Gigi DiMarco <gdmgdms...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is completely wrong: the pump power is not transformed into kinetic > enegy of the water, otherwise you will get after a while an infinite > velocity, not only for the water inside the tube but for cars on motorways as > well. > > Let me point out again that this entire discussion is irrelevant for two reasons, which I clearly explained in the paper, starting on p. 24:
1. Mizuno measured the heat added to the system by the pump. There is no point to appealing to a theory or hypothesis about how much heat there may be when it has actually been measured for 18 hours by running the pump only. 2. It makes *no difference* how much heat is added to the system by the pump. Whether the temperature goes up 0.6°C, or 6°C or 10°C, and whether this temperature represents a half watt, or 5 W, or 10 Watts is completely irrelevant. The pump is left running all the time. Therefore all of the heat from the pump is in the baseline temperature of the system. Mizuno measures from the baseline to the terminal high temperature at the end of the test, just as the temperature begins to fall. He does not measure from the ambient temperature. I wish the people writing these critiques would spend a few moments reading the paper, but they never do. I am not even going to bother adding these remarks to the latest paper. I am busy. If someone here would like to, feel free to add these points. It is a waste of time, I think. - Jed
