I design measurement instrumentation for a living. My PhD is in analytical chemistry. My background includes pretty much every chemical measurement available from atomic spectroscopy, many areas of molecular spectroscopy, mass spectroscopy, gas chromatography, many types of thermal analysis (including calorimetry), laser fluorescence, sensor design and development (got a R&D100 for that). I have also used most types of nuclear instrumentation (GM tubes, proportional counters, Na(Tl)I scintillation, Si-Li solid state devices, liquid scintillation. Spent a summer doing carbon age dating. Currently, I am part owner of my own company which does chemical analysis by microfluidics. Our biggest project was to design the microfluidics "engine" used in a soon-to-be deployed biowarfare instrument (got another R&D 100 for that one). That one got me into biochemical analysis (polymerase chain reaction) and others. We are currently at work on miniaturized autonomous instruments for deployment in oceanographic work for deployment on ship-board and later on buoys and "robotic divers.
That wide diversity of knowledge is why I went into analytical chemistry in the first place...there are lots of areas of technology that working in it let you dig deeply into.
I'm a scientist and I follow the data, except when I don't. Nice Dodge, it got a hemi?
Rossi set the system up the way he chose to. Why he made certain choices may have been a simple as the three phase circuit was the highest power one where he was working. I don't know, and short of emailing him no way to find out.
But at least one of the demos had an oscilloscope on the output of his control box monitoring the power feed to his reactor. This was one of the first two trials in Bologna. Said oscilloscope is not mentioned in the reports from those, but it was there and working, so the witnesses had access to the wave-form feeding the reactor.
"When I started in electronics, I started off in D/C, you have to crawl before you can walk so he skips the method that allows simple math and goes deep requiring vector math to get near the correct number, sorry, no sale.
Again, his choice. If you want to know....ask him.
"As I said previously, he took a leap over the easy method, doesn't make sense.
Again, his choice. It obviously made sense to him.
"Guilty as charged, but I have laid out a logical reason for my speculation,yes?
No.
"I don't really want to search through three years of posts but I'm pretty sure it was you who said the ideal method would be water bath calorimetry. But I'll take you at your word that it wasn't you . This might be a good time to say what other areas of measurement you're an expert in.
It wasn't me. I'm familiar with all the forms of calorimetry used, any of them can deliver the goods.
"During the coil ON states, the instantaneous power absorbed by the E-Cat HT2 and the control box together was visible on the PCE-830 LCD display. This value, with some fluctuations in time, remained in any case within a range of 910-930 W. By checking the video image relevant to the PCE-830 LCD display, we were also able to estimate the length of the ON/OFF intervals: with reference to the entire duration of the test, the resistor coils were on for about 35% of the time, and off for the remaining 65%.
What, exactly does this have to do with the calibration of the IR camera and how it was calibrated.
"Don't be coy, you know exactly what I'm saying here. Levi is a friend of Rossi.
No, Levi was a friend of FOCARDI. There is zip evidence that Rossi even knew Levi before the demonstration(s). They may well have become friends since.
"I'm also an expert on human nature and no way was Levy, Rossi's friend going to sandbag Rossi's demo and I would go farther and speculate he's part of it. While it may not be impropriety, it sure smells like it.
Oh, please. A key part of being a scientist is exactly to rise above your "human nature" and maintain a dispassionate and impartial scrutiny of the data. The only thing you "smell" is your upper lip.
"I think it's wrong and not how science is done, you know like you used to do before selling part of your soul, I hope you got a good price, wait, you gave it away for free and you didn't even know it, awesome. You realize the more you rationalize this, the remaining pieces of your soul dies. Luckily for me, mine died a long time ago.
Stupidity.
"“… the E-Cat HT was already running when the test began…” “…it was not possible to inspect the inside of the control box…”
For that single test. You conveniently forget that there were several demos, for which the observers "did" have full access to the control system.
"Um, you were saying? Were you perhaps speculating?
Uh, no. See above point. Unless you think Rossi re-designed his control system differently for every test.
"So, what do you think of Rossi getting a PhD by mailing a check to a diploma mill?"
Another social argument. I have no idea why he did. But it is basically irrelevant to analyzing the data from the different tests.
"That feeling, it's cognitive dissonance, it's your brain trying to tell you you're on a fool's errand and I don't take you for a fool."
Want to see a fool?? Look in your mirror.
That is actually pretty impressive. So, why did you chuck all that away and begin praying at the alter of Rossi?
Rossi set the system up the way he chose to. Why he made certain choices may have been a simple as the three phase circuit was the highest power one where he was working. I don't know, and short of emailing him no way to find out.
Not curious at all, it all makes perfect sense, yes? You are bsing me, you don't find that curious at all, you would accept that excuse from a coworker and maybe we should ask Rossi himself why he made such a hash of a simple experiment? He only answers fawning letters so you are in a unique place in this regard, hop to it.
But at least one of the demos had an oscilloscope on the output of his control box monitoring the power feed to his reactor. This was one of the first two trials in Bologna. Said oscilloscope is not mentioned in the reports from those, but it was there and working, so the witnesses had access to the wave-form feeding the reactor.
An oscilloscope is a tool, not a panacea. Was it set correctly? Correct time base, trigger set on the correct waveform. I've got a Tek 7904a and every 7000 series module that comes with it and guess what, it's a 500mhz scope but select the one time base and one vertical amp for the slower 7000 series that I have and you only see the low frequency waveform. A scope isn't a magic box, it has to be read. Again, this sounds like a cynical attempt to appear legit.
Again, his choice. If you want to know....ask him.
Lets look at this. I ask him, and he's not going to say, hey, you caught me, I am scamming, really lame and should be beneath you but I guess there's no limit to the depths of human depravity when your reality is slipping away.
Again, his choice. It obviously made sense to him.
Too bad it doesn't make sense to anyone else except for his cheer leading squad.
Me"Guilty as charged, but I have laid out a logical reason for my speculation,yes?
You: No. It's pretty obvious you will go to any lengths to support Rossi. Allow me a little analysis. You've always been smarter than most people and you obviously have an education but you also have an arrogance about you that us unwashed masses cannot know what you and Rossi seem to know and understand. Pretty typical if not pedantic and pathetic. Rule#1, there's always someone bigger, smarter or badder.
What, exactly does this have to do with the calibration of the IR camera and how it was calibrated.
That's laid out in the article, I just thought it was too funny how 900 watts becomes 360 watts. It's not who votes who counts but who counts the votes.
Stupidity.
And here I thought we understood each other, I shall forever be shamed by your one word put down, oh my.
No, Levi was a friend of FOCARDI. There is zip evidence that Rossi even knew Levi before the demonstration(s). They may well have become friends since.
You were saying?
Oh, please. A key part of being a scientist is exactly to rise above your "human nature" and maintain a dispassionate and impartial scrutiny of the data. The only thing you "smell" is your upper lip.
You know, for $5.95 and my ten page pamphlet, you too can use the tools of derision successfully.
For that single test. You conveniently forget that there were several demos, for which the observers "did" have full access to the control system.
Link please, can we get an amen on the number of tests conducted during May of 2013??? Seems rather nebulous to me, let's get the number of tests stipulated to so you don't have an out by way of the other test where everything went well.
Uh, no. See above point. Unless you think Rossi re-designed his control system differently for every test.
I actually do think that but not for the reason you think. Rossi isn't an idiot, just amoral so he listens to his critics and games the next test to quiet the critics of the last test. Scam is such a loaded word, how about fraud?
Another social argument. I have no idea why he did. But it is basically irrelevant to analyzing the data from the different tests.
Bollocks, I so love that word. You, who did put in the time for a real PhD have no problem with what Rossi did, you know, I think you're lying to yourself.
Want to see a fool?? Look in your mirror.
I would but I was in a horrible accident and can no longer face looking at myself, thank you for bringing up that painful memory.
Unless you think Rossi re-designed his control system differently for every test.
***There is evidence he’s been upgrading it over the past 2 years.