On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:13 PM, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:
> Why are Rossi's patents and intentions important, in the context of
> validating his CMNS claims? What the world is waiting for is a protocol which
> allows reputable scientists to replicate at least one of his setups, and to
> obtain similar (+/- 30%) results. That would be a tremendous contribution,
> much more valuable than tens of his patents. He has a lot to gain from this.
> What is he waiting for?
>
> Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
>
> ===================================================
>
> On Dec 2, 2015, at 7:49 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
>
>> That is what the Rossi says
>>
>> I have found that Rossi doen not make misstatements when it comes to
>> egineering details. When his product are finally revailed, this pre release
>> statements are consistent with the product. Also, synthsys of all available
>> experimental data lends insight to what Rossi says. Magnetic confinement of
>> ENPs comes from various ENP theories including the tachyon, the leptonic
>> monopole, the polyneutron, and the Erzion...all ENPs and all informative as
>> to how the cause of LENR behaves.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:30 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> That is what the Rossi says! Unfortunately, we do not have any of the other
>> patents to review at this time to determine how his new device is
>> structured. Until that happens it is wise for us to make it clear that we
>> are speculating on a particular issue so that everyone understands that that
>> is the situation. When you state with authority that 1 device is driving 15
>> others people are left with the impression that Rossi has made that clear in
>> his writings.
>>
>> I have kept a close watch on his journal and do not recall ever seeing that
>> mentioned. In this case I was beginning to think that perhaps I have missed
>> one of his postings, which turned out not to be the case. My models are
>> based upon what Rossi has actually stated and I need to keep that
>> information accurate. Can I count on you and others to make a point to
>> state that you are speculating on a new configuration concept unless it is
>> actually written by Rossi?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 5:32 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>>
>> Joseph
>> November 5th, 2015 at 12:20 PM
>> Dr Andrea Rossi,
>> Congratulations for US Patent and for the 146 patents pending and in the
>> making. The story of your life can explain why you are able to do this and
>> work in your plant in the factory of the customer for 16 hours per day. You
>> are unique.
>> J.
>> Andrea Rossi
>> November 5th, 2015 at 11:25 PM
>> Joseph,
>> Thank you, but if the results will be positive, this will be due also to the
>> work of our Team and also of the great family of this blog, from which so
>> much I have learnt and of Prof Sergio Focardi and Prof Norman Cook, whose
>> book has put the theoretical bases to the evolution of my work during these
>> last 6 years. If the results will be negative, obviously, the responsibility
>> will be totally mine, because I am the one that has taken all the decisions
>> on the battlefield.
>> Warm Regards,
>> A.R.
>>
>> Sorry, there are 146 other patents pending.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:48 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> That was 2 years ago before the patent was granted. Do you see anything
>> within the patent that fits into this form? Rossi is required to supply
>> information that is adequate to construct one of his systems if his patent
>> is to have value.
>>
>> It is quite clear that his patented device has nothing resembling a driver
>> module that is different for the other modules. Please point that out
>> within the written patent.
>>
>> Rossi appears to be playing cat and mouse with Hank! There is nothing like
>> this in the patent that I have seen.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 3:17 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>>
>> Hank Mills
>> December 29th, 2013 at 2:34 PM
>> Dear Andrea,
>> The information you are sharing is facinating. While we wait for the full
>> reports, it gives us something to think upon.
>> 1 – If the mouse over stimulates the cat so it runs around in circles
>> continually, not going back to sleep, does the cat always explode?
>> 2 – Have you ever witnessed the cat running around in circles for extended
>> periods of time, not needing any extra stimulation, but remaining stable?
>> 3 – Other than heat from the mouse, is anything else stimulating the cat
>> during the drive or self sustain periods? It may not work for the hot cat,
>> but I wish there was some low power method of keeping the cat stimulated.
>> For example, like the 100 watts of radio frequencies that kept the one
>> megawatt plant in self sustain mode.
>> 4 – By how many degrees on average does the surface of the cat vary from the
>> end of the drive stage to the end of the self sustained stage?
>> Andrea Rossi
>> December 29th, 2013 at 6:10 PM
>> Hank Mills:
>> 1- no
>> 2- confidential
>> 3- no
>> 4- the temperature of the Cat raises when the Mouse is turned off, lowers
>> when the Mouse is turned on
>> Warm Regards,
>> A.R.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Rossi has provided a comprehensive explanation of the Cat and Mouse reactor
>> clustering method in bits and pieces throughout his Q&A blog. One of them
>> explains how the shutdown of power from the Mouse causes the Cat to be
>> stimulated.
>>
>> I now take this to mean that when Rossi shuts off a magnetic confinements
>> field coil that keeps the ENP inside the mouse, the Cats take off because
>> the ENPs can then get into the Cats to stimulate the LENR reaction.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:46 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I have also seen the reference to the 16 reactors. The question is whether
>> or not 1 is the driver with 15 following devices. Where did you see
>> anything about a special type of driver device among the other 15? Did
>> Rossi state this or is it entirely your assumption?
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 2:12 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>>
>> Roland Bob • 17 hours ago
>> Hi Bob,
>> Each 250kVA module is composed of 16 reactors; we were all confused about
>> this till Rossi revealed the structure a few days ago after the photos and
>> mockups were published.
>>
>> From:
>> Rossi on the E-Cat’s Modular Future: E-Cat X Units Can Combine to Make Power
>> Plants of Any Size
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:42 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Axil, where did you see a description of the tiger? I do not recall any
>> reference to the use of one module to drive the other 15.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Tue, Dec 1, 2015 10:40 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR reactors need magnetic confinement
>>
>> It has be recently revealed that each 250kVA E-Cat tiger reactor module is
>> composed of 16 reactors. Only one of those reactors is a powered
>> activator(mouse). The other 15 are drones driven by the activator. The
>> activator produces a reaction catalyst that drives the other drones. I say
>> that the reaction catalyst is the magnetic Exotic Neutral Particle(ENP) that
>> becomes mobile as its energy content level reaches a self sustaining
>> threshold. At low temperatures the alumina tub reactor shell that all these
>> reactors are comprised of confines the ENP. But as all these reactors heat
>> up, the alumina shell becomes electrically conductive. At high temperatures,
>> the alumina becomes magnetically transparent and this allows the ENP to
>> leave the activator an enter the drone where the ENP catalyzes the LENR
>> reaction.
>>
>> http://www.thevalvepage.com/valvetek/heater/fig1.gif
>>
>> Electrical conductivity Vs, temperature.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The so called Erzion phenomenon was discovered in a series of electrolytic
>> experiments marked by unexplained changes in a pool of cooling water outside
>> of the catalytic cell. After 40 minutes of electrolytic cell operation,
>> water on the tungsten anode side of the cooling vessel started loosing its
>> transparency.
>> Water on the stainless steel cathode of the pool of cooling water remained
>> transparent, at the same 40 C temperature. A sample of bubbly water, removed
>> from the anode side, was tested for induced gamma radioactivity. No such
>> radioactivity was found in it; the sample became transparent after 24 hours.
>> Attempts to reproduce the long-term loss of cooling water transparency with
>> other electrolytes, and under different electrical discharge conditions,
>> were not successful. But the effect was highly reproducible when
>> experimenting with the tungsten-anode electrolytic cell and the 7 M KF
>> electrolyte containing 50% of heavy water.
>>
>> That cooling water on the outside of the electrolytic cell's glass reactor
>> shell at the right side (see Figure 1) is close to the anode while cooling
>> water on the left side is close to the cathode. The disappearance of
>> bubbles, after the electrolysis, was very slow (half-life of about 10 hrs).
>> Attempts to explain the phenomenon in terms of cavitation, and other
>> ultrasonic effects, were not successful. The only satisfactory explanation
>> was possible within the framework of the erzion model. Authors believe that
>> bubbles are produced through the action of neutral Erzions.
>> The Erzons phenomenon behavior is consistent with the magnetic based Exotic
>> Neutral Particle(ENP). To begin with, the glass container is transparent to
>> the magnetically based ENPs both optically and magnetically. The LENR
>> reaction that keeps the ENPs viable produce the vapor that forms the water
>> bubbles. The ENPs become energetically self sufficient in the water of the
>> cooling pool where the ENPs remain viable for hours.
>> If the Erzons phenomenon is produced by magnetically based ENPs, an iron
>> plate placed just on the outside of the glass wall adjacent to the anode
>> would prevent the ENPs from exiting the glass electrolytic cell. With the
>> ENPs blocked from travel, bubble production would be eliminated.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In my opinion, the fundamental nature of the Rossi effect is based on
>> magnetism. The catalytic particle that produces the reaction is magnetic in
>> nature. This particle is produced by heat pumping and EMF stimulation. The
>> nature of this Exotic Neutral Particle (ENP)is reflected by the behaviour of
>> the E-Cat itself and reflect how the E-Cat operates.
>>
>> The ENP can exist at low energy pumping where the energy coming into the
>> particle is equal to the energy leaving the particle. This is similar to the
>> way Rossi keeps his reactor under control. Too much external energy pumping
>> will result in the E-Cat going critical.
>>
>> The same process of over pumping happens with the ENP. Overpumping brings it
>> to the stage where it becomes self-sufficient requiring no additional EMF
>> input. The energized ENP can get EMF from the environment around it not
>> requiring external heat or EMF simulation to be applied.
>>
>> The same is true for the E-Cat. When the E-Cat is subcritical, it requires
>> heat and EMF stimulation to be applied. But when it is "over stimulated" it
>> begins to meltdown since it has become independent from externally applied
>> stimulation.
>>
>> The ENP can live as long as it can catalyze energy production from the
>> material around it. The ENP can live for days on its own as it brings in
>> energy from the environment to sustain its internal LENR reaction processes.
>>
>> Magnetic confinement increases efficiency of the reaction. Such confinement
>> saves the externally applied energy that produced the ENP from being wasted.
>>
>> The ENP can leave the reactor if the material that makes up the reactor
>> enclosure is transparent to the optical and magnetic nature of the ENP. This
>> might be why electrolytic cells have difficulty in sustaining powerful LENR
>> reactions. In this case, the ENPs escape the glass beaker reactor enclosure
>> and all the input energy that was pumped into the ENP is wasted to the
>> environment. outside the electrolytic cell.
>>
>> If the cell is made of material that can contain the ENP both optically and
>> magnetically, the reactor will be efficent. Alumina is antiferromagnetic and
>> will confine magnetic particles thy to escape the reactor shell. Another
>> method of ENP confinement that Rossi might use is a solenoidal confinement
>> coil that keeps the ENPs away from the reactor walls in the center axis of
>> the reactor.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
