I see no point to doing research and then not publishing it. It is like cooking a meal and not eating it, or building houses and then burning them down. Okay, I will grant that research is fun, but without the consummation of sharing your results it seems like ashes in the mouth. A waste of life. Nihilistic.
In the wisdom of your years, how would you advise a lucky researcher who has discovered the foundations of the LENR process to avoid the pitfalls of others in the past? Please provide details. Cheers: Axil On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > DJ Cravens <djcrav...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > For a while I was mistakenly given only a short time to live due to nano >> powder complications. >> > > Maybe next time it will not be a false alarm. All the more reason to get > on with the work quickly. Why do all this work and then take it to the > grave with you, the way Patterson and Case did? > > I see no point to doing research and then not publishing it. It is like > cooking a meal and not eating it, or building houses and then burning them > down. Okay, I will grant that research is fun, but without > the consummation of sharing your results it seems like ashes in the mouth. > A waste of life. Nihilistic. > > > >> I have never said lack of notice is unfair. >> > > You have a short memory. > > > >> It is very fair. Most of the significant work is done by those who go >> un-noticed. I still don’t know why you try to read into everyone’s >> motives and statements fame and money. >> > > I don't give a damn what your motives are or whether you want fame or > money. I am saying that you must have money to do this experiment properly. > With money will come fame. You can't get one without the other. You will > either work in obscurity and fail, or you will accept funding and what > comes with it. > > > >> I fully disclosed my calorimeter to NRL - and it does include such trival >> things as you mention. >> > > Those things are not trivial. > > > >> Although I did opt for water blocks instead of liquid water envelopes. >> They are more stable and reliable and avoid some other problems. I also >> have internal metal walls to decrease the problems of location of heat >> sources within the device (those are often overlooked or hand waved away). >> > > That sounds good! > > > >> I think that it was used in part for the NRL lab design and should be in >> public domain out there somewhere. But I have said that to you before. How >> about trying to understand? >> > > How about giving me a URL to this design? > > > >> I still think a good standalone with thermoelectric chip and a load is OK. >> > > May-bee. I doubt it. Especially not at only 0.25 W. But I could be wrong! > > > >> Again all experiments do not have to prove LENR or go to high powers. It >> can be still a good experiment or endeavor to simply learn something new or >> even try something new. >> > > The only problem being that no one will believe your results are real, > unless you get high power OR you use a really good calorimeter. It sounds > like your NRL calorimeter will fill the bill. That's good! I look forward > to seeing these results at ICCF18. > > - Jed > >
