Someone suggested that Celani's device could not handle a much higher temperature than it currents exhibits. If this is true, he is restricted in the net power output and number of wires without a major redesign.
Dave -----Original Message----- From: Axil Axil <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Aug 22, 2012 2:35 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:What a self-sustaining demonstration by Celani might accomplish If Celani wanted to demonstrate an easily detectable LENRreaction, he would only need to multiply the number of wires he uses in hisdevice by 10 or 100. A 150 or 1500 watt excess output would be hard to misinterpret. Cheers: Axil On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: Akira Shirakawa <[email protected]> wrote: It's true that the calorimetry shown is currently not conclusive, but will this matter anymore once he manages to run it in self-sustaining or mostly self-sustained mode? I do not know what a "mostly" self-sustaining mode would be. A fully self-sustaining run lasting more than 10 minutes with no temperature decline would be irrefutable proof that the effect is real, and anomalous. There is less than a gram of wire in the cell plus hydrogen gas. There is no doubt the heat originates at the wire. There are no chemical changes to any of the materials in the cell. So once you eliminate all doubts about the calorimetry, by making it self-sustain, any measurable amount of heat is anomalous. He plans to let it run for a week or more. That is thousands of times longer than you need to make the case. Why not go for thousands? -- good idea. If Celani can make it self sustain, this will be as conclusive and irrefutable as the Fleischmann and Pons boil off experiments of 1992, which produced massive heat after death. It was easily measured and far beyond the limits of chemistry. See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmancalorimetra.pdf These 1992 experiments did not convince any prominent skeptics, because those people are pathological skeptics who have abandoned the scientific method. Or because they are scientific illiterates such as Taubes, the Wikipedia editors, or your typical mass media "science writer." They do not understand middle-school level science. They have no idea what "the limits of chemistry" or "4 eV per atom" means. A self-sustaining gas loaded experiment by Celani will not convince these people. They will: 1. Ignore the results OR, 2. Misunderstand the results. 2. Come up with absurd reasons to dismiss the results. 3. Accuse Celani of lying. You must ignore such people to preserve your sanity. Dealing with them is a no-win proposition. Never try to address their concerns. They will only invent one crazy objections after another. Like the people who claimed that thousands of thirsty rats invaded Mizuno's laboratory every night to drink the hot water in the bucket during his heat-after-death event. Or this nutcase Rep. Akin -- a member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology committee no less! -- who imagines that women's bodies have a magical ability to avoid pregnancy after rape. If Celani takes the right steps he can easily convince a hundred thousand sane, professional scientists and engineers. The right steps include: 1. Allow independent observers to confirm the result. 2. Present the results in a properly written paper with lots of details and data. 3. Allow me and others to upload the paper, the full dataset from the instruments, photos, papers from the independent observers, and other proof of the claim. As I said in presentation at ICCF17, addressing the researchers, "[if you will only do this] you will be believed, you will be funded, and we will triumph." Whether Celani or any of the others will follow my advice or not I cannot predict. So far, every cold fusion researcher who has had the opportunity to convince the public has failed to do so. People such as Patterson and Rossi failed deliberately. They went out of their way to avoid convincing the public, because that is their market strategy. Patterson told me so. Rossi has not told me that, but it is the only explanation I can imagine for his "no tests!" policy. I mean the fact that he refused to let me and many others spend a few minutes confirming his claims with proper instruments. We offered; he said no. Emphatically no. There has to be a reason. Since he did allow other highly qualified to people to verify the effect independently, but only under NDAs, I assume he doe not want people to know for sure his claims are true. That is not an unusual business strategy. - Jed
