Posts by Mark U

Quote from stefan

One fact that I want to highlight and that is troubling me is that Rossi did not see any sign of the QX to ran out of fuel for a whole year. This is exactly

what you would see in a null device with a faulty measurement of COP. And as an experimenter I would be a bit un-secure if I've not done

a miss take somewhere.

At first glance yes. But as an experimenter, if you had a control (non active) fuel to compare to, it would be immediately apparent there was a huge difference with the active fuel. Rossi has been exploring fuel mixtures for years and would be intimately familiar with what works and what doesn't it seems to me.

Quote from oldguy

I am confused at how a "peak" in the spectrum of a non blackbody thing can be used to calculate its thermal output.

For example, take two LED's one red and one UV and a simple resister that just warms up and run them with 1W of power each. If you use the ideas Rossi uses, won't you calculate entire different thermal outputs if you based it on spectrum peak alone". You could only use the spectra from a flat black resister to calculate the thermal output anywhere near correctly.

My 60W incandescent bulb's tungsten melts at about 3400C but its color temp is 6500K. What is its thermal output?

If you want your "ballerina" to look hot just put a 370 UV led at the base or tint the glass.

The whole thing seems bogus to me.

Display More

Yeah it was clearly a mistake to try to calculate energy from that kind of spectrum. Rossi is self admittedly bad at doing simple calculations, and now as it appears, he can be bad at applying theory.

But heat is heat, pretty straightforward when the amounts are significant. I'll be waiting in earnest for the first customers to report back.

Interesting theory about the ballerina and the application of UV led's. Problem is, it wouldn't account for the alleged intense brightness and it wouldn't account for the cliff ; no photon wavelengths above 450nm. Provided that is real. Very strange spectrum. If UV LEDs were used there would have to be many varieties, ranging from the 200 to 400 nm range.

Personally I was quite enchanted by the Ballerina, rather hypnotic. That in itself is worthy of serious investigation. I can understand how Rossi was quite taken with it. Me too!

Quote from woodworker

I have a couple of basic questions about heating the alleged space. I ask it in all seriousness because I am neither an engineer nor a scientist. Here in California most houses have central heating, with one or more forced air units. The FAU is usually gas fired and then the warm air is circulated throughout the desired areas using a blower and ventilation tubes. This allows the warmer air to be distributed and output to spots throughout the desired area, thereby, as I understand it, allowing the warmer air to mix more easily with the existing air (while the colder air, which is heavier and thus lower to the floor, is being sucked into the FAU through a return system). This type of system seems to allow for warming without higher temperatures being present through distribution means such as radiators. As I also understand it, if you use only one radiator without a circulating fan, the radiator has to get extremely hot, hot and dangerous enough to burn.

Now my questions: If the Blue Box with the samovar attached (credit to someone above for the description was supposed to be the only means of heating a 42,000 cubic foot area (3,000 with 14 foot high ceilings), how the hell does it do that? I see no connections for HVAC tubing and if the samovar is supposed to be putting out all the necessary heat, without a blower or fan, I would have to imagine that the samovar would be verrrrrry hot, and yet it was covered with what appeared to be an ordinary sheet without any harm to the sheet, or to the man with no upper body who stands right next to the samovar.

I would appreciate any substantive corrections / answers to my questions / premises (that means calling me a babbler, idiot or just stupid only reflects on the commenter).

I think there is a misunderstanding. In the E-Cat SK video, the E-Cat presented was not operating, and tubing was not connected. It was there just for display. Now, an E-Cat that was operating would be less hot than a normal boiler, because it does not require air intake and exhaust. It appears sealed. And note: even typical boilers do not get that hot. I can lean up against our 1980s natural gas furnace while it is running with no concern at all. The vast majority of the heat energy is piped away for proper distribution, as also would occur for an operating E-Cat SK.

About heating 42,000 cubic feet. I did the (very simple) calculations for a detached building with dimensions 10m by 30m by 4m, assuming an average R10 value of insulation on the walls and ceiling, and heat loss through the floor the same as that through the walls and ceiling. With the temperature outside 16C colder than inside, 13kW of power is lost to the outside. Thus any heater must be putting out something like 13kW of power, fairly consistent with the stated power output of the E-Cat SK.

Quote from sam12

If I can save 20 percent on my heating bill I sure would.

Me too. And just think, if the E-Cat boiler was yours to own and run directly (rather than leasing energy from Leonardo) it would be more like over a 95 percent savings on the heating bill. Yes please.

But this is assuming the blessed thing works as advertised.

Quote from Roseland67

Said it before and I’ll say it again.

22 kw out of a 115 volt,16 amp, (1.84 kw) duplex outlet?

I know Adrian and Sam and 99% of ECW

believes this, but????????

Well if an eCat unit - fed only by a controller that was plugged into nothing more than a 1.84kW receptacle - was kicking out 22kW of heat, that would get my attention. Wouldn't it get yours?

Quote from Director

The SunCell produces more power because the plasma ball is probably ten thousand times larger in volume than the plasma ball in the SK. If a large SK were built with an equivalent plasma ball, I expect that the SK would produce more power because it would be in a better controlled state of resonance.

I don't recall the volume of the SK plasma. (Although the device weighs 1kg iirc.) The SunCell plasma would be roughly 2.5 cubic feet.

When you say a 'better' state of resonance do you mean a larger SK in comparison to the smaller SK, or to the SunCell? The Suncell doesn't appear to operate on resonance, it just resembles a blast furnace from videos I've seen. In the past I remember thinking that the SunCell had the eCat beat in power density while the eCat was much superior in energy density. But if the eCat is now kicking out 22kW from a 1kg unit it would be the power density champ as well. Hard to imagine how that much power can come from such a small source and remain intact.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

"Definitely a huge value! After 60 days of continued operation an E-Cat SK has produced (as we can and from a simple extrapolation) 31680kWh of heat, approximately the equivalentof 2762 kg of heating oil (avoiding, at same time, the emission of about 800 kg of CO2).”"

Four more days to go.

That works out to 22kW of continuous power. Definitely huge. Not as much as the BLP's SunCell but much longer running and probably higher COP.

Can't wait to see what the E-Cat SK looks like, at least.

Quote from Gruber

So where does the energy come from then?

Ultimately it would come from the coulombic potential energy possessed by hydrogen's orbiting electron. Some of that energy is released when, heretically, the electron drops to a lower energy state than the commonly accepted ground state.

Quote from Shane D.

Well, I meant here on LF. Whatever ones feelings on how much mankind contributes, no one could deny that relying on fossil fuels, can only continue on for so much longer without dire consequences. We are but a sliver of atmosphere sandwiched between a molten interior beneath our feet, and frozen space above.

I agree that we should put only so much CO2 into the atmosphere. The question is, how much. Perhaps ca 600 ppm might be optimal, hard to say.

By the time we get there we'll have hydrino energy and hopefully cold fusion serving most of our energy needs. Providential timing.

Here's a refreshingly different view to the CO2 mainstream stuffiness from fellow Canadian and former Greenpeace activist Patrick Moore:

Quote from Director

I would say that BLP has proven they have something that produces excess energy. I'd even say they have something that can at times produce copious excess energy - melting down their reactors. What I don't think is proven that the hydrino interpretation of what they are observing is correct. Obviously, their catalytic elements work and are doing something, but I don't believe we have proof that "something" is shrinking the electron orbit. I do tend to think hydrinos are at least plausible, but right now results matter much more than theory.

There is lots of experimental evidence that the electron is closer to the proton as per the hydrino scenario.

From Power Determination and Hydrino Product Characterization of Ultra-low Field Ignition of Hydrated Silver Shots

"The catalysis reaction product H2(1/4) was identified by Raman spectroscopy, photoluminescence emission spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and MAS 1H NMR"

Quote from JedRothwell

You misunderstand. The production of solar energy causes the sun to lose mass. It loses roughly 4 million tons per second. The mass does not transfer to the light; it vanishes.

All energy production systems convert mass to energy. When your car drives or your alarm clock rings, they get a little lighter.

(The sun also loses mass as solar wind, but that is a different story.)

To paraphrase what you are saying: All energy has mass. So light leaving the sun is also mass leaving the sun. e = mc^2

Quote from bang99

From JONP (emphasis added)

• Mihail December 8, 2018 at 10:05 PM

  Dr Rossi:

  During the presentation of January 31st the COP will be calculated also considering the electricity consumed by the control panel, or only the electricity consumed by the Ecat SK?

  Thanks if you can answer,

  Mihail

• Andrea Rossi December 8, 2018 at 10:33 PM Mihail:
  We will give also the data related to the consume of the control panel that, by the way, is completely recovered.
  Warm Regards,
  A.R.

So, let's talk about that:

The control panel consumes electric energy (that a potential difference and a current) and for what I've learned at school, a fraction of voltage drops when it hit's a resistance and is transformed to heat. That's why you have to add some cooling device to e.g. power supply units or CPU's.

To spread the heat to another medium, air or some liquid, to "put it away" from your prescious device.

And now Dott. Rossie is able to recover this COMPLETY?! Turn heat 100% to WHAT?!

Can somebody please enlighten me?

Display More

I think your line of reasoning is based on a misunderstanding of what Rossi is saying. We all know it is impossible to 'completely' recover lost heat energy (from powering the controller for instance). It is therefore safe to assume Rossi means that the energy produced by the SK is more than enough to 'cover' the energy losses to the controller. English is not Rossi's first language.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

SK Reactor.

The information that follows is largely from Rossi's JONP. While it is not proven it is the only information that we have. For discussion, I assume it is correct unless proven otherwise.

Origin of the SK

(snip)

Display More

Adrian, forgive my ignorance (because I have missed much of the latest eCat banter) but what does SK stand for? I recall Rossi evaluating his Quark X based on what he called a Sigma rating, and if I recall after some time it reached a sigma 5 (although I was not sure what that meant, but presumably some kind of measure of reliability). Anyways it seems the SK came very soon after, and in a moment of musement I imagined it stood for Sigma Killer. That is, it was inherently stable or reliable. But this is just my imagination at work.

Off on a tangent now; back in the day when I was following theses things, when Rossi was working at Dorval overseeing the plant operations, that's when he came up with the Quark X. It was announced right around the time when his relationship with IH was going sour, or south. I always wondered if Rossi started working on his new project (the Quark X) because 1) he got wind that Industrial Heat did not have his interests at heart with his then existing IP, so he decided to launch into something new with the Quark X, or 2) Rossi started work on his Quark X and was not sharing that IP with Industrial Heat, which then ticked off IH, or 3) the same timeframe for the invention of the Quark X and the souring of relationship between Rossi and IH was just a coincidence. Thanks for any insight you might share.

Quote from magicsound

No, not too difficult to replicate, but all it would show is that electrolysis changes the infrared emissivity of the stainless steel plates. That would result from the color and texture change change commonly seen in electrolytic treatment of metals.

I agree and might add that under these conditions the cathode stainless steel plate probably became hydrogen embrittled, which has been shown to change the morphology of the steel ( see https://www.sciencedirect.com/…abs/pii/S0921509399003196 ) and thus probably its infrared emissivity. Yet the positive anode was probably resistant to oxidation. (Oxidation of metals can increase emissivity on the order of 20 fold. )