Experimental procedure to obtain COP=22000 (Rossi-style)
This thread has made me very depressed, but I'm going to try with a positive reply to the (IMHO) dreadful lack of thought shown by some.
Contention by some: COP=22,000 is too high to be explained away as measurement error. Surely the guy watching this would know if it was 22,000 X off?
I claim: This is absolutely plausible given what we know, and a non-expert (in Rossi experiments) would not question the results.
I will prove my claim by proposing an exact system that Rossi might use that could give the claimed results, as analysed by Rossi and believed by a gullible audience.
I'm not saying this is what he used (There are a whole load of methods, including out and out fabrication, deceit, etc. Only one can be right which means all the others are wrong!). But, Rossi's lies in general are tricky. They more often involve mistaken analysis, misdirection, partial truths misinterpreted by his listeners. So this measurement error solution has more plausibility to me than out and out error.
Background. This looks like a plasma discharge (neon bulb etc). It would likely require a high voltage to initiate. We have a measured implausibly low DC voltage. But a plausible way to generate the high voltages needed to ionise this material is via very low duty cycle spikes from any number of generators that do that. And the average DC voltage (and current) would then be small
Rossi has long past history of using average meters to measure spiky waveforms. It is again plausible that he does that here. What error can we therefore expect on input waveform?
Let us suppose 10V spikes. The duty cycle is then 1% and the error (between power calculated by Rossi from average Dc V and A, and true power) is X100.
Now let us consider the output power. Rossi looks at the radiation spectrum in the range 350-1100nm. He integrates this spectrum to get the spectral peak, which he applies, using Wien's approximation, to determine the super-high temperature of 2700K. He calculates power out as 240W from a 1 sq cm surface area (very high) because of this super-high temperature. Remember this is Rossi doing the calculations, suppose therefore that they are correct, but misleading.
(1) the actual surface area (of the plasma) is not the area of the container, but smaller than this. Likely magnitude d1/d2. We don't know what this could be, but 10 is plausible?
(2) the plasma radiation is not black body, but has a strong and thin spectral line. The difference here is enormous. For example applying the Rossi method to a sodium vapour lamp we get an over-estimate by a factor equal to the area under the Planck curve with peak the line frequency divided by the area under the narrow-band sodium spectral lines. This is a large factor, possibly 50X, because the spectrum is narrow-band.
(3) the claimed spectral peak is near the limits of the spectrum measured (1100nm vs 1150nm). this is suspicious. Suppose we take Rossi at his word. he is integrating the spectrum to find its weighted average wavelength. This will naturally give a number close to the high wavelength end for any wavelength peak that is lonmger than the measurement window. This will lead to an over-estimate of the frequency - even if it is Black body - by some unknown factor. 5X is plausible. that would give a power error of 625X
Now, (2) and (3) are completely opposite, and cannot both apply. But both do happily apply with (1). So we have a choice of a plausible power out overestimate of:
up to 500X (1) and (2)
up to 6250X (1) and (3)
we have an input error or 100X so we get a Rossi super-COP of 50,000 or 625,000 respectively. Comfortably in excess of Rossi's claims.
Obviously, these calculations are wrong. But they show how easily, using known Rossi tricks and the type of power estimation hinted at from this vague report, input and output, large errors can be obtained.
Wow. You really should use your vivid imagination and creativity for something else than coming up with n+1 conspiracy scenarios. Theater maybe. But I get it - almost anything is possible - not very probable though.