For this to be a problem, the data must be of restricted range. The more sine waves worth of data that are processed, the more closely your result becomes to zero. This is one reason that I believe that the result is so well established. Around a week of data is analyzed during which the relative noise level is low. Of course, it the LENR effect takes a month to show up, then it might still come into play later. I can not rule out that possibility.
I felt that it is important to keep others informed of the current state of affairs, especially when some internal indications tend to suggest that several watts of excess power is being generated. Caution is important to exercise to keep form becoming too disappointed at a later time. I will be happy to be proven wrong in this particular case and I plan to make that attempt myself. Perhaps I do not make a very good skeptic. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Wed, Feb 6, 2013 2:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP Null Result Suppose someone asks you to calculate the area under y = sin(x) over one wavelength? Since half the curve is above the x -axis and half the curve is below the x-axis you might calculate the net area as zero, but that would be false "null" result. harry On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> How can you tell whether these are falso positives and not false >> negatives? > > > 0.2 to 0.6 W with this system is zero. Not positive or negative. That is > within the noise. > > As I said before, no instrument can produce exactly zero. > > - Jed >
