Is this in reference to the test where Rossi drove the E-Cat to Sweden and the core casing was cracked? They glued it back together best they could, it came unglued halfway through, and they figured there was no reaction/excess heat as a result, but they checked the ash to be sure. If this is the event being referenced/cited, this is not a legitimate "test" by any stretch of the imagination (even admitted by Swedes in Mats' book), and any reference to the ash data is moot. Perhaps another event is being discussed however.
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Eric Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > > Actually – if you remember from TP1, the Swedes did test the powder with >> XRF. ... They did not report any UV signature. They should have if Mills >> reaction is involved as you seem to be suggesting. > > > Personally, I would not suggest that Mills's reaction is involved in this > instance, or in any other instance. I'm all but convinced against it. I > only refrain from saying it's nonsense out of an appreciation that I do not > have the background, training or understanding of the relevant physics to > say something like that. (The "you" above must be referring to Bob Cook.) > > The x-rays and UV/EUV I had in mind would have been emitted from the core > of the device while in operation. I assume there would have had to have > been an open section in the wall of the E-Cat along with a windowless > detector in order to detect something in the range of tens of eVs, as Bob > Higgins has been describing, or even soft x-rays. > > Rossi was not pleased- as the Swedes were not supposed to report this test. > > > About the XRF I assume. I'm curious where this detail is documented. I > do not recall Mats Lewans mentioning it, but I might have missed it. > > Eric > >
