Merged Cold Fusion Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thon Brocket said:
h t t p://w w w.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=497

FWIW. Way above my head. Have at it.
Click to expand...

OK: It's nonsense. It's the sort of thing you would write in a sci-fi screenplay when you need Mr. Scott to explain the engines to Kirk. You don't care how the engines work, but you have a glossary of quantum-y sounding physics words, which you mix and match until it sounds good.

There is not much to even comment on. Almost every sentence is a bluntly ignorant statement contradicting all known quantum mechanics.

Just to pick a random example, the author "realizes" that he "needs to explain" how 511keV gamma rays don't escape from the catalyst. He looks in his jargon-glossary and finds that the "photoelectric effect", whatever that is, is something that can stop gamma rays. Done! He declares that the photoelectric effect explains why the gamma rays are not escaping. (Nope, sorry, the photoelectric effect is one of the things we already knew about ... that contributes a little to the fact that an inch-thick wall of lead can stop 511 keV gamma rays. It's one of the things we already knew about that does not prevent 511 keV gamma rays from escaping from a hypothetical "e-cat" that's actually undergoing fusion.)

This is like trying to sell someone a car with no brakes. "I read about this thing called FRICTION. Friction stops things gradually. I think that's how the car can stop without brakes." Uh, yeah, we knew about friction already when we were deciding to build normal cars with brakes.
 
Last edited:
The bottom of the article:

stable non radioactive isotopes of nickel are the following five: 58, 60, 61, 62 and 64. These, when fused with a hydrogen nucleus, are being transmuted relatively to Cu-59, Cu-61, Cu-62, Cu-63 and Cu-65. From these isotopes of copper only the last two (Cu-63 and Cu-65) are not radioactive, i.e. they are stable. The other three Cu-59, Cu-61, Cu-62, are being transmuted again to Nickel, with an average life expectancy of some hours and the most unstable Cu-59 in 18 seconds.
Click to expand...

So... How do you get from 4.5% of Ni being Ni-62 and Ni-64 combined, to 10% of the Ni transmuted to stable Cu (as claimed for the "used" Ni sample provided to researchers)?
 
McFate said:
So... How do you get from 4.5% of Ni being Ni-62 and Ni-64 combined, to 10% of the Ni transmuted to stable Cu (as claimed for the "used" Ni sample provided to researchers)?
Click to expand...

Indeed. It's a question that's been asked before but no-one has even tried giving an answer, presumably because nothing they can come up with sounds vaguely sane even to people who believe in magic free energy machines.

This point is actually a beautiful demonstration of why everyone thinks it's probably a scam. If someone genuinely discovered an amazing source of energy that they could only explain as fusion but didn't know how it really worked, then that's what they'd say. Instead, Rossi comes out with increasingly nonsensical "explanations" that only serve to make it more and more obvious he's just making **** up.

It's a classic case of liars tending to give more details, often completely unnecessary ones, than people who are telling the truth. If he was telling the truth, he'd just leave it as an open question and admit that he can't explain it. But because he's lying, he thinks he has to come up with an explanation for everything, even though it's obvious he has no clue about it, has done nothing that could possibly give him a clue, and the explanations don't make the slightest bit of sense.
 
I wonder if the astronomer who discovered the deviation of Mercury's orbit from Newton's laws speculated about the reason for the observed orbit.

The only data of relevance in the paper is the fact that at least one test of the device took place on 7/10/10 (see figure 3).

That makes one more reputable professor either a fraud or a pathetic rube. Man, it's starting to look like everyone who even lets themselves come within sight of this device is a retard or a crook!
 
I think I hear a violin...


We're getting closer to the galileo defense, and a cool 40 points!
 
Crawdaddy said:
I wonder if the astronomer who discovered the deviation of Mercury's orbit from Newton's laws speculated about the reason for the observed orbit.
...
Click to expand...

Actually, yes;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_(hypothetical_planet)

He attempted to apply Newton's laws to explain the anomaly much as was done with the deviations of the orbit of Uranus that lead to the discovery of Neptune, and much as was done with (incorrect) observations of Uranus and Neptune that prompted the search for "Planet X" that eventually discovered Pluto by serendipity.
 
Last edited:
Crawdaddy said:
I wonder if the astronomer who discovered the deviation of Mercury's orbit from Newton's laws speculated about the reason for the observed orbit.

The only data of relevance in the paper is the fact that at least one test of the device took place on 7/10/10 (see figure 3).

That makes one more reputable professor either a fraud or a pathetic rube. Man, it's starting to look like everyone who even lets themselves come within sight of this device is a retard or a crook!
Click to expand...

You know what I like with some people ? They go out of their way to find *some* example which *may be construed* as to have a parallel with their pet new free energy stuff and, you know, nobody believed galileo either, or mercury orbit, or lord kelvin , or bumblebee or whatnot, *wink wink* *nudge nudge*.

But the hundred of example of their pet free energy stuff matching well known scam, they are ignore. It is as if they were showing some bias in choosing their example....
 
Aepervius said:
But the hundred of example of their pet free energy stuff matching well known scam, they are ignore.
Click to expand...

quite, and when I asked a couple of weeks ago, they fail to come up with a *single* counter example.
 
Elementary Instrumentation Design - 101

How I would instrument the setup:

Way back in the early 70s, I worked at SMU in Dallas, and the Central Plant billed each building on campus for their energy usage. Steam consumption was measured neatly by totalizing the condensate weight by integrating the volume with a temperature correction for density (using bi-metallic elements), before pumping it back to the plant. This was based on the fact that a pound of condensate comes from a pound of steam (which from calculation could be determined the energy content extracted).

The gravity volumetric meters used to gather this data had a clever design - somewhat resembling some perpetual motion machines - that could give a quite linear rotational output per volume input (bottom of page 2 of link).

attachment.php


[/anecdote];)

A small unit like this (say,100cm3/rev) could easily be fabricated and attached to a rotary optical encoder to provide signal to a data logger and PC, along with a Platinum RTD (more accurate and linear than thermocouples) to read condensate temperature, fed from a standard Graham condenser to condense the generated steam.

Additionally, several more input channels of Pt RTD (water in/out, hydrogen, steam outlet, casing, etc.), AC/DC ammeters and voltmeters for heater consumption, flow transducers for water in/out and hydrogen flow, pressure transducers for hydrogen and water inlets, etc.

I would also want neutron and Gamma/beta survey meters.

The PC would provide a continuous record of the entire run and display the data and derived values in graphic or numeric form.

Pretty standard stuff, IMHO.

A few thousand $US, not unreasonable.:)

Cheers,

Dave
 

Attachments

  • principles_condensate.jpg
    principles_condensate.jpg
    67.1 KB · Views: 181
Last edited:
Crawdaddy said:
I wonder if the astronomer who discovered the deviation of Mercury's orbit from Newton's laws speculated about the reason for the observed orbit.

The only data of relevance in the paper is the fact that at least one test of the device took place on 7/10/10 (see figure 3).

That makes one more reputable professor either a fraud or a pathetic rube. Man, it's starting to look like everyone who even lets themselves come within sight of this device is a retard or a crook!
Click to expand...

Or doesn't realize how poor the measurements are.
 
CaveDave said:
How I would instrument the setup:

Way back in the early 70s, I worked at SMU in Dallas, and the Central Plant billed each building on campus for their energy usage. Steam consumption was measured neatly by totalizing the condensate weight by integrating the volume with a temperature correction for density (using bi-metallic elements), before pumping it back to the plant. This was based on the fact that a pound of condensate comes from a pound of steam (which from calculation could be determined the energy content extracted).

The gravity volumetric meters used to gather this data had a clever design - somewhat resembling some perpetual motion machines - that could give a quite linear rotational output per volume input (bottom of page 2 of link).

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=22359&stc=1&d=1306438587[/qimg]

[/anecdote];)

A small unit like this (say,100cm3/rev) could easily be fabricated and attached to a rotary optical encoder to provide signal to a data logger and PC, along with a Platinum RTD (more accurate and linear than thermocouples) to read condensate temperature, fed from a standard Graham condenser to condense the generated steam.

Additionally, several more input channels of Pt RTD (water in/out, hydrogen, steam outlet, casing, etc.), AC/DC ammeters and voltmeters for heater consumption, flow transducers for water in/out and hydrogen flow, pressure transducers for hydrogen and water inlets, etc.

I would also want neutron and Gamma/beta survey meters.

The PC would provide a continuous record of the entire run and display the data and derived values in graphic or numeric form.

Pretty standard stuff, IMHO.

A few thousand $US, not unreasonable.:)

Cheers,

Dave
Click to expand...


Good input. Of course, as a bomb calorimeter guy, I think you should have no flow at all!
 
Dave: That assumes some honesty on the part of the heat suppliers. A pound of ice water would give the same result as a pound of steam. Except for customer satisfaction.
 
BenBurch said:
Good input. Of course, as a bomb calorimeter guy, I think you should have no flow at all!
Click to expand...

Different strokes for different folks...

I had intended to add that your way was good, too.:)

My setup would fit in a couple of suitcases, though.:D

Plus provide a running record in real time of any transient events and their effects on performance.

Cheers,

Dave
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom