Excess Heat Claim In Chinese Ni-H System (Video, Updated with Chinese Translation)

I have been sent a link to the video below by someone in China who has communicated with me briefly in the past. So far I have very little information provided beyond what is in the video. I don’t even know the full name of the person who sent me the video.

This is the message I received:

Happy new year for 2017. I just obtain the anomalous heat in my nickel/hydrogen device. I made a video for the temperature change in my experiment.

The following is the video connection in China video website YOUKU.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTg4OTMxNTE4MA==.html?spm=a2hzp.8244740.userfeed.5!2~5~5~5!3~5~A

Best wishes.

Samuel.

UPDATE: Many thanks to Cheng for providing this explanation of the video.

I’m a Chinese and I can help understand what is shown in this video.

This video records the changes of two thermal couples (TC). From inner center to out surface of the setup: fuel, fuel case = stainless steel 340, ceramic chamber, housing of the whole setup, which can be used to heat the setup. One TC is used to control, namely TC1, and it was put between chamber case and housing of the whole setup. Another one is used to monitor, namely TC2, and it was attached to inside of chamber case. The purpose of this experiments is to heat TC1 from 650 C to 950 C. In the beginning, TC1 is higher than TC2 and the increase rate of TC1 is larger than that of TC2. As time goes by, the increase rate of TC1 is smaller than TC2, and TC2 is close to TC1 and finally surpass TC1. In the end, TC1 is close to 950C. And, TC2 is higher than TC1. TC2 ~ 968 C, TC1 ~ 949 C.

This has been verified and authorized by the original author, Zhijie Mao. Thanks for Thomas Kaminski’s encouragement. By, Cheng Liu, University of Wisconsin-Madison. [email protected]

I will note that following the data provided for power (Watts), the power required to heat to ~950 C is about 100 Watts less than for ~750 C.

The video is embedded below

I have asked for more information about this. Meanwhile, if any Chinese speaker is able to help with translating the commentary on the video, I’d appreciate it!

  • sam
  • georgehants

    A good start to 2017 would be for us all to be very clear that Rossi (if genuine) working within the secret system that he does, has delayed the Research and possible utilization of Cold Fusion for six years up to now, this could be much longer the way things are going.
    This is not an opinion but an indisputable Fact that people can either defend for their own reasons or condemn.
    In that wasted time, thousands of workers across the Globe could have advanced the Research to unknown levels for the benefit of the entire Earth.
    Happy New Year, especially to those that most need cheap available energy.

    • Alain Samoun

      Well,I share your opinion that Rossi should have given more information on his work so others could have probably reproduced and increased the performance of his work. But i could understand that he and us are in an economic system that promote individualism instead of cooperation. One thing that we can recognise is that Rossi have kept us interested.
      Happy new year George! Looking forward to read your always interesting comments in 2017

      • Rene

        Things may have progressed differently, faster had Forcardi lived longer. Rossi seriously needs to find a trustworthy open-minded nuclear physicist to help him move on past his roadblocks.

        • Pekka Janhunen

          True, and a good physicist overall, and more than one of them, because it’s not certain that the crux lies exactly on the nuclear side of the problem.

          Rossi is a genial man in many ways, but thus far I have not been impressed by his capability to do physics. He’s a very utilitarian person with an almost hostile attitude towards normal science things such as using a dummy reactor for verification.

          But as J.Rothwell used to say before his…er, transition: never underestimate Rossi.

    • Albert D. Kallal

      Who says it is a fact that Rossi delayed this technology? Quite sure you would not be posting here if not for Rossi. After the wright brothers had demoed their plane, they really did not have any commercial production or product for a good 7+ years.

      So who’s says the time been wasted? Are you an engineer speaking to NASA and DARPA? (and what about their programs on LENR? – are they delaying also?).

      So it is pure drunken rodeo clown logic and reason that it is a FACT that Rossi has delayed LENR to the world – from the evidence and what Rossi’s done, the world is far more aware of LENR today when he started. If Rossi was working in secret, then this blog would NOT exist and you would not be posting here! So what a massive bout of hypocrisy on your part to post on a blog that is the result of Rossi and then say he delaying LENR?

      So no, it not an indisputable fact that Rossi has held back LENR, but one can EASY make the case that Rossi has pushed forward LENR, brought it back into the limelight, and may well be the person that vindicates and makes Pons and Fleeshman a household word someday.

      It is sheer speculation right now as to how far along Rossi is say compared to NASA, DARPA etc. in regards to how well LENR will work. However, given the crude devices Rossi demoed in 2011, they almost for sure would have been a commercial failures. The progress that Rossi has shown in the last 5 years is ASTOUNDING compared to others like NASA, DARPA and even the UN that so worried about climate change but yet doing nothing for LENR.

      So no, it not by any reasoned standard that Rossi has held back LENR, and by all reasonable accounts by reasonable thinking people Rossi has clearly made huge strides in bringing LENR knowledge and awareness to the general public.

      If you think Rossi is holding back LENR, then who do you think is doing more than Rossi in terms of pursuing LENR as a new energy source right now? (opps – more lack of facts on your part!!!). France and India had LENR programs that resulted in no progress for LENR – but Rossi seems to be doing FAR better and FAR more than anyone else in this field right now.

      Regards,
      Albert D. Kallal
      Edmonton, Alberta Canada

    • Mats002

      If Rossi is a scam but the COP 1.1 – that many different replicators report about – then Rossi has been a catalyst for something important that need scientific attention.

  • Gerard McEk

    Best wishes to you too, Frank and also too all here on ECW.
    May the LENR glow heat the beat hearts of everybody in 2017!

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Andrea Rossi
    December 31, 2016 at 11:23 PM
    Sustainers:
    Thank you, the sustain we got from you all has been extremely important and nobody more than me can feel how responsible I am toward you.
    This 2017 incoming year will probably make true the dreams of the year 2016.
    Something important is probably going to happen, but much work is still to be done.
    I hope God bless you all, A.R.”

  • Cheng

    I’m a Chinese and I can help understand what is shown in this video.

    This video records the changes of two thermal couples (TC). From inner center to out surface of the setup: fuel, fuel case = stainless steel 340, ceramic chamber, housing of the whole setup, which can be used to heat the setup. One TC is used to control, namely TC1, and it was put between chamber case and housing of the whole setup. Another one is used to monitor, namely TC2, and it was attached to inside of chamber case. The purpose of this experiments is to heat TC1 from 650 C to 950 C. In the beginning, TC1 is higher than TC2 and the increase rate of TC1 is larger than that of TC2. As time goes by, the increase rate of TC1 is smaller than TC2, and TC2 is close to TC1 and finally surpass TC1. In the end, TC1 is close to 950C. And, TC2 is higher than TC1. TC2 ~ 968 C, TC1 ~ 949 C.

    This has been verified and authorized by the original author, Zhijie Mao. Thanks for Thomas Kaminski’s encouragement. By, Cheng Liu, University of Wisconsin-Madison. [email protected]

    • Stephen

      Thanks for this translation Cheng I really appreciate it. Also to Samuel for posting the link and Zhijie Mao of course. It amazes me sometimes how big and worldwide LENR is these days. When it becomes well known by more people and catches the minds of the most innovative and creative it will be huge.

  • Alain Samoun

    Yes! Happy New Year Frank! Hope that you won’t have to go to China to see and report the first LENR industrial apparatus for us. Miami will do ;-))

  • Daniel Telfer

    Happy New Year! Here’s hoping the first post in 2017 can provide some more clues for replicators.

    • Frank Acland

      We’re still in 2016 here, Daniel! 🙂

      • Daniel Telfer

        See you in 2017 soon. 🎇 From the future.

  • Mats002

    Looks like a replication of MFMP Glowstick, 20 degree difference in temperature between active and dummy. I note that pressure is negative – can be by active pressure decrease or because a chemical reaction in the device lowers ambient pressure. Looking forward to a translation and maybe some more pictures or schematics of the setup.