Dennis wrote:
Yes, it would be hard to fake much over 1kW... wall plugs being what
they are,
gauge of wires being what they are. (unless you used part of the
plumbing as
your current carrier).
Ah! That's one I hadn't thought of.
So it is becoming very interesting -if you believe
any steam numbers over a few kW.
You do realize, I hope, that the latest test had no steam. See the links
at http://lenr-canr.org/News.htm. That was the point of it. Plus I
suppose at 130 kW with the low flow rate it might have exploded. Ed
Storms thinks the machine cannot explode. I hope he is right, but I
would like to see much more engineering stress-test proof of that before
the technology is deployed.
The Jan. 14 test with steam was pretty good. A lot of the criticism of
it was unwarranted. No experiment is perfect. Except in rare instances,
an experiment will leave unanswered questions and legitimate doubts. I
think the Feb. 10 experiment was a great follow up. It answered the open
questions, and put to rest the doubts. It was exactly the right
technique. Together they seem conclusive.
Maybe in a few weeks we will think of some new legit doubts.
One thing that critics should avoid is the "I could do it better"
standard. Yeah, you could do it better. So could Levi and Rossi. Anyone
could, with enough money and time and an ideal setting. The NRL test bed
is a better calorimeter, and so is the one at Hydrodynamics in Georgia.
But this calorimeter is not bad. I've seen worse. I have seen
experiments that cost much more at top-notch institutions that were not
as well-designed as this. Don't reject real world results because you
can imagine an ideal result. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the
good (Voltaire's dictum).
- Jed
