To: Liberty1970
Maybe if we can put together some good suggestions on how Defkalion should enable independent verification of the 1 MW reactor we can pass this along to them. Ideas? My gut feeling is that if this were a truly viable and real system, they wouldn't need suggestions on how to verify it. Good science operates in the open.
2 posted on
08/01/2011 7:05:35 AM PDT by
dirtboy
To: dirtboy
So far all its produced are promises and hype.
5 posted on
08/01/2011 7:10:40 AM PDT by
cripplecreek
(Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
To: dirtboy
I largely agree, but what I'm hoping to avoid is something where Defkalion offers "X, Y and Z" as evidence, and skeptics say "But what we really wanted to see is A, B and C!" for proof. If there is a sort of shared concensus amongst the various parties of what steps need to be taken then this can be avoided.
Of course, once an E-cat finally ships to a private customer none of this will be necessary. The problem is with any financial risks being born until that point.
8 posted on
08/01/2011 7:12:38 AM PDT by
Liberty1970
(For by grace are you saved through faith.)
To: dirtboy; Liberty1970
My gut feeling is that if this were a truly viable and real system, they wouldn't need suggestions on how to verify it. Good science operates in the open.
Obviously said by someone who has never worked in a research lab on something the PI is hoping to score big on.
75 posted on
08/01/2011 11:02:41 AM PDT by
aruanan
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson