RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

bject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea... On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Mark Iverson wrote: > I hope you got some stock in Rossi's company, cuz the parr-teee is > gonna be at your house, and it ain't gonna be cheap! :-) You like Alaska in the winter? T

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Mark Iverson wrote: > I hope you got some stock in Rossi's company, cuz the parr-teee is gonna be > at your house, and it > ain't gonna be cheap! :-) You like Alaska in the winter? T

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > 2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Jouni Valkonen > > > wrote: > >> > >> 2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : > >> > Well it might be if the reactor were at the bottom of a tea pot, and > the > >> > output at the top of

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea... On Jun 25, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Mark Iverson wrote: > Still no denial Horace! > Now you're messin' with us... > :-) > I hope you got some stock in Rossi's company, cuz the parr-teee is > gonna be at your house, and it

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Jun 25, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Mark Iverson wrote: Still no denial Horace! Now you're messin' with us... :-) I hope you got some stock in Rossi's company, cuz the parr-teee is gonna be at your house, and it ain't gonna be cheap! :-) -Mark Good for yet another chuckle! 8^) When I read vort

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

t: Saturday, June 25, 2011 4:29 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea... On Jun 25, 2011, at 1:41 PM, Mark Iverson wrote: > Horace said: > "This is funny because there was an accusation that I worked for Rossi > made here at one time. A co

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Jun 25, 2011, at 4:44 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: 2011/6/25 Horace Heffner : A tea pot has no means to overflow. Water is not continually added. It is also not designed like a percolator, with large confined boiling compartment, and a narrow short chimney. It does not require much engin

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

2011/6/25 Horace Heffner : > A tea pot has no means to overflow. Water is not continually added.  It is > also not designed like a percolator, with large confined boiling > compartment, and a narrow short chimney. > It does not require much engineering to modify tea pot that it supports adding wat

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Jun 25, 2011, at 1:41 PM, Mark Iverson wrote: Horace said: "This is funny because there was an accusation that I worked for Rossi made here at one time. A conspiracy theory." Horace, that was me, and it was only in jest... :-) Are you? Because, come to think of it, I don't think you've

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Horace said: "This is funny because there was an accusation that I worked for Rossi made here at one time. A conspiracy theory." Horace, that was me, and it was only in jest... :-) Are you? Because, come to think of it, I don't think you've explicitly denied it!! Double :-) -Mark

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

aturday, June 25, 2011 12:51 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea... The discussion related to Galantini using the wrong instrument to measure steam quality in Rossi's experiment seems to be slowing down. But here are details on how a relative

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Jun 24, 2011, at 10:02 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: 2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : Well it might be if the reactor were at the bottom of a tea pot, and the output at the top of the pot. But the input and output to the reactor are both horizontal at the same level. here was your misunderstanding

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Jeff: Thanks for all the effort to get a better understanding of how the sensors work. I filled out a technical response request at two different sensor manufacturers to also get a better understanding. Here is one response from Vaisala.com re: the effects of liquid droplets... "If the water d

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

The discussion related to Galantini using the wrong instrument to measure steam quality in Rossi's experiment seems to be slowing down. But here are details on how a relative humidity sensor works (as others have also mentioned). It uses an extremely thin plastic (one manufacturer uses a one micr

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : > > > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Jouni Valkonen > wrote: >> >> 2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : >> > Well it might be if the reactor were at the bottom of a tea pot, and the >> > output at the top of the pot. But the input and output to the reactor >> > are >> > both horizonta

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 1:02 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > 2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : > > Well it might be if the reactor were at the bottom of a tea pot, and the > > output at the top of the pot. But the input and output to the reactor are > > both horizontal at the same level. > > here was your misun

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Jun 24, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jouni Valkonen wrote: It is important that tea pot does not overflow, because it messes up calculations, because steam is not dry anymore. Therefore E-Cat's inner volume has to be big enough to account power fluctuations because peak power can

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : > Well it might be if the reactor were at the bottom of a tea pot, and the > output at the top of the pot. But the input and output to the reactor are > both horizontal at the same level. here was your misunderstanding. This is not true, because water input is at the same l

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Jouni Valkonen wrote: > > >> It is important that tea pot does not overflow, because it messes up >> calculations, because steam is not dry anymore. Therefore E-Cat's >> inner volume has to be big enough to account power fluctuations >> beca

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > > > Well, that would explain the temperature regulation, but it's not exactly > > the same, because there is no pump pushing whatever is in the ecat, > > vaporized or not, out. In the case of the teapot, the exiting steam > leaves > > as it

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > element is always completely submerged. I.E. input flow is adjusted so >>> that it matches evaporation rate. >>> >> >> First of all, the flow rate is not adjusted in any of the demos after the >> experiment is started.

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: element is always completely submerged. I.E. input flow is adjusted so >> that it matches evaporation rate. >> > > First of all, the flow rate is not adjusted in any of the demos after the > experiment is started. > Correct. Only the anomalous heat output is adjusted. The on

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Jouni Valkonen wrote: > It is important that tea pot does not overflow, because it messes up > calculations, because steam is not dry anymore. Therefore E-Cat's > inner volume has to be big enough to account power fluctuations > because peak power can surge over 120 kW. On the other hand if all

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : > First of all, the flow rate is not adjusted in any of the demos after the > experiment is started. The only thing that is necessary to account for a > flat temperature is, as you say, that the flow rate is high enough so that > the entire heating element remains wet. > To

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > 2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Jed Rothwell > wrote: > >> > >> If you have a high temperature thermometer, please try this at home: > >> Boil some water in a teapot so that steam emerges from the spout. Turn >

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

2011/6/25 Joshua Cude : > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >> If you have a high temperature thermometer, please try this at home: >> Boil some water in a teapot so that steam emerges from the spout. Turn the >> flame down, so that only a little emerges. Measure the temperat

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > If you have a high temperature thermometer, please try this at home: > > Boil some water in a teapot so that steam emerges from the spout. Turn the > flame down, so that only a little emerges. Measure the temperature of the > steam. You will

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > 2011/6/24 Joshua Cude : > > > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Jouni Valkonen > > > wrote: > >> I do not know how many times you and abd have been told that the > >> measured boiling point of water is 99,7 °C. Therefore if there is mist >

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: It is not the temperature reading that convinces me it is at the boiling point, it is the fact that the temperature is so perfectly flat. If the steam were dry, its temperature would be free to increase, but it never does. If you have a high temperature thermometer, please

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

2011/6/24 Joshua Cude : > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Jouni Valkonen > wrote: >> I do not know how many times you and abd have been told that the >> measured boiling point of water is 99,7 °C. Therefore if there is mist >> mixed into dry steam, it will reduce the steam temperature below >>

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Jouni Valkonen wrote: I do not know how many times you and abd have been told that the measured boiling point of water is 99,7 °C. Yup. It is ~99°C here in Atlanta, GA, elevation ~300 m. Of course this is thermometer reading is trivial to fake e.g. putting carefully calibrated and electronic

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: > You have to trap most of the steam until all the heat gets > transfered. I don't know what that means. > And 1% by mass is a very think fog, it won't be dragged > out by the flow. > It's not given a choice. There is a pump forcing it ou

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote: > 2011/6/24 Joshua Cude : > > As soon as it starts boiling, things get very turbulent. Steam is 1700 > times > > the volume of water for the same mass, so it's gonna push things around. > > It's gonna push all the water ahead of it out, and co

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

2011/6/24 Joshua Cude : > As soon as it starts boiling, things get very turbulent. Steam is 1700 times > the volume of water for the same mass, so it's gonna push things around. > It's gonna push all the water ahead of it out, and convert the unboiled > water behind it to a fine mist. If 1% of the

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Isn't there a small transparent hose besides the one that pumps water inside?

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

You have to trap most of the steam until all the heat gets transfered. And 1% by mass is a very think fog, it won't be dragged out by the flow.

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: > If you don't want to hot bubbles outside he machine, you have to heat > almost all to steam. Using a teapot shaped boiler is a way to not let > that happen. Jed is right this time. > > Huh? You can't heat almost all to steam by will. There ha

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: > > Why? If it takes say 1 kW to raise the temperature of the flowing water > to > > 100C, and then you supply 1.5 kW (using only and electric heater), then > only > > part of the flowing water will get converted to steam, and you will have > t

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

> Why? If it takes say 1 kW to raise the temperature of the flowing water to > 100C, and then you supply 1.5 kW (using only and electric heater), then only > part of the flowing water will get converted to steam, and you will have to > have a mixture of liquid and gas coming out. What other possibi

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > ** > Joshua Cude wrote: > > If it was overflowing that would be obvious from the temperature. >> > > How? If part of the water was converted to steam, then the water/steam > mixture would be at 100C. > > > With this flow configuration, in

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

From: Joshua Cude >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 2:20:40 PM >Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea... >The vessel will boil away all of the water at these flow rates. > > > >To get water to boil, you only have to heat it to 10

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: If it was overflowing that would be obvious from the temperature. How? If part of the water was converted to steam, then the water/steam mixture would be at 100C. With this flow configuration, in my experience it would around ~95°C as soon as the feed water starts ov

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

If you don't want to hot bubbles outside he machine, you have to heat almost all to steam. Using a teapot shaped boiler is a way to not let that happen. Jed is right this time.

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > It is not necessary to do any tests to know that with a given input flow >> rate of water at room temperature, if the output fluid is at 100C, the >> corresponding power for 99% liquid (by mass) is about 7 times lower

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: It is not necessary to do any tests to know that with a given input flow rate of water at room temperature, if the output fluid is at 100C, the corresponding power for 99% liquid (by mass) is about 7 times lower than it is for 100% steam. This vessel is shaped like a teapo

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

He doesn't need to provide data for that. 1% of liquid mass would mean an intense bubbling foam outside the hose. Just for a comparison, a nebulizer with an output of 46L/min of oxygen takes several minutes to deplete a shallow reserver of a few grams of liquid, and the fog is very thick. http://w

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > The discussions here about how "wet steam" might produce a gigantic error > are nonsense. No one has demonstrated such an error with a system like this. > No one here has run a test demonstrating how to make steam with 6 times less > energy t

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Andrea Selva wrote: Nope. If you use fuzzy data as input and elastic math a power gain of 1 can easily rise to 6 or even more ... There is nothing fuzzy about the data. The method Rossi is using has been used successfully by physicists and engineers since the 1840s, millions of times. The dis

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Nope. If you use fuzzy data as input and elastic math a power gain of 1 can easily rise to 6 or even more ... 2011/6/24 Jed Rothwell > Andrea Selva wrote: > > Rossi could have shown the line voltage too in order to better support his >> claim of 750W. >> Very smart guy, isn't it ? >> > > You c

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

. right you are - MoB. > 230 Volt AC (single phase) is the average AC voltage and not the "peak". So 230 Volt AC means essentially 325 Volt AC peak. Kind regards, MoB

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Andrea Selva wrote: Rossi could have shown the line voltage too in order to better support his claim of 750W. Very smart guy, isn't it ? You can say the line voltage was 260 V. That would not affect the conclusion. This kind of nitpicking is a waste of time. Anyone can see that Rossi is m

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: Until replication of Miles' heat/helium claims makes it past replication, there is nothing to critique. Miles' heat/helium claims were published in peer reviewed journals in 1993 and 1994. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On 11-06-23 11:23 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com>> wrote: It's flowing water, not a kettle. So the input power can only heat it so much. In the chart of temperature, a sudden change in rate of

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Hi, On 24-6-2011 15:22, Jones Beene wrote: *From:*Andrea Selva wrote: Angela Kemmler wrote: The electrical input was 750W No, it was between 784 and 805 W (230x3.4 or 230x3.5). The tension is 230 V in Italy. This is called in Italy "eurotensione", google it. Sorry but this is still i

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

From: Andrea Selva wrote: Angela Kemmler wrote: The electrical input was 750W No, it was between 784 and 805 W (230x3.4 or 230x3.5). The tension is 230 V in Italy. This is called in Italy "eurotensione", google it. Sorry but this is still incorrect. You have not taken into accoun

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

2011/6/24 Man on Bridges > ** > Dear Angela et al, > > On 23-6-2011 22:30, Angela Kemmler wrote: > > The electrical input was 750W > > No, it was between 784 and 805 W (230x3.4 or 230x3.5). The tension is 230 V > in Italy. This is called in Italy "eurotensione", google it. I already posted > th

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Harry Veeder wrote: > > From: Joshua Cude wrote: >  >> What's not plausible is that at the moment it hits the bp, which >> requires 750 W, it immediately begins to vaporize all the water, which >> requires >>5 kW. A 7-fold increase in power requires a 7-fold increase in the >>temperature >

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

If there is a significant quantity of water droplets, they will fall until all what remains is the fluid stream in the hose is vapor. Considering a stream of 10m/s, 1.5g/s out of the hose, with, 5cm2 of area, the pressure inside above 1atm the chamber is P=F/A=(1.5*10(-3)*10)/5*10(-4)=(1.5*10(-2)*1

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

From: Joshua Cude >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 4:59:03 AM >Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea... > > > > > >On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:04 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: > >Joshua Cude wrote: >>> >>>O

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax > wrote: >> >> Joshua, you could try writing a paper with your critique of the >> heat/helium evidence and see if you could get it past peer review. > > > Until replication of Miles' h

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:45 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 06:04 PM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: > I think (?) you may have commented about the supposed lack of HAD in this > experiment. I'm not sure what HAD has to do with much, because the > experimental conditions of HAD are not necess

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > > Joshua, you could try writing a paper with your critique of the heat/helium > evidence and see if you could get it past peer review. Until replication of Miles' heat/helium claims makes it past replication, there is nothing to criti

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > At the flow rates and input power of most runs, the water cannot get any > hotter than 60 deg C. That's impossible. > *One* run. Not most of the runs. Only the E&K run. In both Lewan runs, the input power was enough to bring the water to w

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > >> If all of the claimed input water were converted to steam, that would >> represent 5 kW of power. At least 3 kW, and probably closer to 4 kW would >> escape that hose as steam enthalpy. It is clear that what escapes that hose >> is

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > > It's flowing water, not a kettle. So the input power can only heat it so >> much. >> > > Depends on the flow rate, eh? Look, from the output temperature readings, > water is being raised to the boiling point, it's highly likely that

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Jed wrote: "The test Krivit saw had unusually high input power." The first thing that came to mind when I read that is that it wasn't even a working reactor... Rossi really doesn't want to do any more of these time-wasting demos, and spending time setting one up, making sure it's working pro

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 06:04 PM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Let's see you find one substantive error in this paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHisothermala.pdf Cude, when he quoted Jed and responded to him, omitted this citation. However, in m

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > I have uploaded hundreds of papers proving that I am right. >> > > Oh, Geez, Jed, come off it. "I am right" is about as boring as is possible, > and it convinces nobody. > Those papers don't prove anything, they are evidence, and proof depends > heavily on interp

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 06:27 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: I have uploaded hundreds of papers proving that I am right. Oh, Geez, Jed, come off it. "I am right" is about as boring as is possible, and i

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Regarding: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHisothermala.pdf >From Jed >> Let's see you find one substantive error in this paper: >From Joshua > Why? The world already doesn't believe it. I don't believe it. > And finding other people's mistakes is a mug's game. I don't > believe perpetual

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 05:27 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: At 02:58 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: But still, you've identified a way the steam could be dry and still pinned to the boiling point. Un

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 05:09 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: My guess is that it would still reach boiling point, at roughly the time predicting by extrapolation of the rate of temperature rise, bec

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Man on Bridges wrote: > ** > > At least in electrical engineering and electronics "we" use the term > "voltage"; I've sofar never met any electrical engineer who in discussions > or talks refered to it being "electric tension" > It is an older term (from 1802) tha

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Tesla used the word 'tension' to refer to voltage. I understood what the poster meant; but, then again, I'm an electrical engineer. The term 'high tension lines' is well understood by most power companies. I kinda like it. T

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Hi, On 24-6-2011 0:46, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Man on Bridges > wrote: As a side note: "tension" refers in my book and wikipedia's to : "Tension (physics), a force related to the stretching of an object (the opposite of com

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Man on Bridges wrote: > ** > As a side note: "tension" refers in my book and wikipedia's to : "Tension > (physics), a force related to the stretching of an object (the opposite of > compression)" > > Tension can also mean voltage. According to wikipedia, under volt

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Dear Angela et al, On 23-6-2011 22:30, Angela Kemmler wrote: The electrical input was 750W No, it was between 784 and 805 W (230x3.4 or 230x3.5). The tension is 230 V in Italy. This is called in Italy "eurotensione", google it. I already posted the link to the italian wikipedia article abt ma

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > ** > I have uploaded hundreds of papers proving that I am right. > And yet, few believe. > Any steam proves that Rossi is right. > No. It doesn't. See earlier post. > Heck, his reactor has run with no input! > So he says. > It is ri

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: I didn't _not_ believe either. I wasn't sure. You seemed pretty sure when you said: "As far as I can tell, they disproved the Focardi claims." and many similar things. You say I was "pretty sure" when I said "as far as I can tell"? How many reservations, qualificatio

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Mark Iverson wrote: > Out of that 9m of hose, at least half is lying flat on the floor. That > results in: > 3 m, 9 ft. > 1) condensation forming a layer of liquid water that runs the entire length > of that segment of hose, > Water does not condense on a hose

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > ** > > Other such as Piantelli have seen heat from Ni systems. >> > > Even you didn't believe his results a couple of years ago. > > > I didn't *not* believe either. I wasn't sure. > You seemed pretty sure when you said: "As far as I can t

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: OK. It was sloppy. Multiple claimed sightings of extra terrestrials with inconclusive evidence does not make said visits more believable. Likewise more fuzzy photos of the loch ness monster does not make its existence more believable. The data published by people such as

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 02:58 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: > >> But still, you've identified a way the steam could be dry and still pinned >> to the boiling point. Unfortunately, evidence that it *is* dry is still >> absent. And in the Krivit video, th

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 4:03 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson < svj.orionwo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Joshua sed: > > ... > > > A large number of inconclusive results make them less believable to me, > > not more. There are hundreds of thousands of ufo sightings, and that > > totality of results doe

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea... At 02:58 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: >But still, you've identified a way the steam could be dry and still >pinned to the boiling point. Unfortunately, evidence that it *is* dry >is still absent. And in the Krivit vid

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 11:56 AM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: >> >> My sense, from the weak steam coming out of the end, is that what seems >>> to be marginal at the end is an indication that more power is being >>> gener

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua sed: ... > A large number of inconclusive results make them less believable to me, > not more. There are hundreds of thousands of ufo sightings, and that > totality of results does not make them more believable. Goodness gracious me! You actually said that? A "UFO" stands for Unidentified

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:58 PM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: But still, you've identified a way the steam could be dry and still pinned to the boiling point. Unfortunately, evidence that it *is* dry is still absent. And in the Krivit video, the feeble puff of steam at the output is pretty good evidence that most

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 11:56 AM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: My sense, from the weak steam coming out of the end, is that what seems to be marginal at the end is an indication that more power is being generated than the input electrical power, but I'd not want to claim that this dem

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: In Krivit's visit, Rossi said he had weighed the water and he would do it again after the test. But he quoted the flow rate in the middle of the test, before he weighed it at the end. Anyone can measure the flow rate, at any time. You do not have to wait until th

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

The electrical input was 750W No, it was between 784 and 805 W (230x3.4 or 230x3.5). The tension is 230 V in Italy. This is called in Italy "eurotensione", google it. I already posted the link to the italian wikipedia article abt mains tension in Italy. Must I repeat it? It was 220 V there unti

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > ** > In Krivit's visit, Rossi said he had weighed the water and he would do it > again after the test. > But he quoted the flow rate in the middle of the test, before he weighed it at the end. That's not the reason to doubt him though. I sh

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 11:04 AM 6/23/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Jed, I've asked this before. What second test proved what you show? Are you referring to the Levi test that increased the flow rate? How would this show that Galantini was correct? Yes, I meant the test with flowing water

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

Joshua Cude wrote: Whereas Rossi measured the flow by weighing the reservoir before and after. That method is infallible. It overrules the people at esowatch who are speculating about the pump and waving their hands. Why should I believe Rossi? If I did, there would be no need for

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:45 AM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: You are indeed wrong. Time for a refresher. Look up vapor pressure in wikipedia for a start. Water evaporates into pure gas (not droplets) below its boiling point. Humidity measures the amount of water vapor (gas, not droplets) in the air. When the pa

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > such as your held conclusion, my guess, that this thing *must* be bogus, > since LENR is impossible. Right? > > > Wrong. It's highly unlikely, in my opinion, and so until good evidence is presented, I will remain skeptical.

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 02:32 AM 6/23/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: It is not in any way proof that the E-Cat is *not* producing excess power. That's true, but I've only been arguing that Rossi has not pro

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > ** > Joshua Cude wrote: > > No, it isn't shaky. The water would be 60°C or less in most of these >> tests if there was no anomalous heat. > > > Sticking to the Krivit demo, no, increasing the water to 100C requires > only 600W. The electric

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 11:54 PM 6/22/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: Abd wrote: "Basically, the device does some math for you, based on certain assumptions. Unfortunately, the assumptions are the very issue here!" I don't' think that's correct... Not assumptions. The instrument does calculations based on scientific law

RE: [Vo]:E-Cat vs. Water Heater for coffee/tea...

At 12:14 AM 6/23/2011, Mark Iverson wrote: Abd wrote: "One page 6, the list of humidity probes begins. The "robust" probe, part number 0628 0021, is rated to 180 C. The measurement range extends from 0 to 100% RH. However, the accuracy is not rated above 98%. Basically, the accuracy is 2%, fro

  1   2   3   >