[Vo]:More information on Brian Ahern's LENR

I am not sure whether this material has already been posted to Vortex, but if not, it may be of interest. First, (Ahern's) Vibronic Energy Techologies Corp. presentation can be found at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/39076066/Vibronic-Energy-Technologies - Second, his patent - U.S

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 12:25 AM, David Roberson wrote: On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Rossi has given out far more proof than any previous cold fusion researcher. >That is a damning statement for the field of cold fusion. Now, if Rossi >fizzles in a few year

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 12:25 AM, David Roberson wrote: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> >> Rossi has given out *far* more proof than any previous cold fusion >> researcher. >> > > >That is a damning statement for the field of cold fusion. Now, if Rossi > fizzles in

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

-Original Message- From: Joshua Cude To: vortex-l Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 1:22 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: I wrote: There are videos and data from the Oct. 6 test. That test is irrefuta

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Lets approach this from a logical point of view. We should be able to agree about something. -Original Message- From: Joshua Cude To: vortex-l Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 1:15 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Jed Rothwel

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

-Original Message- From: Joshua Cude To: vortex-l Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 1:03 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:26 PM, David Roberson wrote: All the HVAC guy did was to assume that all of the input water was vaporized.

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > I wrote: > > >> There are videos and data from the Oct. 6 test. That test is irrefutable >> by first principles. The tests from earlier this year were also excellent >> despite the poor instrumentation. >> > > Let me add that if you are not c

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

-Original Message- From: Joshua Cude To: vortex-l Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 12:57 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:47 PM, David Roberson wrote: But, Rossi definitely appears to have 3 cores activ

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

I agree that the old cats were quite a bit different than the new ones. The new devices have a lot of potential volume to contain vapor above the water. And of course the very tiny hole associated with the output valve would make water have a hard time finding its way out with the dry steam.

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Rossi has given out *far* more proof than any previous cold fusion > researcher. > That is a damning statement for the field of cold fusion. Now, if Rossi fizzles in a few years, that should mean there was never anything to cold fusion.

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

Lets make sure we agree on the terms. Then we can proceed to discuss the details. See below. -Original Message- From: Joshua Cude To: vortex-l Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 12:45 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo On Fri, Nov 18,

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:26 PM, David Roberson wrote: > All the HVAC guy did was to assume that all of the input water was > vaporized. > Right. But the assumption was not based on any evidence. The temperature is consistent with 1% steam. > He did not actually measure whether or not the lev

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:47 PM, David Roberson wrote: > > But, Rossi definitely appears to have 3 cores active for the 1 MW > components. They put out at least 2 times the power in the self sustaining > mode as > the October 6 test device and the positive feedback due to core > interaction mak

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:32 PM, Robert Leguillon < robert.leguil...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Dave, > Have you examined the earlier E-Cat tests? Before the "Fat-Cat" (or as > Nasa calls it the "Ottoman", Rossi was claiming complete vaporization under > circumstances that were obviously, I mean REALL

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

Robert, I agree with you completely that the other tests did not have dry vapor output. I concluded that the October 6 test had a quality of about 20% at the time that Mats Lewan collected his .91 grams/second measurement. If this latest monster cat was a copy of those devices in parallel, th

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:54 PM, David Roberson wrote: > Ok, I just did some calculating about the 1% power regulation you insist > upon and it is bogus. Do you wish to prove your point? > If the output is dry steam, and the flow rate is constant, which would be the case if the heating element

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

Dave, Have you examined the earlier E-Cat tests? Before the "Fat-Cat" (or as Nasa calls it the "Ottoman", Rossi was claiming complete vaporization under circumstances that were obviously, I mean REALLY obviously, wrong. This is the main reason that skeptics have been referring to the condensed,

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

I am sorry, but I can not actually tell what is your response as compared to the others. You need to make your own statements so I can straighten them out if they are coherent. I want to mention that you make a great case for the fact that the ECAT system actually puts out more power than the

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mary Yugo wrote: > >>> (1) why is the temperature so stable, requiring power stability of 1% >>> >> > The temperature is not stable. It fluctuates considerably, as you see in > the cooling loop data. > The fluctuation is clearly less than

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

I will give you a clue. A 10 % error in input flow rate would take 47 hours to empty the ECAT. The test was active according the the customer for 5.5 hours, so where is the problem with water level control? This I want to hear. Dave -Original Message- From: Joshua Cude To: vortex

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

Ok, I just did some calculating about the 1% power regulation you insist upon and it is bogus. Do you wish to prove your point? Dave -Original Message- From: Joshua Cude To: vortex-l Sent: Fri, Nov 18, 2011 10:57 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy fo

[Vo]:early lenr

http://www.hulu.com/watch/70135/tales-of-tomorrow-the-golden-ingot

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 8:13 PM, David Roberson wrote: > > If they wish to discuss one issue in depth, I will attempt to find time, > but they should be required to support their claims instead of just > suppositions. > My claims have been supported in detail. More than I can say for yours or Ro

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

I guess you did not read the posts that some of us have written. Many cirtics have succeeded in shouting for a long time, but are clearly in error. I for one do not wish to keep trying to educate those who will not learn or who disregard the evidence that is placed before them. It gets borin

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:36 PM, Rich Murray wrote: > Thank you Joshua Cude, for being extremely persistent in presenting an > extremely strong case with a lucid analysis of the available data -- it may > even be that the proponents are starting  to connect the dots of your > critique... Doubtfu

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

Thank you Joshua Cude, for being extremely persistent in presenting an extremely strong case with a lucid analysis of the available data -- it may even be that the proponents are starting to connect the dots of your critique...

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Berke Durak wrote: > > > For the 1MW demo, the data, as well as the claims, are provided by > Rossi et al. > > IT IS THEREFORE EQUALLY EASY TO FAKE THE DATA AS TO FAKE THE CLAIMS. > This is certainly the way I feel about the 18-hour test, where there were zero out

[Vo]:OT (sort of) Fioravanti does Casa Blanka, Speculative Fiction (2 of 2)

This speculative dramatization takes place in a board room of an unnamed corporation. Characters in this dramatization: "Fioravanti" - Domenico Fioravanti "THE BOSS" - Fioravanti's Superior. THE BOSS: Can I make an offer you can't refuse? Fioravanti: [hesitates] What did you have in

[Vo]:OT (sort of) Fioravanti does Casa Blanka, Speculative Fiction (1 of 2)

There has a lot of speculation concerning the alleged identity of the mysterious "engineer" Domenico Fioravanti. For example PESN states he is a NATO Colonel-Engineer. See: http://pesn.com/2011/11/07/9601950_Bloombergs_EnergyNow_Names_E-Cat_as_Weeks _HotZone/ I gather Fioravanti's identity, at pr

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

I appreciate your handling of this issue Berke. I have become weary of answering some of the skeptic claims that are totally out of touch with reality. If they wish to discuss one issue in depth, I will attempt to find time, but they should be required to support their claims instead of just s

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: > Believers (or at least claimants) are responsible to provide data to > support their claims. > Skeptics just need to show why the data does not support the claims, > by showing the data is also consistent with another interpretation. > If the

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > And who confirmed it's operation? > > > All of them did, in test results they showed me, which unfortunately I > cannot upload. > So, for all we know, you just made it up. > > And as Joshua Cude asked, where did this appear? > > > These

Re: [Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

I think the answer is simple. He is jealous. In one breath he claims that Rossi is producing excess heat and wants him to share information. Next, he is making skeptical remarks. It makes it clear to me that he wishes he could produce the same output Rossi can. So instead of admitting that, he a

Re: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism Theory

One point I forgot to mention, even though you might not consider a skeletal cat as capable of granular motion I have noticed many papers refer to a "rigid" Casimir geometry. As such you could have a similar frequency sensitivity of cilia like appendages left when the softer metal is leached away f

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:55 PM, David Roberson wrote: > Of course I referred to the temperature. There are other ways to check > the quality besides pressure although that is the usual one. > Pressure can only be used to identify dry steam, if the temperature is above the local boiling poin

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:14 PM, David Roberson wrote: > >Not true. This skeptic has considered the measurements reported on > Rossi's 3-page report, and found that the measurements do not support > Rossi's claim of heat from nuclear reactions. > > >His calculation of 470 kW is based on an unsu

Re: [Vo]:Still faster than light...

People are odd... I do not see why people see this neutrino thing as a big news. I predicted something like that to be possible when I was 19 years old. Just simple first principle physics (i.e. say 'no' to emprically unsupported a priori assumptions such as principle of relativity). Also there is

Re: [Vo]:Swedish physicists run the site Ecat.com

Lewan added this to the article: UPDATE: Members of the Hydrofusion team were present at the October 6 test of the Ecat and the October 28 test of the heat plant. They also met with Rossi for a private demonstration of the Ecat at the end of July. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

Robert Leguillon wrote: > You claimed previously that you didn't know of any smart people that > disagreed on the results of Rossi's demos . . . > That is not quite what I said. I do not know any smart people -- or stupid ones either -- who disagree for valid technical reasons. Regarding cold

RE: [Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

Jed, You claimed previously that you didn't know of any smart people that disagreed on the results of Rossi's demos (a swipe at all of the remaining "vortex contrarians"). Obviously you respect Ahern's technical abilities. So, now that Ahern is claiming excess power with Ni-H, but doubting Ross

Re: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism Theory

Hi Terry, I agree oscillon activity could explain the anomalous heat in the Rossi Reactor, and helps to explain why an external exciter of certain frequencies is necessary but I don't think this is fast enough for pair separation like the recent article using SQUIDS to create the equivalen

Re: [Vo]:Scientists create light from vacuum

At 12:53 AM 11/18/2011, Axil Axil wrote: Scientists create light from vacuum http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-scientists-vacuum.html Note the coincidence ...  www.ecat.com : Magnus Holm has a D.Tech and Niclas Sandström a PhD in elementary particle physics at Chalmers University of Technolo

Re: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

I agree that hot fusion was the biggest boondoggle of the 21st century. Cold fusion is going to make everyone realize how the mainstream scientific community kept us in the dark ages. From: Terry Blanton To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, November 18, 201

Re: [Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

I think that there are a group of competitors that are working together to try and bash Rossi, so they can slow down the commercialization of the E-Cat until they can make their systems produce 1/10th as much output. For the time being they are putting aside their differences. ___

Re: [Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

He is very jealous. From what I hear, he has only been able to produce small amounts of output (perhaps 10-50 watts). Rossi has produced a technology that generates huge amounts of output. Rossi once stated that a 50cc reactor core has a maximum safe output of 10 kilowatts. The problem with the

Re: [Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

Someone pointed out to me that Ahern has been posting incendiary comments to Krivit's blog, such as this one, in which he loses the argument, according to Goodwin's Law; a.k.a. *Reductio ad Hitlerum:* * * "This criticism of Rossi is far to leient. He is making his beggest claim yet with no back up

[Vo]:Rossi Interview Questions *** DO NOT REPLY ON VORTEX ***

* DO NOT REPLY ON VORTEX Please reply directly to a...@well.com * Suppose you knew someone who has an upcoming skype interview with Rossi, and who asked you for advice on what to ask. I was originally inclined to ask for "one more test" ... but I don't think that would fly. Likewi

Re: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

I for one forgive Jones for his slight breech of posting etiquette for briefly expressing the understandable frustrations that will eventually bubble up in the trench warfare that surrounds the Rossi issue. But looking beyond the noise, the scientific implications of LENR discoveries could open

Re: [Vo]:Interesting *English* article from Focus.it - letter by Celani to Rossi and Rossi's answer

Alan J Fletcher wrote: Oh dear ... more Rossi speak. 13 separate plants, or one 13MW plant ... ? I am pretty sure that means 13 plants, each 1 MW. That's what I gather from reading the tea leaves. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

Daniel Rocha wrote: Krivit claimed that a few days ago. It was the topic of one of his blog > posts, I think. Ah. Well, he did not ask Ahern. Brian always speaks his mind. He is quite clear about this issue. I can't imagine where Krivit got his information. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Interesting *English* article from Focus.it - letter by Celani to Rossi and Rossi's answer

At 04:24 PM 11/17/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 04:10 PM 11/17/2011, Akira Shirakawa wrote:  .. There's a zero missing somewhere :  «We are building a 130 MW thermal plant, made of 13 plant such as the one you saw on October 28th». Andrea Rossi November 18th, 2011 at 5:33 AM November 18th,

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

From: Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:22 PM, David Roberson wrote: OK, I see your reason for the post. Well, did you consider that the measurement device could have actually shown that result? >What measurement device are you referring to? They measured the

Re: [Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

Krivit claimed that a few days ago. It was the topic of one of his blog posts, I think. 2011/11/18 Jed Rothwell > (Someone here claimed that Ahern does not believe Rossi . . . I do not > recall who.) > >

Re: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

I agree with what you say Terry. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton To: vortex-l Sent: Fri, Nov 18, 2011 2:30 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side" On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > As for the scammed investors: fools and their money will alwa

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

Mouthy Mary - filtered to junk email folder Nick Palmer On the side of the Planet - and the people - because they're worth it Blogspot - Sustainability and stuff according to Nick Palmer http://nickpalmer.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:22 PM, David Roberson wrote: > OK, I see your reason for the post. Well, did you consider that the > measurement device could have actually shown that result? > What measurement device are you referring to? They measured the temperature. Without pressure, that does no

[Vo]:Clarifications from Brian Ahern

Brian Ahern wrote to me: "I [will] give a presentation on the topic of energy localization. I believe [Rossi] did in fact see lots of heat on certain occasions, but he lacks the ability to probe for the conditions that produce the energy. . . ." As I said yesterday, the topic of "energy localiza

Re: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > As for the scammed investors: fools and their money will always be parted – > with or without our help. Rossi represents chump-change compared to Enron or > Madoff – or especially the hot fusion swindle. Hah! If you look at the real cost of

Re: [Vo]: UK's DECC "Monitoring the sector" (LENR)

At 08:53 PM 11/17/2011, Mary Yugo wrote: In other words, they don't believe Rossi either, on the evidence that he's provided. I personally think their position is way too cover-their-a***///  conservative. They don't even include a more public 1MW acceptance test as a possible trigger. I

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Mary Yugo wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:06 AM, David Roberson wrote: > >> If I recall, Uri was tricked once by a scientist controlling the stage >> props and he failed. I would like to have seen that one. >> > Off topic: but here are the images and mo

Re: [Vo]:From Focus.it Customer? Celani test?

At 04:54 PM 11/17/2011, Mary Yugo wrote: On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Alan J Fletcher wrote: He's already said that deliveries to new customers will be in 2 months ... and that he's fully booked (ie 12 more for this one). Sorry but where does he say that.  I missed it.  Is

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

I proposed a scenario of how the 1 MW system was operated and it seemed obvious that it would be quite simple to allow the water level within the ECAT to slowly drop throughout the test. This process would eliminate the demand for super accurate power output that is a sticking point for the sk

Re: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > *From:* Mary Yugo > > ** ** > > **Ø **My understanding was that ad hominems are frowned upon and > precluded from this email list. Does that only apply to skeptics? > > ** ** > > No – all such attacks are frowned on and preclud

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

Marcello Vitale wrote: > So, it should be more "financial fraud based on secretly accepting cash > from VERY credulous investors who sign iron clad nondisclosure secrecy > agreements IN OTHERWISE VERY WISHY-WASHY CONTRACTS THEY CANNOT ENFORCE", > and all that because convinced by the shining per

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:06 AM, David Roberson wrote: > If I recall, Uri was tricked once by a scientist controlling the stage > props and he failed. I would like to have seen that one. > He was tricked by an editor of Popular Photography magazine who used a fisheye super wide angle lens with

RE: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

From: Mary Yugo * My understanding was that ad hominems are frowned upon and precluded from this email list. Does that only apply to skeptics? No - all such attacks are frowned on and precluded, but is my criticism over your habit of posting of dozens of repetitive and shallow messages

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

You know that us technical types would prefer to have a large, accurate volume of data to review, but that is not going to happen anytime soon. We are forced to work doggedly on what we are given and much can be learned by what has been demonstrated thus far. A lot of concentrated data would

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

David Roberson wrote: I do not think Krivit is someone to be believed. He intentionally sets > traps with questions that most people would not give consideration to. > Nowhere within Dr. Levi's answers is anything but honest discussion. > Right. The parts that Krivit described as suspicious wer

Re: [Vo]:Swedish physicists run the site Ecat.com

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Peter Heckert wrote: > Transportation costs are not mentioned. Come on, Peter. Rossi's Reactor constitutes one TEU which can be shipped from Europe to China for about $1400. T

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

David Roberson wrote: So, if the water level is changing within the ECAT, why should the power level output be required to hold within 1%? It is your turn now. Oh right. Power level. I was talking about the T2 temperature remaining stable. I confused the issue. Naturally, the water level

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

I do not think Krivit is someone to be believed. He intentionally sets traps with questions that most people would not give consideration to. Nowhere within Dr. Levi's answers is anything but honest discussion. Dr. Levi is an honest, decent man and you have no right to dishonor him. Dave

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

OK Mary, you have heard my position on this manner, now explain why it is not possible? I refer to the (1) item you list. I expect for you to cry that no one has proved that this is what is happening, etc. Instead, for once let me know why it is not possible. So, if the water level is chan

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

I wrote: > There are videos and data from the Oct. 6 test. That test is irrefutable > by first principles. The tests from earlier this year were also excellent > despite the poor instrumentation. > Let me add that if you are not convinced by the Oct. 6 test I do not think the earlier tests with

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Peter Heckert wrote: > Assuming, that this was a top secret years ago, how did they know what it > is, when they have seen it? > I do not understand the question. It was not top secret to these people. They went into the factory, examined the reactor, and measured the input and output power.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:26 AM, David Roberson wrote: > Lets try to discuss the technical details on occasions instead of the > scamming part of things. It is much more interesting to most of us > technical types. > Sure. But the problem is that many essential technical details are mostly la

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Mary Yugo wrote: > All of them did, in test results they showed me, which unfortunately I >> cannot upload. >> > > Yet another lovely story which can not be confirmed. That's a pity! We > only need *one* that can be and we never seem to get it. > You have got it. Rossi has given out *far*

Re: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

Yes. The restriction on ad hominems only applies to skeptics. A Rossi-believer can call you ignorant, blind, lacking in a seventh grade education, unable to understand elementary science, "pseudo-skeptic", "pathological skeptic", an agent of big oil, LENR-denier, even accuse you of intentional

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Ron Wormus wrote: > Personally, I like the 18 hr water heating only run done in February. > Seems good to me. > It's not a bit good. Did you see the Youtube interview Krivit did with Levi about this issue? Levi has had since last February to repeat the test bu

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Am 18.11.2011 19:23, schrieb Mary Yugo: On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Jed Rothwell > wrote: Mary Yugo wrote: That is incorrect. Focardi and many other people reported seeing it, including several people I know. Anyone independent

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Mary Yugo wrote: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > >> Right, because no one can explain: >> >> (1) why is the temperature so stable, requiring power stability of 1% >> > The temperature is not stable. It fluctuates considerably, as you see in the cooling loop data. People

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

"This one is for you to explain. You always complain about the lack of data. If you think about the system long enough, I am confident you will understand why." That's an answer? Yes, please, by all means clarify. ">(1) why is the temperature so stable, requiring power stability of 1% Easy.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

Fun it is. But you must realize that saying something does not make it so. Why should both sides of this discussion have to repeat or shout their positions over and over? Lets try to discuss the technical details on occasions instead of the scamming part of things. It is much more interesti

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mary Yugo wrote: > > That is incorrect. Focardi and many other people reported seeing it, >> including several people I know. >> > > > Anyone independent of Rossi? > > > They are as independent of him as I am. None of them work for him, and

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

OK, I see your reason for the post. Well, did you consider that the measurement device could have actually shown that result? No one can be sure as to exactly what it is reading under the test conditions. I personally would agree with you that it is hard to believe that such an increase actu

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Personally, I like the 18 hr water heating only run done in February. Seems good to me. I'd like the hard core skeptics (e.g. Mary, Joshua & Rich) to go away and leave us poor believers to our delusions. Ron --On Friday, November 18, 2011 11:41 AM -0500 David Roberson wrote: I guess that

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Mary Yugo wrote: That is incorrect. Focardi and many other people reported seeing it, including several people I know. Anyone independent of Rossi? They are as independent of him as I am. None of them work for him, and none are in business relationships as far as I know. Focardi is

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

I already did. Do you need clarification? Dave -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo To: vortex-l Sent: Fri, Nov 18, 2011 12:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: Right, because no one can explain:

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

I do not know where to begin. There is at least as much speculation in the response as I used to explain what was a likely scenario. On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:17 AM, David Roberson wrote: The October 28, 2011 test of the Rossi 1 MW LENR system was either a success or a failure depending

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mary Yugo wrote: > > Rossi has reported several times and it's in his patent application that >> he had a 35 kW E-cat Ni-H *fusion* heater heating his factory in N. Italy >> for more than a year. Unfortunately, nobody but Rossi has ever rep

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Am 18.11.2011 18:58, schrieb Jed Rothwell: Mary Yugo wrote: Rossi has reported several times and it's in his patent application that he had a 35 kW E-cat Ni-H *fusion* heater heating his factory in N. Italy for more than a year. Unfortunately, nobody but Rossi has ever reported seeing it . .

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mary Yugo wrote: > > Rossi has reported several times and it's in his patent application that >> he had a 35 kW E-cat Ni-H *fusion* heater heating his factory in N. Italy >> for more than a year. Unfortunately, nobody but Rossi has ever rep

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

Mary Yugo wrote: Rossi has reported several times and it's in his patent application that he had a 35 kW E-cat Ni-H *fusion* heater heating his factory in N. Italy for more than a year. Unfortunately, nobody but Rossi has ever reported seeing it . . . That is incorrect. Focardi and many oth

Re: [Vo]:Swedish physicists run the site Ecat.com

Am 18.11.2011 18:11, schrieb Mary Yugo: On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Peter Heckert > wrote: At the same time Rossi says on his forum he has sold 13 1MW plants to an secret military organisation in a secret country. If he continues to sell so su

Re: [Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Jones Beene wrote: I put a smiley there to alert people like Mary, who seldom carefully read > the posts of others before spouting out a new dose of ignorance ... > My understanding was that ad hominems are frowned upon and precluded from this email list. Does t

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:32 AM, David Roberson wrote: > Rossi's machine has been shown to work to me. It has been discussed on > many occasions which you do not accept. So, I guess we should realize that > there is not possible compromise except for the future ahead. > > We all know that the s

Re: [Vo]:High school physics says > 1 GJ excess energy for the Oct. 28 demo

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:20 AM, David Roberson wrote: > This post is completely out of touch with reality. Who has ever claimed > anything about dry steam and Rossi's device at 90 C? Why not discuss the > real world instead of dreamland? > > > I did discuss reality. I said it is implausible f

[Vo]:Gain from the "cold side"

Terry, and/or Harry, and/or others who may remember 'compreture' ... >> Rossi's reaction might be boiling water by >> removing cold, rather than by adding heat. > OK, I can see this is a waste of time. This comes up on Vortex from time to time and it is far from a waste of time. Formerly, Frank

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > Right, because no one can explain: > > (1) why is the temperature so stable, requiring power stability of 1% > (2) how does he get an 8-fold increase in power transfer in a few minutes, > if the first-fold power increase took 2 hours. > Excel

Re: [Vo]:Rossi feeding skeptics with much more skepticism.

Rossi's machine has been shown to work to me. It has been discussed on many occasions which you do not accept. So, I guess we should realize that there is not possible compromise except for the future ahead. We all know that the skeptics believe that Rossi may be scammingleave it at that

Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Peter Heckert wrote: > Am 18.11.2011 17:41, schrieb David Roberson: > > My domestic 10kW gasboiler is in any case better proven than the e-cat. > Rossi has reported several times and it's in his patent application that he had a 35 kW E-cat Ni-H *fusion* heater he

  1   2   >