1. Physorg Posts
These are extracts of my posts (as alanf777) in www.physorg.com
These posts have a 1,000 character limit -- so I have cleaned them up a little (mostly in italics) to make them more readable, and added some comments for clarification..
alanf777 Jan 27, 2011
It's a cylinder 6 in diam by 5 feet long = 1700 cubic inches = 28 liters.
The observed excess power has been noted at 12KW.
Leaving out nuclear, consider a self-contained system of batteries or chemicals.
Energy density - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia has a table of energy densities for enclosed systems.
The best battery is Lithium-Manganese, energy density of 2 MJ/L * 28 L = 55.6 MJ or 15.5 KWH.
For the observed output of 12 KW batteries could sustain this for 1.3 hours.
The 30 minute test was too short to rule out batteries.
The best chemical is Copper Thermite, at 20.9 MJ/L = 581 MJ or 161 KWH.
This could run for 13.4 hours at a rate of 12KW.
The "black box" experiment should be run for 24 hours to rule out any known chemical reaction.
goodtoknow Jan 27, 2011
How could this be some dreary fake? Let us count the ways:
1. As noted by alanf777, the “black box” might have contained a conventional chemical or stored-energy heat source.
2. There was some additional undetected, and undisclosed, electrical/thermal input beyond the reported 1000W/400W, during the demonstration.
3. The reported 12KW of output was somehow vastly miscalculated, misrepresented, and/or overstated.
The alternative—that some new and practical mechanism for producing abundant, cheap, non-polluting energy has been invented—has magical implications. Time will certainly tell.
In the meantime one can only hope, contrary to one previous commentator’s suggestion, this is not mere slight-of-hand.
alanf777 Jan 27, 2011
Actually, goodtoknow, I believe LENR (Or C* F*) is real (H-Ni and D-Pd ).
Rossi's system is the first which can be turned on and off instantly, and checked with "bulk" Calorimetry, vs delicate systems which have to run over months.
I've looked at the credentials of the scientific observers, and I believe their reports and calculations (2) and (3) are credible and correct.
I also accept why Rossi insisted on a black-box demonstration. I'm NOT saying he DID cheat.
I'm proposing a protocol which eliminates ALL plausible cheating.
For the system demonstrated the two easiest ways to cheat are batteries or chemicals.
Batteries are the easiest to eliminate .. just run it for two hours.
I initially proposed a CLOSED chemical system. An easier way would be just to have a hydrogen bottle in the black box and burn it with air. The results would be heat (to boil the incoming water) steam, and nitrogen in the outlet.
I'm designing a setup to detect any possible fraud short of nuclear.
Yevgen Jan 31, 2011
Black box demonstration does not allow to verify that something unusual is happening - only device made by independent group would verify it.
For example they might have filled up their cylinder with NiO2 which is an excellent oxidizing agent (it is a cathode on NiCd and NiMH batteries), and feeding H2 into it (followed by heating) would cause a very energetic reaction:
NiO2 + H2 --> Ni + H20
One litter of NiO2 (that is their reactor size) would be enough to explain the amount of energy generated for 20 min and conveniently what would be left afterward would be only nickel metal and water vapor which would be undetectable in their apparatus which generates steam by design.
Add some other oxides to the mix, such as CuO etc, and you get your "heavier elements" produced by the supposed nuclear reaction.
So it is possible to fake it by all means. The only question would be "why do it??". That would certainly destroy their reputation. But people do act irrationally sometimes...
alanf777 Jan 31, 2011
Control Box is 60L (Villa) or "a few kg" (Levi) : say 20kg.
Horizontal part of reactor: 22L Vertical :9L (Villa)
Total weight before & after=18.6kg (Rossi - unconfirmed It's not clear whether this is the weight of the whole set-up, or just the reactor. In any case, Rossi's numbers cannot be used.)
Anything in the control box can only get to the reactor via electricity, so candidates are batteries or fuel cells.
For reactor: batteries, fuel cells or chemicals.
My spreadsheet uses energy density by volume OR weight : I have NOT constrained the contents by BOTH. (eg filling volume with X might exceed the weight). Some schemes change weight, and are not excluded.
Controller, by volume, best battery could drive it 62 hours. Perfect H+air fuel cell = 174 hours.
Reactor by volume, battery=32Hrs, H+air=90Hrs Be+Air=1116Hrs.
By weight, best is H+Air=442Hrs (Controller AND Reactor)
Best PERFECT fake is H+Air (Fuel cell in Controller) ,Be+Air (in Reactor) = 1211Hrs
Actual fake maximum efficiency is 10%?
NiO+2H (suggested by Yevgen) is only 2*MJ/kg of Li Ion batteries.
Per Yevgen steam-generating system would be easy to hide.
More time needed, or check I/O volume & chemistry -- make sure ALL the input H2O to (comes out as) steam only.
Sorry for 1000-char English!
alanf777 Jan 31, 2011
(Continuation of previous post)
Note : I excluded "explosive" compounds. It must be possible to turn the reaction on and off.
Another possible reaction is Magnesium+Steam --> Magnesium Oxide + H
Note that my "FAKE" is 100% efficient -- for example, for the "battery" the entire volume is filled with material -- no packaging or wires. For Hydrogen and Oxygen, weightless tanks, no plumbing ..
Open the control box for inspection, or check power on all wires.
Check the output to make sure it contains only steam from the input water supply. Condense and measure the steam. Use distilled mix of H2O/16,17,18 oxygen isotopes as a cross-check.
(Mar 3 2011 : I was thinking here of ways to ensure that the SAME water goes in, and goes out as steam. One way of doing this might be to "dope" the water with signature volumes of various Oxygen isotopes. See note on Occam's Razor)
Continually monitor weight. (Or at least weigh it before and after)
Seal the reactor so no air can get in or exhaust can get out except via the steam pipe.
Possibly contain the entire reactor in a calorimetric case, filled with Nitrogen.
(This would eliminate air-based chemicals, and might also be used to detect exhaust gasses)
(See below for ERRATUM)
Battery by volume : 32Hrs By weight: 1Hrs
Compressed H, compressed O : Vol 21Hrs : Weight 13Hrs
Compressed O,Be : 25Hrs (outputs H)
alanf777 Feb 02, 2011
In my MJ/Weight calculations I forgot to convert MJ to KWH.
IF the reactor's weight were 100% hydrogen, the fake could run for 5 weeks.
The actual test 45 minutes would only have consumed 20g of hydrogen. Rossi (not an observer) reported the weight, before and after, as 18.67 kg ... I'm not sure it could have detected a 20g change
There are new phone interviews with Rossi and Levi at
www DOT nyteknik DOT se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3081694.ece
( I hope that passes the spam filter! Link is now correct)
I'm not sure if it's been reported here -- the 1MW reactor will deliver steam, not electricity.
Levi says that Rossi has agreed to another test.
I am forced to conclude that the initial test is inconclusive -- but that is NOT Rossi's fault, it's the scientific observers.
alanf777 Feb 24, 2011
See www DOT lenr-canr DOT org/News.htm
This time they used water only (because of the problems with performing calorimetry with steam). It produced around 16KW for 18 hours.
Levi inspected EVERYTHING except the reactor itself. He says the size of the reactor was about 1 liter.
If the ENTIRE 1 liter volume is composed of the fake material :
Lithium ion battery : 0.81 hours
Diesel, external oxygen : 7.25 hours
Compressed Hydrogen, external oxygen : 0.81 hours
Beryllium, external oxygen : 28.1 hours
Even if the entire "reactor" arm of the original L-shaped rig were used -- 22 liters :
Diesel, external oxygen : 159 hours
Compressed hydrogen, external oxygen : 17.8 hours
Beryllium, external oxygen : 619 hours
It would hard to hide the combustion products. I don't think one could even make a Beryllium-burning fake.
In my opinion, chemicals are eliminated.