Talk-Polywell.org

ladajo wrote:http://ecatnews.com/?p=1409

Krivit: If you don’t mind, can I ask who paid for your travel expenses?

Kullander: Rossi.

http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/06/ ... kullander/

Sven Kullander: There is a valve on the top that was open and we checked that the steam came out.

Krivit: Was the hose connected to the outlet at the same time you checked the steam?

Kullander: Yes.

Krivit: Do you know if the steam dryness was measured by volume or by mass?

Kullander: I think it was measured by volume but I’m not sure.

Direct conversion, huh?

In half a year he will move to spacecraft propulsion, I guess. We should anticipate Rossi to announce that Ad Astra has expressed interest in Rossitech.

Here’s a little bulletin from Daniele Passerini on 22passi.blogspot.com regarding the long-awaited hot cat validation report. (Thanks to ECW reader Renzo for the non-google translation from the original Italian!)

Please have a little patience for news about the E-Cat that you’ve been waiting – as I do – for months after months. I can now tell you that:
1. those independent tests so much expected and delayed are now almost concluded;
2. experimental setting, instrumentation (National Instruments, of course), calibration, procedures, records and so on… this time are “watertight”;
3. nothing is left but the time required to document and communicate all in the standard mode used by the scientific community and those responsible for the tests will certainly do it as accurately as possible.


ref http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/11/perha ... his-month/

The original Italian actually said "tested/proved for bomb", or in English Colloqial, "Bomb Proof" vice "watertight", to be completely accurate.

No that it matters. It is a crock of shit anyway.
Keep holding your breath idiots. You will see the light.

What will you say should the report indeed be water tight and show positive results?
I take you have already written your reply as you don't need to look at the facts in order to form your opinion.
Oh I see you have already. "It is a crock of shit."
A well thought out scientific argument...

parallel wrote:"It is a crock of shit."
A well thought out scientific argument...

At least not worse argument than permanently repeated by you "Rossi said".
Quoted be me dialog in which your Prof. Kulander says that not sure how steam was measured but Rossi's device produces 5 kW not an argument that his support is less significant?

parallel wrote:What will you say should the report indeed be water tight and show positive results?
I take you have already written your reply as you don't need to look at the facts in order to form your opinion.
Oh I see you have already. "It is a crock of shit."
A well thought out scientific argument...

I think you should lose the idea that there is anyone here who would be disappointed by limitless nearly free energy. None of us would be disappointed if it were true.

But that doesn't change the fact that we have to call 'em as we see 'em.

ladajo wrote:Not that it matters. It is a crock of shit anyway.

But that is where the energy comes from -- methane production.

The secret of Rossi's success.

He bottles bullshit and sells it in a 2 inch x 4 inch can for use as a thermal reactor.

Never doubt the power of a single fart to energize a room.

Sorry to interrupt the latest round of Rossi bashing, but I thought this was kind of interesting:

A new video has been posted by the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Fund in which one of the MFMP’s facilitators, Tyler van Houwelingen, visits the Hunt Utilities Group’s lab in Minnesota where one of the Celani replication cells is being built. It’s interesting to listen to Tyler talk about how he was invited to go to Korea to speak at the ICCF-17 conference. I think E-Cat World was the site that brought his slide show to the attention of the world!

In the video the HUG workers talk about their progress in building the Celani cell. At the moment they are in the calibration process, in preparation for running the experiment using wire prepared and sent by Francesco Celani.

http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/11/mfmp- ... n-testing/

The people from the Hunt Utilities Group seem to be capable, methodical and sane and appear have a solid plan for LENR evaluation via an attempted replication of the Francesco Celani experiment.

I sense these guys are pretty straight shooters as well as being capable and careful researchers so the results of these experiments should be worth watching.

For those who might be interested in Tyler van Houwelingen's ICCF-17 presentation mentioned in the video, it can be found here:

http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/07/lenr- ... uwelingen/

The LENR Validation/Replication plan of the MFMP can be found here:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/ ... slide=id.p

Joseph Chikva

At least not worse argument than permanently repeated by you "Rossi said".

My question was what he would write before looking at the results. If you think that is not worse than simply reporting what someone said, I take it your PhD was in potty training or similar area of high logic. Of course you also overlooked that the report would be from an independent third party, but that is just a detail you can ignore.

parallel wrote:Joseph Chikva

At least not worse argument than permanently repeated by you "Rossi said".

My question was what he would write before looking at the results. If you think that is not worse that simply reporting what someone said, I take it your PhD was in potty training or similar area of high logic. Of course you also overlooked that the report would be from an independent third party, but that is just a detail you can ignore.

Before? I think that we talk after and not before.
If as "independent third party” you mean Prof. Kulander, after the so called "5 kW demo" he said that he is not sure how steam flow was measured and what humidity that steam had. Not enough? For me this is more than enough to say that Rossi has nothing worth for discussing.

Chikva,
If you had posted my entire quote instead of just half of it, you might understand.

What will you say should the report indeed be water tight and show positive results?
I take you have already written your reply as you don't need to look at the facts in order to form your opinion.
Oh I see you have already. "It is a crock of shit."
A well thought out scientific argument...

No. Kullander was not the subject. It concerned the independent 3rd party's report on the Hot Cat. We don't even know who the 3rd party is yet, but it is presumed to be a university and expected before the end of the month.

Do you read anything, or do you just make it up as you go, like ladajo?

the report would be from an independent third party

Prove it.

Or are you just making shit up again like Frank Acland?

You really should fully read your sources as well as vet them.

Keep holding your breath idiots. You will see the light.