*What did Hoistadt say in response to your letter regarding this question? *
That they do not have time to discuss on the blogsphere about their paper that has appeared only in the blogsphere. So I asked him to whistle to me when they get the paper published on Nature or Science. Giancarlo PS I agree with most of your technical consideration but it is time to go to bed here now. Regards 2015-01-10 19:07 GMT+01:00 Bob Cook <[email protected]>: > Gigi, Dave and Alain-- > > You, Gigi, wrote to Alain: > > "I, personally, do not think that LENR are real but we are speaking > about some specific experiments: it took 15 minute to me to understand that > electrical power measurements were wrong in the TPR2. It's my job, I design > and build power electonics and usually I use smart methods to measure > power. In the TPR2 there was a hidden wattmeter; I simply found it and I > wrote to Hoistadt. Rossi was very aggressive against me, whereas normally > he lets people say whatever they want; so I'm sure I was right." > > What is the evidence for the "hidden wattmeter" you, Gigi, say you found? > Were there data that it the "hidden wattmeter" provided that you know > about, and if so, what were those data? Your professed understanding of > this should be laid out. > > What did Hoistadt say in response to your letter regarding this question? > > > > > Incidentally, I have a similar question to yours regarding the Mizuno test > as you have implied in the following comment: > > "It is written in the Mizuno's data, our demo is only a further proof. If > you take a look of the data when the pump fails you will see that > immediately both water and reactor wall temperatures start to decrease: in > the presence of a reaction the wall temperature should have increased. Jed > and Mizuno perform an experiment without hydrogen: the result is the same > they got with hydrogen. The conclusion is that there is still some residual > hydrogen in the reactor." > > My conclusion to these reported conditions was that the pump was on and > supplying energy to the system, and was not the absence of a poor vacuum > with residual hydrogen in the reaction chamber. > > A simple measure of pump power usage during testing could resolve this > issue. In fact using the old test setup such a test should be run to > measure this power usage at various temperatures. This would help resolve > the issue of how much energy is introduced into the water bath. Insulating > the pump to reduce the heat loss to the ambient in a run would > further allow determination of the pump efficiency as a function of flow. > A separate measure of differential pressure drop across the pump would > establish the constancy of the flow during the reaction period and the base > lining operation Jed had identified. > > Maybe MUMP should barrow the Mizuno test setup and run the same test with > their own monitoring and ambient condition controls. The radiation > monitors should not be necessary to barrow. Even the recording computer > would not have to be barrowed. > > Bob Cook > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Gigi DiMarco <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Saturday, January 10, 2015 7:25 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:"Report on Mizuno's Adiabatic Calorimetry" revised > > Alain, > > I must confess that I've some problems to follow your statements. You > should stick to the facts not to general theories or books. > I, normally, run a company and at the end of the month I provide the food > for a few dozens families, including mine. I've no time for cospiracies. > I, personally, do not think that LENR are real but we are speaking about > some specific experiments: it took 15 minute to me to understand that > electrical power measurements were wrong in the TPR2. It's my job, I design > and build power electonics and usually I use smart methods to measure > power. In the TPR2 there was a hidden wattmeter; I simply found it and I > wrote to Hoistadt. Rossi was very aggressive against me, whereas normally > he lets people say whatever they want; so I'm sure I was right. > > Two of us measured and discovered the Defkalion trick in the water flow > measurement (or do you think it was really Gamberale?); if you like I can > send you the proofs privately. It seems to me that only you and Peter Gluck > are still confident that the hyperion works [in the meantime Defkalion > disappeared almost]. > > Mario Massa was a good friend of Sergio Focardi and he built and tested a > calorimeter for the Piantelli-Focardi cell. While the Piantelli measurement > was showing an excess heat, the calorimeter showed a little less than 100% > that translates into no excess heat [I hope you understand that it is very > difficult to build a fake calorimeter that gives a COP=1 exactly]. He was > not anymore allowed to stay in the vicinity of the cell. You of course can > continue to call this conspiracy, but your idea will not turn LENR into > real. By the way Mario is a good friend of Bill Collis as well: you can ask > him if he considers Mario to be a conspirator. > > Coming back to Mizuno we think that in the reported experiment there is no > excess heat. It is written in the Mizuno's data, our demo is only a further > proof. If you take a look of the data when the pump fails you will see that > immediately both water and reactor wall temperatures start to decrease: in > the presence of a reaction the wall temperature should have increased. Jed > and Mizuno perform an experiment without hydrogen: the result is the same > they got with hydrogen. The conclusion is that there is still some residual > hydrogen in the reactor. In my vision this simply means they do not have > the will to see reality. > > We are discussing if we are going to prepare on this experiment a paper to > submit to ICCF-19: I'm sorry, this is not conspiracy, this is the > scientific method. Maybe you are not a scientist and you are not familiar > with it. > > Now at MFMP they are trying to replicate the Russian experiment: how can > they hope to positively replicate a wrong experiment? Take a look of the > gamma measurement: he had a mean value of 2 events per minute. With such a > value, the Poissonian statistics that determines the photon counting tell > us that we should have roughly 18% of intervals with zero gamma detected: > do you see them? No one, so the instrument is simply broken and he measured > the electrical white noise of the broken probe, probably. It is again > conspiracy? If he did not detect that one instrument was not working why > should I be convinced that the others were working properly? We shall see, > in the meantime after a couple of years the Celani's excess heat in the > constantan is still not replicated. Conspiracy? > > THE BIG CONSPIRACY AGAINT LENR! I'M THE BIG AND BLACK BOSS. > > > 2015-01-10 14:40 GMT+01:00 Alain Sepeda <[email protected]>: > >> removing evidence of artifact is fraud. >> don't feign to be kind. >> >> nobody with a brain ignore that rejection of cold fusion is based on a >> conspiracy theory involving thousands of actors, mostly frauding, some just >> incompetent. this is the 10 ton gorilla in LENR critics. >> >> people observing the usual mainstream position have to be informed they >> observe a conspiracy theory group. >> >> now there can be errors, but nobody with a brain can ignore that it is >> impossible to explain the mass of result without a conspiracy theory or >> accepting LENr reality. >> >> now, grouthink have the ability to make the brain work in negative IQ, >> this mean that the most intelligent and educated can flee from reality more >> deeply than simple minds. >> >> Nothing personal, I am tired of this kind of hypocritical >> understatement... >> "I am only criticizing that result" >> >> it is a tactic and each result individually is attacked with unproven >> conspiracy theory, carefully not critical on itself. Divide the claims, >> attack individual facts, and conquer the minds. very professional. >> >> If you say that you believe cold fusion phenomenon is real, or probably >> real until disproven, I can interpret your critics as critics. >> >> I will accept it when you will apply some critical judgement on your >> replication, like considering the artifact possible in YOUR setup, the >> difference in various setup. >> >> but I doubt you will admit that reality as do most of deniers. this mean >> that only serious people, who can be very critical I observe it, can >> propose critics. >> >> this is a great problem of todays conspiracy theories supported by >> mainstream, that make real critics hard to separate from pure denial. >> Edmund storms in his book was clear that deniers are toxic to the >> discovery of reality as they prevent sane analysis and push "circle the >> wagon" or "I am tired". >> this is the symptom of the "dead clock right twice a day", which give no >> information. >> >> nothing personal (I always kind when I am personal), this is what I could >> say to any denier like Lewis or Hansen (take it for them), or our beloved >> mindguards,... >> >> all that is in fact coldly, rationally, a very common situation. >> Conspiracy theories grow in our societies, and there is nothing exceptional >> in cold fusion story. >> There is also conspiracy theories in LENR constellation, that make me >> laugh, and I would understand than the accused lose some of their flegme. >> >> I blame incompetence with high ego, as the main source of that tragedy. >> People like Lewis, quite competent, but much more vexed and egotic than >> their great competence, pretended to be sure on what they should not. and >> less competent people with even more ego and influence amplified that >> error, until nothing could be step back. >> and it is tragic that less and more important people became mindguard for >> that individual failure, transforming the tragedy of 5-10 egotic people >> into a western academic tragedy. >> >> maybe Mizuno made an error, but your demo, the conspiracy theory behind, >> is even worse than Rossi's demo, and charge of evidence is on your side >> given the mass of other evidence. >> >> sorry to compare Rossi with you. >> (Rossi will survive that comparison.) >> >> 2015-01-10 12:26 GMT+01:00 Gigi DiMarco <[email protected]>: >> >>> Alain, >>> >>> I'm not accusing anyone of having hidden an excel file; I'm just saying >>> that Jed removed that file from his archives where I found it several weeks >>> ago. I don't know why he removed it, maybe he could explain... >>> >>> Jed says it is of no importance to the present discussion; I find it of >>> paramount importance. I call this, scientific democracy. >>> >>> There is no cospiracy around, but only measurement data: Mizuno's data >>> and ours. Full stop. If you are not able to follow a scientific discussion >>> please feel free to be silent. When we proved that Celani was right with >>> his electrochemical compression at 80 bars, I do not remember you speaking >>> of conspiracy against skeptics... >>> >>> 2015-01-10 10:45 GMT+01:00 Alain Sepeda <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> it move to an accusation of having hidden an excel file... >>>> conspiracy... >>>> >>>> now my tactic is to force the people denying LENR to be clear out the >>>> conspiracy theory they support so witness see it is huge and impossible. >>>> >>>> conspiracy is the easy answer to things one cannot accept... >>>> not only in science 8( >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2015-01-09 21:48 GMT+01:00 Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> Bob Cook <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I see that we are not communicating accurately. To quote you in >>>>>> response to Alain message regarding this subject several days ago, "I >>>>>> will >>>>>> not bother" with further communications. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I meant I would not discuss the matter over at the Italian web site. >>>>> >>>>> - Jed >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
