Mark, I dimly recall Jed said a few days ago, Rossi and Levi would soon rewrite their report on the two demos -- I will alert Joshua Cude -- I'm struck that so many important factors are really unclear -- there are a lot of important claims in Focardi and Rossi, March 22, 2010 9-page "A new energy source from nuclear fusion", which gives data from 6 runs, using 3 different methods for measuring excess energy, from 2008.05.28 to 2009.10.22, with one up to 53 days long -- plus no data from the Italian factory 2009.06.25, the "DOE aided" series of tests 2009.11.19 in Bedford NH, and the DOD 2009.11.20 -- how much has the device changed in 2 years and 4 months? -- have all these large output energy measures really been badly bungled in a total of 11 tests, with "similar results" ? -- can we get some highly qualified physicists to summarize the claims into a coherent review, along with some evaluations, judgements, and proposals -- also, do we have any info at all about the "explosions" mentioned by Rossi? -- a risk for all who venture into their own experiments. Huh, it's got my head spinning...why?
Rich On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Mark Iverson <[email protected]> wrote: > This whole thread started by the critique by Joshua Cude posted by Rich > Murray... > > It would appear that Joshua (and Rich) have not read all of the comments and > reports on Rossi's > website, so they were UNinformed as to the purpose of the 'control box'. > > Rich, > would you please correct Joshua on this so he doesn't go spreading > MISinformation about the demo! > > -Mark > >
