all data points gathered during experiment are bogus so any analysis is pointless besides Rossi looks and acts as a jerk and no-radiation detected plus coulomb barrier.
That should read
We know LENR is impossible so all data points gathered during experiment are bogus so any analysis is pointless besides Rossi looks and acts as a jerk and no-radiation detected plus coulomb barrier.
There have been reports that you could feel the insulated E-Cat box still boiling inside nearly four hours after the power was turned off. Not only that, the heat generated went up as well.
That would be quite a trick for a fairly shallow box of hot water wouldn't it?
Is it not extraordinary that in this latest test the total energy out is still LESS than the total energy in?
And if you want a device which can store heat energy and emit it irregularly at varying power levels I can oblige - it is not difficult.
There have been reports that you could feel the insulated E-Cat box still boiling inside nearly four hours after the power was turned off. Not only that, the heat generated went up as well.
That would be quite a trick for a fairly shallow box of hot water wouldn't it?
Is it not extraordinary that in this latest test the total energy out is still LESS than the total energy in?
And if you want a device which can store heat energy and emit it irregularly at varying power levels I can oblige - it is not difficult.
And that is supposing the temperature & flow readings are good. Which if past experiments are anything to go by is unlikely.
Truly amazing that Rossi could not manufacture any heat generation even with so little checking!
Is it not extraordinary that in this latest test the total energy out is still LESS than the total energy in?
I am sceptical myself, but from what I understood, this is not true.
The device allegedly still produced more output than input during the period of heating up.
Is it not extraordinary that in this latest test the total energy out is still LESS than the total energy in?
I am sceptical myself, but from what I understood, this is not true.
The device allegedly still produced more output than input during the period of heating up.
It is not correct, during "heating up" the ratio E_OUT/E_IN == ~x1
Is it not extraordinary that in this latest test the total energy out is still LESS than the total energy in?
How do you figure that? It does not seem correct.
If the whole device has such capacity for heat, why don't you count that after the experiment has ended, when presumably the E-Cat is still hot?
As far as one can tell, the E-Cat would have gone on delivering heat and was only shut down on schedule in order to cool off so the insides could be shown to the attendees.
Is it not extraordinary that in this latest test the total energy out is still LESS than the total energy in?
How do you figure that? It does not seem correct.
If the whole device has such capacity for heat, why don't you count that after the experiment has ended, when presumably the E-Cat is still hot?
As far as one can tell, the E-Cat would have gone on delivering heat and was only shut down on schedule in order to cool off so the insides could be shown to the attendees.
>"How do you figure that? It does not seem correct."
Actually it does not "seem" incorrect - it IS incorrect unless data is wrong. It shows very clearly x3 out/in ratio. The only way to deny it is to declare that the experiment data is wrong. In fact all setup was not favorable for E-cat, for exmpl. they wasted steam (they should reuse it), did not account the residual heat etc... seems Rossi is getting too cocky. Anyway, if to take the data accuracy within 50% then result is irrefutably favorable for e-cat.
Just have to hope that whoever is designing the set-up of these demonstrations is not involved in the design of their marketable reactors .... talk about a Heath Robinson affair.
There have been reports that you could feel the insulated E-Cat box still boiling inside nearly four hours after the power was turned off. Not only that, the heat generated went up as well.
That would be quite a trick for a fairly shallow box of hot water wouldn't it?
Well, water boils at 100'C and if the temp. inside was greater than is normal to hear water boiling.
As I said water has an high tendency to stratify and not to mix.
stefanbanev wrote:Well, the skeptic defense can be quite simple: all data points gathered during experiment are bogus so any analysis is pointless besides Rossi looks and acts as a jerk and no-radiation detected plus coulomb barrier... besides MIT has proved that CF is a BS therefore, it is an apparent scam and anybody supporting it is a self-delusional idiot. Academia will never admit its stupidity; ignore it, make a lot of $$ and buy their "expertise", they will comply with $$ they always do...
Many (including me) offered to work for free to structure a decent experimental set up to prove his claims.
As you see the the problem is not that "academia" is ignoring him, but that HE is ignoring and refusing "academia" free support.
One of my contacts sent to Rossi an offer to supply and install free of charge 4 complete PC based calorimetry/flow meters to correctly evaluate the heat exchanger production. He never got a reply.
Quite honestly, I am a little less sceptical now than I was before the test and I think that some people are getting to conclusions a little to quickly here.
There were quite a few people present at the recent test and while it was definitely flawed (once again), it does give us some more data to work with. Of course you can always assume fraud, but I have to say that at this point this fraud would be so elaborate and so risky, that it does not seem likely.
My updated gut feeling is right now:
25% fraud
25% self delusion
50% real
So a 50:50 chance that this thing is indeed real.
I do sincerely hope that if Rossi is for real, he will get down from his high riding horse and will let some real tests be performed at a university.
If he is planning on selling the device, then I sure hope that he does a better job at convincing his customers than he does at convincing his doubters...
tomclarke,
Up to 15:53 the input power can be considered that necessary to raise the temperature of the whole module to that required for operation.
At 15:53 the power was turned off and the module continued to stay at the same temperature while producing 2 - 3kW with no sign of slowing down.
At 19:25 the H2 was allowed to escape and the cooling water rate increased. At that time one could assume the whole module was at about the temperature it was at 15:53.
I'm just the opposite... this test has lowered my confidence that it is real.
Certainly he is well aware of the scathing editorials on his scientific method (or lack thereof) in his previous demos, and I can't figure any reason that if he had a real deal that he would not pull out all the stops to ensure this test (the climax of them all), was spotless.
If he was trying to convince people, why would he even put himself in charge of the setup in the first place? Far more convincing is to let one or more of your guests design the test.
Whatever the reason, the fluctuation in temp delta measurements make it, to me, unusable. An un-calibrated bathroom scale to weigh the thing? Really? We finally have a flow meter, but it is irrelevant because it was used on the circuit with wildly unstable temperature measurements. I don't believe we have any idea what the flow rate was for the circuit that went through the e-cat right?
As someone previously pointed out, it seems the only thing we can really take from this is that he kept water boiling for 4 hours in a rather large and heavy box. That doesn't really say much. Especially in the context that this was supposed to be the demo that ruled them all.
stefanbanev wrote:Well, the skeptic defense can be quite simple: all data points gathered during experiment are bogus so any analysis is pointless besides Rossi looks and acts as a jerk and no-radiation detected plus coulomb barrier... besides MIT has proved that CF is a BS therefore, it is an apparent scam and anybody supporting it is a self-delusional idiot. Academia will never admit its stupidity; ignore it, make a lot of $$ and buy their "expertise", they will comply with $$ they always do...
Many (including me) offered to work for free to structure a decent experimental set up to prove his claims.
As you see the the problem is not that "academia" is ignoring him, but that HE is ignoring and refusing "academia" free support.
One of my contacts sent to Rossi an offer to supply and install free of charge 4 complete PC based calorimetry/flow meters to correctly evaluate the heat exchanger production. He never got a reply.
I should apologize for being too harsh on Academia; there are plenty nice people there but the structure is sick in my opinion. I'm not surprised Rossi did not accept a free help; he looks as he may have a paranoia (with good reasons btw) plus he apparently has had a bad experience with academia; having such great result in hand the patronizing attitude he expects from academia may be a roadblock. Anyway, he is not well rounded & well trained business development person, as well as he is not a well spoken balanced professor building up his carrier; he is a disparate men on the mission lucky to stumble upon this effect thanks to his persistence and practical intelligence. Even if E-cat is for real (~80%) there is a good chance Rossi still may fail and "well rounded" people will take over; in such case "we" will win anyway hopefully Rossi will have his reword as well...
