budget projects.
Fran
From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com [mailto:alain.coetm...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Alain Sepeda
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 5:41 PM
To: Vortex List
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Test to show LENR?
it seems National instruments asked such doublinded test in 2012, according
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 11:41 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote:
it seems National instruments asked such doublinded test in 2012,
according to the conference of Concezz in Rome (and Brussels)...
Do you have any better links, I find this test interesting a.t.m.
Of cause when the
Tell me if I'm spaming ...
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
stefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:
But I would like to keep the discussion to the original FP experiment.
Ah, yes. Sounds good.
I think that comparative calorimetry is not accpetable, not needed, given
the hysteric level of skepticism and the high COP.
Absolute measurement of heat, not even with blank, should be the only and
best solution.
no hysterical skeptic will assume the blank is sincere, ...
even the absolute
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that comparative calorimetry is not accpetable, not needed, given
the hysteric level of skepticism and the high COP.
I agree, but you do need a good calibration before and after the test. I
suppose that amounts to the same thing as comparative
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that comparative calorimetry is not accpetable, not needed, given
the hysteric level of skepticism and the high COP.
Absolute measurement of heat, not even with blank, should be the only and
best solution.
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that comparative calorimetry is not accpetable, not needed, given
the hysteric level of skepticism and the high COP.
I agree, but you do need a good calibration
Stefan Israelsson Tampe stefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:
My take on this is that 'unusual method' depends a bit on the standard
practices in a field of science. If for example it is easy to perform a
test with good enough energy surplus, then we only need to supply the
numbers like, take every
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
stefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:
Tell me if I'm spaming ...
Not in the slightest. You seem to know something about statistics. I hope
you will be very critical and complain about any mistaken reasoning you
see. There are many electrical
yes, and seeing the story of LENR compared to other extraordinary claims, I
think that the problem of LENr is that it requires much intelligence,
competence, trust in instruments, in computation, in good protocol, that it
is too easy for a lazy mind (like me sometime) to quickly conclude that it
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
stefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be nice to get some statistics out of that, any links?
Although this is a reasonable request, there are two difficulties in
addressing it. The first is that the experiments span a range of
Hi all, I wanted to ask you how to best do a test proving LENR.
After following this for a short time I would probably try something like
this,
I would use two teams
1. The testers, people well versed in LENR and know how to make the
classic FP experiment work.
2. The skeptics, a scientific team
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
stefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:
H0: the seen effect if it's seen, does not depend on the type of water
H1: It does depend on the type of water.
I think this would be an interesting test to whether there is a possible
isotope effect.
I wrote:
So if the test concerns the *existence* of LENR, rather than a parameter
that affects it, I think another control should be sought out. Whatever
that other control is (input power turned off, a different substrate or
cathode, or some other property), could be varied in the manner you
Hi Eric,
I'm not up to speed with your emails. The LENR+ type of activities is still
something that if proper tests are
done and affirmative, will be much more interesting, this is clear. But I
would like to keep the discussion to the
original FP experiment.
I think this would be an
it seems National instruments asked such doublinded test in 2012, according
to the conference of Concezz in Rome (and Brussels)...
about industrial claims, there is similar concern, not of doubleblind, but
because of suspected fraud by testers.
One big fear of industrialist is when the tester
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
stefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:
But I would like to keep the discussion to the original FP experiment.
Ah, yes. Sounds good. It seems you are pretty familiar with the details,
then.
There is a reason why heavy water is typically
17 matches
Mail list logo
