SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!!
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Neocon who wrote (84733)8/3/2000 3:48:27 PM
From: cosmicforce  Read Replies (2) of 108807
 
In science, a fact can be in dispute. Remember, Cold Fusion? The surplus of energy, a hypothesis, was suggested by the temperature rise of the apparatus, a FACT. Actually, both were in dispute. Was there really a surplus and not just an accounting error? Even with no energy production you'd expect some temperature rise. The question became "How much?".

Sometimes it is not clear whether the syllogism is leading you into falsely accepting your hypothesis as true when you are really misinterpreting what you see. Using the syllogism:

All exothermic reactions produce temperature rises
this apparatus has a temperature rise
this apparatus was exothermic

So what? That's not the question. The question was "Is there Cold Fusion going on?" That requires careful dissection of the data and very exacting calculations, not just the measurement of a temperature rise. And repeatability. This apparatus failed the reproducibility phase. Others couldn't duplicate it. No Cold Fusion.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News