Zephir_AWT Member
  • Male
  • Member since Oct 21st 2014
  • Last Activity:

Posts by Zephir_AWT

    Note that Holmlid has many things in common with Randell Mills: he produces plenty of publications based on one singular idea (ultradense hydrogen versus hydrino) and both of them are still one man show without independent replications. Both of them extrapolate their ideas indirectly from experiments, which may be only tangentially related to them at the very end. No explicit evidence of both hydrino, both ultradense hydrogen has been given yet, quantitative characterization the less.

    Note also that ultradense hydrogen should exhibit the same Rydberg spherical orbitals, like the hydrino - except that electrons within hydrino occupy a subquantum levels. To be honest, I believe in both theories neither in similar way - IMO the truth will be somewhere inbetween.

    Quote

    /* As most of us know, Rossi made a public offer to return all of IH's money as long as IH gave up their rights to Rossi's IP. All IH had to do is take Rossi up on his offer and if Rossi didn't return the money, we'd know Rossi was a fraud. Period. */



    Or Rossi just found an even better technology (Quark-X) - so he just wants to keep all E-Cat related licenses for himself. Which interpretation is more correct?



    Well, the future will tell us, but I could provide a hint: A.Rossi sued IH IMMEDIATELY after IH delayed its payment. So we can be sure, he just wants his license back. Lugano test demonstrated his technology works, even in the lawsuit, references to COP>50 is by referral of the ERV report. It is not Rossi's claim.



    Quote

    I can't search pdf files very well. Can you be specific as to where it is in the agreement? I haven't found it yet.


    The $1000 were beneficiaries from IH in return for heat produced with ECat in Guaranteed Performance Test. It also enables to estimate the amount of heat produced by 1 MW ECat unit.

    Even if he would be press agent of IH, his twaddling would have no more substance.

    What I found something surprising, everyone (including Jed Rothwell) wants to convince the others about his truth - despite he has no evidence to link.

    Nobody says, that Rossi vs IH case is transparent or that Rossi and Darden are saint - but why to spread disinformation here?

    The court judge will not read this forum anyway.

    It could be just magnetic quenching effect - magnetic field makes plasma arc flat and unstable. High voltage circuit breakers use this effect for faster quenching of plasma.

    Nicola Tesla did use it in his experiments with fast interrupters for his coils and scalar wave generators before one hundred years *) already .

    Such a flat discharge will cool itself with surrounding water faster, therefore it will have the same effect, like the flow arrangement.

    This fast cooling would prohibit the iron transmuted (?) and precipitated from plasma into dissolving to ions again.

    Of course there can be some more intriguing effects (A-scalar field, etc.) behind it, but I don't see any evidence for it yet.

    At any case, these trivial tabletop experiments demonstrate, that Energoniva process is replicable in a single arrangement at least in principle

    and no additional secret is needed for its development (which cannot be said about ECat of Rossi and another processes).


    *) Note that above link talks about purple discharge, which can be observed during Energoniva discharges too. This purple color is sometimes attributed to Rydberg resonance transitions (compare the ball lightning phenomena) which exhibit power spectrum of the opposite slope than the Planck body radiation.

    Quote

    Oh, really funny, Rossi started the lawsuit in order to lose it

    He wants to pull the licence from IH back, that's for sure. He started the lawsuit immediately once IH delayed his payment.


    Quote

    you're leaving R droppings in your syntax and vernacular haste

    I don't really think I'm an Italian.


    Quote

    IH didn't buy the 1MW unit and never paid Rossi $10M as the license fee? The madness is unceasing.


    You can talk about madness after you will find some evidence (link).

    What I know, IH did pay $1.5 mil for unit and $1000/day of one year test = $360.000.

    Do you have evidence, that IH did pay more? I'm not friend of Rossi neither his enemy - I just want to talk about relevant facts only.

    Torsional Monopoles and Torqued Geometries in Gravity and Condensed Matter

    Torsional degrees of freedom play an important role in modern gravity theories as well as in condensed matter systems where they can be modeled by defects in solids. Here we isolate a class of torsion models that support torsion configurations with a localized, conserved charge that adopts integer values. The charge is topological in nature and the torsional configurations can be thought of as torsional `monopole' solutions. We explore some of the properties of these configurations in gravity models with non-vanishing curvature, and discuss the possible existence of such monopoles in condensed matter systems. To conclude, we show how the monopoles can be thought of as a natural generalization of the Cartan spiral staircase.

    Mine one - fast Google translation:


    We tried to solve solve the problem of cathode erosion in many ways. We started with the technology of "powder" magnetic confinement electrodes nickel powder on the contact rod and at least we managed to reduce the destruction and to get COP> 1, more precisely 1.68 to nickel powder but unfortunately to achieve stable operation of the unit did not succeed. Then we tried to "liquid-electrode" option plasma electrolysis cell CNF, but he has not justified itself purely technological problems - insufficient financing and high cost of the materials needed to build a workable prototype After all the done some lost faith in the possibility of creating a reliable suitable for use in the national economy plasma electrolysis CNF reactor, we turned to the competitors achievements, and more specifically to the works Bazhutova on plasma electrolysis with discharge at the anode Though I originally as a chemist was 100% sure that electrode erosion at "ignition" of the plasma at the anode will be much stronger because of a purely chemical process - burning metal oxygen is released to the one under the electrolysis, and as a scientist, I always hated it far-fetched and not having under a preponderance of the evidence Erzion theory. The main role is that we turned to the subject of the anode process plazmenngo played no scientific arguments and Bazhutova credibility and confidence with which he talked about the effectiveness of his installation, COP> 7.


    Repeating the experiments Bazhutovu started with the fact that we tried to launch the anode process at our plant with low voltage to 300 V power supply and using an electrolyte specified by the author - of NaOH, at concentrations of 0.1 - 5 M \ l. But in all cases with the "low-voltage" power installations showed gruesome results - extremely large consumption reaching up to 6 kW, a low COP of not more than 0.6 and very rapid destruction of the tungsten anode. It has been suggested that this is due to non-compliance with conditions specified Bazhutovym, namely the supply voltage is not less than 400 and we decided to reproduce fully the conditions specified by the author. It was bought by a step-up transformer and on its basis the assembled power supply AC \ DC 220 \ 660. The high voltage power supply was connected to the cell filled with p-rum NaOH. Even at low concentrations of 0.1 M electrolyte, the device showed extremely large consumption, though the plasma light up with a deafening roar and a bright glow, the device current was consumed more than 20A, and after 10-15 seconds of work, the built-in high-voltage power supply protection, and these kontsenratsiyah author of 5M, the device and consumed even more protection and fire a couple of seconds after the start. As such a system works in Bazhutova not very clear for the power supply circuit is the same as ours - up transformer with a diode bridge output, current limiting devices without? There was a question whether he did not falsify the results because he claimed the current consumed by the installation of a maximum of 2A, and we have more than 20 ..


    In order that-be to dot the I employee S.Salnikovym our laboratory was designed and built a unique adjustable high voltage PWM converter 220 \ 700V, which lets you restrict and regulate current to the cell. With maksimuumom no more than 1.5A. Experiments with this device is connected plasma electrolysis to the reactor cold fusion "HYaSogrey" mounted on a measuring teplostend gave the first positive results in the anode plasma electrolysis managed to get COP slightly greater than 2, but when you consider the extra energy released during the burn-in is allocated tungsten anode, the realny COP It will be approximately 1.7-1.9 at 5M NaOH solution, but not a claimed 7 Bazhutov. It is interesting that at the cathode during c the same high-voltage power supply fixed maximum COP was the same about 2. However, to avoid the erosion of the electrodes did not manage that at the anode that the cathodic variant powering the cell. Repeating this eksperment nature of the erosion of the electrode was determined to open the cell - at the cathode during tungsten rod destroyed microexplosions and overheating - active the surface is literally boiling dropping molten tungsten particles in the electrolyte, while the anode rod is really burnt out in allocated to him oxygen to form the yellow tungsten oxide - WO3 sediment which accumulates on the bottom of the cell ... In addition, we decided to check the presence of "Erzion" radiation when working on open-radiation cell Bazhutova method using a dosimeter and a Teflon plate. However, indications of growth during measurements with a Teflon plate has not been fixed, but instead recorded a slight decline from 16-24mkR \ h to 12-14mkR \ h.

    Author - Mikhail Mironov

    Quote

    The $10 million IH paid was not only for the successful Validation Test in April 2013, but also for all Ecat IP to be transferred to IH.

    Nothing like this follows from the License Agreement among Andrea Rossi, Leonardo Corp., Ampenergo, Inc. and Industrial Heat LLC

    You never bothered to read it, do you?


    sepCcWA.gif

    Quote
    Anyone who continues to promote or make this argument demonstrates their cluelessness on corporation structure and international investing.

    What we know, the Industrial Heat Company didn't exist three days before signing the Licence Agreement with A. Rossi.

    It's just papery company.

    Quote

    This is Alice in Wonderland logic. Repeat after me: they did not "attempt to replicate." They ACTUALLY MADE IT WORK.


    Nope, they never made the MOSFET and MESFET transistors of Lillienfield work. These transistors were made in 1959 by Atalla and Dawon Kahng at Bell Labs.


    New Zealander Dr Robert Adams in 1933 created crystal amplifier which shares close resemblance to bipolar transistor of Shockley. Another bipolar transistor was prepared in 1938, when Robert Pohl and Rudolf Hilsch experimented on potassium-bromide crystals with three electrodes at Gottingen University, Germany. They reported amplification of low-frequency (about 1 Hz) signalss.


    8sOYnEJm.gif


    Quote

    It did not work at all. It could never have worked.


    Nope, this is just a conjecture of yours without substance. Look, I understand my stuff and I recognize, when someone's is trying to BS'ing me (willingly or not).

    You should prepare the Lillienfield's transistor first for being sure, it doesn't work. Actually Lillienfield demonstrated many circuits in his patents, which could be hardly proposed if he wouldn't have some samples well working in hands.

    Quote

    This is crazy. The people at Bell Labs made the first successful transistor! ... they got the Nobel prize, and deserved it.


    This is just what I'm not sure about (Lillienfield died in 1963, long after first transistor recognition). The people at Bell Labs never attempted to replicate the Lilienfeld transistor, so that they cannot be sure, it doesn't work.


    Quote

    As it was, AT&T had to scale back their patent to avoid infringement.


    This would speak for my Lillienfield priority violation claim.


    Quote
    It could not have been implemented in the 1930s because they did not have materials of sufficient purity. Also because the design itself was probably not adequate according to experts.

    This is just a speculation based on belief, that the FET transistor requires the same purity of materials like this bipolar one (and I even will not comment the "adequateness" of his design, which is out of discussion). Whereas today the FETs are manufactured from carbon nanotubes, graphene, molybdenum sulfide and whatever else unpurified stuffs.

    Quote
    He is like most mainstream physicists. They think that cold fusion was never replicated and it is pathological science. That is what Nature and other mainstream journals say.

    Mainstream physicists aren't idiots. Many of them are informed about progress in cold fusion in the same way, like we are or even better. But the existence of ECat and cold fusion undermines the investments into projects like ITER, NIF and actually all other methods of energy production/transport/conversion and storage. Which is whole half of existing applied research today and the people involved in it can calculate their job and grant perspectives under such a situation. In particular Moniz has been head of nuclear research at MIT - the LENR research contradicted his own interests directly.