Hi Jed.
I understand you passed along some information from an insider at Levi's
second experiment and sent it to along to be included in an article here:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/News.htm
Some folks saying you skewed the data. I'm not saying you did. And I'm not
saying you didn't.
It's just
Does your psychoanalyst know what you are doing on the internet?
Are you currently institutionalized?
Do you still see you analyst? I hope so.
If you are not seeing your analyst I think you should.
Because you should tell him how it makes you feel to mimic him when he
whispers into his littlte
From Damon:
I understand you passed along some information from an
insider at Levi's second experiment and sent it to along
to be included in an article here:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/News.htm
Some folks saying you skewed the data. I'm not saying you
did. And I'm not saying you
We, from the list, are well aware that Jed Rothwell has some inside
information about the validity of the e-cat. Despite that, I haven't seen
him clearly manifest about the feeble steam output of the hose in the e-cat
video. The merit is not on the quality of the steam, even if has 0% liquid
One interesting new electric E-Cat replication. This really puts final mark
for steam depate, altough I still wait for modification where cooling water
is continuously pumped. And steam temperature measured. Also it is good to
see how much higher level Swedish discussion goes. Instead of plain and
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:
One interesting new electric E-Cat replication. This really puts final mark
for steam depate, altough I still wait for modification where cooling water
is continuously pumped. And steam temperature measured. Also it is good to
see how much higher
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
I understand you passed along some information from an insider at Levi's
second experiment and sent it to along to be included in an article here:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/News.htm
Some folks saying you skewed the data. I'm not saying you did. And I'm
This is a qualitative test, actually cannot be used for an analysis or
judgment.
The enthalpy of the steam has to be measured continuously
mixing the steam with a known flow of cold water and measuring the
temperature of the mixture. Simple like ...that.
Peter
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:37 PM,
According to the standard model, a Higgs field (named after a Scottish
physicist Peter Higgs) is a cosmological field that permeates the entire
universe. This field is supposed to be responsible for the genesis of
inertial mass (and, because of Einstein's equivalence principle,
gravitational
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
We, from the list, are well aware that Jed Rothwell has some inside
information about the validity of the e-cat.
Despite that, I haven't seen him clearly manifest about the feeble steam
output of the hose in the e-cat video.
It does not look
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a qualitative test, actually cannot be used for an analysis or
judgment.
The enthalpy of the steam has to be measured continuously
mixing the steam with a known flow of cold water and measuring the
temperature of the mixture. Simple like
Yes, better and even simpler- but from some reasons (temperature difference,
control) Rossi prefers steam.
Peter
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a qualitative test, actually cannot be used for an
On Jul 28, 2011 6:07 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, better and even simpler- but from some reasons (temperature
difference, control) Rossi prefers steam.
For me Rossi's choice does make perfect sense, because purpose of these
steam generators is not to produce warm water,
Dear Jouni,
Low pressure steam is not good for its main potential use- to generate
electricity.
Ill willed people have said that he prefers steam because
it is similar to smoke or fog. But this is ordinary calumny.
Peter
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Jouni Valkonen
Peter,
producing low pressure steam is not the point, but to produce high pressure
steam when E-Cats are scaled up and connected in serial and paraller for 1MW
plant. It is claimed by Defkalion that E-Cat is able to produce 414°C steam
in high pressure. This is what scaling up means here.
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:
producing low pressure steam is not the point, but to produce high pressure
steam when E-Cats are scaled up and connected in serial and paraller for 1MW
plant.
I am pretty sure Rossi said the 1 MW reactor is for hot water. I have no
idea what they
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
Low pressure steam is not good for its main potential use- to generate
electricity.
As I said, low temperature process steam is very useful for many
applications. But I think the point that Rossi is trying make is this:
'Here is steam at 100°C. If I
The issue is why Rossi prefers steam, when for demonstrating the potential
of the E-cat- simply heating water is straigtforward.
Peter
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
Low pressure steam is not good for its
In neo Lorentzian Ether Theory the Ether intersects with space at what we 3D
beings perceive as the constant C in all inertial frames. This rate of
intersection is at 90 degrees to the spatial axis, has no directional bias and
is equivalent to a relative motion of 300 million m/s
I saw the numbers at lenr-canr.
How did you get them. Was it on a scrap of paper?
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Damon Craig decra...@gmail.com wrote:
I understand you passed along some information from an insider at Levi's
second experiment and
Damon Craig wrote:
I saw the numbers at lenr-canr.
How did you get them. Was it on a scrap of paper?
By e-mail. Also, looking through my e-mail I see that I sent them off to
Rossi and others, and they confirmed them. Plus you can compare them to
the Nyteknik articles, as I said. The people
Can you post it here, verbatum? Not the entire email, if you like, just the
data.
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Damon Craig wrote:
I saw the numbers at lenr-canr.
How did you get them. Was it on a scrap of paper?
By e-mail. Also, looking
Peter Gluck wrote:
The issue is why Rossi prefers steam, when for demonstrating the
potential of the E-cat- simply heating water is straigtforward.
As I said, my feeling is that he prefers steam because it proves the
thing works at high temperature. Also, it is a little more convenient to
As I said, my feeling is that he prefers steam because it proves the thing
works at high temperature. Also, it is a little more convenient to work
with. The flow of water is lower and you can use a weight scale instead of a
flow meter. As I have said here, flow meters tend to be a pain in the
Damon Craig wrote:
Can you post it here, verbatum? Not the entire email, if you like,
just the data.
Nope. Even if I did, it would prove nothing, since anyone can write a
few lines of ascii text and claim they came from an e-mail.
You need to stop harping on this. Take it or leave it. The
25 matches
Mail list logo
