From: Jed Rothwell
* Okay, so in the Feb. 10 test, input was 80 W and output was not 16 kW or 130 kW but 320 W (4 times input) It is a mistake to conflate the two tests. Both have their own separate problems. This is not new to Jed, and there is no reason to repeat the details of the problems with the Feb 10 fiasco now, since the insurmountable looming problem for anything above a few kW will be coming out soon. Anyway I have less faith, not more, in the Feb 10 test, but both are physically impossible. But again 400 watts in and 1600 out is FANTASTIC, a Nobel quality finding ! so even the skeptics cannot rejoice. We simply need to put the discovery into the right framework. Myself or someone else will be presenting evidence this coming week (hopefully) from an expert in thermodynamics, if Krivit does not scoop the story - that the gain claimed is physically impossible, under any circumstances - even in a fission reactor; and the reason is mundane and overlooked: heat transfer. Of course, these calculations will of necessity be based on the presumed surface area of a stainless steel inner reactor, as Rossi assures us is there - and the flow rate of the liquid. Those who have fallen for the impossibly large claim will then be forced to invent some other kind of magical way to provide an order of magnitude more surface area than is possible, given the weight and internal pressurization. IOW the average of 16 kW is physically impossible ! The 130 kW claim borders on complete ignorance of thermodynamics. I understand that this data will be presented first to Levi for comment. Professional courtesy, one presumes. What was that joke about the lawyer in the shark tank. !?! Jones
