-----Original Message----- From: Stephen A. Lawrence > If the "current" RMS value is off by a similar factor, then the measured input power is off by a factor 3.5^2 -- it's about 12 times too small.
Thanks for the excellent analysis. This seems about right. And also thanks for dredging up this important experiment for a relook, but with the benefit of a few years of hindsight. An important point remains - the data table on the Gifnet site does indicate *substantial OU* and in a usable range of many Watts. For instance, look at lines 20 and 24 on that Table about half way down this page: http://www.gifnet.org/MAHG/The%20Moller%27s%20Atomic%20Hydrogen%20Generator. htm Especially line 24, with a 570 watt gain, and net output over 1 kW thermal, and COP>2. That 570 watt gain blows anything ever achieved in LENR experiments out of the water in terms of robustness, AFAIK. Think about this: the gain above was with plain H2 and what is probably a suboptimum metal matrix. What would the gain be with the simple substitution of D2 for H2 ? ... or heck - do not stop there: what about prior codeposition of Pd-D2 on the tube wall? IOW - this is the kind of large scale near-commercial format, but in a prototype with heating value near the 1 kW level, needed for space heating. This is the kind of robust usable gain that LENR has begged for over twenty years, and not yet seen. But is it LENR? I would bet a dollar to a donut hole, that a test for transmutation of the sputtered W on the tube would find a number of transmutation products. Jones
