I was always taught that, technically speaking, "steam" is an invisible gas. However, most of us quite naturally tend to only notice the clouds of water vapor condensing out from the invisible "steam" as it cools. We tend to incorrectly associate, in the visual sense, those tiny suspended condensed droplets of water as "steam." I continue to make this visualization mistake all the time even today, as do most of us, simply because it's convenient to do so, even though technically speaking I know it's inaccurate.
To be honest I think the latest semantics "battle" over the definition of what "steam" really is, is now in danger of turning into silly pointless argument - is the "steam" wet or is it dry. Josh, Correct me if I'm wrong but I gather you believe (or are convinced of the fact) that the videos you viewed proved that tiny suspended condensed water droplets (mist) was observed being expelled directly FROM WITHIN the end of black hose from Rossi's e-cat test. In other words I gather you are arguing from the premise that the "steam" already contained suspended droplets of condense water within the black hose, and through guilt by association, there must have also been condensed water vapor within the chimney of the e-cat prior to the water-gas mixture exiting into the black hose. Is this an accurate assumption on my part? As for me, I was under the impression (an impression that admittedly could be wrong) that those who looked closely at the end of the black hose noticed that the first signs of condensation of tiny suspended water droplets were observed to have formed OUTSIDE of the end of hose... let's say, maybe, about quarter of an inch or so from the tip. Can someone tell me if this is this an accurate assumption on my part or not? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
