me356: Photos of AURA control unit

Quote from Can

They have a work-in-progress document on their testing plan here:

https://docs.google.com/docume…UvzHSvWM84-geOCF38pw/edit

His objective is first, having verified, then he's going to send to an official verification body, then he's going to do a three-way replication - this is what the plan is so far - then a 100-way replication, which we have a philantropic donor that says he will fund that, and then from that bit point -- uh, you know, the greed bug might hit, but it might not [laughs] and he says the commitment has always been he would release the technology, but at that point it's everywhere so it can't be stopped, and that's the idea.

me356 claims COP=10, and 10kW out. MFMP is right, this is trivial to test without possibility of error, as long as you use agreed and correct methodology for measuring input and output power. Basically, those figures are the Holy Grail which if validated give me356 billions and transform the world economy.

Some sort of a control test would be important to validate these methodologies. After all, Rossi's COP=9 device that IH tested had exactly this apparent performance, but turned out to show the same performance when tested with a null reactor. I'd expect MFMP to do the same thing with their testing and if so it would be easy to get a bomb-proof whole world gets interested test. Actually the whole world would take a while, but it would happen.

However, until such external testing happens me356 claims are highly likely wrong, and should be treated as speculation.

Quote

However, until such external testing happens me356 claims are highly likely wrong, and should be treated as speculation.

I don't see any reason for doubts even without similar reports about QuarkX reactor of Andrea Rossi. As Axil noted, this video from Me356 shows the application of the stimulus at 55 second point. The video seems to vibrate when the stimulus gets applied. Immediately after then we can see, that the reactor will start to glow along whole its length...

Now as a chemist you can start to think: which known chemical reaction would delay its starting at 1200 °C and it could be triggered with impulse, which camera can capture at distance? Such a reaction could be only faked for example with sudden introduction of oxygen into reactor filled with magnesium or titanium sponges. But providing that the reactor is already in steady-state regime and closed, then no known chemical process could explain such a weird behavior even without colorimetric measurements.

Quote from THEDEBATEISUSELESS

If you notice there's not going to be a "control" reactor: another nail in the coffin of this test to the cynics before it even starts. Now, personally, I think that excess heat can be determined in a test without a dummy unit, although it is always far better to have one. But this is yet another aspect of the test that will be a huge target of cynics and skeptics.

A cynic is someone who is "distrusting or disparaging the motives of others," or "showing contempt for accepted standards of honesty or morality by one's actions, especially by actions that exploit the scruples of others," or "bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic." You don't need to be a cynic to insist on a control in a test or experiment. This is basic science and common sense. If a control is left out, I think you are right that no one of a scientific orientation will go along with the conclusions of the test. It will only be fodder for people who are happy with unsubstantiated tidbits here and there. If a control is intentionally left out, this calls into question the inventor's understanding of previous results.

Can you clarify what you mean exactly with control reactor?

Quote from Can

They have a work-in-progress document on their testing plan here:

https://docs.google.com/docume…UvzHSvWM84-geOCF38pw/edit

Thanks. This test plan includes a extended question/answer portion between Brian Albiston and me356 and is well worth reading. This also answers my previous question about black box--yes. I have no real concern about this at this time as long as Rossi is not there to start and stop the reactor

Great to see Brian Albiston on the team doing the test. I have confidence that MFMP will do a good test and follow up. My fear is that me356 will back out at the last minute for some personal reason.

Keeping the LENR tech secrets is a wise move. I would not want to get exposed to subatomic particle emissions from prolific use an untested technology. Nobody wants to test the LENR reactor for subatomic particle emissions. Even Rossi says that his reaction is based on meson and pion interactions. How do we know that these reactors are safe? It is better to be safe than sorry. Test first so we are not sorry latter.

@ thedebateisuseless. I thought you were done following all of this stuff and was going to get back to your life before you die alone. I mean I would be ok with that because your posts are really long and nerve racking who cares if me356 stuff works or doesn't or he tells us or not I really am not concerned with it it just would be cool to have someone like mfmp to test this I trust them and they will know if it works for sure or there is not enough to tell. if they tell without a question it is cop10 I will probably not even care about the whole subject anymore. And go get some gasoline because it is easy. For me it is more of a who can do it first and I won't lie if I found out how to do it first I would bet my wallet would tell me to shut the hell up until I had a lock down on it! We are talking about trillions of dollars here, set every relative you have up for millions of generations kind of money!

Jack Cole, thank you for your confidence.

All, thank you for your criticism of the test plan so far. Your criticism will make it a better test. Based on the criticism so far, we've prioritized coming up with a suitable plan for a control run (a control run was in the test plan, but poorly fleshed out). We are investigating using a tankless domestic water heater in combination with a variac to perform a control run over the expected power output range.

Please keep your criticism of, and suggestions for the test plan coming as it will make it a better, more robust test for the LENR community.

Brian

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

He is not under any obligation to tell you anything so quit moaning about it, like so many naysayers on this forum. ... If you have to bitch about something complain about how your tax dollars are spent by DOE, who still won't even look at LENR, and about the Patent Office refusing to grant patents on cold fusion ensuring that it is kept secret until it appears on the market.

Hi Adrian. You're new to this forum. I know you from Vortex, so welcome. Take your time to look around at the threads and get a sense of what this place is about. The tone here is ideally polite and collegial.

Me356 is under no obligation to reveal his secrets. But we are under no obligation to give him a free pass. Claims made without a genuine effort to substantiate them will be critiqued, as they should be. Hopefully the collaboration between me356 and MFMP, if it comes about, will put his claims on a footing that is easier to assess.

Also, if I may add TBIU is going nowhere, he is my friend even though we disagree, he is just frustrated. The only way we lose people here is either BANHAMMER or they become disinterested. Sorry to be so blunt. After Rossi we should consider that anyone making claims of COP over noise ->> as just noise. We have too many good folks working on this problem. It will be cracked eventually. I may think the good doctor is a stinker but that does not reflect on what I think of LENR nor should it for you all.

Adrian, I stand corrected about your time here. Welcome as someone who is now posting something.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

I don't subscribe to finding the plaintive guilty before the trial and verdict.

me356 is not a plaintiff or a defendant. He is someone who has made many claims, most of them unverifiable. As has Rossi. We will surely take a look at all claims, both verifiable and unverifiable, and call them as we see them without apologies.

Quote from Adrian Ashfield

The naysayers add nothing to the party.

To the contrary. If by "naysayers" you're referring in broadbrush strokes to people who are pessimistic about Rossi, we're saving the party, despite the wishes of his enablers. (1) We're protecting the credibility of the LENR field by helping to make clear to third-party observers that Rossi's claims are well separated from those of hardworking, legitimate scientists who have been laboring in the field for years. (2) We're bringing as much information to light as we can so that this case does not become another Papp episode, where decades after the fact nobody really knows what happened. (3) We're helping to educate LENR observers on what science and invention look like; they surely do not look like whatever went down in Doral, Florida. (4) We're helping replicators to take a second look at simply following recipes of anyone who claims he has something but has not been willing to give evidence, thereby saving the time of any who will listen and encouraging them to raise the bar for claims. Obviously not everyone will listen, but perhaps some will.

It is the people enabling unconstructive and antisocial behavior by lending support to anyone who says something that sounds good to them who risk harming the reputation of the field, and possibly attracting people willing to exploit for parasitic ends the blurred boundaries of acceptable behavior that result.