Harry wrote: "How do you hide 1 cubic meter of iron in the device which was tested?"
I don't have to. First of all, less than 100 liters of water were heated in the desktop demos - and secondly, 10,000 cm3 are just 10 liters (not 1,000 liters) weighing merely 78kg (not over 7,000). The October 28 demo supposedly heated 3,700 or so liters in 107 modules. 27kg of iron (a slab of 30x20x6cm) per module would have been more than enough (unless I messed up the numbers somewhere along the line). ________________________________ Von: Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> An: Yamali Yamali <yamaliyam...@yahoo.de> Gesendet: 18:28 Freitag, 20.Januar 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Lewan Mats says he never thought the reactor shipped On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Yamali Yamali <yamaliyam...@yahoo.de> wrote: > Jed wrote: "...tell me the number right here..." > > I AM SORRY BUT THAT NUMBER IIS CONFIDENTIAL. ALL THOSE SNAKES AND CLOWNS OUT > THERE. COMPETIITION YOU KNOW. BUT I CAN SHOW YOU THE PCM IN A LARGE HEAVY > METAL BOX ON A TABLE AND PUMP WATER THROUGH IT TO MAKE SOME STEAM IN A > RUBBER HOSE AND THEN WE CAN CALCULATE THE MEGAJOULES FROM THERE - AND THEN > YOU WILL BELIEVE ME. DEAL? > > Sorry - couldn't resist. > > Jed, we've been there before. 10,000 cm3 of iron at 1,500 C would easily > hold enough energy to heat over 100 liters of water to the boiling point and > even vaporize some of it. How do you hide 1 cubic meter of iron in the device which was tested? Also it would weigh over 7000kg and break the table it was sitting on. Harry >Some isolation and you've got yourself a monster > e-cat. If you prefer a simpler solution, some dry SiO2 would do it, too. Or > maybe he used a combination of the two or something completely different > (though I guess it's purely thermal storage and that's why he came up with > the pre-heating procedure of something probably already pre-heated when the > demo starts) - but the point is: it wouldn't even have to be exotic or > especially clever. Heck - it may even be nothing like that and all he > really does is hiding cables or faking sensors or some such thing. > I know you believe such a simple setup is physically impossible - what I > don't get is why you believe at the same time that an Italian philosopher > has done what people like McKubre can't even dream of. Just going with > probabilities here - and I know what I find more likely.
