---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 6:07 PM Subject: Re: fx-discuss: NiLENR To: fx-disc...@ideosphere.com
I created the claim to test the Bayesian relationship to CFsn as a way of further testing the meta-claim that Ideosphere does what its founder(s) claim: "The Idea Our policy-makers and media rely too much on the "expert" advice of a self-interested insider's club of pundits and big-shot academics." IMHO, Ideosphere, by judging CFsn (and now likely NiLENR) "False", has failed perhaps its most definitive test. On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Neal Gafter <n...@gafter.com> wrote: > The NASA work is solid enough to prove the Science without looking at > Rossi's demos. The engineering is still some ways off though. > > The claim says "Cold fusion of hydrogen in nickel *can *produce over 10 > watts/cc net power" > > Can. Not has. The clear wording of the claim does not require a > demonstration. > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 3:44 PM, chrisran.bma e-mail < > chrisran....@virgin.net> wrote: > >> >> If you read something else to get more in deep you would know the >>> researchers confirmed Rossi didn't interfere with the experiment. >>> >>> > >>> https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-e-cat-cold-fusion-or-scientific-fraud-624f15676f96 >>> > The controls were laughable. It wasn't an independent test. >>> >>> If you presume fraud anyway, there is no control enough to satisfy you. >>> >> >> You honestly believe it is or even could be real??? >> >> Have you seen >> >> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/Andrea-Rossi-Energy-Catalyzer-Investigation-Index.shtml >> >> crandles >> > > On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:55 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Claim CFsn - Cold Fusion <http://ideosphere.com/fx-bin/Claim?claim=CFsn> > Category: *Science & Technology:Physics*bid 0, ask 2, last 2Owner:0, Bank > (i...@ideosphere.com)Judge:306, SMWinnie (smwin...@yahoo.com)created: > 1994/09/23due date:TBDThe Claim > > Cold fusion of deuterium in palladium can produce over 10 watts/cc. net > power at STP (standard temperature and pressure). Cold fusion is discussed > on the fusion newsgroup <news:sci.physics.fusion>. > > Judge's Statement > > Judgment will be entered on CFsn on or before January 1, 2015. > > I will judge based on the intent of this claim, if I perceive such intent > to be obvious. If such intent is ambiguous I will judge on the basis of the > precise wording. If both are ambiguous, I will look for a solution which > follows IF/FX precedent insofar as such precedent is apparent to me and > applicable to the claim. I will seek the guidance of the claim's > owner/author in interpreting the claim. It's his or her question - s/he > ought to get the answer sought. If I believe this claim to have met a YES > or NO condition, and if I believe judgement will be controversial, I will > post a prospective judgement to fx-discuss and forestall entering the > judgement for a comment period to be announced in the post. >
