How does this theory of fraud fit in with Rossi's money back customer satisfaction guaranty? I do not understand how Rossi and this partners make money with this condition in place. Please explain.
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 2:27 PM, John Milstone <john_sw_orla...@yahoo.com>wrote: > I guess you haven't bothered actually reading my earlier posts. <sigh> > > With the "dead" wire rigged to supply power continuously, we would see a > modulation of the input power of 1200 Watts (400 from each of the 2 "live" > phases plus 400 Watts from the "dead" phase) for 2 minutes, followed by 400 > Watts (just from the "dead" phase) for 4 minutes, repeating. > > Instead of the claimed power input (400 Watts * 2 phases * 33% duty cycle > = 266.6 Watts (average), the E-Cat (actually, the heating coils in the tube > furnace) would have 400 Watts * 3 phases * 33% duty cycle + 400 Watts * 66% > duty cycle = 666.6 Watts (average). This gives an observed COP of 2.5, > just what the report describes. > > No laser beams. No magic paint. No tricky DC bias or high-frequency > signals inserted into the normal A/C power supply. Just one hidden > conductor in the supposedly "dead" wire. (If the wire wasn't doing > anything, why was it left in the circuit?) > > John > > ------------------------------ > *From:* David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Sent:* Friday, June 21, 2013 2:08 PM > > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]: About the March test > > John, > > Please explain how the dead wire you discuss is able to deliver a > continuous power into the control box while still explaining the modulation > of the output power and temperature as seen by the IR camera system. If, > as you imply, power is continually sent to the power resistors you need to > explain how the waveforms fail to show any indication of this. Also, the > input power matches quite well with the output power determination in the > time domain. > > Where the graphs show power going into the control box, temperature is > rising on the exterior of the device. Why do you suppose this is so? > Reference to continuous power input is not consistent with any of the data. > > Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: John Milstone <john_sw_orla...@yahoo.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Fri, Jun 21, 2013 1:47 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]: About the March test > > Nice attempt by Benne, Storms (I'm surprised that he piled on), and > Roberson to deflect the issue. > > There is still the issue that Rossi has a supposedly "dead" phase on his > 3-phase power cabling, and that that additional wire, if it were actually > "live" (as per the wiring gimmick in question), would have provided exactly > the amount of power allegedly being generated by the E-Cat (conveniently > hidden inside of a furnace out of sight of the IR camera). > > Regarding your specific rant, attempting to discredit "hot" fusion (or > other branches of conventional physics) does nothing to enhance LENR. > > John > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Sent:* Friday, June 21, 2013 1:21 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]: About the March test > > I agree Ed. Both you and Jones have stated the situation eloquently and > I hope that John gives considerable thought to what has been said. > > I suppose that one reason that any current modern physics determination > can be overturned by a knowledgeable skeptic is that they all are the > current ideas which one day will be replaced by updated ones. This is > scientific progress as it should be. For example, Newton's old laws were > assumed perfect at the time, but Einstein came along and improved them with > his breakthroughs. > > So, now Rossi has his device under scrutiny by the skeptics who can always > find some reason to complain. Most if not all of the reasons thus far > suggested are invalid, but the skeptics seem to keep themselves occupied. > This is their job and they would not know how to behave otherwise so I > guess we have to cut them some slack. I would be concerned if what they > spread throughout the Internet were able to delay the solution to many of > the needs of mankind. > > Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Cc: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > Sent: Fri, Jun 21, 2013 12:56 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]: About the March test > > Well said, JONES!!! This is exactly the situation. Physics has sold > the governments of the world on spending money for research that has > practically no value. This use of money limits what else can be > explored and greatly distorts what can be discovered. LENR has been > rejected and held to a very high standard simply because it threatens > this spending, as you so clearly state. When LENR is finally applied > at a level that even an idiot will have to accept, the physics > community will have to explain why this acceptance took so long when > so much evidence was available and when the need for the energy was so > great. Careful evaluation and rational skepticism is important but > rational limits must be applied because EVERYTHING believed by science > can be rejected by a determined skeptic. We would still be in the > Dark Ages if rational limits to skepticism had not been agreed to and > applied in science. Why is so hard to do now with LENR? > > > > Ed > On Jun 21, 2013, at 10:42 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > > > > > > > From: John Milstone > > > > > > > > For starters, CERN isn't selling "franchises" to the Higgs Boson. > > CERN > > doesn't rely on "secret" customers and "secret" experts to validate > > their > > work. Etc, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is complete bull crap ! Big Science is doing much worse than > > that. > > > > > > > > But more so with regard to ITER or NOVA or Hot Fusion or other Big > > Science > > projects that are threatened by LENR than with CERN. > > > > > > > > The physics establishment is essentially selling "franchises" to > > every > > overpaid PhD and "yes-man" techie on the large staffs - who would be > > fired, > > if this kind of no-bid work were to be made moot by LENR. > > > > > > > > CERN might survive, but ITER and other extremely generous projects > > with > > routine $250k salaries would bite the dust! > > > > > > > > That is billions of dollars of bribe money, being paid out to an > > elite group > > to "tow the company line" ... That is far more despicable than Rossi > > struggling for investment capital. > > > > <winmail.dat> > > > > > > >
