On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com>wrote:
> At 07:48 PM 12/28/2012, James Bowery wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Axil Axil <<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>ja >> **nap...@gmail.com <janap...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Heat output can be neglected. >> >> >> I strongly disagree. >> >> If there is no excess energy, expressed in motion, then the lack of heat > is *not* an anomaly. A triple negative. How about this: "If there is excess energy, expressed in motion, then the presence of heat is *not* an anomaly." That is true enough on its face. However it does fly in the face of Papp's claims. > I'm looking at heuristics here. What approaches will most efficiently > resolve claims? > Axil is proposing 3 quantitative measurements that, in the absence of Papp's claim of absence of substantial heat, are clearly needed. I'm looking merely to falsify one claim by Papp with one qualitative measurement. Now, it is true that the accelerometer measurements have been made much more economically accurate than in the past and that my intuition may be off in this area. However, we _are_ dealing with discontinuous phenomena here and it isn't always the case that the time constants on measurement instruments are well specified.
