Dennis,
The best proof is one that has the least possibility of error. Every
complication that is added to the setup results in many more issues to question
by the skeptics. The technique used by the testers of the ECAT is good enough
for any reasonable scientist to accept and all this non sense we are hearing
from the skeptics is ridiculous.
You fail to realize that there is no way what so ever to meet their
requirements since they do not believe LENR is possible. Any test results will
be found lacking by their measures. The more complicated the test setup is,
the more ways that they will suggest a scam is possible.
The latest report has been shown to be solid from a normal technical point of
view. For this reason, the skeptics now insist that a scam must be the answer.
They have failed to prove their position entirely, and most normal skeptics
would realize that perhaps they were wrong in the beliefs. Not this group.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: DJ Cravens <djcrav...@hotmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, Jun 3, 2013 5:03 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:A Couple Hundred Bucks Maybe...
You may want to refigure that if you want to run for extended times- an Olympic
pool (likely overkill) has a volume of 2.5 million liters and some are indoors
and have covers. ( I would just use bubble wrap) You could easily go long
enough to be an order of mag or two above chemical.
The advantage is if they are truly at > 3:1 then you only need to measure 1
time and 1 temp for the output. That is a lot fewer items. And indoor heated
pools could give you a good control measure.
But it really doesn't matter, they will do what they do. They only need to
make their sponsors happy not Crude. I hope the best for them.
D2
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 16:46:12 -0400
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A Couple Hundred Bucks Maybe...
From: jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
DJ Cravens <djcrav...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Notice I did not say flow calorimetry was needed. Just heating a container of
water - pool, spa, teapot....
I have thought about that. During the initial warm up phase you would get an
interesting result. After that, when it reaches a steady state, you would
maintain the entire body of water at a certain temperature for weeks. The body
(the bath and its container) would be losing heat into the surroundings. It
amounts to more or less the same thing they are doing now, with a bigger body
and more thermal mass, plus evaporation and other complicated stuff. I do not
see an advantage.
