Assuming the eCat is not a scam:
The Defkalion press conference video indeed says that the eCat power is limited
by pressure.
We know that the reaction chamber is controlled by - quantity of nickel powder,
presence of hydrogen, and requires a sufficient heat to ignite the reaction.
Saying that
http://www.allinlondon.co.uk/knowledge/posts.php?thread=13183
London artists Jamie King (feat. Sway) released an album in June called This
is the Life:
Release date - 12/06/11
Now, whether the video was just an advertising scheme is the question. The date
format question is moot.
Date: Mon,
I listened to EVWorld's interview with Andrea Rossi:
http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=2004
What I hadn't noticed is that on the table behind them is an array of what look
to be Good-and-Proper e-Cats. I don't know if this is an old photo that
already made its rounds, but I found
This is all conjecture, but I thought that it may be a fun exercise.
IF Defkalion's statements are true (that's a big IF):
Defkalion is running ahead of Rossi on this. In one of the
post-press-announcement interviews, Defkalion's rep is asked if Rossi is
building e-Cats for their 1 MW plant.
Never tried the superheating water in china. I would assume that it's the lack
of nucleation sites on the smooth china. Pure water can be driven well outside
of normal phase-change temperatures when there's a lack of nucleation sites.
The tea bag or sugar cube would merely serve as a place
I would expect that the 1MW demo will not involve a phase-change in the
calorimetry. With Defkalion's statements as to alternate coolants being used
into a heat-exchanger, and combination heat-and-power models, the questionable
Rossi tests will hopefully be rendered obsolete.
This is presuming
[snip]
However, we know that Rossi is, shall we say, enthusiastic, and not
terribly careful about what he says. The 18-hour test allegedly
showed a transient temperature phenomenon that has been interpreted
as 120 kW. Just for starters, that might be explained, for example,
by some scale
Good degassing references can be found in the Stremmenos interview on the
22Passi Blog:
http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/05/stremmenos-cold-fusion-will-solve.html?m=1
Also, references can be seen in Brian Ahern's replication efforts.
Stremmenos observes that the oxidization coating the nano
Jed,
Agreed. The 18 hour test, assuming the observations we are given are fact,
would be conclusive.
I made the comment about someone flushing the toilet to demonstrate that some
of the momentary power spikes could be caused by correlating drops in water
pressure. There was no continuous
So not only is very wet steam with 95% liquid by mass possible, but there are
ways to measure it accurately. Not with an RH probe, though.
http://evworld.com/press/e-cat_cutaway.jpg
Two heaters. The internal heater makes sense for bringing up the Ni-H to
operating temperatures (and, presumably, keep it there). It's the purpose of
the external heater that's puzzling.
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 04:06:00 -0500
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New
I must ask, Jed... What is your take on this?
Specifically, the NASA calculations:
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/37/3714appendixelectriconly.shtml
And Summary:
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/NASA/18.jpg
I don't think that Curiosity Killed The E-Cat, but I'm finding in much
That 1.21 Gigawatt drop in production could correspond to some kind of a flux
capacitor being attached to the grid.
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
See:
If the E-Cat is going to truly be analyzed as black box, we need all inputs
and outputs. Obviously, a thermometer stuck inside the E-Cat, when we don't
know the pressure, physical construction, etc., does nobody any good. (Hell, we
don't even know if it's in water, or what type of thermal
My Two Cents--
I must confess that I'm unfamiliar with the effect of electromagnetism on
conductive heating. I thought that I'd throw out a few questions regarding the
observations of the 4th paper, hoping to learn:
Background for the questions: Alternating current (dependent on the
Okay.. Two More Cents:
Just for clarification, references to the skin effect were made as an effort
to explain the temperature difference without a magical violation of CoE. I
was proposing a circumstance where misinterpretation of observations are the
root cause of the apparent power.
My two cents:
As was previously theorized, Rossi may have really been onto something.
Unfortunately, when the reaction occurs, it is difficult to keep stable; it
runs away and needs to be quenched. If you recall, the Defkalion rumors
centered around a nonpayment from Defkalion until Rossi
My Two Cents:
I really hate to go on the record with predictions, but why not just for fun?
FWIW, I really, really hope that I am wrong.
Predictions:
1) This test has the potential to be quite conclusive. It won't be.
2) It will take a LONG time for the e-Cat to come up to temperature.
Again, FWIW, I hope to God this is a conclusive test.
As this argument is already raising eyebrows, let me go back to the original
predictions that are raising a fuss:
4) Power gains will be relatively small and will be reliant on calculations
using a no input value during the
I was running on the assumption that she was next door at Rossi Brothers'
Tires, getting new tires for her Alfa Romeo.
A scientific journalist, on the other hand, is an even better back-story.
I'm calling her E-Kitten.
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 14:57:19 +0200
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Uppsala +
Is there a long report for July 7th?
I've noticed that the times on the graph do not match Bianchini's report at
all. It appears that the graph may have been clipped during its stability
phase. If it had leveled for a long period (during phase change) and then
rose again, that would be
7th E-Cat test report
From: jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
We can only hope and pray that there is more power observed on the secondary
than is supplied to the primary during peak energy application.
If gains are only observed
Leguillon seems to have notion that heat originally stored as the water is
warmed up somehow vanishes and is never accounted for. That is not how a
calorimeter works.
Rothwell seems to like putting words into my mouth. If the ENTIRE energy
balance is looked at, it will obviously
1 MW is used as a measure of power transfer. The velocity of steam, through a
given opening, produced by 1 MW cannot be calculated; too few required
variables are populated.
You would have to know beginning and ending temperatures, to calculate required
water or steam. If you start with 1
Jed,
Now, let me stress that I do not think that there was a hidden heater, but
you're missing the point.
The argument was not for a hidden 5 kW heater. It was for a small heater near
the thermistor (or temperature probe). This small heater would not have to be
of a kW order. It would only
My Two Cents:
Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.
Most of the previous experimental problems were solved in this setup. We
could've seen measurable, stable, power gains completely unaffected by
phase-change or water overflow. We should have been presented with an
operating E-Cat producing 6 or more
on October 6th test
From: cchayniepub...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 11:21:18 -0400
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 09:01 -0500, Robert Leguillon wrote:
My Two Cents:
Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.
Most of the previous experimental problems were solved in this setup.
We
So, you will go on the record? The demonstrations have proven excess heat? This
is irrefutable?
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
If he has drained the water from the primary circuit he has wasted energy.
He said in august or september,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu_iwdjf1gI
It's a laugh for the Rossi-FanBoys.
Do we know how they measured the temperature at the output of the primary?
The temperature variations at the secondary look very suspicious (not following
rhyme-nor-reason, and taken too infrequently to track trends).
Those measured temperatures of condensed steam, at the output of the primary,
I think the reason for easy confusion is that kWh is not a term that the lay
person normally deals with.
1 KWh, or 1 kilowatt-hour, does not indicate 1 kilowatt per hour, but
represents 1 kilowatt over a span of 1 hour.
Hence, 500 watts for two hours = 1 kWh.
The layperson inherently links kWh
), thermocouple inserted
INSIDE E-Cat)
T3 : Primary circuit INPUT (from peristaltic pump)
When Mats Lewan took measurements of the steam condensate at the end of the
test, I assume he used his own temperature sensor...
-m
-Original Message-
From: Robert Leguillon
I saw it in the video, but this JPEG makes it even more obvious. Thanks for the
upload.
You've got 120+ degrees (allegedly) on one side, and a couple inches away less
than 30 degrees. A few degrees of heat transfer is lauded as conclusive,
irrefutable evidence of a multi-kilowatt cold fusion
Jed, I hate to ask, really.
You seem to be impressed by that graph. If you look closely at the Ny Teknik
results, the output at the heat exchanger doesn't seem to track the logged
E-Cat temperatures in any meaningful way.
A quick example is between 19:03 and 19:22: In that time frame, E-Cat
contents of the E-Cat
would take 2-4 hours to be completely replaced. All the while, a device that
generates frequencies is still running. When it is turned off, the E-Cat temp
begins declining.
S many questions.
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil
. But, of
course, this didn't happen, did it?
Hmmm.
If my numbers are off, I apologize. I didn't recheck.
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
Does anyone have a decent water capacity for the E-Cat? I see that H.H.
calculated 14.2 liters
will see this is irrefutable
proof
From: jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
The rapid overfilling was at .91 grams/second (It turns out the 1.92 g/s was
for quenching)
The rapid overfill I refer to is the quenching, at 1.92 g
Predictions:
1) This test has the potential to be quite conclusive. It won't be. *Check
2) It will take a LONG time for the e-Cat to come up to temperature. Only
after it's stable, Rossi will begin circulating water in the secondary, and the
e-Cat temperature will drop a little, and
If someone Couldn't care less, it means that they care so little that it's
impossible for them to care any less than they do right now.
If someone Could care less, it means that they care enough that it's possible
to care less.
Irregardless, people will continue to use the phrase to the
Look closer at this one:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiT2Pout.png
Let me give you a scenario. There is some back pressure on the E-Cat, so
boiling temperature rises as high as 124 degrees.
Note: This is in the believer's favor. If atmospheric pressure is lower, then
the boiling
The double flow was recorded after they began trying to quench the reaction.
Increasing the flow rate was specifically mentioned before that second
measurement, and everyone previously lauded the pump for it's accuracy during
previous demonstrations.
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
Let's now take this to its logical conclusion.
At a primary flow rate of .91 g/s, the evidence makes it look as though the
average power (including the power applied by the band heater) over the entire
span, could not have been over 2.5 kW. Anything higher would have resulted in
higher E-Cat
Jed,
Don't miss the fundamental argument of heat storage.
Great care was taken to insulate the E-Cat, and keep heat from escaping. If
you think that this is impossible, I have an experiment for you. Make a
scalding hot 1/2 cup of coffee. Put it into a Thermos. See how long it takes
to
long does the water
continue to boil?
Harry
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Robert Leguillon
robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
Jed,
Don't miss the fundamental argument of heat storage.
Great care was taken to insulate the E-Cat, and keep heat from escaping. If
you think
: 15kg/h here:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=20#comment-94236
Colin
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 6:44 AM, Robert Leguillon
robert.leguil...@hotmail.com mailto:robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Let's now take this to its logical conclusion.
At a primary flow
@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Please stop making unsupported, physically impossible
assertions about stored heat
Pour some boiling water into a thermos. For how long does the water
continue to boil?
Harry
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Robert Leguillon
robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
Jed,
Don't
The data from the September test is great, in this aspect. They did it right.
They were filling the E-Cat from a reservoir, and after it was boiling, they
gave us the net weight of water in the input reservoir at 21:07, then logged
every time water was added, and provided us a final weight.
I forgot to mention. In the September test, before the pump was hooked up, they
measure 15.8 kg/hr (4.38g/s) consumption. Once connected to the E-Cat, it
dropped to 13.76 kg/hr (3.8g/s), then at boiling, it dropped to 11.08 kg/hr
(3.07g/s). This is just to demonstrate that the pump does not
:35 PM, Robert Leguillon wrote:
If someone Couldn't care less, it means that they care so little
that it's impossible for them to care any less than they do right now.
If someone Could care less, it means that they care enough that it's
possible to care less.
_*Irregardless*_, people
In the September report, they drain the water in the E-Cat through the fill
port, and 22,400 grams are expelled. This seems to be at or near overflowing,
based on the collected water; Also, the E-Cat weighed about a kg more than it
started at (this is presumably water retained below the level
Facepalm.
The inflow rate is NOT well regulated, nor is it 15 l/h.
It was very, very well measured in the September test, and we can learn a lot
from it.
In the September test, before the pump was hooked up, they measure 15.8 kg/hr
(4.38g/s) consumption. Once connected to the E-Cat, it
I do not think Rossi was lying about dry steam. He says he does not know
much about how to measure steam quality. He assumed that Galantini knew
what he was doing. I still do assume that. Many people here have been
yelling about this but experts I have heard from say it was dry.
The wet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVkdfJ9PkRQ
It's probably been shared before, but it's making the rounds again: Pendulums
of varied lengths create some very entertaining wave effects.
In this case, the skeptics are ignoring the fact that the heat increased during
heat after death, instead of declining according to Newton's law. This proves
they are wrong. I have not seen a response from any of them trying to explain
this fact.
Steve Krivit was so anxious to gloss
“There’s nothing else happening in the rest of the world at this time, in terms
of human land use, that could explain this rapid carbon uptake,” says Jed
Kaplan, an earth systems scientist at the Federal Polytechnic School of
Lausanne in Switzerland.
Note the phrase in terms of human land use.
Take any two digit number, subtract the sum of the individual digits, and the
result is a multiple of 9. All of the multiples of 9 correspond to the same
symbol in the table, and Bob's your uncle.
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Am 16.10.2011 16:36, schrieb Peter Gluck:
Peter,
The skeptical, conservative position is to believe in conventional physics and
to trust that laboratory grade instruments have worked correctly in thousands
of experiments (including this one) and therefore cold fusion must be real.
Am I to understand that even the most pragmatic skepticism
Obviously, you have come to your conclusions. I have found this test
inconclusive. You may disagree, and now be 100% convinced, but it's your
personal attacks that are troubling. You continue to strike down questions
with comments like:
Skepics who claim that the temperature
Mr. Rothwell never attacked me personally. He merely labeled all remaining
skeptics as ignorant/blind/foolish/etc. I think that there is still room to
question the results, and I'm certainly not the only one. I think that the ad
hominems can stifle open communication, and I thought that they
personally repaired an anvil, and you heat it slowly to avoid destroying
its hardened characteristics - and you cool it overnight packed in vermiculite
to allow slow cooling.
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
Mr. Rothwell never
Obviously, you prefer to go after an individual. Then you oversimplify
arguments with an 8 gallon pot. I cannot comprehend if you're being facetious,
or truly do not understand what we are referring to by stored heat in the core.
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert Leguillon
in nickel, nickel mining, and
short oil.
You stifle debate when you minimize arguments as junior-high level physics
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
You have grown tiresome.
Leaving an anvil in a forge overnight was merely
You are placing a lot of stock on minor variances of the T2 temperature.
Have you considered that no energy increase is necessary to increase the T2
probe temperature? It is highly unlikely that the E-Cat is bone dry, and the
steam is being superheated. It is much more likely that the
Has anyone seen a photo? Does anyone know what make/model? Does anyone know the
specific purpose it was serving? Does anyone know how it was hooked into the
circuit? Was it electrically connected to the heater? Was it electrically
connected to the E-Cat at all? Had anyone heard any reference to
. That is where the relatively low temperature at
T2 starts to rise most of the way through the test.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Oct 27, 2011 6:44 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:ECAT Measurements Confirm Excess
: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Oct 27, 2011 7:30 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:ECAT Measurements Confirm Excess Heat Production
It appeared in the water dump at the end of the September video, that the
E-Cat
ressure was above 1 ATM
So, if the steam is recirculating, is there a secondary flow and heat exchanger?
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 08:43:59 -0700
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Tailgating on day zero for the E-Cat 1MW.
From: ecatbuil...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Per Rossi's blog, the steam is going into a dissapater,
Has anyone seen any data come through on test protocols?
If the water/steam is recirculating, does this mean that the 1MW is entirely
closed-loop?
Is there NO water being added to the system?
How is water flow rate in the primary being measured, if at all?
How is temperature in the primary
/snip/ We will all await further data before issuing judgement, right? /snip/
Anxiously awaiting
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 6:21 PM, John Harris jfhar...@dodo.com.au wrote:
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 6:15 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:First video from
This test has been a colossal disappointment.
I was hoping for good, reliable, superior calorimetry, and something decisive.
When it began, I was concerned about the steam output being recirculated and
never actually observed. Any measured output over 100C would be considered
complete
I don't think the Mafia has written non-disclosure agreements.
But when things go wrong, they are known for putting out contracts
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Am 29.10.2011 19:55, schrieb Daniel Rocha:
Area 51?
Cosa Nostra?
Mafia!
;-)
2011/10/29 Alan Fletcher a...@well.com
I was assuming RFG was the Radio Frequency Generator
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
What is an RFG? As in: The reactors have been served by a RFG . . .
There are some minor corrections to this report coming from Rossi. I will
upload a new version later. They are:
1. The weight of
I know that this post is going to ruffle some feathers, but:
He has indeed done stints in jail. He has repeatedly claimed incredible strides
in developing rare technology, and has seen things go awry in delivery.
Petroldragon appeared totally revolutionary. The telling of this story varies
Defkalion responds to a reader re: the possibility of DGT's Hyperions replacing
the Fukishima reactors:
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=431p=3617#p3617
___
Could the steam temperature be safely raised to 600 degrees C
*facepalm*
The year 0 P.R. (Post Rossi)? I hope the horse will overtake the cart, and
regain it's rightful station.
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
See:
http://www.xecnet.com/publish.htm
Book blurb:
Featured Book
Our featured book is John Michell's new book Rossi's eCat - Free
The issue of complete vaporization has plagued the E-Cat from the beginning. In
the early E-Cats, water was able to run straight out of the E-Cat and down a
drain, without ever being collected or sparged. In the 1MW demo, the steam is
condensed and fed back in, there is no way of knowing how
/snip/ If I were to call him ax murderer I suppose you would say I admire his
dexterity with tools. /snip/
Brilliant!
a good laugh at our expense. If the public
report is falsified, then it is a scam, pure and simple. Otherwise, it is
real as many expect.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Nov 7, 2011 8:53 pm
Subject
Rossi's largest contribution to improving on the Piantelli-Focardi work, may
have been his suggestion at using nano-nickel. The increased surface area, and
available crystalline lattice has been garnering a lot of attention. Variations
in particle size and, possibly more importantly, surface
of the secondary
thermocouples bring the results into question
Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Robert Leguillon
robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
The issue of complete vaporization has plagued the E-Cat from the
beginning. In the early E-Cats, water was able
Any idea if anyone has received the entire NASA LENR presentation? I've been
checking their website
(http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/sensors/PhySen/research.htm) for some time, and it
looked promising:
Tests conducted at NASA Glenn Research Center in 1989 and elsewhere
consistently showed
/snip/
Heffner is saying that since the flow rate may not be 60 L in 4 hours it might
be zero. That is preposterous.
/snip/
Because the flow rate was not at its max (it was sped up during quenching) and
it decreases with back pressure (as demonstrated in the September test), we
have no idea
Maybe I'd overlooked this, when did they measure and film the outpouring water?
I thought that it was twice during the entire demo - once while it was running,
and once during quenching, no?
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert Leguillon wrote:
/snip/
Heffner is saying
Statement only slightly more ridiculous:
The most energetic thing that they could put inside is a fission reactor. A
fission reactor produces the most energy, because if it didn't, nuclear power
stations would use something else. And since we can't fit all of the necessary
safety controls in
I apologize. I did not institute my five-minute sarcasm filter.
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
Statement only slightly more ridiculous:
The most energetic thing that they could put inside is a fission reactor. A
fission reactor produces the most energy, because
/snip/
Additionally it has been disclosed that Rossi and NI have been working
together for some time as well as the fact that Rossi had 107 modules working
in parallel for 5.5 hours and maintained a very good regulation on the heat
output.
/snip/
Statements from NI do not indicate that they
In the PESN postscript, it is quite obvious that NI is distancing itself from
any conclusions on authenticity. I added emphasis with the below:
PESN Postscript
On November 10, 2011 4:39 PM [MST], regarding the above story, I received the
following from Trisha McDonell | Corporate PR Manager |
If someone wanted to buy the current E-Cat manifestation for anything other
than debunking or reverse engineering, what would that look like? (Assuming
that the technology is 100% real and has a COP of 6. I'm skeptical, but think
this could be a fun intellectual exercise)
Current Cats produce
/snip/
Added valve on connection to jerrican. It indeed seems closed on the Ny Teknik
video. I suppose it was opened at some point?
/snip/
This is unclear. It is indeed where the 5 L of condensed water was measured. It
does appear closed in the video (if it were open, water/steam/both would be
This may be pointing to the earlier theory (purely supposition):
Rossi really improved Ni-H technology. His reactions were hard to keep stable,
so he kept tuning it down to keep it stable. When it was 100% stable, he'd
actually turned it off and was only producing reactions that could be
Defkalion wasn't obligated to release anything. The pictures do show that they
were working on the product, and appeared to have invested more into it than a
few pipes and elbows.
This news is great, because it lends a lot more credence to their claims that
more information will be forthcoming.
Completely concur. These are the kind of test environs that I'd expect to see.
Also, their technical posts were always at least logical (e.g., experimenting
with different coolants for a single-phase primary loop). They always came
across as more ready for primetime than Rossi.
I'm eagerly
I forsee other times when thermal energy is produced to prevent global cooling.
There will be global controls to regulate a stable climate, and the most
powerful nations will clambor to have the global climate skewed in their
regional favor.
Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
I can
I believe that the water leaks were at the top seal, and would only have come
into play when the E-Cat was effectively overflowing. They would not contribute
to net energy loss during the proposed heat storage
Also, the only measured primary flow before the rate was increased (for
quenching)
Refresh my memory.
If I recall correctly:
1) ecat.com had videos from the recent demonstrations, and is now officially
affiliated
2) e-cat.com began with the Countdown to October, then it had the We've got
Ssssteam Heat video, and then was redirected to Google Green
Is that right?
Date:
If Rossi did use three cores (assuming he didn't before):
The energy output may increase, but we'd still still be without any method to
acually measure it, because of his calorimetry.
The energy consumed would have tripled, too, with a zero-net-gain possibility
still on the table.
The October
/snip/
Actually, there is no reason to believe that it will require additional input
energy to activate the 2 extra cores. He has a COP of 6 when all are used which
results in an output of 1558 * 6 = 9348 each ECAT of 107 total. I used the test
data to determine that this was entirely in line
By reactance, I misspoke, meaning impedance, but you get the point.
If each wafer has its own core heater, the input current would have to triple
to support three cells.
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 15:40:24 -0600
Subject: Re: [Vo]: ECAT With 3 Cores Would Have Been Convincing
From:
I believe that he was recommending warming up the E-Cats before most of the
reporters show up, with minimal supervision, if their time is too precious.
It was not a theory on what may have occurred, merely a suggestion on what
could occur to avail a longer (and hence more conclusive) run time.
Yes. The restriction on ad hominems only applies to skeptics.
A Rossi-believer can call you ignorant, blind, lacking in a seventh grade
education, unable to understand elementary science, pseudo-skeptic,
pathological skeptic, an agent of big oil, LENR-denier, even accuse you of
intentionally
1 - 100 of 273 matches
Mail list logo
