Posts by axil

Quote from Warthog

"Why should I do your homework for you? Are you seriously suggesting that factory equipment is not regulated and inspected? This is not 1870."

Perhaps because I "have" looked at your Florida regs and am not finding what you say is there? What you need to grasp in this discussion is that research prototypes (including test pilot plants) are NOT considered "factory equipment". They may be in a factory environment, and they may perform operations similar to commercial factory equipment, but they are a different category completely and, in my experience, are regulated differently.

Some of their commercially available components may well be "regulated and inspected"by outside parties, either before leaving the factory or on site. But there is no regulatory agency capable of "regulating and inspecting" the whole pilot plant system, because most of the time, it is the first ever of its type, and no regulations have yet been written.

Display More

Jed is the master of using the "Red Herring" method in the debate. He not only uses it, he exaggerates it, distorts it, reformes it, to manufacture his own reality, and through the weight of repetition and the volume of opressive verbiage attempts to circumvent reality to suit his own prejudices and emotions.

Quote from brian ahern

People are assumming this LENR is a nuclear system.. There is just about as much data to support this as UFOs.

I think LENR is real, but probably a Mills-like reaction. The 1995 Thermacore report was the hgih water mark until Rossi showed up.
I think Rossi is nt real.

What is confused in LENR is cause and effect. Oftentimes, effects are confused a being the cause of LENR but in fact the effect is not the cause. For example, what produces the hydrino?

In the Fractional quantum Hall effect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_quantum_Hall_effect

Hall conductance shows a factional chance as a result of a change in a strong magnetic field. The reason for this is the creation of the composite fermion, a electron/magnetic quasiparticle. The magnetic field produces quasiparticles that change the nature of the electron.

A strong EMF field could be changing the nature of the electrons in the presence of a catalyst that is producing a magnetic effect to form hydrinos which might be composite fermions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_fermion

The magnetic flux quanta could result in a modification of electron orbitals as Mills observes. But the cause is an applied magnetic field, the hydrino is the effect of that magnetic field.

If the magnetic field is the true cause of LENR and the hydrino also appears as a result of the magnetic field, it is possible that the the hydrino is mistakenly assumed to be the cause of LENR. But the real cause that works at a deeper and irreducible fundamental level is the applied magnetic field.

Quote from brian ahern

People are assumming this LENR is a nuclear system.. There is just about as much data to support this as UFOs.

I think LENR is real, but probably a Mills-like reaction. The 1995 Thermacore report was the hgih water mark until Rossi showed up.
I think Rossi is nt real.

The test that will determine the nuclear nature or not of the Mills reaction is the production of transmutation of elements. Transmutation must have a nuclear cause.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Here somewhat I heard half ear while watching nature TV... The origin goes back to 2010

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/sun-082310.html

or more popular in : http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_sol41.htm

Who can report any progress about this matter ?? Has the effect been confirmed?

Display More

http://phys.org/news/2014-10-t…dioactive-substances.html

Old textbook knowledge reconfirmed: Decay rates of radioactive substances are constant

Quote from JedRothwell

Again you fail to understand what "fraud" means! When Rossi defrauds I.H. by making false statements about his fake customer, I.H. is not a "party" to that. It is the victim. When someone sticks you up with a gun and robs you, you are not a "party" to armed robbery. You are the victim. The police arrest the criminal. They do not arrest you.

I am astounded that you do not understand this distinction.

When the customer shows up in court and tells the jury that they got all the steam that they needed and that they have ordered 3 more systems then where does that leave you and IH? You have been blowing BS for a number of years and that two weeks in court is your time of reckoning. So gird your loins and get ready.

Quote from Keieueue

Oh but I already explained why I am here: to play Internet Police

Thank you for your service

Those volunteer police shot people and kill them out of incompetence.

Quote from stephenrenzz

As far as we know, Rossi is the only one who has profited from this. You have absolutely no proof 50-250 million have changed hands due to Rossi...and please do not post that silly quote about how IH praised Rossi years ago before they realized they were being fooled. FACT: Rossi pocketed millions. WEAK SPECULATION: 50-250 million was pocketed because of Rossi.

IH fraud will probably be a result of the trial.

Quote from padam73

Maybe because Jupiter is Planet Rossi?

Jupiter is real. Or do you think that Jupiter is a fraud. NASA will be shocked.

Quote from stephenrenzz

Or they are just another in the long line of those fooled by a frXXXster...a talented one at that.

That is possible, IH can be a fraud too. They are more likely at fraud than Rossi, and got more money (50 to 250 or more millions)

Quote from stephenrenzz

I would love to be a fly on the wall when the jury talks about the fake customer. I'm sure it will start something like this..."Okay so let me get this straight, so the company that was used for Rossi's test was created and is headed up by Rossi's lawyer but is supposedly a shell company for some other company that in the UK that makes metal sponges?" Priceless..

On page 25 of the licence agreement, the customer was recognized by IH as a company out of the UK. If they are a fraud, then IH was a party to that action.

Quote from JedRothwell

Okay then. Shut up and look. Stop nattering on about a subject you know nothing about. Read some manuals about flowmeters, or admit you have no clue.

Heck, try using a flowmeter and report back. I promise you will discover many ways to get the wrong answer.

That is why the non expert needs a simple demo to cut through the complexity.

Quote from JedRothwell

If you truly "want" to see this I suggest you start by reading the manuals for various flowmeters. Or you can read about how Defkalion managed to produce a fake reading with a flowmeter in a kilowatt-scale test.

I do not think you want to see anything of the sort. I also think you have no experience using flowmeters. Do your homework and learn about these instruments before commenting on them.

It does not have to a 5000% error, as I said. Look at some of Rossi's previous tests. All of the parameters were wrong. Not just the flow rate, but also the inlet and outlet temperatures, the location of the thermocouples, the calibration methods (or lack thereof), steam quality measurements, etc. There are many ways to do calorimetry wrong. When you make several mistakes simultaneously, you multiply errors. (I mean the wrong flow rate is multiplied by the wrong Delta T temperature.) When you do this deliberately you get any answer you like, as Defkalion demonstrated. As Gamberale demonstrated, it wasn't hard to find the error and prove Defkalion was doing it wrong.

Seeing is believing.

Quote from Wyttenbach

In fact Alain: There is a separate LENR branch called sono-fusion. The COP of their reactors recently has gone up close to 4.

May be You should start a seprate thread for this!

In that thread. I will show how polaritons form in the collapsing cavitation bubble.

Quote from JedRothwell

I have done this inadvertently. Not by a factor of 50, but I got it wrong. The city of Atlanta reduced my water bill from $200 to $40 with a bad flowmeter for several years.

The flowmeter is not the only probable source of inaccuracy in this data, so it may not need to explain the entire bogus COP of 50. I think tracking down exactly how the instruments came up with this COP would be a complicated and time-consuming job. I suppose I.H. experts are doing this, but I am only speculating.

As I said, you can find ways to do this by reading the cautions and warnings in a flowmeter manual. It does not take a lot of imagination. This is kind of like asking "how can I destroy an automobile engine?" Okay, you can drain the oil and run it. Or you can submerge the air inlet in water. Or put metal shavings into the oil. Use leaded gasoline in an unleaded car. . . . A mechanic will know many other methods. Here is list of common problems with flowmeter instability:

http://www.seametrics.com/site…t/files/LT-65650293-A.pdf

Display More

Your entire argument will fall apart when the "customer" is revealed during the trial and he testifies that his manufacturing process requires a lot of heat and he got that heat from the E-Cat. Then what? How will you look? How will your reputation suffer? It is better to prove the fraud now before the trial. IH should help. Dewey will fund it.

Quote from Alan Smith

Outside of the Sun, the hottest place in the Solar System is the core of Jupiter. Once again, while the cloud tops of Jupiter are more than 100 degrees below zero, the core of the planet could be up to 30,000 Kelvin. This high temperature comes from the intense pressure that comes from the entire mass of the planet bearing down on the core and compressing it.

So they say...

Jupiter produces twice as much heat than it receives from the Sun. WHY?

Quote from AlainCo

Ultrasonic waves have need observed as triggering LENR in PdD among many other stimulations.

That is cavitation when water is present. It does not apply in the gas phase.

Quote from stephenrenzz

Well hang tight, I am sure you are going to see that and much much more when this goes to trial. I don't know how I and others here can say this any other way so that you can comprehend it, the trial has NOT started yet, therefore we wait until release of findings and the anticipated grilling of Rossi by experts. Jed says he has seen data, I believe him, but I have not see it yet personally just like you. This is all speculation on both sides....I could ask you the same thing...show me the data that proves the "Rossi Effect"...oh wait Rossi has NEVER produced data for the E-Cat or anything related. (Sorry FrankWTF I really tried my best not to reiterate this for you the forum police officer..but poor Axil is having trouble with comprehension)

Science is not built on hearsay, it is built on first hand data. I want to see a flow meter with a 5000% error rate. When I see that, I will question what Rossi and the ERV have presented. MFMP has it right, you see the experiment first hand so it can be done, so do it.

Quote from stephenrenzz

What on earth are you talking about? Produce what data? I have no connection with IH or Rossi, so I await data the same way you do. I am sure it will all come out in proper time...spoiler alert Axil...the trial hasn't started yet. You are just reaching for anything at this point.

Rossi has produce the 1 year test. He released the results namly COP = 50. Ypi all have said that the data was caused by a lack of a check valve in the flow meter.

I want to see how a flow meter can be made to produce a 5000% error rate. This level of error is hard to beleive.

The Juno probe might prove cold fusion by show that more helium is contained in the gas clouds of Jupiter than was generated by the big bang nucleosynthesis (bbn).

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/BBN

If cold fusion has been producing heat inside Jupiter for 4.5 billion years, then there will be an ash residue.

Of cource, science will find fault in bbn and not admit to LENR, but we will understand what is really going on with Jupiter.

Additionally, if the juno probe finds no solid core which would contain radioactive elements to generate 2 twice as much heat as Jupiter gets from the Sun, then another heat source must be causing all that heat. Let us see what new process that science will invent. One thing for sure, it will never be LENR.

Quote from stephenrenzz

Wow...at least you have FINALLY admitted Rossi needs to do an independent demo! I am blown away right now. As for IH proving how Rossi faked his results...I am quite sure we will see more than just information on how the flow meter was tricked, I am sure Rossi had other tricks up his sleeve. I am interested in serial numbers as well. This really is going to be so interesting when Rossi has to face REAL experts over this. If you don't think it is extremely easy to trick just about any metering device numerous ways with the right circumstances, I have some land in Florida to sell you...oh wait...so does Rossi. (if you don't get the Florida land sale reference - Google is your friend)

Your credibility would be better served if you diverted some of the energy used in posting endlessly, to producing data. Have at it and quickly.