NO, NO, NO.
The cable I'm referring to, which I've described three times now, os the other
one - the one between the control box and the device.
Good Grief.
----- Original Message -----
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 1:36 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ethics of the E-Cat investigation put into question
I think there is some confusion on the issue of cables, what cables, and
'bringing your own cables' and I want to make sure we are all on the same page.
correct any misunderstandings in the following so we all understand the
details and importance of each.
First, the cable Andrew is referring to is the one from the AC wall plug to
the control box. The REASON why Andrew and others are asking if Rossi would
allow the scientists to use their own AC power cable is because of the diagram
on this page which is immediately following the pie chart of "Natural Nickel
Composition":
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/2013/05/21/the-e-cat-is-back-and-people-are-still-falling-for-it/
The diagram is by Peter Thieberger, a particle physicist. It shows how some
'rewiring ' of a power cable can be done so that it will register NO current on
any meters monitoring the separate wires of the power cable. I do not know if
this scenario is one that the test team thought about, but if someone can
present them with the diagram and find out if their measurements can eliminate
this possibility, that'd be great. If they did not account for this scenario,
then we need to make sure they are aware of it so the next test can eliminate
this possibility of fraud.
Second, when someone (Rossi) said, ". they could bring their own cables.", I
got the impression that this was only referring to the cables which attach the
measurement instruments to the system (e.g., the cables from the Power Analyzer
to the AC power cable), NOT the AC power cable. So let's not get confused as
to 'what cables' are being referred to.
-Mark Iverson
From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 11:28 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ethics of the E-Cat investigation put into question
Andrew <andrew...@att.net> wrote:
The cable is what connects the control box to the device. It appears from
the report that they did not examine it for anomalies.
They did not examine it. That would reveal trade secrets, as noted in the
report.
So, are the researchers free to replace it with one of their own, or not?
Of course not. They do not even have the specs for it.
What happens in the cable and controller is irrelevant to the energy balance.
Despite the discussions here, there is no way what occurs in the controller
box or the cable can "steal" electricity without the meters detecting it. That
would violate the conservation of energy. When electric power is consumed,
either the amperage or the voltage must rise.
You might hide input power from some types of meter by changing the output
from the electric plug. However, there has been a great of nonsense about that
here, as well. You can't do that merely by raising voltage. When voltage
exceeds the meter's limits, the meter does not ignore that. It displays a
message such as "EEEE" or "OUT OF RANGE."
The March dummy calibration run, according to the report, involved placing
voltage probes across the device while the control box was switched on in
non-pulsed mode.
You are right. It says:
"Resistor coil power consumption was measured by placing the instrument in
single-phase directly on the coil input cables, and was found to be, on
average, about 810 W. From this one derives that the power consumption of the
control box was approximately =
110-120 W."
In this case they were using the coils as joule heaters in a conventional
step-by-step calibration.
So your statement that "At no point did they measure output from the
controller" contradicts that. Please clarify.
I got that wrong.
- Jed
