what you cannot deny is tha even if your conspiracy theory of rossi injecting DC in the plugs, and not toasting the equipment pluggen inside, and trobbling the instruments...
even if it is possible, all you propose could be easily detected by simple measure s that an electric technician can do with a home multimeter... opening the cables, adding an intermediate switch box... I agree that the scientists seems, from the few data we have (maybe they tested it and did not write it already, or maybe like on other subjects it is written, but missed)not to have tested those hypothesis... but the fact is that THEY COULD and Rossi could not have controlled that. if rossi was a fraudster he would have constrained the usage of multimeters, of his own cables... I'm sorry, but sometime it is more efficient to use the huma facto reasoning, that take a conspiracy theory position... the bad point is that opposition to LENR is extremely vilent, dishones, and desperate, and no reasoning is possible . Forgettin those detail, let room for irrationality and manipulation of the ignorant... anyway ther is NO HOPE to convince physicists with evidences NO HOPE. as thomas kuhn explain, they CANNOT SEE THE RABBIT ! They have been taine to see the duck, and the rabbit is not allowed in their brain. 2013/5/26 Andrew <[email protected]> > ** > The bottom line is that currently there is no way to deny the thesis that > *all the output power derives from the input power*. The due diligence > exercised by all these august testers was quite frankly of a > disappointingly low standard, because they failed to obtain a resolution to > this question. What is worse, they appear not to have been aware of it, > since it finds no mention in the report. Elephant in the room syndrome, > quite likely. > > Andrew > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Rich Murray <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] ; Rich Murray <[email protected]> ; Joshua > Cude<[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, May 25, 2013 9:54 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The inanity of the hidden input power hypothesis > > Thanks, Duncan -- > > I'd certainly be excited, as would be Joshua Cude, if irrefutable > evidence, no faith in anyone needed, arises to launch a scientific > explosion of work on cold fusion. > > My part-time contribution since December 1996 has been to give un-expert > detailed critiques of simple facets of cold fusion claims. I am totally > willing to be convinced. I'm playing the critical role, because then the > enthusiasts have to succeed at the public evidence game, which is much of > what drives overall scientific progress. > > So, the apparent excess heat in this E-Cat HT is several times the > apparent electrical input, at up to 960 deg C in a device the size of a > bowling pin. > > So, one of the first candidates for a fake would be at least one well > hidden wire, which, if it uses ten time higher voltage, can have a very > small diameter conducting gold core -- or it could even be a tube of > elastic conducting plastic of much larger size, hidden within a larger > plastic water tube -- somewhere in the world by now, this stuff may exist > -- or, high voltage conducing wires that are hidden within the insulation > of what appears to be conventional power wires -- Jed, is this inane? -- no > way to dodge this ball... > > [PDF] > Conducting Polymers and the Evolving Electronics ... - NEPP - NASA > nepp.nasa.gov/docuploads/4D1C9F67-F567-4E16.../SyedRevision2.pdf > The simplest of these polymers is polyacetelene. The mechanical > flexibility and tunable optical properties of some conducting polymers make > them attractive ... > > So, this is proof that subtle, unexpected ways of providing extra electric > power may be developed by a highly motivated.... dare I say?... inventor. > > So, if what Rossi is actually doing is hiding a thin high temperature > tungsten or conducting ceramic straight wire in the center of his device, > then the first step is to to find out whether he has or will allow this to > be publicly vetted with video records. > > Joshua Cude raised the question of whether the many evenly spaced > horizontal lines on the outside of the glowing case were from the heater > resistor wires looking hotter, or were from the resistor wire shadows from > an even brighter central source inside the cylinder of heater resistor > wires -- has this been ascertained? > > within the community of service, Rich > > > > On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Duncan Cumming > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> 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 >>> >>> >> >
