>From Jones:
...
> We cannot assume honesty from a man like Rossi who
> is seldom honest.
>
> Not to mention – this demo was Rossi’s tribute event
> to Focardi – maybe a kind of pre-eulogy.
>
> Rossi had every incentive to fudge the results, to make
> it look better than it was, or in case someth
Jones Beene wrote
ØNo it cannot be added. You can't cause that much friction with these
pipes. Not enough to measure.
Are you serious !?! The gullibility quotient here defies the
imagination !
In fact, it is quite easy to add friction if that is your intent.
Okay, let's think about this.
On 04/20/2011 02:36 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> Stephen A. Lawrence mailto:sa...@pobox.com>> wrote:
>
>
> Say WHAT? You just "proved" that all pipes inside the ecat are
> *frictionless* !!
>
>
> Actually, if you read what I wrote previously, and repeatedly, I said
> that a tiny amount
From: Jed Rothwell
* JR:It is NOT added to the system, for crying out loud. That is physically
impossible!
Of course it can be! It is potential energy! and potential energy can always
be added.
*
* No it cannot be added. You can't cause that much friction with these
pipes. Not enoug
Jones Beene wrote:
ØJR:It is NOT added to the system, for crying out loud. That is
physically impossible!
Of course it can be! It is potential energy! and potential energy can
always be added.
No it cannot be added. You can't cause that much friction with these
pipes. Not enough to measu
From: Jed Rothwell
He does not think that a large source of electrical power added to the
system needs to be accounted for.
*
* JR:It is NOT added to the system, for crying out loud. That is physically
impossible!
Of course it can be! It is potential energy! and potential energy c
Ah, wait. The light dawns. As Peter Gluck said, this only makes sense if
you are talking about the electric bill. I see. Jones Beene wrote:
There are two P-in points, one for the whole system and one for the
calorimetry.
If by "system" you mean the cost of running the experiment, including
t
Jones Beene wrote:
Calling Ed Storms!
Please set Jed straight on this issue.
You do not need Ed. Ask anyone who has done flow calorimetry about this.
Better yet, build a flow calorimeter. I have built several and seen dozens.
He does not think that a large source of electrical power adde
Calling Ed Storms!
Please set Jed straight on this issue.
He does not think that a large source of electrical power added to the
system needs to be accounted for.
There are two P-in points, one for the whole system and one for the
calorimetry.
He is going into brain freeze again an
I wrote: "No, the Kill-a-watt goes between the control electronics and the
wall socket."
Technically, the power should be measured between the PLCs in the control
box and the resistance heaters in the cell. When you measure at the wall,
you overestimate power input because some of it is expended a
OK, Jed, this is a nit, and I'm stating that up front. But with that
said...
On 04/20/2011 02:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> There is no need to measure the pump input because it cannot transfer
> to the system between the inlet and outlet temperature sensors. The
> water does not slow down or st
Jones Beene wrote:
JR:The power input related to the proper operation cannot be measured
with flow calorimetry, and even if it could, it would be many orders
of magnitude too small to be detected by these methods.
That is supposed to say the PUMPING operation cannot be measured . . .
No on
From: Jed Rothwell
Jones made another statement about this which I cannot understand:
"It [the Rossi cell] will not work reliably without constant heat removal.
Therefore, power input related to the proper operation must be included as
P-in."
JR: No cell can work without constant he
Clarification. I wrote:
In flow calorimetry it is not possible to measure the power of the
> circulation pump, because the pump adds heat to the water before the water
> passes the inlet temperature sensor.
I meant the electrical and mechanical heat from the pump. That would be at
the milliwatt
14 matches
Mail list logo
