Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Well that's not exactly true... there is an overlooked detail here which > should be clarified . . . If me356 can make it work, he must know something no one else knows. No one can make Ni-H produce 8 kW out 1 kW input. If me356 can patent his method, even if it is very similar to previous patents or public domain information, it will still be unique, patentable and worth $1 trillion. > The problems with the proposed testing is HUGE and must be changed- as of > now, this is looking like the oldest scam in the book - > wet-steam/dry-steam. Rossi has been successful in making the wet-steam scam > into an art form. To have any credibility - this test must not involve > steam at all. They plan to use a heat exchanger, which will eliminate this problem. The method I described, sparging the steam in cold water, will also eliminate this problem. Sparging will accurately measure the enthalpy from any mixture of wet steam, dry steam or hot water. It is a lot simpler than a heat exchanger. The limitation is, you can only do it for 30 minutes or so. If you want a long-term test to prove the excess heat goes beyond the limits of chemistry you have to use some other method. I recommended they start with sparging because it can be done quickly and easily. If it shows excess heat they should do the heat exchanger method. If it does not show any excess I would pack up and go home. - Jed
