On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:11 AM, Andrew <andrew...@att.net> wrote: > ** > The Abstract of the paper characterises this instrument as "a large > bandwidth three-phase power analyzer". I'm not seeing that. However, it > also says "The 116-hour experiment also included a calibration of the > experimental set-up without the active charge present in the *E-CatHT . *In > this case, no extra heat was generated beyond the expected heat from the > electric input." That implies that there's no problem with the input power > measurement, does it not? The only way out is for someone to flip a magic > switch between calibration and measurement runs, such that extra power was > input during the measurement run; power that was invisible to this meter > (HF or DC). That's too bizarre to contemplate. All it would take would be > for one of the Italians to casually walk around the back of the big blue > box and surreptitiously do that. Of course, it's not an accusation, Terry > :) - it's simply a possibility. > > p15 states: "the TRIAC power supply has been replaced by a control > circuit having three-phase power input and single-phase output, mounted > within a box, the contents of which were not available for inspection, > inasmuch as they are part of the industrial trade secret." I find it hard > to believe that simply viewing the contents of a box would be off limits. > Perhaps it contained 100 Kg of batteries, which is roughly sufficient to > produce 500 W for 116 hours. Look at the two huge blue boxes in Fig. 16. > Why would they be off-limits? You can guess the nature of a proprietary > waveform by looking into a box? This really stinks. > >
Two issues: 1) If batteries were inside the box, the box would get quite warm. 2) Did he use battery power to make the first test over heat in November? Harry
