James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Although it is true that "a couple hundred bucks" is only 1% of $20,000 > and that it is ridiculous think of the other 99% as going into technical > aspects alone, even if 90% of the budget were for "overhead" . . . > I have significant experience with flow calorimeters. I would say: 1. It would end up costing much more than a few hundred dollars. 2. It would take weeks of testing and futzing around to make it work. 3. It would clog up and it would leak. They always do. I would hate to work with something like this running constantly for months! 4. The skeptics would find a hundred reasons to doubt it, as they did with Rossi's other flow calorimeters (some of which I will grant were not good). I agree with Dave Roberson that the "Rossi used the best approach possible to eliminate the most questions and [the skeptics] still complained." The "most questions" means the most you can address in one test. No test can answer all questions or lay to rest all doubts. That's why you have to do multiple tests. - Jed
