They tested a dummy device, that is, an empty reactor, which showed a supposedly correct IR emission. The input was the same.
2013/5/21 Andrew <andrew...@att.net> > ** > Daniel, > > I'm misunderstanding this reference of yours to the control with the empty > reactor. If there's a gizmo, then I assume it's either in the power supply > or the waveform generator. I suspect you're making a serious point that I'm > missing here. > > Andrew > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> > *To:* John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 21, 2013 7:02 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem > > But that would mean another device, a circuit, which modified the input > when they compared with the empty reactor. > > > 2013/5/21 Andrew <andrew...@att.net> > >> ** >> I don't know if you are an EE in any way (I am), but irrelevant it is >> not. If the measurement probes only work up to 60 Hz and the majority of >> the power is being pumped at 200 Hz (arbitrary numbers), and the probes are >> 40 dB down at 200 Hz.... >> >> Andrew >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> *From:* Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> >> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com >> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 21, 2013 6:25 PM >> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem >> >> Andrew <andrew...@att.net> wrote: >> >> >>> Rossi has stated that the input waveform is proprietary. Therefore the >>> obvious question is whether these researchers were even allowed to look at >>> it. >>> >> >> I do not think they were allowed to look at it, but it is irrelevant. >> They measured the power going into the power supplies and wave form >> generator. Output power far exceeded all input power into the entire >> system. It does not matter what the power supplies did. >> >> - Jed >> >> > > > -- > Daniel Rocha - RJ > danieldi...@gmail.com > > -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
