Steven Krivit wrote:
Without seeing a lot more heat data, I have to agree, it is difficult to derive any meaning from this and that there is, as you say, "practically no real-time correlation to the helium."
I have no difficulty deriving meaning from this. Again, maybe I am missing something but it seems pretty clear to me. The reasons why there is little real time correlation are obvious.
We also are missing a lot of information about their method of helium sampling.
Well it seems pretty clear to me, but I have read other papers and descriptions from SRI, and heard lectures. Anyway, the 1994 helium tests were done at much higher power levels, and they are described more comprehensively on pages 349 - 357. This discusses the history of the cell, when the cell was flushed with D2 gas, how long it took them to collect the sample, the diffusion rate, and so on. The spectroscopy at the U.S. Bur. of Mines is described elsewhere.
Frankly, I don't see what bothers you about this work, apart from the inherent complexity. No one ever said helium studies are easy.
(I was amused to see a "skeptic" the other day suggest that when Rob Duncan visited Energetics Technology, he should have surreptitiously attached a flask to the cell and taken a sample of helium "to see if it really is fusion." I told the skeptic you have to design the experiment from the ground up to do this, and it takes hours or days to collect the sample. These people get their notions of experimental science from Hollywood movies.)
- Jed
