this graph is not data, it is decoration. we should not overinterpret . It might be one of the first run, unoptimized, a missed run, or ... You might also miss the interpretation of the labels.
their claimed data are normally the best they succeed after optimization.... they gave no data, beside a few tables with COP... the rest is pictures to explain the test setup. so easy to misinterpret data without the manual. 2012/8/13 Jones Beene <[email protected]> > Thanks Andre - that "little discrepancy" between the real data and > conclusion - is what makes it hard to believe that the claimed COP of 8-22 > gain is real. > > There is almost no supporting data for that conclusion. > > After all - this chart is apparently the only real data they chose to show, > and the gain is so low that it could be measurement error. Would not one be > inclined to show better, if one had better? > > I like the fact that there is some gain, but the real data, going back to > Thermacore, and including Celani's demo - is that the proved gain in Ni-H > is > generally COP<2. Apparently from the conference in Korea, according to Jed, > Brillouin may be poised to show more than that - if SRI can duplicate. > > The good news, but only in a "perfect world" is that proved COP>1 should > win > the Nobel prize, but the bad news is that until gain gets above 3 for > extended periods, this technology is going to be hard to commercialize > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andre Blum > > If you download the .docx document you can zoom the picture...it says: > [snip] > Heat - out Wh: 166.34 > Electric- in Wh Total: 145.675 > > So that show excess heat, but not by a factor of 8 - 22. > > > > >
