On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:01 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
> Now, do you sincerely think that the large generator was supplying the > heat energy to vaporize the water? > I don't have sincere thoughts about anything on this subject. It could be, and that weakens Rossi's case. Those ecats could all have little burners in them too. Or thermite. There are too many possibilities to accept the highly unlikely claim of radiation less nuclear reactions producing heat. What would it take for you to be finally convinced that the 1 MW system > is real? > This has been covered. First, I would prefer a single ecat to simplify the scale. 100 ecats making 100 times the power is pointless, and I think a deliberate distraction. Either way, it should be completely and obviously isolated, with verification from skeptical observers. It should produce heat in an obvious and verifiable way, by heating up large bodies of water, or doing mechanical work, or at least using a properly calibrated heat exchanger, and verified by skeptical observers. The more obvious, the less verification needed. For example. heating a few thousand liters of water to boiling with a single ecat would be visible. Boiling it to half the volume, even better. It should keep going long enough to really exclude chemical fuels. In other words, produce more heat than the entire weight of the thing in the best chemical fuel. There's a factor of a million to work with. Why not at least demonstrate a factor of 10 or 100?
