On 12/28/2009 02:11 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen A. Lawrence > > >> "So what we seem to have is this: They time phase during which pressure >> > doesn't rise, then they measure the rate of pressure rise once the Pd > gas absorption slows down, and they use that measured pressure rise, > along with the duration of the constant-pressure phase, to *estimate* > the amount of gas injected into the container. Using that, plus the > weight of the Pd, they arrive at an estimated value for the loading. > > >> Is that how other folks understood this?" >> > Yes and no. It is in seeming conflict with the charts at the end. BTW - and > this is jumping ahead, since the results are in doubt and need to be > carefully replicated ... but ... If there were some kind of useable "loading > gain" that could be exploited; then apparently it would need to be > engineered in a way that the cycling of active material is in a narrow range > ... one which goes from "almost completely loaded" to "fully loaded" - and > this happened at a rapid rate. > > Let's say you could go from a H/Pd ratio of 1.1 down to 1.05 and back, ad > infinitum - and furthermore that there would be continuous excess heat in > that small gap - due to some force like Casimir or picogravity.
But why do you think there would be less energy needed to unload the Pd than it released during loading? Nothing in these results suggests that. Certainly if picogravity is at the bottom of it, you're dealing with a conservative force, and what comes out must go back in if you're return to your starting conditions. Casimir is going to behave conservatively too in situations where all you're doing is letting things smash together and then yanking them apart again.
