Terry Blanton <hohlr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Wait a minute. Aren't you the guy that keeps saying the best proof is a > self running machine? Closed loop? >
Oh yeah. Sure, if you can pull that off on a reasonably large scale. But a small toy-like device would not be convincing because a battery can be hidden in it. Yes, you can run it for a long time to overcome that objection but there is induction or a fine wire or what-have-you. I remember as a kid making HO scale railroad gadgets with lights and moving parts that seemed stand-alone. I was assuming this would be a physically small device. Not sure of the details. The one that Dennis Cravens is talking about is ~10 W I think. That's too small for a convincing self-running machine. My gut feeling is that he should stick to a calorimeter. Somewhere around ~50 W, where the heat become undeniably tactile and you can produce significant electricity, maybe look at a toy. Arata made a toy at around 1 or 2 W with analog watch motor. It was unconvincing. Maybe I am confused about the scale or the use of the word "toy," which may not imply a small device, but rather a simplified proof of principle device. Assuming Rossi's gadgets are real, just having one the size of a shoebox producing a kilowatt or so for week would be all the proof you need. Make it a hot water heater. The simplest method of HVAC calorimetry would be fine. - Jed
