David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
On many tests, I find it difficult to detect an indication of the
underlying transient curve that is many times greater than the noise
surrounding the ideal response.
Say again? I don't quite follow your conclusion. Your grammar is a little
, Jan 3, 2013 5:35 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
On many tests, I find it difficult to detect an indication of the underlying
transient curve that is many times greater than the noise surrounding the ideal
response
are
looking for.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Jan 3, 2013 5:35 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
On many tests, I find it difficult
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Most likely less than 1.5 watts was all that I could squeeze out of the
shape.
That sounds insignificant.
I mentioned this to the MFMP gang but did not receive any reply. Of
course, I requested information about the exact test that was being
To: dlroberson dlrober...@aol.com
Sent: Sat, Jan 19, 2013 9:52 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
This is the third installment of my explanation of how to use my simulation
program. The last time I left those interested with a task of determining the
roots
That's great work. Thanks. Unfortunately I think you and the MFM have
demonstrated that Celani is not getting any excess heat. He sent them his
own wires and they got nothing. Bupkis. Nada. Zilch.
- Jed
That or the wires are torn by too much use and new ones must be provided.
2013/2/2 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
That's great work. Thanks. Unfortunately I think you and the MFM have
demonstrated that Celani is not getting any excess heat. He sent them his
own wires and they got
I'm not sure the MFMP have shown more than a null result -- I doubt it can
be taken as a negative result. Celani's P_xs was on the order of many
watts, if I remember correctly. It seems like he would have had to have
some pretty egregious instrument artifact to get those graphs that have
been
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, Feb 1, 2013 10:56 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
I'm not sure the MFMP have shown more than a null result -- I doubt it can be
taken as a negative result
: Fri, Feb 1, 2013 10:56 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
I'm not sure the MFMP have shown more than a null result -- I doubt it can
be taken as a negative result. Celani's P_xs was on the order of many
watts, if I remember correctly. It seems like he would have had
Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you identifided the difference (or error) in MFMP team's program
that leads them to find excess power?
I don't they have found excess power in their most recent analyses. Have
they?
As I have mentioned here before, what bothers me about Celani's
@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Feb 2, 2013 3:57 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
Dave,
Have you identifided the difference (or error) in MFMP team's program
that leads them to find excess power?
Harry
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 12:54 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote
Sent: Sat, Feb 2, 2013 4:56 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you identifided the difference (or error) in MFMP team's program
that leads them to find excess power?
I don't they have found excess power in their most
On Feb 2, 2013, at 16:22, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
My belief is that if much excess power were generated, it would certainly
show up at the elevated power inputs more than at the lower power steps.
Your curve-fitting analyses are always interesting. But I think we should be
...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Feb 2, 2013 7:59 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
On Feb 2, 2013, at 16:22, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
My belief is that if much excess power were generated, it would certainly show
up at the elevated
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you identifided the difference (or error) in MFMP team's program
that leads them to find excess power?
I don't they have found excess power in their most recent analyses.
Hello Dave,
Your tool is powerful! Did you make also the calibration and exercises with
the EU cell? They have reported about ~6W excess heat when direct current
applied. The cell reports ~2.5W excess heat with an indirect heating.
US cells have been disappointing up to now. But EU cell shows
for
now.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Arnaud Kodeck arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 3, 2013 6:04 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
Hello Dave,
Your tool is powerful! Did you make also the calibration and exercises
, but I suspect that you would
be able to use it effectively after a learning experience.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Feb 3, 2013 9:43 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
I have
From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: dimanche 3 février 2013 18:05
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP
I just took a quick look at the calibration conditions for the EU cell and
am not convinced
20 matches
Mail list logo
