Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
It could just as well be that the resistive wires are what are bright and the gaps between them are where it gets darker. If this were the case, won't there be a double dark shadow cast on either side of the wire with the bright wire in between. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: The shadows of the wires in figs 12 are problematic ... but we don't have enough information to figure out if they are actually the result of light, or if they represent zones of different thermal conductivity, as in the first independent test (which had a steel outer cylinder). I've thought about this, too. In both this report and the previous one, there was the suggestion that the inside of the E-Cat is so radiant that the resistive wires are darker and conceal some of this, creating shadows of sorts. On the basis of the photos that have been provided, there's no reason to conclude this. It could just as well be that the resistive wires are what are bright and the gaps between them are where it gets darker. Perhaps if one is able to get close to an operating E-Cat there is enough parallax to see where the wires are in relation to whatever is behind them. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
The dark wire is thinner than the bright shadows so I think that the wire is casting the shadow. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: It could just as well be that the resistive wires are what are bright and the gaps between them are where it gets darker. If this were the case, won't there be a double dark shadow cast on either side of the wire with the bright wire in between. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: The shadows of the wires in figs 12 are problematic ... but we don't have enough information to figure out if they are actually the result of light, or if they represent zones of different thermal conductivity, as in the first independent test (which had a steel outer cylinder). I've thought about this, too. In both this report and the previous one, there was the suggestion that the inside of the E-Cat is so radiant that the resistive wires are darker and conceal some of this, creating shadows of sorts. On the basis of the photos that have been provided, there's no reason to conclude this. It could just as well be that the resistive wires are what are bright and the gaps between them are where it gets darker. Perhaps if one is able to get close to an operating E-Cat there is enough parallax to see where the wires are in relation to whatever is behind them. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The dark wire is thinner than the bright shadows so I think that the wire is casting the shadow. Maybe. Do you have a closeup that you're looking at? The details in the image I see in the writeup are hard to make out. The dark lines could be due to an additional loop of Inconel wire through which no current is flowing (e.g., to provide an additional layer of packing). Without further information, I would not readily conclude that the dark lines are the same ones as the wire exiting from the left into the alumina tube, although it's a possibility. If I were editing the paper prior to release, I'd either strike the speculative comment about the shadows or I'd ask the contributor to provide more details to back it up. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
The two pictures on page 25 of the 54 page report can be zoomed to a high resolution by using the control key of your keyboard and the wheel on your mouse if you are using a new windows computer running with high screen resolution. You can see the dark wires as clear as day. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The dark wire is thinner than the bright shadows so I think that the wire is casting the shadow. Maybe. Do you have a closeup that you're looking at? The details in the image I see in the writeup are hard to make out. The dark lines could be due to an additional loop of Inconel wire through which no current is flowing (e.g., to provide an additional layer of packing). Without further information, I would not readily conclude that the dark lines are the same ones as the wire exiting from the left into the alumina tube, although it's a possibility. If I were editing the paper prior to release, I'd either strike the speculative comment about the shadows or I'd ask the contributor to provide more details to back it up. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You can see the dark wires as clear as day. Yes. And now where does it say in the report that the team conducting the trial determined that current was flowing through them? Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Page 25: The resistors appear to glow intensely in the parts lying outside the caps, whereas inside the reactor body they seem to shade an underlying emission of light. This may be explained if we consider that the main source of energy inside the reactor body is actually the charge, and that it is emitting more light than the resistors. This makes sense to me. It is amazing that the powder is hotter than the heating wires. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You can see the dark wires as clear as day. Yes. And now where does it say in the report that the team conducting the trial determined that current was flowing through them? Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
If it has a COP 1 you might expect that, right On Saturday, October 11, 2014, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Page 25: The resistors appear to glow intensely in the parts lying outside the caps, whereas inside the reactor body they seem to shade an underlying emission of light. This may be explained if we consider that the main source of energy inside the reactor body is actually the charge, and that it is emitting more light than the resistors. This makes sense to me. It is amazing that the powder is hotter than the heating wires. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','eric.wal...@gmail.com'); wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','janap...@gmail.com'); wrote: You can see the dark wires as clear as day. Yes. And now where does it say in the report that the team conducting the trial determined that current was flowing through them? Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Right... On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:31 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: If it has a COP 1 you might expect that, right On Saturday, October 11, 2014, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Page 25: The resistors appear to glow intensely in the parts lying outside the caps, whereas inside the reactor body they seem to shade an underlying emission of light. This may be explained if we consider that the main source of energy inside the reactor body is actually the charge, and that it is emitting more light than the resistors. This makes sense to me. It is amazing that the powder is hotter than the heating wires. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You can see the dark wires as clear as day. Yes. And now where does it say in the report that the team conducting the trial determined that current was flowing through them? Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Page 25: The resistors appear to glow intensely in the parts lying outside the caps, whereas inside the reactor body they seem to shade an underlying emission of light. What this sentence says to me is that the team assumed that the two were the same. My question is whether they were able prior to that to determine that the three wires coming in from the three phase power were the same as the wire or wires that are masking out part of the interior. In order to do that they would either have to had to ask Rossi or opened up the device and verified the connection themselves. My main reason for wondering is that I would have expected the three Inconel chords to be more tightly wound and to take up more surface area within the cylinder, and to visibly glow in the manner of what is being masked rather than whatever is doing the masking. But that was just an initial impression and could be mistaken. This may be explained if we consider that the main source of energy inside the reactor body is actually the charge, and that it is emitting more light than the resistors. ... This makes sense to me. It is amazing that the powder is hotter than the heating wires. This is a possibility. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
When talking about the resistor heaters... Remember that Rossi repeats that his E-Cat requires AC and can't run (directly) with DC. The current on the three phases of electricity going in is different. But it sounded like the phase and frequency going into the reactor matches that from the mains. (Hard to tell without the PCE data.) Why is 3-phase always used.. and is it inductive heating or just some electromagnetic stimulation... - Brad On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:31 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: If it has a COP 1 you might expect that, right On Saturday, October 11, 2014, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Page 25: The resistors appear to glow intensely in the parts lying outside the caps, whereas inside the reactor body they seem to shade an underlying emission of light. This may be explained if we consider that the main source of energy inside the reactor body is actually the charge, and that it is emitting more light than the resistors. This makes sense to me. It is amazing that the powder is hotter than the heating wires. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You can see the dark wires as clear as day. Yes. And now where does it say in the report that the team conducting the trial determined that current was flowing through them? Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Especially if they switch to a pulse mode where they are not really heating directly anymore, the pulses are working like an induction stovetop where the quickly changing magnetic fields are inducing arcs/currents in the secret sauce http://www.finecooking.com/videos/induction-cooktop-action.aspx Rossi is a Chef! On Saturday, October 11, 2014, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Right... On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:31 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cheme...@gmail.com'); wrote: If it has a COP 1 you might expect that, right On Saturday, October 11, 2014, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','janap...@gmail.com'); wrote: Page 25: The resistors appear to glow intensely in the parts lying outside the caps, whereas inside the reactor body they seem to shade an underlying emission of light. This may be explained if we consider that the main source of energy inside the reactor body is actually the charge, and that it is emitting more light than the resistors. This makes sense to me. It is amazing that the powder is hotter than the heating wires. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: You can see the dark wires as clear as day. Yes. And now where does it say in the report that the team conducting the trial determined that current was flowing through them? Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Especially if they switch to a pulse mode where they are not really heating directly anymore, the pulses are working like an induction stovetop where the quickly changing magnetic fields are inducing arcs/currents in the secret sauce That's a pretty cool idea. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
It basically means goat guys theory might be goat F'd... On Saturday, October 11, 2014, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cheme...@gmail.com'); wrote: Especially if they switch to a pulse mode where they are not really heating directly anymore, the pulses are working like an induction stovetop where the quickly changing magnetic fields are inducing arcs/currents in the secret sauce That's a pretty cool idea. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Especially if they switch to a pulse mode where they are not really heating directly anymore, the pulses are working like an induction stovetop On page 6 there's a photo of the power and harmonic analyzer. I don't know how to read these, but on the left of the display there are pulses, two up and then two down. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
At 09:02 AM 10/11/2014, Axil Axil wrote: The two pictures on page 25 of the 54 page report can be zoomed to a high resolution by using the control key of your keyboard and the wheel on your mouse if you are using a new windows computer running with high screen resolution. I zoomed and did screen captures : http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig2.jpg http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig12a.jpg http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig12b.jpg It's impossible to tell whether the heater coils are dark or light. In the last hotcat test the heater coils themselves were a tight spiral which was then strung lengthways : now it appears to be a tight spiral coiled as loose spirals down the tube. I think that there is most likely a ceramic insert holding these resistors, so the shadows could represent different thermal zones rather than being illuminated/shadowed. But I'm just guessing. Too little information to proceed.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
To me, the width/continuity of the dark lines seems much more consistent then the light colored areas so I would say the dark areas are wires On Saturday, October 11, 2014, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 09:02 AM 10/11/2014, Axil Axil wrote: The two pictures on page 25 of the 54 page report can be zoomed to a high resolution by using the control key of your keyboard and the wheel on your mouse if you are using a new windows computer running with high screen resolution. I zoomed and did screen captures : http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig2.jpg http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig12a.jpg http://lenr.qumbu.com/web_hotcat2_pics/141011_lugano_fig12b.jpg It's impossible to tell whether the heater coils are dark or light. In the last hotcat test the heater coils themselves were a tight spiral which was then strung lengthways : now it appears to be a tight spiral coiled as loose spirals down the tube. I think that there is most likely a ceramic insert holding these resistors, so the shadows could represent different thermal zones rather than being illuminated/shadowed. But I'm just guessing. Too little information to proceed.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
I think you all made the job (respect to Jed BTW, as usual) 1- the window of transparency can be real for some alumina materials, but not in the wavelength that the IRcam use (7um) 2- if the IRcam was troubled by the white light, the bright zone would be much hotter for the IR cam. the IRcam rather consider zone are quite equivalent, thus it does not see the inside of the reactor, as our eyes do in the visible spectrum. job done guys. kudos to all! 2014-10-11 19:01 GMT+02:00 ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com: It basically means goat guys theory might be goat F'd... On Saturday, October 11, 2014, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Especially if they switch to a pulse mode where they are not really heating directly anymore, the pulses are working like an induction stovetop where the quickly changing magnetic fields are inducing arcs/currents in the secret sauce That's a pretty cool idea. Eric
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:48 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Especially if they switch to a pulse mode where they are not really heating directly anymore, the pulses are working like an induction stovetop On page 6 there's a photo of the power and harmonic analyzer. I don't know how to read these, but on the left of the display there are pulses, two up and then two down. Eric It is worth noting that pulses of a different kind were used in the cooler version of the Ecat. They were in the form of pressure pulses of injected H gas. Harry
[Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? 2- can someone confirm (I cannot yet reread the report) that some known emissivity dots were used, but that the surface of the reactor prevented permanent thermocouple installation... can someone analyse the report precisely 3- can someone confirm or refute my position that if the same object is brighter for an IR cam, even with a complex emissivity curve, it is hotter than the same object that bright less the term bright is apparent temperature for an IR cam, or for a blacksmith 4- finally what is the possible error that - translucidity of alumina - with resistor switching that move heat source to change : the observed COP, to higher or to lower ? 5- or to make COP possibly =1 my position is that because of my naive rule 3, 5 is impossible. moreover 2 remove the possibility that effect in 1 are noticeable and not mostly corrected. I want to know if I'm wrong. and I have other duties... please help ... I'm sorry.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
I find it funny that anonymous GoatGuy is literally one of the best-read skeptics out there and get's so much play, but in my view he deserves it because he's pretty good and the skeptical community generally sucks. Still don't think his objections discredit the report, but I wouldn't mind seeing them answered. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? 2- can someone confirm (I cannot yet reread the report) that some known emissivity dots were used, but that the surface of the reactor prevented permanent thermocouple installation... can someone analyse the report precisely 3- can someone confirm or refute my position that if the same object is brighter for an IR cam, even with a complex emissivity curve, it is hotter than the same object that bright less the term bright is apparent temperature for an IR cam, or for a blacksmith 4- finally what is the possible error that - translucidity of alumina - with resistor switching that move heat source to change : the observed COP, to higher or to lower ? 5- or to make COP possibly =1 my position is that because of my naive rule 3, 5 is impossible. moreover 2 remove the possibility that effect in 1 are noticeable and not mostly corrected. I want to know if I'm wrong. and I have other duties... please help ... I'm sorry.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
The 7 professors who wrote the TIP report are supposed to be answering such criticisms. They should have set up a website for just that purpose. Rossi did. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:31 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: I find it funny that anonymous GoatGuy is literally one of the best-read skeptics out there and get's so much play, but in my view he deserves it because he's pretty good and the skeptical community generally sucks. Still don't think his objections discredit the report, but I wouldn't mind seeing them answered. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? 2- can someone confirm (I cannot yet reread the report) that some known emissivity dots were used, but that the surface of the reactor prevented permanent thermocouple installation... can someone analyse the report precisely 3- can someone confirm or refute my position that if the same object is brighter for an IR cam, even with a complex emissivity curve, it is hotter than the same object that bright less the term bright is apparent temperature for an IR cam, or for a blacksmith 4- finally what is the possible error that - translucidity of alumina - with resistor switching that move heat source to change : the observed COP, to higher or to lower ? 5- or to make COP possibly =1 my position is that because of my naive rule 3, 5 is impossible. moreover 2 remove the possibility that effect in 1 are noticeable and not mostly corrected. I want to know if I'm wrong. and I have other duties... please help ... I'm sorry.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
At 02:22 PM 10/10/2014, Alain Sepeda wrote: Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? I did a bit of research. eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparent_ceramics a) It CAN be made completely transparent to visible light a) The kind used in the hotcat is most likely opaque to visible light Most ceramic materials, such as alumina and its compounds, are formed from fine powders, yielding a fine grained polycrystalline microstructure which is filled with scattering centers comparable to the wavelength of visible light. The shadows of the wires in figs 12 are problematic ... but we don't have enough information to figure out if they are actually the result of light, or if they represent zones of different thermal conductivity, as in the first independent test (which had a steel outer cylinder). But it's proably transparent to IR , and if so I believe (without proof ... but see Jones Beene's http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98226.html http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98253.html ) that it DOES affect the power calculation. Right now I'm changing my position from positive to inconclusive. I have another post ready to send.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Alain, There are several answers to your question. 1. Alumina is not completely transparent and so heats to equilibrium. 2. The run with the dummy unfueled E-Cat takes care of any IR measurement error. 3. I believe they did use calibrated dots at some point. Adrian Ashfield
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Again how serious this is depends on the temperature difference between the inner and outer shell no. If that was serious you would expect the top edge of a picture of the hot cat to have unsharp color shade because the top edge should represent the heat of the outer shell. I have not find such an indication and either it is completely black or the difference is neglible. Am I wrong? On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 02:22 PM 10/10/2014, Alain Sepeda wrote: Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? I did a bit of research. eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparent_ceramics a) It CAN be made completely transparent to visible light a) The kind used in the hotcat is most likely opaque to visible light Most ceramic materials, such as alumina http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alumina and its compounds, are formed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceramics_processing from fine powders, yielding a fine grained polycrystalline microstructure http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microstructure which is filled with scattering centers comparable to the wavelength of visible light http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_light. The shadows of the wires in figs 12 are problematic ... but we don't have enough information to figure out if they are actually the result of light, or if they represent zones of different thermal conductivity, as in the first independent test (which had a steel outer cylinder). But it's proably transparent to IR , and if so I believe (without proof ... but see Jones Beene's http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98226.html http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98253.html ) that it DOES affect the power calculation. Right now I'm changing my position from positive to inconclusive. I have another post ready to send.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Not scientific -- but a search of google images for alumina transmission indicates that you can get pretty much any profile you want (Include transparent sapphires, of course), and that the actual profiles vary wildly. One would thus have to characterize the ceramic actually used, and then calculate the power (as Goat Jones suggested) based on a mixture of transmitting and conducting. I think that this could be modelled as a radiating cylinder enclosed by a transmitting/conducting cylinder, but you'd have to know ALL the parameters to do it. Complicated by the fins, of course. I'm still inclined to say that the quantitative numbers are suspect. We really shouldn't have to look at un-annotated photos to figure out how even the coloring is.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Yes and the thickness of the alumina and the time constants of heat transfer dTouter/dt = K(Tinner - Touter) or similare suitable equation. On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Not scientific -- but a search of google images for alumina transmission indicates that you can get pretty much any profile you want (Include transparent sapphires, of course), and that the actual profiles vary wildly. One would thus have to characterize the ceramic actually used, and then calculate the power (as Goat Jones suggested) based on a mixture of transmitting and conducting. I think that this could be modelled as a radiating cylinder enclosed by a transmitting/conducting cylinder, but you'd have to know ALL the parameters to do it. Complicated by the fins, of course. I'm still inclined to say that the quantitative numbers are suspect. We really shouldn't have to look at un-annotated photos to figure out how even the coloring is.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
At 03:48 PM 10/10/2014, you wrote: Yes and the thickness of the alumina and the time constants of heat transfer dTouter/dt = K(Tinner - Touter) or similare suitable equation. Fundamentals of Ceramics Michael Barsoom About 600 pages. I found a probably bootleg copy on the web, but you'll have to google it yourself.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Jones is right... If the reactor material is transparent to infrared to any degree, the remote temperature sensor would be looking at the temperature somewhere inside the ceramic tube. Since the amount of radiate heat is proportional to the surface area of the radiating body at the air boundary, the temperature measurement would be incompatible with the proper temperature times surface area formula for calculating heat flow. They should have painted the reactor black or covered it with graphite and calibrated the remote temperature sensors based on a dummy reactor also painted black. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 03:48 PM 10/10/2014, you wrote: Yes and the thickness of the alumina and the time constants of heat transfer dTouter/dt = K(Tinner - Touter) or similare suitable equation. Fundamentals of Ceramics Michael Barsoom About 600 pages. I found a probably bootleg copy on the web, but you'll have to google it yourself.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/83021/1/Sintering%20to%20transparency.pdf See page 528 Al2O3 is transparent to mid range infrared between the 2 and 5 micron wavelengths. That is the operating temperature of the E-Cat. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Jones is right... If the reactor material is transparent to infrared to any degree, the remote temperature sensor would be looking at the temperature somewhere inside the ceramic tube. Since the amount of radiate heat is proportional to the surface area of the radiating body at the air boundary, the temperature measurement would be incompatible with the proper temperature times surface area formula for calculating heat flow. They should have painted the reactor black or covered it with graphite and calibrated the remote temperature sensors based on a dummy reactor also painted black. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 03:48 PM 10/10/2014, you wrote: Yes and the thickness of the alumina and the time constants of heat transfer dTouter/dt = K(Tinner - Touter) or similare suitable equation. Fundamentals of Ceramics Michael Barsoom About 600 pages. I found a probably bootleg copy on the web, but you'll have to google it yourself.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
This transparency to infrared photons must be why Rossi uses this ceramic material to get heat unencumbered to his powder. Rossi is clever. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/83021/1/Sintering%20to%20transparency.pdf See page 528 Al2O3 is transparent to mid range infrared between the 2 and 5 micron wavelengths. That is the operating temperature of the E-Cat. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Jones is right... If the reactor material is transparent to infrared to any degree, the remote temperature sensor would be looking at the temperature somewhere inside the ceramic tube. Since the amount of radiate heat is proportional to the surface area of the radiating body at the air boundary, the temperature measurement would be incompatible with the proper temperature times surface area formula for calculating heat flow. They should have painted the reactor black or covered it with graphite and calibrated the remote temperature sensors based on a dummy reactor also painted black. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 03:48 PM 10/10/2014, you wrote: Yes and the thickness of the alumina and the time constants of heat transfer dTouter/dt = K(Tinner - Touter) or similare suitable equation. Fundamentals of Ceramics Michael Barsoom About 600 pages. I found a probably bootleg copy on the web, but you'll have to google it yourself.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
At 04:34 PM 10/10/2014, Axil Axil wrote: Jones is right... Fundamentals of Ceramics Michael Barsoom The chapter on optics is mostly concerned with transparent ceramics. But it does point out that ceramics are mostly transparent, and that they become opaque by scattering from point sources or crystal boundaries. Confirms your other information from http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/83021/1/Sintering%20to%20transparency.pdf I'm wondering if one could put bounds on it by considering two extremes (in my concentric-cylinder model). a) If the outer ceramic cylinder were perfectly opaque then the paper's analysis holds b) If it were perfectly transparent, then we can treat the outside of the inner cylinder as the source. The energy per square can be calculated, but the area is smaller (as r^2) But what's the emissivity of the inner cylinder? Or can we assume that it's radiating as a pure black body? A mix, including cases with varying transmissivity will lie between the extremes. To put a limit on the power, use the smaller of the two.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
At 05:15 PM 10/10/2014, Alan Fletcher wrote: b) If it were perfectly transparent, then we can treat the outside of the inner cylinder as the source. The energy per square can be calculated, but the area is smaller (as r^2) But what's the emissivity of the inner cylinder? Or can we assume that it's radiating as a pure black body? The inner cylinder will be in thermal equilibrium, so I think it would have an emmissivity of 1.0 In that case the power/area goes up a lot, and the area goes down a little. So maybe the current analysis IS the lower of the two.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
The issue of translucency would alter the absolute power calculations but wouldn't the relative difference between input and output power remain roughly the same and therefore the COP too? Harry On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 03:48 PM 10/10/2014, you wrote: Yes and the thickness of the alumina and the time constants of heat transfer dTouter/dt = K(Tinner - Touter) or similare suitable equation. Fundamentals of Ceramics Michael Barsoom About 600 pages. I found a probably bootleg copy on the web, but you'll have to google it yourself.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: This transparency to infrared photons must be why Rossi uses this ceramic material to get heat unencumbered to his powder. Rossi is clever. Or maybe it allows more infrared photons to escape unencumbered once the reactor ignites. Harry
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
At 06:14 PM 10/10/2014, H Veeder wrote: The issue of translucency would alter the absolute power calculations but wouldn't the relative difference between input and output power remain roughly the same and therefore the COP too? No -- the input power calculation is correct as it is. The output power -- and hence COP (output/input+output) -- may change.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
No -- the input power calculation is correct as it is. The output power -- and hence COP (output/input+output) -- may change. Ooops COP = (input+output)/input
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:35 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 06:14 PM 10/10/2014, H Veeder wrote: The issue of translucency would alter the absolute power calculations but wouldn't the relative difference between input and output power remain roughly the same and therefore the COP too? No -- the input power calculation is correct as it is. The output power -- and hence COP (output/input+output) -- may change. quite right...thanks harry
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
No, its very laughable. He uses phrases like, well know that. as in, we should all know this. but... he gives no sources, no numbers, and has failed to notice that there are DIFFERENT types of sintered alumina, some of which are DESIGNED to be transparent (sapphire shielding), and some which aren't. He mentions that the experiment had calculations that ASSUMED transmission of infrared, but tied it at a 25 percent transmission rate. What we havent seen are any numbers of the transmission rate of infrared light through that particular size and type. Now, knowing that a lot of the armor alumina that is transparent in visible light has a quick drop off in the infrared spectrum, who wants to bet that the scientists running the experiment, who designed the numbers to calculate the energy loss, actually TESTED and MEASURED the alumina they used? I know I would in that instance. Suggesting that they couldn't possibly have thought of it is, frankly, insulting, unless hes got numbers from actual bench tests of the variety of alumina they used. In addition, the fact that it heated up to such a level is STILL more energy out than is being put in. Even if you account for the resistors heating more inside the block and reaching a higher termperature, the temp reached and the LENGTH OF TIME it was that hot ismore than is possible from that setup. That, or Rossi has at the very least created the most efficient electric heater know to man! On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? 2- can someone confirm (I cannot yet reread the report) that some known emissivity dots were used, but that the surface of the reactor prevented permanent thermocouple installation... can someone analyse the report precisely 3- can someone confirm or refute my position that if the same object is brighter for an IR cam, even with a complex emissivity curve, it is hotter than the same object that bright less the term bright is apparent temperature for an IR cam, or for a blacksmith 4- finally what is the possible error that - translucidity of alumina - with resistor switching that move heat source to change : the observed COP, to higher or to lower ? 5- or to make COP possibly =1 my position is that because of my naive rule 3, 5 is impossible. moreover 2 remove the possibility that effect in 1 are noticeable and not mostly corrected. I want to know if I'm wrong. and I have other duties... please help ... I'm sorry.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Mistakes happen, NASA crashed a Mars probe because they mixed up metric and standard measurements. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:19 PM, leaking pen itsat...@gmail.com wrote: No, its very laughable. He uses phrases like, well know that. as in, we should all know this. but... he gives no sources, no numbers, and has failed to notice that there are DIFFERENT types of sintered alumina, some of which are DESIGNED to be transparent (sapphire shielding), and some which aren't. He mentions that the experiment had calculations that ASSUMED transmission of infrared, but tied it at a 25 percent transmission rate. What we havent seen are any numbers of the transmission rate of infrared light through that particular size and type. Now, knowing that a lot of the armor alumina that is transparent in visible light has a quick drop off in the infrared spectrum, who wants to bet that the scientists running the experiment, who designed the numbers to calculate the energy loss, actually TESTED and MEASURED the alumina they used? I know I would in that instance. Suggesting that they couldn't possibly have thought of it is, frankly, insulting, unless hes got numbers from actual bench tests of the variety of alumina they used. In addition, the fact that it heated up to such a level is STILL more energy out than is being put in. Even if you account for the resistors heating more inside the block and reaching a higher termperature, the temp reached and the LENGTH OF TIME it was that hot ismore than is possible from that setup. That, or Rossi has at the very least created the most efficient electric heater know to man! On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? 2- can someone confirm (I cannot yet reread the report) that some known emissivity dots were used, but that the surface of the reactor prevented permanent thermocouple installation... can someone analyse the report precisely 3- can someone confirm or refute my position that if the same object is brighter for an IR cam, even with a complex emissivity curve, it is hotter than the same object that bright less the term bright is apparent temperature for an IR cam, or for a blacksmith 4- finally what is the possible error that - translucidity of alumina - with resistor switching that move heat source to change : the observed COP, to higher or to lower ? 5- or to make COP possibly =1 my position is that because of my naive rule 3, 5 is impossible. moreover 2 remove the possibility that effect in 1 are noticeable and not mostly corrected. I want to know if I'm wrong. and I have other duties... please help ... I'm sorry.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
Rossi would nave used alumina that is transparent to infrared in his reactor design because he wants the heat from his primary heater that is imbedded in the alumina to get to the nickel powder. An infrared insulator is not good reactor design. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:19 PM, leaking pen itsat...@gmail.com wrote: No, its very laughable. He uses phrases like, well know that. as in, we should all know this. but... he gives no sources, no numbers, and has failed to notice that there are DIFFERENT types of sintered alumina, some of which are DESIGNED to be transparent (sapphire shielding), and some which aren't. He mentions that the experiment had calculations that ASSUMED transmission of infrared, but tied it at a 25 percent transmission rate. What we havent seen are any numbers of the transmission rate of infrared light through that particular size and type. Now, knowing that a lot of the armor alumina that is transparent in visible light has a quick drop off in the infrared spectrum, who wants to bet that the scientists running the experiment, who designed the numbers to calculate the energy loss, actually TESTED and MEASURED the alumina they used? I know I would in that instance. Suggesting that they couldn't possibly have thought of it is, frankly, insulting, unless hes got numbers from actual bench tests of the variety of alumina they used. In addition, the fact that it heated up to such a level is STILL more energy out than is being put in. Even if you account for the resistors heating more inside the block and reaching a higher termperature, the temp reached and the LENGTH OF TIME it was that hot ismore than is possible from that setup. That, or Rossi has at the very least created the most efficient electric heater know to man! On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? 2- can someone confirm (I cannot yet reread the report) that some known emissivity dots were used, but that the surface of the reactor prevented permanent thermocouple installation... can someone analyse the report precisely 3- can someone confirm or refute my position that if the same object is brighter for an IR cam, even with a complex emissivity curve, it is hotter than the same object that bright less the term bright is apparent temperature for an IR cam, or for a blacksmith 4- finally what is the possible error that - translucidity of alumina - with resistor switching that move heat source to change : the observed COP, to higher or to lower ? 5- or to make COP possibly =1 my position is that because of my naive rule 3, 5 is impossible. moreover 2 remove the possibility that effect in 1 are noticeable and not mostly corrected. I want to know if I'm wrong. and I have other duties... please help ... I'm sorry.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
At 07:42 PM 10/10/2014, you wrote: Rossi would nave used alumina that is transparent to infrared in his reactor design because he wants the heat from his primary heater that is imbedded in the alumina to get to the nickel powder. An infrared insulator is not a good reactor design. The report doesn't say if the resistors are embedded in the alumina, or contained inside it : Three braided high-temperature grade Inconel cables exit from each of the two caps: these are the resistors wound in parallel non-overlapping coils inside the reactor.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
the alumina is outside the resistors and the reactor. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Rossi would nave used alumina that is transparent to infrared in his reactor design because he wants the heat from his primary heater that is imbedded in the alumina to get to the nickel powder. An infrared insulator is not good reactor design. On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:19 PM, leaking pen itsat...@gmail.com wrote: No, its very laughable. He uses phrases like, well know that. as in, we should all know this. but... he gives no sources, no numbers, and has failed to notice that there are DIFFERENT types of sintered alumina, some of which are DESIGNED to be transparent (sapphire shielding), and some which aren't. He mentions that the experiment had calculations that ASSUMED transmission of infrared, but tied it at a 25 percent transmission rate. What we havent seen are any numbers of the transmission rate of infrared light through that particular size and type. Now, knowing that a lot of the armor alumina that is transparent in visible light has a quick drop off in the infrared spectrum, who wants to bet that the scientists running the experiment, who designed the numbers to calculate the energy loss, actually TESTED and MEASURED the alumina they used? I know I would in that instance. Suggesting that they couldn't possibly have thought of it is, frankly, insulting, unless hes got numbers from actual bench tests of the variety of alumina they used. In addition, the fact that it heated up to such a level is STILL more energy out than is being put in. Even if you account for the resistors heating more inside the block and reaching a higher termperature, the temp reached and the LENGTH OF TIME it was that hot ismore than is possible from that setup. That, or Rossi has at the very least created the most efficient electric heater know to man! On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, among the skeptic argument one of the only that is not laughable is the one of goatguy... maybe is it because I don't understand it well... He seems to say - that alumina is not a grey body, but transparent, and that emissivity must be mixed with translucidity when considering the radiation of heat... - and maybe that one effect could came from changing resistors that are more or less hidden optically... I propose a kind of group work, I propose that people with competence, analyse goagguys arguments, and the report. 1- can someone explain first the point of goatguy on the fact that alumina is transparent... is it noticeable ? does it change the way radiation equation are computed or is it simply emissivity change ? what can be the order of size of the error induced ? 2- can someone confirm (I cannot yet reread the report) that some known emissivity dots were used, but that the surface of the reactor prevented permanent thermocouple installation... can someone analyse the report precisely 3- can someone confirm or refute my position that if the same object is brighter for an IR cam, even with a complex emissivity curve, it is hotter than the same object that bright less the term bright is apparent temperature for an IR cam, or for a blacksmith 4- finally what is the possible error that - translucidity of alumina - with resistor switching that move heat source to change : the observed COP, to higher or to lower ? 5- or to make COP possibly =1 my position is that because of my naive rule 3, 5 is impossible. moreover 2 remove the possibility that effect in 1 are noticeable and not mostly corrected. I want to know if I'm wrong. and I have other duties... please help ... I'm sorry.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
I discount Goat's hypothesis for the following reasons: As shown in figure 10 they split the reactor IR camera image into 10 segments plus the ends. They record the temperature for each segment. As shown in the photograph, some segments were incandescent and others were not. If incandescent segments showed up erroneously being much hotter than the other segments, I suppose they would notice this discrepancy. Alumina has good thermal conductivity: http://accuratus.com/alumox.html My point is, if the surface really is ~750°C (meaning there was no excess heat), that temperature would show up in the dark segments. The incandescent segments would show up as considerably more than 1200°C, to make the average around 1200°C. Such a huge temperature difference is not possible. They would know that is a bogus reading.
Re: [Vo]:About Goat Guy theory of Alumina transparency and emissivity change on E-ca test
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: The shadows of the wires in figs 12 are problematic ... but we don't have enough information to figure out if they are actually the result of light, or if they represent zones of different thermal conductivity, as in the first independent test (which had a steel outer cylinder). I've thought about this, too. In both this report and the previous one, there was the suggestion that the inside of the E-Cat is so radiant that the resistive wires are darker and conceal some of this, creating shadows of sorts. On the basis of the photos that have been provided, there's no reason to conclude this. It could just as well be that the resistive wires are what are bright and the gaps between them are where it gets darker. Perhaps if one is able to get close to an operating E-Cat there is enough parallax to see where the wires are in relation to whatever is behind them. Eric
