On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com>wrote:
> Subject was Re: [Vo]:Some doubts expressed about Celani demonstration > > At 10:43 PM 8/17/2012, James Bowery wrote: > >> Isn't 23 years of torture enough? >> >> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Jed Rothwell <<mailto: >> jedrothw...@gmail.com**>jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Several experts in calorimetry expressed doubts about the Celani >> demonstration at ICCF17. Mike McKubre in particular feels that it is >> impossible to judge whether it really produced heat or not, because the >> method is poor. He does not say he is sure there was no heat; he simply >> does not know. Others feel that he exaggerates the problem. >> > > But that's not the purpose. Celani is investigating the behavior of > materials, and for his purpose, every experiment is a control, with respect > to variations in material processing. He doesn't need to scale up, and he > doesn't need to know absolute heat production. He only needs to know > *relative* heat production, and for that purpose, absolute calorimetric > error is not so important. > > When he's found a reasonable optimization of his processes, *then*, before > he attempts to scale up or to finalize his work, he'd want absolute > accuracy in his calorimetry. > This is incommensurate with McCubre's criticism which is that he doesn't know if there is heat being produced. If Celani has a bunch of systems that are more or less "below unity", he's not getting the information he seeks. On the other hand, expanding on my terse exasperation: The calorimetry problem should, for the purposes of cold fusion, have been solved by now -- not just technically but economically. There have been enough experiments done that the instrumentation design should not only be relatively standardized but inexpensive. > > This is even worse. A century? For perspective, the section has: > > In early 2012, NIF director Mike Dunne expected the laser system to >> generate fusion with net energy gain by the end of 2012.[56] >> > But we should _expect_ a lack of progress in a technosocialist field. There are ZERO incentives to succeed (as long as you aren't _politically_ embarrassed by something like cold fusion) and every incentive to expand the length and scope of the "development effort".
