I wish I knew how to answer this line of inquiry. If you are suggesting that there should be LENR activity and thus a reading of zero excess power is a false negative, then the program demonstrates that. It is my philosophy to let the results speak for themselves regardless of the outcome. The program does that by fitting the input power variable to the data for the best match. I have no way to change this once it has been told to optimize unless I intentionally lock its value for other purposes.
For all of the runs up through the present, the optimized input power has calculated less than the applied power. There have been a few times when the instantaneous power difference has suggested that slightly more is coming out than in, but the longer term average never has. Most times the average excess power has been quite close to the applied input as in the latest run where it was within -.2 watts out of 105.4 watts. I suspect that the noise riding on the data due to external temperature variation, or etc. has enabled the peaks to exceed the input, but there also may be a small component of true excess power. When I make an objective analysis of the program runs so far I come to the conclusion that there is no significant excess power being displayed. Label me a skeptic, but I very much want to see positive results. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> To: John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Thu, Feb 7, 2013 5:53 am Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP Null Result Why not doing both? You refer to true positives, that is, a signal actually being measured. So, why not a false negative, that is, something that should be there but it isn't. 2013/2/6 David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> If it does not show up, how could it be measured? -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
