Jeff Berkowitz <[email protected]> wrote: Sorry, I choose not to believe this right now. >>> >> >> On what basis? Do you know anything about their calorimetry? >> > > No, and that is my point. >
If you do not know, then the correct attitude is not to doubt the results, and not to believe them either. You should be a neutral skeptic, awaiting more results. I lean toward believing them because I have seen previous research from STMicroelectronics and I believe they usually do quality work. That isn't much to go on, but then again I am not saying I am certain it is real, am I? As I said, it is presumptuous for you to assume that their calorimeter is no more sensitive than the MFM instrument. That makes no sense. Most calorimeters are more sensitive than ~1 W. The MFM one is accurate but not very precise. You also have no reason to suppose STMicroelectronics do not know what they are doing. It is okay to doubt a result. It is fine to question results, express reservations, or reserve judgement. However, as I said the other day to David Robinson, you may be a gifted amateur. You may understand these issue better than 99% of the reading public. But unless you have worked day in and day out for many years with the equipment or the algorithms, I think you have no business declaring that a field of research is a "train wreck" or that you can "choose not to believe" a result. This is arrogant. That kind of arrogance is the source of our problems in cold fusion. It goes without saying that some fields of research are train wrecks, and that researchers at large companies such as STMicroelectronics do sometimes make stupid mistakes. So you and Robinson might be right. But if you are right, it is a lucky guess. You have no rigorous proof. - Jed
