In regards to Rossi using caps all the time, I have noticed that he does not do that with the intention of shouting. In one of his posts he simply states that he would add his answers in caps.
Unfortunately, he does not realize that people take caps as yelling. Maybe someone should tell him that?
It sure does not do anything to make him look more professional. I do have to say in his defense though that he is not demoing anything related to computer science. So one may cut him some slack there.
That said, I am very confused about this man and everything we have seen about the e- cat so far.
If it works, it might enter history as the messiest reveal of a new technology ever.
If it is a fraud, it will enter history as the worst executed fraud ever.
10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)
I dunno. 470 KW out. 500 KW generator. What happened to the missing 30 KW? Could this be a new source of unlimited energy? Some one should start looking for that 30 KW. It could mean the end of oil.Seriously, though, plausible explanations for what we’ve seen are getting harder to come by
Do I sound confused? It is intentional.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I am exchanging e-mails with Krivit and it seems exactly as you are stating.ladajo wrote:And Krivit's post today is not pulling any punches.
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/10/ ... ot-enough/
Krivit has a decent history of objectivity, but what ever has happened behind the scenes has certainly pushed Krivit to go all in, betting against Rossi.
Something Rossi has made or told him must have convinced him to be 100% against Rossi.
I wonder if he will disclose what point exactly made him take this decision or if it was more (like I think) a sum of different points.
And that's why he should not be afraid to let external verificators to take independent measurements of what is going on.painlord2k wrote:I strongly disagree. Self-delusional people are not able to heat water with their self-delusion. It don't matter how much they are deluded.
Mind you, I am not saying he has to disclose WHAT is going on, but just to let them set up a decent test rig.
There is no need for steam, no need for fancy data loggers, no need to place 107 ecat in one container. All you need is a 1 M3 of cold water, one Ecat, one thermometer, one amper meter, one heat exchanger, one watch and 3 hours of time.
Give me a good reason as why this has not been made till now and you might convince me that Rossi is not a self delusional guy, but until than......
-
Joseph Chikva
- Posts: 2039
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 4:30 am
Some people only called somewhere or sent messages like "I have 100 millions deposit of my died husband". Nevertheless this is FBI web-page on that: http://www.fbi.gov/scams-safety/fraudicarus wrote:All he has done is self-publish some test data, let people post you-tube clips of his lab set-up and put up a website for alternative nuclear theories.
i do own a hat, but i will not actually eat it until the fat lady sings.
fuller/original story here - http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 303682.ece
(as usual no one actually saw very much and the technical report was full of mistakes - but credit to Rossi for getting/surviving this far - scam or no.)
I was being sarcastic. But you are correct - his publicity machine is working well. Even some people I would expect to be sceptical are saying good things about Rossi.rcain wrote:i do own a hat, but i will not actually eat it until the fat lady sings.
fuller/original story here - http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 303682.ece
(as usual no one actually saw very much and the technical report was full of mistakes - but credit to Rossi for getting/surviving this far - scam or no.)
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I guess he has been clever enough. The febrile blogosphere has a limited attention span. And 1MW reactor test sounds so impressive - you can't imagine measurement errors that would make the results of short-term tests ambiguous. Unlike the small-scale tests none of which gave clear evidenceMSimon wrote:I was being sarcastic. But you are correct - his publicity machine is working well. Even some people I would expect to be sceptical are saying good things about Rossi.rcain wrote:i do own a hat, but i will not actually eat it until the fat lady sings.
fuller/original story here - http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... 303682.ece
(as usual no one actually saw very much and the technical report was full of mistakes - but credit to Rossi for getting/surviving this far - scam or no.)
There is also the way in which, in the right PR context, continued lack of clear evidence (for something extraordinary) turns into "there has got to be something there!".
Though frankly I can't quite understand how he does it given his extraordinarily bad handling of Krivit's polite questions.
OMG, Rossi was "set up by the Italian Mafia"! Well, that explains everything.Giorgio wrote:What a jokeparallel wrote:This is a good rebuttal to Krivit's accusation of fraud
http://pesn.com/2011/10/30/9501941_Rebu ... Fraudster/
Who is this Hank Mills anyway?
This was the best line. He is sure that Rossi is not a scammer because "I have fooled before by people I thought were genuine but who turned out to be scammers."
IC
A bit of trolling, in-his-face, might get Maui to learn not to CAP like our beloved subject does, but will never prove E-Cat working, icarus.icarus wrote:It is informative to look for the first offender in name-calling flame wars ...Maui wrote:HAVE YOU NOT SEEN ANY OF ROSSI'S POSTS IN RESPONSE TO VERY LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS BEING ASKED? 90% OF THE VITRIOL, ANIMOSITY, NAME CALLING AND CAPS I HAVE SEEN IN THIS DEBACLE HAVE COME FROM ROSSI.icarus wrote:Krivit's butt-hurt snivelling is pathetic and cringe-worthy, I don't think we'll ever know what his real agenda was, maybe as simple as petty jealousy and bruised-ego envy. The vitriolic accusations of fraud levelled at Rossi, many on this board, have a level of personal animosity that far outweighs any of Rossi's actions thus far.(as if it really matters when you are talking about scientific revolutions??) ... got a peer-reviewed link for your 90% figure and righteous outraged extreme caps-lock certainty? (no, i don't really care ... nor do I really care what you think.)
Tell me you've read the "rebuttal" and did not laugh at the man who wrote it. It is an epic fail OR a trolling stunt much thinner than you'll ever know.
+1. This would be a third time in a row he's got set upseedload wrote:OMG, Rossi was "set up by the Italian Mafia"! Well, that explains everything
Let us just say that a self-deluded person can't distinguish between water heated by electricity & water heated by nuclear reactions?painlord2k wrote:I strongly disagree. Self-delusional people are not able to heat water with their self-delusion. It don't matter how much they are deluded.Rossi may well not be a fraudster. But nothing prevents self-delusion.
It is like the end of "Dusk to Dawn" with George Clooney and Quentin Tarantino: psychopathics don't explode when exposed to sun light.
Rossi is so transparently self deluded (or fraudster) it is source of continual interest to me how people manage to explain away all the inconsistency.
We get some insign into Allan Sterling's stance from comments on Krivit's latest post (and BTW Ks post summarises well why no-one with any judgement would reckon Krivit is for real).
Of course, if Rossi's device behaved as his demos & claims: 100C steam out & Q = 6 - it would not be over-unity in any generating system: with 100C in and say 40C out you cannot get 17% efficiency - it is just above the Carnot limit of 16%. And of course realistically you would do very well to get 14%.John W. Ratcliff says:
October 30, 2011 at 18:08
Your post has found itself worthy of a rebuttal by the great conspiracy theorist of the free energy field, Mr. Sterling Allan, over at PSEN.
I’ve been following the antics of Allan for years now. He’s never met a free energy device he wouldn’t give the greatest benefit of doubt until, finally, proven an inevitable hoax as they all have. I repeat that *all*, as in 100% of the time always.
He supports the belief that Stanley Meyer, of water powered dune buggy fame, was murdered to suppress his technology. In fact, he supports a lot of HOH claimants even though none of them have ever worked.
He asked me in another forum to ‘prove’ that Rossi was conducting a hoax. To me, the hoax hypothesis should be considered the default position in lieu of the fact that his work has not been published or replicated. Add to that the simple observation that not a single demonstration he has performed has been shown to produce so much as a single milliwatt of electrical energy.
How can you beat that? A guy touting a free energy device that can’t produce electricity! Instead we argue about ‘steam quality’ and other nonsense. Last I checked, we have had the technological capability to convert steam to electricity for about a hundred years.
Apparently, Rossi hasn’t figured out how to turn steam into electricity yet, so maybe someone could give him a hand?
If his device needs a little bit of electricity to keep it’s parts running, that’s just fine. Start the thing up, send the output steam to an electrical generator, feed that electricity back into the machine and un-plug it from the wall!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There you have it. A self-sustained closed system which would be monumentally more convincing than anything we have seen to date. And, unless I am somehow woefully confused, this should be a trivial thing to do. And, instead of measuring steam we would be measuring amperes, something just a tad bit more concrete and less susceptible to misinterpretation.
And, if it’s so trivial, why has he not done it yet? Perhaps because his device doesn’t work, isn’t over-unity, and his house of cards would collapse?
I hardly think I should be the only one asking this question. If you have a device that can produce cheap energy, wouldn’t it be cool if it actually produced…well..some energy as output?
Not a tea kettle boiling, but usable electrical energy?
Am I really asking for too much?
Or, am I under mind control by the black-op secret force CIA MK-ULTRA goons who have implanted alien splinters into my brain?
Yeah, that’s far more likely the story that I’m simply a engineer who has a fondness for rational thought.
John W. Ratcliff
Actually the difference is enormous. It is the distinction between having to select one minor isotope out of the middle of several around it versus taking the upper end of a smear of many where 58Ni is at the very bottom end.D Tibbets wrote: What is the difference between purifying and removing contaminates? Natural abundance of 62Ni is about 4% of all nickel. I doubt purifying it to 50% would effect the (real) radiation problem much. But, even that level of purification is difficult, and expensive. And what of the isotopic analysis that someone did?
My question to whoever it was, that you responded to, was a request for illumination of his contention that "new physics" was required. Where your statements were appropriate to my question, I responded appropriately. Where they were not, I responded appropriately to that situation too!D Tibbets wrote: As far as new physics or just incredible engineering or experimental claimes, didn't you read the first line of my post? To remind you I said 'new physics OR unsupported incredible claims.
Dan Tibbets
You should take a moment to consider the fact that you are pontificating about how Rossi controls a reaction when you don't even know what the reaction is? What reaction? How can you even speculate about controlling a "reaction" when you don't know anything about the reaction itself?painlord2k wrote:Rossi told that due to an unexpected glitch discovered he would be able to show 1 MW with a COP => 6 power driven or 1/2 MW self sustained.MSimon wrote: What speaks against that is that they reduced the output to 480 KW.
As to why the lower output? To prevent uncontrolled output - all the Nickel reacting at once.
The client preferred the self-sustained mode to the 1MW with a cop of 6.
The e-cat, he say, is safe because the reaction stop when the nickel melt.
But a broken e-cat is not very useful.
The self sustained mode is safer with the electric power connected, because they are better able to keep the reaction under control and don't allow it to become self sustained.It appears that the devices are safe as long as they are not connected to electrical power. But they need to be connected for start-up.
Probably they are able to produce positive energy at some temperature but it become self supporting at higher temperatures.
Yes they could. I already asked it to Rossi in his blog (JoNP).I wonder if they couldn't be started by a natural gas burner and a heat pipe?
My opinion is the geometry of the reactors is the most complex thing to design properly to be able to control the reaction. Small enough to not be able to become really self sustaining but large enough to be able to initiate the reaction.
Maybe small self-sustaining reactors (like pebbles in a pebbles-bed) could do it and be more manageable, just take them one at time and throw them is a pool of cold water.
When Rossi is your only source, you are better off saying nothing, IMHO.
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!
Rossi quote from NYTEKNIK, ""We had to decrease the power during self sustained mode as the temperature rose too much”, Rossi said after the test."
So, he had to reduce the output power in an uncontrolled self-sustained device, because above 50% power the temperature was too much. So, I am grappling with, had he run it at 100% (with input power to "control" it), he would have gotten the full megawatt and how would the temp have been any different, other than the core itself being at twice the thermal power, which in turn begs the question, "Isn't that bad, based on the first issue?"
How do you run something at 50% power, because it is temp limited, and then be able to run it at 100% power safely by adding energy?
This is a simple device: Hot rock heats water, water cycles in loop to heat sink. Heat sink can be used as source to draw energy from for further use.
Hot Rock can only operate safely to certain temperature. So at 50% power or less, in can be run within temp limit (which speaks to the heat removal meduim's ability to bleed of accumulated energy). I am struggling to understand that if you double the power you get safer Hot Rock temps (by adding energy via "heating resistance").
Maybe I am stuck in my perspective of nuclear and boiler style plants. But at the end of all this, a heat source is a heat source, you draw off energy, and send it somewhere else. If you don't, and you don't dial back your heat source, it will cook itself off somehow.
Where is Rossi's dial? A Thermal Source comprised of an electrical resistance? And you dial it down by adding heat?
None of this is making sense.
But, thank goodness we did not get a 1MW stress test of his device, because I really think it was not sufficiently designed to handle the pressures, temps and flows. Someone might have gotten seriously injured or worse.
So, he had to reduce the output power in an uncontrolled self-sustained device, because above 50% power the temperature was too much. So, I am grappling with, had he run it at 100% (with input power to "control" it), he would have gotten the full megawatt and how would the temp have been any different, other than the core itself being at twice the thermal power, which in turn begs the question, "Isn't that bad, based on the first issue?"
How do you run something at 50% power, because it is temp limited, and then be able to run it at 100% power safely by adding energy?
This is a simple device: Hot rock heats water, water cycles in loop to heat sink. Heat sink can be used as source to draw energy from for further use.
Hot Rock can only operate safely to certain temperature. So at 50% power or less, in can be run within temp limit (which speaks to the heat removal meduim's ability to bleed of accumulated energy). I am struggling to understand that if you double the power you get safer Hot Rock temps (by adding energy via "heating resistance").
Maybe I am stuck in my perspective of nuclear and boiler style plants. But at the end of all this, a heat source is a heat source, you draw off energy, and send it somewhere else. If you don't, and you don't dial back your heat source, it will cook itself off somehow.
Where is Rossi's dial? A Thermal Source comprised of an electrical resistance? And you dial it down by adding heat?
None of this is making sense.
But, thank goodness we did not get a 1MW stress test of his device, because I really think it was not sufficiently designed to handle the pressures, temps and flows. Someone might have gotten seriously injured or worse.