Yamali Yamali <yamaliyam...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> You've read their report, Terry, and you are an EE. And you would, based > on what you read in the report and what Hartman and Essen said in > interviews afterwards, sign a statement to the effect that "there is no > possibility of fraud in these tests"??? > If this were something like a court case and an EE was asked to testify, I think it would be reasonable for him to say: "Based on what I have seen here I cannot think of any way in which fraud could be committed. The methods of deception that have been suggested by others would not work in my opinion." That's not to say fraud or error are absolutely ruled out under any circumstances. In real life you can never say that. As I said, in principle there could be an error in Ohm law or the laws of thermodynamics. Also, testimony of this nature is always "to the best of my knowledge," which is an escape clause. It may be that an EE would want to clarify some details with the authors before testifying to that effect. That would be reasonable. - Jed
