Today Sean cleared up lingering Jury questions. chili fries asks:
I also can't resist asking (though I understand if I don't get one) for clarification. Are they only testing the devices with Steorn's measurement apparatus? Are they building the devices for themselves? Are they building and testing the devices at their places of business, or is the validation process only taking place at Steorn in Dublin?Sean's reply:
Well I can't in fact 'tell' the Jury what to do. They will not rely only on Steorn data, who would? They will not only do tests in Steorn, who would? I doubt that they would rely on Steorn provided systems (the ones with our hamsters in them!), who would?Here are some additional comments from Sean today:
This talk about the supposed 'test limits' placed on this process by Steorn is false and mis-leading. Part of someones game no doubt.
I fully expect that the method of reaching their conclusions will form part of the final assessment. The only purpose of 'information control' is to allow these people to do their work, without the need to deal with media or bloggers and to allow the results, once ready, to be released in a coordinated way to the media, that simple.In regards to how the Jury is going:
Well I guess that the first thing to understand is that our original view of the process was modified based on input from people who where applying. Basically the suggestion was that an additional phase was added to the process that in effect involved a 'peer review' of white papers, test methods and test data provide by Steorn. This will not of course be the basis of the final evaluation report but was included, by request, so that they have a very clear understanding of what the technology is about. This is reflected in the jury contract posted on the main site, part I being, in effect a form a peer review and part II being selection of independent labs (by the Jury), definitions of tests and so on.It looks like we'll be waiting a while for the next jury update. Let's hope they've made a lot of progress on phase 1 testing by then. Here's more from Sean:
The whole point about the Jury process is that it is not conducted under any form of pressure, hence we will not be in the business of predicting when, how and so on. So I guess that the best that I can say is that we will give another update at the end of Q2.
We said from the outset that this would be a long and involved process, others of course have views that this could all be over in 10 mins, this was never going to be the case and we have repeatedly stated this from the very start . No credible scientist is going to throw out hundreds of years of experience in the blink of an eye. The process will be must be in-depth and run at a pace dictated by the Jury.It's been an eventful week, but my hunch are things will slow down around here before they get busy again. Sean is holding his cards close. I hope between now and Q2 we can make some progress with Dr. Mike's visit and also with crank's activities with Steorn.
...we have no doubts about our claims - but we have never expected anyone in the public domain to believe us. The role of the Jury is to provide a deep technical analysis of our claims, at that point I will ask you to believe us. Up till then I will simply ask you to believe that we are genuine about the process.
Not only the people involved and the methods used to determine a result will be available, but also the details about how we came to select the 22 and so on. There is no point at all in this process if its details are not in the public domain AFTER the result. I stress after for the simple reason that while doing this, the last thing the people involved need to do is (1) deal with some of the crazy bloggers that are out there or (2) give a false or misleading impression of what is going on. As always the answer to the question we pose is far too important for all of us to allow it to be influenced by some of the very cynical bloggers or indeed the crazy ones. It really is a case that the full story will be known at the end, but it will only be known at the end.