Maybe we are making headway in this discussion. Can I assume that you are now saying that the hot cat can actually produce heat by some unknown process? So far it is not clear that you accept this premise.
Then, are you agreeing that DC current flowing in the primary due to rectification at a complex load does not contribute to the calculation of power being delivered by that primary? Remember that this is what Duncan Phd EE and Andrew insist is true. Lets set this straight here and now by you agreeing that it is not good theory. You can then explain it to them on your other sites. And better yet, you will avoid stating it in the future. I have not personally been following the energy density so I must leave that discussion to those with more knowledge. No one really knows exactly how LENR works including me so that is unfair to ask of me. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Fri, May 31, 2013 2:39 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ethics of the E-Cat investigation put into question On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:11 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: Lets start with one of your choice regarding the many heat generation issues. How about how a small amount of heat can control a much larger amount? I agree this is possible under certain circumstances. But I don't see it in the hot cat. I made the case for why I think it wouldn't work. What part of that case do you disagree with? Or, how about my favorite recent issue about how DC I made no specific claims about dc. I simply said there's enough complexity on the input for one to be suspicious that a deception could work, The cheese video is an example. I'd much rather you explain how a power density 100 times that of uranium in a fission reactor works without melting the nickel, and how a nuclear reaction is triggered by heat, and how nuclear reactions can produce that much heat but no radiation. I know it involves secrets, but them secrets are the basis of tricks too.
