It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Independent Researchers Test Rossi's Alleged Cold Fusion Device For 32 Days

page: 3
23
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 09:44 AM
link   
I searched this forum for other nuclear fusion threads because Lockheed Martin just announced it expects to have a working device in 5 to 10 years! Pretty amazing stuff.

I started a thread for Lockheed's new here.




posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Maxmars

I've never been optimistic about any cold fusion story, but I am optimistic about this one. It is the most promising cold fusion device I have ever seen. 1.5 megawatts out is a very big deal.

The other devices out there have not generated significant power and are never reproducible. This seems both reproducible and practical.



posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 11:36 AM
link   
When someone mentions 'cold' and 'fusion' in the same sentence its bound to make others dubious.

After all there are thousands of great minds on this planet, and you'd think that 'd be able to replicate E-Cat. But they Haven't.

The history of fusion power is long, delicate, time consuming and wallet emptying. What Rossi has achieved (or didn't achieve) could shed light on the subject and the fact has he has remained tight lipped doesn't give people much confidence.






edit on 15-10-2014 by Thecakeisalie because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
The history of fusion power is long, delicate, time consuming and wallet emptying. What Rossi has achieved (or didn't achieve) could shed light on the subject and the fact has he has remained tight lipped doesn't give people much confidence.


Well, not to mention his claiming to chemically catalyze a nuclear reaction. Which isn't going to happen.



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: wayforward

I think it's bull# and let me explain why. I just spent the better part of an hour reading through that article explaining their measurements and I found several things disconcerting because their reasoning just doesn't make any sense.

Why again could they not measure the temperatures directly? and had to resort to using thermal imaging units???

Why do they only show pics of the thermal imaging taken of the base readings without the reaction taking place at somewhere along the lines of 350 degrees celsius, but then just expect you to accept that they also have readings of over 1300 degrees when the reaction is taking place???

Then they try to explain the reaction using pics of the reactor glowing in non uniform ways, when they've already explained that the iconel cabling is wound around the inside of the reactor but they won't show you how it is put together?

They try to lead you into accepting that the glowing is light being emitted from the reaction. Leading verbiage like that belongs in science fiction novels not in academic papers.

I just don't buy it...

Also, why the hell wouldn't they just mount it in a boiler with water and attach a turbine and generator to it and have it power itself for 30 plus days? I mean the expense couldn't possibly be THAT much. They're only needing to generate less than a third of a KW to power the damn thing.


That would be less expensive and more telling than buying thermal imaging units to measure temperature that for some strangely explained reason, they can't measure directly with a high temp sensor.

Too many anomalies without even getting into ad hominems that are seemingly justifiable in this case based on this guys history...

Considering that I've been working on utilizing existing known tech (not used in the way I'm proposing) to double the overall efficiency of any internal combustion engine for a decade and am getting close to doing it, I understand the desire to reduce our dependence for conventional fuels, but come on, let's not let this make us not use logcial evaluation to determine the credibility of the claims being made.

Jaden



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: wayforward

Also, why the hell wouldn't they just mount it in a boiler with water and attach a turbine and generator to it and have it power itself for 30 plus days? I mean the expense couldn't possibly be THAT much. They're only needing to generate less than a third of a KW to power the damn thing.




this is tht most obvious one for sure!!

Get it going and "up to speed" - then just disconnect it from EVERYTHING and watch it go......



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Nicorette

Lockheed is developing FUSION, not cold fusion, which is fusion at room temperature.

Lockheed is using electromagnetic fields to contain reactions at potentially millions of degrees...Not much that can go wrong there....

The desire for cold fusion to be a reality is because it wouldn't be as dangerous as high temp fusion.

Jaden



posted on Oct, 16 2014 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Masterjaden
Lockheed is using electromagnetic fields to contain reactions at potentially millions of degrees...Not much that can go wrong there....

The desire for cold fusion to be a reality is because it wouldn't be as dangerous as high temp fusion.

Jaden


Temperature isn't heat. Something very low density at millions of degrees isn't inherently any more destructive than something at lower temperature with more heat. The boilers at your local coal-fired plant have a lot of heat, but not as much temperature. They can be very destructive.

The desire for cold fusion is related to them thinking it would be something you could do more easily. That didn't turn out to be the case so far. Alas.

But any energy source that can pop out a steady stream of 100MW is going to have some degree of inherent danger, whether that's a diesel plant, a natural gas fired plant, a fission reactor or a fusion reactor, because you've got a lot of energy involved.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join