Hi Jones, I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing and re-commissioning it. Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying their building.
The Griggs device was not tested in the MOAC calorimeter. I spoke with the engineers who built MOAC and who also tested the Griggs device. They measured the actual torque and RPM going into the cavitator (hence they measured the mechanical input power). I didn't ask how they measured the heat output. Their conclusion was no excess heat. That's about all I know about the experiment. <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 7:41 AM Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > Bob Higgins wrote: > > BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show > excess heat. The testing process was described to me. > > > Hey Bob - that null result does not surprise me but is it really > meaningful? > > Earthtech has a precision calorimeter which can accommodate small > cavitation devices but as Rothwell has stated in the past, the Griggs > machine is about 1000 times too large to be tested by them. He says that Ga > Tech did test the device and found net thermal gain but, sadly, those > results are not to be found on the WWW for unknown reasons ... so... it > looks like an open issue. > > I wish someone would do the definitive testing of the large machine and > have the courage to defend positive results if found. > > > >
