Peter Heckert wrote:
No. if it was hot water, then the energy was 5 times less than 100 kW.
If there was a cold water flow in the other pipe, then it was less
than 50 kW.
If there was a heater near the thermoelement, then it was almost zero.
Especially Domenico Fioravanti (customer engineer) must know this if
he is an expert.
Yes, he is an expert. And as an expert he would have know there was a
heater near the thermocouple, or that there was cold water in the other
pipe. Any expert would notice this. Heck, I would notice this in an instant.
Look, stop telling us that Fioravanti and Rossi might have faked this.
That is perfectly obvious. No one disputes it. That is not news. If they
wanted to present fake results they would not bother to put a heater
near the thermocouple; they would simply present fake numbers. No one
saw the power input measurements or temperature measurements. For all we
know, the genset was powering the reactor the whole time.
This situation is very, very simple. It is binary. If you think
Fioravanti is telling the truth, this must be a real result with real
anomalous heat. If you think that he and Rossi got together to put fake
heaters near the thermocouples or pretend flow rates or any of a dozen
other ways to make a fake demonstration, then you do not believe it.
There is no point to listing all the ways they might have cheated. We
know these ways. Listing them proves nothing. Okay, it illustrates how
easy it is to fake a demonstration and why we must have independent
verification and replication. I am sure that all readers here agree with
that, so there is no need to keep repeating it.
- Jed
