RE: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
Rich, I enjoyed reading about your personal experiences, particularly the mistakes & hardships you encountered and your honorable endeavors to rectify them. It gave me some insight into you. Thank you for sharing them. BTW, ten years ago I lost five grand playing the commodities market. Fortunately, it was only my own retirement account that suffered the consequences. I consider the experience a valuable lesson learned... a unique kind of tuition, you might say. Just so you know, I never got a degree in psychology. FWIW, it's been my experience that acquiring a degree in psychology is no guarantee that one will acquire a better understanding of the eccentricities of human nature. I would instead suggest making a few stupid (and occasionally unavoidable) mistakes throughout one's life. Following such folly, willingly or unwillingly, appears to have been the most valuable "degree" I've had to take. As you may recall I took issue to the following statement you made: > ...-- I suspect Jed is likely to agree within a few days. You seem to be inferring that either Rossi and/or Mr. Rothwell are "sibling[s]" in need of "...mild accepting, nonpushy outlines..." all this in order to "...highlight a possible breakthrough..." presumably in reference to their evolving opinions. I cannot speak for Mr. Rothwell and certainly not for Rossi, but I suspect that both of them could care less about any advice and/or opinions you might want to dispense presumably for their benefit, especially dispensed within the medium of a public forum. Why would anyone care to accept "advice" dispensed in such a manner. My previous plea was to suggest that we are in "mutual service" to one another when we endeavor to express as clearly as we can the lessons we learned from our life and the subsequent opinions that evolved from those lessons. You did just that such as when you posted some of the financial mistakes you made back in 1988 trying to be a successful day trader. Thank you for sharing that. I feel your pain! Doing so is in "mutual service" to others as it gives them the freedom to choose to learn whatever insight & wisdom they can glean from the hard lessons you learned. But leave it at that. The other side of the coin to my plea was to strongly suggest that we leave predictions pertaining to the personal evolution of another person's personal opinion. the evolution of their personal insights, in their own capable hands. It is of no "mutual service" to have the evolution of someone else's personal opinion and insights "predicted" by strangers, especially in a public forum. It's just plain annoying. I hope I have at least been able to express what it was about your previous post that riled me so. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Rich Murray wrote: > Well, I did get an MA in psychology in 1967 -- decades ago, I read > about a Neuro Linguistic Programming gambit, to wit: > > "Jed, please, above all else, do not just jump swiftly to a completely > skeptical appraisal of Rossi's demos..." > > the strategy being to use supporting the partner in doing the opposite > of what one thinks is best, in order to plant in the same sentence the > suggestion that mentions what one thinks is best -- e, it works, > too... Not on all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgYdVNHNz4Y T
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
Well, I did get an MA in psychology in 1967 -- decades ago, I read about a Neuro Linguistic Programming gambit, to wit: "Jed, please, above all else, do not just jump swiftly to a completely skeptical appraisal of Rossi's demos..." the strategy being to use supporting the partner in doing the opposite of what one thinks is best, in order to plant in the same sentence the suggestion that mentions what one thinks is best -- e, it works, too... from my point of view, it can be helpful to offer a sibling some mild, accepting, nonpushy outlines that highlight a possible breakthrough -- I've done this for Rossi several times for months, outlining the possible benefits of publicly acknowledging his own path of folly -- in 1988, when I was losing my friends' investments as an amateur day trader, a nice stranger took me for lunch, mildly inquired about what I was doing, and after a while, he muttered something about the danger of getting caught up in a Ponzi scheme, without requiring me to have to respond -- it wasn't until 1994 that I was able to sell my house at a 50% gain, and willingly pay back my many friends $ 70 K -- so I know how it feels to evolve with the best of intentions step by step into a hazardous blind alley in the maze of life -- this self-disclosure, also, is a well-known mode for sharing healing ideas -- we are all one another's keepers -- I am pleased to see these complex, confused, polarized discussions going on for weeks and months with warmth and humor and mild exasperation -- he who talks his walk has foot in the mouth disease? -- perhaps you have some more reservations re my sharings -- indeed, I'm all ears! -- "within mutual service" highlights the awesome actual intimacy within which apparently highly individualized evolving aspects of single entire unified creative hyperinfinity collaborate... richly, Rich On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 6:20 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: > From Mr. Murray > >> You [Horace] present calm, clear, extremely reasonable points to justify >> qualified skepticism -- I suspect Jed is likely to agree within a few >> days. > > Horace often presents interesting points worth considering. > > However, for you to follow-up with your own prediction that Mr. Rothwell > will soon capitulate to the other side is, to put it bluntly, naive of you. > There is little "mutual service" in making predictions of the opinions of > others on these matters. You strike me as being oblivious to the fact that > what you are doing is a form of psychological manipulation, even though I > suspect that from Jed's POV, he could care less what your opinion of his > predicted opinions might be. > > Let me put it to you this way: Is it really any of your business, predicting > the opinions of others? It's rude and offensive conjecture on your part. It > serves no purpose other than to give yourself another shot-in-the-arm. It's > nothing more than manufacturing a form of psychological self-assurance that > your own opinion must be right, because you now predict that others will > soon come around to the same opinion of yours as well. > > Really??? > > Who knows what opinions Jed may feel more comfortable broadcasting to the > Vort Collective tomorrow. Shoot! I have no idea what my own opinions might > turn out to be tomorrow either. It's a full-time job managing my own > opinions. They change all the time! > > Rich, please PLEASE! ...just be responsible expressing your own opinions, > and let others manage the responsibilities of their own. > > Regards, > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks > >
RE: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
I'm allergic to peanuts... :-( -Mark -Original Message- >From Horace: > Just to avoid miscommunication, I just realized that I should note that the > above refers to vortex-l as a peanut gallery with respect to the Rossi > extravaganza. Being a staunch card carrying vortex-l member myself, it seemed pretty clear to me whom you were referring to. ;-) Make mine salted, please. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
On Sep 16, 2011, at 6:20 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: From Horace I wrote: "I would not be surprised that most people here, including Jed, feel there are various points which justify skepticism. The problem seems to be agreeing on which ones and what a proper course would be. Not that I expect anyone would take any action based on comments from the peanut gallery." Just to avoid miscommunication, I just realized that I should note that the above refers to vortex-l as a peanut gallery with respect to the Rossi extravaganza. Being a staunch card carrying vortex-l member myself, it seemed pretty clear to me whom you were referring to. ;-) Make mine salted, please. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks I think two bags works best - one for eating and one for throwing! 8^) Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
>From Horace > I wrote: "I would not be surprised that most people here, including Jed, > feel there are various points which justify skepticism. The problem seems > to be agreeing on which ones and what a proper course would be. Not that I > expect anyone would take any action based on comments from the peanut > gallery." > > Just to avoid miscommunication, I just realized that I should note that the > above refers to vortex-l as a peanut gallery with respect to the Rossi > extravaganza. Being a staunch card carrying vortex-l member myself, it seemed pretty clear to me whom you were referring to. ;-) Make mine salted, please. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
I wrote: "I would not be surprised that most people here, including Jed, feel there are various points which justify skepticism. The problem seems to be agreeing on which ones and what a proper course would be. Not that I expect anyone would take any action based on comments from the peanut gallery." Just to avoid miscommunication, I just realized that I should note that the above refers to vortex-l as a peanut gallery with respect to the Rossi extravaganza. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
RE: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
>From Mr. Murray > You [Horace] present calm, clear, extremely reasonable points to justify > qualified skepticism -- I suspect Jed is likely to agree within a few > days. Horace often presents interesting points worth considering. However, for you to follow-up with your own prediction that Mr. Rothwell will soon capitulate to the other side is, to put it bluntly, naive of you. There is little "mutual service" in making predictions of the opinions of others on these matters. You strike me as being oblivious to the fact that what you are doing is a form of psychological manipulation, even though I suspect that from Jed's POV, he could care less what your opinion of his predicted opinions might be. Let me put it to you this way: Is it really any of your business, predicting the opinions of others? It's rude and offensive conjecture on your part. It serves no purpose other than to give yourself another shot-in-the-arm. It's nothing more than manufacturing a form of psychological self-assurance that your own opinion must be right, because you now predict that others will soon come around to the same opinion of yours as well. Really??? Who knows what opinions Jed may feel more comfortable broadcasting to the Vort Collective tomorrow. Shoot! I have no idea what my own opinions might turn out to be tomorrow either. It's a full-time job managing my own opinions. They change all the time! Rich, please PLEASE! ...just be responsible expressing your own opinions, and let others manage the responsibilities of their own. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
On Sep 15, 2011, at 7:24 PM, Rich Murray wrote: Horace, thanks for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_diffusivity It's useful to know that water has one of the lowest values -- so if some of the water flow is stopped in some parts of the Fat Ecat, for instance by being in some side chamber, bypassed by the main flow, then it would be slow to come to an equilibrium heat flow, so, for instance, doubling of the heat input from the electric heater resistor would send a clear-cut heat pulse slowly across the thickness of the immobile water, I don't think this is totally correct. It might apply to a gel, or ice, but not liquid water. Convection is always present and significant in effect even at low temperature differentials and temperatures. Liquid water transfers heat mainly by convection. Convection is effective even at low temperatures and very low water velocities. I wrote a post on a related issue, the Mpemba Effect, in 2001: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Mpemba.pdf OTOH, it also may be of interest that imposing heat pulses into laminar flows has been used to measure flow velocities at various cross section points of the flow - and this works largely because the short induced heat pulse diffuses at a slow rate. if it doesn't reach boiling temperature, which would increase turbulent convective heat transfer -- such a heat pulse could reach the thermister a certain time after the electric power cutoff -- the main point being: we can't assume much about this stunningly complex system when we have no details about the design or synchronized measures at many locations at once for hours of stable operation. Amen to that. You present calm, clear, extremely reasonable points to justify qualified skepticism -- I suspect Jed is likely to agree within a few days. within mutual service, Rich I would not be surprised that most people here, including Jed, feel there are various points which justify skepticism. The problem seems to be agreeing on which ones and what a proper course would be. Not that I expect anyone would take any action based on comments from the peanut gallery. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
Rich, as E-Cat is not closed system but there is (small) opening into ambient pressure and water temperature is above ambient boiling point, therefore water inside E-Cat is always boiling. That is because pressure inside E-Cat is generated by steam production. If there is no boiling, then there will not be excess pressure at least not more than is required to push water out. —Jouni On Sep 16, 2011 6:27 AM, "Rich Murray" wrote: > Horace, thanks for > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_diffusivity > > It's useful to know that water has one of the lowest values -- so if > some of the water flow is stopped in some parts of the Fat Ecat, for > instance by being in some side chamber, bypassed by the main flow, > then it would be slow to come to an equilibrium heat flow, so, for > instance, doubling of the heat input from the electric heater resistor > would send a clear-cut heat pulse slowly across the thickness of the > immobile water, if it doesn't reach boiling temperature, which would > increase turbulent convective heat transfer -- such a heat pulse could > reach the thermister a certain time after the electric power cutoff -- > the main point being: we can't assume much about this stunningly > complex system when we have no details about the design or > synchronized measures at many locations at once for hours of stable > operation. > > You present calm, clear, extremely reasonable points to justify > qualified skepticism -- I suspect Jed is likely to agree within a few > days. > > within mutual service, Rich >
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
Horace, thanks for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_diffusivity It's useful to know that water has one of the lowest values -- so if some of the water flow is stopped in some parts of the Fat Ecat, for instance by being in some side chamber, bypassed by the main flow, then it would be slow to come to an equilibrium heat flow, so, for instance, doubling of the heat input from the electric heater resistor would send a clear-cut heat pulse slowly across the thickness of the immobile water, if it doesn't reach boiling temperature, which would increase turbulent convective heat transfer -- such a heat pulse could reach the thermister a certain time after the electric power cutoff -- the main point being: we can't assume much about this stunningly complex system when we have no details about the design or synchronized measures at many locations at once for hours of stable operation. You present calm, clear, extremely reasonable points to justify qualified skepticism -- I suspect Jed is likely to agree within a few days. within mutual service, Rich
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
On Sep 15, 2011, at 2:01 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Horace Heffner wrote: A 0.7°C temperature rise is significant with any thermocouple. That can't be noise. There is no question there must be a heat source in the cell. Yes - it is the 80 kg of cell metal which has stored heat. Stored heat can only be released monotonically declining. The rate cannot increase, as far as I know. It is passive. The temperature can only rise if you increase the insulation or slow down the flow rate with this system. Or generate heat, of course. What Catania calls "thermal inertia" can only release heat at a declining rate. This is not true. There can be a slow transmission rate in the flow of heat pulses through matter. Of course there can be a slow transmission rate or flow of heat! I didn't say you can't have slow transmission; I said it cannot speed up on its own without some external or internal change. As far as I know that is thermodynamically impossible. Can you explain how this would work, or cite an example of this happening elsewhere? The flow of heat can only slow down, as the temperature difference between the two bodies decreases, per Newton's law. It can never increase the temperature above where it reached when there was power going into the cell. Again not true. Sez who? Sez me. Who else? 8^) The magic words are open sez a me. Lemme put it this way: that is my understanding of thermodynamics, and I have never seen data from a calorimeter that contradicts it. Calorimeters would not work if this was possible. You could not tell the difference between power and a situation in which metal suddenly decides to increase conduction for no apparent reason, with no change in the lattice. - Jed Metal does not change its characteristics. Jed, it appears you need to read up on "thermal diffusivity". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_diffusivity Your misconceptions demonstrate why high precision thermal FEA analysis is required to understand dynamic thermal systems. Using FEA you can see thermal pulses migrate through systems, and get an intuitive feel for the dynamics. Here is a site that might be of use to you: http://ccl.northwestern.edu/papers/ABMVisualizationGuidelines/palette/ examples/Heat%20Difussion/ http://tinyurl.com/3emm6g8 However it only shows dynamic thermal flows through a single plate made all of the same material. There is no facility for insulating plate edges etc. Note that you can move the edge temperature sliders while the simulation is running. If you visualize chunks of metal as capacitors and the heat conduction paths between them is resistors, then you can see that if you apply a variable signal to an RC network that it can propagate the signal in the form of pulses. It is possible I suppose to build the thermal equivalent of an RC transmission line for carrying thermal pulses. I don't know what application such a thing would have though. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
Horace Heffner wrote: A 0.7°C temperature rise is significant with any thermocouple. That can't be noise. There is no question there must be a heat source in the cell. Yes - it is the 80 kg of cell metal which has stored heat. Stored heat can only be released monotonically declining. The rate cannot increase, as far as I know. It is passive. The temperature can only rise if you increase the insulation or slow down the flow rate with this system. Or generate heat, of course. What Catania calls "thermal inertia" can only release heat at a declining rate. This is not true. There can be a slow transmission rate in the flow of heat pulses through matter. Of course there can be a slow transmission rate or flow of heat! I didn't say you can't have slow transmission; I said it cannot _speed up_ on its own without some external or internal change. As far as I know that is thermodynamically impossible. Can you explain how this would work, or cite an example of this happening elsewhere? The flow of heat can only slow down, as the temperature difference between the two bodies decreases, per Newton's law. It can never increase the temperature above where it reached when there was power going into the cell. Again not true. Sez who? Lemme put it this way: that is my understanding of thermodynamics, and I have never seen data from a calorimeter that contradicts it. Calorimeters would not work if this was possible. You could not tell the difference between power and a situation in which metal suddenly decides to increase conduction for no apparent reason, with no change in the lattice. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
On 2011-09-15 23:32, Jed Rothwell wrote: The heat-after-death event is marked here in the top graph with the red cross-hatching, between 22:35 and 23:10. Correct! I do not see why you have the Input Current (A) rising at around 18:35 from 0 to 11. I thought that happened at 18:59. This is from the report: 18:35 The control box was switched on. Over all input AC current was 0.139 A. DC current was insignificant. 18:59 Power to the electric resistance was set to the value “5.” on the control panel. The system apparently switched on and off the power intermittently about every second, which resulted in an input AC current that went continuously between zero and 11.4 A. The resistance was switched on at 18:59 according to it. This caused intermittent readings for some time, but for practical reasons I left the data point to the reported 11.4 A in the chart. By the way, you can see that data points for voltage and currents measurements are linearly interpolated, but that's just for the sake graphical clarity. Of course I'm aware that those measurements weren't continuous. I emphasized that in the chart by making individual data points visible with symbols. I guess there is no vertical axis left for Power Level. The power level has no scale, but again for practical reasons I aligned it to the secondary axis (for current values, on the right). You could remove everything before 18:00. I don't see anything happening. Ok, will do. It is a shame they did not start earlier in the day. Lewan says he regrets cutting off the test when they did. It was late at night and he was tired. Another hour of heat after death would have been nice. (Although actually 35 minutes is long enough to prove the point. In other tests it has gone for hours or days. You could let it go for 10 years and Certain People would still say it is caused by "thermal inertia" or "recombination" or what-have-you.) At the very least it should have been ran long enough to reasonably exclude (= not taking into account exotic or dangerous methods) hidden heating sources contained in the black box volume. Also, electricity measurements should have been continuous, and the temperature probe for water should have been put in a visible place outside the black box. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
On Sep 15, 2011, at 12:44 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: I wrote: The thing cools down slowly after the pump is turned off at 23:10. assuming the reaction is fully quenched at that time . . . That may be a rash assumption. It is sometimes hard to quench a cold fusion reaction. I don't see the temperature going up anywhere after 23:10, so I guess the reaction is fully off. The temperature does go up during the heat after death event, which is impossible without a source of energy in a system where the insulation, flow, and other heat losses remain constant. It goes from 133.0°C soon after the power cut-off (22:35) up to 133.7°C for a while at 22:42. A 0.7°C temperature rise is significant with any thermocouple. That can't be noise. There is no question there must be a heat source in the cell. Yes - it is the 80 kg of cell metal which has stored heat. What Catania calls "thermal inertia" can only release heat at a declining rate. This is not true. There can be a slow transmission rate in the flow of heat pulses through matter. It can never increase the temperature above where it reached when there was power going into the cell. Again not true. In a pot of hot water after you turn off the flame, you may see a momentary increase in temperature because the water temperature is not uniform and a stream of hot water may hit the probe. Once things settle down and water stops moving much, the temperature falls monotonically. Rapidly at first, then more slowly. See Newton's Law of Cooling: "the rate of change of the temperature of an object is proportional to the difference between its own temperature and the ambient temperature (i.e. the temperature of its surroundings)." Again a false analogy. The walls of the pot are thin. It only takes seconds or fractions of a second for a uniform thermal gradient in the pan walls to form and a small delta T between the inside and outside of the pan walls to develop., In this dataset, after the heater power is cut off, during heat after death, the cell seems to want to stay at the same temperature. Yes, the majority of the heat is located a meaningful distance from, and through a (comparatively) large thermal resistance to, the thermometer and the water. That may sound weird but it has often been observed in cold fusion cells. It was first reported by Stanley Pons, who called it a "memory." Ed Storms described trying to quench a reaction that kept going back to the same temperature. Many physical systems exhibit this kind of behavior in various ways, such as a modern plastic toothpaste tube. You fold it over and it unfolds. It goes back to where it was. I myself preferred the old-fashioned ones which stayed folded. By the way, the link to this data is available in the article: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3264362.ece Look on the right column, where it says "Ladda ner Report E-cat test September 7 (pdf) Temperature data Sept 7 (xls)" - Jed Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
Akira Shirakawa wrote: I tried making a more detailed chart: http://i.imgur.com/lU42G.png Good job. The heat-after-death event is marked here in the top graph with the red cross-hatching, between 22:35 and 23:10. I do not see why you have the Input Current (A) rising at around 18:35 from 0 to 11. I thought that happened at 18:59. I guess there is no vertical axis left for Power Level. You could remove everything before 18:00. I don't see anything happening. It is a shame they did not start earlier in the day. Lewan says he regrets cutting off the test when they did. It was late at night and he was tired. Another hour of heat after death would have been nice. (Although actually 35 minutes is long enough to prove the point. In other tests it has gone for hours or days. You could let it go for 10 years and Certain People would still say it is caused by "thermal inertia" or "recombination" or what-have-you.) - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
On 2011-09-15 22:13, Jed Rothwell wrote: This is very helpful. See: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3267991.ece/BINARY/Temperature+data+Sept+7+%28xls%29 The data is taken at 2 second intervals. The thing cools down slowly after the pump is turned off at 23:10. assuming the reaction is fully quenched at that time you can estimate how good the insulation is. I tried making a more detailed chart: http://i.imgur.com/lU42G.png Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
Daniel Rocha wrote: There is a curious thing between 23:25:19 and 23:26:23 on column D, where > probably water enters the cell 2. I believe this is discussed in the log graph: "Note: jumps in serie2 to (inlet water temp) are due to the probe being pulled out of the water for short moments." - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
>>>It doesn't go down. The temperature falls to ~100.3C at 23:19:00 but starts raising at 23:22:01 an slowly raises continuously until the data collect is stooped at 23:29:07, with a temperature of 105C. At 23:15:53 the temperature is 114. Then it begins dropping rapidly. I am assuming this is when pressure is released inside the device, forcing the temperature down to 100.3 where the temperature stalls until about 23:22:03 where it then starts to rise. It could very well be that someone closed the valve that equalized the pressure. I don't know how to confirm this but there was a valve open at one point near the end of the run. Craig
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
Daniel Rocha wrote: It doesn't go down. The temperature falls to ~100.3C at 23:19:00 but starts > raising at 23:22:01 an slowly raises continuously until the data collect > is stooped at 23:29:07, with a temperature of 105C. Oh! You are right. I should have graphed it. I must have lost track of the decimal point or something. Okay, the log says at 23:10 the pump was stopped and hydrogen pressure released. That should quench a cold fusion reaction, but maybe not. That will certainly change the heat loss characteristics. Even with "thermal inertia" as the source of heat, I guess that could raise the temperature. At 23:29, the end of this dataset, the log says they emptied the remaining hot water through the inlet valve, 22,463 g. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
There is a curious thing between 23:25:19 and 23:26:23 on column D, where probably water enters the cell 2. The temperature raises fast , but continuously within 10s, from 24.5C to 67.6C, and then goes back to 24.9C within 60s. The slow raising output doesn't change its slow raising pattern during this time.
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
It doesn't go down. The temperature falls to ~100.3C at 23:19:00 but starts raising at 23:22:01 an slowly raises continuously until the data collect is stooped at 23:29:07, with a temperature of 105C.
Re: [Vo]:Lewan uploads temperature data for Sept. 7 run
I wrote: > The thing cools down slowly after the pump is turned off at 23:10. assuming > the reaction is fully quenched at that time . . . > That may be a rash assumption. It is sometimes hard to quench a cold fusion reaction. I don't see the temperature going up anywhere after 23:10, so I guess the reaction is fully off. The temperature does go up during the heat after death event, which is impossible without a source of energy in a system where the insulation, flow, and other heat losses remain constant. It goes from 133.0°C soon after the power cut-off (22:35) up to 133.7°C for a while at 22:42. A 0.7°C temperature rise is significant with any thermocouple. That can't be noise. There is no question there must be a heat source in the cell. What Catania calls "thermal inertia" can only release heat at a declining rate. It can never increase the temperature above where it reached when there was power going into the cell. In a pot of hot water after you turn off the flame, you may see a momentary increase in temperature because the water temperature is not uniform and a stream of hot water may hit the probe. Once things settle down and water stops moving much, the temperature falls monotonically. Rapidly at first, then more slowly. See Newton's Law of Cooling: "the rate of change of the temperature of an object is proportional to the difference between its own temperature and the ambient temperature (i.e. the temperature of its surroundings)." In this dataset, after the heater power is cut off, during heat after death, the cell seems to want to stay at the same temperature. That may sound weird but it has often been observed in cold fusion cells. It was first reported by Stanley Pons, who called it a "memory." Ed Storms described trying to quench a reaction that kept going back to the same temperature. Many physical systems exhibit this kind of behavior in various ways, such as a modern plastic toothpaste tube. You fold it over and it unfolds. It goes back to where it was. I myself preferred the old-fashioned ones which stayed folded. By the way, the link to this data is available in the article: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3264362.ece Look on the right column, where it says "Ladda ner Report E-cat test September 7 (pdf) Temperature data Sept 7 (xls)" - Jed