Am 04.09.2011 17:23, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Peter Heckert <peter.heck...@arcor.de <mailto:peter.heck...@arcor.de>>
wrote:
10-20% COP is easily explained as measuring error.
Not with the instruments used by McKubre or Storms. If you think it
would be easy I suggest you write a paper explaining how that might
work with the system described here:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHisothermala.pdf
In any case, they measured far more than 20% in some cases, ranging
from 300% to infinity (no input power).
The cases with high COP are not repeatable. If, then it would be easy to
prove.
Just because you assert that something "is easily explained" that does
not actually mean you have easily explained it. I do not get a sense
that you have read the literature carefully or that you can back up
your assertions, either easily or with difficulty. I say that because
if you had read the literature you would know that excess heat has
often exceeded 20%, and you would know that cold fusion is much easier
to replicate than many other physics experiments. You might also
realize that the difficulty of replication is not considered a reason
to reject a finding. The Princeton PPPL and the Top Quark experiments
are far more difficult to replicate than cold fusion but I do not
think they have been rejected on that basis.
These are predicted by theory.
Also the other examples (the Transistor) from your previous post where
predicted by theory.
So the chance to find something was very high-
LENR effects are not predicted by theory , they appear for unknown
reasons and disappear for unknown reasons.
If you do not wish to do your homework and learn about this subject,
that's fine, but you should not expect people here to take your
comments seriously. I, for one, plan to ignore you unless you indicate
a willingness to learn the facts about cold fusion instead of waving
your hands and making up stuff.
There are too much claims like this and it is a waste of time to test
them all. 98% of them are investment fraud.
You dont even know where to begin, so much claims are made.
I have already tested this
http://www.ostfalia.de/cms/de/pws/turtur/FundE and finally found it is
nonsense and a scam.
If somebody has a labor and a COP of 100% then he has to proove it.
If it is less, then it is indeed very difficult to prove. Maybe there is
something. Its not impossible.
There are already some tabletop fusors working, but these are
experimental and too small to produce energy.
There is no reason why this should be better witzh D-D or H-Ni fusion.
But I have no chemical labor, I cannot do these experiments so I have to
wait for a definite proof.
