The Playground

    The video is interesting for dealing with some meter errors but poorly explained and presented by its OP and difficult to see smaller detail clearly, on the rather distant meters. It doesn't appear to have the same symptoms as the Current Test on the SKLEP


    The 3430 only uses 'OL' on certain ranges (as mentioned in my earlier post #9618) plus Diode check, but it doesn't appear to include Current


    I don't know the context of the other photo, two posts above, but again it doesn't appear to contain the same symptoms as the SKLEP demo Current Test



    I find it interesting that, despite the incongruous appearance of the '1' in the LH segment of the m.s. digit place, the demo meter shows the digital and the 'analogue' readings to be in agreement both about the '457.3' part and the negative polarity (again mentioned in that same earlier post)


    Still, we're promised further excitement with repeats of the Current Test ahead, so maybe we'll learn more later!

    One image shows a PSU making 0 Amps while the meter reads 3+ mA, as well as the display clearly indicating mA, etc.
    The OL image shows that it does not use the far left digit for that.

    The meter should have chosen AC or DC for uA readings and it defaults to DC. (One online tester noted that ‘high DC’ blocks AC measurements on a tear down and evaluation of the MS version.)

    Auto ranging it might hop from 1 _ _ _ _ uA (over range display for 220.00 uA scale) to roughly 450.0 uA in the 2200.0 uA scale.

    The indicator position on the 0 to 22 scale bar is consistent with the around 450 uA digital reading.

    Why it would be negative is weird the way it is hooked up.

    The 1 ____ over range reading shouldn’t come back again or keep flashing.

    If there is some sort of game of fool-the-meter then any quality meter will do.

    Yes, some more good points, thanks


    WRT the above photo of the meter and the PSU, though, the PSU shown only has 2 dec. places in the current reading and is likely to be fixed-range, so the lowest non-zero current it can display will be 10mA. A reading of '0.00 A' on the PSU is to be expected if the current, as shown on the 3430, is only 3+mA

    Gie me ae spark o' nature's fire, That's a' the learning I desire

    R. Burns

    Quote from nul-points

    Yes, some more good points, thanks


    WRT the above photo of the meter and the PSU, though, the PSU shown only has 2 dec. places in the current reading and is likely to be fixed-range, so the lowest non-zero current it can display will be 10mA. A reading of '0.00 A' on the PSU is to be expected if the current, as shown on the 3430, is only 3+mA

    In all cases these DMM measurements are not guaranteed accurate. In many they are not likely accurate. For the following reason.


    If meters are on DC ranges (similar issues with AC) they will be smoothing out any ac waveform with a DC component. For many reasons, it is very likely that Rossi's circuit has a pulse current waveform with a low duty cycle and hence a high crest factor (ratio of max to average value).


    Such waveforms are tricky to measure correctly (one reason Rossi has in the past has such success with them).


    In this case, with a DC measurement, we have the possibility that any DMM, integrating these pulses over say 20ms (or whatever) will have an input amplifier circuit that saturates during the peak, thus underestimating the current. Whether this is true depends on the duty cycle (very small => higher crest factor) and the DMM and which range of the DMM is being used. auto-ranging will often result in low duty-cycle signals having DC value underestimated. (The DMM may LP filter inputs before any limiting amplifier for DC measurement, which can reduce this problem. But to check that you would need all the details of the DMM circult and the details of the pulse waveform).


    Note that this error is different from the other one Rossi likes (when he famously told Mats Lewin that it was fine to measure ac power using dc non-true-rms meters) where a pulse waveform is misread by anything except a true-RMS meter that independently measures, multiples instantaneously, and integrates instantaneous power. Easily confused with it, because pulse waveforms can show both types of error depending on what exactly they are and how they are measured.


    In this case I am supposing the voltage in is constant, which simplifies things but makes keeps dc mismeasurement likely.


    As I said a long way above, the only safe way to measure (pretty well any) black-box circuit is a scope to check for high frequencies which can defeat many things, and to measure crest factor and a meter. The scope can the be used to check that the meter normal operating conditions (low enough crest factor, no frequencies beyond those specified, and so on) are met. In reality I'd rather measure everything with scopes. For current then you have to rely on a shunt resistance having the stated value and being correctly connected. A big ask for Rossi - so even then I'd not trust a Rossi video'd demo.


    To validate such measurements with someone of Rossi's integrity providing the demo all you need (and you always need it) is competent and unpartisan people checking everything outside the black box. Easy for any normal person wanting an honest test. Rossi has never had this except when IH paid him a lot to show and tell - and then found what he showed was apparently nothing, and when asked to tell he went off in a huff.


    THH

    It used to be the case that we needed to be rigourous in the detail just to ensure we could do the necessary accounting when inspecting the data for clear and unequivocal proof exactly where around the <100%, =100%, >100% efficiency boundary the claimed performance landed (<=100, in all our previous experience, of course)


    Now, somehow, we seem to have been transported into a parallel universe where n > 1 is a given, and folks happily throw calculations around with values of n in the thousands, or tens of thousands - all off the back of wild and unsupported claims


    I'm not sure that it is even worth being rigourous yet until we can show just how preposterous and disconnected from reality some of these currently-claimed 'facts' are: "Not even wrong"**


    (** different discipline, i know, but sadly relevant for us here too)

    Gie me ae spark o' nature's fire, That's a' the learning I desire

    R. Burns

    Like 2

    Here is another article about ChatGPT. This is a gift version which you should be able to read. It includes a paragraph generated by ChatGPT.


    Paul Krugman

    Does ChatGPT Mean Robots Are Coming For the Skilled Jobs?

    Opinion | Does ChatGPT Mean Robots Are Coming For the Skilled Jobs?
    How A.I. will affect the demand for knowledge workers.
    www.nytimes.com


    The paragraph:


    It is difficult to predict exactly how A.I. will impact the demand for knowledge workers, as it will likely vary, depending on the industry and specific job tasks. However, it is possible that in some cases, A.I. and automation may be able to perform certain knowledge-based tasks more efficiently than humans, potentially reducing the need for some knowledge workers. This could include tasks such as data analysis, research and report writing. However, it is also worth noting that A.I. and automation may also create new job opportunities for knowledge workers, particularly in fields related to A.I. development and implementation.

    Open access ChatGPT is here:


    https://chat.openai.com/chat


    Sample queries I submitted:


    What happened in the battle of dan no ura (1185)?


    The Battle of Dan-no-ura was a naval battle fought on April 25, 1185 in the Shimonoseki Strait near the Japanese islands of Honshu and Kyushu. The battle was fought between the rival clans of the Taira and Minamoto, and it marked the end of the Genpei War, a civil war that had lasted for over a decade. The Taira clan, also known as the Heike, were defeated by the Minamoto, also known as the Genji, and the Genji's leader, Minamoto no Yoritomo, became the first shogun of Japan.


    [An absurd answer]


    What happened in the battle of shikyou no eki in 1866?


    I'm sorry, but I am not aware of a battle called the "Battle of Shikyou no Eki" that took place in 1866. I am a large language model trained by OpenAI, and my knowledge is based on the text that I have been trained on, which ends in 2021. It's possible that the battle you are referring to took place after my training period and I am not able to provide information about it. Is there anything else I can help you with?



    How does a flow calorimeter work?


    A flow calorimeter is a device that is used to measure the heat capacity of a material. It works by flowing a known quantity of a material through a temperature-controlled chamber, and then measuring the heat that is transferred to or from the material as it passes through the chamber. This allows the heat capacity of the material to be calculated by measuring the temperature change and the flow rate of the material. Flow calorimetry is often used in research and industrial settings to study the thermal properties of materials and to optimize the design of heat exchangers and other thermal systems.

    This section is not for discussions, but here is one more fascinating query. This program is remarkable.


    Why do some scientists think that cold fusion is real?



    Some scientists think that cold fusion is real because they have observed evidence that suggests that it is possible. This evidence typically comes in the form of excess heat and the detection of small amounts of helium, which are both products of the fusion reaction.


    However, many other scientists are skeptical of the claims made about cold fusion. The scientific community as a whole has not yet reached a consensus on the reality of cold fusion, and there is still significant debate and disagreement about the validity of the evidence that has been presented.


    One of the main reasons for skepticism about cold fusion is that it goes against our current understanding of physics. The fusion reactions that occur in the sun and other stars require extremely high temperatures and pressures to take place, conditions that are not present in most cold fusion experiments. This has led many scientists to doubt that cold fusion is possible based on our current understanding of the laws of physics.


    Overall, while some scientists believe that cold fusion is real based on the evidence they have observed, many others remain skeptical and believe that further research is needed to fully understand the phenomenon.

    This is mainstream condensed matter physics, not our special section. Probably Forsley will present NASA LCF results.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

    Today at 12pm someone (Rossi?) walked in and pulled (accidently?) the voltage first down and then up. The LED faded and then went full brightness, up to about 7 Watts. The person then tried to tune it again to 10V, and landed at 9,99V, obviously not knowing that there is a "Fine" knob.

    The whole setup is just an LED operating barely above the threshold thus drawing low amps. Watch it here:

    External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    Judging from the ring on the left hand it was Rossi.

    Quote from h_l

    Today at 12pm someone (Rossi?) walked in and pulled (accidently?) the voltage first down and then up. The LED faded and then went full brightness, up to about 7 Watts. The person then tried to tune it again to 10V, and landed at 9,99V, obviously not knowing that there is a "Fine" knob.

    The whole setup is just an LED operating barely above the threshold thus drawing low amps. Watch it here:

    External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    Judging from the ring on the left hand it was Rossi.

    LOL. It actually looked like a working headlight for a moment.

    Inside a typical COB LED is visible, I would guess maybe 10W. It's certainly not from the original manufacturer, it hangs loose off center through the hole in the back of the reflector. The "SKLep" behind is probably completely empty or houses a resistor for LED protection.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.