best of luck with that
Eventually, you’ll buy a LENR water heater and say to yourself, “why didn’t I understand the technical arguments at the time?”
An independent test is an independent test, until skeptopaths get involved.
“Edmund Storms Mon, 20 May 2013 09:15:15 -0700
Before we get too excited. I think two questions need to be answered.
1. When was the calibration done and under what conditions. The amount of heat being radiated depends on the value of the effective total emissivity of the surface. This value will change with time and temperature. Therefore, the value needs to be determined as a function of temperature both before and after the hot-cat was heated. Details about how the temperature of the surface was determined also need to be provided. A detailed description of the test is required before these claims can be accepted.
2. How long does the hot-cat function at such high temperatures. This time will determine whether the device is a practical source of energy. The extra energy may be real, but if it only lasts a short time before the NAE is destroyed, the value of the design is limited.”
I would also ask what equipment was supplied by Rossi and what was provided entirely by the experimenters. I have not finished reading the paper but I am skeptical about the accuracy of both input power and out. As in the past, it is possible, even likely, that Rossi (or his surrogates who may have present during the experiments) found a way to fool the scientists.
It would be much more convincing if, instead of going to this very demanding and difficult to understand test, Rossi had simply had earlier tests repeated with PROPER CONTROLS AND CALIBRATIONS. He has **always** refused to do this. A perfect example of a test that would need to be properly redone was Levi’s original using liquid flow calorimetry but no proper calibration.
Also convincing would be if Rossi could produce an independent and credible customer who had bought a “megawatt plant” and had, in fact, extracted substantial power from it over a long period of time– for example heating a building or a chemical process plant.
Without more evidence, it is very hard to believe that this is not just another case of Rossi cleverly fooling people who very much want to believe him.
Rossi has presented a very strange method of proving his technology just as he did in the past. Much easier and more straightforward ways are available with the old ecat and lower temperatures which do not require measurement of radiative heat transfer.