yes Jed, it seems many people use the wildcard answer "there have been errors"...
is there any peer-reviewed paper showing proven artifact, and was it corrected ? (just to answer to the usual pretended physicist who parrot wikipedia without any real fact in the mind). 2013/12/6 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> No. I think you're caught up in some sort of conspiracy mindset loop. >> I think there are a lot of people that want to believe but have burned by >> too many measurement errors. >> > > There have not been many measurement errors. I'll bet you can't list more > than five. > > > > >> However, there is a pattern of something. The question is what's >> causing it and can it be scaled up reliably and safely. >> > > Obviously it can, since it has been. > > > > >> Why is this interesting and the previous 14,000 similar experiments not >>> interesting? This is not especially dramatic or clear-cut. >>> >>> >> It's interesting because Toyota is particularly credible. >> > > Are you suggesting that Los Alamos, China Lake, the ENEA or SRI are not > credible? > > - Jed > >
