Posts by JedRothwell

Quote from IH Fanboy

From the depositions that I read, there was at least a temperature probe and a water flow meter on the JMP side. Bass even refers to them in his testimony. They were used to spot check what was being received from Leonardo.

Again you betray your ignorance of grade school science. You CANNOT POSSIBLY spot check energy with a temperature probe and a water flow meter when the fluid is supposedly steam. That is not enough to determine steam quality. The answer can wrong by a gigantic factor, for the reasons described by Smith.

Also, you are factually wrong. There were no such instruments in the JMP site.

Also, it makes no sense to suggest that JMP was asking to be billed for energy when the method was so crude it hugely disagreed with Penon's data. Penon's data was so crude it was meaningless. He had no way to determine how much enthalpy there was. So this would be even more crude than a hopelessly crude fantasy-based measurement. No sane person would ask to be billed tens of thousands of dollars based on metering that anyone can see is wrong by a factor of 50. Nobody pays 50 times more for energy than they need to. The only reason Rossi asked I.H. to bill his fake company was to establish evidence that I.H. thought the company was real. They weren't fooled, and they did not issue the invoices.

Quote from Rends

He has a proof, the ERV Report, that is not accepted by Darden et.al.

The ERV report is proof that Rossi had no excess heat, and that his test was fraudulent. It was not accepted by any expert I know. They agree with Smith. He said the report violates basic thermodynamics and that the data is so regular it has to be fake. I don't see how anyone could argue with that. There are many other indications it is fake, such as the sequence I pointed out: 36,000 L, 18,000 L, 36,000.

The moment I saw that data I knew it was fake. I do not think you or IHFB have any technical knowledge or experience with instruments, and you do not understand grade school level science, so perhaps you don't see why it is fake. That is forgivable, although after you make mistake after mistake you should realize you are in over your head and you should stop make bold assertions about things you know nothing about. What I find astounding and appalling is that experienced people such as Peter Gluck do not instantly see that the ERV report is fake. I cannot imagine how it fools them. I guess it is wishful thinking.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Heck, you don't even understand that water boils at different temperatures depending on pressure.

And you draw this conclusion from what may I ask? It seems you might be embarrassed about the pipe dimension FUD, upon which your pressure FUD was built.

I draw this conclusion from the fact that you think steam leaking out of a pipe proves there is steam inside the pipe. You do not understand that when pressurized hot water leaks, it turns into steam. You do not understand that pressurized hot water has far less enthalpy than steam.

You claim you have met other technical issues "head on" but you have not. You have either evaded them or come up with absurdities such as saying that you asked a child whether there was glass in the window and he said no. If Rossi's claim were true, there would not just be missing glass. There would be a blower in the window larger than a person.

Quote from IH Fanboy

That's good to know because all of the contemporaneous written evidence we have of tests performed by IH show successful replications upwards of COP 9.

No, we do not. You made that up. There were, at best, a few indications there was excess heat, but they discovered the blank tests were producing as much apparent heat as the tests with nickel, so obviously the results were wrong.

Quote from Rionrlty

They don't get to claim they worked and then decide they didn't after all, as soon as Rossi files suit.

You made that up. Long before Rossi filed suit they said the machines did not work. You can see that in the lawsuit documents. That is also what they told me and others. They never publicly claimed the machines worked. In the early stages, some of their memos were optimistic but they always said results need to be confirmed.

Quote from Alan Smith

A single truck radiator ought to be good for 100kW at a reasonable wind-speed (20-30 mph). This is because a 300kW fully loaded truck climbing a gradient needs to be able to dissipate that much heat via the radiator.

OOPS. I got this wrong --

A truck radiator has to dissipate a lot more heat than that. I do not know what size truck that is for, but suppose it is a large American GM pickup truck, such as the 420 HP Silverado model. That's 313 kW. Unfortunately, ICE engines are extremely inefficient. Around 30% at best, for Diesels. To produce that peak power, the truck has to produce ~600 kW of waste heat. Most of that comes out at the radiator, I think. (Some is radiated from engine block, the transmission and so on.)

Even if that radiator was only needed to dissipate 100 kW, you could not put it inside the warehouse without a hood and large ventilation fans. That is too much heat for an enclosed space. That is the size of a large commercial kitchen, which must have hoods and fans. On the other hand, you could put the truck radiator outside the building. That would work fine. I think any sensible person would do that.

The radiator does not work by itself, passively. A automotive radiator is always coupled with a large, powerful fan. I think that would be needed even at 100 kW, which is roughly what a pickup truck produces while idling or driving slowly with no load. It will overheat if the fan breaks. So, for this to work, you would have a large radiator and a powerful fan outside the building. Anyone would see that.

ADDENDUM: I forgot that a lot of the heat goes out with the exhaust gas. I don't recall how much, but perhaps the radiator would only need to dissipate ~100 or 200 kW. Anyway, it would still be best to put it outside.

Quote from IH Fanboy

And as far as we know, all of them worked.

As far as you know? You know nothing. You just make up stuff and call it facts. I happen to know that none of those tests worked. I probably know more about them than you do.

For a while, people thought the Lugano test might have worked, but it was a bust. None of the other tests worked. They were done by people who know more about calorimetry and LENR than Rossi does, or than you do. Heck, you don't even understand that water boils at different temperatures depending on pressure. That's elementary school science and you got it wrong. You won't admit that, and of course you will not discuss any technical details or try to show an error in the Smith report. Just because you are ignorant and you dance around and evade the issues, that does not make you right.

Quote from Alan Smith

Why not email Bo Hoistadt and ask him about Ni/H research? It would be interesting to know what they are doing over there.

I do know anything about that. I have heard reports that a new group of marks in Sweden is preparing to fund Rossi's latest claim for the blurry-blue-LED quark-X or whatever he calls it. Does he even claim that is Ni/H? I don't know what he claims about that.

Quote from Alan Smith

There was no contractual requirement (AFAIK) that this plant should produce 1MW of heat continuously. Running at 250kW would be fine, so long as the COP was high enough to meet the required standard. Perhaps someone can point me to a contradictory clause in the disputed contract that says otherwise?

You are right. There was no contractual requirement for that. If Rossi himself had not claimed the device produced 1 MW, there would be no dispute about this particular issue. No one would be talking about the invisible pipes or the non-existent heat exchanger in the mezzanine. If Rossi had simply claimed there was 20 kW input and 40 kW output, we would all agree his warehouse HVAC could handle that. That would the equivalent to 2 or 3 stoves.

Rossi was the one who brought about this controversy, by making a preposterous claim.

Mind you, given the equipment he used, there was no way he could have proved it was 20 kW in and 40 kW out. There was no way to test steam quality, and the flow rate was obviously wrong. So, 40 kW would have been disputed. But not because the heat would have killed the observers.

If he actually had 40 kW output, with convincing proof, I.H. would have happily paid him the $89 million.

Quote from Rends

To say that the report must be faulty, or even preposterous, is not the solution, because with the means available to us from the outside, we simply do not have the possibility to produce evidence and therefore it is all but a presumption.

That's absurd. Anyone with knowledge of calorimetry, instruments or basic thermodynamics can look at the report and see it is a preposterous fake. Rossi supporters refuse to look at it. Or they look at it and see sequences such as 36,000, 18,000, 36,000 and say "ho hum, nothing wrong with that." Which proves they have no idea what they are talking about.

The Penon report could not be more convincing or more clear proof of fraud. It shouts out that conclusion.

Quote from IH Fanboy

IHSupporter wrote:

I think that it is clear that Rossi reasonably foresaw that there would be a pending legal issue.

Yet the IH supporters here say that IH was shocked when the lawsuit was filed. That Darden never would have imagined that Rossi would sue.

Rossi foresaw there would be a legal issue because he himself intended to sue! He filed a lawsuit, not I.H. He had no business doing that. His test was a total failure, and blatant fraud. He should have skipped town and gone to Sweden, where he has already prepared a new scam with a new group of marks. It was foolish to try to get the $89 million after scamming I.H. out of $11 million. He pushed his luck too far.

Quote from Rends

Why did they do not perform a long-term test there, as foreseen in the agreement with Rossi

They did perform both long-term and short term tests, on several devices, with Rossi's help. None of them worked.

Quote from THEDEBATEISUSELESS

For an excellent writer with an impeccable understanding of the English language who maintained a high standard of online posts for many years, this type of banter (even in response to a statement you strongly disagree with) doesn't seem to match you're previous standard.

Another concern troll! I am unworthy of your attention, o mighty one.

Quote from we_cat_global

I understand your client wants you to react to every post coming from a (potential) Rossi supporter. However, your latest reply is of such an abject low level that i cannot help myself to let you know.

You are so kind! But please, don't sacrifice yourself on my account. I'm . . . I'm just not worth it. (sniff) (Wipes tears from eyes)

Quote from we_cat_global

Please, beware of the slippery "quality floor" of this discussion. You (and your reputation) might slip and get hurt.

Oh thank you Mr. Concern Troll.

Quote from Roseland67

Previously you indicated that "you have seen many, many cold fusion claims fail".

Does that suggest you have seen some succeed?

Sure!

Quote from IH Fanboy

Wow, the venom! The personal attacks! The foul language! You folks seem desperate as of late.

Awww, gee . . . Are we hurting your itty-witty feewings??? Poor baaaybee.

Quote from IHSupporter

yes, turn over a system to someone else, but I would only want 1kW not 1MW. I just don't like the idea of trying to do a good control run at 1MW.

Yup. That's why I said "a single unit." I guess that's supposedly more than 1 KW.

Calorimetry is easiest and most accurate between 10 W and 100 W, in my experience. It starts to get dangerous above 1 KW. Below 1 W, it starts to get difficult. It would be best to avoid phase changes (steam production).

Some people have the odd notion that it is easier to measure a large effect, or that a large effect or a large machine is somehow more convincing.

Quote from THHuxleynew

If you believe Levi every single Lugano-style test would be positive, including, most unfortunately as Darden tried to tell Rossi, a control. When should IH have stopped trying to see whether Rossi's stuff could be got to work? That is the real question.

I agree, that is the key question. As I said before, this is like drilling for oil. It can be hard to say when you have hit "suitcase rock" and it is time to give up, pack up, and go home. For me it would be the time you point to. When Darden tells Rossi the control produced as much apparent heat as the test sample, and Rossi refuses to acknowledge that, I would say it's over.

The only thing I would consider after that would be for Rossi to hand over a single unit from the 1 MW reactor and have it tested by experts such as Murray, in NC. If he refused, I would have ended it. Perhaps I have a lower threshold than I.H. because I have seen many, many cold fusion claims fail.

Quote from IH Fanboy

The old ways and means are not of the future. LENR+ or nothing.

Oh horseshit. You and Peter Gluck say this. Neither of you knows the history of technology. The first radioactive samples produced a fraction of a watt, but the Curies knew they far exceeded the limits of chemical heat. The first fission reactor at U. Chicago produced a few watts but everyone knew it was a fission chain reaction capable of producing gigawatts. The size of the reaction is totally irrelevant. The only things that matter are understanding and control. If you have them, you can convert the whole world to cold fusion in a generation. Without them, you have nothing.

LENR+ does not exist in any case. If you are counting on that, you count on a figment of Gluck's imagination, and a fraudulent illusion sold by Rossi.

Quote from IH Fanboy

Unfortunately for we outsiders, the evidence is still highly clouded,

No, it isn't. I have read about dozens of experiments. I have seen data from dozens of experiments. I have never seen one remotely as bad as this. I have never seen such a clear-cut, indisputable, outrageous fake data. Even Defkalion was less blatant. I saw that it was fake after looking over the numbers for 5 minutes. Anyone who fails to see that knows nothing about calorimetry, instruments, or experiments. I know several experts who looked at the 1-year test data. Every one of them agrees with Smith that the numbers are impossible and the instruments could not have measured heat, even in principle. There was no way to test steam quality, or even confirm there was any steam!

If you find the evidence clouded, it is because you do not understand elementary physics. You demonstrated your ignorance when you said that a leak from the pipe produced steam. Of course it did. When pressurized water is above the boiling point for 1 atm, and you reduce the pressure to 1 atm, it boils. It cools and stops boiling. Reduce the pressure again and it will boil again. Put it in a vacuum and it will boil away completely.