Were this true one would expect the professors at U of Bologna as well as any involved in the manufacture of these devices to be heavily shorting the energy market.
I am somewhat surprised none have tried to replicate this. How many catalysts exist? Run through any room temp solid in the periodic table.
10KW LENR Demonstrator?
Of course. If it works 24H a day/seven days a week within the projected parameters than is hard to invoke fraud claims.parallel wrote:Will having a working commercial unit quiet the doubters even if there is no accepted theory?
Problem is that the only public demonstration for now was so flawed in the very basic set up that you cannot avoid to have doubts.
Let's face it, until now 100% of the people claiming an energy breakthrough have been proven crooks. I am not saying that Ing. Rossi is one but he will have to give plenty of proof if he wants to be taken seriously.
Well, plenty of proofs or a stand alone working reactor.
I second Giorgios post.
I do want to say that I am willing to be convinced. Simply having a commercial device in operation on my turf with my power- supply and my measurement setup and that for at least several days continuously would go a long way in convincing me.
The thing is, I want this to work, I really do. I just dont have enough evidence to support this extraordinary claim, nor is there a convincing theory or theoretical model to explain why it works. So all I have are two semi- public demonstrations that were not executed in any way suitable to remove my doubts.
That is not enough!
I do want to say that I am willing to be convinced. Simply having a commercial device in operation on my turf with my power- supply and my measurement setup and that for at least several days continuously would go a long way in convincing me.
The thing is, I want this to work, I really do. I just dont have enough evidence to support this extraordinary claim, nor is there a convincing theory or theoretical model to explain why it works. So all I have are two semi- public demonstrations that were not executed in any way suitable to remove my doubts.
That is not enough!
Agreed. So he wants to keep the reactor chamber secret.
Fine. Put a lockbox around it, put it in the University lab, turn it on and leave... for a week or two or three.
These short tests are leaving me with a 'if he found something, it might not be sustainable' feeling. For example, it put out 15KW for 18 hours but went through 10g of palladium catalyst.
Fine. Put a lockbox around it, put it in the University lab, turn it on and leave... for a week or two or three.
These short tests are leaving me with a 'if he found something, it might not be sustainable' feeling. For example, it put out 15KW for 18 hours but went through 10g of palladium catalyst.
More details on the 18 hour experiment from the Professor who oversaw it (Giuseppe Levi) can be found here:
http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 108242.ece
Very interesting...
http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 108242.ece
Very interesting...
Still a few potential sources of dodgyness (even if we take Levi at his word):
-External water supply could have dissolved reagents in it. Need to use a closed coolant loop to ensure that they are not up to mischief. An aquarium PC or spa pool water pump and motorbike radiator are all that is needed here (very cheap and easy - refusal would suggest dishonesty).
-Verification of all instrumentation fittings and readings - are the instruments really reading the water temps and flow rates? Swap thermocouples (PRT's are better) around to be sure. Lower flow rates and larger delta T is better.
-Hidden external heat sources (eg inductive, microwave or xray). Need to be able to move the demonstration device around on a wheeled trolley to prove this is not a factor - another good reason for a closed loop circulating pump and radiator.
They are working in a field that is generally very demanding on experimental technique and yet doing a terrible job of eliminating outsiders doubts (or even demonstrating their own competence), even though it would be very cheap to do so. This makes me very suspicious.
-External water supply could have dissolved reagents in it. Need to use a closed coolant loop to ensure that they are not up to mischief. An aquarium PC or spa pool water pump and motorbike radiator are all that is needed here (very cheap and easy - refusal would suggest dishonesty).
-Verification of all instrumentation fittings and readings - are the instruments really reading the water temps and flow rates? Swap thermocouples (PRT's are better) around to be sure. Lower flow rates and larger delta T is better.
-Hidden external heat sources (eg inductive, microwave or xray). Need to be able to move the demonstration device around on a wheeled trolley to prove this is not a factor - another good reason for a closed loop circulating pump and radiator.
They are working in a field that is generally very demanding on experimental technique and yet doing a terrible job of eliminating outsiders doubts (or even demonstrating their own competence), even though it would be very cheap to do so. This makes me very suspicious.
Dott. Levi is a long time believer of Ing. Rossi and fully convinced that there is something actually new going on. To me experiments made only with his presence do not add anything new to the discussion.Skipjack wrote:Good points Rob!
Also, who is this Levi guy?
They should have asked Dott. Celani to be present if they wanted to add more credibility to this "closed door" test. In case you do not remember him, he is the guy that was measuring the Gamma radiation in the last test and was/is still quite skeptical about what is going on.
Under Rossi’s current business plan, the only audience Rossi must convince is the patent examiners and his recent demos are designed to do that. No patent means no product. If these demos are not enough to accomplish patent award, he will do more. When the patent is granted he says he will be protected and states that he will then reveal all.
What I cannot understand is how he can keep the details of the nano-powder secret through the patent application process. That powder is central to the entirety of the invention.
What I cannot understand is how he can keep the details of the nano-powder secret through the patent application process. That powder is central to the entirety of the invention.
that would be about $18.33 per KW. Hmmm.Indeed. The design of the reactor is nothing special in the patent application. Any number of designs would achieve the same aim.Axil wrote:What I cannot understand is how he can keep the details of the nano-powder secret through the patent application process. That powder is central to the entirety of the invention.
About the only unique thing here is the catalyst and perhaps how he prepared the nano-nickel/catalyst combination. I would have expected the patent app to be heavy on that.
What is 'nano-nickel' anyway? Extremely fine powder? Crystals?
He can't. Not if the patent examiner is doing his or her job.Axil wrote:What I cannot understand is how he can keep the details of the nano-powder secret through the patent application process.
I have not heard that palladium is involved. Just nickel, hydrogen, and some unspecified catalysts. Whether the unspecified catalysts include palladium, americium, thermite, pixie dust, or whatever, is all a matter of speculation at this point.ladajo wrote:If he burned 10 grams of Palladium to get his 15KW, he does not have very much of a business plan.