I dispute your "COP 6" point. Dave Roberson has pointed out in a series of posts that /in a thermally controlled heat generating reaction/ the COP of 6 is about the best you can reliably aim for. Values above that are too near thermal runaway, and of course lower COP is less efficient.//A telling point alright, but not for /your/ case...
Looks like you are saying that if an experiment proves CF, then it proves fraud. Oh please, just go away. Ol' Bab On 5/21/2013 2:39 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > On May 21, 2013, at 5:09 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This is a gem. > Indeed. This paper proves that Mr. Krivit's criticism on bad calorimetry was > utterly false but Rossi has a method to import excess electricity into device > that does not register on measurements. I.e. he has hidden wires. > > Rossi just keeps getting COP 6 with all his devices. I think that this is the > most telling fact. In earlier demonstrations having steam there was a good > distraction, but this demo tells directly that it is about falsified > electricity readings. > > I think that this is the reason, why science does not approve black box > demonstrations. They are too easy to counterfeit! It is just required one > David Copperfield for designing the good illusion. > > ―Jouni > >
