Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: Jed, how much of Rossi's data do you have? > Days; weeks? >
Exhibit 5 says the data is the same for all days and weeks, so you only need a week or so to draw conclusions. Actually, one day is enough. The flow rate is exactly 36,000 kg, the pressure is 0.0 bar and the temperature is ~102°C every day, including days when the reactor was turned off. It is remarkably stable performance! > How would you convince us that you have them indeed? > I cannot think of any way to convince you. Evidently, you do not believe Exhibit 5 or me. You will have to ask Rossi for the data. > I confess that after what you have told about knowledgeable people being > those who know to cheat with an instrument I cannot belive anything you > say without proofs. > You now have proof that Defkalion and Rossi both cheated using flowmeters, using different methods. See the Gamberale report and Exhibit 5: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GamberaleLfinaltechn.pdf https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B6qvuFUMAp9HMEQyeHZlX256U1E You also have the guide to flowmeters which describes the problems these people deliberately induced to get the wrong answers. http://omega.com/prodinfo/flowmeters.html If you do not believe this proof there is nothing more I can give you. Your statement was structurally dishonest. > You mean Exhibit 5 is dishonest. Not me. You might consider the possibility that Rossi's data is dishonest, since it shows enormous anomalous heat when the reactor was turned off. - Jed
