Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Finally! Independent Testing Of Rossi's E-Cat Cold Fusion Device. Success?

Started by rukiddingme, May 21, 2013, 12:06:50 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


markdansie

Sadly the methodology was flawed, calculations and assumptions wrong. Why do they not do a simple calormetric test??????

e2matrix

Quote from: markdansie on May 21, 2013, 07:27:32 AM
Sadly the methodology was flawed, calculations and assumptions wrong. Why do they not do a simple calormetric test? ??? ??
So I guess you are saying that without even seeing the device or testing it yourself you know that all the below listed highly credible academics are wrong?    You think that measurement of the produced heat performed with high-resolution thermal imaging cameras, recording data every second is not even more accurate calorimetry tests?   BTW that is spelled calorimetric.   Maybe you'd like to show where the calculations and assumptions are wrong?   
The paper was authored by Giuseppe Levi of Bologna University, Bologna, Italy; Evelyn Foschi, Bologna, Italy; Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér of Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; and Hanno Essén, of the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.

MileHigh

E2matrix:

QuoteYou think that measurement of the produced heat performed with high-resolution thermal imaging cameras, recording data every second is not even more accurate calorimetry tests.

I am not an expert here but note that the thermal imaging cameras only measure temperature, they do not measure heat flow (a.k.a. heat production).  I believe that they have to rely on formulas to estimate the heat flow based on the observed temperature.

Some kind of "water jacket" wrapped around the reactor with water flow measurement and water temperature differential measurement would have been one way to measure the heat flow.  It's such a basic kind of setup so it's really unfortunate that apparently we are still "here" and not progressing forward.

We will see in the ensuing weeks what kind of comments we get about the paper from others in the scientific community.  If these four men get "heat" from their peers perhaps that will "knock some sense" into Rossi and he will finally do a proper heat flow measurement?

One can hope.

MileHigh

JouleSeeker

Quote from: markdansie on May 21, 2013, 07:27:32 AM
Sadly the methodology was flawed, calculations and assumptions wrong. Why do they not do a simple calormetric test? ??? ??

I agree, Mark, that they should do a straightforward calorimetric test.  Hard to understand why they did not.

But - can you explain why you say, "calculations and assumptions wrong"?