On 11-11-01 10:25 PM, Rich Murray wrote:
Steven A. Lawrence has presented a new argument,
No I didn't. (No credit where no credit is due, please.) It's the same argument that's been bashed around for the last how-ever-many months.
I think it's vanishingly unlikely that the power level could have been held constant to better than 1%, and precisely matched to the pump rate. Jed and a number of other people see no problem with it. That's it, in a nutshell, and my recent post didn't contain anything new except a simple calculation which nobody had bothered to do previously.
