10KW LENR Demonstrator?

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Kahuna
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: CA

Re: Um

Post by Kahuna »

bcglorf wrote: So you'd have no problem with a guy manufacturing and selling a cure for cancer without any proof it actually works? There is most certainly a large enough market of dying people, desperate enough to be suckered into buying a well marketed placebo.
I doubt Rossi has what he claims, but come on, the cancer metaphore is absurd. You can certainly do better than that.

Assuming Rossi ever manufactures and markets his device, it will either work or not (for everyone). They can do adequate controlled tests in one day and have a pretty good idea if it is snake oil or not and know where to go for redress if it is. Better yet, you can talk to the guy you trust who bought one yesterday and see how his tests went.

Now with regard to investing in the Rossi device as a venture, that is a different story and a one in which your metaphore may hold some water. However, I can't see where he is seeking venture capital so not sure it can apply there either.

The reason people pay attention (rightfully IMO) to news such as Rossi's is that even though the probability of it being real are very small, the potential payoff is so huge that the product of the two makes it worth at least tracking. I don't see much sense in getting too excited about it at this point, but I also don't think it appropriate to totally dismiss it as some here suggest.

Torulf2
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: Swedem

Post by Torulf2 »

Watt do "snake oil" means?

bcglorf
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:58 pm

Re: Um

Post by bcglorf »

Kahuna wrote:
bcglorf wrote: So you'd have no problem with a guy manufacturing and selling a cure for cancer without any proof it actually works? There is most certainly a large enough market of dying people, desperate enough to be suckered into buying a well marketed placebo.
I doubt Rossi has what he claims, but come on, the cancer metaphore is absurd. You can certainly do better than that.

Assuming Rossi ever manufactures and markets his device, it will either work or not (for everyone). They can do adequate controlled tests in one day and have a pretty good idea if it is snake oil or not and know where to go for redress if it is. Better yet, you can talk to the guy you trust who bought one yesterday and see how his tests went.

Now with regard to investing in the Rossi device as a venture, that is a different story and a one in which your metaphore may hold some water. However, I can't see where he is seeking venture capital so not sure it can apply there either.

The reason people pay attention (rightfully IMO) to news such as Rossi's is that even though the probability of it being real are very small, the potential payoff is so huge that the product of the two makes it worth at least tracking. I don't see much sense in getting too excited about it at this point, but I also don't think it appropriate to totally dismiss it as some here suggest.
Explain why he shouldn't be totally dismissed. I can make exactly the claims he has. If I was of a mind to, I could even emulate his results with pretty low tech fraudulent device. Until he presents something I couldn't fake over a weekend why should anyone take him seriously?

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

Torulf2 wrote:Watt do "snake oil" means?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quackery

Search the page for 'snake'....

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

Jboily wrote:Actually, I don't quite get your point here. Rossi is a small player, and was self funded. He based his design on institutions R&D on this exact subject that was actually going nowhere for decades. On top of this, the one doing and "in control" of the testing of the demonstration device is not Rossi, but one of those institutions researcher!...The one doing the "bad sciende" is not Rossi.
I like your point. I think you are right. Rossi has sought academic 'approval', and he should be given some due regard for this action. What else should he, a non-academic, have been expected to do?

The person, or persons, supporting him from within academia are, as you say, the ones who should be questioned on it - hard. But, as I reconsidered already, it is not breaking any sort of academic-news barriers anyway, so it is a non-issue.

The one thing that is still against Rossi is that he has heard what he has wanted from someone in academia but does not appear to be listening to critics who might help guide his experimental protocols. It is wise to listen to the critics, as I say so often. It is they who can usually establish the robust path to an evidential demonstration.

Listen to your detractors, grasshopper, for there may be the wisdom you need in their words that your supporters cannot give you.

But... yes. Basically I agree with you and, perhaps, I should give credit to Rossi and focus my disapproval at Levi, in this situation.

Warthog
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 1:43 pm
Location: Fox Island, WA

Post by Warthog »

chrismb wrote:The person, or persons, supporting him from within academia are, as you say, the ones who should be questioned on it - hard.
It is wise to listen to the critics, as I say so often. It is they who can usually establish the robust path to an evidential demonstration.
Listen to your detractors, grasshopper, for there may be the wisdom you need in their words that your supporters cannot give you. But... yes. Basically I agree with you and, perhaps, I should give credit to Rossi and focus my disapproval at Levi, in this situation.
Yeah, and after being "questioned hard" they should have a political campaign run behind the scenes to have them denied tenure, grant funds, promotions, and all that other stuff that constitutes a successful career in research.

See the treatment of Peter Hagelstein when he actually tried to do "real science" related to cold fusion. And he is no exception.

And the "true believers" in the global warming modelling business (mostly physicists), are behaving precisely the same way to anyone who dares question the current "party line" of AGW.


For those who might be interested in Hagelstein's take on the current state of "cold fusion" research:

http://io9.com/#!5499139/an-interview-w ... hagelstein

Jboily
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:50 am

Re: Um

Post by Jboily »

bcglorf wrote:... So you'd have no problem with a guy manufacturing and selling a cure for cancer without any proof it actually works? There is most certainly a large enough market of dying people, desperate enough to be suckered into buying a well marketed placebo.

Can you explain why Rossi deserves the time of day from anyone?
Since you are in metaphors;

You know, every times I hear about a disruptive idea, I think about this King in his tent, preparing for a battle with swords, bows and arrows. A salesman show’s up with a riffles and bullets. The king send him on it’s way, He has no time to talk about toys.

Throughout my short career (about 30 years) I have met many inventors of very disruptive technologies ( Dr. Gerard O’Neal inventing GPS, Dr. Bussard inventing the Polywell, Dr. Jim Benson promoting the capture of Asteroids, to name a few …) I think all of then died not long after publishing their results, before seeing their idea come to pass. Actually many of them died from cancer, so I do not like the snake oil scams. Some time however, you do get antivenin from snakes! It is not easy to distinguish it from snake oil.

The nickel-hydrogen invention that Rossi came up with is at risk. At this time, there might not be enough people knowing the secret to protect it if Rossi disappears. I do not know if this is a scam. If it is a scam, I am quite sure he will pay dearly for it eventually. However, it might not be a scam, you must accept this fact. We should not throw him out of the tent because we are preparing for the energy war.

Here is an other concept to wrap your mind around.

I can calculate the orbital speed of a spacecraft using Euclid geometry. I do not need derivative nor special math. So, why is it that it took over 2000 years, until Newton to figure it out. Newton invented the math required to really understand what was going on, because he needed it to solve his gravity model accurately. The concept of orbital speed came to him before he needed the math to calculate it, before he understood that something we call “gravity” was responsible. In Euclid time, they did not have the concept of orbital speed, so they never calculated it, but they could have.

What I am saying is that we do not have all the knowledge of everything. I do believe that many misteries are still hidden from our primitive science. So, do not throw away all your snake oil jars, you might get bitten by a snake one day, and need this one bottle of antivenin.

We can and should remain skeptic about these new ideas like the Rossi reactor, but you should not dismiss them so lightly just because it does not fit our understanding of the laws of physic. Proper investigation should be done, and over time, we will find out if it is real or not. At this current time, no one here has the necessary data to prove it does not work, so do not make wild claim of a scam unless you can prove it, and try to shut it down before it is proven either way. It take time and efforts to do proper science, and most of the time these efforts are waisted in wrong directions. Once in a while, you do get lucky, and get something totally unexpected.

Cheers,

jb

Enginerd
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:29 am

Re: Um

Post by Enginerd »

Jboily wrote:The nickel-hydrogen invention that Rossi came up with is at risk. At this time, there might not be enough people knowing the secret to protect it if Rossi disappears. I do not know if this is a scam. If it is a scam, I am quite sure he will pay dearly for it eventually. However, it might not be a scam, you must accept this fact. We should not throw him out of the tent because we are preparing for the energy war.
And are you willing to try that same strategy the next time a set of missionaries knock on your door with a message from God? When somebody wants you to help them transfer cash from Nigeria? When your neighbor asserts they were abducted by aliens? Maybe Rossi really has solved all the world's energy problems. But without some extraordinary evidence rigorously and conclusively proving their claims, I think it best to presume their claims should be discounted. The burden of proof is on Rossi...

Kahuna
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: CA

Re: Um

Post by Kahuna »

Enginerd wrote:
Jboily wrote:The nickel-hydrogen invention that Rossi came up with is at risk. At this time, there might not be enough people knowing the secret to protect it if Rossi disappears. I do not know if this is a scam. If it is a scam, I am quite sure he will pay dearly for it eventually. However, it might not be a scam, you must accept this fact. We should not throw him out of the tent because we are preparing for the energy war.
And are you willing to try that same strategy the next time a set of missionaries knock on your door with a message from God? When somebody wants you to help them transfer cash from Nigeria? When your neighbor asserts they were abducted by aliens? Maybe Rossi really has solved all the world's energy problems. But without some extraordinary evidence rigorously and conclusively proving their claims, I think it best to presume their claims should be discounted. The burden of proof is on Rossi...
This is really getting silly. I don't see anyone here giving the Rossi Reactor a high probabilty of meeting its claims (I certainly don't), but it seems some here will not rest until all dismiss it outright as a scam based on the limited available information. Rossi certainly has not made his case to my satisfaction, but I don't think it has been disproven yet either. He is not asking anything of me. No money. No duplication of the experiment. Nothing.

I just plan to keep an open (yet skeptical) mind and set up a couple of Google alerts to see what happens over the next few months. It may cost me a few minutes a week. I'm not sure why some find delaying final jusdgement on this such a problem. In the unlikely event that Rossi has what he claims, it certainly would be monumental and so worth following for awhile IMO.

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

I agree with Kahuna and that is the same thing I am doing.
I say that it is most likely a scam, but I do not want to dismiss something outright as a lie, just because I do not have enough evidence that it is not (neither do I have much that it is).
So lets just all take a step back, relax and wait what happens. The timeframes that have been announced dont seem to be that huge. So I think we should all be able to manage. Heck I can wait that long and I am the most impatient person I know.

Kahuna
Posts: 300
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:17 pm
Location: CA

Post by Kahuna »

Not sure if this has been posted before:

http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_m ... ntent=main

Evidently the U.S. firm building the reactors is in Miami which was news to me. Also, the NyTeknik staff votes the device a likely scam 2:1.

A few other interesting tdibits...

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Post by Axil »

Kahuna: Thanks for the reference to this interesting article.


The article brings up an interesting theory of fusion causation as follows:
Ny Teknik: We talked with the Swedish physicist Hanno Essén who has the hypothesis that it may involve runaway electrons at relativistic speeds (near speed of light) that form a kind of plasma (his paper here). Would that be possible?

“It is certainly a very intelligent theory. The person who says this surely has a very high level of preparation. It demonstrates that we must be very careful not to expose anything before the patent is granted,” Rossi answered.
This Hanno Essén paper deals with the catalyzing of fusion by electrons at relativistic speeds. This fits in with many of the tidbits of seemingly disjointed data have been discussed here and elsewhere.

Radiation is important … First of all, Rossi is reluctant to have the radiation profile measured saying that this profile would tip off his industrial secrets.

Next to produce kilowatts of power, only 1 gram of very pure nickel powder is added to a thin hollow copper tub of limited volume (one liter) is described in the Rossi patent.

This means that the nickel powder is applied as a uniform surface coating on the inside of the copper tube (used beacuse it provides high thermal conductivity at a reasonable cost) to even out the heat transfer to the circulating water on the outside of the tube.

A even powder coat is indicated, because an uneven coating would cause a heat distribution that would burn a hole in the soft copper at a hot spot.

The secret catalyzer must be a surface treatment on the inside the copper tube.

Puting this all together, this all means that this secret catalyzing surface treatment must be a radioactive material that produces relativistic electrons at or on the surface of the pure nickel powder.

When a radioactive isotope is placed (imbedded) within 15 microns of a surface of a material, ionizing radiation (knock-on electrons at relativistic speeds of about 10% of the speed of light) will escape to the surface of that material.

Such fast electrons will catalyze a fusion reaction between the nickel and the hydride coating in the presence of motion (thermal vibrations at 300C) of the crystal structure of the nickel nanopowder.

The most probable radioactive element used to do this is thorium. It is easy to get and not too radioactive or dangerous with a long half-life.

Once the nickel/hydrogen fusion reaction gets going it builds on itself… this fusion reaction produces more radioactive relativistic electrons at the surface of the pure nickel powder from thorium and so on back and forth in a chain reaction.

I can see how a runaway meltdown could happen in this feedback loop.

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Axil, I think you are spending to much time speculating based on to little evidence.
I would suggest to wait a bit and see what happens.

Torulf2
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: Swedem

Post by Torulf2 »

There is lots of speculations possible if you presume this is not a scum.

Relativistic electrons colliding with nucleus giving X-rays how is the measured "gamma" radiation. Or maybe it is specific electron transitions from the "mini atoms" give specific X-rays.

But how is the "necessary" gamma from the Ni fusion avoided?
Melt down? Probably not if the reaction is depending of the thermal movement in crystals.

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Post by Axil »

All indications at the Bologna demo were that the undisclosed catalyst is radioactive, since Rossi would not permit the use of a NaI spectrum analyzer, but did permit various other kinds of gamma and neutron detectors.

In more detail, the lead investigator to examine the transmutation properties of LENR found by the Cincinnati group in thorium was Celani under a contract to DOD. Rossi would certainly have read this Celani paper which confirms LENR transmutation reactions in thorium and Rossi would have understood its importance. Rossi knew that Calani is too smart and too well informed because of this previous DOD work to let him look at the radiation spectrum of his device.

Celani was present at the recent demo in Bologna and had with him a NaI meter in spectrum mode, which Rossi forbade him to use. The signature of thorium would have been apparent, had Celani been allowed to use his device.

Three other kinds of radiation detectors were present, and were allowed. None of them would have been able to distinguish the radiation signature of thorium.

One of my favorite papers is the Simakin paper; it confirms that thorium will directly fission in a LENR reaction under radiation from a high powered laser producing Cs137 fission fragments without the production of protactinium or U233.

In the analysis of the Rossi reaction ash, Cs137 will not appear in the ash of the nickel powder thereby hiding the role of thorium in the reaction. The byproducts of the thorium LENR reactions would be confined to the inside thorium coated surface of the copper tube.

A self reinforcing LENR positive feedback loop between fusion (in nickel) and fission (in thorium) if sustained at a steady state might produce the Rossi heat reaction.

The direct fission of thorium could catalyze the fusion of hydrogen with nickel by producing high energy knockon electrons on the surface of the nickel powder. And low energy neutrons produced by the action of fusion of hydrogen in nickel could produce LENR fission in thorium.

Post Reply