MarkI-ZeroPoint <zeropo...@charter.net> wrote: Jed:**** > > ** ** > > You left out the more important part of my posting:**** > > “And JC is WELL aware of this, yet asks the question as to why they used > 3-phase power in their tests… the second test was SINGLE phase power, so * > *JC is misleading people**…” >
I was giving him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he did not notice that? Let us see if he now acknowledges the second test was with single phase power so this is not an issue. (Not that it ever would be an issue, since the meter works with 3-phase power.) Some of these people refuse to take "yes" for an answer. The discussion, if you want to call it that, goes like this -- Skeptic: I will not believe this until they do it with single phase power. Response: They did. Skeptic: I will not believe this until they confirm that the IR sensor was correctly calibrated. Response: They did, by comparing it to a thermocouple and with standard emissivity materials. Skeptic: That's still not enough! I demand they look for DC! Response: They now say they did. Skeptic: I want to know what the cable and the waveform looks like! And the powder! Response: Why? That cannot possibly effect the outcome. Skeptic: I say it can! Besides, it isn't enough to confirm the heat. I demand a theory! A theory I can believe . . . Etc. etc., ad nauseum. - Jed
