On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mary Yugo <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I suggest you stop guessing and read the literature. >>> >> >> I suggest you stop referring vaguely to some amorphous "literature" and >> answer the question . . . >> > > No can do. I learned years ago there is no point to spoon feeding > information to skeptics. First they misunderstand. Then they demand more > and more. You will have do your own homework. > If that is the best you can do, and if you are one of the best known authorities in cold fusion/LENR, I am starting to understand why it is so difficult to get funding for more research. In case it slipped your mind, it's those who make the claims who have to support them. "Do your own homework" usually means the person saying it has no clue where to find the accurate and appropriate information or that such information doesn't exist or, at the very least, is not clear or not accepted as accurate by the scientific community. > > >> "Apart from them"? So the after death cells produce electricity? >> > > I rest my case. > > You can't be serious. > Reread what you wrote. It implies the cells produce electricity. Here's the quote: "Cells running heat after death have closed the loop. Apart from them, no laboratory scale device can produce electricity. " The implication is clear. The cells can produce electricity. If that isn't what you meant, just say so. I even tried to help you correct it! Geez. Of course, I'm serious. Read what you wrote, man! > > And I will ask again: is there an experiment in which all energy input is >> discontinued from a cell and it continues to provide heat or electricity (I >> don't care which) for a VERY LONG PERIOD-- such as weeks or more -- one >> which is well and properly documented by reliable people . . . >> > > If I tell you they went for hours, you will say they should have gone for > days. If I say they went for days, you demand weeks. You will move the goal > posts to months, then years. This is all nonsense. The only relevant > criterion is whether the heat after death reaction exceeds the limits of > chemistry. It does, in most cases. For details, read the literature. > It must do more than barely exceed the limits of chemistry, what ever exactly that is. It must be a properly performed and controlled/blanked/calibrated experiment. If it's a nuclear power source, why would it not exceed chemistry by orders of magnitude? What stops it from so doing? Why would you believe it's nuclear if it doesn't vastly exceed chemical limits? It seems to me it's questions like this and responses like Jed's which make it impossible to get funding. And Krivit's allegations of persistent fraud, if they get much traction, don't help either. It seems to me the CF/LENR community must do much better than it is if what Jed just wrote is an example of how it reacts to reasonable questions. With Rossi and Defkalion truly acting and writing like clowns, it's not hard to see why there is no major press coverage or much of anything else going on, a full year after the original announcement and hoopla. And Aussie Guy's extravagant writing and claims, followed by what amounts to backing down on them, doesn't help either. This stuff gets less credible and more fanciful every day.
