On 11-11-16 06:16 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I don't really see an exothermic reaction with hydrogen as a
problem. The error would be in favor of Rossi and I am happy to
accept it if (and only if) he runs so long that it's accounted for...
Oh get real. You just made my point -- the blank and non-blank
runs must run "long enough" so the excess due to adsorption "is
accounted for" -- as I said, we're right back to square 1, arguing
over the calorimetry.
As I said, it's not a yes/no test -- yes, the signature is higher
_than_ the blank, or no, it's not.
No. "The signature in the blank is higher?" What does that mean?
It means you didn't read it right. I said "higher /*than*/ the blank",
not "higher */in/* the blank".
Obviously.
Obvious, at any rate, if you devote more than about half a second to
trying to understand it.
