Jed, I have reason to believe that the output thermocouples are reading incorrectly. Rossi has stated on several occasions that he has only one core working within the ECAT used for the October 6 test. One core can only generate approximately 3.4 kW of power since three are needed to generate the rated 10 kW. The high power output calculated during the self sustaining mode does not add up. Also, Other calculations support the indication that the power output is due to one core. I will explain the backup data and calculations for my position if it is required.
I am not inferring that there is any concrete hidden within the ECAT enclosure. Also, I am firmly convinced that the output power will prove that LENR is responsible for the excess energy provided that sufficient time is allowed and accurate data obtained. The driven mode is a far better mode to demonstrate the LENR character of the device. That is what I would do if I were Rossi and wanted to convince people of the device capacity. He would just have to run it for long enough to eliminate any other possibilities. You have made an excellent point regarding the original cylindrical device. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Tue, Nov 8, 2011 9:13 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Minor progress Horace Heffner <hheff...@mtaonline.net> wrote: Again, I don't know of anyone being allowed to see the insides of the 30x30x30 interior box. 1. Levi and the people at Defkalion say they saw inside. Lewan says you can see more than the photograph shows. There is no sign of concrete. 2. In previous tests observers dumped out the water from the vessel after the run and measured the volume. There is no space unaccounted for in the vessel. There is no place to put concrete. 3. The previous cylindrical reactors were easy to see inside of. There was no concrete in them. It makes no sense to claim that the previous reactors were real and this one is fake. Furthermore, you claim that output power is not measured accurately but this is incorrect. This analysis shows that the temperature of the cooling loop thermocouples was correct to within 0.1°C: http://lenr-canr.org/RossiData/Houkes%20Oct%206%20Calculation%20of%20influence%20of%20Tin%20on%20Tout.xlsx No one has challenged this analysis. Besides, even if this is incorrect and half of the input power is being stored while the electric power is turned on, the overall output profile is still correct, and output greatly exceeds input. In other words, in the storage scenario, you lower the output curve to half of the input, while power is on, and then measure the area of stored energy, and compare it output energy during the time power is on, and afterwards. The area of the latter greatly exceeds the former. Storage cannot explain these results. - Jed
