>From current results 4-5 times the number of wires (=60-75W) should just about be self-sustaining, and should probably not run-away.
On 22 August 2012 08:11, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > Someone suggested that Celani's device could not handle a much higher > temperature than it currents exhibits. If this is true, he is restricted > in the net power output and number of wires without a major redesign. > > Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Wed, Aug 22, 2012 2:35 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:What a self-sustaining demonstration by Celani might > accomplish > > If Celani wanted to demonstrate an easily detectable LENR reaction, he > would only need to multiply the number of wires he uses in his device by 10 > or 100. A 150 or 1500 watt excess output would be hard to misinterpret. > Cheers: Axil > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Akira Shirakawa <shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> It's true that the calorimetry shown is currently not conclusive, but >>> will this matter anymore once he manages to run it in self-sustaining or >>> mostly self-sustained mode? >>> >> >> I do not know what a "mostly" self-sustaining mode would be. A fully >> self-sustaining run lasting more than 10 minutes with no temperature >> decline would be irrefutable proof that the effect is real, and anomalous. >> There is less than a gram of wire in the cell plus hydrogen gas. There is >> no doubt the heat originates at the wire. There are no chemical changes to >> any of the materials in the cell. So once you eliminate all doubts about >> the calorimetry, by making it self-sustain, any measurable amount of heat >> is anomalous. >> >> He plans to let it run for a week or more. That is thousands of times >> longer than you need to make the case. Why not go for thousands? -- good >> idea. >> >> If Celani can make it self sustain, this will be as conclusive and >> irrefutable as the Fleischmann and Pons boil off experiments of 1992, which >> produced massive heat after death. It was easily measured and far beyond >> the limits of chemistry. See: >> >> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmancalorimetra.pdf >> >> These 1992 experiments did not convince any prominent skeptics, because >> those people are pathological skeptics who have abandoned the scientific >> method. Or because they are scientific illiterates such as Taubes, the >> Wikipedia editors, or your typical mass media "science writer." They do not >> understand middle-school level science. They have no idea what "the limits >> of chemistry" or "4 eV per atom" means. >> >> A self-sustaining gas loaded experiment by Celani will not convince >> these people. They will: >> >> 1. Ignore the results OR, >> >> 2. Misunderstand the results. >> >> 2. Come up with absurd reasons to dismiss the results. >> >> 3. Accuse Celani of lying. >> >> You must ignore such people to preserve your sanity. Dealing with them >> is a no-win proposition. Never try to address their concerns. They will >> only invent one crazy objections after another. Like the people who >> claimed that thousands of thirsty rats invaded Mizuno's laboratory every >> night to drink the hot water in the bucket during his heat-after-death >> event. Or this nutcase Rep. Akin -- a member of the House Committee on >> Science, Space, and Technology committee no less! -- who imagines that >> women's bodies have a magical ability to avoid pregnancy after rape. >> >> If Celani takes the right steps he can easily convince a hundred >> thousand sane, professional scientists and engineers. The right steps >> include: >> >> 1. Allow independent observers to confirm the result. >> >> 2. Present the results in a properly written paper with lots of details >> and data. >> >> 3. Allow me and others to upload the paper, the full dataset from the >> instruments, photos, papers from the independent observers, and other proof >> of the claim. >> >> As I said in presentation at ICCF17, addressing the researchers, "[if >> you will only do this] you will be believed, you will be funded, and we >> will triumph." >> >> >> Whether Celani or any of the others will follow my advice or not I >> cannot predict. So far, every cold fusion researcher who has had the >> opportunity to convince the public has failed to do so. >> >> People such as Patterson and Rossi failed deliberately. They went out >> of their way to avoid convincing the public, because that is their market >> strategy. Patterson told me so. Rossi has not told me that, but it is the >> only explanation I can imagine for his "no tests!" policy. I mean the fact >> that he refused to let me and many others spend a few minutes confirming >> his claims with proper instruments. We offered; he said no. Emphatically >> no. There has to be a reason. Since he *did* allow other highly >> qualified to people to verify the effect independently, but only under >> NDAs, I assume he doe not want people to know for sure his claims are true. >> That is not an unusual business strategy. >> >> - Jed >> >> >
