To be realistic, if the output heat was consistently showing up as say
85% of input electrical power, then naturally the experimenter must
"recalibrate" to show it as roughly even... <g>
After all, the accepted assumption is that input energy can't disappear
or be stored, right?
H LV wrote:
Yes, but how to square this with the fact that the input energy
balanced the output energy during the prep time. Could the combined
margin error in both the input and output measurements allow for the
storage of enough energy during the prep time?
harry
Jones Beenewrote:
Harry, You seem to be suggesting that the experiments in France
could be operating by (inadvertently) storing applied energy in
nuclei for later release - at least as an alternate explanation
for the two runs which showed gain after months of what looks very
much like a battery being charged.
As unlikely as this possibility may sound at first to a proponent
of cold fusion - the mechanism has not been eliminated. In fact,
it may be more physical than suggesting nuclear fusion without
radiation, since it involves "one less miracle."
For instance, the weak nuclear force has two poorly understood
properties - weak hypercharge and weak isospin -- either of which
(or both) arguably could be boosted or pumped up by electrical
current flow (in palladium electrolysis) over time and then the
accumulated energy released later.
In fact, the weak force could even supply helium (which does not
come from fusion but from alpha decay of the heavier palladium
isotope after months of "hypercharging" ;-)
This "weak force pumping" rationale, having its main validity
based on our lack of understanding of the weak force - indicates
how little is known about the underlying mechanisms for the
unpredictable gain of cold fusion. There could be many. The
appearance of helium should never lead to the reflexive conclusion
of fusion, that is- when gamma radiation is absent.
