Posted on 01/15/2014 4:26:24 PM PST by Kevmo
Ask your flesh and blood PhD where in the PDF you link there is any mention of “hydrinos.”
hot fusion researchers have NEVER claimed they were on the brink of producing a controlled fusion.
***No, they were simply better frauds than the guys you loudly focus on. It takes superduper guvmint teat fraudsters to suck in hundreds of $billions when the payoff is 50 years away. In contrast, the guys you focus on seem to have secondhand equipment, private money, crappy demos and short runway stresses but all the while you accuse them of being masterminds who can do a Vulcan Mind Meld over 7 independent scientists or do something like a Tarallo Water Fake magic trick that requires a million gallons of water and fit it all into one 55 gallon drum.
But even if they had, their failures
***Their failures are evidence of long term, deep fraud.
DO NOT justify the con-artists plying their trade in the cold fusion business.
***Let’s see. Hundreds of $billions of public money fraudulently lost in a bandwagon ploy vs. tens of $millions of good solid scientific research in cold fusion but no bandwagon. So where do we find bandwagon boy?
Tell me what existing theory High Temperature Supercondictivity falsifies.
I’ll be glad to play fetch if you will.
How many of the 14000 times that the PF Anomalous Heat Effect has been replicated are due to error? How many are due to fraud?
Keep in mind that National Instruments, the experts in Measurement Error, say that there is not a measurement error, that there is a true anomalous heat event. That’s after they went through 150 peer reviewed results. Maybe you’d like to accuse them of confirmation bias even though they have much to lose by putting their reputation on the line if this is a pseudoscience.
I’ll be glad to play fetch but you first. Answer this hypothetical:
You have a resistor to measure. Electricity in, heat out. 100Watts in, 99 Watts of heat out. You verify the measurement for 6 continuous days.
Then someone hands you a black box resistor. You measure 100Watts electrical in, 150Watts heat out. You measure the volume, and if it were to have been filled with ANY Chemical (Like gasoline), it would burn out within 2 minutes, but you’re seeing the heat out for 20,000 minutes. You look for extra wires, external sources and find none. You invite 6 other colleagues to find the evidence of fraud, to no avail.
What is the Energy Density of the first resistor compared to the second one? Come on, Mr. Advanced Science Degree. Even I can do this calculation.
You posted a link to Krivit. Not to an italian court.
Congratulations. That makes at least three frauds you know. Rossi, Mills, and some d!ck at the IRS. But I'm not signing my house over to any of them. You go right ahead.
***It’s from Krivit, a well known anti-Rossi guy.
The pdf is a court filing.
The name calling starts from the anti-LENR side.
There is no anti-LENR side, anymore than there is a conspiracy to disprove the existence of fairies. Nobody cares about it, so there isn't a side.
Well, at least I get that 1%
The 1% of non-drivel in your articles consists of the words: "a", "an", and "the."
National Instruments who reviewed 150 of them and said there is no measurement error
What happened to 14,000? Or are only 1% of them valid. NI sells instruments. That doesn't mean they're endorsing the technology. They just don't want to alienate customers. At any rate, I note it is not a technology NI is interested in investing in themselves, despite claims by LENR advocates that they were (yet more lies.)
I posted a link to a pdf. Since you can’t properly post ref’s in your own writing, I’m not surprised you don’t understand how they work.
So you think that the euphemism “Low Energy” came from the lower energy required to overcome the Coulomb Barrier? I suppose when you’re playing fetch you can give us all a link that proves this. That is, in between sucking on the guvmint teat and learning new freshman level logical fallacies you can amaze us with. I don’t believe you made it past freshman level anything, let alone post grad physics. But there is a possibility you took polysci and did very well in the classes on narcissim, Alinsky tactics, and socialism. Yup. That would make sense.
As Feynman explains it:
In the South Seas there is a cargo cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes land with lots of good materials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they've arranged to imitate things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas--he's the controller--and they wait for the airplanes to land. They're doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn't work. No airplanes land. So I call these things cargo cult science, because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they're missing something essential, because the planes don't land.
Now go look up what I told you to look up, and don't come back until you can tell me what existing theory of physics was shaken to its knees by the discovery of High Temperature Superconductivity.
Oh...
Wait...
I'll save you the search, because no physical laws were broken by the discovery. Physicists and materials scientists had been looking for liquid nitrogen and higher temperature superconductors for years, something they would not have been wasting their time with if there were a theoretical basis that said it was impossible to do.
That does seem to be the tactic.
***And the tactic of the skeptopaths has always been to jump on the bandwagon, never discuss the science, ridicule, insult, and engage in vigilante censorship. It is the tactic of the asshole.
I especially like Tweedledumb’s approach of taking some sentence fragment out of context and responding to it as if it were a complete thought.
***Perhaps if you could post a complete thought, it would be worth responding to in the manner you prefer.
The whole website is broken, not just that link.
***I may have found it. But I’m no longer on a Windows system and my Ubuntu system can’t pull it up.
http://ebookily.org/xls/thermal-calculator-139755269.html
no independent scientist was able to confirm that the resistor was isolated from external sources of power.
***I see you’re no better at addressing a hypothetical than you are at avoiding logical fallacies. You verified 100W In. No external sources.
I see reading comprehension is a problem for you as well.
There’s no reason for me to go to an super-biased site when a FReeper tells me to fetch something. Especially someone like you.
But keep at the insults. They keep the thread open.
The word "euphemism" by the way, does not mean what you think it means, unless your opinion of LENR is the same as mine, which I doubt.
A mild or pleasant word or phrase that is used instead of one that is unpleasant or offensive. Webster, online.
Only real scientists find "cold fusion" offensive. Crackpots did not. But then, they couldn't get anyone to buy their frauds.
Only real scientists find “cold fusion” offensive.
***Wow, let’s see how many people you throw under your ignorant Luddite bus when you say such a thing. Here’s a partial list
All the scientists who generated the 14000 replications; National Instruments, who reviewed 150 peer reviewed replications; Toyota; Mitsubishi, Navy SPAWAR;
Brian Josephson, Nobel Prize Theoretical physics, Cambridge Julian Schwinger, Nobel Prize Physics, Berkeley, Purdue, deceased Dennis Bushnell, NASA chief scientist, Langley Research Center, LRC Dr. Joseph Zawodny, NASA senior research scientist Langley Research Center Dr. Michael A Nelson, NASA LENR Space Applications Lead David Wells, NASA LRC, Aeronautical engineer Gustave C. Fralick, Arthur J. Decker, and James W. Blue, NASA Lewis Research George Miley, University of Illinois, Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and Radiological Engineering Dr. Mike McKubre, SRI (Stanford Research Institute), Director Energy Research Center, University of Missouri Dr. Francis Tanzella, SRI, PhD chemistry, senior electrochemist Dr. Brian Ahern , Ames National Laboratory Prof. Peter Hagelstein, Electrical Engineering, MIT Dr. James Truchard, National Instruments founder, President and CEO Edmund Storms, Los Alamos National Laboratory Dr. Mace, Los Alamos National Laboratory John Bockrus, electrochemist Texas A&M University Dr. Francesco Piantelli, University of Siena, Considered the father of modern LENR, filed original patents in 1995 for Ni/H based LENR Dr. Sergio Focardi, emeritus professor University of Bologna Dr. Giuseppe Levi , University of Bologna Dr. David Bianchini, University of Bologna Dr. Christos Stremmenos, University of Bologna, Dept of. Physical and Inorganic Chemistry, retired Francesco Celani, National Institute of Nuclear Physics (Italy’s equivalent of Los Alamos) Dr. Frank Gordon, US Navy’s Space and Naval warfare systems (SPAWAR), retired Eugene Mallove, Professor of science MIT, deceased Dr. Mastromatteo, STMicroelectronics
Now go look up what I told you to ...
Oh...
Wait...
***And then you proceed to argue against something you propped up. Yet another straw argument, and you didn’t even answer the question put to you. By your reasoning it is proper to “impute fraud” to you.
What happened to 14,000? Or are only 1% of them valid.
***All of them are valid. You expect NI to wade through 14000 replications? They waded through 150 of them. They did their homework, and you don’t do your homework. It is a replicated anomaly. Experiment trumps theory. Whine all you want, Luddite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.