On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 3:13 AM, Mary Yugo <maryyu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Continuing the discussion of the mathematical modeling proposed for the > October 6 experiment, my informant, who still prefers to remain anonymous, > remarked that the examples suggested by Jed and others (nails, anvils and > the like) are not comparable to the October 6 experiment which involved a > much larger and substantially more massive E-cat than before. The informant > now provided computations of the power and energy vs time curves for the > model, assuming only electrical (Joule) heating (no LENR reaction) as you > can see here: http://i.imgur.com/SWbvW.jpg > > Once again, the original diagram of the model and temperature vs time curves > are here: http://i.imgur.com/XAdrr.jpg > <snip>
For this to work the electrical input power measurements must have been incorrect or fake, because it would require more power to heat the iron to such a high temperature than was apparently supplied to the ecat. What specific evidence do you have that the Oct. 6 demo is a fake? A plausible method of fakery is not evidence of fakery. Harry Harry
