10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

[MSimon]

This is another of the "well d'uhh" comments. :D

I was waiting for that. I just knew you could,'t resist.

And who am I to deprive you of your simple joys in life?
Have you met your pieman? :wink:

Yeah. He sent over three nice young ladies. The First Mate put her foot down though. Said I'd have to settle for two.

[sparkyy0007]

DGT lab pix

http://www.defkalion-energy.com/files/D ... -11-14.pdf

Kinda cool.

Just an observation, no hi-vac used and no oil trap(cold trap) between rotarys and process chambers. Regardless of the process, this is not a clean system, strange.

[Joseph Chikva]

Ah, the con man seeks an accomplise.

No, I am asking your opinion. Right now I have received the letter bellow. What I should to do?

Dear Friend,

This message may Surprise you. Please accept my apology if it does embarrass you. However, it’s my urgent need for a foreign partner that made me to contact you.I am a bank manager I have an opportunity to transfer US$15 Million Dollars (Fifteen Millon United States Dollars) I'm Inviting you for a business deal where this money can be share between us, I intend to offer to you 40% of the total sum on a provision of a foreign account where this fund can be remitted immediately.

Meanwhile, arrangement to facilitate the easy transfer of this fund without problem has already been put in place by my humble self, if you are interested kindly reply to indicate your interest, then i shall intimate you with the method of application and how you can apply to the bank for the release and transfer of the fund into your nominated bank account. In fact , the bank law stipulates that if such fund remains unclaimed over a given period of time, precisely 9 years ,the bank shall automatically transfer the fund into the bank treasury account as unclaimed or lost fund .Hence no one is putting claims to such funds , I want to also inform you that once you apply to this funds , no other person owns the right or eligibility to this account any more therefore the bank sees you as the true next of kin by making you the genuine owner of this account legally , even if the law has to prevail you are genuine and ascertain with all proofs of eligibility that I shall intimate you with later on, as we proceed in this transaction .

This account has been dormant since 2002 that i have been monitoring it .I do advice you to keep this as a top secret. I wait for your urgent reply once you are interested to be my partner kindly send the below information’s

1. YOUR FULL NAME………………

2. OCCUPATION……………

3. MARITAL STATUS…………

4. YOUR PRIVATE TELEPHONE NUMBER………………

5. AGE………

Regards,

Mr Franklin Adam

[rcain]

FUTURE TALKING POINTS:

Does nuclear composition play a role? Some of the Pd papers I’ve read seem to use on Pd-108 or Pd-110. Rossi (ugg I hate quoting this guy) says only Ni-62 and Ni-64 react.

Actually, he says only 62 and 64 react... to form stable copper. And that is a "duhh" kind of statement. He also said that there is no observable radiation outside the unit while the reaction was working" which I find an interesting and POTENTIALLY telling modifier.
...

as i recall, there were accounts of gamma 'being off the scale' (!), during the start up phase of an 'unshielded'/'loosely shielded demo.

if that is true, it suggests this is a two-phase process; vis: some gamma mediated start-up, gives rise to some other low gamma phase.

i also seem to recall there is some 'frequency generator' (whatever that is meant to designate) in the design (microwave/RF?). and that the process is a little 'unstable' if 'self-sustain' mode, rather than 'controlled mode' is allowed to prevail - though either way, the final state is claimed to be 'more or less balanced'.

very intriguing if there is something in it. shame its probably a sham.

very good synopsis btw Kite (imho). shame we can only konjecture.

[bk78]

Luckily, if the first condition (quasi-particle of electrons) is true, there should ALWAYS be an electron available at the time of the reaction to accomplish IC.

And for the last time: This process would result in lethal amounts of Bremsstrahlung.


Is it true I can't have an ignore list for this forum?

[Giorgio]

Less and less probable IMHO.

Change that "probable" to "likely" and you agree with me. But I have no data with which to calculate probabilities.

I thought we already agreed on an older thread that we do not agree on this issue

Kidding apart, just look at how many "If", "Somehow", "it Seems" and "Perhaps" you had to invoke to make up something that can even be considered an attempt to explain what Rossi is claiming.
One "If" can be accepted in a theory. Two "If" start to make it crumble. Anything more than that and you start to enter the realm of imagination. It could also be true in a pure hit of luck, but it can hardly be passed as a theory of which we can discuss about without compelling evidences.

You can of course argue that also in a lottery the chances are slim but sooner or later there is always a winner and that Rossi might be the lucky winner of the cold fusion lottery.
I will than argue that so far Rossi hasn't even proved that he bought a ticket to this lottery, let alone winning it!

Lastly, if we have to enter this pure speculative field, why do we have to believe what Rossi has to say more than (say) a MIB conspiracy believer or a "circles in the grain" UFO nut?

FUTURE TALKING POINTS:

Your points are interesting if taken one by one, but none of them has ever been seen before by anyone. What are the chances that, out of nowhere, Rossi was able to ace all of them in a raw? Well...... I hope you got my point.

[KitemanSA]

Based on your personality, I feel you are being false and a scam. I choose not to send you any money.

Hehe, he feels. Declared scam is not scam but only the sample which is very similar to real scam of Mr. Rossi, my acute friend. Take a look on common fraud schemes: http://www.fbi.gov/scams-safety/fraud

Take a look at the FUNDAMENT difference between what YOU did and what Rossi has done. YOU asked me for MY MONEY, he has not. If he ever does, I guess I will have to decide on available data. Till then, I have the luxury of looking for more relavant data!

[KitemanSA]

Ah, the con man seeks an accomplise.

No, I am asking your opinion. Right now I have received the letter bellow. What I should to do?

Dear Friend,
.
.
.

Choose. My advice, choose wisely!

[KitemanSA]

Luckily, if the first condition (quasi-particle of electrons) is true, there should ALWAYS be an electron available at the time of the reaction to accomplish IC.

And for the last time: This process would result in lethal amounts of Bremsstrahlung.


Is it true I can't have an ignore list for this forum?

I think you have made that assertion before. I would like you to explain, specifically, why you say that. Please.

Seems I keep asking and you keep sniping. PLEASE, data. PRETTY PLEASE.

[rcain]

Based on your personality, I feel you are being false and a scam. I choose not to send you any money.

Hehe, he feels. Declared scam is not scam but only the sample which is very similar to real scam of Mr. Rossi, my acute friend. Take a look on common fraud schemes: http://www.fbi.gov/scams-safety/fraud

Take a look at the FUNDAMENT difference between what YOU did and what Rossi has done. YOU asked me for MY MONEY, he has not. If he ever does, I guess I will have to decide on available data. Till then, I have the luxury of looking for more relavant data!

fwiw: Rossi is actually asking other people for money however, so in that (alone?), they are the same. in addition, we 'know' that Rossi is doing whatever he is doing, 'primarily' and/or 'solely' for money. and that he operates (protects his position) by 'concealing' critical information.

those factors must weigh heavily on any rational assessment of his 'claims'.

[KitemanSA]

[/quote]

Less and less probable IMHO.

Change that "probable" to "likely" and you agree with me. But I have no data with which to calculate probabilities.

I thought we already agreed on an older thread that we do not agree on this issue

I think the only thing that REALLY seperates us is the appearant scientific certainty implied by the term "probability". I think it "likely" to be either a scam or a VERY interesting delusion.

Lastly, if we have to enter this pure speculative field, why do we have to believe what Rossi has to say more than (say) a MIB conspiracy believer or a "circles in the grain" UFO nut?

I would hope that you don't. I certainly don't. But neither can I say he is wrong.

FUTURE TALKING POINTS:

Your points are interesting if taken one by one, but none of them has ever been seen before by anyone. What are the chances that, out of nowhere, Rossi was able to ace all of them in a raw? Well...... I hope you got my point.

Well, I beg to differ. Internal Conversion and Electron Capture are well known factors that modify the output of a nuclear reaction/decay. The ONLY issue is whether an electron would be present. And the posited processes ALL assume an electron is present for the initial reaction. It would not be TOO much of a stretch to posit that an electron will be available again before the ground state unstable Cu has time to decay. Thus, no measureable gamma.

Except that bk78 keeps "asserting" that the IC would produce leathal Brem. No supporting data provided AFAICT.

I can posit a knowledge path whereby Rossi might have gotten to where he CLAIMS to be. If Piantelli's work is correct, the nature of the nickel coated rods AFTER the experiments may have indicated to Rossi that specific isotopes of Nickel may have been important. From there, some experimentation may have yielded the results he claims. I doubt TOTALLY whether he predicted ANYTHING. I suspect, if this is REAL, he still doesn't have any good idea of HOW it works (ICBW). But if this is real, luck and persistance may have resulted in such a discovery. This is after all, the lowest tech of low tech reactors.

[KitemanSA]

fwiw: Rossi is actually asking other people for money however, so in that (alone?), they are the same. in addition, we 'know' that Rossi is doing whatever he is doing, 'primarily' and/or 'solely' for money. and that he operates (protects his position) by 'concealing' critical information.

those factors must weigh heavily on any rational assessment of his 'claims'.

Then it behooves his targ... unh, investors to make a wise decision. I am not responsible for his "investor's" decisions. If he ever asks me, I will demand a WHOLE lot more REAL data before I decide, or I will decide "not proven = no".

[bk78]

I think you have made that assertion before. I would like you to explain, specifically, why you say that. Please.

Seems I keep asking and you keep sniping. PLEASE, data. PRETTY PLEASE.

Let's say, the reactor produces his power in form of 6MeV (was it?) beta radiation. If you have kWs of this beta radiation, you get hundreds of watts of bremsstrahlung with a few MeV. 1 cm of lead will roughly half the intensity, 10 cm of water will half it again. Thats still many 10s of Watts coming outside the device, or 1E13...1E14 gamma particles per second.
Integrated over an hour, this would be hundreds of kJs. If a person stands close to it and covers 1% of the area as seen from the device, it receives some kJs. Divided by 80kg, thats 10s of Gray or 10s of Sieverts. This person will certainly die.

page 116. You said you have a problem with the expression "beta radiation". You may use "IC electrons" instead. The electrons won't care.
Now what about the ignore list?

[rcain]

...

fwiw: Rossi is actually asking other people for money however, so in that (alone?), they are the same. in addition, we 'know' that Rossi is doing whatever he is doing, 'primarily' and/or 'solely' for money. and that he operates (protects his position) by 'concealing' critical information.

those factors must weigh heavily on any rational assessment of his 'claims'.

Then it behooves his targ... unh, investors to make a wise decision. I am not responsible for his "investor's" decisions. If he ever asks me, I will demand a WHOLE lot more REAL data before I decide, or I will decide "not proven = no".

i was actually referring to his alleged customers. but, whatever.

as a 'possible' customer of Rossi's - i can visualize you now: eCat up on the kitchen table, with its guts out, probing inside with your spectrum analyser.

at some point, EU legislation has got to kick in and ask 'are these things really safe to have in our homes', or are we being inadvertently blatted with with gammas, whatever. the (technical) lid will have to come off at some point.

other than that, Rossi will just have to run away very quickly to a non-extraditing country (with the cash, presumably).

[Giorgio]

I think the only thing that REALLY seperates us is the appearant scientific certainty implied by the term "probability". I think it "likely" to be either a scam or a VERY interesting delusion.

Ok, on this I can agree. I tend for the "interesting delusion" at this moment.

Lastly, if we have to enter this pure speculative field, why do we have to believe what Rossi has to say more than (say) a MIB conspiracy believer or a "circles in the grain" UFO nut?

I would hope that you don't. I certainly don't. But neither can I say he is wrong.

Neither we can say that about MIB or "Crop Circle" believers...... but you have to draw a logic line somewhere.

FUTURE TALKING POINTS:

Your points are interesting if taken one by one, but none of them has ever been seen before by anyone. What are the chances that, out of nowhere, Rossi was able to ace all of them in a raw? Well...... I hope you got my point.

Well, I beg to differ. Internal Conversion and Electron Capture are well known factors that modify the output of a nuclear reaction/decay.

I was not clear in expressing my thought.
None of them has ever been seen before by anyone in a chamber with Nickel powder and Hydrogen under pressure when applying heat.
Something done in hundreds experimental labs in the last years.

The ONLY issue is whether an electron would be present. And the posited processes ALL assume an electron is present for the initial reaction. It would not be TOO much of a stretch to posit that an electron will be available again before the ground state unstable Cu has time to decay. Thus, no measureable gamma.

When you start to stretch logic it stops in being logic.

Anyhow, even assuming that all what you postulated will happen, you will still need to assume that this process will prevent the global 100% of the unstable Cu decay events.
Is this logic?