Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:
> No meter or measurement can change that underlying situation, so the > discussion about accurate meters could be premature. > > From there on, everything is supposition. We can probably agree that if > anyone were to meter the power going into say a three pulse generator setup > - versus the effective power of the complex single waveform which is > generated and going into the cell, then the combined losses could be HUGE - > as high as 90%. > My first thought was to run the waveform output through a joule heater submerged in water, as a calibration. I suppose that might not produce the same profile as the waveform generator attached to the gadget. It is not a simple problem. If the waveform generator itself consumes a lot of power, that does make it difficult to account for input power. Perhaps the generator itself could be placed in an air-flow calorimeter, like Mizuno's. That is a large plastic box with reflective padded aluminum insulation around it, and air flowing through it. See: https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTexcessheat.pdf For that matter, put the waveform generator and the gadget in the box. - Jed
