Many CF researchers like to compare CF cells to a mini nuclear fission reactor, but instead of fission process providing the "excess" heat, it is a low temperature fusion process. This is why they tend not to be interested in power measurements and focus on energy measurements instead. Basically, this reflects the theoretical bias that cold fusion does not depend on any LofT violations. Or to put it another way cold fusion is a process which releases "stored" energy, instead of producing power from "nothing".
Harry Michel Jullian wrote: > Since you know them all and for a reason, a link to a CF paper describing a > COP of the order that ED described (6) would be welcome Jed. TIA > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <vortex-L@eskimo.com> > Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 5:08 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Cold Fusion skeptic Dr. Michael Shermer > > >> Edmund Storms wrote: >> >>> Excess energy from electrolysis is seldom over unity. Energy in >>> excess of that applied to the cell is the only important measurement >>> during such studies. My latest excess energy is about 2.5 W for a >>> calorimeter with an error of about 25 mW. The cell was not designed >>> to maximize the efficiency. Therefore, the Power out/Power in ratio >>> has no meaning. >> >> It has no meaning in the sense that it does not predict whether cold >> fusion can be made practical. It tells us nothing about whether one >> technique is more promising than another in the long term. However, a >> high ratio does make the calorimetry easier. That is to say, it is >> easier to measure 2.5 W with 5 W of electrolysis input than with 35 W >> input. (The input power is sometimes called the "background," as in >> "a 5 W background.") It resembles instrument noise in this respect, >> except that electrolysis input is a deliberate and inescapable part >> of the experiment. Gas loading and some other methods have no input >> background power, so they are easier to confirm with a high s/n ratio. >> >> - Jed >> >
