Let me add a correction to this this thread. I recall now that Arata used a thermoelectric chip and small motor used to focus a camera lens. That is bigger than an analog wristwatch motor. Still, it was not a good demonstration because it takes such a small amount of power. That leaves room for error or even fraud. It was not convincing. As I said, conventional calorimetry would be a lot better.
Conventional Seebeck calorimetry is conceptually the same thing as driving a motor from a thermoelectric chip. The Seebeck is quantitative, way more informative and more reliable. As I recall the motor only ran when there was a chemical reaction still occurring, according to Arata himself. That make it even more pointless. I do not think much of Arata's experiments, as I made clear in this paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJreportonar.pdf I think his claims are probably correct despite the problems with this experiment. Some of his DS-Cathode experiments were a lot more convincing. McKubre's tests were way more convincing, needless to say. The core of the experiment is the same, so the early work supports the later claims. - Jed
