Berke, they do not have anything else to come up with in their effort to
discredit Rossi and his system. It is sad to see them resort to this level of
criticism.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Berke Durak <berke.du...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sat, Nov 26, 2011 1:01 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi's E-cat is claimed to have a COP of around 6
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Peter Heckert <peter.heck...@arcor.de> wrote:
The question is, how did they measure the energy input?
This is not documented.
Were you being sarcastic? I'll assume you weren't.
To answer your first question, it is not documented but it seems quite
bvious.
The power was entirely supplied by a diesel generator. The diesel
enerator had a fuel level meter or an electricity meter built-in, or
aybe they connected an electricity meter between the diesel generator
nd the equipment.
They obviously took readings before and after and wrote down the
ifference. What else? Do you imagine that Fioravanti took a hard
ook at the genset, then said, "Well I guess that's about 66 kWh" and
rote that down?
> This colonel engineer confuses kg and g.
False. The correct sentence would be :
> This coloned engineer CONFUSED kg and g.
That is, he made a mistake in the report. You can't claim with
straight face that he doesn't know a gram from a kilogram.
> He measures a hydrogen consumtion of 1.7000 kg and dont write down all
significant digits.
That's part of the same fuck-up.
> Then he subtracts this from a value that means gramm. but is mistakenly
labeled as "kg".
That's part of the same fuck-up.
> How can we win a war where precise decisions must be made in seconds? ;-)
What?
> He makes many handwritten corrections and erasures to ensure he can
read his own writing.
Is this sarcasm?
> He has two different ways to write a one: "1" and "|" in one and the
same document.
That remark is completely silly. Or are you one of these people who
elieve in "graphology"?
> He uses decimal point and decimal "," alternating in one and the same
document.
That would tend to indicate that we was often reading or writing
echnical documents in different languages with different conventions.
> How can we believe he measured or calculated the electrical energy or the
diesel consumption correctly?
How can we take what you say seriously when you come up with arguments
ike this instead of discussing the core issue?
> Possibly he has confused more than that?
Yeah, maybe he was just some random drunken hobo off the streets of
ologna calling himself "colonel".
> This is not a Nato colonel engineer with 30 year of experience in a
multi-language military organisation.
You must be joking.
Maybe Fioravanti is one of these rare engineers who is not an
bsessive-compulsive robot with Asperger syndrome?
Anyway, let me resume the content of this topic.
(a) MY gratuitously asserts that the reason for the "guaranteed COP of
" statement is that Rossi, in her belief, thinks that he can get away
laiming that he sells million-dollar devices that vaporize water
ompletely where, in fact, they barely vaporize it.
(b) I reply by showing that, even if Rossi's device didn't vaporize a
ram of water during the 1 MW demo, it would still have a COP of 40
ecause it takes more than a fucking gigajoule to heat 4 tons of water
y 90 degrees, and the energy input was less than 250 MJ.
(c) PH finds it appropriate to cast a baseless doubt on the measurement of the
nput energy and then goes on a completely wild tangent by nit picking on
ioravanti's handwriting. But it's so comical ("NATO colonels don't make
istakes") that I have probablly missed some sarcasm.
I'd be happier when you guys come up with real arguments and not silly "I don't
ike his handwriting!" arguments.
-
erke Durak
