Excellent observation! If this was a closed system with no FLOWING WATER
EXITING THE SYSTEM you would have a point. As it is you have only discredited
your argument about thermal inertia. Congratulations!
I find your hand waving arguments completely unconvincing. Please describe in
detail the geometry of the system you propose could account for the observed
changes in temperature taking into account the well known rate of heat exchange
between water and metals/other materials and the heat capacities of the various
materials. Also, please account for the energy inputs and outputs to the
device during its operation.
5 minutes with a text book will convince anyone with half a brain that what you
describe is more improbable than cold fusion itself! Please do everyone here a
favor and give a rigorous explanation of how "thermal inertia" can explain the
rossi device. Please use equations and data to back up your claims.
If you don't want to do this please stop spamming this message board and
distracting from more interesting discussion.
Well, at a setting of 9 you have the same temp rise
in 35 minutes as temperature fall in 35 minutes after power-off.
----- Original Message -----
From:
Mark
Iverson-ZeroPoint
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 4:55
PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:E-cat news at
Nyteknik
JC
stated:
“(and note that this
takes considerable time in the ramp up)”
Where
he is referring to the long time it takes to ramp up the E-Cat’s internal
temperature on startup…
Mr.
Catania, do you realize that the electrical power into the E-Cat’s resistance
heater was NOT started at 100%, it was started at a setting of ‘5’ and RAMPED
UP slowly over 40 minutes! Here is the time progression for resistance
heater power…
Timestamp
PLC Setting DeltaTime (minutes)
---------
----------- ----------
18:59
5
0
19:10
6
11
19:20
7
10
19:30
8
10
19:40
9
10
We
know that the ‘Setting’ is referring to the duty cycle, but we do not know
exactly what the relationship is… since 9 is the MAXimum setting, and Lewan
states ‘power was at this point
constantly switched on’,
then a setting of ‘9’ is presumably a 100% duty cycle. (?)
Since
the PLC’s are programmable, we cannot assume that a setting of ‘5’ is 50% or
60%; it could even be programmed to be 10% duty cycle. So no useful
calculations OR conclusions can be made during this ramp-up
phase.
-Mark
From: Joe Catania
[mailto:zrosumg...@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011
11:58 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-cat
news at Nyteknik
I think it caused a
rise. There is no rise. Its your imagination. The temperature at power off is
too low and must be discarded. If I bring a piece of metal the size of an
E-Cat to some temperature (and note that this takes considerable time in the
ramp up) and then I cut the power, the temperature will not instantaneously
drop. It will stay at the same temperature and decline slowly. There is much
too much mass for what your talking about to happen. I have to laugh at the
fact that if you saw the temp drop even a hundredth of a degree at power down
you would have declared the thermal inertia regime over and the CF regime to
have begun.
