P.S., I almost burned down a research lab in Portland, ME as a co-op engineer in 1984 when the polymer shell we were spinning onto a roll cover caught fire and evacuated the building from thick black smoke.
So that qualifies me as an expert. On Monday, October 13, 2014, ChemE Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > Robert, > > I am not convinced the wires are "wound tightly around an inner core". I > think they may be imbedded within the alumina shell and work primarily thru > induction and not conduction. Alumina is a good insulator and may protect > them (somewhat) from the hi temp core. > > The alumina shell may have been originally cast around a pipe/tube that > was later removed. And don't ask me to prove that. > > Stewart > > On Monday, October 13, 2014, Robert Lynn <[email protected] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote: > >> It seems clear that the thermography is way off - because the built in >> inconel heater wires would fail at <1350°C. (The peak temp from >> thermography is 1412°C). And the wires would necessarily be much hotter >> than the external surface of the reactor - if they are wound tightly around >> an inner core with little or no conductive contact with outer shell then >> that outer shell will only be around 1000°C and there will have been little >> or no LENR output. >> >> Until or unless that can be explained satisfactorily the rest of the test >> results are nothing but castles in the air. >> >> On 14 October 2014 09:06, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Ø The previous message I quoted from you was definitely an accusation >>>> of fraud in the calorimetry: "No one would ever use an IR camera in this >>>> situation unless they have the intent to deceive." >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Of course I meant it - in the context that they received intense >>>> criticism for doing this in the previous report, and yet they went ahead >>>> and did it anyway without any additional concern for the accuracy – as was >>>> clearly the problem before. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Callous disregard for the truth is tantamount to intent. >>>> >>> >>> Oh, okay. Now you are back to saying the calorimetry was callous >>> disregard for the truth tantamount to fraud. I thought you agreed with >>> Brian Ahern and his expert friend. Okay, that was 6 hours ago and you have >>> flip-flopped again. >>> >>> >>> >>>> As for libel, I would love to enter “discovery” with this Levi and his >>>> group. Bring it on. >>>> >>> >>> I meant that libel here is bad form. A million people on the Internet >>> attack Rossi and Levi with unfounded BS. But we are not supposed to do that >>> here. Especially not when you have zero evidence he has done anything >>> wrong, and no reason to think he would do anything wrong -- other than your >>> own private scientific theory that his results are impossible. >>> >>> I have been hearing people say "this is impossible so it must be fraud" >>> since 1989. >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Ø By the way, as far as I know Rossi had no say in design of this >>>> experiment. The decision to "use an IR camera in the situation" was made by >>>> Levi et al. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> And do you know that Levi has received no financial remuneration or >>>> promise of future funding from this work ? It would be a huge surprise if >>>> he had not. >>>> >>> >>> Ah, so he is on the take. And when Levi destroys his own reputation by >>> putting in fake ash, or using an IR camera knowing it is the wrong choice, >>> this will help Rossi and Levi . . . how again? Never mind. I am sure you >>> have an elaborate conspiracy theory. We don't need the details. Anyway, in >>> 6 hours you will have a different theory. >>> >>> >>> >>>> In short - all you really know is that you want this grossly >>>> deficient paper to transform into rock-solid proof of LENR, whether it is >>>> compromised or not… >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This isotope analysis stinks, and if it goes down, so can the rest of >>>> it. >>>> >>> >>> Ah, so the calorimetry is fraud -- again -- because you are convinced >>> the mass spectrometry is. Or no, it isn't fraud, but the "rest of it" um . >>> . . "can go down." Because if Rossi committed fraud with fake ashes that >>> means we cannot trust the calorimetry performed by other people when Rossi >>> was absent. Because . . . because . . . we can't! We just can't. Rossi has >>> magical ESP and he can change IR camera readings in the dead of night from >>> another continent. >>> >>> - Jed >>> >>> >>
