Of course. A robust fully demonstrable 1.5 - 2.5 COP gain would be a Holy Grail moment to demonstrate that new physics is involved - I'm not decrying it, just the commercial potential...
On Fri, 19 Jul 2024, 21:23 Jones Beene, <[email protected]> wrote: > The interesting point is that despite lack of market value for the tech, > it seems to actually violate long standing physical laws plus there seems > to be an intrinsic window where the actual gain is around 50 percent over > input > > The heat pump, in contrast, merely taps environmental heat and there is > no physical anomaly > > This situation is somewhat like the Griggs pump scenario of many decades > ago... > > ... in that there apparently is a real anomaly but only a small market for > low grade heat > > To my knowledge, the cavitation tech and real gain of Griggs has never > been debunked > > > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > Nicholas Palmer <[email protected]> wrote: > > If it can only manage a COP of 1.5-2.5, it's not as effective as a heat > pump... > > Yes. 1.5 has no practical use. Still, 50 W excess is good because it can > be measured with confidence. I think they said the results are > "consistent." If they can make it happen every time, "consistently" with > about the same magnitude, then I would say it is important progress. > > One of the articles says it is not ready for practical applications yet. I > suppose they realize that 100 W in, 150 W out has no useful applications. > >
