I uploaded that to the News section. I was tempted to add: Hey, Richard
Garwin: here's your cuppa tea, big guy!
I will soon upload a more detailed description by Mike Melich, and I
hope I can add Prof. Levi's report.
I think it is all but certain these results are real. They cannot be a
Roarty, Francis X wrote:
Nice job! My only question regards the Alternating-current heater used
to bring the Rossi device up the working temperature. Do they specify
if this is just out of the wall AC or a more elaborate HV duty factor
sort of arrangement?
I asked that but I have not got
I was going to mention this before I saw Peter's message, but he beat me
to it.
On 01/17/2011 11:14 AM, P.J van Noorden wrote:
Hello Jed,
How do we know that all the water ( 8.8 l) evaporated? Was the Rossi
device weighted before and after the test? The diameter of the device
is about 10
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
How do we know that all the water ( 8.8 l) evaporated?
That's what the RH meter is for. (May have answered already.)
This is another example of the disastrous consequences of depending on
a black box test. The stuff coming out could have been dry steam,
or it
On 01/17/2011 02:39 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
How do we know that all the water ( 8.8 l) evaporated?
That's what the RH meter is for. (May have answered already.)
Mmmm? I didn't see that mentioned, and I didn't realize that's what it
was doing. In fact I thought
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
How do we know that all the water ( 8.8 l) evaporated?
That's what the RH meter is for. (May have answered already.)
This is another example of the disastrous consequences of depending
6 matches
Mail list logo
