All you need to do is to move further away from the radiator to ease the burden upon your eyes. The inverse square law can work wonders. I suspect that he was referring to his particular case with a short viewing distance.
Dave -----Original Message----- From: Finlay MacNab <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 1:07 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Thermal cameras better than thermocouples for averaging temperature Hard to look at with the naked eye? I don't recall anything in the lugano report about the ecat being hard to look at. I am not sure this is correct. An examination of black body radiative power versus temperature shows that below 3000 degrees kelvin the emission from a hot body is diffuse and the bulk of the energy is at longer wavelengths. https://www.e-education.psu.edu/astro801/content/l3_p5.html A 1700K radiator (1400 Celsius) has a peak emission intensity of around 1.7microns in the infrared. The wikipedia page on infra-red heaters has a picture of quartz heating elements that operate at 1500C. The text accompanying the picture implies that the lamp is radiating 100W/inch or 780 W over 20cm (the length of the Rossi reactor). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_heater Based on this information, I don't think the reactor would have to appear very bright to the naked eye. Finlay
