Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
Do you think the eCat is real of fake. IMO, it's probably for real. (Depends on which demo. ;-) ) The eCat probably exhibits heat, sufficient quantities of heat to warrant commercialization. However the underlying theoretical process that generates the excess heat is obviously not well understood. Current recipes used to exploit the effect are tantamount to a witches brew of incantation and finger crossing. Some days it works better than on other days. A significant amount of engineering and theoretical analysis will be needed to in order to exploit the process to its maximum potential. Once the fundamental theory is better understood and the frighteningly potential of what the eCat represents is subsequently exploited, I suspect some on this planet may begin expressing grave doubts as to whether we as a species are responsible enough to control it. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
Do you now think the eCat is Real or Fake? Definetly a scientific scam
Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
I think this poll is indispensable. Exactly as poetry - it is shown in this quotation: * I know that poetry is indispensable, but to what, I cannot say. (Jean Cocteau)* What can such a pseudo-statisitical democratic study solve or change? Will everybody, incluiding reality be converted to the opinion of the majority? I doubt it. BTW I think the E-cat gives some excess heat but for technological maturity and commercial use many other virtues are necessary. Use http://www.timeanddate.com/date/duration.html to calculate days to the Test (Oct 31, the last week of October has only a single day) 87 days left from today. Peter On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: Do you now think the eCat is Real or Fake? Definetly a scientific scam -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I know that poetry is indispensable, but to what, I cannot say. (Jean Cocteau) Ah, Jean Cocteau, I remember him from my studies of the Priory of Sion. :-) T
Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
I remember him first of all for the script of the movie L'Eternel retour (Jean Marais, Medeleine Sologne) a story similar to Tristan and Isolde- one of the first I have seen Peter On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I know that poetry is indispensable, but to what, I cannot say. (Jean Cocteau) Ah, Jean Cocteau, I remember him from my studies of the Priory of Sion. :-) T -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
At 07:27 AM 8/5/2011, Mattia Rizzi wrote: Do you now think the eCat is Real or Fake? Definetly a scientific scam WHOA This isn't the actual poll . coming up REAL SOON !!!
[Vo]:Time for a new poll?
I previously asked whether steam is a problem : http://www.zoomerang.com/Shared/SharedResultsPasswordPage.aspx?ID=L26QG6QVBZQL http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg49076.html I'm thinking of setting up a new poll. a) Old question, again : Is the eCat steam quality a problem? Definitely a problem 33 41% Probably a problem 7 9% Don't know/ don't care 7 9% Probably not a problem 24 30% Definitely not a problem 10 12% b) New question : Do you now think the eCat is Real or Fake? Definitely Fake Probably Fake Don't Know/Don't Care Probably Real Definitely Real Any other questions? (I don't want to make it too complicated). I'll either set up BOTH a vortex and non-vortex version, OR I'll set up separate questions.
Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
Alan, What about something like Do e-cat's people know how to make correct experiments ? mic Il giorno 04/ago/2011 21:15, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com ha scritto:
Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
Michele Comitini wrote: What about something like Do e-cat's people know how to make correct experiments ? My answer: Yes, they know how to do correct experiments, but they do not know how to write papers in English describing these experiments. Or if they know how to write such papers, they have not taken the trouble. This is an important experiment, so they should take the time. I have no problem with the procedures or choice of instruments. Only the presentation is substandard. If I had been there during the 18-hour test, observing the procedures they did, I would have: 1. Collected data every 5 minutes manually into a lab notebook: flow rate, flow meter odometer reading, inlet, outlet temperature, and power meter instantaneous and total kWh. 2. I would have done some manual checks with my own instruments to confirm their instruments, such as collecting the flow for 20 seconds in bucket and confirming that it is weighs about 20 kg. 3. From that I would have published a paper that sensible people would find convincing. The extreme skeptics would not believe it. People who imagine that conventional flow calorimetry might be wrong by a factor of 1,000 for no apparent reason would not believe it. But any HVAC engineer would know it is correct. They could have done this, even without a computer or video cameras, using the laboratory techniques I learned in grade school in the 1960s. I mean techniques such as keeping a lab notebook and writing down the date, time and instrument values, and then setting a kitchen timer to remind yourself to write them down again in 5 minutes (or 10 minutes after a while). This is not rocket science. I am sure this is how Levi was trained to do experiments. Everyone his age and mine, who grew up and went to college before we had computers, learned to do it this way. If they have a lab notebook, I hope I can persuade them to publish more data from it. They deserve to be criticized for holding back this kind of data. It is unprofessional. An inspector doing a boiler test is justified in writing down only one value. It does not even need to be a computed average or a thermocouple min/max reading. It can be what the thermometer showed most of the time. One value is enough to prove the point. But it is customary for a scientist to provide more data. They could have done this back then, and they darn well can do it now. What I outlined here is exactly what I proposed to do -- to augment confirm their instruments with conventional, old-fashioned manual techniques, circa 1970. I spelled it out in more detail than I have here. Rossi said he did not want me to do this. He invited Krivit instead, and he showed him a set of procedures that are interesting, educational, and that an astute observer might learn a lot from. But these procedures prove nothing, for reasons I spelled out when Rossi described them to me. The quick test that Rossi did for Krivit does have a legitimate use. If you already know the machine is real, and it works, that test is a convenient way to check how it is performing today, or with a new configuration. It is a way to do a quick experimental iteration. I expect this is why Rossi does it. It is similar to the way a programmer who is debugging a large program runs a quick utility to simulate a situation and force an intermediate program state, rather than running the whole thing from the beginning. The programmer sets up a fake situation, skipping over many steps, because the goal is to test a subset of the whole, and the programmer knows that the overall program exists and works, so there is no need to prove it. An observer from outside will not be convinced the overall program works, but the programmer is not trying to prove that. She is trying to tackle a specific problem that day in the shortest, most convenient fashion she can. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Time for a new poll?
My take on it: a) Old question, again : Is the eCat steam quality a problem? Definitely not a problem Kullander-Essen report, even if 100% liquid phase still 2x! b) New question : Do you now think the eCat is Real or Fake?Definitely Fake Probably Real
