2010/3/23 Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>: > Michel Jullian wrote: > >> You missed my point about Scott/Earthtech, which is not that they have a >> more sensitive calorimeter (which for kW level power is irrelevant I agree), >> but that they can perform an _independent_ measurement of the device.
> as a > practical matter, actually moving an experiment from one calorimeter to > another, and especially from one lab to another, is a lot harder than it > sounds, and I don't see much point to it. It does not seem particularly > "independent" to me. It is less independent than using a fresh cathode and > your own cell. Which, since you don't really know what makes the original cell work, is even harder than moving the original cell. Anyway, I said "independent measurement", not independent replication. > I doubt it would convince any skeptics, if that is your goal. I am sure it would convince many on the contrary. What would you think of someone telling you he can fly to the moon by flapping his arms, to use your analogy, and never letting anyone watch for 20 years? Wouldn't you be less skeptic if you witnessed the feat yourself? Or would you insist that the guy teaches you how to fly this way before believing him? > Also, I do not think the MOAC is of better quality or better suited to these > experiments than the instruments at SRI, Energetics Technology, or Storms' > lab. Even if it wasn't, the aim is confirmation, not better measurement. Michel
