It would induce currents/heat something like this

http://www.acrossinternational.com/90mm-ID-with-8mm-Copper-Tubing-Insulated-Vertical-Induction-Coil-IHVC908.htm

On Monday, October 13, 2014, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The testers has no access to anything inside the reactor or any access to
> its IP. The opinion of the testers  that these wires are Inconel could be
> wrong. The wires could well be tungsten or one of its alloys.
>
> There is a boatload of assumption being made about this test that is
> detrimental to analysis.
>
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Robert Lynn <
> robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com');>> 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 <jedrothw...@gmail.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jedrothw...@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','jone...@pacbell.net');>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to