required. Baking in atmosphere (for intentional oxidation), vacuum degassing, flushing with hydrogen (chemical reduction), surface treatments: there are many durations, temperatures, pressures, and other variables to test. The work is hard and tedious.


    3) On a practical note, Me356 seemed to focus on cycles of vacuuming and flushing with hydrogen until his nickel wire could breath so much hydrogen (in a very short time period) the resistance would go up or down 40%. I've also read and heard (even privately) of multiple accounts where extended, deep vacuuming under heat was critical for the effect to show up. The problem, as you've pointed out in the past, is the sintering of the nickel powder. If the degassing is done at a low enough temperature so the nickel powder doesn't sinter, the diffusion rate of oxygen and CO2 out of the lattice will be reduced.


    4) A lot of commonly available LiAlH4 is of very poor quality. Me356 claimed his Alfa Aesar 97% LiAlH4 seemed to emit twenty times the hydrogen as the LiAlH4 he had been using. Also, a few minutes of exposure to atmosphere can allow LiAlH4 to absorb a LOT of moisture that could result in oxygen going into the reactor. LiAlH4 also bonds with nitrogen in the atmosphere. If someone had a high quality professional lab and was qualified to do so (no one except a trained expert should try this) they could dissolve and purify a lower quality LiAlH4 into a 99.9% pure sample. I also wonder if by controlling this process if the particle size of the LiAlH4 could be made smaller.

    Quote

    Q. Product steam of the reactors. And it goes into what interior diameter pipe to go, once it exits the reactor?


    A. I suspect it was a DN80, but I don't know because it was covered by insulation.


    Murray isn't absolutely convinced it was a DN40.


    He also mentions that he took pictures of everything. Maybe we will see the picture he took of the flow meter to learn if it was really at the bottom of a "U" like Rossi claims. If it wasn't, then that is what would really throw a wrench into the works of Rossi's machine.


    Wow!


    What document is that in?

    Rossi specifically stated that the input flow meter was at the bottom of a "U".


    I wonder if IH will make a stunning revelation tomorrow with a photograph taken of the flow meter when they visited the plant the first time to seal it. If they really want to show Rossi lied about the setup of the plant, this would be an ideal way.

    2) My second thought is that we have been told over and over that the flow meter was NOT at the bottom of a "U." (Or am I wrong? Am I hallucinating? Due to this, I was expecting an exhibit including a photograph of the position of the flow meter the FIRST time IH went to the plant and took pictures soon after the lawsuit was launched before all the pipework was removed. However, no such photograph was provided. Did Rossi prevent such a photo from being taken during IH's first visit to the plant when the container was sealed?


    Rossi specifically stated, using a sockpuppet on the JONP, that the flow meter was at the bottom of a U.


    Could this have been true?


    I've been studying these documents all day. I have just finished with IH's motion to dismiss and their exhibits.


    Of SEVERAL thoughts, I want to bring up TWO.


    1) It sure does seem that Rossi was not "producing" platinum sponge in the JM Products container behind the wall. The descriptions in the various documents make it seem like he had "reactors" (in the NUCLEAR sense) in the heat flow from the 1MW plant. He was literally taking a finished product (platinum sponge) and then FURTHER cooking it. However, my guess that could be totally wrong is that he thought or possibly was cooking it with NUCLEAR fire. What is especially interesting is how Andrea Rossi asked him to come up with a 5 million volt source/system that was small and compact. He then said he would need 100,000 of them.


    - Bass claims the process in the JM Products container on the other side of the wall was ENDOTHERMIC.


    - Bass claims that "energy conversion" was taking place in that container.


    - Bass claims that high voltages are needed to trigger at least some forms of the Rossi Effect (we know that just heat will work too in some setups).


    There is also a mention of Project "Beagle Bone."


    Now, my totally crazy idea here is that Rossi thought he was using some of the excess heat to not only perform endothermic chemical reactions but possibly endothermic nuclear reactions. This is just a guess and a hunch. I don't know if he really thought this. I also don't know if it worked.


    But I'm really thinking to myself (take it with a ton of salt) what he was doing in the JM Products container was an attempt at a NUCLEAR process and not purely chemical.

    If this reactor turns out to work -- it requires much verification -- then it changes the whole ball game.


    The source of the light, heat, and direct electric production of the Quark becomes obvious: the excess electric current traveling through the reactor is the source of all three! If the results of the paper can be verified, the following is what comes to mind.


    - The current ionizes the gas emitting light.


    - The current adds kinetic energy to the ions increasing the temperature.


    - The current -- from potentially multiple sources including direct thermionic emission from the heated electrode -- raises the amperage flowing through the output wire.


    If this reactor can be verified, EVERYTHING ROSSI HAS SAID ABOUT THE QUARK MAKES PERFECT SENSE.


    If of course these results are verified by third parties and turn out to be correct.


    I'm hopeful that can be done.


    Anyone willing to try and answer my questions?

    Manganese is essential to iron and steel production by virtue of its sulfur-fixing, deoxidizing, and alloying properties, as first recognized by the British metallurgist Robert Forester Mushet (1811 - 1891) who, in 1856, introduced the element, in the form of Spiegeleisen,
    into steel for the specific purpose of removing excess dissolved
    oxygen, sulfur, and phosphorus in order to improve its malleability. Steelmaking,[35]
    including its ironmaking component, has accounted for most manganese
    demand, presently in the range of 85% to 90% of the total demand.[32] Manganese is a key component of low-cost stainless steel.[30][36]


    Could Rossi be using a nickel Manganese alloy to remove the oxygen in his nickel?

    I just had a thought.


    In systems that rely on heat and no electric current running through the nickel or electric fields from a resistor, fractoemission could produce a current running through the metal during thermal shocks (rapid increases in temperature) that damage the lattice and emit electrons. Once this happens, additional electrons could be emitted producing more current and the reactions could proliferate, self sustaining.

    Kind of a letdown having a COP of only 22000. But, I'm comforted by the fact that you can get heat, light, electricity, and propellantless thrust from it. Modest claims, but I think most people could agree that they are quite realistic. Who would have someone add their name to another theoretical paper with lots of formulas in it if it wasn't really true?


    If the Rossi Effect is real as a whole then I think this claim is probably very realistic.


    First, we know that all of Rossi's devices have been capable (I'll say allegedly capable to be diplomatic with some people on here) of self sustaining for hours at the time. Even Sergio Focardi who tested Rossi's earliest systems claims this. This means a COP of INFINITY. And infinity is far higher than 22,000! So from one point of view, the COP is extremely impressive but nothing that we shouldn't have expected.


    Secondly, my guess is that in addition to perhaps expelling energetic electrons and other emissions that might ionize the hydrogen gas, the nuclear effects will warm up the cathode until it becomes a thermionic emitter. This would make the nickel start emitting electrons -- adding the current going through the cell. This current would seem like it was "free" but it would really be a product of the heat generated by the nuclear reactions.


    This is an amazing paper and worthy of high praise, in my opinion. Of course this technology needs to be tested by multiple third parties ASAP to obtain verification.


    But take my words with a container of salt -- I'm not a physicist. I'm just giving my opinion.

    My questions about this paper for anyone who is interested:


    1) The following pathway is mentioned: 62−x Ni + xn∗ →62Ni. Can anyone explain this in a little more easy to understand manner? For example, he states, "where p∗ and n∗ means a bound nucleon which has a source in another nuclide." What do the "x" symbols represent?


    2) He then goes onto mention, "The main sources of the bound nucleons are" and identifies "5Mn → 54 Cr + p"


    He also states the following later on in the paper: "For example the reaction Ni+p* with p* from manganese or lithium would give copper isotope below the ground state."


    Does the above tell us that Rossi is using Mn in his fuel mixture!?


    3) The start up voltage of .105V seems too low to start up a glow discharge which usually requires a couple hundred volts even if the gas is at low pressure. An arc discharge, however, is what seems to be depicted in the paper. An arc discharge could operate at a much lower voltage. Was it some special property of this system that allowed for the ionization to begin at such a low voltage OR could the control system have imparted a brief high voltage spike (even for a millisecond) to get the arc going before lowering the voltage back down?


    4) Rossi just indicated on the JONP earlier today or yesterday that the pure electrical output of the Quark would be more like a current rather than a voltage. Does this mean that the nuclear reactions occurring at the cathode are perhaps emitting copious electrons and providing the power for the current flow? Could this device basically be a nuclear "current" (rather than voltage) booster device?


    5) There is a sentence in the paper that reads, "The important part for this to work is that the electrons needs to be unpaired in order to make a s in flip to emit photon in the microwave region." Does this mean that one form of output from the cathode is microwave radiation? This would certainly further ionize the gas into protons and electrons -- perhaps explaining the high current.


    6) The paper states, "Suitable elements that are naturally in 1S states are the alkali and coin metals. In addition some more metals could be in 1s states this includes nickel, platinum, niobium, molybdenum, ruthenium, rhodium and chrome. A dz2 state is particularly good since this is a magnetic quadrupole seen from

    the nucleon.." Is palladium in a 1S state? I'll have to do a search to find out. If it is not in the 1S state, perhaps this could be one of multiple possible reasons why Ni-H works better than Pd-D?


    7) What elements have the dz2 state which is claimed to be particularly good?


    8) On the practical side of things, getting hydrogen into the nickel seems to be of critical importance. The hydrogen or liquid alkali metal needs to be placed between grains or cracks. According to the paper, this would allow them to be exposed to a quadrapole magnetic field. Basically, this seems to imply that methods of optimizing hydrogen absorption such as the use of atomic hydrogen or ions bombarded onto the metal could accelerate the effect. Could me356 by performing multiple cycles of vacuum degassing and then exposing to hydrogen be simply tremendously embrittling his nickel?


    "A good way to put atoms in between the grains is by using liquid metal embrittlement and/or hydrogen embrittlement. There charged ions of the liquid metal/hydrogen fills the space in between grains to make cracks and at the same time place them in strong magnetic quadrupoles."


    9) Does the following statement explain why Andrea Rossi has used frequencies that included square waves and allegedly resonance conditions with his resistor that produces sudden spikes?


    "The special electromagnetic fields that are required for extracting energy out of a nucleon is a magnetic quadrupole or a changing electric field."


    10) It seems to me that this paper tells us TWO very important things: fuel processing is critical and varying electric fields can also help. What do all of you think?