On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:22 PM, DJ Cravens <[email protected]> wrote:
> yes, calorimetry is not needed IF you believe the claims, methods, and the > effect. > The claims are that the device produces significantly over unity, the methods have been alluded to but Rossi is definitely not public with this and he may well be lying (e.g. there may be no catalyst). The effect seems to have been demonstrated by the tests. > As you may know, I don't doubt the reality of CF/LENR in general. > However, if you goal is to convince "non-believer" then it is best to avoid > systems where you have to know the exact waveforms, cables, instruments, > material emissivity's,..... you name it. Perhaps the reaction is > controllable, perhaps not. Perhaps the reproducibility between samples is > solved, perhaps not. > Ah, now we have it ... it's the questions of reproducability and controlability, > > Heating a pot/container of water from a standalone unit is the way to go > .... in my humble opinion. > Indeed, making steam and using it to, say, drive a car across Italy without stopping would be pretty damn convincing. [mg]
