Jed,
I worry that you are placing too much emphasis upon that rust stain. It would
be wise to speak with an expert from the company that makes the device to
determine if they agree. Also, you should be able to get additional
information about that stain from the witness. He should be able to tell you
where the flow meter was located relative to pumps, tanks, and etc. Was it in
the lowest point in the return system for instance?
Are you holding back information from us due to it being proprietary? Why
should I.H. not reveal everything they know about the system design? The
reason I ask is that we should be capable of figuring out whether or not the
flow meter was starved of coolant water by that relatively minor bit of
information. Rust stain is one clue, but surely the other information would
support that conclusion if it is valid.
I agree that the stain appears to be strong evidence if proven true. But, the
actual layout of the system should add additional support. Who benefits by
hiding this data from us?
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Fri, Aug 26, 2016 5:28 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Interesting Steam Calculation
a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote:
I was expecting you couldn't because it's secret.
A little bird is about as solid as the rest of the speculations.
You have a peculiar definition of the word "speculation." If I said, "I suppose
Rossi did not send the flow meter back for calibration," that would be
speculation. What I said was a positive assertion, not speculation. You seem to
think you can recast sentences and their meanings without regard to syntax.
If you do not believe me, you should say so, rather than putting words in my
mouth.
Why no piping drawing, that is key to most of it? Easier to argue
without the facts?
No, the rust is the key. A drawing might be wrong, but physical evidence is
proof. But how do you know these are not facts? For that matter, how do you
know I have not seen a piping drawing? As I have pointed out before, you have
(another!) peculiar notion which is that information you personally have not
seen does not exist.
- Jed
