Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
Daniel, most likely Focardi don't even know about this Facebook page. I've heard that, as an old style school professor, is not very confortable with internet and stuff. When he needs to use emails he needs often someone's help. He still calls his desktop elaboratore (calculator). I believe that for him to be in front to an ultimate ultra hi technology PC or a VT100 terminal connected to a '70s mainframe is pretty the same thing. Thats also explain why for Rossi is a so easy job to, let's say, cheat him a little bit when he spreads some of his claims over the net. Just for fun it's worth to see again this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa_5oEtx1NY when asked who anfd why wanted the 14th Jan show. Understanding both Italian and English, lies, -ops- I meant to say inaccuracies, come up to the surface like tennis table ball released from under water. Krivit really did a good snake job :) 2011/9/16 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com That is not a joke, if you follow Focardi's page on facebook, you will see that he was very angry with that. Also from Levi's comments as far as I remember. If that test was a farce, everything is a farce.
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
Susan, I know that it is written by a fan, I checked that right after Jouni's answer and figured out by myself. BTW, while written Italian is a bit weird and I don't understand much of it, but given the way Rossi, Focardi and Levi speak, I can understand most of it. For example, while Rossi said that the reason why Focardi wanted the January demo was his old age, Focardi actually said the reason was that he wanted to make the researchers believe the phenomenon was real and did not give further explanation. Rossi did things like this all the time, but it looked like Focardi was well aware of what Rossi was saying. So, I don't see any reason to see any lie in that. And working with old computers would never be easier than new ones. They actually require much more sophisticated knowledge of computing to operate them than nowadays. The more hi-tech something is, the dumber it is.
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
Hi, On 16-9-2011 14:55, Daniel Rocha wrote: And working with old computers would never be easier than new ones. They actually require much more sophisticated knowledge of computing to operate them than nowadays. The more hi-tech something is, the dumber it is. Hear, hear, someone who speaks from experience ;-) Although sometimes very rudimentary, old computers have one very big advantage over new PCs: they actually do what you tell them to do and don't do for you what they (ehum) think you mean want them to do. Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
If that was a practical joke, why was Rossi so angry?
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
2011/9/16 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com: If that was a practical joke, why was Rossi so angry? Good question, Daniel. I have some guesses but your guess is as good as mine. But is he really angry? –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
He spent weeks calling snakes and making paranoid posts. He said he wouldn't make any more tests until October. He just calmed down 2 or 3 weeks ago and even allowed that new Lewan's test. I thought you and Jed conceded that 3000KW of output could be a reasonable quantity from the looks of the steam.
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
That might be very odd, and I cannot answer that. However what else it could be than a joke? Rossi demonstrated E-Cat 5 times so that we have some objective data available before June demonstration. And all of them they worked exactly as Rossi claimed. As we remember Rossi always claimed more than 6 times the energy output than input. And this was success. March demonstration was most close to fell below 6x line, but it also probably made it. But then why did he demonstrate a dummy E-Cat to Krivit what did not produce any excess heat? Not even single watt. This is very difficult to explain. As there was nothing to complain previous demonstrations, then why to show Krivit a mere joke? Perhaps he had reasons. I have come up numerous explanations, but since there is so many of them, I have stopped speculating. Jed's analysis has been debunked, because the fact that water inflow rate was less than 3 kg/h (it was considerably less than with Mats' E-Cat). Therefore 3000 kW value is not plausible. –Jouni 2011/9/16 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com: He spent weeks calling snakes and making paranoid posts. He said he wouldn't make any more tests until October. He just calmed down 2 or 3 weeks ago and even allowed that new Lewan's test. I thought you and Jed conceded that 3000KW of output could be a reasonable quantity from the looks of the steam.
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
That is not a joke, if you follow Focardi's page on facebook, you will see that he was very angry with that. Also from Levi's comments as far as I remember. If that test was a farce, everything is a farce.
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
On 2011-09-16 01:48, Daniel Rocha wrote: That is not a joke, if you follow Focardi's page on facebook, you will see that he was very angry with that. Also from Levi's comments as far as I remember. If that test was a farce, everything is a farce. As far as I know the Focardi facebook page is some kind of fan page, and has nothing to do, directly at least, with the professor himself. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
Focardi answers questions there.
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
On 2011-09-16 01:54, Daniel Rocha wrote: Focardi answers questions there. Do you mean this Facebook page? http://it-it.facebook.com/pages/Prof-Sergio-Focardi/116761995001742 Informazioni QUESTA PAGINA E' UN OMAGGIO NON UFFICIALE DI AMMIRATORI DEL PROFESSORE. [...] Translation: this page is an unofficial tribute from prof.[Focardi] fans. Comments from Prof. Sergio Focardi also refer to Focardi in third person. It's not Focardi himself who writes there, but somebody else instead. This is not immediately clear at a quick glance. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:What is steam quality?
I was checking. It's true, that's a fan page. But only Rossi's emotional state is enough to conclude that either that test is true of everything is a fake.
