One Mega Watt E-Cat Cold Fusion Device Test Successful!

Originally posted by charlyv
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

You are both incorrect here. You should study the process, which is posted many places. E-Catalyst CF needs a jump start which sets up the reaction, then it goes self sufficient. Yes it is 'Free', and nothing says standalone has anything to do with free energy.

If it cost $100 to start something that produces $1000 and hour after it disconnects itself, then it pays for it's jumpstart in the first 6 minutes of self-sufficient mode, as it runs from the energy produces by the cold fusion, using miniscule amounts of nickle and hydrogen.

Secondly, WATTS are a unit of work, it is power, meaning the system was under a load that was consuming 475 KW per hr. not to be confused with voltage or amperage which can be measured but meaningless unless applied to a load - I=E/R, P=I*E -

Third, it is no hoax, the scientists there and the whole incredibly expensive and elaborate prototype... This is a promising development and deserves praise.

edit on 29-10-2011 by charlyv because: spelling , where caught

This is the argument given by the people who want to believe in this, however we have never seen a device running longer than a few hours. CONTRARY to his claims that the device can produce power for "days, weeks, months".

"Watts are an unit of work" ---> They only measured the temps/steam..did not connect a generator/turbine (for generating actual power) and did not consume the created energy (Why is that? Is this hard???) .. have a device somewhere *demonstrating* how it powers something. Why is that?

Third, it is no hoax, the scientists there and the whole incredibly expensive and elaborate prototype...

You are aware that for PROOF he doesnt need to connect 100s of devices and make this "1MW Generator" in a container - ONE FRICKING DEVICE would be enough to prove once and for all that it works!

The fact that he made an "elaborate" generator with hundred of devices just adds to difficulties to verify..some argue it is easier to conceal "something" in a container than what would be possible with ONE single device.

Ask yourself why, instead of eliminating all skeptic's doubts he did not make a rather simple test suite showing ONE device...say something simple as powering a christmas tree for a day or two

Originally posted by Alkolyk

If this isn't true, and is a hoax. Then shame on the hoaxer.

Why would someone invest this much $$$ into such a pointless hoax?

Why would they knowingly flush their career down the drain?

I mean sure, yeah it's possible. But why??
Doesn't make much sense to me.

Originally posted by Alkolyk
S+F but...

Look, only time will tell the truth.

If this is true, and it did happen on the 28th of oct this year. Then a lot of people will have their minds blown away.

I agree, more time required.

I find it a bit sickening all the people rushing to debunk or cry "hoax" - when the anonymous "customer" have not even had ONE DAY to analyze their data or work on a proper presentation yet...

For those repeating "ad nauseam" that "energy can't be created", please read this:

en.wikipedia.org...

Yes, energy can be created. It is possible to turn matter in energy. This is precisely what our Sun does everyday.

Read this:

en.wikipedia.org...

In a nuclear reaction, the total (relativistic) energy is conserved. The "missing" rest mass must therefore reappear as kinetic energy released in the reaction; its source is the nuclear binding energy. Using Einstein's mass-energy equivalence formula E = mc², the amount of energy released can be determined.

reply to post by muzzleflash


Neither to me, and trust me, I sincerely hope this thing is real.

It's freaking awesome to see it happen on oct 28 along with the strong movements happenning in the world right now. Provided it is true this should be launching a global race for developing this type of technology.

If the technology is real and you don't see such a race by different corps/govs then we'll know that all theses conspiracies are real and the people will need a strong movement to push the change through.

reply to post by lance_covel


It is called the law of the conservation of energy...and it is why perpetual motion can never be a reality it take an action to get a reaction it is a give and take situation...to get electric power from a water fall, the water must rotate a generator...same with wind power...the wind must first exist or no power...a nuclear reactor just heats up water to produce steam which then turns a turbine attached to a generator...nothing is free...it takes energy to get energy...that is just how it is.

it wasn't proved, just the only observed fact. we never observed creation or destruction of matter/energy.

reply to post by GLontra


even that is not free...it takes great pressure and heat to change hydrogen to helium...again energy is not created only it's form has changed

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by Arken
The test was at the half power but: 470 kilowatt hour per hour of completely free energy, free of fuel is a breakthrough? Yes, I think this is a breakthrough.

Why do you ignore the generator that was constantly running and connected during the entire test?

Just another hoax. Remember the Orbo, with people making similiar claims about it, that was also a hoax

edit on 29-10-2011 by spoor because: (no reason given)

To quote what you are speaking of from the article: "I'm not sure why they kept the generator running after that, but I would guess it was for back-up or safety."

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly.....that sounds extraordinarily fishy to me. A simple hidden wire, from the generator to the device is all it would take to create the illusion...for instance you would have a large and obvious fake wire...you would unplug it, while the real wire is buried underground and connected to the device underneath. (other ways to do it to...that's just an example)

Originally posted by Andronian
reply to post by GLontra

 

even that is not free...it takes great pressure and heat to change hydrogen to helium...again energy is not created only it's form has changed

Do you really think that the "energy output" in a nuclear power plant is not MUCH HIGHER than any "energy input"?

Originally posted by Arken
We are on the verge of a revolution in energy production and no one can stop it.

So far they have been pretty successful of stopping it.

reply to post by GLontra


do you understand you're comfirmed that energy can't be created, but that matter is considerd as a form of energy and can be converted. you should learn the first laws of thermodynamic

Originally posted by GLontra

Originally posted by Andronian
reply to post by GLontra

 

even that is not free...it takes great pressure and heat to change hydrogen to helium...again energy is not created only it's form has changed

Do you really think that the "energy output" in a nuclear power plant is not MUCH HIGHER than any "energy input"?

it cannot be higher, it would violate the laws of physics

If we power a plant, say a coal plant or whatever plant which produces energy...we do IN FACT put energy in. In the case of a coal plant...we put *fossil energy* in, eg. coal, oil etc...which then gets converted to heat-->steam-->turbine. It is in fact a CONVERSION of energy, not a creation.

I am not technical inclined to explain how a nuclear reactor works, but there is also energy "produced" which exists...i think in the Uranium. Pretty sure someone can explain this better.

So..yes....we cannot produce "more" energy than we put in..otherwise we would live in a total different world..we wouldn't worry about fossil energies running out etc..we would have an abundance of energy

Originally posted by Atzil321
reply to post by flexy123

 

DARPA are investing in the rossi e-cat, are they known for their stupidity or being at the cutting edge of breakthrough technology?

From what I've seen, apparently some of each.

Not every new thing you try will work out, that's how the investigative method works. Anyone researching the limits of science and technology is bound to have both successes and failures.

Besides, until the customer is revealed, we don't know who it is, it could be DARPA or anyone else.

The OP article seems to suggest that if the technology doesn't really work, the customer is likely to remain anonymous to avoid embarrassment, but if it works, they are likely to reveal themselves so they can take credit for being part of the new breakthrough.

So, let's see if the customer is ever revealed and something beyond the initial test is confirmed, like ongoing energy production.

Flagged

interesting

Cold Fusion

Did someone say Rossi might be on the next hit List! like the Ones Below ! ?



List of Dead Scientists

stevequayle.com...

One Was Dedicated to Cold Fusion ! and he was on the Brink to reveal what he knew !
but was Brutally Murdered Tending his Deceased Mothers Home that he was renting Out

Dr. Eugene Mallove

Mallove was well respected for his knowledge of cold fusion. He had just published an "open letter" outlining the results of and reasons for his last 15 years in the field of "new energy research." Dr. Mallove was convinced it was only a matter of months before the world would actually see a free energy device.

Eugene Mallove
en.wikipedia.org...

Hopefully that Andrea Rossi. isnt One of them!

Dr. Rossi talks about the Energy Catalyzer on USA national radio


Cold Fusion Times (( About the ENergy Catalyzer With Rossi
world.std.com...

peswiki.com...:October_28%2C_2011_Test_of_the_One_Megawatt_E-Cat

Please, please tell me he did NOT talk on C2C?

Edit: Oh my..confirmed he was on C2C. Which (for me) seals the whole thing. He can stay with his buddies like hoagland, howe etc...no SANE scientist/engineer would appear on C2C. Sorry to hear that.

Originally posted by flexy123
it cannot be higher, it would violate the laws of physics

You've heard of E= mc^2 right?

It's mass that's converted to energy in nuclear reactors, so yes there's more energy out than is put in, but the excess output comes from mass via the E=mc^2 formula so it doesn't violate any laws of physics.

The source of energy in any nuclear reaction (fission or fusion) is the nuclear binding energy.

The nuclear binding energy (binding energy of nucleons into a nuclide) is derived from the strong nuclear force and is the energy required to disassemble a nucleus into the same number of free unbound neutrons and protons.

Read here: en.wikipedia.org...

In a nuclear reactor, we are just harvesting the energy stored in the nuclei of the atoms. The "Energy Catalyzer" just harvests the energy stored in the nucleus of a hydrogen atom and a nickel atom.

The same way that we discovered how to use exothermic chemical reactions in the past, Rossi has just discovered a new way to use an exothermic nuclear reaction.

Flagged, will be interesting to see where this goes.

Hopefully not a scam....will remain doubtful until we see more tests / independent confirmation.

Originally posted by therealoverdose
reply to post by GLontra

 

do you understand you're comfirmed that energy can't be created, but that matter is considerd as a form of energy and can be converted. you should learn the first laws of thermodynamic

Matter is only considered a form of energy in modern (relativistic) Physics.

In classic Newtonian Physics, matter is not considered energy. The first law of thermodynamics was first developed by Newtonian Physics, many years before the Theory of Relativity.