Posts by seven_of_twenty

Curbina

Thanks for reminding me that large Seebeck calorimeters have not been made, that I know of, for high temperatures. It would be difficult. But a cooling system on the outside of a Seebeck can raise it's operating temp considerably. And one made with ceramic heat flow transducers would work while very hot as well. Again, though, not easy to do nor cheap. I think JedRothwell is quite correct-- at the powers and power ratios claimed, Mizuno's methods are more than sufficient.

I know heat flow through the steel tube isn't uniform but still, a single or a few high temp heat flow transducers on the surface would be useful to corroborate the air calorimetry for doubters but I don't think Mizuno or Rothwell care about that nor probably should they. Still, it would be a simple way to estimate the output of the larger reactor. I wonder if Mizuno has thought of it.

Just for giggles:

Quote

Room-sized human thermoelectric gradient layer calorimeters exist, including a large (3.05 × 2.74 × 2.44 m)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3920988/

Efficient very thin commercial heat flow or flux sensor or transducer (there are others):

https://www.fluxteq.com/products

Just as a curiosity, In fact you can actually reverse a commercial thermoelectric (Peltier) cooler and make it into a clumsy heat flow transducer. BTW, commercial reject Peltier coolers were what Rossi foisted on DOD as efficient thermoelectric converters as per prior conversation.

Quote

Outcomes 3, 4 and 5 are what usually happens to cold fusion claims. This experiment is easier than most, and it apparently produces more power, more readily, so I hope these outcomes are less likely

I think they are extremely unlikely. This report is essentially 10x larger than most if not all clear and even slightly credible reports. And absent error or fraud, it is very credible. And fraud, as I said. is somewhat improbable or better.

Quote

Rossi demonstrates why high power claims and a high power ratio can be wrong. Or deceptive.

Rossi demonstrated how easy it is to fool desirous people with complete garbage. Anybody who had pushed Rossi to calibrate properly early on and to allow proper inspection of the gear would have defeated his fraud. Why nobody forced the issue is an ongoing mystery to me. Had Rossi refused, that would also have been strong negative evidence. We all know the usual suspects for what actually took place.

Quote

Some people have said they don't trust air flow calorimeters at all, and these results will not be believable until they are seen with something like a Seebeck calorimeter. That's silly. Those people are looking for an excuse to ignore the results.

I agree with you for the power and power ratios you are claiming here. It might be good to have Seebeck results but it's probably overkill and it isn't very easy. As I said though, you can make it easier with the use of premanufactured heat flux transducers and if the inside of the Seebeck is very thermally conductive (thick copper for example) you don't need to do more than sample the walls with the heat meters at some reasonable intervals (which can be calculated). This has been done with Seebeck calorimeters intended for biological research with living animals, Portland cement work and other chemistry experiments. Some of these were quite large. The largest would accommodate a cow! But you're right. Such refinement isn't required at the levels of heat claimed.

Quote

seven_of_twenty is correct that higher power matters, as I should have acknowledged previously.

Thanks. It's OK. I (and others) have only been saying and supporting that issue for about six years! Which is why Rossi got so much attention- high power claims and high power ratio. And I knew Rossi was almost certain to be a crook and supported that assertion starting about 8 months after his announcement in January 2011. And what did I get? A lot of abuse, doxxing and even stalking and threats of violence.

Well, that's past history. Anyway, there is nothing (not the faintest evidence) to suggest Mizuno and JedRothwell are crooks so either the world is about to change or these two made the mother of all mistakes. And kudos to them for doing it more or less open source (I am not familiar with the patent situation if any).

It will be really REALLY interesting to see if Mizuno's reactor can be made to work by others like it seems to work in Mizuno's latest papers and JedRothwell 's reports. I wish someone would get IH interested again. They probably have the money and at least some access to capability. And they may be able to mobilize some sort of effort quickly.

I would be interested in kirkshanahan 's opinion on this new work, if he's still reading the forum. He's also been much maligned for no valid reason BTW.

I' m not sure how hopeful I really am, Shane D. I am very cautious. It sure sounds easy to test the larger reactor though. I have always said and others have always poopooed that the more power and higher the "COP" the easier it is to be sure the measurement method is good enough. So here, no high accuracy is required. Maybe just fry a pork chop on it. Actually here's a recipe-- maybe buy Mizuno a leg of lamb and some foil.

Quote

I don't think people are lying or cheating. I think they probably have made some kind of mistake. We don't really have enough information to be able to pour over the details, but someone will try to replicate it I'm sure. If it's replicated by someone else, then I might begin to get a little excited.

@ Jack Cole

Geez Jack, if a mistake it would have to be a bruiser-doozer of a mistake.

I am as hardened a skeptic as one will find about LENR. But look at JedRothwell 's figure in post #642 above. Now this innocent looking piece of gear supposedly was an excellent robust room heater with 300W power input from a voltage and current regulated supply rated at 500W maximum (IIRC from the paper). And IIRC, it does it for long periods (hours ). Now there are not too many ways to account for such a phenomenon or "make a mistake" about it. Which is why I tend to lock on and focus on stories like this. There are only a few explanations, they are simple and they are easy to sort out. Either it's bullsh*t like Rossi's heating a whole factory with an "ecat" in 2007 (!) or it's proof positive of something extremely anomalous (as anomalous as an alien visitor in a flying saucer). As several pointed out, this doesn't require precision calorimetry! Either it's true and valid or it's not. I'd sure like to know which and it can't be that hard to find out! I have to admit I am suspicious. But please get someone reliable to check it out, JedRothwell . Maybe Dewey Weaver is ready to return to Japan or maybe what was his name... ? Murray I think. Maybe it was Moray or Amore but most likely Murray.

And JedRothwell , just for amazement, I would love to see a short video of Mizuno or friend standing near it while it operates, holding a thermometer in hand (any Amazon cheapie would do) while he approaches the device and leaves it again. Showing also that the only connection is the wires to the power supply.

I am getting this weird Steornian vibration about all this. Sort of a deja vue. Where you ask all sorts of rational and reasonable questions, easily satisfied rapidly if the story is true, and you get evasive stuff in return. Like Sean McCarthy used to do. Oh well, I guess in a few months or a year we will know one way or another. It's either going to be BS or amazing new science. I don't see any possibility of anything inbetween.

Jack Cole You're not excited about a space heater whose output equals that of a 3kW commercial heater and runs on 300W? That could only be for one reason: you think someone is lying or cheating. If there is another explanation for doubt, I'd love to hear it. To me, it looks pretty darn exciting as long as it is eventually proven by good measurements and as long as it's not some sort of sleight of hand.

Thanks for the gauge information. I understand the device needs no pressure relief if it's operating normally under a partial vacuum. The question referenced what might happen in the very improbable event that something lets loose inside the reactor, for example an unexpected release of extremely large amounts of heat that converts some parts to a very hot vapor or gas. In that case, it occurred to me that the sealed strong stainless steel container would become a bomb. After all, the reaction and its properties are, as per what was written, entirely unknown. It would seem reasonable enough to add some sort of burst disc or other safety device. Just curious but it's OK. I recall LENR experimenters tend not to use safety barriers and like to live dangerously.

Just out of curiosity and sorry if it was already described or in the paper: what sort of pressure relief and/or sensor does Mizuno's latest reactors have?

Someone should ask Rossi if he read Mizuno's papers.

JedRothwell

Quote

Also, by the way, if you do not think the data in this paper is pretty convincing, there is no point to going. You are not going to see anything more convincing than this. Just a whole lot more of the same. It is just a bunch of numbers marching across the screen, as I said. Real-time graphs are no different from Acrobat file graphs.

I couldn't disagree more. Imagine a setup like is shown in the photo in the recent Mizuno paper where a small heater radiating an obvious appx 3kW is sitting there powered by only a 300 or 500W supply cleanly connected and clearly metered. I'm not saying that is definitive, there is always sleight of hand to consider. But what a spectacular demo that would be. And how easy would that be for Mizuno or his coworkers to do, if the data in the paper are correct. Try to see this from the perspective of someone who is open minded but definitely not convinced cold fusion claims are real and who keenly remembers Rossi.

Next, imagine a wealthy investor in front of that heater, with access to a team which can review numbers marching across a screen, etc. etc.

And hopefully, the whole time, a busy bunch of home brew inventors are trying to replicate the work. It should be an interesting few next months if all this holds together. Still an "if."

Quote

Would you demand the plasma fusion people set up a Tokamak at a physics conference before you believe their results?

Sure I would, if the Tokamak in question were the size of a small suitcase and heated my living room better than a Lasko ceramic heater and did it on less than 500W input!

Seriously, I see your point. Then invite some truly impressive people, not usual suspects, to witness a demo and as "Dr. Mike" used to demand to do to Steorn's Orbo, take a screwdriver to it. Of course, Dr. Mike never got to take that proverbial screwdriver to anything made by Steorn.

I mean, you do want something good to happen to this and the sooner the better and with Mizuno and you getting credit for your respective contributions, right?

I still say you should show up with a working model at an HVAC trade show. You might get arrested eventually but it would be tons of fun before that happened. Call it an electricity multiplier.

And I just want to say if anyone cares, that I am still very skeptical of this demonstration. I can't find fault with it from what was presented and I hope it's real but I am still wondering what/where the joker is.

And if a working model is not shown at ICCF or some place similar, then my skepticism will be much greater.

Quote

I am also sure they have read nothing and they know nothing. You can see that from their descriptions of the experiments.

Yes, you accused me of the same thing. It's a great excuse for failing to get definitive testing done. I guess you're left with Kim Kardashian as your only hope. Good luck.

BTW, why won't you contact Earth Tech?

And I never got the impression that Miles, McKubre, or anyone else had near the long term, consistent, reproducible high output and high out/in that you and Mizuno are claiming this time around. Maybe in your eyes only?

JedRothwell

Quote

This is real life. You cannot seriously think that middle-class researchers will do something that is sure to end their careers, just because the results are interesting. If that is what you are waiting for, you wait in vain. If that is your standard, it will not be met until Nature turns around and takes credit for cold fusion. Do you see any sign of that

I call bull on this. The results are "interesting?" That's what you consider them? (if true of course)

Like I said, I really doubt fraud here. But one thing you are doing which scammers often do (it does not mean you are a scammer!) is to minimize the impact of the discovery if it's true. Scammers classically avoid testing because they say nobody credible will believe them enough to even do a test. Then they get third rate testers they can influence like Rossi did. Carl Tilley (the self charging DeLorean car) and Steorn (the magnetic motor) did similar moves.

Even if major test labs or agencies won't test Mizuno's device, I already mentioned Earth Tech. Have you contacted them? And what about Boeing via IH? God knows they need a lift of some kind right now. What about going back to Kimmel or Duncan with this? Or Carl Page? Or the Gates Foundation officially? Surely you know more likely places to get good tests than I do. My point is that this is such a momentous discovery if true and the results are so impressive and the documentation is so comparatively clean that it should not be hard to get a hearing somewhere influential. You can also try Musk through his people, Bezos, or be creative- try Kim Kardashian! Or even the energy department. Under the current president, there are probably people there who will believe what would normally be considered to be improbable tales.

Or have Mizuno get a local investor to put up a modest sum based on a demo, get proper local authorizations and make and sell a dozen or so space heaters. That would also put Mizuno on the map if it could be done. Hard to certify and maintain I suppose. But maybe do it differently. Make another 3kW unit and take the pair to a trade show. For heaters. LOL. Set up some thermometers and big visible meters for the power supply and let people get close and feel the heat. Don't tell anyone it's "nuclear" until the show is over. Just say it's a proprietary "power enhancer" or concentrator or a way more efficient heater.

But I mean something this big... there has to be someone. Your paranoia is choking you. Get rid of it for now. Put it on the shelf at least.

JedRothwell I agree that the RTD's are an unlikely or even impossible source of major error in Mizuno's experiment. I only brought them up to be complete and because they could matter where there is a lot of electrical noise, as in Brillouin's setup with spikey waveform inputs at considerable power levels. As I wrote before, one would have to invoke quite a few extremely hard to imagine (or simply impossible) coincidences to overrule the calibrations. Assuming, of course, that the results were honestly acquired and reported.

Quote

In short, with those assumptions, it seems to this anonymous observer that we have proof positive coming after a successful replication. Congratulations to the experimenters and the entire community conditional on the successful replication. It's almost too good to believe is true. Cheers!

Yes but caution. To be credible, the fiasco that was caused by the inept Swedish professors and Lewan "replicating" Rossi, experiments in which Rossi obfuscated everything and was heavily involved have to be studiously avoided. It is critical that the replicators do their final definitive work completely independently of Mizuno except for consultations. It is also important that these replicators not be "usual suspects." IMO, to be convincing, it would be vastly better to avoid people with close ties to the LENR research community.

A result of such magnitude should be replicable by any well known test lab or government organization- also by a major university physics department where the department itself would endorse the tests. And there would be no problem with Mizuno providing the equipment, even as a black box, as long as all power in and power out measurements were provided by the experimenters using their own methods and equipment. So not just replication but replication done well by the best available and especially the most credible people- people with no vested interest if possible.

@IHfanboy

Quote

And when the histories are written, those same "skeptics" will claim that they gave Cold Fusion a fair shake all along. That there was no reputation trap. That MIT never fudged data to protect their hot fusion interests. That government funding was always available for basic research in this area. That scientists who dedicated their entire careers to this research were always revered as mavericks. And so forth.

First, this sort of complete crappola is OTC in this thread so I would hope the admins would move it to clearance. Then...

Quote

And when the histories are written, those same "skeptics" will claim that they gave Cold Fusion a fair shake all along.

Absolutely. And most skeptics are greeting Mizuno's work with open arms, assuming it is not a huge error or some sort of falsification.

Quote

That there was no reputation trap.

That's a ridiculous concept to begin with. Either something works or it doesn't and it usually gets figured out pretty soon in this modern and comparatively open world.

Quote

That MIT never fudged data to protect their hot fusion interests.

I've never seen credible evidence that they fudged anything.

Quote

That government funding was always available for basic research in this area.

Pretty much, at least through SPAWAR and related efforts. And more support was available via Kimmel and Duncan and if it is to be believed, now Gates.

Captain Obvious: https://www.urbandictionary.co…hp?term=Captain%20Obvious

Quote

So SOT , you have basically concluded your technical review.

THHnew has asserted that 64% of the area in the pipe has not been tested.

This could be the whopper problem

How so think you? Scary.?

A technical review? Hardly. I read most of two of the papers, skimmed the third, and read some but not all of the voluminous comments in the 2017 and current threads. I did not check formulas or math. I paid closest attention to calibrations.

With due respect to THHuxleynew , I am not concerned with the measurement of temperature in a pipe if that is what you are referring to. Undergraduates often aren't taught the great glory of well done calibration and some learn it on their own and others don't. I learned it the hard way very early on. So I am not concerned with the details of the calorimeter as long as the design and construction are plausible (they are) and calibrations work over the entire range of the measurements. Sure, there are better devices and methods for measuring heat flow but I although I like them, I doubt they are needed here.

I still think something major could be wrong that this group including me missed. Most things that are too good to be true... you know the rest. But I readily admit I don't know of anything wrong so far. Next step would seem to be as JedRothwell wrote, replication and not refinement of the calorimeter or reactor design.

It is really unlikely that a large error, if there is one, is in the calorimetry. Again from Captain Obvious, that's because of the calibrations from resistive (Joule) heating. Because the "COP" and the absolute power out are so large, it is extremely improbable that an error in calorimetry would account for the result and not be caught by calibration. Input power errors are also very improbable because a fully regulated power supply is used and again, any error sufficient to account for the results would be very large. These are reasons I am a fan of calibrations, large output power and large "COP." They render it unnecessary to agonize over fine measurement details. I don't see much point in more examination of air flow or temperature measurement in the calorimeter or related calculations because the calorimeter accounts for known inputs very well and in any case, way more accurately than is needed for this experiment.

So what else is left? Platinum RTD's can react to electrical noise. But that should affect both reactors as well as calibrations. Is something we're not thinking about very different about the experimental reactor compared to the control one which could account for the spectacular results? I know they are interchanged but is something other than the active mesh or deuterium gas different when a reactor is run? What else could it be?

So if anyone cares, at this point I am cautiously optimistic but concerned some problem is being missed. It would have to be a whopper though. And if there is a measurement issue, how to account for the larger experiment being able to act as a room heater with less than 300W (IIRC) input power.

And then, while I do not believe anything is being falsified, sadly, it always has to be ruled out. IIRC, JedRothwell received data from Japan but did not take data himself (please correct me if that is wrong).

For all these reasons, independent testing by a really good lab would certainly help resolve the issue and again being obvious, it certainly deserves a rapid definitive resolution! Meanwhile, thanks to JedRothwell for bringing these amazing results to the forum. And contrary to the usual suspects' opinions, skeptics will be quite convinced if these results are reliably and credibly duplicated.

Dewey Weaver : maybe it's time for IH to involve themselves again with Mizuno. Soon,