Jed
I find the "heat after death" nomenclature to be a bit weird. I think Rossi's "self sustaining
mode" is more descriptive. Any idea where "heat after death" originated?
Ron
--On Wednesday, October 19, 2011 11:02 AM -0400 Jed Rothwell
<jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote:
The answer to your question can be given only by experiment.
I gather the "question" being: Will this system run indefinitely without input
power?
"Indefinitely" is an indefinite description, meaning I do not know how long it
might run. There
is no question it would have run longer than 4 hours.
Rossi claims his system is absolutely different
from all the other LENRs so what happens in an Arata Cell is not valid for the
E-cat.
The fact that Rossi makes this claim does not prove the claim is true. He does not
"own" this
reaction in the sense that he can declare what it is or how it works. His
opinion has no more
authority than, say, that of Piantelli or Storms.
In their White Paper, Defkalion claimed that this reaction has nothing to do
with cold fusion.
All of cold fusion researchers I know disagree with them.
It is now the time Rossi should predict the duration of the
1 MW demo- and this cannot be a few hours.
There is no indication this will be in heat-after-death mode. The large-scale
reactor that
supposedly ran in a factory for months was not in heat-after-death mode as far
as I know.
- Jed
