Sorry Dave but I do not agree at all with your DIY physics about pumps. 1) We actually don't know the actual power flow: you assumed 9 l/m : who told you? any flow meter around?
2) The physics of pumps is well known, there is no need to re-invent it see for example the first equation in the box here http://www.thermexcel.com/english/ressourc/pumps.htm as you can see the mechanical power depends not only on the flow rate (that we do not know) but also on the pressure loss, that we do not know either. I think we have to wait for the excel file from Jed; there we can find the way to solve our problem. Gigi 2015-01-08 17:22 GMT+01:00 David Roberson <[email protected]>: > Gigi, > > While Jed is locating that information for you may I request that you make > a calculation of the kinetic energy contained within the moving water > exiting the pump? Then, do the same thing for the kinetic energy of water > that is about to enter the intake pipe of the pump. Do you agree that the > difference in heat must be deposited within the standing liquid? > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gigi DiMarco <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Thu, Jan 8, 2015 10:54 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Report on Mizuno's Adiabatic Calorimetry" revised > > > > *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. * > dear Jed, > > I could not find anymore the excel file of this 18 hour measurement [it > used to be http://LENR-CANR.org/Mizuno/Mizuno2014-11-20.xlsx] > > In that file it was clearly shown that the water temperature, with no > excess heat, rised by 2.5 °C in a stable way against the room temperature. > Is not it too much for 0,24 W? > > Could you post the file again? > > Many thanks > > > > 2015-01-08 16:39 GMT+01:00 Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>: > >> Gigi DiMarco <[email protected]> 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 >> >> >
