I don't think anyone outside of Mills' team can say that he has made even 1W of excess heat from any of his devices. The one quick bomb calorimetry demo done was very crude calorimetry, was not believable, and a paper was not published on it. If Mills wants to convince his critics, he should publish credible calorimetry of one of his devices over the course of a reasonable time period (at least twelve hours). He should describe the experiment in detail, and provide data and analysis. He wouldn't have to publish anything about what is inside his black box. He doesn't need to wait on mythical photovoltaics to make this measurement. He could establish credibility with one such paper. If he published a credible paper, we would believe his result with some measure of confidence. There must be a reason he hasn't established his credibility this way.
Without having done this, he is relegating himself into the same class of pseudo-science as Rossi: hyped un-demonstrated science. He shows pretty stuff, but the data is never published, and then he moves on to something else. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:55 AM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote: > Brian, > > He has demonstrated the SunCell to various audiences. Mills says he will > demonstrate the SunCell producing power soon after the required > photovoltaics are developed and in pace - later this year. Obviously he > can't do that before. > > You are saying he is a fraud and will never do that, without proof. I > have trouble understanding the vocal critics here who seem to be of a class > "NO! What was the question?" Strikes me as very unscientific. > > Slightly related see. http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/uk-should-be- > generating-research-into-world-changing-cold-fusion-system-1-4400376 > > AA > > On 3/27/2017 5:38 AM, Brian Ahern wrote: > > It has never been independently observed, but is often quoted. > > > If it was true, he could openly demonstrate it operating. > >
