At 02:49 PM 6/24/2006 -0600, Edmund Storms wrote:
Hi Jones,
Actually, my approach is just the opposite of idealism. If we could make
a CF cell work well enough to make a "practical" demonstration, we would
not be having this discussion because the effect would be demonstrated,
whether we understood the effect or not.
If you, Ed, practiced actually making demonstrations at International
meetings as other groups have done,
undoubtedly you would learn more. In retrospect, the late Gene Mallove's
pushing us to do so for ICCF-10
was very important. We miss him.
---------------------------------------
We can not make this demonstration simply because we do not understand the
effect well enough to make it work on demand at high level. How would we
get such information?
The complete, uncensored, literature is a good first place to start.
The Proceedings of the international meetings is a good second place.
----------------------------------------------
.... We do not need to know everything, we only need to know how to make
the effect work. What part of this knowledge would you leap frog? By the
way, this was not the issue with the steam engine and ignorance about
thermodynamics.
Regards,
Ed
We (in the general sense) do know quite a bit about making cold fusion
work.
------------------------------------------
Well Jones, I suggest you are starting with a false assumption.
Calorimetry is considered proof in every other field and in every other
application. Good calorimetry, i.e. that which can not be questioned by
a rational person, can be done and has been done in the LENR field.
Granted, a lot of poor calorimetry also has been done. However, just
because a few efforts are incompetent does not mean all observations are
wrong. Otherwise most beliefs in science would have to be rejected. The
doubt occurs simply because scientists can not bring themselves to
believe an idea that is at odds with accepted theory. Add the Myth
provided by the press, and it is a wonder anyone believes the claims.
You are asking for a practical device before the basic process is
understood. Basic processes are always investigated using laboratory
style apparatus, which is always inefficient. This would be like asking
a person to investigate how a transistor worked only after a practical
transistor had been made.
If a transistor (or a diode) were not made, it would be impossible to
investigate it.
On the other hand, a simple galena-wire junction acting as a diode would
suffice, too.
-----------------------------------------
Also, it is a waste of time to speculate how CF can be applied or
coupled to energy convertors before the process is understood.
Actually, after more than 18 years of science, it appears that
engineering may now
have one of the biggest roles in cold fusion today. Jones is correct.
Consistent with that, locally we have begun looking for an engineer and a
designer with specialized skills.
------------------------------------------
People have to acknowledge CF is real but we have no idea how or why
it works.
Regards,
Ed
Actually, It does not matter if "people" acknowledge CF, and most
importantly,
we have good ideas of how and why it works.
Dr. Mitchell Swartz
JET Energy
=====================================================
Cold Fusion Times http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html
The journal of the scientific aspects of loading isotopic fuels into
materials ISSN# 1072-2874
JET Energy http://world.std.com/~mica/jet.html
Working for Safe and More Efficient Heat Products to Serve You
