As a cold fusion researcher, I can tell you that your opinion is not
correct. First of all, cold fusion is only cold because the energy
provided by a high temperature, as is necessary for hot fusion too work,
is not needed for cold fusion. Second, cold fusion and hot fusion make
energy by similar nuclear reactions. Third, we in cold fusion measure
power. As I said before, we do not focus on COP because this is not an
engineering program, but one trying to understand the phenomenon.
Regards,
Ed
Harry Veeder wrote:
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
