I believe that he was recommending warming up the E-Cats before most of the reporters show up, with minimal supervision, if their time is too precious. It was not a theory on what may have occurred, merely a suggestion on what could occur to avail a longer (and hence more conclusive) run time. I disagree, but just wanted to clarify.
David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > >snip...From: Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> > > >Second, what's to stop him from doing the pre-heating overnight, and getting >started at 7 am. These guys are professionals; they won't mind getting up >early. It's true, you might want a witness to measure the input energy, but if >it runs long enough to exclude chemical fuel, then storage is excluded too. >Then if they ran it self-sustained until 7 pm, you'd have 12 hours. Still too >short, but a lot better than 3 1/4 hours. > >... > >Please explain why it too so long for the temperature to read an elevated >value during the October 28 test if the ECATs had been preheated? > >Dave >
