Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com via<http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=en&ctx=mail&answer=1311182> eskimo.com 7:48 AM (2 hours ago) to vortex-l
Joshua, ...You argue that it is not real, but simply the result of many mistakes made repeatedly by many well trained scientists. ***In order to avoid a straw argument, I ask Joshua if you do argue this? If so, let's examine the mathematical possibility of so many positive results arriving by virtue of mistakes. I would estimate the chance of making a mistake that leads to positive result to be 1 in 4. You can use whatever estimate suits your fancy afterwards. That means 3 in 4 are genuine, mistake-free positive results, right? So let's be even more generous to the argument and make it 1 in 3. So if 3 independent labs generate positive results due to mistakes, it's 1 in 3^3 or 1 in 27 chance of happening. In my book, if there was a 1 in 10 chance of a professional scientist generating such errors, he should be fired; but that's just me. Since there have been more than 14,700 replications (see below), the chance of measuring errors or noise causing false positives in replication would be 1/3 ^ 14700, which is ~10^-5000 Perhaps you do not realize just how ignorant this statement is. The mathematical definition of Impossible is if something has a chance of 10^-50. Such a position is a whopping, gigantic, humungous four thousand Five Hundred and fifty ORDERS OF MAGnitude less than impossible. I tell you what, I’ll grant you 3 levels of impossible to be “conservative” with the numbers (which is about on the order of the number of molecules in the universe), that is 4400 orders of magnitude less than impossible. * https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/8k5n17605m135n22/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=xwvgza45j4sqpe3wceul4dv2&sh=www.springerlink.com *<https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/8k5n17605m135n22/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=xwvgza45j4sqpe3wceul4dv2&sh=www.springerlink.com> Jing-tang He • Nuclear fusion inside condense matters • Frontiers of Physics in China Volume 2, Number 1, 96-102, DOI: 10.1007/s11467-007-0005-8 This article describes in detail the nuclear fusion inside condense matters—the Fleischmann-Pons effect, the reproducibility of cold fusions, self-consistency of cold fusions and the possible applications. Note that Jing-tang He found there were 14,700 replications of the Pons Fleischmann Anomalous Heat Effect. * http://www.boliven.com/publication/10.1007~s11467-007-0005-8?q=(%22David%20J.%20Nagel%22) *<http://www.boliven.com/publication/10.1007~s11467-007-0005-8?q=(%22David%20J.%20Nagel%22)>
