From: David Roberson > The report that Parkhomov generated implied that his steam quality was very > good since the calibration worked as expected with a known heating power. Is > there reason to believe that the physical arrangement of his bucket > calorimeter is especially good at keeping the steam clean?
The calibration runs are the key. A skeptic has no leg to stand on when several calibration runs show that the device functions as physics says that it should with no fuel. At the very least, the burden of proof shifts to the skeptic to explain how and why the control runs can operate normally as expected, but the fueled run is different and shows false gain. Most of the time, they simply cannot do that. Parkhomov’s problem is not the calorimetry, but appears to be the input power measurement and the assumptions concerning the power supply noise.
