At 10:01 AM 8/9/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The "overflowing water" hypothesis does not apply to the flowing water test, and it is definitely wrong for the tests observed by Galantini. He removed the probe and observed that it was dry. So Rossi can control the water level in the cell and keep it from overflowing. That does not surprise me. I can do the same thing easily in the kitchen, at the speed the water level changes with these systems.
Jed, you make hosts of assumptions and don't seem to be aware of them. But first, let's get one thing out of the way.
What "overflowing water hypothesis"? That there is water flowing. Of course that applies to the "flowing water test," it's *all overflow water.* But what you mean is that it doesn't account for the reported heat, because there is, in the 18-hour test, not enough heat to raise the temperature of the water more than about five degrees. It's a huge flow....
The "overflow water hypothesis" is merely that there is, even in the steam tests, some water overflowing that isn't vaporized.
This is distinct from the wet steam issue. Steam could be quite wet from processes inside the E-cat, that's a huge unknown. I'm unconvinced by any of the "expert" argument on this, because "experts" sometimes will speculate and not tell you the nature of the speculation. They may state as a fact some assumption from their experience, which can be normally sensible, but which will break down when circumstances are different than they expect.
But "overflow water" does require that the water level in the E-cat reaches the outlet.
You are, however, assuming that Galantini could tell that the chimney had no liquid water in it at the level of the thermometer, because he withdrew the probe and "observed that it was dry." Perhaps you recall that the temperature was above boiling at ambient pressure. Has it occurred to you that steam doesn't come out of the thermometer port when the thermometer is removed? Do you realize what this is telling us about the internal details there? This port must be designed to seal, I'm suspecting. It will "wipe off" the thermometer when it is removed. Even if it did not do this, the thermometer is above boiling, and is designed not to hold water, I suspect, the water will not remain on it, it will be at most a very thin film and it will immediately vaporize when removed, before the hot thermometer can cool.
Essentially, depending on the thermometer being wet to inform the observer of the lack of water is foolish. There is a much simpler way, but they didn't do it.
Since Rossi was able to keep the thing from overflowing when Galantini observed the tests, why do you think he was unable to do this when Krivit was watching the test? Do you think he let it overflow deliberately? Why would he do the test two different ways?
He didn't. You are assuming that the tests were different. Galantini's observation is not reliable, it was naive. Do remember, Jed, he is apparently *not* any kind of expert in steam.
During the flowing water test he was able to leave the cell alone without adjusting the output because overflow was not an issue.
Jed, you have reliable information about the flowing water test? How do you know whether he left it alone or not?
