Spoiling for a fight? Nah, just helping you develop your own critical thinking skills.
Although seeing as we are at the stage of you claiming that respecting the views of others is 'tribalism', I guess I've failed!
Zeus46
Member
- Member since Sep 22nd 2016
Posts by Zeus46
-
-
Fair point ShaneD, I smell something else, but I’ll refrain from going further down the politics rabbit hole.
-
On the contrary. People adore their fascist leaders regardless of the awful things they say and do. Followers giving them leeway and respect allows fascists to retain their power.
Who are you trying to kid?! You really think dictators survive on leeway and respect? ...Perhaps you should read some history.
Critical thinking is a key ingredient of science. Discarding it in the name of tolerance does not further the way to anything useful.
So what?
Maybe you could use your apparently-excellent critical thinking skills to give a real example of one of these “many societal woes” that are caused by respecting people’s views.
-
All I see in the Sochi lab visit photos, are a bunch of stony faces. That does not inspire confidence.
-
Giving people a lot of leeway and respect regardless of their views is responsible for many of society’s woes.
Such as...? Sounds like you advocate fascism?
-
“Son, never argue with idiots, they’ll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience”.
Should rename this as ‘The Idiot Thread’
-
You just can't make this stuff up!
...Is a British idiom implying something is ridiculous, not that you are personally making things up...
-
(I am not sure J5's findings are LENR as he has been detecting radiation instead of heat.)
Well, the ‘N’ does stand for ‘nuclear’...
-
I assume you will be there every step of the discovery process reminding them they are probably wrong?
Everyone’s gotta get their kicks somehow. Just don’t ask him to visit!
-
Nice try Paradig. but Parkhomov's are way better!
-
As a modeler, I know the secret. A model can only compute what you build into it and what you test via your range of parameter variation.
Congratulations for stating the obvious. What FE modelling software do you use?
-
And some of the aforementioned cherry-picking! Brilliant.
-
Nah, I prefer a finite element model over your sophistries. The matrix algebra would take too long to type out.
-
"Because the effects can be ingrated away with decent calorimeter design."
No, they can't. Just shows you haven't bothered to understand as usual. Troll.
Five times now. And Shanahan, you nutter, you're now claiming that 'every single calorimeter ever' would be flummoxed if the heat source moved? Because that's just silly...
And I point out an old post from McKubre, which answers your recent points, and then point out how typically you ignore such posts... And suddenly the post is being ignored, and I'm accused of trolling. Some kind of distraction strategy perhaps.
I could equally argue that you troll anyone with common sense, or maybe even a single shred of rational thought. -
Ah Shanahan you little crackpot, you...
All reasonable points, however as McKubre hasn't dropped any major clangers about the first two laws of thermodynamics (to my knowledge at least) - I'll stick with him for now, ta.
And that's probably your fourth "last ever" reply to me! That shtick is wearing a little thin...
And just what is 'wooly' about partitioning the recombination heat between two (or more) locations as opposed to limiting it to just one?
Because the effects can be ingrated away with decent calorimeter design. As FEA modelling can no doubt affirm.
-
Rossi actually received the Pigasus Award (if memory serves)
Actually memory does not serve you very well...
-
Not at all. I responded at least twice to that posting in the thread you plucked it from and probably acouple oftimes or more in this thread by stating that none of what Dr. McKubre says is relevant to the CCS/ATER problem. And I'm sure you saw that I pointed out today that Dr. Mckubre's setups are as suceptible to the CCS/ATER problem as anyone else's...
So you think that your woolly suppositions about CCS trump McKubre's finite element modelling (with moving heat sources)?
Laughable, at best.
-
How about Adrian and Sam?
-
porous "titanium oxide"
I don't think an oxide formed on a Ti surface (in air) can be porous... it's Pilling-Bedworth ratio doesn't allow it.
-
If you had read and understood the post above where I talk about the Two Zone model, you would realize that the 'goodness' of your calorimeter does not protect you from the CCS problem I pointed out in 2000.
Kirk, I seem to recall that someone* once accused you of cherry-picking the points you will argue against, whilst ignoring any posts that you don't like...
Perhaps this is one of those posts here:
Display MoreWe obviated the precise issue that Kirk speaks about as follows:
1. ... (snip)
9. We tested our assertion that heat was measured equally independent of its source position two ways:
a. Finite element calculation (this is a complex matter not handled by two term algebra) which modeled the entire calorimeter up to its isothermal boundary: submerged in a water bath held at constant temperature ±0.003°C; in a room held constant to ±1°C
b. Experimentally testing the influence of current to the cell and the complimentary Joule heater over a wide range in blank cells (H2O, Pt or poorly loaded Pd cathodes, early before initiation of the FPHE)
10. ...
...Here endeth the lesson. I will answer only relevant technical questions for clarification (and then probably slowly).
The full version is worth reading.
* indeed...
