I myself am somewhat doubtful about the power measurements, and would
like to consider the meter A / meter B issue.
There is nothing at all mysterious about this. Meter A is a current
clamp, incapable of detecting DC. Meter B is a current shunt or hall
effect clamp, capable of detecting DC. The way to bamboozle meter A is a
simple diode in series with the load, costing under a dollar. Hardly
rocket science. There is, of course, a simple way to uncover such a
fraud - just use an oscilloscope to measure the current waveform.
It is much cheaper and easier to procure meter A than meter B, and also
much easier to use. It is a pain to break the cables and insert current
shunts, plus some power is wasted in the shunts. Also, you need a
floating power supply and true differential amplifier to power the
amplifiers after the shunts. All of this is possible, but a lot more
difficult than a simple clamp ammeter. So Rossi would make a good guess
that meter A (not DC capable) would be used for the test.
Now for the argument that Rossi runs the risk that somebody will try a
type B meter (DC capable), or, for that matter, a simple oscilloscope.
He simply does not permit such things. He claims not to allow an
oscilloscope because it would reveal a "proprietary waveform". By
keeping tight control over the test conditions, he is able to ensure
that his questionable power measurements are not exposed. By not
allowing inspection of the heater controller, he keeps the diode (or
asymmetrical firing of the Triacs) from public view. Rossi behaves as if
a mundane heater control is super-secret technology - does nobody else
find this strange?
As to the hypothesis that only a fool would give money to an inventor
without independent testing, I can only agree.
Duncan
On 5/24/2013 6:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Several people have proposed that Rossi has secretly installed
equipment in the wall circuit to deliver more electricity than the
power meter shows. Common sense considerations show that this is so
unlikely we can dismiss it. People should do a reality check.
First, let us define the hypothesis, in general terms.
You say there is a method of arranging electricity with hidden DC or
something else that will fool a certain kind of power meter. Let us
call it meter Type A.
There must also be a meter of Type B that will detect this trick. You
do not assert that it impossible to detect this power with any
instrument on the market. That would be absurd. You are saying that
Levi et al. brought the wrong kind of meter.
Here are some problems with this hypothesis:
Rossi did not know what kind of meter they intended to bring. He might
have gone to a lot of trouble to fool Type A only to see them show up
with Type B. His scheme would fall apart.
Rossi does not know what kind of meter they will bring to the next
test. They might show up with Type B, putting an end to his scheme a
few weeks from now.
Sooner or later, someone is bound to try Type B. Or they will try
plugging it into another circuit. Despite all the blather to the
contrary, it is a fact that Rossi has allowed several completely
independent tests of his machines, in Italy and the U.S. He was not
present. He wasn't even on the same continent. They plugged the
machines into their own wall sockets.
There is not the slightest chance anyone will give him a large sum or
money without independent testing. I know some of the people who might
give him money, and who have given him money. They are not fools.
Perhaps you assert that Levi may have brought Type A because he is in
cahoots with Rossi. The same set of conditions apply. Sooner or later
someone will try power meter Type B and the scam will collapse
instantly. Levi knows that. If he knows how to conspire to select the
wrong kind of meter, he will also know the right kind, and he will
know there is no chance of keeping this under wraps indefinitely, and
no chance of cashing in on it. He knows that he will be caught sooner
or later.
This applies to all of the other far fetched notions about IR lasers
and so on.
I would also point out that despite all the noise from Krivit, neither
he nor anyone else has caught Rossi cheating so far. They have caught
him making stupid mistakes, with a plugged up reactor. Suppose Rossi
had allowed me to come with my instruments. Or suppose that I had gone
with Krivit and used Rossi's instruments. I would measured a few
things, sparged the water, and I would have said, "Andrea, this thing
is not working. It is plugged up." That is exactly what happened to
the people at NASA. It took them little time to figure this out. It
would not have taken me much longer. I have spent several months
making similar measurements. I may not know much, but I can tell when
X liters per minute are going in but only a fraction of X is coming
out, and I darn well would check for that. Anyone who has ever done
flow calorimetry would. The cooling water flows everywhere. It leaks.
Always.
Krivit got the idea that Rossi was cheating because neither Krivit nor
Rossi measured anything or made any effort to see what the machine was
doing. It is not an attempt fool someone when the method is so simple
that I or anyone else who bothers to look will find it within minutes.
- Jed
