God, I hate to address this, but you either:
1) fundamentally misunderstand,
2) are asking the wrong question
3) are willfully ignoring clarification
If you don not understand the arguments, you need to look back to the early
E-Cats, where the question first arose.
The steam experts were right in the INITIAL steam discussions. I agree with
you. But they were being asked about steam quality, not water "overflow."
Krivit raised his questions on steam quality which were, more than likely,
bullshit. Steam quality and "entrained droplets" were totally unnecessary and
confused a valid issue.
It is true that the steam was measured with the wrong probe plugged into the
meter, using it for measurements it was never intended. It couldn't have
measured pressure or steam quality; but that's irrelevant. People continued
arguing the point because they were right, and needed to be recongnized for it
- Ignore it.
Even though the method used to determine the "steam quality" was useless,
"steam quality" was a red herring - a misnormer, really. The steam was
measured out of the top port, and it may have been 100%. Water would have been
pouring out of the hose.
The reason that people say that the temperature contradicts 100% dry steam is
that the temperature never indicated a phase change. The temperature would
have climbed to whatever the local boiling point was, remained there for quite
some time, and then elevated. Attached is a graph showing temperature elevation
with a fixed heat source.
The fact that this didn't occur means that the slightly elevated boiling
temperature represented either impurities, poor calorimetry (sinking heat from
adjoining metal, for example), or elevated pressure. The closest example to
ANYTHING like this graph occurring was in the 1MW demo, from which only the
graph itself was supplied.
Look at the E&K graph, which is the most convincing of all that I'd seen:
Rossi claims full vaporization, because the temperature is 100.2C! If you don't
understand how the evidence directly contradicts complete vaporization, there
is nothing that will open your eyes. The temperature indicates only that
boiling is occurring.
You could open the steam port, and have dry steam coming out, but the evidence
shows that water is flowing out the hose and down the drain. Period.
This is the same thing that may be happening in the "Ottoman" E-Cat: water
gurgling out, and some steam. The assumption of complete vaporization cannot be
relied upon, and is actually contradicted by the measurements. This is why your
"Method 2" for the October 6th test was unuseable.
Now, I need to go do something productive.
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 09:43:42 -0500
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a long paper about and mainly against the E-cat
From: jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Robert Leguillon <robert.leguil...@hotmail.com> wrote:
You cite the temperature as evidence, but the temperature actually contradicts
full vaporization.
All of this has been explained succinctly ad nauseum, so please do not ask for
any details on it
I do not need any details. As I mentioned, every expert in steam I have
consulted with says this is bullshit.
- Jed
