Wolf - How can you say that DGT is "sure" - when they do not even have calorimetry set up on any reactor ? That does not inspire confidence that they are as far along as we had thought.
If they simply used the Thermacore formula of 1993, except for going to nano nickel - then they would show plenty of gain, but perhaps it is less than Rossi. Maybe they are "optimizing" and that explains the situation, but can they get there - without isotopic enrichment ? Moreover, the "20-1" which has been mentioned - could be "puffery" to the extent that yes, it happened, and yes it represents the best gain they have ever seen . but only over 60 seconds. That is technically not a lie. .when in fact the average gain could be in the range of Thermacore or lower - maybe COP = 3 or so. That would win a Nobel prize, but they have bigger fish to fry (so to speak). Yes, they do seem to be considerably more honest than Rossi or Mills, but it is always a sliding scale at the level of R&D when things change on a daily basis - and they desperately need outside money, so 'puffery' is to be expected. A staff of 40 - is way more than Mills' staff of a dozen or so, and RM has burned through $60 million or more. If DGT needs cash, then puffery helps, and the same goes for AR, so we cannot be too critical as long as they do let independent experts in to have a look, with few restrictions (which is more than Rossi or Mills has done). Give them a little time, but keep in mind that perhaps they are not as far along as we thought. From: Wolf Fischer Jones, if they don't know Rossi's catalyst - why do they allow independent parties to test the reactor? They seem to be pretty sure about what they are doing. Perhaps they are just trying to optimize the reaction? Wolf
