Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

> >From: Jed Rothwell >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Sent: Sun, February 27, 2011 9:45:55 PM >Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux > > >Harry Veeder wrote: > > >> evidence is not relevant in this case; only if they can show that >>> fixed-

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

harry wrote: >>If the premises of the other side not understood or recognised then it may >>seem > >>illogical. Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:  > >Premises?  No, just simple definitions. > >They're using well accepted and understood terms, and the definitions of >those well understood terms simply

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Horace Heffner wrote: > What impact did Brian Ahern make on ICCF-16? There was no paper of his > presented, at least not in the abstracts. Was it talk regarding his > Pd-Ni-Zr oxide composite “PNZ2B” used by Kitamura1 et al? Mainly that. That was presented by Kitamura. Plus the fact that he

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

On Feb 25, 2011, at 1:11 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Lots of people feel that way, and are doing similar experiments. As far as I know, Brian Ahern is leading the pack. Ask him for some of his material. He was one of these people who made a large impact at ICCF-16 without being there. Wha

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

On 02/27/2011 08:55 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > Jed and Stephen, > > > > > - Original Message > >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Sent: Sat, February 26, 2011 1:08:21 PM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypoth

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Harry Veeder wrote: > > evidence is not relevant in this case; only if they can show that > > fixed-geometry systems with an electrostatic charge spontaneously warm > > up can they claim that something is "doing work". > > That is like saying it can't be cold fusion because > there are no gamma

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Jed and Stephen, - Original Message > From: Stephen A. Lawrence > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Sat, February 26, 2011 1:08:21 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux > > > > On 02/25/2011 09:19 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > Jed Rothwe

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > I need to point out > that a solenoid with movable core which is holding a lever in position > -- say, for instance, holding the little man's arms in position (the > little man is a robot in that case) is also *NOT* "doing work" despite > the fact that it's getting h

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

On 02/25/2011 09:19 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> The worst example was the Correa claim that a stationary gold leaf >> electroscope >> does work. No, it doesn't! It isn't a little guy standing with his arms out. >> >> >> > He claimed to have electrical evidence th

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > With a single report, lots of opportunities exist for error or, yes, fraud. > With many reports, and especially with independent confirmations . . . This is not a single report. People have done flow calorimetry millions of times. Seriously, Prof. Levi did not inv

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > That's correct. It would take a magician familiar with physics, perhaps. > Certainly that would be the case here. Ordinarily, magicians can fool > physicists about as well as they can fool anyone else. No doubt they can, but they cannot fool thermocouples or comput

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

At 09:07 PM 2/25/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Ah! That's one I hadn't thought of. This is my point, there may be a million things you haven't thought of. Nope. That does not work. A good experiment cannot have a mill

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

At 08:45 PM 2/25/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Why does this sound so familiar? "Until someone can propose a plausible mechanism that will explain cold fusion, I will consider it impossible." Wrong comparison. The co

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

I wrote: > In an experiment with only 4 main parameters -- input power, inlet > temperature, outlet temperature and flow rate -- the number of potential > significant errors will BE small, and so will the number of ways > deliberately fake data can be surreptitiously introduced. > This is a bit

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Harry Veeder wrote: He claimed to have electrical evidence that a stationary gold leaf > electroscope > does work. > For the audience: this means "it performs work." (The English "it does work" is confusing, as it could mean "it does what it is supposed to do.") > I assume your rejection is b

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Jed Rothwell wrote: >The worst example was the Correa claim that a stationary gold leaf >electroscope >does work. No, it doesn't! It isn't a little guy standing with his arms out. > > He claimed to have electrical evidence that a stationary gold leaf electroscope does work. I assume your reje

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > Ah! That's one I hadn't thought of. >> > > This is my point, there may be a million things you haven't thought of. Nope. That does not work. A good experiment cannot have a million possible problems. If we had to think up a million ways that an experiment might be

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Why does this sound so familiar? > > "Until someone can propose a plausible mechanism that will explain cold > fusion, I will consider it impossible." > Wrong comparison. The comparison you should make is: "Until someone can prove otherwise, I am sure that cold fusion

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

At 05:37 PM 2/25/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Dennis wrote: Yes, it would be hard to fake much over 1kW... wall plugs being what they are, gauge of wires being what they are. (unless you used part of the plumbing as your current carrier). Ah! That's one I hadn't thought of. This is my point

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

At 06:20 PM 2/25/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Impossible. Until someone can propose a plausible a way to fake the two Rossi demos, I will consider that impossible. Without specifics, the claim that "it might be faked" cannot be tested or falsified. Why does this sound so familiar? "Until someone

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: There have been dramatic demonstrations, I've read about them, but I don't care to look them up. I'm simply going to assert that, given enough motivation, I could fake a demonstration like that reported. I'd have to have the motivation, and I certainly don't. I'm not

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Dennis wrote: Yes, it would be hard to fake much over 1kW... wall plugs being what they are, gauge of wires being what they are. (unless you used part of the plumbing as your current carrier). Ah! That's one I hadn't thought of. So it is becoming very interesting -if you believe any ste

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

At 04:07 PM 2/25/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: The assertion that "a determined con artist" can do this or that strikes me as inadequate. A con artist is not a magician capable of changing the laws of physics or magically influencing instruments. Uh, Jed, a con artist

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Lots of people feel that way, and are doing similar experiments. As far as I know, Brian Ahern is leading the pack. Ask him for some of his material. He was one of these people who made a large impact at ICCF-16 without being there. He told me he will never go to India ..> - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Dennis wrote: Jed, thanks for the compliment... I think It was a compliment. My point about that proposed experiment was that it was not a good means of convincing skeptical people. That many not matter. No experiment can accomplish every goal. The LED experiment would be fascinating an

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

-- From: "Jed Rothwell" ..Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux ...> Here is an example of an experiment that could be faked. Dennis Cravens proposed to use Pd-D powder to produce heat inside a thermoelectric devic

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: The assertion that "a determined con artist" can do this or that strikes me as inadequate. A con artist is not a magician capable of changing the laws of physics or magically influencing instruments. Uh, Jed, a con artist is indeed a magician, that is, someone skill

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

At 05:09 PM 2/24/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: The assertion that "a determined con artist" can do this or that strikes me as inadequate. A con artist is not a magician capable of changing the laws of physics or magically influencing instruments. Uh, Jed, a con artist is indeed a magician, that i

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Note that when the machine initially started up, it had ~80 W input, a liter per second flow, and the outlet temperature was 40°C. This continued for "a while." I take that to mean long enough for someone to put his hand on the outlet pipe to confirm that the tap water was coming out at body temper

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: I'm not understanding how one would need 130 KW to get, what was it, a 10 KW demo? It produced 130 kW for "a while." QUOTE: "Initially, the temperature of the inflowing water was seven degrees Celsius and for a while the outlet temperature was 40 degrees Celsius. A

Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

At 10:34 AM 2/24/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Rich Murray <rmfor...@gmail.com> wrote: During a long meditation today, I wondered about the floor under Rossi's demo -- is there a space under it that could allow wires or thin metal tapes to carry 15 KW electric power from