Michele Comitini < michele.comit...@gmail.com> wrote:
- Since the claim is a 200 ratio for out/in the following simple
- components could be used besides the E-cat, H2 gas tank and control
- box:
- 1) a (sealed) room without power outlet.
- 2) a number of car batteries that can provide the necessary but
- limited amount of energy
This is not necessary. Power meters can be relied upon. Normal scientific instruments and procedures should be used to test this device.
Power meters can NOT be relied on.
< http://pesn.com/2011/02/27/9501773_Aviso_Ponders_Open_Sourcing_Self-Running_EV_Tech/ >
< http://pesn.com/2011/02/24/9501772_Philippine_DOE_Verifies_Aviso_Self-Charging_EV/ >
is almost certainly due to high-frequency crud confusing "normal scientific instruments and procedures"
Carl Sagan was wrong. Extraordinary claims do not require extraordinary proof. They are best supported with ordinary evidence
I agree -- see "Rothwell's Razor" -- but the ordinary evidence has to be complete.
from off-the-shelf instruments and standard techniques. (M&R)
See above.
A test with batteries would be "showboating" in my opinion. It would be giving the skeptics and their unrealistic doubts more respect than they deserve.
It is physically impossible for the wire used in this device to conduct more than ~3 kW. The wire would melt. Years ago, plug in electric heaters drew ~3 kW and the wires became very hot. Those were thick wires. Heaters nowadays are limited to 1.5 kW, or 12.5 amps.
To be specific, from the photos I take this to be: 18 AWG, 1.0 mm, 2.3 max amps transmission, 16 amps chassis wiring. ("Chassis wiring" means a short stretch of uninsulated wiring inside a machine.)
See: Handbook of Electronic Tables and Formulas
http://www.powerstream.com/Wire_Size.htm
It is preposterous to suggest that you could use this wire to conduct 16 kW at any voltage. Furthermore, Levi looked inside the box at the control electronics and found only "5 simple PLC" (programmable logic control). Such devices are rated at one power level and will not work at far higher levels. They would burn up, along with the wire.
I agreed with you on this one.
Fletcher's scenarios are "Just So Stories" meaning that in real life we can dismiss them.
Except for extending the inner line of the Tarallo fake down the output hose (and selecting some of the chemicals) every single fake I've analyzed has been suggested by somebody else, including the original observing team.
Everyone else on the web/academia is demanding more stringent proof. They are NOT dismissing them.
Even my methodology comes from an observer:
As Villa reported:
In the present test, as a precautionary attitude, whatever was not known, not disclosed or not understood has been considered as the energy source.
....
The duration of the tests would be directly proportional to the mass and volume of unknown origin.
The devices he describes are physically impossible.
The methodology proof of the chemical/finite storage methods does exactly that. By setting the bar at 100% fuel and 100% efficiency all quibbling about engineering efficiency goes away. Why settle for "improbable" when you can have "impossible" or "unlikely" or "would have noticed" with very little extra work.
The people and instruments in his stories would have to react precisely the way he imagines they might -- the slightest variation in their actions or use of instruments would instantly reveal the fake nature of the device. One glance in the wrong direction, one touch of the wrong component, and all would be revealed. The observers would have to be hypnotized to follow Rossi's every instruction.
I include air-breathing and fume-emitting combustion as not eliminated, because nobody checked it. But I also include closed systems, where nothing is output except heat, and where the weight of the apparatus doesn't change. They are indistinguishable from a wrapped eCat except that they eventually run out of fuel.
His scenario demands that 50 or more highly experienced engineers and scientists suddenly forget how to do experiments, ...
Gee : Essen admits it : http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg44803.html
Hello group, In answer to a question from a concerned person regarding water flow measurements during the last Rossi E-cat test/demonstration, Hanno Essén added, perhaps unconsciously, that there will be a follow-up experiment next week. Here's the original email as posted by him on an italian discussion forum (some personal info omitted):
* * * Hello I remember clearly that there was no adjusting of the pump during the experiment. There was a tank of distilled water on the floor below the pump. Unfortunately its refilling and weight etc were not checked. These things will be better checked in a follow up experiment next week. Best regards Hanno EssénThey also forgot to weigh the hydrogen bottle. They accepted many of Rossi's statements as fact. That wouldn't make it through hostile peer-review.
The Jan/Feb team didn't check the outlet of the output hose at all.
Nobody checked that the output volume equals the input volume. Nobody checked the output temperatures outside of the Rossi-supplied instrument port.
Nobody checked that the input water pump delivered the same volume when it's connected to a constricted system.
and how to take rudimentary common sense steps such as holding their hand briefly over the device to confirm it is radiating heat, and over the outlet tube to determine that it is warm. Three of the observers in the January 14 test assured me they did check the tube, and it was too hot to touch, therefore the reactor was definitely producing the level of heat the instruments indicated.
So the world is going to accept that as proof? It influences my opinion, but not my analysis.
The outlet tube would be stone cold in the scenarios Fletcher imagines.
No it wouldn't : In EVERY scenario the output tube would be HOT
Even for the (yummm...) Tarallo fake:
http://lenr.qumbu.com/fake_bypass_3a.jpg
His scenarios also assumes that Rossi is a lunatic who has spent 1 million to produce a fake ..
The world at large still seems to think it's a scam.
that will be completely revealed soon when they open up the cell and look inside.
by which time he (allegedly) has taken the money and run ...
Give me $500,000 and I'll build you a Tarallo fake which passes the all the experiments. The technician (G. Chesters) who built me this brass device to a tolerance of 0.0005 inches could do it !
http://lenr.qumbu.com/110415_feed_001_w1K.jpg
