DJ Cravens <djcrav...@hotmail.com> wrote: For a while I was mistakenly given only a short time to live due to nano > powder complications. >
Maybe next time it will not be a false alarm. All the more reason to get on with the work quickly. Why do all this work and then take it to the grave with you, the way Patterson and Case did? I see no point to doing research and then not publishing it. It is like cooking a meal and not eating it, or building houses and then burning them down. Okay, I will grant that research is fun, but without the consummation of sharing your results it seems like ashes in the mouth. A waste of life. Nihilistic. > I have never said lack of notice is unfair. > You have a short memory. > It is very fair. Most of the significant work is done by those who go > un-noticed. I still don’t know why you try to read into everyone’s > motives and statements fame and money. > I don't give a damn what your motives are or whether you want fame or money. I am saying that you must have money to do this experiment properly. With money will come fame. You can't get one without the other. You will either work in obscurity and fail, or you will accept funding and what comes with it. > I fully disclosed my calorimeter to NRL - and it does include such trival > things as you mention. > Those things are not trivial. > Although I did opt for water blocks instead of liquid water envelopes. > They are more stable and reliable and avoid some other problems. I also > have internal metal walls to decrease the problems of location of heat > sources within the device (those are often overlooked or hand waved away). > That sounds good! > I think that it was used in part for the NRL lab design and should be in > public domain out there somewhere. But I have said that to you before. How > about trying to understand? > How about giving me a URL to this design? > I still think a good standalone with thermoelectric chip and a load is OK. > May-bee. I doubt it. Especially not at only 0.25 W. But I could be wrong! > Again all experiments do not have to prove LENR or go to high powers. It > can be still a good experiment or endeavor to simply learn something new or > even try something new. > The only problem being that no one will believe your results are real, unless you get high power OR you use a really good calorimeter. It sounds like your NRL calorimeter will fill the bill. That's good! I look forward to seeing these results at ICCF18. - Jed
