Re: Proposed CS protocol version 1.1

1998-08-04 Thread George Martin
On Tue, 4 Aug 1998 08:33:05 -5, M. G. Devour wrote: = =B! I wouldn't bet either. That's why I hope our microscopists =will duplicate our experiments so they can compare what we send them =to the behavior they're seeing and we are describing in e-mail. = =If 4 or 5 of us set up the same

Re: Proposed CS protocol version 1.1

1998-08-04 Thread George Martin
A somewhat simpler solution is to just lower the voltage. There doesn't seem to be anything magical about the value of 27 volts. I think it was originally just a convenient voltage to generate that gave rapid results. I suspect that the smallest particles are generated when

Re: Proposed CS protocol version 1.1

1998-08-02 Thread Bill Kingsbury
7-23-98, Mike Devour wrote: [] I believe we can test the results with no light bulb and see just what goes wrong as current gets too high. That will be useful information. Then we can back off on run-time or add the bulb later to fix it. Is this a good way to go, or should we go

Proposed CS protocol version 1.1

1998-07-23 Thread M. G. Devour
Okay. Questions were raised about silver source, the light bulb (or lack thereof), and using 4 batteries instead of 3. I explained my reasons for not being concerned about the minor impurities in the silver. I don't know if what I said made enough sense. I believe we can test the results with