At 11:36 AM 8/16/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Aug 16, 2012, at 10:38, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yet we cannot rely upon this reality until there is substantially
more available. McKubre would be, with his comment, encouraging Bob
Rohner to continue his work.
Agreed. You make many valid points, especially concerning
speculation about any mechanism.
The point I'm directly addressing is one suggested earlier by Jones,
that one would be naive and gullible to take interest in the newer
Papp models. To this I would say, to the contrary -- all one needs
is prima facie evidence that there might be something going on,
which is what we get with Michael McKubre's endorsement.
To be clear, I don't think that anyone is naive and gullible for
taking "an interest in the newer Papp models." Interest, though, is
cheap. One would be naive and gullible, given what I've seen so far,
to send off a big check to any of these people.
Buying a kit, that depends. I'd say that anyone who buys a kit who is
not prepared to find that the thing doesn't work is naive and
gullible. At this point, without confirmation, I'd think of a group
of people cooperating to get and build a kit, to lower individual
costs and risk. There is another approach, as well.
The kit offered for $350 is just the electronics, i.e., the circuit
board, coils, and electrodes (apparently modified spark plugs). Also
needed: the fuel (a specified mixture of noble gases, though whether
the percentages specified are "by weight" or "by volume" is not
specified. That question can probably be easily answered. Also
needed: the piston and spring and other hardware.
So someone could make some money, my guess, by offering these things.
As part of this, the person might buy a kit. To make money on this,
it is not necessary that the Papp engine actually works, but,
presumably, an ethical businessperson would not claim what they were
not prepared to back up.
"Designed to be used with Such-and-such a kit from Such-and-such a
company. No representations are made that an engine built with these
components will actually function. We guarantee only that the
materials we supply are according to these specifications [taken from
the kit instructions or referring to them]>"
The person would immediately offer the other necessary things for
sale, it is not necessary that the kit actually work. What would be
necessary would be that the gas kit be exactly those percentages (not
necessarily easy, but it's a matter of care and possibly some
equipment), and that the piston kit duplicate the specifications in
the available electronics kit.
This person would also, then, actually assemble one of these, or
encourage someone else to assemble it, being in a position to supply
everything. What's done with that information is down the road. Hint,
though. I would not recommend buying the gases in huge quantities,
counting on a massive flow of orders. Just go for something minimal
that will work.
Now, a fly in this ointment: the kit documents specify the gas
percentages in tenths of a percent. There are no tolerances
specified. Getting *exactly* those percentages is actually
impossible. It is possible that one could make gas with actual
percentages that will round off as shown. The way that the gas
percentages are specified shows lack of sophistication. Or a desire
to set up possible failure.
"Hmmm, it doesn't work for you. It worked for us. Did you have
exactly X.Y% of this gas? No? Next time, follow instructions!"
In the Galileo project, an attempted SPAWAR codep charged particle
radiation replication, the necessary chemicals for the electrolyte
were given with tolerances. That's what I'd expect in a sophisticated
set of instructions.
