I am pretty sure the decimal in the first number should be a comma. Rossi is mixing up numbering conventions.
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* David Roberson **** > > ** ** > > It looks as though he used the conversion factor of .0001 to convert the > square centimeters to square meters which is a valid calculation. I wonder > why he does not include the area of the end caps in his calculation? Do > you suppose he wants to be conservative on this one? [image: ;-)] **** > > ** ** > > The data is hard to interpret as usual for Rossi, but the numbers look > pretty good as a start.**** > > ** ** > > Dave**** > > What about the “*COP* of 3.268/278.4 = 11.7 (eleven point seven)”**** > > That is “according to Rossi”… or is this too a translation error, or in > need of a conversion factor ? **** > > Can Rossi really be this big of a fool ?**** > > Or is there a new revision (of the prior revision) that corrects all of > this silliness?**** > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jones Beene **** > > Amidst all the hoopla over Rossi's recent hot-cat claims, and the first**** > > retraction - and the notable lack calibration data, or lack of real data -**** > > did Rossi also make a devastating math error?**** > > ** ** > > Last night, in the comments - it looks like Ahern suggests that Rossi's > own**** > > calculations are off by four orders of magnitude. The Stephan-Boltzmann**** > > calculation involve multiplying by the surface are in meters squared It**** > > should be 0.0891 (m^2) not 891 (cm^2). Someone else then implies Rossi > made**** > > the correction, but he seems to make a similar error.**** > > ** ** > > http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/10/update-andrea-rossi-provides-corrected-por**** > > denone-hot-cat-report/**** > > ** ** > > I'm not so sure if there is a real error or not at this stage; since it is**** > > far from clear what Rossi is doing in these calculations: can anyone > defend**** > > Rossi's math and explain what he is doing in the "Energy Produced"**** > > calculation ?**** > > ** ** > > After all - if he is getting a COP of 11 at 1000 degrees, then it should**** > > only take a few weeks to "close the loop" by converting that heat to**** > > electricity. **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > -- Frank Acland Publisher, E-Cat World <http://www.e-catworld.com> Author, The Secret Power Beneath <https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/>
