Of course you are making a good point that they did use extra equipment to ensure that the steam was very dry. The question is what is the dryness of the steam before it entered those devices? Do you have any reference to this information? Are we talking about only 5% at this point?
Thanks, Dave -----Original Message----- From: Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Dec 7, 2011 4:10 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:a long paper about and mainly against the E-cat On 11-12-07 04:01 PM, David Roberson wrote: Dear Josh, at least you are consistent. Always claiming that someone or something is not as it appears. MY realizes she might be in error and I respect her for some honesty. Now, do you sincerely think that the large generator was supplying the heat energy to vaporize the water? If all of us on the vortex tried to find ways to scam the public as you seem to enjoy, do you not think we could be successful like you? Sometimes realism needs to float to the top. All you ever seem to do is to tear down things and people. Why not use your talents for the good instead? What would it take for you to be finally convinced that the 1 MW system is real? I would honestly like to know the answer to that question. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Joshua Cude <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Dec 7, 2011 3:11 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:a long paper about and mainly against the E-cat On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:38 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: I have always maintained that I will follow the evidence and have been faithful to that end. That is not consistent with your frequently expressed absolute certainty that LENR is occurring. Why should we assume that a well trained engineer would be so stupid as to be incapable of catching water? Because of the geometry of the trap. It would not capture entrained mist. Why should we assume that a well-trained engineer would be so stupid as to be incapable of knowing the output flow rate? Please read the Wikipedia article on steam locomotives to put things in some perspective. I would estimate that the total area of Rossi’s 107 ECATs is comparable to that of boiler within one of these devices. How do you think that they can function at all if most of the steam leaving has a quality of 5% or so as you keep repeating? How does steam engines producing dry steam mean that the ecats are? You need more than the same area. You also need the power. The water level in steam engine boilers is regulated to ensure dry steam. If by "steam engine" you mean "steam locomotive engine", then they actually incorporated steam driers specifically to dry the steam after it left the boiler and, IIRC, before it entered the superheater. That's what at least some of those funny domes on the tops of the old locomotives had inside them. The designers did not simply assume the steam came straight out of the boiler "already dry".
