Posts by seven_of_twenty

Wouldn't all this arguing about flow rates and blowers evaporate (sorry) if Mizuno had used an SGVIT style liquid cooled and jacketed calorimeter? Or a liquid cooled Seebeck type? Or better yet, SGVIT calculations from the coolant in and out of a Seebeck calorimeter? Just saying. Air flow calorimeters are very difficult for some of the reasons we are seeing and probably additional ones as well. Still, to question Mizuno's results, you have to account for the spot on calibrations with Joule heat. I have not seen that so far.

Quote

I was joking! Of course I do not expect you to make a useful contribution to this field. I doubt you are skilled in the art

Never mind little old me. You don't admit that recent (last 10 years) skeptics have done a great service by helping to weed out scumbags like Rossi, the jokers who perpetrated Defkalion, and all the other claimants to various high technology energy related frauds? I bet people who considered investing with those crooks appreciate the advice from skeptics that they found on the internet. There are other ways to contribute than to putter around in your garage.

Sorry this got OT

Far as I am concerned you can move my recent discussion with JedRothwell elsewhere if he agrees. I did feel a need to be on the record about what I thought should come next.

Quote

Also, we don't agree with you. If you would like to do this, I suggest you buy some mesh and palladium and get cracking. Be careful with the Ni nano powder! In six months or a year of intense effort, you might be able to do the test you describe, if you are skilled in the art.

Ridiculous. I know oldguy gets it. Maybe others also who have not spoken up. Maybe I wasn't clear but I doubt that. Sure, I'm going to build a complex machine because you and some guy in Japan says it makes LENR. You're dreaming.

I am not suggesting that you or Mizuno are like Rossi. I am saying that you believed in stuff from Rossi (and his associates and offshoots) about which you should have known better much earlier and you put down as ignorant the people who did know along the way. That's a fact. The similarity I see is that you use the same paranoid rant again against Nature, Science, several institutions and skeptics in general. I don't think Mizuno is necessarily FOS like I thought from mid late 2011 that Rossi for sure was. But it is certainly possible. The claimed results alone don't make LENR more probable outside the usual suspects community of believers.

And to my thinking, it is very curious that Mizuno exhibits a claim for a hugely capable reactor but well... sorry. We can't do any test at all on that one. Too powerful. I'm sorry you don't understand the concept of estimating heat flow from a hot surface using a heat meter. I thought you had worked with Storms on envelope "Seebeck" calorimeters and purchased commercial models from Thermonetics (and the late Dr. H. F. Poppendiek). Maybe you didn't realize it but those are made from electroplated thermocouple type heat flow transducers connected in series and embedded in their walls.

On another issue, I am puzzled that Mizuno's large reactor doesn't exhibit thermal instability or runaway because the reaction is temperature dependent with a positive temperature coefficient. And it is haphazardly cooled by radiation and air convection. In fact, if I am seeing the image right, there is a heat reflector above the reactor which inhibits cooling further. I would have expected forced air or better yet, forced liquid cooling or at least careful temperature monitoring. If the claim is true, the potential is probably there for uncontrolled temperature rises. And people venturing by are exposed, unshielded, to the reactor in a living room. Something doesn't seem right with all this, it's just that I can't figure out what it is. But it doesn't matter. You guys go ahead. I do like a good train wreck when nobody gets badly hurt and I suspect one may be coming with this project. And just to be crystal clear, it's a suspicion, a feeling, nothing scientific and I sincerely hope I am wrong. Me being wrong would be much more interesting of course.

ETA: I wish I could volunteer to bring a heat meter and read out gear to Mizuno's lab. If I did that, the test I propose would take an hour or two for the active test. A blank would not even be necessary because, in Rossi's immortal words, "we already know what that would show." Everyone is familiar with 300W heaters. Unfortunately, I can't volunteer for that even if Mizuno were willing. It's a bit far and I'm busy too.

I wouldn't know where to even start with the above so I am going to leave it alone. I've been following LENR since 2011 when Rossi first started braying. I guess I can wait a bit longer to know whether or not Mizuno is for real. It's a pity though that I (we) have to wait when the simple experiment I proposed would make it far more clear in less than a week at a cost less than $1000, which by the way, I offered to pay in advance. Of course, it's always clear to JedRothwell - I have a sinking feeling we might be revisiting the Rossi past soon because Jed and others have forgotten it. I hope not. I will not forget that Rossi's claims had to be true because the data were derived on the basis of first principles and that anything in papers that the skeptics can't cite specific technical errors in have to be right. In fact, I am thinking of calling those Jed's Postulates.

OK. But don't complain that skeptics don't believe you and Mizuno on faith when you won't do such an obvious and compelling proof test as a brief heat meter experiment on the most powerful reactor claim in LENR history. It's reactions like the above that make me more skeptical. I think it will be quite a while before the merits of Mizuno's claims are known. That will be on the believers. It really does work a lot like a religion.

Quote

It is easier to measure that [lower power] accurately.

Here we go again JedRothwell . If Mizuno really has a 3kW reactor that runs on 300W of electricity, you really think anyone needs a highly accurate power measurement? For what, exactly?

A couple of more recent books on calorimetry:

https://www.amazon.com/Calorim…hias-Sarge/dp/3527327614/

https://www.amazon.com/Princip…y-Gaisford/dp/1782620516/

But calorimetry is a very diverse field. There are many specialized types of calorimeters and you do not need to learn about them all. Depending on which type you are interested in, a technical article/paper may be better than a book. So is personal contact with an expert when you are ready to get to work.

Someone for the love of God please explain to me why replicate an experiment that makes "40 to 100W" while the newest claim from the same experimenter is a reactor that sits quietly in his fireplace, making 3kW from a 300W input? That makes sense to someone? Let's choose the slowest runner to represent our country next time we pick an Olympic team?

Alan Smith If the above claim (3000W/300W) is true, you can bet there will be progress and very fast. That alone, after safety and practicality testing is already a product!

It's interesting that so many people are eager to rush to replicate what Mizuno claims to have done. It would be quicker and more efficient for one or more of the more skilled of these folks to try obtaining an invitation to Mizuno's lab to go over his work in meticulous detail. And oldguy , nobody seems to get the concept of using a simple heat flow meter on the hotter and more powerful Mizuno reactor to do a "quick and dirty" measurement of surface heat flow and consequent rough output power calculation to see if the result is even in the ballpark. It's not rocket science. It's quick and inexpensive. And I love it when JedRothwell concludes that I know nothing about heat flow measurements, I offer to link him (privately) to my peer-reviewed published technical papers on the subject and he ignores it.

Suppose an amateur scientist in his garage replicates (or fails to replicate) Mizuno's result. Are we really going to know that much more? Especially since some advocate varying and deviating from the cookbook method.

Ah well... LENR quest is one messy and inefficient affair and it is easy to see why.

Quote

How many of these experiments have you done?

Try to curb your unpleasantness. Write me an email: [email protected] (alert me here please if you do) and I will refer you to one of my papers on this issue.

oldguy I think those would work. The usual problem with using these as heat meters (and it has been done) is that they are thick and have a high thermal resistance which tends to distort the temperature distribution and the heat flux where you place them. In this instance, I would need to have someone compute it from the specs but I suspect that the heat flow would be so large compared to the control that the thermal resistance of the device would be no issue. Normally, heat meters/heat flow transducers are made as thin and thermally conductive as possible, compatible with adequate sensitivity. But in this case, I doubt it matters. One has the luxury of accurate blanks and calibrations here which overrides some clumsiness in making the measurement.

ETA to oldguy: I was thinking something more like this:

https://www.fluxteq.com/hthfs-…rature-heat-flux-sensor-1

https://www.fluxteq.com/products

-many companies make these. The whole experiment would take a day or two actually running, maybe a week or less total -- if the reactor was ready to fire up and depending on how long it would take to replace the active mesh with an inactive one and pump everything down again for the control run. Total cost probably $1000 or less. Hell, if he wants to do it, I'll send him the money (via Rothwell I would assume) myself. I'm getting impatient because the claims are so good and while I know people are preparing to replicate, nobody has said they are repeating it carefully and with a fresh view with Mizuno.

Everyone seems to overlook that if it turns out Mizuno is, respectfully, FOS, then there isn't much point in going to the trouble and expense of replication.

Quote

Not considering any of Rossi's technology - which he will never allow to be verified one way or the other - the most impressive and perhaps advanced player in this field that's moving towards commercialization is Brilliant Light Power via their utilization of the negative resistance regime to produce a massive rate enhancement of "hydrino" production. I'd go so far as to say that compared to Mizuno's system, Brilliant Light Power's Suncell is literally light years ahead with numerous advantages. For a company the size of Google with billions of dollars to spend, I can't help but think that a project composed of a series of experiments to investigate the potential of the complex space charge or "macro-EVO' that MUST form (this is in mainstream literature) during a negative resistance - to power the circuit while the voltage and current relationship is reversed - should be conducted.

How can anyone be so wrong?

Quote

Not considering any of Rossi's technology - which he will never allow to be verified one way or the other - the most impressive and perhaps advanced player in this field that's moving towards commercialization is Brilliant Light Power via their utilization of the negative resistance regime to produce a massive rate enhancement of "hydrino" production. I'd go so far as to say that compared to Mizuno's system, Brilliant Light Power's Suncell is literally light years ahead with numerous advantages. For a company the size of Google with billions of dollars to spend, I can't help but think that a project composed of a series of experiments to investigate the potential of the complex space charge or "macro-EVO' that MUST form (this is in mainstream literature) during a negative resistance - to power the circuit while the voltage and current relationship is reversed - should be conducted.

How can anyone be so wrong?

Quote

Anyway, sooner or later I hope he will get around to testing this thing in a large calorimeter.

JedRothwell Geez Louise, he doesn't have to do that! With the power ratio he claims, all he has to do is stick a heat flow transducer on the exterior of his large reactor. Two HFT's if he wants to go deluxe. Any small non-uniformity in the heat flux through the casing won't matter compared to the claimed power gain. A control run would be the same thing, same heater power, just mesh with no Pd as Alan Smith astutely suggested. Relatively low cost. The only issue is getting an HFT with the right sensitivity and operating temperature range. Any of the manufacturers of those things could help with that. I bet it'd be less than $1K and would give a resoundingly positive answer if the claim is even close to correct.

OBVIOUSLY Mizuno

They could also try to replicate Brillouin but I doubt those rascals would cooperate.

Also don't forget the link to the entire "JNOP" farce-- all posts back to 2011 on one html page:

RECENT ONLY: http://www.rossilivecat.com/

COMPLETE (long! -- may bog down or jam slow internet connections or very old computers): http://www.rossilivecat.com/all.html

Quote

GSVIT 's fluid is tight and holy water.

Just to clarify a couple of things I wrote, I have no problem with anyone taking a microscope to Mizuno's methodology. That sort of detailed and careful examination is never bad. It's just that to account for a power output of 250W with an input of 50W, any error to cause entirely wrong results for that is going to be a whopper-- not something subtle.

As to liquid flow calorimetry as opposed to air flow, the thermal properties of water (or other heat transfer liquids) are much better suited to making straightforward and accurate heat flux measurements in the required temperature and heat flow regime than is air. It is less likely heat or coolant will escape undetected through unknown pathways in a calorimeter constructed and implemented like SGVIT's than it is in Mizuno's. Still, as I have been beating the dead horse over, with this much power and this much power ratio, and those sterling calibration results, differences between air and water calorimetry almost certainty don't matter. So, apart from dishonesty or delusion, what we are probably looking to rule out is something very gross like the error JedRothwell cited NASA made when it confused unit systems causing a Mars probe to crash. Furthermore, it would have to be something that allows the calibration to come in correct but affects the active experiment result differently. That is a tall order.

I am still skeptical about the validity of the claims. However, I am at a complete loss to explain how an error meeting the above requirements could possibly be made under the circumstances. That makes for a very interesting situation indeed.

One other thing: I hope the always from the start idiotic idea that skeptics can't be convinced by good data has been defeated for good around here. Otherwise, name one skeptic on the forum who claims this Mizuno experiment couldn't be valid based only on a priori reasoning and concepts. Name one who has said they wouldn't accept the data if the experiment can be properly and reliably replicated by credible people or organizations. So please: stop all the dumb sh*t about pathological skepticicism already. Prior doubts have been logical, not pathological.

Quote

The thing that bothers me about THH's attitude was his statement that he expects this is an error. "Expect" is the wrong word. I fear this is an error.

Here, I have to share THH's view. Expect, fear, whatever, these results are hard to believe. I fervently hope they're right - that would be far more interesting than if they are wrong. But if they are wrong, I suppose the error that was made or whatever explanation there is, will be pretty interesting too, unlike the Rossi and associate fiascos.

What I have would have done differently would have been to use the calorimetry method of GSVIT as well as the air method. In fact, if I could only do one experiment, it would have been with the liquid cooled cell. It just seems tighter. And two different methods would have been better plus you could run calorimetry on the more powerful reactor if you could fit a GSVIT type coolant jacket around it.

GSVIT again: https://gsvit.wordpress.com/20…te-calorimetria-a-flusso/ (use Google translate)

But it always comes back to this: calibration returns valid results within excellent tolerances. And far as I know, nobody found faults with it yet. If only it can be verified properly, it is exactly what much maligned skeptics like me have been asking for all along engendering hostility from the true believers for it. I am amused that it can be all summed up with:

ETA: About Jed's computer errors, I was just watching the first moon landing again and I was reminded it almost didn't happen because of a "1202" overflow error in the guidance computer which kept repeating and returning all the way to the surface.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.…m-explained/#.XSeu-etKiJA

Quote

Maybe they will take that money, and use it for some real LENR research

Wanna bet?

Why Rossi keeps going? Because that is what sociopaths do. Being a sociopath implies having a certain mind set which some would call a sort of insanity. Crazy is not usually logical, right?