Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

lt;jedrothw...@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jedrothw...@gmail.com');>> > *Sent:* Saturday, May 27, 2017 4:37 PM > *To:* Vortex > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today > > I do not know whether me356 claimed it takes time to crank up his machine.

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

Looks like a major problem has been spotted, suggesting why me356 honestly thought he was getting excess heat: His power meter was reading 0.452 KW vs 1.112 KW from MFMP meter Yikes... such a significant deficit error in measuring input power will certainly give the appearance of OU. The

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

Has the testing concluded? It is now 3 PM in Czech. From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 4:37 PM To: Vortex Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today I do not know whether me356 claimed it take

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

I do not know whether me356 claimed it takes time to crank up his machine. I have not been following the discussion. However, if it *does* take time, he should have told that to the people from MFMP. Or, if the machine is unreliable and does not work some days, he should have said so. He should

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

ect: Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today ... It would be great if this could run for several days... in the best effort of P experiments in France, there was no excess for 60 days - followed by several months of gain. - One comment on the above in

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

... It would be great if this could run for several days... in the best effort of P experiments in France, there was no excess for 60 days - followed by several months of gain. - One comment on the above in the context of today's lack of results, since there

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

I agree with you Brian. This is quite disappointing. Dave -Original Message- From: Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com> To: Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Sat, May 27, 2017 12:03 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today Jed is being too g

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

Jed Rothwell wrote: > Apparently they are performing a test in his absence. There is an informative ongoing summary page here - with rolling averages https://freeboard.io/board/MwMhlL The COP seemed to be hovering around one while I was watching. No radiation. No surprises. It would be

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

>From what I can tell in their live document, me356 is there with them tweaking things. Doesn't really seem to be making any difference. Jack On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:41 AM Jed Rothwell wrote: > Brian Ahern wrote: > >> Jed is being too generous.

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

Brian Ahern wrote: > Jed is being too generous. His failure to test today is unforgivable! > Apparently they are performing a test in his absence. https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5228-me356-photos-of-aura-control-unit/?postID=60623#post60623 If he allows some of

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

ubject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today At lenr-forum, me356 is quoted from somewhere: "I can only tell, that the test was conducted in the condition that was very far from ready from my side. This mean that I was not prepared for testing with the current rea

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

At lenr-forum, me356 is quoted from somewhere: "I can only tell, that the test was conducted in the condition that was very far from ready from my side. This mean that I was not prepared for testing with the current reactor at all. But this is the only one with a cover - thus nothing else can't

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

Looks like he has already punted for the day citing family obligations. The Americans are leaving Monday, I believe, so there may be tomorrow. Were he planning to be objective, I think he would have said, "either I made a mistake and it doesn't work, or it is not getting up to a high enough

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

As of now, this is looking worse than an objective observer would have predicted from the circumstances. I agree with Jed that just by letting these people in the door, me356 has enhanced his credibility... possibly less than being an early Porsche owner but at least he is open to scrutiny.

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

Bob Higgins wrote: The first 10 minutes would not necessarily be better because the heater was > being driven with more power. It may measure more accurately because the > water was closer to room temp. > That's what I meant. Better calorimetry. More adiabatic. Maybe

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

I was only working from data I extracted from the plots. It may prove to be a little better when the raw data itself is analyzed. The first 10 minutes would not necessarily be better because the heater was being driven with more power. It may measure more accurately because the water was closer

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

Bob Higgins wrote: > Calculated values for COP from the data graphs during this sparge test > varied from 0.5-0.7 depending on the span of time taken. > That is a low recovery rate. I think because the bucket was small and they ran the test for a long time, letting

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Adrian Ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: That was what I wrote about in my last post but for some reaspn the post has not been published. I saw your suggestion afterwards. I think

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Adrian Ashfield wrote: That was what I wrote about in my last post but for some reaspn the post > has not been published. I saw your suggestion afterwards. I think it somehow started a new thread rather than remaining in this one. Eric

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

An oscilloscope is of negative value. It provides a false reading. From: Adrian Ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 9:24 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today That was what I wrote

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

That was what I wrote about in my last post but for some reaspn the post has not been published. AA -Original Message- From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, May 25, 2017 10:46 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting t

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

measuring the RF ambiance with an oscilloscope can raise red flags. imprecise indirect measurement are often good cross check Nothing is fool proof individually but if the testers improve their tests and cross check with simple measurement (like kill-a-watt at the socket, electricity bill,

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

I believe an oscilloscope can also be used to check for high-frequency components in the input power waveform. Eric

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

Don;t know what all the fuss is about. It easy enough to look at the signal with a good oscilloscope and see if there is likely to be a problem. Seems to me the skeptics are busy looking for exotic ways to cheat so they can console themselves that it doesn't work even if me356's reactor

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

This wiring diagram shows the AURA Device plugged into something similar to a "Kill A Watt" brand EZ Electricity Usage Monitor (power meter). Another brand is the "Watts Up" meter. See: https://www.amazon.com/P3-International-P4460-Electricity-Monitor/dp/B000RGF29Q/ Those gadgets are great

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote: > Measuring rich HF signal power is tricky > > is it not more easy to measure power at the power supply input, adding > good filters, and why not if paranoid

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

Measuring rich HF signal power is tricky is it not more easy to measure power at the power supply input, adding good filters, and why not if paranoid an inverter/UPS or a good old predictable batteries ? You lose precision and performance, but at least you are sure it is not HF tricks..

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

A heat exchanger avoids this wet steam issue. On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Brian Ahern wrote: > May I make a prediction? > > > When the COP is around 6-8 and the process is plasma electrolysis, the > input is

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today

May I make a prediction? When the COP is around 6-8 and the process is plasma electrolysis, the input is invariably under reported. The plasma is actually a series of sporadic arcs. Measuring the I(t) and V(t) simultaneously is impossible for all but the most sophisticated test equipment.