As a non-technical person who greatly enjoys and respects this forum
I am extremely cautious about opening new threads, so I have thought long
and hard about this and I think the time is right. I hope the brain trust
here will take a little time to answer.
My question: why would this not work?
1) Build a well insulated box about the size of a generous walk in
closet, large enough to comfortably accommodate the ECat, its electronics,
the frame and other supporting equipment, as well as a couple human
technicians.
2) Design and build an airflow system that, under steady
conditions, can most accurately measure the temperature of the air coming
in, leaving, and the volume of air being transferred.
3) Perform a series of calibration runs using a resistance
heater, and accurately measure the power coming through the outflow under
all combinations of temperature and airflow (and pressure if that's an
issue). By comparing these results to the known power being input to the
resistance heater, one will know the power being lost through the insulated
walls for all combinations of temperature and airflow.
4) Turn on the ECat and run it anyway you like provided it is at
or close to a steady state. Adjust the airflow so the ECat is kept at a
comfortable temperature. Follow four simple measurements, input power, temp
in, temp out and volume of air transferred. Run your results through your
calibrated software. Now you know how much power the ECat is producing.
I think it is fair to say at this juncture that the current
report if far from convincing, for regular posters at Vortex not to mention
the general public, due to the byzantine issues being raised concerning the
IR camera, the transmissivity of the alumina, and a host of other things. I
would venture a guess that one would not be able to find a single,
objective, expert member of the human race who could look at all this and
say for certain whether the results are valid or not. And even if such a
person existed, would he or she be able to convince the common person,
given all the objections being raised by the skeptics?
I sincerely hope that Darden or one of his lieutenants is
following this forum because I think I have something important to say. In
order for the ECat to reach its stated goal of lifting fellow human beings
out of poverty the technology is going to have to prove itself convincing
to the common, reasonably well educated person, the journalist, the
politician, the lobbyist, the board member of the philanthropic
organization that wishes to participate in the lifting up of humanity. In
other words somebody like me. I think I would be a thousand times more
convinced by a well-conducted airflow calorimetry than by the convoluted
investigations that have taken place up to this point. If the brain trust
at Vortex has any reason to say this wouldn't work, please let me know.
