Jack Cole uses heat to produce the magnetism that LENR requires. Cravens simply uses powder high temperature magnet. Because these two systems are so different, a common type of demo of these two different systems is not feasible IMHO.
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Brad Lowe <ecatbuil...@gmail.com> wrote: > That is exciting news. Can a Cravens style demo be made by putting > both control and test into a lab furnace? Hard to beat that for > elegance and simplicity. > > - Brad > > > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > > Jack Cole continues to improve his prior results, based on a simplified > > Rossi/Parkhomov alumina tube reactor - with the aim of finding a safe and > > reliable “baseline” experiment which almost anyone can pull off, even a > > physics professor, in order to see thermal gain greater than chemical. > > > > > http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/2015/01/27/replication-nilioh-excess-heat-results/ > > > > Please note: > > > > 1) Yes, Jack’s experiment is low gain (COP~ 1.1) for now, and has no > > frills, but it is simple and SAFE and does not require large power input > > (although larger input is being considered) > > > > 2) LAH is a dangerous reactant and only skilled experimenters with a > > glove box should even think about it > > > > 3) This experiment is now looking repeatable, and given that it is > > safer, since there is no LAH, hopefully it will be replicated by many, or > > else someone will discover where the experimental error lies and why > > control-run calibrated thermometry (as in Lugano) can’t be trusted. > (note: > > everyone agrees that this should move to precision calorimetry > eventually, > > once the gain is improved). > > > > 4) Please do not be overly critical of low budget efforts where the > > gain is based on calibration against a dummy reactor. Not everyone can > > afford foolproof calorimetry, but anyone can make small cumulative > advances > > to a common theme, if the underlying experiment is safe enough and > > inexpensive. > > > > 5) In fact, Cole’s technique is similar but better performed than > the > > Lugano report, since he did use calibrated thermocouples which Levi > failed > > to do. > > > > 6) Since the resistance wire is internal the experiment cannot reach > > temperatures in excess of say 1000C but lower temperature will show > thermal > > gain. But this makes the experiment much simpler. > > > > 7) In principle, COP of 1.1 is no less AMAZING than COP 2.5, if the > > gain is above chemical, since both are arguably outside the laws of > normal > > thermodynamics. > > > > Jones > >
