-----Original Message----- From: Craig Haynie This doesn't make any sense. If there was some kind of thrust being developed in the ecat, along the lines of the emdrive, then no one would ever know. If no one tries to measure it, they'll never see it, or suspect it. --------------- Heck, Craig - didn't you hear: it also cures baldness, stops that embarrassing itch and pays for itself in as little as two months. Your results may vary.
Seriously, from the blogs today, it looks like that the faithful are being prepared for "COP-shock." Not 12 any longer, not even 6, maybe not even 2. But we do have this: "more than 1.5" say AR. Actually COP=1.5 would be fantastic, if Rossi could fully document a run of 2000 hours, with 2 GWhrs of heat out and an average rock-solid COP of 1.5. Over 20 years ago, Thermacore ran electrolysis cells for an 8000 hour year with that same COP but only at the 50 watt level. Rossi will be vindicated even with low COP since there will be market in a few areas. I do not believe that this will happen, or else IH would already be onboard. They certainly realize COP= 1.5 amounts to a paradigm shift, even if the heat still cost 4 times more than natural gas. The big problem is looming - that even with reduced expectations - the data will not be there to fully validate the claim, and the customer will not be available to freely comment on the experience. Ron Kita wrote: > Greetings Vortex-L, > > I wonder if the term Ecat-Q is a mistake or something that I misssed: > http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/04/04/now-thrust-from-the-e-cat/ > > Per aspera...Ad astra, > Ron Kita, Chiralex, Doylestown PA
