I hate to say it, but I'm leaning to "inconclusive" for the report as a whole.
Controls: I don't have any problems with the experimental controls as a whole, and in particular Rossi's involvement, which was supervised at all times. There is no chance that secret power was fed to the system.
Equipment structure: we know nothing about the internal structure of the "tube". Where were the heaters? (In the first test they were held in place by a cylindrical ceramic frame. Here they are just said to be "inside" the cylinder). This is important, as it might help explain the heating-wire "shadows" in fig 12. It's apparently so simple that I doubt there are any major trade secrets. Also, it would have revealed if there was a "magician" compartment to hold "fake ash". (But "fake" ash wouldn't have surprised Rossi.)
Transmutation: the amount of material given for analysis was ridiculously small -- in the end, a single particle of Nickel "ash" was analyzed, which might not be representative of the fuel as a whole.
Input power: since the input to the controller was from a Rossi-inaccessible AC source, and was checked for DC, I don't think there are any fake paths. It would have been interesting to see a very wide-band oscilloscope trace on the heater feeds, just to confirm there's nothing above the 5Kz (or whatever, 100 harmonics) that the meters monitored. Similarly, there was no direct measurement of EM fields, but Rossi had no access to this. Nor, I think, would any "mole" on the team.
Output power: I'm inclined to agree with Jones Beene http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg98226.html http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg98253.html and Goat Man that the translucence of the Alumina cylinder is a major issue, and that the calculation of output power is questionable.
All we have to analyze are visible-spectrum photos 12a and 12b -- and we don't even know when they were taken. In the "cool" half, or the "hot" half of the test? There certainly appear to be "shadows" of the heating wires. I presume (but there are no explicit photos) that during the dummy control run and maybe during the "cool" half, that the wires did not show up as "glowing" through the alumina.
In the first report we knew the structure of the coils ... held by a cog-like ceramic holder, and that there was an outer steel cylinder which prevented all direct radiation from escaping. The "melting" photos of the first failed test showed light and dark bands which could be explained by the different thermal conductivity of the "cogs" and the gaps between them.
But here we just see "shadows" of spiral wires, which are darker than the background. The wires themselves are too narrow to show a shadow on the outer cylinder when lit by a diffuse source on their inside. But with no knowledge of the structure of the tube we are left with speculation only. If we postulate that the "active" area is essentially a smaller cylinder just inside the wires, shining through the outer semi-translucent alumina cylinder, then we might be able to calculate the output power. But, If Might ....
(lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- and the defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)
