Axil--
Regarding you concern about the Hot Cat EMF, Rossi in August noted the
following:
>>>>The external surface of the Hot-Cat is electrically insulated, for obvious
>>>>safety reasons.
Currents are out of the reaction but inside the Hot Cat.
If you touch any external part of the Hot Cat you do not feel any current nor
measure any electromagnetic emission.
Warm Regards
A.R. >>>>>>>>>
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Color Temperature
There are types of magnetic EMF that cannot be shielded. Furthermore, if
large amounts of electrons are being produced as a reaction byproduct, their
chaotic interaction with the directly connected sensors and connectors may not
be predictable over time.
There may be an agreement in place between Rossi and the testers to keep this
EMF based behavior of the Rossi reactor confidential to protect Industrial
Heat's intellectual property claims.
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Axil--
From my experience, I would doubt that is a major concern for these simple
thermocouples. It there were a 50,000 watt antenna near by you might get a
pick up which could be detected in the voltage output of the thermocouple.
However, the external leads of a T/C are generally in a metal sheath and
insulated from each other by a potting compound or other insulating material.
The sheath would tend to shield the leads from RF (RG?) radiation.
Axil, I think your concern is unfounded.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Color Temperature
Any directly connected sensor may be unreliable and erratic because of
the production of intense RG radiation especially in a reactor without RF
shielding.
The only way to get good temperature data is through remote sensing,
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
From: Jed Rothwell
The discussion of color and temperature only mask the glaring reality
that
an inexpensive way to be certain of thermal gain in the TP2 device is
flow
calorimetry.
I think flow calorimetry with this device at these temperatures would
be problematic. For one thing, you could not see the device, which might even
be dangerous. I think the present method is better, although it may not have
been done right. It should be confirmed with the internal thermocouples.
Well, catch-22 they used an internal thermocouple - and apparently took
data from a perfect location, which could “see” down the axis of the tube,
presumably the hottest place in the system, but chose not to release the data.
What excuse can they have - other than the thermocouple data does not
support the thermography (therefore the thermocouple failed)?
Ahern proposed a calorimeter which would not compromise the integrity
of the ceramic tube.
Jones
