Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote:
> Please remember: we do not know that NiH heat is "cold fusion." We don't > know what it is. Mike McKubre and I suspect that whatever it is, it is the same thing as Pd-D heat, based on the conservation of miracles. Since no one has checked for products yet, fusion is a good a guess as any other. > We certainly, however, are not going to discard apparent XP results > because they are too smooth! > I wouldn't discard them but I would be wary of them. That's not how cold fusion heat looks. Whether it comes from electrolysis or gas loading, it is usually more lumpy. That's how things look when you imagine you are seeing excess heat, but you made a mistake. I have seen such results time after time, from many people. One way to resolve this would be to put the whole cell into the air-flow calorimeter. Assuming that device works properly. Ed Storms has expressed some doubts about it. He thinks the time constant is too long and changes in air pressure and humidity may affect the instrument too much. If the signal really is as stable as it appears here I guess the time constant will not be a problem. I suppose you could catch changes in air pressure by installing a heater next to the cell and doing on-the-fly re-calibration. I think Ed would prefer a Seebeck calorimeter. - Jed
