Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 09:46 AM 10/3/2009, Horace Heffner wrote: >> I don't think controlling thermal instabilities is important, it is >> eliminating their effect on the calorimetry. This is of course why >> Seebeck calorimetry is useful. Whatever directions the heat flows, >> it is measured. > > It occurs to me that, while there is a very important role for precise > calorimetry to play in cold fusion research, from an engineering > perspective it might be a bit of a red herring.
>From an engineering perspective it's irrelevant. As long as you need precise calorimetry to tell if anything's happening, there's nothing going on which can be "engineered". When enough heat is generated reliably enough to be useful for "engineering" rather than "science" you won't need a calorimeter to detect it. Do you need a calorimeter to tell whether the fire in your fireplace is lit or not? To tell if your car motor has caught? To determine whether a space heater is doing its job? Obviously not.
