I'm glad you pointed that out because the calculation you seem to be
alluding to is incorrect. Its not correct to assume the water would be
heated evenly- it would not.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Heckert" <peter.heck...@arcor.de>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 27, 2011 7:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Krivit Videos Part 3
There is some strong evidence that has been missed by most.
It is in the Essen-Kullander report. Unfortunately this was not emphasized
in the media, but if you read the report, it becomes obvious.
<http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3144960.ece/BINARY/Download+the+report+by+Kullander+and+Ess%C3%A9n+%28pdf%29>
Look at page 1, chapter "Calibrations" and the following page 2.
They report a water flow of 6.47 kg/h. They checked this, using a carafe.
They had an input power of 330 Watt total, including the electronic
equipment.
They calculated that 300W heater power is barely enough to heat the water
to 60 centigrade. Then the rise of temperature should stop.
Obviously they watched the current meter, because they report, that the
temperature rise accelerated from 60 centigrade to 100 centigrade and then
it started boiling without visible increase in electric power.
So the thermal output power clearly was much more than 600W, while the
electrical input power was 330W.
Now this basically is mass-flow calorimetry, and this impressed me.
Definitely there was extra energy and this means it works, or Kullander
and Essen where fooled by a trick.
I think error is impossible here. (I dont say, they where fooled, I have
no right to say so, I say that is the only theoretical possibility
remaining if it doesnt produce extra energy)
I was not convinced from the other demonstrations. It looks as if Rossi
did not even try to give a scientific proof to the other observers Ny
Teknik and Krivit. He told them numbers and thougt "I can tell them
anything, they cant check it anyway" and I think his steam claims where
false. However, if he really has heated a building, as he says, then he
might be so sure about it that he doesnt feel the need for a scientific
proof now and delays this until the 1 MW demonstration.
I have also read most Piantelli-Focardi papers and these show some
evidence for energy production. Maybe they are so convinced about it that
they dont see the need to give hard scientific evidence at this point in
time.
Best,
Peter
