This is a continuation of an earlier thread on cold fusion, or low energy nuclear reactors which was running earlier this year but is now out of date so I can't update it.
Here it is if you've forgotten;- or if you wanted to forget then don't bother looking it up.
www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/General-Discussion/Chat/More-important-than-JJJ-Top-100-Maybe/?SearchTerms=triple


Since the original post last March, the device has been granted a patent in Italy which expires in 2028, but not yet a world patent. The granting of world patents typically take up to 2 or 3 years unless they involve matters of national security or world significance.

The granting of a patent is not proof that it actually works because you can apply for a patent on almost anything you like with no proof that it will work.
( I don't think this applies to perpetual motion machines which do require a working model to be submitted in order to cut out the huge waste of time from having to examine all the crackpot submissions.)

There has been lots of chatter on various forums arguing whether it works or not but nothing which conclusively proves it either way. It pretty much comes down to whether you would like to believe it or not, and it seems most don't. Hence to my knowledge it hasn't received any air time on TV or radio. Bit of a shame really because I think it deserves a lot more than that.

A few days ago on Thursday October 6th another public test was done in front of a whole lot of invited scientists and experts who had the opportunity to see it running in self sustain mode, i.e. producing output power with no apparent input power being applied. After the test, the device was partially dismantled and photographed.

Ny Teknik has been reporting on this extensively and has a video of the test on this site
www.nyteknik.se/energi/span-style-color-red-tv-span-e-cattest-styrker-varmeproduktion-6419561
The site seems quite busy and It takes a while to download. In fact sometimes it doesn't.

From the info on the video it says it heats about 600 litres per hour of water from 24.6 deg C to 31 deg C. i.e. 6.4 deg C temp change.
It did this for over 3 hours with no apparent external energy input.

given;-
1 Litre water = 1 Kg
1 Kg water heated 1 deg C is 1 Calorie = 4184 Joules.
and 1 joule per second is 1 watt,..
Rough calculations are;

600/3600 = 0.166 Kg per second heated 6.4 deg C
0.166 X 6.4 X 4184 = 4463 Joules / second i.e. 4.463 Kw

I'm not sure why but the same site listed above, rates the output at between 2 to 3 Kw but they don't give any workings for it. ???
Maybe I forgot to add GST or the carbon tax?


Anyway, so far it certainly looks like the idea works which is the important thing.

There is a 1 megawatt plant due for delivery later this month or early November maybe.
Hopefully then it might get some prominent air time on telly with a scantily dressed big breasted woman explaining it all so as to get everyone's attention.

Here is a link to another site which carries lots of info on progress, and in many regards is highly critical of it so I don't think they are trying to hype it up. In fact it appears to be the opposite so I have some regard for the reporting, even though I don't really agree with all their criticisms.

peswiki.com/main-page

Have read other discussion about this... essentially they are still hiding stuff, all they are showing is a 'magic box' that appears to do stuff but we have to take their word at this stage.

What they did last interview was open the big 'magic box' and show some parts inside, including... a little 'magic box' that we still can't see into. It could very well have a battery inside, or other stuff that makes it appear to do what they say.

So for now, we can just be skeptical and wait for independant scientific examination, if it ever happens.

I reckon it'll fizzle like STEORN did...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steorn

For anyone interested in this, a test was done on a 1 megawatt 'Low Energy Nuclear Reactor' unit in Bologna, Italy on the 28th October.
The purpose of the test was 'proof of concept' by a prospective customer to determine if the device would run for a number of hours with no power input to the reactor body, that is, in 'self sustain' mode.
The test conditions and instrumentation were set by the customer who had an engineer present to supervise the test and to confirm that the test was done in accordance with the requested conditions.
Obviously the purpose was to determine that the device was producing more power than what was put into it.
According to the published results, the unit produced an average of 479 kilowatts for 5.5 hours ( total of 2635 kwhrs) with no energy input to the reactor body, after which the test was terminated.
This is short of the 1 megawatt claimed but still a very significant amount of energy.

I would have to say that there is no way on a unit that big with so many wires and pipes, that we can have any idea whether the test was rigged or not.
However, the report is that the customer is sufficiently convinced that it is working and will buy the unit and ship it to America for further development.
Certainly, if the numbers reported in the published test results are valid then this is the beginning of something big.
If not, then it's been a really interesting and exciting circus for the last 12 months.
My feeling is that there is something big happening and it's being mostly ignored.

Here's a link to look at if you want to follow up on it.
http://pesn.com/2011/10/31/9501942_After_the_E-Cat_Test--Report_and_Q-A_with_Rossi/

There's also buckets of stuff on various other sites now, which is certainly different to a year ago when there was almost nothing.
A google search on "Rossi LENR" or anything similar will bring up truckloads, although much of it refers back to just a few sources.

I have not really read anything on this, but surely anything to do with fusion or similar tech would as a minimum have to show weeks or months of sustained operation? Otherwise you can achieve the same with a battery - and not a very big one....

The power they pack into Lipo batteries these days is incredible...

I'll put my hand up as a sceptic until they can show it works without external input for far longer than any other device could currently do.

pweedas said...

I sort of agree but not entirely.
To make an analogy, you're saying that you won't believe the Wright Brothers have managed powered flight until you see a jumbo jet flying the Atlantic. The important point was 'does it fly?'

Not a good analogy. If the Wright brothers had simply jumped off a hill and landed, then the analogy is : did they go further than they would have if they had just jumped forward ? and therefore did they fly as opposed to simply leaped.

Paradox (and in fact yourself) put it well. It needs to be show to produce energy for a longer period (or produce more energy) than can be justified by chemical reaction / battery or similar technology.

I would like to argue Paradox but I can't,.. because I agree.

Although I seriously don't think this thing is run on batteries. Some other chemical reaction maybe but not batteries.
Earlier tests were opened up and no such items were observed and the un-opened spaces were not large enough to conceal them.
I think if it's a fake then it's a fake on the basis of faulty measurements and calorimetry.

It may even be that it's a fake and the inventor still believes it's real.
If you want to know if that's possible, talk to a mormon and see if they are genuine people with a firm belief but genuinely deluded.
If you really want to believe something then no contrary logic or science is an insurmountable barrier to that belief.
It's part of the human condition.