On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mary Yugo <maryyu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Do you seriously think that a chemist examining that cup would not find >>> the source of heat? Get real. Once you look inside the magic trick stage >>> prop, the trick is always instantly obvious. >>> >> >> >> That's the point though, isn't it? Nobody was ever allowed to see the >> inside of Rossi's ecats -- not the little ones and not the "Ottoman" sized >> one either. > > > That is incorrect. Many people have looked inside these devices. The > photographs of the Ottoman size device instantly rule out any possibility > of a chemical or other conventional source of heat. The size of the > inner-cell alone rule this out. You do not have to know what it is made > of. You can estimate the necessary volume of a chemical or electrical > source of heat sufficient to produce approximately this much energy. It > would be much bigger than this. > > I have pointed this out many times. Evidently you do not understand it. > This point is fundamental to cold fusion, so I suggest you make an effort > to grasp it. We do not know what is going on inside a cathode or piece of > metal. No one can look "inside it" at the subatomic level where the > reaction occurs, except by indirect means. Nevertheless, we know from the > volume and mass of the cathode alone that the reaction has to be nuclear. > Mme. Curie new the same thing about her radium samples, for exactly the > same reasons. > That may have been true for MMe.C but it is not true for Signore Rossi. I go with the proposed running times in the NASA slide. Or do you think they're full of shhhhsteam too?
