They performed something a bit like this for me earlier. First, the Celani wire was given several input power steps up to the max to be used followed by steps of the heating wire. All the average points gathered around these steps was used to establish a quadratic calibration curve. The R^2 fit for these points was in the .9999+ range. This would not have been so accurate had any of the steps been significantly out of line.
I also ran the program with most of these individual steps and the fit was marvelous. After the step process was finished, they then ran two major steps. The first was from zero power to the maximum Celani wire drive. A second step started at that point and proceeded to the maximum total power level. These calibrations were a dream come true for setting up accurate parameters to use with my program. I thanked them profusely for the effort and now both of us have the proper tools to evaluate the real data. I just hope I find support for LENR activity soon to help repay their great contributions. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Jack Cole <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Thu, Feb 7, 2013 10:47 am Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP Null Result Seems to me like they could do something like that with a calibration run. Heat with the inactive wire, then put 10watts through the active wire. It should then show up as 10W excess if they leave that power input out of the calculation. Just to demonstrate that the method is working conceptually. On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Daniel Rocha <[email protected]> wrote: No, what I mean is that you could try to make a dummy, a fake data and input that into the program and see if you can hide a positive, dummy, signal. 2013/2/7 David Roberson <[email protected]> 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. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ [email protected]
