So, here's two cases where Joshua Cude and Jed Rothwell concur about evidence. ***It is this kind of common ground and base set of facts that we should try to establish as a group. If anyone comes along hoping to debunk it, they can read the base set of facts and either move on or engage with us.
If I were to try to log onto a unicorn discussion group, and they were all obviously unicorn 'believers', what is the point of trying to separate them from their unicornian beliefs? But if they cite genuine historical evidence that they rely on to pursue their belief system, and we're invited to investigate that evidence rationally, then there is some common ground between us. For a non-unicornian to try to impose his viewpoint that if unicorns are real, they must be amphibians, is beyond the pale for unicornians. But for a rule to exist that all participants should adhere to the belief that unicorns can fly is also beyond the pale. The common ground is what we need to establish. On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Rich Murray <rmfor...@gmail.com> wrote: > "I think many people have expressed highly skeptical view of BLP, Rossi > and others here. I think most of this skepticism is justified!" -- Jed > Rothwell > > So, here's two cases where Joshua Cude and Jed Rothwell concur about > evidence. > > The claims about Toyota's successes are indeed extraordinary evidence: > > " They achieved high reproducibility, routinely triggering boil offs in > 64 cells at a time. The work culminated with cells that ran for weeks at > boiling temperature, at 40 to 100 W. See: > > http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RouletteTresultsofi.pdf [ 9 pages ] > > This project was terminated because of politics and disputes over money > between Toyota and other companies, not because the research itself > failed." -- Jed Rothwell > > "Roulette, T., J. Roulette, and S. Pons. Results of ICARUS 9 Experiments > Run at IMRA Europe. > > in Sixth International Conference on Cold Fusion, Progress in New Hydrogen > Energy. 1996. Lake Toya, Hokkaido, Japan: New Energy > and Industrial Technology Development Organization, Tokyo Institute of > Technology, Tokyo, Japan. > > RESULTS OF ICARUS 9 EXPERIMENTS RUN AT IMRA EUROPE > T. Roulette, J, Roulette, and S. Pons > IMRA Europe, S.A., Centre Scientifique > Sophia Antipolis, 06560 Valbonne , FRANCE > > INTRODUCTION > > We describe herein the construction, testing, calibration and use of a > high power dissipation calorimeter > suitable for the measurements of excess enthalpy generation in Pd / Pd > alloy cathodes during the electrolysis of heavy water electrolytes at > temperatures up to and including the boiling point of the electrolyte. > > With the present design, power dissipation up to about 400W is possible. > > Excess power levels of up to ~250% of the input power have been observed > with these calorimeters in some experiments. Extensions of the design to > include recombination catalysts on open and pressurized cells will be the > subject of a future report." > > 2 of 7 runs, months long, gave excess heat. > no details about how the Pd cathodes were prepared and changed. > no references are given. > how qualified are T. and J. Roulette? > > Joshua Cude, would you comment on this on newvortex? > > within the fellowship of service, Rich Murray > > > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: >> >> There is plenty of room to be skeptical that LENR will ever get to market. >>> Cude was correct on that point. I think that airing alternative >>> viewpoints >>> on the subject of what it takes for commercialization can be quite >>> productive for the future of the field. >> >> >> Exactly right. Plus there are many technical claims that are questionable >> or not repeated yet. Host metal transmutation is not as well established >> as, say, tritium. Iwamura has done good work and Toyota replicated him, but >> it is still long way from the tritium results. >> >> >> >>> Many of us really resent the efforts of those who want to impugn many >>> years >>> of quality research at Universities, SRI, National Labs and so on - by >>> top >>> researchers. Sure, there is some research which is substandard, but that >>> is >>> not the point. The existing level of good research almost certainly >>> proves >>> than nuclear reactions can occur at low temperature. >> >> >> Yup, I resent that! >> >> >> To be in denial of that >>> evidence by skeptics is no more than intellectual dishonesty. >>> >> >> Maybe it is with some people. But I think the debate is reasonably fair. >> Most supporters and skeptics who are wrong (wrong in my opinion) are making >> honest mistakes, or they are ignorant, or they interpret the data wrong. >> Cude strikes me as honest in his opinions. I think he sincerely believes >> that McKubre Fig. 1 has no significance, because most cells do not achieve >> the high loading shown there. That is a mistake, not dishonest. He does not >> understand the point of this graph. >> >> Perhaps he should make more of an effort to understand, but we can't >> fault people for misunderstanding. >> >> >> >>> This still does not prove that the World will ever benefit from this >>> technology, but that is a completely separate subject for showing that >>> it is >>> real on a laboratory scale. >>> >> >> Yes, separate. Except that some results, such as that the final results >> from Toyota, do prove that commercial level power density, i/o ratios, and >> temperatures on a small scale are possible. Whether they can be sustained >> or scaled up is an open question. >> >> You would never get those temperatures or ratios from muon catalyzed >> fusion. Plasma fusion has never achieved "fully ignited" heat after death. >> >> >> >>> That LENR is a physical reality at some scale is a given - but even so, >>> that >>> situation is far removed from the ability to take the underlying >>> principle >>> to market. >> >> >> It sure is. >> >> >> >>> Look at Blacklight Power after running through maybe $80 million. >>> Are they close to market? >> >> >> No idea, and I would love to know. >> >> >> A PoC device from BLP was due out in February and >>> it is not here. >> >> >> Who knows what to make of that. Sigh. . . . >> >> I think many people have expressed highly skeptical view of BLP, Rossi >> and others here. I think most of this skepticism is justified! >> >> - Jed >> >> >
