I agree that this would explain the result. However at 4:10 of the video I linked above we can see that there is a significant and pulsed (in time to the pump strokes) flow of liquid water from the outlet of the reactor. If the reactor geometry is the same in this test as in the October 7 test, isn't this consistent with water overflow? Under these conditions would a heat exchanger be able to super heat steam to the degree observed? Not to mention the observed, yet not quantified, pressure of the reactor at 6:30 in the video.
I agree, the video clearly shows overflow with mixed steam indicating a full boiling vessel. If this is the same condition of the oct 7 demo, where the temperature was as high as 137C indicating 2 bar, the box would have deformed, more probably ruptured, at least at the flange. Something doesn't add up. I haven't had time to keep up with the myriad of details.
Good eyes!
Actually I never tried to estimate it because the very same idea of making a pressurized reactor in square shape (when you can make a cylindrical one with off the shelf parts) is already a clear indication that no engineering design has been made.
But let's crunch numbers.
We know the reactor is 80Kg empty (if memory serves me right).
Deduct say 20 to 30 Kg for the weight of the internal reactor, than we have 50 to 60 Kg left.
You posted the dimensions to be equal to: 50x60x35
This gives a total surface area of external reactor of 1,4 M2.
Remove weight of 1mm of lead from total weight (11.35*1.4= 16Kg about)
You have left 34 to 44 Kg of weight for the external case.
(Weight in Kg) =(Area in m2)*7.85*(Average Thickness in mm)
Average thickness = 3,1 mm for 34 Kg
Average thickness = 4,1 mm for 44 Kg
(I suggest you do not use the gauge system, as it corresponds to different values in mm depending the type of metal or its external finishing.)
Feel free to modify any number that is not correct, as I was going by memory. Anyhow the final results should not change that much.
Is not a 10 mm thickness for sure.
Crawdaddy wrote: a mechanism of the e-cat's function.
Personally I would embrace all well reasoned arguments with regards to mechanism put forward by those with sufficient knowledge of theory, as long as they make predictions that can be tested by experiment and are consistent within a mathematical framework that agrees with existing experimental data (e.g. known nuclear physics).
I don't think "inverse beta decay" falls into this category.
Try Kim's BECNR theory.
I like the idea of BECNR.
It is problematic for my small brain because in his initial paper Kim predicted that in Pd/D systems cold fusion would be enhanced at low temperature and that the probability of BEC formation drops with temperature (obviously).
In this paper, he assumes the formation of electron pairs (cooper pairs?) at temperatures above the curie point of nickel. And then, that at that temperature, a further condensate of nickel and the electron condensate occurs.
My first impression is this is a bit of a stretch. If Prof. Kim publishes calculations that show how this idea can be implemented in experiments with other metals (lithium is mentioned in this paper) the theory can be tested (if the e-cat actually works!).
I don't understand why you need nickel to generate the electron pairs...
What I find really intriguing is the tacit. support for Rossi's device given by Brian Josephson, well-known for nobel work on quantum tunnelling, Josephson tunnelling leading to Josephson junctions, etc.
Is it as simple as quantum tunnelling protons through the Compton barrier?
icarus wrote:What I find really intriguing is the tacit. support for Rossi's device given by Brian Josephson, well-known for nobel work on quantum tunnelling, Josephson tunnelling leading to Josephson junctions, etc.
Is it as simple as quantum tunnelling protons through the Compton barrier?
Josephson tunnelling fusion?
tempting. but i thought that only happened at extremely low temperature?
icarus wrote:What I find really intriguing is the tacit. support for Rossi's device given by Brian Josephson, well-known for nobel work on quantum tunnelling, Josephson tunnelling leading to Josephson junctions, etc.
Is it as simple as quantum tunnelling protons through the Compton barrier?
Josephson tunnelling fusion?
tempting. but i thought that only happened at extremely low temperature?
Not necessarily. At low temperatures, it is just that it is simpler to establish the correct boundary/initial conditions for the effect to manifest. (As with many other 'quantum' coherent phenomena.)
more generally then perhaps, some form of 'quantum tunnelling' in play.
without further knowledge and proper investigation of the actual/supposed configuration of Rossi's machine i think we are stabbing in the dark a bit.
i'm trying to keep away from this thread until we have something 'hard' and tangible to discuss; seems little point in unsubstantiable conjectures at this time.
rcain wrote:tempting. but i thought that only happened at extremely low temperature?
Not necessarily. At low temperatures, it is just that it is simpler to establish the correct boundary/initial conditions for the effect to manifest. (As with many other 'quantum' coherent phenomena.)
We have discussed this before.
The idea of a quantum coherent phenomena at high temperature does not make sense. You cannot get a "coherent" state while increasing "random" motion.
rcain wrote:tempting. but i thought that only happened at extremely low temperature?
Not necessarily. At low temperatures, it is just that it is simpler to establish the correct boundary/initial conditions for the effect to manifest. (As with many other 'quantum' coherent phenomena.)
We have discussed this before.
The idea of a quantum coherent phenomena at high temperature does not make sense. You cannot get a "coherent" state while increasing "random" motion.
The key to all this theory is quantum mechanical coherence and entanglement. The people who are developing quantum computers require entangled subatomic particles for their computing elements. They have found that Rydberg matter can do the job at higth temperatures.
I believe Rydberg matter is what makes the cold fusion reaction go because it can generate quantum mechanical coherence and entanglement at high temperatures. It is a topic that few in science think is important but it will be at the center of the new cold fusion theroy.
George Miley (U. of Illinois) recent published a Powerpoint presentation
(dated Oct-3-2011 on Google) entitled
"Nuclear Battery Using D-Clusters in Nano-materials ---
plus some comments about prior H2-Ni power cell studies"
at the following URL:
Note: In this document, D-Clusters are Rydberg matter which may or may not be inverted...
rcain wrote:tempting. but i thought that only happened at extremely low temperature?
Not necessarily. At low temperatures, it is just that it is simpler to establish the correct boundary/initial conditions for the effect to manifest. (As with many other 'quantum' coherent phenomena.)
We have discussed this before.
The idea of a quantum coherent phenomena at high temperature does not make sense. You cannot get a "coherent" state while increasing "random" motion.
Well I guess that is the end of the matter if you have discussed it before? (You could have added a "nothing to see here, move along" for dramatic effect though I thought).
We already have evidence and experiments demonstrating photonic BEC at room temperature. It is not just temperature that can determine the BEC statistical state, cavity geometry (length scale) can also ....
So if it is the interstitial spacing of the nickel lattice containing the protons that is the determining factor for BEC conditions to occur (and ensuing Josephson tunnelling fusion) it would be possible that temperature (up or down) is a knob that can adjust the the geometry (length scale) of the lattice to induce BEC formation.
Giorgio wrote:The key to all this theory is quantum mechanical coherence and entanglement. The people who are developing quantum computers require entangled subatomic particles for their computing elements. They have found that Rydberg matter can do the job at higth temperatures.
We have been into this discussion before Axil, there is no proof to date about this point, and it's REALLY strange that no one lab working in entaglement and/or Rydberg matter has not seen such evidences till date.
Axil wrote:I believe Rydberg matter is what makes the cold fusion reaction go because it can generate quantum mechanical coherence and entanglement at high temperatures. It is a topic that few in science think is important but it will be at the center of the new cold fusion theroy.
As above, no one working in Rydberg matter ever noticed this?
Axil wrote:George Miley (U. of Illinois) recent published a Powerpoint presentation
(dated Oct-3-2011 on Google) entitled
"Nuclear Battery Using D-Clusters in Nano-materials ---
plus some comments about prior H2-Ni power cell studies"
at the following URL:
Note: In this document, D-Clusters are Rydberg matter which may or may not be inverted...
I suggest that we wait for him to publish some real data, than we can understand what he is talking about.