Andrew <[email protected]> wrote:
> That is precisely why I (and Duncan Cumming) are calling for a test > whereby there is no power input for a decent amount of time. > My understanding is that the Hot Cat will blow up if you do that. It is not stable running in heat after death mode. > > How do you know that the power meter was not selected by Levi and given to > the group? > It might have been selected by Levi, but I assume he is honest, and not conspiring with Rossi. Actually, I assume he is sane. I am certain that if it is fake, someone will soon find out, and Levi's reputation will be destroyed. He knows that as well as I do. Obviously, I also assume that Rossi is honest -- about his experimental results, that is. I have not seen a shred of evidence that he has lied about his tests, ever. He has lied about other things and other people, including me. He has botched his tests and refused to admit it. > What kind of researcher would not put a scope on the cable? or would break > open the cable to check for trickery? > The cable is broken open. You cannot use a clip on ammeter without breaking out the cable. Usually you bring a pre-separated cable or breakout box supplied by the ammeter manufacturer, rather than taking an X-Acto knife to a regular cable. You can't measure voltage without exposing the cable either. Rossi is definitely not using an HTSC power cable or a gold cable. The breakout box would melt. > The testers did neither of these things, and that's perhaps because not > one of them was a competent EE, and/or trusted Rossi to not try and fool > them. > This is silly. No one has actually proposed a method of supplying enough "secret electricity" to melt a cell. It cannot be done. You need to put aside this nonsense. - Jed
