Stefan,
"I got the impression that these validatoins will be done when they
close the system reliably and not when they manage to get the
photovoltaics functioning which is logical."
That does not sound logical to me. They are close enough to having
photovoltaics that it seems pointless to mess around with water calorimetry.
AA
On 3/27/2017 1:54 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote:
As I understand the crucial thing to achieve good evidences is to
close the reactor and run it for long enough time with plain old water
bath calormetry. Previously he had to shut down the experiment after
just a short time. Closing the system can reveal new caveats and
difficulties so this step can take considerable more time than what we
heard so far. I got the impression that these validatoins will be done
when they close the system reliably and not when they manage to get
the photovoltaics functioning which is logical. But sure they should
know by know the ball park of the release of energy if they are
honest, and there have been several attempts to characterize this
ballpark and all tell the same story. Also a system that releases 10MW
from 10KW for say 15s should be obvious from pure inspection and rules
of thumb estimates - but that conclusion is hard from just the videos
so the careful need to wait for better evidences as always. As I tell
all people I discuss this with, let's wait and see, what comes will
come but sure it is a fun and entertaining ride - making energy from
constructing dark matter, thats a great lol, and even greater so if it
turns out to be real.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Bob Higgins <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
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
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 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
<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.
