http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTV85J2QHj0 <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTV85J2QHj0&feature=plcp> &feature=plcp
contrast this one with the Thrapp video as it is a bit more believable - there are differences and similarities - however, can there be any doubt that geometry and resonance are involved as much, or more so than Ohmic heating or direct water-splitting? Dave, You are exactly right - the video is suspicious, and that suspicion is not mitigated by the inventor's demeanor, nor the fact that he is supposedly a Christian minister. But I prefer this Thrapp scenario - to the Rossi's credentials anytime. The biggest problem with Thrapp/Davey is that here we are 4 years later and there is no commercial unit, BUT this situation is little different to Rossi's delay - since AR claimed to be in full production over a year ago. I would not even have mentioned Thrapp - had not the Davey device, with its undeniable similarity, been investigated by Steven Jones with what appear to be positive results. It there is anything to the claim of excess heat, SJ will probably find it. From: David Roberson Does this device operate with standard tap water that has impurities? The mention of an RF resonator in the video has interesting implications if this device actually works. The spherical shape of the unit suggests that it would have resonances at radio frequencies within and some might be closely coupled to the water molecules or atoms to which they are composed. The heating energy must arise from some mechanism since the device appears to warm up at a rate that far exceeds the possible output power of the 9 volt battery. My opinion is that there is some kind of trick being displayed here although there is no proof. Perhaps the 'water' is not really water but some mixture that self heats when triggered by the battery input. The invention needs to be tested with fresh water applied and controlled by the experimenter without interference of the inventor. This test should be run several times in a row to ensure that the metal enclosure does not contribute to the heating as well. I would further carefully measure the time required to heat the fresh tap water during each warm up period to ensure that this is the same while using fresh batteries for each run. One can never be positive that a demonstration such as this is not a magic trick since there are many ways to confuse people. I guess that Rossi has determined that the only way to prove his ECAT to the world is to sell them and he might be correct is that assumption. This device might be another case where that concept is valid. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Jones Beene Actually, I think that this is one of the better slide presentations out there this year - in the entire field - despite a few controversial statements and being in need of massive editing. Hats off to Steven Jones to support the Davey device, even though that inventor was nutty - and the prior claims were heavy on anecdote. Both the Davey and Timothy Thrapp spherical hot water heaters have been demonstrated to be way overunity, and operate on what could be a similar principal, and also are the product of inventors who are their own worst enemies. Both tried to hide the role of nickel alloys, but there is also a geometry factor is the sphere or hemisphere, along with recombination (chemical asymmetry). Here is a Thrapp video, and you can probably see note that this inventor suffers from the same Messiah complex as Joseph Newman. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06iCfowinUM
