parisd, milehigh, and all other sceptical pessimists,


The fear behind the word nuclear reactor is totally unfounded in this case, and does not fit into any LENR based fusion reactor.
Just as Andrea Rossi has indicated, to provide a satisfactory safety analysis is easy, since any malfunction just stops the reaction.

  1.  The reactor does not produce any wastes besides copper.

  2. The e-cat cannot overheat since any heat excess destroys the nickel powder and immediately stops the reaction.

  3. The nuclear reaction is of LENR type and cannot create any high energy Gamma emissions.

The e-cat will just become one of these simple installments in the basement  that enhances your heat economy if you
are heating your house with electricity , and the only thing to worry about is that the reactor keeps adding heat to your house. 

But as far as I am concerned, the electrical input needed to keep these things going cools me off quite a bit.

Only if getting one of them stripped of its heat exchanger and used as a nitinol driven electrical generator,
thus feeding generated electricity into itself and additionally into another e-cat would be interesting.

One e-cat of heat out of two e-cats, or even better, two e-cats of heat out of three e-cats would be great.


Gwandau

Quote from: Gwandau on April 04, 2012, 08:44:27 PM
parisd, milehigh, and all other sceptical pessimists,


The fear behind the word nuclear reactor is totally unfounded in this case, and does not fit into any LENR based fusion reactor.
Just as Andrea Rossi has indicated, to provide a satisfactory safety analysis is easy, since any malfunction just stops the reaction.

  1.  The reactor does not produce any wastes besides copper.

  2. The e-cat cannot overheat since any heat excess destroys the nickel powder and immediately stops the reaction.

  3. The nuclear reaction is of LENR type and cannot create any high energy Gamma emissions.

The e-cat will just become one of these simple installments in the basement  that enhances you heat economy, and the only thing to
worry about is that the reactor keeps adding heat to your house.  But as far as I am concerned, the electrical input needed to keep these
things going cools me of quite a bit.

Only if getting one of them stripped of its heat exchanger and used as a nitinol driven electrical generator,
thus feeding generated electricity into itself and into another e-cat would be interesting.

Gwandau

Notice how they do not attack the NASA scientists either by name or in general yet they would have this forum believe that they know better than NASA's top scientists as well as MIT!!!  Do they really think people are going to overlook or forget the fact that they do not even try to refute credentialed scientists who ACKNOWLEDGE and ENDORSE LENR technology and have publicly gone on the record to convey this fact?  It's so hillarious!!!

Then some are publicly (and liably) accusing Rossi of running a scam with the E-Cat yet not ONE SHRED OF PROOF has been presented!  Because you can not have a scam without one single victim who has been cheated out of money, period.  Where are these victims?  Okay, then where is JUST ONE???  Where are the lawsuits claiming fraud even?  Where is JUST ONE lawsuit filed against Rossi even alleging fraud over the E-Cat? (ROTFLMAO)


Really,

Chess

Gwandau:

Quote2. The e-cat cannot overheat since any heat excess destroys the nickel powder and immediately stops the reaction.

That statement doesn't make sense.  Nickel can't be "destroyed."  It can melt though.

Quote3. The nuclear reaction is of LENR type and cannot create any high energy Gamma emissions.

That is a known contradiction in that Rossi says that it emits gamma radiation but when he met with the government representatives he claimed it didn't emit gamma radiation.

The issue about gamma radiation is probably related to the alleged rate of fusion.  Low rates will equal low amounts of gamma radiation.  But I want to emphasize again that the fusion reaction itself, whether "regular" or LENR, will emit exactly the same amount of gamma radiation at exactly the same energy level when the fusion takes place.  I am not so sure that you understand that.

I can sense that you want to believe that the E-Cat is a nearly perfect, benign and absolutely safe producer of heat.  You are making it sound too good to be true and that simply doesn't smell right.

Sorry to repeat myself, but I simply can't envision that the first commercial implementation of the E-Cat will be the "home" version.  It just doesn't make sense, and by extension Rossi is not making sense.  The pieces of the puzzle are not fitting together in my opinion.

MileHigh

Chessnyt:

QuoteNotice how they do not attack the NASA scientists either by name or in general yet they would have this forum believe that they know better than NASA's top scientists as well as MIT!!!  Do they really think people are going to overlook or forget the fact that they do not even try to refute credentialed scientists who ACKNOWLEDGE and ENDORSE LENR technology and have publicly gone on the record to convey this fact?  It's so hillarious!!!

If you can provide some links I will have a look.  I would be interested in reading and seeing what's up and then I will share my thoughts on what the articles have to say.

QuoteThen some are publicly (and liably) accusing Rossi of running a scam with the E-Cat yet not ONE SHRED OF PROOF has been presented!

This is the same old exercise in logic that has to be brought up over and over.  It's about the burden of proof.  The skeptics don't have to prove that Rossi is wrong.  It's Rossi that has to prove that he is right, the burden of proof falls on his shoulders.

If you don't accept that, then prove to me that giant pink elephants don't materialize in the sky over the center of Greenland every second Tuesday.

Now, since I am willing to look at the NASA scientist stuff, would you be willing to tackle a related issue:  Whenever Rossi has done a demo he never presented credible evidence that could be verified by independent third-party testers.  Please have a look at my posting #891.  Would you care to comment?

MileHigh

Quote from: MileHigh on April 04, 2012, 10:13:41 PM
Chessnyt:

...This is the same old exercise in logic that has to be brought up over and over.  It's about the burden of proof.  The skeptics don't have to prove that Rossi is wrong.  It's Rossi that has to prove that he is right, the burden of proof falls on his shoulders.

If you don't accept that, then prove to me that giant pink elephants don't materialize in the sky over the center of Greenland every second Tuesday.

MileHigh

@MileHigh:
People in this thread have been accusing Rossi of running a scam.  This is defamation of character my friend.  This is clearly slanderous and malicious conduct.   

My dictionary defines "scam" as:

To scam means to victimize: deprive of by deceit; "He swindled me out of my inheritance"; "She defrauded the customers who trusted her"; "the cashier gypped me when he gave me too little change"

I'm not asking you to locate pink elephants or find the white unicorn.  There is no such thing as a victimless scam.  It's a contradiction in terms.  Back to the definition again; "To scam means to victimize: deprive of by deceit; "He swindled me out of my inheritance"; "She defrauded the customers who trusted her"; "the cashier gypped me when he gave me too little change". 

So where is just one (not a pink spotted elephant or green horned unicorn) victim who was scammed by Rossi concerning the E-Cat?  Can you simply just name one victim who has been cheated out of money by Rossi concerning the E-Cat?


Waiting,

Chess Knight