Peter Heckert <[email protected]> wrote: 10-20% COP is easily explained as measuring error. >
Not with the instruments used by McKubre or Storms. If you think it would be easy I suggest you write a paper explaining how that might work with the system described here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHisothermala.pdf In any case, they measured far more than 20% in some cases, ranging from 300% to infinity (no input power). Just because you assert that something "is easily explained" that does not actually mean you have easily explained it. I do not get a sense that you have read the literature carefully or that you can back up your assertions, either easily or with difficulty. I say that because if you had read the literature you would know that excess heat has often exceeded 20%, and you would know that cold fusion is much easier to replicate than many other physics experiments. You might also realize that the difficulty of replication is not considered a reason to reject a finding. The Princeton PPPL and the Top Quark experiments are far more difficult to replicate than cold fusion but I do not think they have been rejected on that basis. If you do not wish to do your homework and learn about this subject, that's fine, but you should not expect people here to take your comments seriously. I, for one, plan to ignore you unless you indicate a willingness to learn the facts about cold fusion instead of waving your hands and making up stuff. - Jed
