What if this new test report concludes that the e-cat doesn't work?
wooowooo
Member
- Member since Mar 2nd 2014
- Last Activity:
Posts by wooowooo
-
-
Where in the quotes above do I read that Lewan is certain that the e-cat works?
-
If Lewan somewhere in his book states that he's certain that the e-cat works, you should cite it properly and with a page number. Not propose others to do that for you.
-
My point is that none of the people you're misquoting are certain that the e-cat works, and I believe that you do them, the lenr-field, and your self a disservice when stating just that. Do you understand?
-
Where in his book does Lewan say that he's certain that the e-cat works? Where in the quote above does he say that he's certain that the e-cat works?
-
I have read Lewans book. He's not certain that the e-cat works. Neither is anyone from the march 2013 test team, except Levi maybe ... but you are. Why?
-
Yes, if the test isn't fully independent it isn't fully independent. I agree that the test is more independent this time, but there's still room for error or fraud, sorry. The e-cat is still waiting for a third party scientific independent validation. This is not a "tea kettle argument", it's standard scientific protocol.
I wonder, how could you be "more concerned about stability and performances", than with the question if it really works?
-
what control ?
not on the wire ? not on the outer wall ?
Rossi did not have enough control on the environement to risk any trick...the cables were unplugged, meters could be used to check anything, thermocouple could be placed anywhere, know emissivity dots could be placed anywhere, and many things have been tested (but not all, without Rossi being responsible of that)...
That freedom to test, remove any possibility to use trick on that details...The only possible trick that have been imagined is the DC offset. Not only it look hard to do it practically (since there was instruments on the same phase that would have exploded with high voltage DC), but simply it could be detected so easily that it was irrational to use that trick without controlling the instruments used.
You can see what participant like Torbjörn Hartman
http://www.pureenergyblog.com/…arding-recent-e-cat-test/
or Bo Hoistad
http://ecatnews.com/?p=2620
tested many tricks, with more or less scientific methods.This is the opposite to his previous test, where Rossi controlled the instruments, the water flow, the thermocouples.
I agree that even test where you allow people to check and test, but when they don't control, are much weaker.
Defkalion demo for ICCF18 was weak in that sens, as matt lewans did not controls the water flow, could not play with the piles and wires for days... it was a demo, like previous Rossi's demo.The fact that they used IR cam, thermocouples to calibrate it, instead of waterflow redice many opportunities to trick.
The only thing that Rossi was controlling was the building and the inside of the boxes, and all else could be checked and touched, without any opportunity to oppose...
He could tweak the electric plug, but it could be measured...
He could tweak the emissivity of the reactor, but thermocouple, known emissivity dost, and IR cam would find it.
He could send energy my microwave, IR, UV, radiations, but the people moving around the reactor would have detected it, or suffered from it by mistake.As Bo Hoistad admit, the content of the reactor is not proven... it can be pixie dust and Rossi team may have replaced it with black powder. What is sure is that it produce 3x/6x more heat than put inside as electricity.
If he was proposing tricks, he would have allowed few things, but would have controlled all else (as he did before).
I agree with Jed Rothwell and Krivit that the test was not independent. Period. -
Interesting! Do you have any info on the progress of making this a reality? Have you spoken to anyone at Mitsubishi?
-
Now, with Elforsk and Cherokee support, after Levi&al test, it seems clear there is something honest and working.
However the test show modest performances, and I suspect stability problems...
But Elforsk's test wasn't independent. Rossi still had control over the facilities and the equipment used.QuoteJed Rothwell who have been suspicious about E-cat, is now much more positive in his comment after having access to next test results...
Is this a genuin independent test? -
So, you believe in Rossi and the e-cat?
-
I add margin.
Ok, thought something more specific was in the doings. I too believe there is something there but are less optimistic about the time frame. Maybe 10 years from now, considering the slow pace since 1989. -
Ok, thanks for the links, I'll have a look later.
It is time to invest and prepare, because in 6 month it will be to late.
Exactly six months? Why? -
So, are there any hard scientific studies done here, or are they just doing their usual futuristic projections 'in case' LENR is real?