Jed Rothwell wrote: > Edmund Storms wrote: > > >> You think you have all the information you need to make the effort. > > No, I do not. I require complete descriptions of experiments,
I believe Ed Storms published a complete description of his recent experiments with gas phase LENR and radiation generation, didn't he? Here's another one which might be worth publishing a full, detailed, painfully complete description of: http://oasys2.confex.com/acs/237nm/techprogram/P1217150.HTM Orani claims a hit rate of 20 out of 20 runs getting particles from electrolysis, with a hit rate of 0 out of 20 control experiments seeing the same effect. This *ought* to be something other labs could replicate, or so it might seem. Is there a complete description of Orani's experiment available anywhere, along with full data sets? Jumping ahead a bit, later on Jed said: > Many years ago Martin Fleischmann and I tried to purchase 1 kg of > Johnson-Matthey "Type A" palladium. We failed because we did not > have enough money and also because other people did not express > interest in doing this. I think it was a grave mistake that other > researchers did not take part in this initiative. As Melvin Miles > showed, this type of palladium works nearly all the time, usually > at much higher power levels than other types. Does Johnson-Matthey "Type A" palladium still work? I.e., is it possible to put together a reproducible experiment around their cathode material? Backing up again, earlier in the note, Jed said: > [I require complete descriptions of experiments,] and a > commitment to help newcomers by supplying sample materials and training, > and various other things that I have outlined. I call for the kind of > effort AT&T made to disseminate information about semiconductors a few > months after they developed them. Twenty years after the development of > cold fusion no one has provided the sort of information AT&T provided. > In that regard Charles Petit was correct: this field does resemble a > hobby more than a serious technology. > > There are reasons why people have not been able to publish detailed > descriptions, such as lack of money, patents, and intellectual property > concerns. And there are some detailed descriptions but unfortunately > they cannot be made public. EPRI and SRI published a detailed > description of their experiments but I cannot get permission to upload > the whole thing. > > The problem with cathode materials is even more difficult. It is > expensive and time-consuming to make a good cathode, so people are > understandably unwilling to distribute cathodes to other researchers, > and new researchers. Mizuno was willing to send cathodes to people trying to replicate his results. See, in particular, the Earthtech website, and the complete description of Scott Little's attempts at repro'ing one of Mizuno's experiments. For some number of the runs he used cathode(s) which Mizuno sent him. **NOTE** : Little's description covers a number of web pages -- his initial rather sketchy efforts to repro Mizuno's results, which efforts by Little Jed has disparaged in the past, were followed by a series of experiments in which Little tried to exactly reproduce every step of Mizuno's experiment, including run times, transparency of the calorimeter to make visual monitoring of the arc feasible, cooling curves, the works. An early paper, which may be the one which raised Jed's ire, is here: http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/Inc-W/Mizuno.html **HOWEVER**, an additional, apparently more thorough, series of experiments are documented on this index page, which links to the detailed descriptions: http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/ Note particularly the first, second, and third attempts at replicating Mizuno, with runs 1-10 for first experiment, runs 1-9 of second experiment, and runs 1-6 of third experiment described on about two dozen separate pages. Of course, Little still got a null result and the reader is left scratching his head wondering why. But there's something buried in these descriptions which is highly apposite to the points Jed has been raising. The Earthtech work contains an example of an acute problem with the incompleteness of published descriptions: With everything set up as Little *thought* Mizuno had it, Little couldn't replicate Mizuno's *cooling curves*. Little's curves were shallower, showing slower cooling than Mizuno was getting, with nearly identical flasks. It was only by using a fan that Little could get a cooling curve which looked like Mizuno's; see in particular: http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/Inc-W/300volt/run3/run3.html http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/Inc-W/300volt/run3/cool.html http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/Inc-W/300volt/run4/run4.html http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/Inc-W/300volt/run5/run5.html Little says (somewhere) that he *did* *not* *know* if Mizuno used a fan, but he *guessed* that he did. And so, on this little detail which was not covered in Mizuno's published description, the whole reproduction effort may have fallen apart.
