Daniel, Of the ones I mentioned, none exhibited COP > 1. I will let MFMP speak to whether they think they might have gotten COP>1, but I would say that they have not convincingly. Some of my early experiments looked promising, but I must conclude them in error since I saw nothing when I improved my instrumentation and methods. Same for Brian Albiston. There is no convincing / repeatable demonstration to of COP > 1. With respect to Bob, this is really reaching and hoping. IH was supposedly given everything they needed to replicate, and they were unable to. The tests of Rossi's devices fall into the same category with other purported positive replications: No convincing evidence of excess heat or not repeatable / poor methodology / poor disclosure (e.g., Parkhomov, Songshen Jiang, me356). There has not been one high quality repeatable experiment demonstrating excess heat.
If you have been following replication efforts, MFMP and Brian Albiston have tried about every suggestion. I'll not try to convince you further. All the information is there for you to make up your own mind. On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 8:10 AM Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote: > That is not the same as testing Rossi's devices. But some of them did > yield COP>1, at least that's what I understand from Bob Higgins. And these > are not perfect replications. Check his new patent out to know what you > missed. > > > 2016-05-18 10:02 GMT-03:00 Jack Cole <jcol...@gmail.com>: > >> Yes, of course. I should have probably said at least a 100 instead of >> 100s, although 100s would probably be valid as people often don't publish >> negative results. >> > >
