Again, FWIW, I hope to God this is a conclusive test.
 

As this argument is already raising eyebrows, let me go back to the original 
predictions that are raising a fuss: 
 
4) Power gains will be relatively small and will be reliant on calculations 
using a "no input" value during the supposed "self-sustaining" mode of 
operation to exist at all.  As a result, we will all be cursing the 
"self-sustaining" mode as an unnecessary invention that only muddies the 
results.  Many will say that the hours of "warm up time" should correlate to 
hours of "cool down" time, and that residual heat can explain away the 
maintained temperature.
5) Rossi and Jed will say that the test was conclusive (Sorry, Jed)

**Note: All that we NEED here for a conclusive test is:
1) Input power properly and completely measured, time-stamped, and flagged with 
any Rossi-enduced duty-cycle changes during operation.
2) Secondary circuit water flow with flowmeter measurements, continually 
recorded and time stamped
3) Secondary circuit water flow input temperature, continually recorded and 
time stamped
4) Secondary circuit water flow output temperature, continually recorded and 
time stamped
5) Sufficient operation time to rule out a conventional reaction
Extraneous data, and this "heat-after-death" stuff, will only serve to 
complicate what should be very straightforward calculations.

 
Jed,
 
You're absolutely right that residual heat would only result in tempearture 
loss and not temperature gain (which briefly appeared in the last demo).  But, 
a momentary increase in the "heat after death" recorded in the last test cannot 
reconcile all of the enormous problems I have with that test.
 
1) They were taking temperature INSIDE the eCat. - Unacceptable
2) They presumed where they were taking the temperature was at 1 ATM of 
pressure - Impossible
 
I know, you'll say, "Impossible? What do you mean impossible?"
My answer is that steam cannot be superheated to 130 degrees Celsius in the 
presence of 40% water at 1 ATM of pressure. Noone is able to reconcile this 
without higher pressures or exotic restrictions.                                
          

Reply via email to