On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:35 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
> I would like to thank DGT for allowing me to view this particular video. > I have worked within product development labs in the past and feel that the > one seen in the video is not unlike many of those. The equipment that is > required depends upon what they are testing or upon whether or not they are > trying out a new idea. We do not know exactly what procedures are being > conducted so I think it is premature to assume the worst. > > It was not very long ago when some of our major skeptics were suggesting > that even this level of display was not available. It was suggested that > DGT was effectively a shell company and that no product exists. This video > clearly proves that they were wrong. > > So let's give DGT a chance to reveal more of their product information > before we shoot the messenger. What they have shown is an important first > start of much to come. I prefer to be an optimist that sees the glass half > full of water instead of one who sees it half empty. > > I will add to what Dave says- the DGT people > have a responsibility and they have to perform the experiments as they want, not as a result from the summation of myriads of advices given by e-paper tigers and amateur experts. If they want to test first the bare reactors they know why and everybody who thinks that there is no life and no technology without flow calorimetry NOW! - has to wait. I remember e.g. when we made the first industrial synthesis of ethyl chlorformiate, this was not discussed by the entire factory, the union and the Party activists. They let us working in peace and stayed far- the raw materials are ethyl alcohol and chlorine and the product is a nasty tear-gas. If you have not worked in the lab of DGT, you cannot know why the pipes are so long or how long will stay the hydrogen bottle there. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nigel Dyer <l...@thedyers.org.uk> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Mon, Jan 30, 2012 10:57 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: Defkalion video of internal testing > > Despite the shortcomings of the experimental setup, I would have thought > it should be possible to use dataplots such as these to characterise the > thermal characteristics of the a dummy hyperion system providing we know > the power input. This should give usable figures for heat capacities > and thermal couplings. > > This could then be used to give an indication of the excess heat from > the 'real' reactor, and it should then be possible to give a good > estimation of the error range of any results obtained this way. I seem > to remember that Mary Yugo(?) got someone to do something along these > lines with a previous set of data. > > Some of the uncertainty would be removed if the two runs were done with > the same reactor, first with the Ni/H in the reactor, and then second > with a dummy powder with approximately the same thermal capacity. The > electrical heat input in the second run should mirror the heat input > that was used for the first run. > > If we there are two reactors, then doing a real test on both and then a > dummy test on both would be even better as it might allow additional > quantification of the errors. > > Nigel > > On 30/01/2012 15:01, Jones Beene wrote: > > What is curious is the chart on the laptop. Blow it up. Of course, we do not > > know what it purports to show, but the two spikes are indicative of what > > have been known to appear in many early H2 fractional hydrogen experiments > > in the past. > > > > Jones > > > > > > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
