Jed, do you have a system diagram for the 1 year test unit? If I were Rossi, and I knew that some of the units would have to be taken off line, I would design in bypass valves.
Do you have evidence that the water circulation pump(s) was ever shut off? Even if the reactors themselves were shut down, the water flow could remain constant. Looking at the flow gauge spec, there is some discrepancy in the specification. It has 6 digit mechanical readout, claims a range of 1E6 m^3, but also claims an indication of down to 0.5 liter. It has a pulse output option, and I suspect with that option, it will detect the 0.5 liter passage; however, just reading the dial, it will be in m^3 or 1000 liters, ~1000kg. So, if the flow rate were constant due to the pump in continuous operation, then the daily flow could be easily constant to within the incremental reading of 1000kg. However, what one would expect to see in that case of constant flow is the water output temperature to be reduced during reactor shutdown or bypass. Do you have that corresponding temperature data? On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm not convinced the meter readings were totally faked, or even >> necessarily faked at all. >> > > Then explain how they could be exactly 36,000 per day for weeks. As I > pointed out, the flow rate would have to be exactly the same to 1 second > per day for this to happen. > > This is simply *not possible*. > > If Penon had said "these are approximate values" in response to Exhibit 5, > that would be reasonable. Sloppy, but reasonable. No response at all is > tantamount to admitting it is fake data. > > - Jed > >
