Blaze, you should review the paper by these two guys in detail. You will see that they fail to understand how the device operates and the model that they used to simulate the behavior did a poor job of replicating the operation of the device. They admit this in at least two ways. First, they claim that the data from the original report must have been time shifted since it did not match their latest model. Second, they admit that much additional power was needed to make the temperatures agree to a reasonable extent. How much more evidence do you need to realize that what they are saying is incorrect?
I have constructed a simple model that incorporates positive feedback using heat control which agrees with what Rossi states as well as the report that was generated by the test team. There is no problem with respect to time adjustment or shape. Why do you suppose this is true? And, you really should get a clue from the lack of understanding that these two guys demonstrate about thermal control of a Rossi type device. They fail to understand why heat is needed for control, but my model makes it clear that heat of a PWM shape is necessary to keep it operating without thermal runaway if good COP (6) is to be obtained. The thermal control is going to be the most difficult aspect of a design of this type. Why not expect the paper written by these guys to be representative of the data collected during the experiment? Dave -----Original Message----- From: Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, Jun 28, 2013 2:44 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:arXiv:1306.6364 Comments on the report "Indications of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder" blaze spinnaker <[email protected]> wrote: "That is incorrect. They verified all facts. That was not hard, because this was a black box test with only two relevant sets of facts regarding power input, and heat output. They did not discuss anything else in this paper." Gotcha. You're no longer worth talking to. Thanks for the heads up. Well, okay, they also discussed the Ragone chart and the limits of chemical energy. Anyway, you are welcome. - Jed
