Andrew,

Don't you think that it would be unusual for them to specifically mention that 
they carefully inspected the waveforms to ensure that there was no fraud 
attempt?  The assumption is that Rossi and others are not trying to influence 
the test.  They discussed the power measured and had they found a problem I am 
sure it would have been mentioned.

It would be more productive for you to look up the specifications for the 
instrumentation used for the test and to see if you find that they are not 
accurate when RF or DC is sent through them.

Dave


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew <andrew...@att.net>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tue, May 21, 2013 9:21 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem



Dave,
 
That would be great if they joined in. It's not that I think there was foul 
play so much as, going by what's been written in the paper, there's nothing to 
suggest that they guarded against it. So, for example, there's no frequency 
spectrum published on the input power feed. The paper raises more questions 
than answers.
 
Rossi has stated that the input waveform is proprietary. Therefore the obvious 
question is whether these researchers were even allowed to look at it.
 
Best, Andrew
  
----- Original Message ----- 
  
From:   David   Roberson 
  
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 6:16 PM
  
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a   gem
  


  
Andrew,
  
 
  
I would be very surprised to find that these highly educated and   qualified 
scientists would fall for a power input trick.  They had many   days to uncover 
anything of that nature.
  
 
  
Has anyone checked into the specifications of the instruments used by   them to 
see if this were even the least bit likely?
  
 
  
It would be great if some of these scientists would join the discussion   and 
set aside your concerns.
  
 
  
Dave
  
  
  
-----Original   Message-----
From: Andrew <andrew...@att.net>
To: vortex-l   <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tue, May 21, 2013 6:52 pm
Subject: Re:   [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem

  
  
  
It's been pointed out here in comments by Isaac Brown 
  
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/156393-cold-fusion-reactor-independently-verified-has-10000-times-the-energy-density-of-gas
  
that the input power measurement was done on the E-Cat side of   the supply 
box. You might think that this immediately eliminates   the "battery hoax" 
theory, but it turns out that the power measuring equipment   would be 
insensitive to anything other than 50-60Hz. Therefore DC power could   
certainly be snuck in there. There is also no barrier, as the commenter notes,  
 to using frequencies other than 50-60 Hz to convey unseen power to the   
device.
  
 
  
I think I've made a decision about this thing. I'm not going to believe   it 
(let alone speculate about what nuclear processes are involved) until it's   
demonstrated in a completely self-booted configuration. Zero power input, in a  
 metal box of independent design to foil "output hoaxing", and run for weeks on 
  end. There are simply too many ways to fool people, given the controls   
stipulated by Rossi et al over this experiment. I don't trust him.
  
 
  
Best, Andrew Palfreyman
  
 
  
    
-----     Original Message ----- 
    
From:     Andrew 
    
To:     vortex-l@eskimo.com 
    
Sent:     Tuesday, May 21, 2013 2:52 PM
    
Subject:     Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem
    


    
I think it's valuable to approach this topic as would a stage magician     - 
just recall how far this sort of keen observational common sense got     Randi; 
you don't need a whole lot of physics, but you do need a "jaundiced     eye". 
Rossi is not renowned for his honesty, after all, and therefore one     has to 
be prepared to fight fire with fire, but without devolving into some     
hopelessly crabby sceptic. I realise that discussing the mechanics of a scam    
 may be distasteful to some purists, but hey, there's a lot of money involved   
  here, and we are all grown-ups.
    
 
    
Below we're discussing the input hoax. As for the output hoax, I've run     
across a second possibility (my first was infrared lasers). Those long     
"resistors" could serve double duty as RF receiving antennae. Same principle    
 as the lasers, but just a different frequency.
    
 
    
And note that all this was done inside Rossi's own facility. Note     further 
that, according to Randi, scientists are the most easily-fooled     audience of 
all. Just ask Geller and Taylor.
    
 
    
Andrew
    
      
-----       Original Message ----- 
      
From:       Andrew       
      
To:       vortex-l@eskimo.com 
      
Sent:       Tuesday, May 21, 2013 2:07 PM
      
Subject:       Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem
      


      
A hidden wire at 10 KV would need to carry only 50 mA. That's       "small". 
      
 
      
A battery would need to supply (say, conservatively) 500 W for 116       hours, 
or 200 MJ. Lithium batteries are about 2 MJ/Kg, so that's 100 Kg of       
battery. I agree that's unlikely but don;t have enough information to make      
 the call.
      
 
      
Andrew
      
 
      
 
      
----- Original Message ----- 
      
        
From:         Jed         Rothwell 
        
To:         vortex-l@eskimo.com 
        
Sent:         Tuesday, May 21, 2013 1:53 PM
        
Subject:         Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem
        


Andrew <andrew...@att.net>         wrote:
        

        
          
          
You're missing my point. A power meter looking at wall power is           blind 
to any internal power source in the box that directly supplies           the 
device with additional power.

        


        
What sort of internal power source?
        


        
A generator? That would noisy and obvious.
        


        
A battery? That would run out before 5 days elapse. Or, if Rossi         has 
developed such a battery, it is an important discovery in its own         right.
        


        
A hidden wire? It would have to be a fairly large wire, to carry         500 to 
800 W. They would see it.
        


        
Do you have anything else in mind?
        


        
- Jed
        







Reply via email to