Joshua Cude wrote: > Actually, even if you trust F. about the energy during the run the > data is entirely consistent with no excess heat.
Not according to Ny Teknik's "This is how the test was done" box at http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3303682.ece > Subtracting the energy supplied during startup, about 320 kWh at an > average power of 160 kW, the net energy would still be 2249 kWh. In > this case the energy output during startup should also be estimated > and added. That's 320e3 x 3600 = 576 MJ. So if you trust the reported figures, then there clearly is plenty of excess energy, and the only non-cold-fusion explanation involves an international conspiracy and technologically non-trivial deception. -- Berke Durak
