RE: [Vo]:Bill Gates (MS) LENR Cold Fusion- Italy meeting
You have to parse the Foundation’s statement carefully… “He [Bill Gates] was not there as a representative of the foundation, nor are there any plans for funding or other partnerships between the ENEA and the foundation. Yes, Bill was NOT there on BEHALF of the Foundation; it was him, personally, looking into ENEA’s work. The Foundation has no plans with ENEA, but Gates could easily pull out his checkbook and write them a check for $10M… or come back to the states and set up his own lab and hire people from his ‘circle’… -Mark Iverson From: Kevin O'Malley [mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 6:27 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bill Gates (MS) LENR Cold Fusion- Italy meeting The folks over at E-Cat world are on top of this, moving faster and more thoroughly than us vorts.Kudos to them. http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/17/update-from-the-gates-foundation-joe-shea/#comment-1698388366 Bob Greenyer http://disqus.com/embed/comments/?base=defaultdisqus_version=c6ed14e4f=ecwt_i=11372%20http%3A%2F%2Fwww.e-catworld.com%2F%3Fp%3D11372t_u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.e-catworld.com%2F2014%2F11%2F17%2Fupdate-from-the-gates-foundation-joe-shea%2Ft_e=Update%20from%20the%20Gates%20Foundation%20%28Joe%20Shea%29t_d=Update%20from%20the%20Gates%20Foundation%20%28Joe%20Shea%29t_t=Update%20from%20the%20Gates%20Foundation%20%28Joe%20Shea%29s_o=descl= • 2 hours ago http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/17/update-from-the-gates-foundation-joe-shea/#comment-1698335441 This is how Bill Gates felt about Nuclear in April 21, 2010 in the year before Rossi's first public demonstration in 2011. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbbq_KdPzjE At 4:44 he talks about the group HE (not BM Foundation) is backing, they use U238, he says ...because we have fast Neutrons, we have this Neutron budget that's very different, now our main problem is the material science problem - is these damn Neutrons - uh - degrade the cladding and everything - we don't have a predictable way of saying over a 40 year lifetime - uh - how various materials deal with that. Then the Kicker... he dismissively says... If you look at the [Hot] Fusion guys, their Neutrons are like a thousand times worse than our Neutrons, but even ours are, are... those guys [hot fusion] have 14 MEV Neutrons - good luck to them! He starts smiling and goes on... People should work on that - that is NOT an easy thing in terms of the economics. In the same video he states boldly I love nuclear Given that: 1. his own investment since this video was made 3.5 years ago hasn't yielded cheap ubiquitous, safe and easy to deploy energy 2. the very obvious dismissal of the practicality of hot fusion given his own real experience of his nuclear investment 3. this was pre Rossi 4. this was pre-Fukashima 5. the fact that he was looking at small reactors in a lab with Vittorio Violante There is no doubt in my mind that Bill Gates is looking at LENR. The only questions is, when will he announce I love the New Fire Bob Greenyer http://disqus.com/embed/comments/?base=defaultdisqus_version=c6ed14e4f=ecwt_i=11372%20http%3A%2F%2Fwww.e-catworld.com%2F%3Fp%3D11372t_u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.e-catworld.com%2F2014%2F11%2F17%2Fupdate-from-the-gates-foundation-joe-shea%2Ft_e=Update%20from%20the%20Gates%20Foundation%20%28Joe%20Shea%29t_d=Update%20from%20the%20Gates%20Foundation%20%28Joe%20Shea%29t_t=Update%20from%20the%20Gates%20Foundation%20%28Joe%20Shea%29s_o=descl= • 3 hours ago http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/17/update-from-the-gates-foundation-joe-shea/#comment-1698205387 At DAVOS Bill first quotes the importance of new energy and recognises the slow pace and problems with storage of alternative energy and the fact that it is not a priority for government research investment because of the payback horizon [is not within a politically useful time-frame] http://youtu.be/aen6ubFLSmo?t=... http://youtu.be/aen6ubFLSmo?t=21m32s In his second segment he is specifically asked if he is going to broaden the remit of the foundation, and he says that the focus of the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation will remain the same, helping farmers, solving health issues The focus of our foundation for my lifetime will be these health and agricultural issues, uh, you've gotta specialise, uh we think that we can go from a world where 6 million children a year are dieing, get that down to under 2 million and so we're gonna stay focussed on those things uh, until we achieve health equity where if you are born in a poor country, you're no more likely to die than any other child on the planet. http://youtu.be/aen6ubFLSmo?t=... http://youtu.be/aen6ubFLSmo?t=52m25s That says 1. Nothing about his own personal capacity, he is keen to mention the specialisation as being that of the foundation 2. Helping create an affordable means to desalinate water would help farmers. For me, it is interesting WHY Mishal
[Vo]:Russ George knows much about Gates before the gates of LENR
Dear Friends. Please read http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/11/bill-gates-ante-portas-gates-at-gates.html I have no special information about the visit of Bill Gates at ENEA, however my friend Russ George knows a lot and says it in his writing that I have re-published on Ego Out, with thanks to the author. I was busy and preoccupied due to the presidential elections in my country but now I will investigate more thoroughly this possible-Manhattan-Plan for LENR. Great money generates great ideas, and sometimes, vice-vers. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons
Axil, it seems to touch on and connect many of the sweet spots being pursued here on vortex. I continue to follow everything you and Jones write wrt polaritons and plasmons as I am convinced it is the linkage between scales that allows the anomalous heat to be exported and controlled – the article makes it clear that polaritons are difficult to create synchronize and normally want to cancel by going in opposite directions – layering of powder geometries may give some small bias but this new laser sounds like a tool that we want to test on LENR to see if large scale control of polariton direction and synchronization can be employed for finer/faster control of the reaction. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:45 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaritonics I admit I did not know about this new field of science. Here is the paper that the article was based on http://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.7390.pdf Creation of Orbital Angular Momentum States with Chiral Polaritonic Lenses. On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.commailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141117093336.htm Summary: Physicists have engineered a spiral laser beam and used it to create a whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons, hybrid particles that have properties of both matter and light and could link electronics with photonics.
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons
Axil and Fran-- It sounds like a coupling of spin energy and angular momentum of particles with the spin/orbital momentum of the electronic structure of atoms may be coming to the surface finally. Fran and Axil, I agree with your comments and good work. I have been hoping for such information such I started to communicate with Vorts 9-1/2 months ago. I'm only a little overdue now. Bob - Original Message - From: Roarty, Francis X To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:35 AM Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons Axil, it seems to touch on and connect many of the sweet spots being pursued here on vortex. I continue to follow everything you and Jones write wrt polaritons and plasmons as I am convinced it is the linkage between scales that allows the anomalous heat to be exported and controlled – the article makes it clear that polaritons are difficult to create synchronize and normally want to cancel by going in opposite directions – layering of powder geometries may give some small bias but this new laser sounds like a tool that we want to test on LENR to see if large scale control of polariton direction and synchronization can be employed for finer/faster control of the reaction. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:45 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaritonics I admit I did not know about this new field of science. Here is the paper that the article was based on http://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.7390.pdf Creation of Orbital Angular Momentum States with Chiral Polaritonic Lenses. On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141117093336.htm Summary: Physicists have engineered a spiral laser beam and used it to create a whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons, hybrid particles that have properties of both matter and light and could link electronics with photonics.
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons
Thanks Bob, I’m not suggesting it is the source of the energy but it may be the mechanism that allows an otherwise unexploitable chaotic energy to be organized and harnessed at a scale where it can do useful work. I am a little surprised at the simplicity of the laser mask to affect such a change. Is it the constructive and destructive patterns of phonons emanating away from the spirally displaced plasmon beams? I can’t wait for someone to apply this new tech to LENR – I would even suggest that much smaller masks could be made in a tungsten stip and embedded in the powder to amplify and synchronise the existing polaritons ..much less control but very quick feedback on the underlying concept. Fran From: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 12:04 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons Axil and Fran-- It sounds like a coupling of spin energy and angular momentum of particles with the spin/orbital momentum of the electronic structure of atoms may be coming to the surface finally. Fran and Axil, I agree with your comments and good work. I have been hoping for such information such I started to communicate with Vorts 9-1/2 months ago. I'm only a little overdue now. Bob - Original Message - From: Roarty, Francis Xmailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:35 AM Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons Axil, it seems to touch on and connect many of the sweet spots being pursued here on vortex. I continue to follow everything you and Jones write wrt polaritons and plasmons as I am convinced it is the linkage between scales that allows the anomalous heat to be exported and controlled – the article makes it clear that polaritons are difficult to create synchronize and normally want to cancel by going in opposite directions – layering of powder geometries may give some small bias but this new laser sounds like a tool that we want to test on LENR to see if large scale control of polariton direction and synchronization can be employed for finer/faster control of the reaction. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:45 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaritonics I admit I did not know about this new field of science. Here is the paper that the article was based on http://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.7390.pdf Creation of Orbital Angular Momentum States with Chiral Polaritonic Lenses. On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.commailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141117093336.htm Summary: Physicists have engineered a spiral laser beam and used it to create a whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons, hybrid particles that have properties of both matter and light and could link electronics with photonics.
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons
On 2nd thought I realize the same light source must hit the mask to synchronize so a passive mask to exploit any plasma or phonons in situ would be a task for someone a little more clever than me. Something the vort might pick up and kick around. Fran From: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 12:04 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons Axil and Fran-- It sounds like a coupling of spin energy and angular momentum of particles with the spin/orbital momentum of the electronic structure of atoms may be coming to the surface finally. Fran and Axil, I agree with your comments and good work. I have been hoping for such information such I started to communicate with Vorts 9-1/2 months ago. I'm only a little overdue now. Bob - Original Message - From: Roarty, Francis Xmailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:35 AM Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons Axil, it seems to touch on and connect many of the sweet spots being pursued here on vortex. I continue to follow everything you and Jones write wrt polaritons and plasmons as I am convinced it is the linkage between scales that allows the anomalous heat to be exported and controlled – the article makes it clear that polaritons are difficult to create synchronize and normally want to cancel by going in opposite directions – layering of powder geometries may give some small bias but this new laser sounds like a tool that we want to test on LENR to see if large scale control of polariton direction and synchronization can be employed for finer/faster control of the reaction. Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 17, 2014 11:45 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaritonics I admit I did not know about this new field of science. Here is the paper that the article was based on http://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.7390.pdf Creation of Orbital Angular Momentum States with Chiral Polaritonic Lenses. On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.commailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141117093336.htm Summary: Physicists have engineered a spiral laser beam and used it to create a whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons, hybrid particles that have properties of both matter and light and could link electronics with photonics.
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons
The key point to take from the article is that a vortex of polaritons are indispensable to the LENR process. When we have a vortex of polaritons, we automatically get a Bose Einstein Condensate at high temperatures. That BEC produce a polariton soliton and an highly focused and powerful EMF beam. A laser is a poor why to pump polaritons. Dipole motion is the optimum pump to get a polariton vortex going. Whenever a steady flow is interrupted by a stationary object, a vortex will form. http://www.math.unm.edu/mctp/summer/lecturenotes/fluids/notesnit.pdf A vortex is a result of fluid dynamics. On page 15. the vortex is defined as a consequence of the stokes theorem. In LENR, the flow of electrons that are vibrating under the constraint of positively charged holes that form on the opposite side of a particle will form a continuous quantum liquid flow. When that flow is interrupted by a abrupt material boundary: a sharp point of a ridge, a vortex will form. Inside that whispering gallery wave so formed, infrared photons will couple with these electrons to then form long lived polaritons. A boson condensate will naturally form and produce a polariton soliton. This soliton forms a highly focused EMF beam perpendicular to the plain of rotation. This beam produces the LENR effect. This beam is comprised of both real photons as resonant EMF particles and virtual photons as non resonant EMF particles. On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: On 2nd thought I realize the same light source must hit the mask to synchronize so a passive mask to exploit any plasma or phonons in situ would be a task for someone a little more clever than me. Something the vort might pick up and kick around. Fran *From:* Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, November 18, 2014 12:04 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons Axil and Fran-- It sounds like a coupling of spin energy and angular momentum of particles with the spin/orbital momentum of the electronic structure of atoms may be coming to the surface finally. Fran and Axil, I agree with your comments and good work. I have been hoping for such information such I started to communicate with Vorts 9-1/2 months ago. I'm only a little overdue now. Bob - Original Message - *From:* Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:35 AM *Subject:* RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons Axil, it seems to touch on and connect many of the sweet spots being pursued here on vortex. I continue to follow everything you and Jones write wrt polaritons and plasmons as I am convinced it is the linkage between scales that allows the anomalous heat to be exported and controlled – the article makes it clear that polaritons are difficult to create synchronize and normally want to cancel by going in opposite directions – layering of powder geometries may give some small bias but this new laser sounds like a tool that we want to test on LENR to see if large scale control of polariton direction and synchronization can be employed for finer/faster control of the reaction. Fran *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com janap...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Monday, November 17, 2014 11:45 PM *To:* vortex-l *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaritonics I admit I did not know about this new field of science. Here is the paper that the article was based on http://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.7390.pdf *Creation of Orbital Angular Momentum States with Chiral Polaritonic Lenses*. On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/141117093336.htm *Summary:* Physicists have engineered a spiral laser beam and used it to create a whirlpool of hybrid light-matter particles called polaritons, hybrid particles that have properties of both matter and light and could link electronics with photonics.
[Vo]:HotCat and Tunnel Diode Operational Curves are Similar
Recently I have been modeling the HotCat in an effort to better understand the dynamic operation of the device. After a number of attempts I was able to construct a computer simulation that exhibits interesting characteristics. There have always been questions concerning how a device that is driven by a power input signal, which integrates into heat energy, can be used to control the output heat power generated by the device. I have discussed that issue on several occasions and felt that now would be an excellent time to continue that dialogue. My latest simulation runs suggest that Rossi can deliver a product which has a decent COP provided he carefully implements the important parameters of his HotCat. The first criteria is to ensure that the internal power generation process is limited so that it never supplies more power at any temperature than is naturally conducted, convected and radiated away as determined by the geometry of his device. Radiation of power is proportional to the forth order of the absolute temperature of the surface area so it is not too difficult for this term to limit the high temperature regions of operation. I do not know the functional relationship between the power generated and temperature for one of his CATs, but must assume that the radiation ultimately will dominate the behavior. If this is not true then thermal run away will destroy the device. Earlier models apparently were subject to this problem, but the most recent third party testing implied that it is now under control. We also are aware that low temperature operation of a HotCat does not result in the generation of significant extra thermal power within the unit. Operation in the very low temperature region is the same as with a dummy system and that is fairly easy to demonstrate. Most groups attempting to replicate an LENR device can attest to the trouble proving that excess heat is being generated at the low end! The middle temperature region of operation allows for the most interesting conditions to occur. It is here that the internally generated power battles with the conduction, convection, and radiation paths in order to obtain the final operating point. Stable operation in this region can be achieved provided the geometry of the device is sound. Rossi can adjust the powder charge in both quantity and quality in his attempt to achieve his goals. If he adds more powder to the tube, then more heat power will be generated at a given temperature. Also, a better quality of mix that is more efficient will lead to additional power that needs to be handled by the design. The best combination appears to be established when the internally generated power comes very close to matching the escaping power at a temperature that is close to the point where the forth order radiation power component begins to dominate.There the magnitudes of the convection and radiation powers can be within the same ballpark. The convection power path ensured stability throughout the lower regions and finally the radiation takes over as the main path. Of course, for the task to be handled off it is necessary that the internal power generation term must exceed a linear function of temperature but remain less than the forth order dominance of the radiation. It would be great to have actual data that defines this power generation function, but it is not too difficult to understand why Rossi would not want to release that valuable information. I can adjust my simulation to handle a reasonable range of functions once it is released. The title of this posting was derived when I noticed that the simulated Rossi CAT follows a curve that is quite similar to what is seen during operation of a tunnel diode. You can substitute current in the diode for heat power of the HotCat. Diode voltage is substituted for temperature along the horizontal axis. The negative resistance region that the tunnel diode is famous for can be found in the HotCat curves provided the internally generated heat comes close to the thermal exit paths as discussed above. Of course it is entirely possible to design a HotCat that does not have this special region of operation but that would be at the expense of COP. My simulation demonstrates that this tradeoff is of enormous consequence where a COP of 10 or more rapidly deteriorates to being in the 2 to 3 range without the added boost. Perhaps that is what was intentionally done to the third party testing to keep the device stable and also to keep from revealing trade secrets. The effect is very sensitive to the output power per kilogram and quantity of the powder. It is important to realize that operation within the negative resistance region will take place naturally provided the design supports that behavior. This operation is indicated by the observation of a rapid increase in temperature with respect to time as the region is passed
[Vo]:Heat from the pump would not be a problem even if we could detect it
Some people are still confused about the input power from the pump in Mizuno’s calorimetry. Let me point out two things about this: 1. While there has to be some heat from the pump, with this configuration, that heat is too small and too close to the noise to be detected with this equipment. This is obvious from the data I uploaded. 2. If the heat could be detected, it would still not be a problem. It would simply be included in the baseline. In calorimetry you sometimes see input power from the instruments themselves, or from something like a circulation fan in a Seebeck calorimeter. The pump runs under the same conditions at all times so power is stable and it would be easy to subtract. Let me discuss these two points in more detail. Some people seem to have difficulty grasping the notion that heat can be too small to measure with a given instrument. I suppose the heat from this pump is on the order of ~0.2 W. Based on other data I think ~0.5 W is barely detectable with this system. The pump heat cannot be measured because it is close to the noise from ambient temperature changes. With any calorimeter it is always more difficult to measure at the bottom of the scale down in the noise. You can measure the difference between 3.0 W and 3.2 W more easily than the difference between 0.0 W and 0.2 W. Mizuno left the pump running for a day to see whether he could detect heat from it. Looking at the water temperature for the day he did not see an elevation above ambient. No doubt there was one, but he could not see it. Ambient temperature changes swamped it. One minute the room is warmer than the water by 0.2°C. A few minutes later the room heater turns off and the reactor is soon warmer by 0.1°C. This is what I observed on October 23 when we did not conduct testing until afternoon and I left the Omega thermometer in the T1-T2 comparative mode. That means heat from the room is sloshing into and out of the water, albeit at a very low rate thanks to the insulation. Still, it is apparently doing that enough to hide the effects of the pump. Once the water is heated above ambient, the heat sloshes *out only*. After the heating and air-conditioning in Mizuno’s lab is upgraded, it may be possible to detect a slight average temperature rise above ambient caused by the pump. If that happens we can then subtract that difference from the temperature readings. That is what I mean by included in the baseline. A low level of input power will cause a persistent average higher temperature compared to ambient. It will *not* cause the temperature to climb higher and higher indefinitely, until you can see it. The temperature instead reaches a peak where losses equal input. In other words, after a while the system functions as an isoperibolic calorimeter, not an adiabatic one. Because insulation is not perfect. That seems to confuse people. Let me go it over it again with an example. On October 21 the average power measured with the reactor metal and water is roughly 4.7 W. That is 1.4 W from the resistance heater pulses plus 3.3 W of anomalous power, ignoring losses. (If you want to estimate losses, which I figure are ~1 W, they should all be added to the anomalous power by this method.) The temperature rises throughout the day as you see in Fig. 7. In Fig. 9 we zoom in, and you can measure the water and wall temperature increase from hour 1.0 to hour 2.0. This increase is 0.3°C, which means the power during this time is ~3.5 W (ignoring losses). That was all anomalous power; by hour 1.0, the effect of the pulse is gone and temperatures are in equilibrium. If there had been no anomalous power, the curve at hour 1.0 would be monotonically dropping back to ambient, as it did in the evening and overnight after the anomalous heat went away. (The pump has to be contributing a little heat, and slowing down this decline, but obviously it does not contribute enough to overcome losses, because otherwise in the evening and overnight the temperature would not fall.) Suppose you remove the palladium wire and input a steady ~6 W with a resistance heater. After losses that would be about 4.7 W so the temperature will rise about the same way it does in Fig. 7. The curve will be fairly straight for 6 hours. However, the reactor walls and the cooling water will gradually become much warmer than ambient. Losses increase, per Newton’s law of cooling. Eventually, losses equal input power, and the temperature will rise no more. At that point we would have a poorly designed isoperibolic calorimeter with a ridiculously long settle time. It would take months to calibrate. As Hemminger and Hohne emphasize, with a properly designed isoperibolic calorimeter the heat losses are predictable and controlled. They are also fast enough to allow a calibration in a reasonable amount of time. Because the pump constantly does the same amount of work, and it is left running pretty much all the time, we know this terminal temperature remains the
Re: [Vo]:Heat from the pump would not be a problem even if we could detect it
Jed, is it possible to calculate the amount of power that is being added to the water by looking at the system? I assume that the water is not moving just prior to being accelerated to finally reach the speed that it is moving inside the pipe. That may allow you to calculate the kinetic energy that must be imparted to it which would be deposited into the far tank. The frictional losses within the pipe would have to be supplied by the pump as well. That heat would likely end up within the water instead of conducting through the hose surface. A good first start would be to calculate the kinetic portion of the pump power. It does make me curious as to where they assume the 3 watts is being dissipated. I find it difficult to believe that this much power is always being delivered regardless of the load configuration. In a very short pipe the losses must be kinetic. Do you have information concerning the mass of water pumped per second and its velocity at exit? Energy is equal to 1/2 * mass * velocity squared. The power can then be determined by dividing by the time during which that energy is imparted. Give it a shot! Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Nov 18, 2014 5:45 pm Subject: [Vo]:Heat from the pump would not be a problem even if we could detect it Some people are still confused about the input power from the pump in Mizuno’s calorimetry. Let me point out two things about this: 1. While there has to be some heat from the pump, with this configuration, that heat is too small and too close to the noise to be detected with this equipment. This is obvious from the data I uploaded. 2. If the heat could be detected, it would still not be a problem. It would simply be included in the baseline. In calorimetry you sometimes see input power from the instruments themselves, or from something like a circulation fan in a Seebeck calorimeter. The pump runs under the same conditions at all times so power is stable and it would be easy to subtract. Let me discuss these two points in more detail. Some people seem to have difficulty grasping the notion that heat can be too small to measure with a given instrument. I suppose the heat from this pump is on the order of ~0.2 W. Based on other data I think ~0.5 W is barely detectable with this system. The pump heat cannot be measured because it is close to the noise from ambient temperature changes. With any calorimeter it is always more difficult to measure at the bottom of the scale down in the noise. You can measure the difference between 3.0 W and 3.2 W more easily than the difference between 0.0 W and 0.2 W. Mizuno left the pump running for a day to see whether he could detect heat from it. Looking at the water temperature for the day he did not see an elevation above ambient. No doubt there was one, but he could not see it. Ambient temperature changes swamped it. One minute the room is warmer than the water by 0.2°C. A few minutes later the room heater turns off and the reactor is soon warmer by 0.1°C. This is what I observed on October 23 when we did not conduct testing until afternoon and I left the Omega thermometer in the T1-T2 comparative mode. That means heat from the room is sloshing into and out of the water, albeit at a very low rate thanks to the insulation. Still, it is apparently doing that enough to hide the effects of the pump. Once the water is heated above ambient, the heat sloshes out only. After the heating and air-conditioning in Mizuno’s lab is upgraded, it may be possible to detect a slight average temperature rise above ambient caused by the pump. If that happens we can then subtract that difference from the temperature readings. That is what I mean by included in the baseline. A low level of input power will cause a persistent average higher temperature compared to ambient. It will not cause the temperature to climb higher and higher indefinitely, until you can see it. The temperature instead reaches a peak where losses equal input. In other words, after a while the system functions as an isoperibolic calorimeter, not an adiabatic one. Because insulation is not perfect. That seems to confuse people. Let me go it over it again with an example. On October 21 the average power measured with the reactor metal and water is roughly 4.7 W. That is 1.4 W from the resistance heater pulses plus 3.3 W of anomalous power, ignoring losses. (If you want to estimate losses, which I figure are ~1 W, they should all be added to the anomalous power by this method.) The temperature rises throughout the day as you see in Fig. 7. In Fig. 9 we zoom in, and you can measure the water and wall temperature increase from hour 1.0 to hour 2.0. This increase is 0.3°C, which means the power during this time is ~3.5 W (ignoring losses). That was all anomalous power; by hour 1.0, the effect of the
Re: [Vo]:Heat from the pump would not be a problem even if we could detect it
Here is some more info on the pump, that Mizuno just sent me: IWAKI magnet pump, MD-6K-N Max capacity: 8/9 ℓ/min Max head: 1.0/1.4 100V 12W/60Hz, 12W/50Hz He plugged it into the WattChecker which shows it is drawing 10.8 W. (I thought it was 5 W just by feel. Not a bad guess!) Based on the efficiency of the other MD 6 model (18 W in 3 W out), that would deliver ~1.8 W to the water, but I expect this is less efficient. My guess is still 0.25 to 0.50 W because I think this system would detect 1.8 W and nothing shows up when the pump alone is running. However much heat it adds, the losses exceed it. That is what the data shows. He is going to repeat the test where he runs it for several hours or a day with just the pump. The last time he did that, there was less insulation so it was not as sensitive, but I believe 1 W would have showed up.
Re: [Vo]:Heat from the pump would not be a problem even if we could detect it
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Jed, is it possible to calculate the amount of power that is being added to the water by looking at the system? I assume that the water is not moving just prior to being accelerated to finally reach the speed that it is moving inside the pipe. That may allow you to calculate the kinetic energy that must be imparted to it which would be deposited into the far tank. It is continually looping around. The only work the pump needs to do is to overcome friction. It has to lift the water a short distance, but the water in the pipe is a siphon; the water goes right down again. The pump is just above the Dewar. The frictional losses within the pipe would have to be supplied by the pump as well. That heat would likely end up within the water instead of conducting through the hose surface. To measure this, you can run water through a 16 m plastic pipe, 1 cm in diameter at 8 L/min. I promise you will not find any measurable temperature rise from the friction. Put the coil in a well insulated envelope. A good first start would be to calculate the kinetic portion of the pump power. It does make me curious as to where they assume the 3 watts is being dissipated. It turns out that is for another model, the MD-6. This is an MD-6K-N, smaller, only 12 W max. It is not listed in the spec. sheet except to say, Note: Bearings are not used on MD-6K-N/6ZK-N/10K-N models due to their small size. http://www.iwakipumps.com.vn/doc_viewer.aspx?fileName=/upload/file/md.pdf I assume that means the bearings are not as good, so the ratio of input power to output mechanical power is probably worse than 6:1. As I said, Mizuno just measured the input electrical power at 10.8 W. I am guessing the ratio is 20:1 (~0.5 W delivered) because otherwise we would have seen the heat show up, I think. I just looked at a 39 min. segment. Ambient starts higher than the water: 24.64 vrs. 24.54 deg C. Ambient goes up, the water does nothing. Then after 20 minutes ambient falls, the water does nothing until it abruptly rises a little, about 0.08 deg C. Then it is flat. At the end ambient is 24.24, water 24.68. That does not look like ~1 W to me, but with all that noise who knows. There are currents of warm and cool air blowing around and two gas heaters. The ambient around the reactor could be as much as 0.3 deg C different from what is recorded here. The water is well mixed and I am sure that temperature is right, but I would not try to draw any conclusions from this. Maybe 8 hours of data with nothing but the pump and reasonably stable ambient will tell us something. Anyway, however much the pump is delivering it is not enough to keep the temperature from falling. Whereas after that 39 min segment, when I put a tiny blip of 300 J (5 W for 1 min) the temperature rose from from 24.67 to 24.72 about 20 minutes later. Ambient hardly changed. 300 J over 20 minutes is 0.25 W. Later that day it looked like the first 39 minutes. Random movement by both ambient and slight changes in the water. No clear trend. Certainly not 1 W unaccounted for. It is much too noisy to make any firm conclusions. You can only measure higher power, where the water is much warmer than ambient, and heat losses are in one direction only. - Jed
