Very wise idea, Jed. It has inspired me to formulate Rule No.20 of problem solving, in addition to http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/06/all-my-rules-of-problem-solving.html
"*NOT *always* *the real, but many times, the imaginery problems are more difficult to resolve" Artificial problems can be very *wicked. *They come from stubborn and stupid memes. Thank you for your contribution, Cousin! Peter On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > Here is a message I sent yesterday. I do not think it went through. > > This calls to mind what someone said about 19th century German professors. > They would sometimes invent a word from some complex conception. Then, > having the word for the thing convinced them that the thing must exist. > > Over the last 22 years, people who call themselves skeptics have repeatedly > done this. They invent an imaginary problem, then they assume they are > right, then they assume the researcher did not think of this problem and the > experiment must be wrong. They do not examine their own assumptions. A vivid > example be found at the Defkalion forum, here: > > http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=104&start=80 > > In a future history of the field we should use this example. Here is the > sequence of events: > > The Defkalion forum moderator said they use an ultrasonic flowmeter, > similar to these: > > http://www.dynasonics.com/ > > Someone took a look at that site, and came up with: > > "I just checked the specs of some of the dynasonics flow meters and I think > the measuring results do not primarily depend on the type of the flowing > medium but on the number of flowing and reflecting microscopic parts in it. > For example the Series 700 flow meters need a minimum of 25 PPM with a size > of at least 30 microns. . . . Does the coolant naturally contain these > contamination or do you add any substances for that purpose?" > > This person calls himself "pseudosceptic, debunker and negativist" which is > apt. Someone else assumed this pseudoskeptic is right, ran with the idea, > and declared: > > "And now it seems that you either need particulates in your coolant, or > your ultrasonic flowmeters won't work properly either." > > I stepped in and wrote: > > "That is incorrect. Please see: > > http://www.dynasonics.com/resources/products/pdfs/TFX_Ultra_5-11_web.pdf > > It says, 'May be used to measure clean liquids as well as those with small > amounts of suspended solids or aeration (e.g., surface water, sewage).' > > See also: > > http://www.dynasonics.com/resources/products/pdfs/TFX_Ultra_5-11_web.pdf > > 'The TFX Ultra is available in two versions: a stand-alone flow meter, and > an energy flow meter used in conjunction with dual clamp-on RTDs. The energy > flow meter measures energy usage in BTU, MBTU, MMBTU, Tons, kJ, kW, MW and > is ideal for retrofit, hydronic and other HVAC applications.' > > This would be a hydronic application." > > > Unlike many skeptics, these people saw they had made a mistake. They agreed > this is not a problem after all. The discussion ended. Good, but let's look > closer to what happened here. > > The information I found was two mouse clicks away from the initial link. > Why didn't the pseudosceptic take a moment to examine the literature and see > if his assumption was correct? > > This person cannot be familiar with these flow meters or he would have > known they work with clean water. He is speculating about an instrument he > does not know much about. It is fine to speculate or wonder about something, > but before you post a message, you should do your homework. This is the 21st > century. We have the Internet. > > The skeptics made larger mistakes here, beyond a mere technical blunder or > a careless assumption. They did not stop to think about how corporations do > business, or how product engineers do their jobs. > > Consider the facts -- > > Defkalion says they will soon be manufacturing 300,000 of these reactors > per year. Every one of them will be equipped with on-board calorimetry and > diagnostics linked by cell phone to the factory. This is how high tech 21st > century technology should work. You could not build these reactors without > computerized controls. > > So, Defkalion will be purchasing 300,000 flow meters per year. The > ultrasonic model may seem expensive, but as one of the skeptics pointed out > in the discussion thread in that forum, Defkalion will get a volume > discount. I can tell you more, based on my experience with flow meters. You > do not want to sell 300,000 rotary flow meter or any other immersion type in > pipes with rapidly flowing glycol. > > Metering the flow correctly is important. It is service-affecting, and > probably a safety issue. The Greek Ministry will surely check the > performance of the flow meter. If they find it does not work, they will not > license the equipment. Since this meter is important, Defkalion will assign > the job of selecting it to a good product engineer, and they will review the > choice on many levels. They will contact several instrument manufacturers > and have them submit proposals. These manufacturers will pay close > attention, because this is a contract for 300,000 units per year. They are > not going to recommend a meter that does not work! That would lead to > lawsuits and no end of trouble. > > This is how people do business. > > Even if you assume that Defkalion's product engineer in charge of > calorimetry is a dolt, you can be sure that engineer's mistakes will be > caught and corrected. There is no chance they will end up with a flow meter > that gets the wrong answer. Not even at the prototype stage. As I said, > other people within Defkalion, and the instrument vendors, and finally the > regulators will all work to prevent this. > > In short, you have to look at the big picture. > > I get a sense the skeptics cannot bring themselves to take this discussion > seriously. Perhaps they imagine that Defkalion's plans are a fantasy, and > this company has no intention of manufacturing one unit, never mind 300,000. > > People here and in comments to me off line still suggest that Rossi may > have bamboozled Defkalion, and his devices do not actually work. Or that > Defkalion is in cahoots with him, and they are both bamboozling the > investors and magically fooling the Greek Ministry engineers. People assign > Rossi superhuman abilities to fool engineers in laboratories in several > places at one time. Or they say that Defkalion (or Rossi) may have paid > bribes to hundreds of professional engineers in regulatory agencies. This is > so preposterous, on so many levels, only a true believer or conspiracy > theorist would believe it. Rossi would have to be handing out fantastic sums > of money -- hundreds of millions of Euros -- which have to be well hidden in > Swiss banks. The engineers will surely realize the scheme will be revealed > within a months. They will be caught, fired, and probably sent to jail, and > the bribe money will be confiscated if the government can find it. So it has > to be well hidden. There has to be enough money to entice dozens of > engineers and two government Ministers to destroy their careers and go to > jail. > > People opposed to cold fusion pride themselves on not being taken in by > what others say, and perhaps it is true. From my point of view, they will > not listen to others, or learn from others. But they are gullible all the > same, and suggestible. They are taken in by themselves. They believe > any damn thing that pops into their own minds. > > - Jed > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
