No, that simple scenario is not possible. If you ran the circuit backwards, the current would not change; if you switched wires the ammeter would read zero, which it never has (it always showed the current for the controls and/or radio frequency generator). Unfortunately, the input power is only spot-checked and can be varied when noone is looking. The double-lead theory is completely unnecessary if Rossi just "kicks up the power" when you're in the other room. The "fraud" arguments are exhausting and futile. A good number of Vortexans have spent a great deal of effort describing a very simple scenario to record total power in and total power out, in order to get a conclusive demonstration. I personally laid out the simple evidence required prior to the October 6th demo; I know that Mr. Rothwell forwarded many concerns directly to Rossi prior to the test. It didn't happen. Rossi does not seem interested in "conclusive" tests. I'm anxiously awaiting more Defkalion and Piantelli information. As for Rossi, I am no longer holding my breath.
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 11:28:07 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:a long paper about and mainly against the E-cat From: ashot...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Ethan Siegel is suggesting a rigged power cord to explain the self sustained heat observation: "In fact, the entire "observed" effect of having your system continue to generate heat even after it's been turned off is remarkably simple to rig." Possible? rigged power cord: http://db.tt/RFOa0EAa On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: The Physics of why the e-Cat's Cold Fusion Claims Collapse
