Lets approach this from a logical point of view. We should be able to agree about something.
-----Original Message----- From: Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 1:15 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : ECAT 1 MW System-Dazzle or Fizzle On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: Rossi has given out far more proof than any previous cold fusion researcher. >That is a damning statement for the field of cold fusion. Now, if Rossi >fizzles in a few years, that should mean there was never anything to cold >fusion. Rossi is not the only horse in the race. It is not fair to use a broad sweep. There are videos and data from the Oct. 6 test. That test is irrefutable by first principles. The tests from earlier this year were also excellent despite the poor instrumentation. >Once again, cold fusion standards are pitifully low... Why rush to judgement. You and the other skeptics have not raised a single objection to the proof shown in the October 6 test, which is the fact that the water remained at boiling temperature for four hours with no input power. >Wrong. You just ignore them, and then claim they don't exist. The thing weighs >100 kg, and it gets heated for several hours beforehand. If it's losing heat >at 1 kW, 30 kg of fire brick heated to 500 or 1000C would have no problem >holding the >temperature at boiling for 3.25 hours. >And 1 kg of alcohol could do it too. >Live with it. Why should we be so combative? Point by point discussions should allow some agreement. You yourself have not even addressed this issue. You talk about the position of the thermocouples -- which is irrelevant >It means you can ignore the power calculation based on that, meaning the best >guess is (once again) from the primary fluid, which can be as low as 1 kW. Is this attitude going to convince anyone of anything? you do not even understand steam at one atmosphere never gets much hotter than 100°C. >Oh god, you're relapsing. Steam can be heated to any temperature you want at 1 >atmosphere. >Don't you know anything? This is not the proper way to address fellow vortex mates.
