Jed Rothwell, "You have to specify a method that is not only undetectable but that allows far more electricity to be conducted than normal. This is an ordinary wire. It has to conduct enough electricity to heat up a reactor so much that it melts 3 mm steel and ceramic. That seems highly improbable to me."
If the supplied heat cannot readily dissipate by radiation, convection, or conduction, then a moderate fixed energy input can readily melt steel and ceramics. Note, ceramics are not good heat conductors. Using high voltage DC power input allows high energy input with low currents, and thus small wires, which can be well insulated by thin layers of plastics and ceramics -- this is simple technology. We have no data on how much steel and ceramic was melted, or the melting temperature of the ceramic -- maybe only a small region at a key location was melted -- the active Ni may have been as little as 0.3 grams. The hidden wire scenarios, being technically feasible, must be specifically refuted, if a breakthrough heat production anomaly must be proved. I noticed just now, in my earlier post today, I was confused -- it is the exponential rise and fall of temperature (power) that is a hallmark of ordinary resistors being heated by a constant current being turned on and off -- whereas the E-Cat curves rise and fall almost linearly, possibly indicating a concurrent extra production of anomalous power. I am keenly interested in this angle of the critical appreciation. within the fellowship of service, Rich On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>wrote: > Alan Fletcher wrote: > > That was me -- and only a couple of things were plugged into the same socket > -- the meter and a camera. The laptops were further over on a separate plug. > > > The same socket in the wall, or the very same plug in that socket? I > suppose one plug could be secretly wired and the all the others in the > building not. Rossi would have to worry that they might come in to the lab, > unplug it from where it is and plug it in somewhere else. I doubt they > would do that. > > And of course, since the whole building was wired for the power-input fake, > just that ONE socket for the controller would have been rigged, set up before > the test team arrived. (Certainly for the December test -- they said it was > already running.) > > > Perhaps you meant to say the whole building was not wired, just that one > plug in that one wall socket. > > People can go on playing these games of what if, maybe, suppose until the > cows come home. For example, you might ask why did it worked normally after > the second run, during the six hour calibration? Perhaps Rossi was present > when the test ended, and secretly went and turned off the extra > electricity. Suppose you hear from Essen that Rossi wasn't there when the > test ended. Oh, well, in that case he had a secret camera and he saw the > test was over so he turned off the electricity from a remote site. > > This sort of thing is a fantasy like one of these cheesy paperback > thrillers for sale in the drugstore. To believe you have to up a scenario > that becomes more and more improbable. You have to ignore many commonsense > reasons why this is not possible. Such as: > > Rossi would have to know exactly what kind of power meter they were > bringing so that he could devise a circuit to fool it. A circuit that would > work with one power meter would not work with another. I suppose you could > say that Levi is in cahoots with him. Even if Levi is, Rossi would have to > hope the others do not bring a different kind of meter in the next round of > tests. > > You have to specify a method that is not only undetectable but that allows > far more electricity to be conducted than normal. This is an ordinary wire. > It has to conduct enough electricity to heat up a reactor so much that it > melts 3 mm steel and ceramic. That seems highly improbable to me. If Rossi > is capable of doing things like that he is an extraordinary engineer and he > can make a great deal of money improving the electric power transmission > network. > > This hypothesis is baloney. It is only slightly less preposterous than the > infrared laser hypothesis. People who call themselves skeptics would never > believe a crackpot conspiracy theory that depended upon things like this > thing true, such as tons of thermite packed into the World Trade Center > buildings. > > - Jed > >
