Dave, There was a schematic that GoatGuy referenced some time ago. His speculation of how it could be faked included air in the system registering on the flow meter. I'm not certain the schematic was the ultimate configuration that was used. I'll try to find it in the archives. Jack
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 3:36 PM David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > Jed, I do not see any obvious reason why the flow meter can not be lower > than the reservoir. Do you have some form of schematic that supports what > you are describing? > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Wed, Aug 10, 2016 4:29 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:angry and sad LENR comment but info too! > > Jed, > Your answer is too pathetic for words. > Placed so it was half full??? Show a diagram of the piping so an > engineer can judge it. > I note you still won't admit you were wrong on something else even after I > posted proof . > > > On 8/10/2016 3:53 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > And what exactly is the truth, where was the flowmeter placed? >> > > It was placed such that it was half full. That is what the rust marks > shows, and what careful testing shows. Obviously it cannot be lower than > the destination (the reservoir). > > > >> Can you tell or is it under NDA? >> > > I just told you. I.H. told you. You don't believe us. You believe Rossi > instead. He gave you no more proof than I did, but you believe him, > unconditionally. So I see no reason to give you any more information. You > will reject it and demand more, and more, and more. > > I expect I.H. will publish more in response to the lawsuit. You can wait > until then. But, since you do not believe what they already published, > there is no point to waiting. You have already made up your mind that Rossi > is always right, no matter what he says, not matter how impossible it is. > > - Jed > > >
