Daniel Rocha <[email protected]> wrote:

Jed, so, you can say now that you are convinced that eCat is 100% true.


Unless these people are lying. Or, unless when they open the reactor they
find a 5 kW heating element.

There may be some problem with the test. Let us wait to see the reports. My
point is that the problem suggested by Murray is ruled out. There is no such
thing as an invisible 5 kW electric water heater with no wires. That's
ridiculous.

That does not mean all other problems are ruled out, or ridiculous. For
example, it could be that the inlet and outlet thermocouples are not
properly calibrated. There might be a large bias. I hope that they took
steps to ensure this is not the case. I suggested several steps they should
take to do this. I have not heard yet whether they did take these or other
steps.

A lot of things can go wrong with flow calorimetry. However, many people are
practiced in the technique, and it is not difficult to eliminate all likely
sources of error. Whether they eliminated them in this test I cannot say.
The previous reports were not detailed enough to ensure that all sources
were eliminated, but they did give me the impression that an error is
unlikely. The previous tests should have been more rigorous, and the reports
should have been more detailed. They should have included, for example, the
make and model of every instrument used, and some discussion of null runs
and calibration. Krivit says there is "no evidence" of heat in 10 tests.
That's an outrageous exaggeration. There was considerable evidence even if
it was poorly presented and not fully convincing. There was also evidence of
other Ni-H reactions from other researchers. In cutting edge scientific
research, if you demand perfectly convincing proof before you begin to
believe something -- or at least find it credible -- and you demand that
every i dotted and every t crossed, you will never look at any interesting
new claims. All discoveries are a mixture of true and false.

It remains to be seen whether this test will be convincing.

- Jed

Reply via email to