Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> With most other > demos I have been less impressed than the person doing the demo. > > I can see your point, but my impression is not that he is unimpressed, but > that he realizes the similarity to Arata, which also was understated . . . Arata's demonstration calorimetry was bad. Awful, really. As Ed and I pointed out: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJreportonar.pdf Arata was upset with us. "Upset" to say the least. He has quite a temper. > – and the similarity to Les Case and the Arata replications . . . Do you mean Cravens' replications? I do not recall that he replicated Arata. McKubre did. Are you saying his demo was too similar to their experiments to stand on it own merits? I disagree, if that is what you mean. It was different enough. > , and moreover - that he has also improved it, possibly substantially If it is improved, that is all the more reason to do the demo again, and to enter the contest. > - and finally… (but most importantly)… that he is not the same kind of > self-promoter as are many inventors in LENR. Well, when you do a demo, you are promoting yourself. So you do the best you can, and you stand by the results. He honestly does not think the demo is as impressive as I do. That is a matter of opinion. I guess it could be modesty, but we have specific technical reasons on both sides. It is a mild disagreement. > Obviously, if they made the requirement to be a minimum of say - 100 watts > – > then that could eliminate this type of demo. > Yup. It would resemble the demonstration the British astronomers set for chronometers. See the book "Longitude" for details. Around 1780 the astronomers launched the biggest, most expensive science project in history to compile lunar tables for navigation. Along came Harrison with a chronometer suitable for use on a ship, version 1, 2 and 3. The government set up a reward for a working chronometer, similar to the X-prize, but it put the astronomers in charge. They were determined to prevent the use of a rival technology, since they had this make-work Tokamak-like project underway. All three of Harrison's devices were tested in transatlantic voyages, in tests dictated by the astronomers. All three passed with flying colors. They were easier to use than lunar tables. So the astronomers kept moving the goal posts and making the tests harder and harder. Finally, Harrison and the others gave up. By that time they were selling directly to ship captains, so the contest was moot. The lunar table project continued until 1911, as I recall. (With the lunar method, you use the moon as a clock to know the time at the prime meridian. With a chronometer, you leave the chronometer set to Greenwich time. You would adjust the chronometer when you reached a port at a known location. The local astronomer would fire off a cannon or ring a bell at midday for the navigators aboard ships in port.) - Jed
