All the energy we need to run our
civilization will soon be readily available.
This test used 300 watts to produce a net gain of 2300 to 2600
watts. It is a confirmation test of the
Focardi Rossi demonstration test of a couple of months ago. We will be seeing many more such tests
obviously as every physicist will want to see it in action.
As expected a number of naysayers
are been heard, but this demonstration is at a magnitude both practical and
really irrefutable. The original ‘cold
fusion’ announcement made the error of claiming it demonstrated physics we
thought we knew instead of merely presenting the empirical evidence which was
at best marginal though real enough.
Here we have the empirical
evidence and it is not slightly marginal. In fact we are going immediately to a
hot box to produce brake horsepower totaling one megawatt. The purpose is to assure the world beyond
reasonable doubt that it is all real in a way no bench test will ever convince
the diehards.
The present theory attempting to
explain this argues that the crystal geometry is able to shield an electron
from the coulomb barrier which was the obvious conjecture back when cold fusion
was first announced. At least that was
what I thought at the time, impossible as it may have seemed.
I will share an additional
thought. It is assumed that Coulomb
force is mathematically smooth down to the boundary of the accepting
proton. In fact this is not true at all
but it is presently not understood. The
same also holds true for the electron and the prospect of a pathway is real if
the atoms can be held rigid enough which is plausible in a dense crystalline structure.
Now we know that this trick is
even possible we will certainly rig up additional protocols and make even more efficient
heat engines using the same ideas. This
is actually great triumph for empirical
physics which went ahead exploring the limits whatever the theorist had to say
about how it cannot be done.
MAY 02, 2011
The new tests with the energy catalyzer, which seems to generate heat
by an unknown nuclear reaction,
took place in Bologna
As in previous tests the objective was to measure the net energy that the device generates as accurately as possible.
The results of the two tests showed a developed net power of between 2.3 and 2.6 kilowatts – of the order of a large stove plate. Input electric power was in the order of 300 watts.
As previously, the power output was calculated from the amount of water
boiled into steam, and thus depends on the water flow. At the two new tests the
water flow was set at a slightly lower rate than in previous tests.
The device used was the smaller version of the energy catalyzer, which was first shown at a test March 29, 2011.
The tests lasted for two and three hours respectively and the total net energy developed was calculated to be 5.6 and 6.9 kWh (see report for April 19 and April 28).
As Professor Sven Kullander and Associate Professor Hanno Essén noted previously, the energy released is greater than can be generated by a chemical reaction in the reactor, which has an estimated volume of 50 cubic centimeters.
At this point precise measurement is crucial if credibility in the process under study is to be established.
Hundreds of thousands of readers have now followed our reporting on the energy catalyzer, and in thousands of comments readers have discussed among other things possible sources of error in previous tests.
In the new tests, Ny Teknik aimed to reduce measurement uncertainty in three ways:
1. The ammeter used to measure the input current, from which the total power consumption is calculated, were calibrated by us against other instruments.
2. Total water-flow input was measured by weighing.
3. By calibrating the temperature-sensor probe in boiling water, we have as far as possible ensured that there is only vapor at the outlet of the energy catalyzer.
The last point has been discussed intensively. To assess developed energy, it’s essential that all the water flowing into the energy catalyzer evaporates, given that the phase change – evaporating water into steam – requires much more energy than mere heating.
Shortly before the test on April 28, we calibrated the probe by immersing it in a pot with boiling water, and the measured value was then 99.6 degrees centigrade.
The probe, which sits just below the outlet of the energy catalyzer, later during the test showed temperatures of about 100.5 degrees centigrade.
Therefore it cannot reasonably be in contact with water, thus there should be only water vapor (steam) at the outlet.
Alternatively, the probe is subjected to other heating, but probably not electrical as the temperature curve during start-up is quite uneven.
During the April 28 test, we also checked the steam flow through the outlet hose regularly. Some steam was reasonably being condensed back into water in the three-meter-long tube that was exposed to air and was thus at a slightly lower temperature, and a small amount of water was observed coming out of the hose.
The amount of water coming out before boiling was clearly larger, and this was initially measured.
We also controlled all other equipment and checked that there were no hidden connections from the floor or walls.
To safely exclude the transfer of external wireless energy, we measured electromagnetic fields from 5 Hz to 3 GHz. No increase could be noted except for a slight increase at the power-grid frequency of 50 Hz, close to the electrical resistor positioned around the reactor.
In the first test on April 19, the national Italian television channel RAI was present and its reportage will be broadcast on the channel RAI News (live streaming here) Thursday, May 5th at 20:35.
In the second test on April 28 only Ny Teknik, the inventor Andrea Rossi, and a colleague of his were present Energy Catalyzer
Many physicists are very skeptical. Partly because fusion of nuclei,
which with their positive charges repel each other (the Coulomb barrier),
requires hundreds of millions of degrees according to current knowledge, and
partly because fusion should produce very high levels of gamma radiation.
The debate has gained new momentum after Professor Sven Kullander and Associate Professor Hanno Essén participated in a test on 29 March and found that the measured values can only be explained by a nuclear reaction, while an isotopic analysis of the used nickel powder raised questions.
Among the most critical is Peter Ekström, lecturer at the Department of Nuclear Physics at
Slightly more cautious in his skepticism, Kjell Aleklett, physics professor at Uppsala University in Sweden, summarizes his discussion: ’I myself have nothing against to reveal a scam, or join in and verify something that no one could imagine. Both extremes belong to that which makes life as a researcher incredibly interesting.’
An intense debate is also being held on the Wikipedia discussion page related to the article ‘Energy catalyzer’, and in many other forums.
However, to date no one have been able to explain the measured values that Ny Teknik now has been able to confirm.
The inventor Andrea Rossi is planning an installation of 300 energy catalyzers at a total of one megawatt in
No comments:
Post a Comment