Say Terry, Since you followed that forum for a number of years, and since we discussed at the time that the MAHG device could have been vastly improved had nickel, rather than tungsten, been sputtered on the anode wall (at least under the teachings of Mills' theory)... and given this was before we were generally aware of the paradigm-shifting value of "nano" anything ...
... yes, sputtering does produce a small percentage of porosity in the nano range (this is still part of the long 'setup' to the original question) ... so, what are the chances that Andrea was tuning into that forum, and what are the chances that what he did early on, basically, was to make his E-Cat in the configuration of an RF tube, like MAHG but with nano-nickel applied to the anode (as we begged Moller to do)... and that the so-called central heater element is now being identified as a cathode heater for the RF filament - and given that we now know that RF is being used ???? IOW - the E-Cat is NOT inconsistent with a MAHG tube, and we might have essentially suggested to AR all of the details that he needed to know. At the time - we wanted Moller (thru Naudin) to do this - to conform to an underlying theory which had exhibited promising but disputed results for a decade ... Whoa ... this is not out of the question, is it? I think Fran Roarty might have even suggested a version of this scenario some time ago, but the possibility did not register with me at the time, since we did NOT know about the RF input till recently, and since Naudin never did correct his errors. I am blown-away by this sudden realization ... Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
