What is hilarious about this whole discussion is that none of it is either desirable or necessary. Rossi's silly kludge should never have been tested with a thermal camera. It should have been tested with a high temperature calorimeter like this one: https://gsvit.wordpress.com/20…te-calorimetria-a-flusso/ (use Google translate).
Of course, that, and proper control and measurement of input power, would show that Rossi has nothing but an electrical tube furnace. So Rossi invented and I am sure carefully tested, two or more misdirections which he used for his so-called Ferrara (sp?) test and his Lugano test. Why do you think the Swedish professors won't answer questions from Clarke, Branzell, and Pomp et. al. ??
Anyway, to prove that the ecat principle works, the professors would have had a much easier time trying to replicate the experiment by Levi supposedly done back in February 2011.
http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter…energi/article3108242.ece
High power, high output/input ratio, great duration, everything whoopee except the dog ate Levi's homework and he wouldn't do it again with proper calibration. What a guy! So have fun guessing what might be behind the thermal camera data. But it's all a gross waste of time. Not only did Thomas Clarke and Branzell explode the results so that they mean nothing. It's also the wrong test with the wrong device. Other than that, it's ok!