Andrew: IIRC, one of the team said that the 'waveform' could be seen on the power analyzer screen. so in a sense, they had, albeit, a limited oscilloscope. Perhaps that was considered enough for the given stage of testing.
Most all instruments today use fast ADCs and digital sampling to capture a waveform. The power analyzer likely uses this technique as well, so it has all the digitized values needed to not only do the calculations, but to also display the waveforms. We'll see what kind of setup is used in the 6 month test, and revisit the discussion. -Mark From: Andrew [mailto:andrew...@att.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:29 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ethics of the E-Cat investigation put into question Would you have us believe that the use of an oscilloscope and/or a spectrum analyzer was not forbidden for these tests? This has been discussed on this very forum just this week, and the opposite conclusion was drawn by the folks here. Either it was forbidden, and what you write is misinformed, or you're correctly describing the situation, in which case the testers were not, in my view, as thorough as they ought to have been. Andrew ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell <mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:18 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ethics of the E-Cat investigation put into question Andrew <andrew...@att.net> wrote: So this is an "independent test" in your book, when you freely acknowledge that Levi and Rossi have been friends and colleagues for a long time? It is what it is. Call it independent, semi-independent, or a friendly visit. You can read the details in the report and judge for yourself. Some of the other participants have no connection to Rossi. That does not prevent them from knowing how to use instruments or comparing the IR camera readout to a thermocouple. I am a friend of Rossi. If I went there with my thermocopules, would you automatically dismiss my readings as well? And you see no hypocrisy when Rossi says that any equipment may be used, and then Levi constrains that . . . Levi DID NOT constrain that. You made that up! It is nonsense. I have been in contact with these researchers. They made it abundantly clear that neither Rossi nor Levi constrained them in any way. They agreed this was a reasonable set of instruments. They are of the opinion that Rossi and Levi have no magical ability to change the readout of a digital ammeter or an IR camera. I agree. (following perhaps dicta from Rossi)? No such dicta occurred. Rossi had no say in the matter. He did not know what meters they would bring, and he has no idea what they will bring next time. No one knows. That has not been decided yet. The whole point to doing multiple tests is to improve the instruments and techniques. Your saying "perhaps" does not make something true, or even likely. This all sits nice and comfy with you? Yes, absolutely. Your veiled and unfounded accusations do not sit nice and comfy with me. - Jed
