David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: You might well be correct Jed. But, he had, I believe about 100 individual > test devices. Is it likely that every one failed? >
The data I have seen, which is described in Exhibit 5, is for the entire system. It is calorimetry applied to the outlet pipe for all reactors. I have no knowledge of whether calorimetry was also performed for individual units. The system as a whole did not produce measurable anomalous energy, so I guess that means individual units did not. > Also, is the granularity of the test able to confirm that zero excess heat > was generated? Some believe that he is achieving a COP of 1.2? or so which > might be undetected under this condition. > Rossi's own data is so vague, with such a gigantic error margins that I cannot rule out the possibility of a COP slightly above 1, but my estimate is that it is below 1. That is after I make some crude adjustments for what I consider nonsense, such as the pressure being 0.0 bar. Taken at face value the numbers do indicate 1 MW. I.H. reportedly has better data which shows no excess heat. I have not seen it. I can well imagine how they collected it. It would not be difficult to circumvent Rossi's instruments. If he actually did not generate any additional heat, I would be concerned > that this form of LENR is totally without merrit. If so, it is time to go > back into hibernation. > Other people have reported positive results with Ni powder, so I think it merits continued investigation. There is nothing in Rossi's techniques or experiments that anyone else can use. No useful information has been released. Even if it works, no one has any idea how to replicate it. Rossi failed to transfer any IP to experts at I.H. (assuming he has IP). So it is of no use to the rest of the field. - Jed
