Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

My power supply blew up shortly afterwards and although I have bought some new ones (they are only a few pounds) I have not set it up again as it has been rather overtaken by events Nigel On 24/04/2017 02:17, Eric Walker wrote: On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Nigel Dyer

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Nigel Dyer wrote: > If I remember correctly it was something like that. The counter had to be > very close to register clicks, such that it was consistent with alpha > particles, but it was not stopped by a peice of paper, which would have

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

If I remember correctly it was something like that. The counter had to be very close to register clicks, such that it was consistent with alpha particles, but it was not stopped by a peice of paper, which would have stopped alpha particles, but which would allow through a voltage transient.

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Nigel Dyer wrote: It worked quite succesfully for a couple of days experiments, during which > I found that the high dV/dT it generates causes false positive clicks on my > cheap geiger counter. What was the approach you used to determine

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

Yes Jed, and the more advanced the technology generally, the narrow the range of success becomes. This failure sharing idea might work ok if we were designing plows or wagons, but even something as basic as the internal combustion engine is too complex and has too narrow a range of success for

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

in fact in my school (ESIEE), multilevel neuronal network were fashion (Yann Lecun was a reference as ancient from the school). what was limiting was compute power (we were thinking about specialized hardware mimicking life)... Experts systems were more applicable, like natural language processing

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

John Berry wrote: > It might have limited application, but mostly, I don't see it, too often > success and failure is just an inch apart. > Yes! That is an important point. Unfortunately, failure is a more likely outcome. There are countless way to make an experiment

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

:59 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures   The problem is that with many experiments, the result may clearly be not successful, or the experiment may have ended prematurely, but it is NOT a complete failure and has an avenues for improvement. Null r

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures Nigel Dyer to you (Bcc) + 1

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

I built a Marx generator powered by a cheap 7kV generator http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DC-3V-7KV-7000V-Boost-Step-up-Power-Module-High-voltage-Converter-Generator-S52-/122391848213?hash=item1c7f1f6515:g:LqUAAOSwo6lWOc7o It worked quite succesfully for a couple of days experiments, during which I

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

com> To: fznidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com>; vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Sun, Apr 16, 2017 11:43 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures Here is the picture of the latest failed experiment. http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/temp/silver.jpg to left h

RE: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures The problem is that with many experiments, the result may clearly be not successful, or the experiment may have ended prematurely, but it is NOT a complete failure and has an a

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

tists Must Share Their Failures This may be the problem with the app. Oh what a pain. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/26990816/mediarecorder-issue-on-android-lollipop -Original Message- From: Frank Znidarsic <fznidar...@aol.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> S

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

Sharing now: Tried a silver 22 gauge wire in hydrogen and then helium at one atm. I put the wire and the gas in a small plastic bottle upside down so in case it blew up it would project no shrapnel. Wires for the RF stimulation enter at the bottom. The wire was stimulated with RF (1 to

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

The problem is that with many experiments, the result may clearly be not successful, or the experiment may have ended prematurely, but it is NOT a complete failure and has an avenues for improvement. Null results often point to avenues for improvement. Most often, this is not an "either/or"

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

In the specific case of LENR/cold fusion, vortex-l provides an excellent source of this sort of information. There have been a number of times when I have searched the archive to find whether something had been tried or considered and found the information from a discussion at some point in

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

So if that was done with cold fusion... IMO failures in experimental sciences are too specific for it to be meaningful. It might have limited application, but mostly, I don't see it, too often success and failure is just an inch apart. John Berry On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:05 PM, Nigel Dyer

Re: [Vo]:Why Scientists Must Share Their Failures

Excellent article. I have found that it is possible to find out some of the failures by going to conferences and talking with people. For every field there is usually someone who knows what has been done, and what has worked and what has not. The problem is that this is very hit and miss