On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think that comparative calorimetry is not accpetable, not needed, given > the hysteric level of skepticism and the high COP. > > Absolute measurement of heat, not even with blank, should be the only and > best solution. > > no hysterical skeptic will assume the blank is sincere, ... > I only care for the skeptic, hysterical skeptics are just junk and pushes sane scientist towards believing. Of cause critical minded persons would like to redo the test, just that if you present the needed method, then they will reproduce the result and believe in it. The trick is to get skeptics going to do the right kind of test. Again you need to have control of the dynamics of the production and you will need to have good statistics for them to do a correct test. > even the absolute heat measurement, are currently put in doubt. > well you need to optimize the process, which probably will take quite some effort e.g. funding so that the higher yields will be much more reproducable no? Until that happens one need to take the advantage of what we can produce with not too much effort e.g. also use the cases where the heat generated is less then total input. (Note, If I have good statistics about the result we have had to this point I could be much more precise, without it I can be off target.) for which one can raise funding etc. > > the doubt must be addressed, but no more no less than about apollo and > 9/11 conspiracies. > > I totally agree, conspiracies is all the rage these days. But it flourishes on both side of the fence. Regards Stefan
