David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I guess I hit a touchy subject with this one. Rossi's device came up because
his heat gain(6) is so low relative to, as example, DGT(20).
Rossi has demonstrated a self-sustaining reaction lasting 4 hours. The ratio
is infinite. Why do you say the
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Why do you say the ratio is 6?
This is Rossi's claim on every question that has been posed to him. If
you read his blog, you will see that he only guarantees an output to input
ratio of 6 to 1 and never more.
I meant that other people have
? Perhaps the name should be modified to
pertain more to the subject at hand?
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Not Me energya...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Mar 24, 2012 11:15 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
I'd like more
? Perhaps the name should be
modified to pertain more to the subject at hand?
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Not Me energya...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Mar 24, 2012 11:15 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
I'd like more
energya...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 25, 2012 8:02 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
Perhaps instead of practical I should have said economical.
You were the one who started comparing the overall energy efficiency of the
E-Cat to heat
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It does concern me that the ECAT performance is dangerously close to that
of a high efficiency heat pump.
No, it is not. It is light years away from the performance of a heat pump.
There is not the slightest chance it is a heat pump. The reasons are
I forgot to mention Reason #3 this cannot be a heat pump:
3. It works without input power (self sustaining, or heat after death).
You can forget about the heat pump hypothesis.
- Jed
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Gesendet: 13:26 Samstag, 24.März 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
I forgot to mention Reason #3 this cannot be a heat pump:
3. It works without input power
...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Mar 24, 2012 8:21 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It does concern me that the ECAT performance is dangerously close to that of a
high efficiency heat pump
@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Mar 24, 2012 8:26 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
I forgot to mention Reason #3 this cannot be a heat pump:
3. It works without input power (self sustaining, or heat after death).
You can forget about the heat pump hypothesis.
- Jed
]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It does concern me that the ECAT performance is dangerously close to that
of a high efficiency heat pump.
No, it is not. It is light years away from the performance of a heat
pump
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Jed, I know it is not a heat pump.
Then why did you bring up that subject? Do you not understand that a heat
pump moves heat, and must cool down a body as much as it heats up another
body? I do not understand why you mentioned heat pumps and their
of view instead
of launching negative personal attacks.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Mar 24, 2012 11:45 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I guess I hit a touchy subject with this one. Rossi's device came up
because his heat gain(6) is so low relative to, as example, DGT(20).
Rossi has demonstrated a self-sustaining reaction lasting 4 hours. The
ratio is infinite. Why do you say the ratio
I wrote:
Instruments are important to science, but even more important are
observations and common sense knowledge of how things work. The human
senses are reliable and just as good as any instrument . . .
As Francis Bacon put it:
. . . But, as I said at the beginning and am ever urging,
.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 21, 2012 6:52 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
Thane Heins
, Mar 22, 2012 2:40 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
The conversion of one form of energy into another form may involve a
loss (destruction) of energy or a gain (creation) of energy depending
on the type and direction of energy conversion.
Even if a system
I apologize -- I missed some of the early context for this thread. I just
want address a general point or two.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The reason for the self sustaining requirement is to ensure that there are
no false measurements taking
pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
I apologize -- I missed some of the early context for this thread. I just want
address a general point or two.
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The reason for the self sustaining
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 21, 2012 6:52 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
Thane Heins continues
, 2012 6:52 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
Thane Heins continues with his bold claims.
This is the second video of four videos with a total length
of 3 hours.
ReGenX generator demonstration, Part 2
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder
In Thane Heins' system an input of kinetic energy
maybe required to keep the system creating more kinetic energy,
because the conversion of the created kinetic energy into electrical
energy destroys the kinetic energy that was created.
Yes, that
[mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 9:30 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder
In Thane Heins' system an input of kinetic energy
maybe required to keep the system creating
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 21, 2012 6:52 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
Thane Heins continues with his bold
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder
In Thane Heins' system an input of kinetic energy
maybe required to keep the system creating more kinetic energy,
because the conversion of the created kinetic energy into
Thane Heins continues with his bold claims.
This is the second video of four videos with a total length of 3 hours.
ReGenX generator demonstration, Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yrk_7MSSQMwfeature=related
At 11 minutes into this video he says his device has been tested by
the NRC
hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 21, 2012 6:52 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
Thane Heins continues with his bold claims.
This is the second video of four videos with a total length of 3 hours.
ReGenX generator demonstration, Part 2
: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
Thane Heins continues with his bold claims.
This is the second video of four videos with a total length
of 3 hours.
ReGenX generator demonstration, Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch
: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
Thane Heins continues with his bold claims.
This is the second video of four videos with a total length
of 3 hours.
ReGenX generator demonstration, Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v
29 matches
Mail list logo
