2011/11/16 Mary Yugo <[email protected]>:
> The purpose of a blank/calibration run, I say *again*, is to validate the
> measuring method and equipment. I know of no other iron clad way to do
> that. Without it, arguments about dryness of steam and thermocouple
> placement and pressure and endless others will continue. With a proper
> blank/calibration (if it's done correctly) all those arguments are
> untenable. It's ABSOLUTELY necessary. Any self respecting scientist would
> require it. I have no idea why you can't grasp that. It's usual and
> standard to calibrate calorimeters with electrical heaters. It's done every
> day!
>
This is untrue, because blank run is trivial to falsify. It does not
improve the reliability or reduce the probability of a hoax.
Yet again it is far easier to do proper calibration of the
calorimetry. Not using time consuming blank run, because it does not
give us any increased accuracy of the measurements.
If we measure for the total enthalpy 25 MJ ± 5MJ and we measure for
the input energy using oscilloscope 5 MJ ± 50 kJ, then we get for the
excess heat 20 MJ ± 5 MJ. Blank run does not provide any increased
accuracy to our measurements, and we can just subtract the input
energy that was measured with accuracy of ±50kJ. That is, we know the
result of blank run a priori.
In science, we are only interested to determine the proper error
margins for the measurements. For example, that superluminal neutrino
was observed with probability of six sigma.
–Jouni
Ps. you are correct, that blank run would give information about the
heat capacity of E-Cat. E.g. Horace Heffner ignored in his analysis
that Oct 6th Fat-Cat had very high heat capacity (ca. 18 MJ) that did
not show in the calorimetry. (However I have not read his updated
versions so I am not sure if he has discussed it in later versions.)
But there is also the thing, that heat capacity is rather simple to
calculate if we know the metal mass and water storage capacity.
