{"id":19035,"date":"2014-10-13T16:18:28","date_gmt":"2014-10-13T23:18:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.backwoodshome.com\/blogs\/ClaireWolfe\/?p=19035"},"modified":"2014-10-13T16:18:28","modified_gmt":"2014-10-13T23:18:28","slug":"if-these-two-things-work","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/2014\/10\/13\/if-these-two-things-work\/","title":{"rendered":"If these two things work …"},"content":{"rendered":"

Tiny, portable box<\/a> adds TOR to every Ethernet connection. And everything you do online.<\/p>\n

Claim: cold fusion may<\/i> have been verified<\/a> by third-party researchers. I’ll believe it when I see it. Just posting as an item of interest for now. But oh my, if this ever turns out to be for real, it changes everything — and not<\/i> just in tech or power generation.<\/p>\n

(H\/Ts: MJR and MtK)<\/p>\n

—–<\/p>\n

ADDED<\/b>: Sigh. It’s possible both of these might turn out to be scams. Per Sam in Oregon, here’s the latest on the Anonabox<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Already got a reality check on the cold-fusion device below.<\/p>\n

ADDED<\/b>: A comment by a friend who works in the power-generation field:<\/p>\n

I downloaded and read the paper on the cold fusion device, called E-Cat.<\/p>\n

Disclosure: I would like for this to be true. It would improve the health and wellbeing of mankind at least as much as the mastery of fire.<\/p>\n

Rossi has been making these claims for years. One of the common elements in all of his experiments is that he uses complex means to measure the energy.<\/p>\n

This paper is no different. They have to estimate the energy losses for no fewer than 3 different physical effects. One of those, radiation, accounts for more than 100% of the observed \u201cexcess\u201d heat. <\/p>\n

That\u2019s a red flag right there. A competent analysis would have predicted how the heat would manifest itself: so much to radiation, so much to convection, so much to conduction. Then they could have checked their results against this prediction.<\/p>\n

But they didn\u2019t do that. They didn\u2019t even test their \u201ccontrol\u201d at the same power and temperature levels. Another red flag.<\/p>\n

Radiation is a very difficult way to measure energy production. The power goes as the temperature to the 4th power, so a 5% error in temperature gives a 22% error in power. Then the alumina they used has a big change in emissivity as a function of temperature, and the temperature of the tube is far from uniform.<\/p>\n

Bottom line; the most likely explanation for the \u201cexcess heat\u201d is a sum of small errors in the measurements.<\/p>\n

There are also claims of isotopic shifts, but those are tough to measure with the equipment they used. The absence of any radiation means we would have to throw out most of what we know about nuclear physics.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m not at all against throwing out theories that don\u2019t work. The problem is that nuclear physics works pretty darned well. Nuclear reactors, nuclear weapons, nuclear medicine, solar physics, cosmography, all of these things require detailed calculations of nuclear reactions and rates, and all of them get answers that are pretty much exactly right. There are always questions at the edges, such as solar neutrinos, but there isn\u2019t any suggestion that the physics is wrong.<\/p>\n

The process of throwing out older theories for better ones always follows the same path. The old theories work well enough for a while. Eventually we push the edges enough that the calculations start producing answers that don\u2019t match what we see. A fair amount of data is collected showing that we have a problem. Then some smart person proposes a new theory that explains all of the old stuff AND all of the new stuff.<\/p>\n

That isn\u2019t happening here. There isn\u2019t a collection of hints that we have a problem in nuclear physics. Quite the opposite. The further we push, the more confirmations we get.<\/p>\n

So I don\u2019t buy the claims of isotopic shifts.<\/p>\n

Then there is the question of the complex experimental setup. <\/p>\n

The excess power they claim is equivalent to nearly 2,000 watts of excess heat being produced. That\u2019s a lot. If there really was that much heat, it would be easy to measure directly, without the trouble and errors of trying to calculate power from radiation.<\/p>\n

Just one idea, to show how straightforward this could be.
\nImmerse the thing in wax, or lead, or salt. Make the container big enough that it is clearly impossible to melt the contents from the electrical input power alone. Then run it until the container is full of melted whatever. That\u2019s proof. No fancy measurements required. A bit of engineering math in advance, build 2 or 3 to run controls before and after, and you have a bullet-proof demo.<\/p>\n

This isn\u2019t a bullet-proof demo. It\u2019s not even a demo. I don\u2019t know if Rossi is running an elaborate con game or if he believes this stuff. It doesn\u2019t matter; I\u2019m pretty sure there is nothing here. I\u2019d be more than happy to be proved wrong.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Tiny, portable box adds TOR to every Ethernet connection. And everything you do online. Claim: cold fusion may have been verified by third-party researchers. I’ll believe it when I see it. Just posting as an item of interest for now. But oh my, if this ever turns out to be for real, it changes everything — and not just in tech or power generation. (H\/Ts: MJR and MtK) —– ADDED: Sigh. It’s possible both of these might turn out to be scams. Per Sam in Oregon, here’s the latest on the Anonabox. Already got a reality check on the cold-fusion…<\/p>\n

Continue readingIf these two things work …<\/span><\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,22],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19035","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-computers-and-technology","category-off-grid","ratio-natural","entry"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19035","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19035"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19035\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19035"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19035"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.clairewolfe.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19035"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}