Re: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:32 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a plausible explanation for why the temperature at which reaction initiates in the E-Cat just happens to be so close to the boiling point of water? We don't know the temperature of the core when the reaction is claimed to initiate. The apparent coincidence, as I've pointed out many times, is that somehow the *claimed* power output is always just enough to vaporize all the input water flow to within a per cent or two. This happens no matter the flow rate or the ecat size. Of course, it's not really a coincidence at all. The fact is that the output temperature at the boiling point (with some steam), occurs over an enormous power range. If P corresponds to the onset of boiling, then any power between P and 8P will give the same observed temperatures. So it is not all surprising that that's the temperature it operates at.
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a plausible explanation for why the temperature at which reaction initiates in the E-Cat just happens to be so close to the boiling point of water? The water never goes above 100°C because it is at one atmosphere. It boils. But if the power exceeded that necessary to vaporize all the water, then the *steam* would exceed 100C. And in fact, a 10% increase in the power would result in output steam temperature of about 200C. And that's still at atmospheric pressure.
[Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
Is there a plausible explanation for why the temperature at which reaction initiates in the E-Cat just happens to be so close to the boiling point of water? A NiH system doesn't bear any particular relationship to water that I can see. Is this a big scientific coincidence/serendipity or is there a plausible explanation for the apparent coincidence?
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
Actually, the initiation temperature is much above 100 C. The heater is hidden within the heat sink device is close contact with the core. Dave -Original Message- From: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Nov 16, 2011 2:35 pm Subject: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence? Is there a plausible explanation for why the temperature at which reaction initiates in the E-Cat just happens to be so close to the boiling point of water? A NiH system doesn't bear any particular relationship to water that I can see. Is this a big scientific coincidence/serendipity or is there a plausible explanation for the apparent coincidence?
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
At 11:32 AM 11/16/2011, James Bowery wrote: Is there a plausible explanation for why the temperature at which reaction initiates in the E-Cat just happens to be so close to the boiling point of water? Mostly coincidence, but it also represents the point at which the entire system has heated up to its operating temperature. We have no idea what the core temperature is -- but it's most likely the Ni Curie temperature of 358°C (catalyst?)
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a plausible explanation for why the temperature at which reaction initiates in the E-Cat just happens to be so close to the boiling point of water? The water never goes above 100°C because it is at one atmosphere. It boils. In the Defkalion system, they use another fluid such as ethylene glycol in the primary loop. It has a higher boiling point and it gets much hotter. This is a better method. There is no telling what the temperature inside the cell is. The temperature of an electric stove element or flame is much higher than 100°C but a pot of boiling water is always at this temperature, never higher, except in a pressure cooker. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: At 11:32 AM 11/16/2011, James Bowery wrote: Is there a plausible explanation for why the temperature at which reaction initiates in the E-Cat just happens to be so close to the boiling point of water? Mostly coincidence, but it also represents the point at which the entire system has heated up to its operating temperature. We have no idea what the core temperature is -- but it's most likely the Ni Curie temperature of 358°C (catalyst?) The Ni Curie temperature may explain it. The core temperature is what I am thinking about when I talk about the coincidence (understanding that we don't have direct read-outs from it). So if it is some sort of ferromagnetic transition phenomenon, then the close proximity to 100C of Ni's Curie temperature is, indeed, a coincidence/serendipity. Now, the question is: Are we dealing with a ferromagnetic transition phenomenon???
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
At 12:53 PM 11/16/2011, James Bowery wrote: The Ni Curie temperature may explain it. The core temperature is what I am thinking about when I talk about the coincidence (understanding that we don't have direct read-outs from it). So if it is some sort of ferromagnetic transition phenomenon, then the close proximity to 100C of Ni's Curie temperature is, indeed, a coincidence/serendipity. Now, the question is: Are we dealing with a ferromagnetic transition phenomenon??? Kim : http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/yekim/BECNF-Ni-Hydrogen.pdf specifically thinks it's the Curie temp. His other papers referenced from that one are at : http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/yekim.shtml
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat's Big Scientific Coincidence?
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:46 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The heater is hidden within the heat sink device is close contact with the core. On the original E-cat with the copper tubing, the main heater is a standard industrial unit strapped around the outer tube. As such, it can only heat the coolant! Why would that be done that way? It was described by Rossi as a safety heater. How does heating an exothermic reaction help with safety as opposed to say, providing a river of emergency coolant if needed?
