Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: Jed. have claimed that a good flowmeter expert can convince the instrument > to show one order of magnitude more flow than the real one. (now this is 4X)
Yes, you can make the error 4 X, or 10 X. At Defkalion the flow was zero and they showed it was high. That is an error of infinity, I suppose. > The results of the paper are perfectly plausible and the solution- > scending pipe is simple and fine. > No, it is not "perfectly plausible" that the pressure was 0.0 bar, the flow rate was exactly the same every day, even on days when the machine was turned off. It is no possible these pumps provided as much water as shown. It is not possible the machine consumed more electric power than the power company supplied. That is not "perfectly plausible"; it is outrageous nonsense. > The main differences to the Doral plant case: > a) the paper describes an open flow not a circuit, the Plant has that > ascending pipe > That is incorrect. The flow meter is located in the gravity return pipe, according to Rossi's schematic. I suggest you ask him for a copy of that schematic, since you do not believe me. > b) the tests with errors are made when the flow is just starting, a > professional test would let the flow for a few minutes when the parameters > are established and constant- and only then to compare reading and > effective flow. > That is incorrect. You would see the same result no matter how long the water runs. > You do not measure the speed of flight during landing- start is anomalous > in a way. > Completely wrong. > Now there are two cases possible in principle: > A. Normal professional setup: > RESERVOIR- PUMP-FLOWMETER-E-CATS: no systematic, significant errors > possible > No, the flow meter was installed in a half-empty pipe. Everyone who looked at it saw that immediately. > B. Setup according to Jed > The setup is according to Rossi, not me. > FLOWMETER- RESERVOIR-PUMP- E-CATS- serious problems; doubtful if flowmeter > works- erratic, inconstant, jumping readings due to air inclusions however > not constant multiplier effect, incontrollable system. > There is no doubt whatever the flow meter was wrong because: 1. The pipe was half empty. 2. It was the wrong kind of meter. 3. The pumps could not possibly supply that much water. Various other reasons such as -- 4. Everyone in the building would be dead if there were a 1 MW heat source. > Errors- yes, scamming is much more difficult. > This was the most inept and obvious scam I have ever seen. > BTW the same true for Luca Gamberale's calumny paper. > Where in the LENR land are you now, caro Luca? > You should ask instead: where is Defkalion? Why did they never answer the issues raised by Gamberale? - Jed
