At 03:21 PM 6/22/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Jed Rothwell
<<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote:
Mark Iverson <<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote:
Many people have asserted that the two meters used in these studies
do not measure by mass, or that they cannot combine this measurement
with the temperature to measure enthalpy. They are saying the
manufacturers of these meters are wrong, and Galantini are wrong.
No. Only Galantini. The manufacturers make no claim about enthalpy in steam.
Correct here. Not in what follows.
This looks like ~2 kW, used to clean an automobile interior:
What is your point? That thing produces steam at several times the
rate of the ecat in the Krivit video.
The Krivit video does not show the steam production rate, that's the
problem. It shows what's left after the steam runs through three
meters of rubber hose. We know that steam will condense in this hose,
and some estimates have been made of how much. It's quite enough to
explain that weak showing. All this means is that the demo is a piece
of crap. It would only convince someone who is inclined to believe.
It is not in any way proof that the E-Cat is *not* producing excess
power. That conclusion would only come from someone who is inclined
to disbelieve.
My sense, from the weak steam coming out of the end, is that what
seems to be marginal at the end is an indication that more power is
being generated than the input electrical power, but I'd not want to
claim that this demo shows that, it's way too shaky.
The sad thing about this is that a convincing demo -- absent true and
serious fraud -- could be easily done. I've pointed out many times
that there is no way, with a demo controlled by the inventor or close
allies of the inventor, to rule out a sophisticated fraud. But the
demo Krivit video'd, that isn't a "sophisticated fraud," it's an
obviously deficient demo! If Rossi were interested in fooling people,
he could manage much better than this!
Look, Rossi, attacking Krivit, looks like a complete nut case. Jed
excuses this as an idiosyncracy of an inventor. Maybe. I'm skeptical.
I suspect that Rossi is smarter than that, that he knows how he looks
and is deliberately creating the impressions that he's creating. I
can think of a number of reasons for this, both psychological and
practical or economic.
And, of course, none of this helps us to actually know how much power
this kitten is producing. Kullander and Essen did see a more
convincing demo, and apparently did see (directly) the quality of the
steam, at least at one point. Unfortunately, their report doesn't
allow us to rule out that significant water may have been flowing out
the outlet tube, consider the possibility that their inspection of
this tube was controlled precisely how Rossi controlled it with
Krivit. Measuring steam quality with their meter, even if it actually
worked for that purpose, would not rule out this water flow problem.
I love it, in a way. The situation causes many observers to reveal
their biases, by how they respond. However, I'll caution myself that
Rothwell, for example, does claim to have private information that he
trusts, and private information can create an appearance of "bias."
Still, Jed's attachment to the "expert testimony" here is not a good
sign, I urge him to quickly climb down from that! The sooner the better!
It's fascinating to me that the Levi paper included detailed
information about the calibration of the fundamentally irrelevant
radiation measurements, and nothing, in fact, on the steam quality
measurements. The results of those measurements was not even
reported, it was merely *implied* that the issue was addressed.
And then everone is falling all over themselves over whether the
non-reported measurements were based on mass or volume! It would be
like arguing over the result of zero divided by zero. Hey! my result
checks correctly and perfectly, therefore your different result is wrong!
