Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:
> Get some caffeine, or someone will think you have lost the encyclopedia… > cough, cough… after all, this is only the longest running (by far) > validated experiment in the entire field. Fully replicated by NASA at two > locations with same results. COP about 1.5.**** > > ** ** > > *lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf* > You misunderstand. I did not say "there are no low-gain Ni-H experiments." I said there are many other high-gain Ni-H experiments, and many infinite-gain ones with no input, so the effect is not limited to a low gain. If you believe any evidence for any Ni-H experiment, then you must also believe that "gain" does not exist. The evidence proves that as surely as it proves the effect is real. That applies to Pd-D cold fusion as well. There are many "low gain" experiments. More than the high-gain ones. But there are enough high-gain ones and heat after death ones to prove that the concept of a COP has no application whatever to cold fusion. The input power -- when present -- is only needed to form and maintain the nuclear-active environment. The highly loaded metal, in other words. The material is dynamically formed in some experiments, like one of these "moonwalk" inflated game sets for kids. As soon as you turn off the blower power the moonwalk starts to collapse. When you turn off electrolysis in a Pd-D experiment, the cathode starts to de-gas. Then the effect peters out. Sometimes this takes a few minutes. Sometimes it takes hours or days. That's called "heat after death." It is not profound. Not even very interesting. That's all there is to it. It does prove, however, that input does not "produce" output in any sense, so the term COP (coefficient of production) is a misnomer in this case. - Jed
