Posts by Paradigmnoia

Quote from Roseland67

Para,

It is beyond trivial to install a revenue accurate meter on the power inputs of the entire Ecat.

Then you measure the “energy out“ provided by the Ecat divide that by the

“Energy in” to to the Ecat and viola.

This continuous sleight of hand, pay no attention to the human behind the curtain

chicanery of measuring voltage drops across resistors, negative frequency, upside down power factor reading s are just a meaningless smokescreen to keep the gullible fooled.

There are no industrial customers anywhere on planet earth that would ever fall for this tripe. Now, on planet Rossi, probably.

Display More

There are several ways to test electricity that are suitable.

What I wonder is, what will actually be done, since solid proof of Rossi tech never seems to be the goal.

I was enjoying Keith T asking Rossi 100 questions about certification.

Best guess for a new demo...

Maybe a 1 ohm on the ‘input’ and a 1 ohm on the ‘output’ and compare to show the glowcat making more than input?

Certainly these strange PCE-830 readings are not what should be expected a day into the test.

LDM ,

Part of the problem may be that there were 4 cables (3 phases plus neutral) attached to the ecat in December 2012, and which are connected in the strangest way.

Quote from LDM

Instead it shows the ecat producing over 1 kW, and was totally ignored by the Professors.

Don't know when and where this picture was taken.

However the screen layout suggests that the PCE-830 is in 3 phase, 3 wire mode.

Voltage of about 240 Volt suggests that the measurment took place in Europe and thus that the mains frequency should be 50 Hz.

However the PCE-830 shows a frequency of 5.3 Hz !

Normally you set the frequency on the PCE-830 to a fixed mains frequency of 50 Hz (Europe) or 60 Hz (USA).

In that case the the display will show 50 F or 60 F, the F meaning that the frequency is set fixed.

In the picture shown the display shows 5.3 A, the A meaning that the PCE-830 is set to automaticcaly trying to determine the frequency.

And it is failing to do so, probably due to the a non sine current wave form.

It will now use the 5.3 Hz as the base frequency for determining the higher order harmonics and these will be incorrect.

As a result the presented measurement results will also be incorrect.

So if the results presented in the display where ignored, then that was a correct decision.

They have no comment since 10 years.

Incorrect. In the UNSWORN DECLARATON OF GIUSEPPE LEVI in the court documents Levi made a comment about the critique on the Lugano test.

Maybe not detailed answers we all expected, nevertheless it is a comment.

Display More

This photo was taken by Adolph Schneider, the Switzerland region licence holder for Leonardo Corp products, in the middle of the December 2012 test, part 1 of the “Indication of ...” Levi et al report. Note the date on the watch, which was to confirm the time in the video recorded of the PCE-830 power meter. Compare to the photos in that report.

Quote from Mark U

Well I couldn't make out the whiteboard with any confidence.

But yeah, from the arXiv papers it does look like the "energy consumed" by the QuarkX is calculated by the energy consumed by ... the resistor!

Assuming this is so, why would this be? I can think of two things:

1) The resistance across the QuarkX itself, and hence the voltage drop across the QuarkX itself, and hence the energy consumed by the QuarkX itself, is just about zero.

2) There is no voltage drop across the QuarkX ; there is instead a voltage increase. In other words the QuarkX, in addition to making heat, was making some electricity as well.

If option 2 is correct, the discovery of this was kept rather hushed, but it would have formed the nexus from which would spring the development (and soon demonstration) of the Ecat SKL, where purportedly about 70 percent of the output energy is electricity. Goosebumps?

PS All this is ignoring the so-called Control Box, which apparently consumed lots of power. If I recall correctly the control box is quite small now and presumably uses much less power.

Display More

No goosebumps.

I am hopeful that he will make a really nice presentation test this next time.

Quote from PhysicsForDummies

What everyone seems to be forgetting is that in Stockholm, Rossi was videotaped flipping a switch under the box right before the 1 ohm resistor test, nullifying the whole test anyway. Yet we still must believe him because we hope for his scam tech to work.

Turning off the HV ignition spark was possibly a very good idea for all the participants.

Quote from Mark U

Surely there is more to it than that. Could you provide a link if you have one handy, thanks. If not I'll look for it myself.

Here is where the whiteboard part came from. It is a bit blurry, but you should be able to make out the power equation using the resistor values.

Rossi Describing the Quark on a Whiteboard

The two Gullstrom-Rossi papers on arXiv have some Rossi equations tossed in.

“DATA REPORT OF THE MEASUREMENTS MADE ON NOVEMBER 24TH 2017 ON THE E-CAT QUARKX TESTED AT THE IVA, GREV TUREGATAN 16, STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN.

Duration of the measurement period: 1 hour: the measurement has been made after the apparatus has reached a reasonably constant temperature

amount of water pumped through the reactor: 1 000 g

Water temperature at the input of the reactor: 21 C

Water temperature at the output of the reactor: 41 C

Delta T: 20 C

Energy produced: 20 x 1.14 = 22.8 Wh/h

Measurement of the energy consumed ( during the hour for 30′ no energy has been supplied to the E-Cat) :

V: 0.3

OHM: 1

A: 0.3

Wh/h 0.09/2= 0.045 EDIT: here we have the 1 ohm V and I, 0.3 x 0.3 = 0.09 W

Ratio between Energy Produced and energy consumed: 22.8/0.045 = 506.66

Instrumentation used for the measurements:

Oscilloscope Tektronix TBS 1052B

K probes Omega supplied and calibrated by Prof. Bo Hoistad of the University of Uppsala

Water pump Prominent. The water pumped for 1 hour has been poured in a plastic container seat on a scale to measure exactly the water passed through the E-Cat.

Temperature Data Logger: PICO Technology

The scale to weight the water passed through the E-Cat has been supplied by Eng. Mats Lewan of Stockolm

William S. Hurley

Senior Engineer- Endeavor

Los Angeles”

Quote from LeBob

Thanks for paying attention to the details, the little things that slip past are many times the clincher or key.

The clincher is that if Rossi was using an AC waveform, like shown in Stockholm, then the DC measurements are probably garbage anyways.

Quote from Mark U

So you're saying that Rossi is taking the voltage drop across a one ohm resistor, and pretending that's the voltage drop across the entire circuit.

Sorry, that's something (even) I find very hard to believe!

And yet that is exactly it.
Practiced in Doral with the whiteboard, published in two Gullstrom-with-a-hint-of-Rossi papers, signed off by Hurley, and placidly ignored by dozens of scientists in Stockholm.

Quote from Mark U

OK, I understand now. But I'm not seeing a problem. The electrical measurement of voltage drop across the 1 ohm resistor leads one to calculate the current in the circuit, which of course will be the same everywhere, including the load. If you're seeing a problem, please be explicit.

Right. The current is correct.

The problem is that Rossi also uses the the voltage from the 1 ohm resistor as the entire circuit voltage, as well as for calculating the total circuit current.

What he is actually doing is calculating the power dissipated in the 1 ohm resistor. Then he uses that as the entire circuit power.

And also the spectrometer Rossi uses is fully capable of integrating the radiant power received.

No need to abuse Wien's Law or make Planck roll in his grave.

Quote from Mark U

Yeah I believe Wien's law was misused and abused, made to fit the calorimetry result. As long as the calorimetry was OK, I'll take it.

About your 1 ohm simulator. You have it in parallel with the load. That would defeat the purpose. Or is that your point, that this is what you think Rossi was actually doing?

The 1 ohm is in series with the load (10k ohm here). Change whatever you like, just leave the 1 ohm resistance as your measurement location for all electrical measurements.

Feel free to remove the voltmeter and just hover the mouse over the 1 ohm for information.

Here:

http://tinyurl.com/ughe3xe

.

Quote from LeBob

Supposedly 38w input, since we are in this thread might as well work with what you have.

Supposedly is not a measurement.

This image shows what is supposedly ~360 W input.

Instead it shows the ecat producing over 1 kW, and was totally ignored by the Professors. They have no comment since 10 years.

.

Quote from LeBob

I said what I said because we don't know the output. People just assume its the same as the SK which it most likely is less than.

We don't know the input, and don't know the output.

What a revolutionary device!

Quote from LeBob

COP comes from knowing the output of the individual claimed liter sized apparatus as well as input.

And we know of this from....?

Quote from Mark U

But I'm giving Rossi the benefit of the doubt and assuming he isn't grossly mismeasuring the electrical energy input and output.

Of course he is!

Did you not try this 1 ohm simulator? It does a COP of 10000 Rossi style. Just add abuse of Wien's Law and bump it to 22000 COP Rossi style.

http://tinyurl.com/quva6f8

.

Quote from LeBob

I'm just above it and I wont emphatically state anyone is a liar or fraud untill their claims contradict the most basic tested assumtions of physics.

Did we not just go over a few of the contradicted laws of physics four days ago?