10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:45 pm

2. Third party independent tests for scientific purposes and advancement of theory
Praxen - Defkalion Green Technologies is a strong supporter of LENR technologies globally. Greece can become the global centre for R&D on LENR technologies. We have already received numerous requests from leading scientific authorities, academic institutions and national laboratories from key countries to conduct tests on our products. Our policy is to accept their requests, under agreed protocol, and to allow publication of their findings. The process of agreeing to dates for such tests depends on the availability of our staff and labs, keeping in mind that we run a business, not a technology show room.


Well, if true, that would certainly help clear things up!

Ironically, this might actually help Rossi, if Defkalion proves there's something to Rossi's ideas.

Time to make more popcorn. 8)
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Wed Nov 30, 2011 4:54 pm

Simon -- what do you think of the Hyperion's gamma shielding? They're using 3mm of "ECOMASS compound polyether block amide."

http://www.ecomass.com/index.html

It's a lead-equivalent material, apparently. Seems like that ought to have the same issue we talked about for the E-Cat.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

Crawdaddy
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 5:27 pm

Postby Crawdaddy » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:06 pm

TallDave wrote:
Crawdaddy wrote:The point of my comment is that known reactions are not empirical they agree with theory and can be predicted by calculation from first principles using quantum theory.
Yes, but that's a meaningless distinction. It does NOT mean every possible reaction is now known and Mankind will never discover a new and unexpected chemical reaction empirically. See, for instance:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 141550.htm

That's not to throw out theory entirely -- as I said, I would be interested in looking at chemical potential.

Another misconception engendered by your post is the notion that chemical reactions can be controlled to release large amounts of energy at a slow steady rate.
Obviously that depends on the reaction, the engineering, and the value of "large"; a simple bonfire will burn for days. Again, you seem to be confusing "not easy" with "not possible." If it was something simple and easy, we wouldn't be talking about it here. And some petroleum engineers have remarked on something similar occurring with hydrogen-doped nickel catalysts, in an uncontrolled fashion.

If you are interested in the possible chemical mechanisms of fraud in the rossi demonstrations, the vortex mailing list has addressed these issues ad nauseum. You can easily find all the data you require there.
Thanks, maybe I'll check that out, hopefully the arguments have some numbers on chemical potential based on volume/mass.


Go check it out. The discussion started last january. About 5 posts in the possibility of honest mistake due to chemical reaction is ruled out. I don't intend to go over the same ground here.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Postby ladajo » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:32 pm

TallDave wrote:Simon -- what do you think of the Hyperion's gamma shielding? They're using 3mm of "ECOMASS compound polyether block amide."

http://www.ecomass.com/index.html

It's a lead-equivalent material, apparently. Seems like that ought to have the same issue we talked about for the E-Cat.


ECOMASS is manufactered to lead equivilant densities. Either way, 3mm is about nada for shielding of a real source. Although in the design, they do have it further out from the core, which does reduce flux via the inverse square law prior to hitting the shielding. However, that does not answer the mail about the coolant not being exposed. Maybe the greeks feel differently about the effect. But either way, for the type and level of shielding we are talking about a low rate source.

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:49 pm

Hmm, did we calculate the maximum power 3mm lead (or equivalent) would allow at that distance? I should go back and check.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

Maui
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:10 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby Maui » Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:57 pm

ladajo wrote:Defkalion also says they will allow for Gamma monitoring to prove the LENR reaction.

Well, technically the wording of the question was "Could you allow gamma ray measurement tests?".

I suppose they could later elaborate on the "Yes" answer by adding "... but we won't".

seedload
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:16 pm

Postby seedload » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:00 pm

Defkalion is certainly ready to capitalize on Rossi's mistakes: not getting patent protection, not getting any investment, allowing them access to his machine, and not fulfilling his contract with them. They certainly will get the proper investment to destroy Rossi and his backwards operation. Rossi will have no chance of competing.

Hopefully, Rossi doesn't quietly go away because he can't compete, never having committed fraud because he didn't actually take any money. Hopefully, Defkalion doesn't take a lot of money by selling licenses and other investments but fail to get to a final product because they didn't fully understand Rossi's concepts - not really a fraud but merely a failed business venture. Hopefully, there is no back channel from Defkalion to Rossi.

Naw, that could never happen.
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:03 pm

Crawdaddy -- I think the question of whether Rossi is deluded or committing "fraud" (whichever way on chooses to define that, he has already said he misled Defkalion) is not very interesting relative to the question of the maximum possible chemical potential that could be contained in an E-Cat in terms of explaining output. It may make the problem easier to just look at nickel and hydrogen and call everything else fraud, but I don't find it nearly as interesting. YMMV.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:06 pm

Maui wrote:
ladajo wrote:Defkalion also says they will allow for Gamma monitoring to prove the LENR reaction.

Well, technically the wording of the question was "Could you allow gamma ray measurement tests?".

I suppose they could later elaborate on the "Yes" answer by adding "... but we won't".
If this doesn't pan out, the old saw will be updated to "Never trust Greeks bearing low-energy nuclear reactions."

In addition to taking the energy sector by storm, Defkalion also appears poised to revolutionize the sex toy industry based on the "Pleasure and temperature sensors" at the bottom right of their schematic.

3, please give the date of the first public demonstration of a working Hyperion.

Date of every specific schedule tests will be released later.
Hmmm.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

Crawdaddy
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 5:27 pm

Postby Crawdaddy » Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:01 pm

TallDave wrote:Crawdaddy -- I think the question of whether Rossi is deluded or committing "fraud" (whichever way on chooses to define that, he has already said he misled Defkalion) is not very interesting relative to the question of the maximum possible chemical potential that could be contained in an E-Cat in terms of explaining output. It may make the problem easier to just look at nickel and hydrogen and call everything else fraud, but I don't find it nearly as interesting. YMMV.


Any treatment of these devices that assumes a chemical origin of the observed heat must explain all the reported test work to be of any value in answering the question of whether the e-cat is legitimate. To explain the 18 hour Levi test the argument immediately degenerates into absurdity.

Imagining a black box weighing 90kg filled with unknown materials that generates heat is nothing more than a bad question on a first year chemistry homework assignment, not an explanation of what Rossi is doing. As someone who has graded such quiz questions thousands of times I can assure you that it is not interesting in the least.

cgray45
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 10:15 pm
Contact:

Postby cgray45 » Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:19 pm

TallDave wrote:Crawdaddy -- I think the question of whether Rossi is deluded or committing "fraud" (whichever way on chooses to define that, he has already said he misled Defkalion) is not very interesting relative to the question of the maximum possible chemical potential that could be contained in an E-Cat in terms of explaining output. It may make the problem easier to just look at nickel and hydrogen and call everything else fraud, but I don't find it nearly as interesting. YMMV.


The problem is that his pattern does not fit delusions as much as it does fraud-- for example his work with the DOD. Now it may be true that he is deluded, but the actions he's been taking are those that you see among most scams and frauds-- refusing to reveal the source, claiming a need to protect his IP, a history of other failed attempts, etc. etc.
Check out my blog-- not just about fusion, but anything that attracts this 40 something historians interest.

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:51 pm

To explain the 18 hour Levi test the argument immediately degenerates into absurdity.
That may be true, but I'm not trying to explain anything, just trying to find upper bounds. What I'd really like to see is a comparison to the highest known chemical potential per mass/volume, assuming (yes, very optimistically) no engineering constraints. I'm having trouble moving beyond handwaving on that point, at least in the small amount of time I put into it. I was guessing something like high explosives might be a good starting point, but there I'm not sure whether that's more a question of energy release over a short time than actual energy density, and chemical potential per mass or volume doesn't seem to be something that jumps out of data on a given material. Oh well.

Imagining a black box weighing 90kg filled with unknown materials that generates heat is nothing more than a bad question on a first year chemistry homework assignment, not an explanation of what Rossi is doing. As someone who has graded such quiz questions thousands of times I can assure you that it is not interesting in the least.
Quite true, except of course in the case that one actually has a box of unknown materials that is producing heat, which oh look we do. With all due respect to your no doubt impressive quiz-grading prowess, I find your reasoning there poor. The question of how much chemical potential such a box might contain seems quite interesting to me in these circumstances, as it could set some upper limits on how long it might produce a given level of heat by any chemical means -- but again, YMMV. Feel free to not be interested, as I'm relatively uninterested in the "fraud vs. delusion" debate.
Last edited by TallDave on Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:34 pm, edited 7 times in total.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

MSimon
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:05 pm

TallDave wrote:Simon -- what do you think of the Hyperion's gamma shielding? They're using 3mm of "ECOMASS compound polyether block amide."

http://www.ecomass.com/index.html

It's a lead-equivalent material, apparently. Seems like that ought to have the same issue we talked about for the E-Cat.


The material used for shielding (as long as it is above atomic number 15 (or is it 10?) hardly matters except for volume required. If we assume a 1/10th reduction from 1 cm of lead 3 cm means a factor of 1,000 reduction. If the main reaction produces gammas that is not near enough for close in work while the "reactor" is operating. If the gammas are merely produced by a side reaction that is not too probable (1E-6 or less) it might work. OTOH if it is merely another accoutrement of the "art project".....

I recall looking into that stuff in the early Polywell days when I was interested in D-D and some of the pB11 side reactions.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

TallDave
Posts: 3114
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Postby TallDave » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:15 pm

OK great, what's a safe gamma radiation level from such a device, given in watts? It sounds like you're saying it's much less than 470KW / 1000 = 470 watts. I'm thinking more in the range of milliwatts, so we're talking maybe 5 or 6 orders of magnitude too small to be producing the power they claim safely? Does that sound right?

I think this would be a good question to ask Defkalion's forum, they seem open to inquiry. I will give it a shot over there.

The material used for shielding (as long as it is above atomic number 15 (or is it 10?) hardly matters except for volume required
This is where I started wondering about graded-Z shielding and x-ray flourescence. Not sure it's applicable here, though.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

seedload
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:16 pm

Postby seedload » Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:36 pm

What I don't get anymore is where the gammas are supposed to be coming from.

Originally, I thought from the 'reaction' of Nickel and Hydrogen and ALSO from decay of unstable isotopes of Copper and Nickel. This was per Rossi's patent and per his white paper on his blog. But, recently he told me that if you blow the thing up, there is no radiation. So, we can throw out the decay processes of his original papers/patent and say that the gammas are ONLY coming from the main 'reaction'. I guess this is consistent with his new claimed miracle of only NI62 and NI64 reacting, but it is terribly inconsistent with his previous claims of doing careful isotopic analysis of the ash to determine that Copper and Nickel decay must have been happening.

Oh well.
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 6 guests