Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Dec 15, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 10:45 AM 12/15/2011, Horace Heffner wrote: Just to be clear, no one is talking about heating the outside box metal envelope. My focus is entirely the inside box, the 30 cm x 30 cm x 30 cm inside box, the insides of which no one has s

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Archeologists concern themselves with the reconstruction of cracked pots. Crackpots have fragments of insight. Harry

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Dec 15, 2011, at 1:30 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: Rossi's tests and explanations are full of holes and self contradictions, impossibilities. It is Rossi's tests and explanations that matter. All the blather from the peanut galle

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On 15 December 2011 15:21, Jed Rothwell wrote: > 1. Stored energy can only cause the temperature to decline monotonically, > very rapidly at first (Newton's law of cooling). Yet this heat increased > during the event. > It is easy to create a system in which heat transfer is limited to a near co

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On 11-12-15 06:11 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: Falsifiability just means it should be possible to conceive of an experimental result that would contradict the assertion. It's intended to avoid religious claims in a scientific arena. It actually has much broader applications than just that. Hang a

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > "If you can't think of a specific way this EXPERIMENTAL scientist's work > could have jumped the tracks, then you have no basis to challenge the > conclusions." > First of all, there are many specific ways suggested to explain the ecat, t

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > "If you can't think of a specific way this EXPERIMENTAL scientist's work > could have jumped the tracks, then you have no basis to challenge the > conclusions." > I can't think of any way (much less a specific way) that famous magicians co

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I am saying that as a rule of logic, all assertions much be falsifiable, > Resorting to misunderstood rules is the refuge of people who have no good arguments left. Falsifiability just means it should be possible to conceive of an experime

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Alan J Fletcher wrote: > At 11:08 AM 12/15/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: > > I need to add phase-change salts (and possibly even ceramic bricks) to my > fakes paper. Can you give me / point me to a likely candidate? > > > http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~meam502/projec

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > It is a problem of logic, as I explained to Yugo. An assertion that cannot > be tested or falsified cannot be debated. I cannot dispute it. Or agree > with it, for that matter. It is meaningless. > This sounds like the tactic of a loser. The

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > Other than Talbot Chubb every researcher I have discussed this with > believes most of the claims. > Not many on record though. It will be interesting if the ecat comes to nothing, to see how they will rationalize their beliefs in the cla

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Alan J Fletcher wrote: > > I need to add phase-change salts (and possibly even ceramic bricks) to my > fakes paper. Can you give me / point me to a likely candidate? > > You might also consider reversible metal-hydride reactions.

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: > > Rossi's tests and explanations are full of holes and self contradictions, > impossibilities. It is Rossi's tests and explanations that matter. All > the blather from the peanut gallery is irrelevant, except possibly to alert > the few g

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > The power between 150 and 250 shown in the cooling loop is more or less > stable, meaning the thing has reached the terminal temperature. It has > achieved a balance between input and output. > It's stable because it's measuring the temperat

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Oh come now. I have dealt with fraud by pointing that Yugo's claims of > stage magic is not falsifiable. > I don't know who you think is convinced by that. Of course it's falsifiable. Just run the experiment long enough without input to e

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > The problem with Jed's point is that it's vulnerable to a reductio ad > absurdum. Specifically, it leads to a rather obvious logical conclusion, > which goes something like this: "If you can't think of a specific way this > scientist's work could have jumped the tr

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On 11-12-15 03:52 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Jed Rothwell > wrote: I am talking about YOUR STATEMENT, taken in isolation, strictly from a logical point of view. I am NOT TALKING ABOUT what Rossi can or cannot do. Apart

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I am talking about YOUR STATEMENT, taken in isolation, strictly from a > logical point of view. I am NOT TALKING ABOUT what Rossi can or cannot do. > Apart from everything else, why on earth would you want to do that? This is a practical

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Mary Yugo wrote: > It is a problem of logic, as I explained to Yugo. An assertion that cannot >> be tested or falsified cannot be debated. I cannot dispute it. Or agree >> with it, for that matter. It is meaningless. >> > > You keep saying that but other people and I keep pointing out to you tha

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

At 11:08 AM 12/15/2011, Alan J Fletcher wrote: I need to add phase-change salts (and possibly even ceramic bricks) to my fakes paper. Can you give me / point me to a likely candidate? http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~meam502/project/reviewexample2.pdf    (2007) Very few with a melting-point above 100C

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > It is a problem of logic, as I explained to Yugo. An assertion that cannot > be tested or falsified cannot be debated. I cannot dispute it. Or agree > with it, for that matter. It is meaningless. > You keep saying that but other people and

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

I have bowed out of this discussion, but let me clarify this point: Horace Heffner wrote: > Oh come now. I have dealt with fraud by pointing that Yugo's claims of > stage magic is not falsifiable. > > > Uhhh how does that differ from just ignoring it? > It is a problem of logic, as I exp

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Mary Yugo wrote: > So these people support your views about the impossibility of storing > enough heat during the warmup period in the large "Ottoman" E-cat of > October 6 to account for the results? > It would be more correct to say I support their views, or we arrived at the same conclusion.

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Dec 15, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Horace Heffner wrote: Your choice of my paper as an example is diversionary because (1) it only deals with one test . . . I have dealt with the other tests, separately, as have others. Some of them are also definitive. The last one was no

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mary Yugo wrote: > >> >> Does he know who these knowledgeable people are? Do we? >> > > Cold fusion researchers who know a lot about calorimetry. The usual > suspects. > > Horace is well acquainted with them, and generally held in high rega

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Mary Yugo wrote: > > Does he know who these knowledgeable people are? Do we? > Cold fusion researchers who know a lot about calorimetry. The usual suspects. Horace is well acquainted with them, and generally held in high regard, I believe. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > As for the rest of your comments . . . I am not the only one who disagrees > with you. So do all of the knowledgeable people I asked to review your > paper. I suggest you ask one of them for a critique. > Does he know who these knowledgeab

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Horace Heffner wrote: > 3. The data shows that the reactor cools in ~40 min. when the power is > cut. That is the actual, measured limit of stored heat with this system, at > these temperatures and inputs. > > > That is merely a measure of the stored heat and thermal conductivity at > the end of

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

At 10:45 AM 12/15/2011, Horace Heffner wrote: Just to be clear, no one is talking about heating the outside box metal envelope. My focus is entirely the inside box, the 30 cm x 30 cm x 30 cm inside box, the insides of which no one has seen. It is easy to place a thermal mass inside this vo

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Dec 15, 2011, at 6:21 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Robert Leguillon wrote: You should read the report you cite again. He doesn't ignore that the reactor remained at boiling temperatures for four hours. He takes it head-on. Go straight to pages 8 and 9. I saw that. That is an attempt to

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

>  Stored heat can only emerge. It cannot stay hot. It has cool monotonically, >according to Newton's law: You're burning the last point I held for Rossi (which was that I wondered whether scientists could be fooled so easily - apparently they can). Newton's law would not be violated, of course

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Horace Heffner wrote: Your choice of my paper as an example is diversionary because (1) it only > deals with one test . . . I have dealt with the other tests, separately, as have others. Some of them are also definitive. The last one was not! > and (2) it assumes a configuration with no frau

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Dec 15, 2011, at 5:31 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Horace Heffner wrote: The other tests cannot be faked as far as I know. No skeptic has come up with a plausible method. Jed, your memory must be even worse than mine. I mean it. Take your analysis here: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffne

RE: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

> The fact that it remained hot is all the proof you need. I don't get it. If there was no nuclear reaction and all of the energy came from thermal storage, then in deed the device will stay "hot" for a long time. However if all the heat came from a nuclear reaction, I'd expect it to cool down

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

> You cannot heat the iron around the cell or in the call walls  up to 543°C with electric heaters inside the cell. They would have to reach much higher temperatures than any electric heater is capable of. It wouldn't have to be uniformly heated to 543 C and couldn't uniformly remain at that te

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > 1. Stored energy can only cause the temperature to decline monotonically, > very rapidly at first (Newton's law of cooling). Yet this heat increased > during the event. > Not true. If the inside is hotter than the outside, the outside can

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Robert Leguillon wrote: > You should read the report you cite again. He doesn't ignore that the > reactor remained at boiling temperatures for four hours. He takes it > head-on. Go straight to pages 8 and 9. > I saw that. That is an attempt to explain the Tout thermocouple. It cannot explain

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > You ignore the central fact about this test which is that the reactor > remained at boiling temperatures for four hours with no input power. > Big deal. It weighs 100 kg. Ten kg is enough to stay at boiling for 40 hours, without any nuclea

RE: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Jed, You should read the report you cite again. He doesn't ignore that the reactor remained at boiling temperatures for four hours. He takes it head-on. Go straight to pages 8 and 9. Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:31:17 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz From: jed

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Horace Heffner wrote: > The other tests cannot be faked as far as I know. No skeptic has come up > with a plausible method. > > > > Jed, your memory must be even worse than mine. > I mean it. Take your analysis here: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf You ignore the c

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > The other tests cannot be faked as far as I know. No skeptic has come up > with a plausible method. After all this time, I do not think any skeptic > will come up with anything. At least, not with anything that can be tested > or falsified.

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: > http://www.heise.de/tp/**artikel/35/35803/1.html > > English translation > > http://translate.google.com/**translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&** > prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=**2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Patrick Ellul wrote: > Hi Mary, > > Do you intend to ever reveal your true identity? If Rossi is proved right? > Or proved wrong? > My privacy fetish way antedates the Rossi story and has nothing to do with it. I'd tell you more but it's probably not of any inte

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Hi Mary, Do you intend to ever reveal your true identity? If Rossi is proved right? Or proved wrong? Regards, Patrick On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: > >> The other tests cannot be faked as far as I know. No skept

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: > The other tests cannot be faked as far as I know. No skeptic has come up > with a plausible method. > > The usual history of scammers is that they eventually have to do more demonstrations and then they get caught or become obvious. That's

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

On Dec 14, 2011, at 2:50 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Robert Leguillon wrote: You said: No, he is a terrible psychologist.>>He does not know how to fool anyone. < That's what I meant by: " The descriptions of Rossi's ability to fool scientists is in stark contrast to Mr. Rothwell's contenti

RE: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

ex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz Robert Leguillon wrote: You said: No, he is a terrible psychologist.>>He does not know how to fool anyone. < That's what I meant by: " The

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Robert Leguillon wrote: You said: No, he is a terrible psychologist.>>He does not know how to fool anyone. < That's what I meant by: " The descriptions of Rossi's ability to fool scientists is in stark contrast to Mr. Rothwell's contention that "Rossi couldn't fool anyone." I stand by tha

RE: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

:10:20 -0500 > From: jedrothw...@gmail.com > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz > > Robert Leguillon wrote: > > > I feel even more uneasy about PetrolDragon after seeing this video, > > again. The descriptions of Rossi's abil

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Robert Leguillon wrote: I feel even more uneasy about PetrolDragon after seeing this video, again. The descriptions of Rossi's ability to fool scientists is in stark contrast to Mr. Rothwell's contention that "Rossi couldn't fool anyone." This article quotes me saying there is no independen

RE: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

this video, again. The descriptions of Rossi's ability to fool scientists is in stark contrast to Mr. Rothwell's contention that "Rossi couldn't fool anyone." > From: hheff...@mtaonline.net > Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz > Date: Wed, 14

RE: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Peter G. asked Levi about this device, at the time. Levi indicated that it was the radiation (positron) detector, IIRC. -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner Leitz references the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9I_CJti-RU&feature=player_embedded which is in regards to 14 J

Re: [Vo]:E-cat article by Haiko Leitz

Leitz references the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9I_CJti-RU&feature=player_embedded which is in regards to 14 Jan 2011. Note oscilloscope at time 00:32! Measuring frequency generator output? Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ <>