Gigi DiMarco <[email protected]> wrote:
The major result is that we measured 43°C in the pump body very close to > the water so it is really easy to understand that, despite what Jed says, > the pump motor delivers a lot of heat to the water . . . > You are wrong. This is not what I say. This is what Fig. 19 proves. If your graphs show something else, your experiment is different. Perhaps you are using a different kind of pump, or more pressure in the tubes, or perhaps you have confused the effects of falling ambient temperature with rising water temperature, as you did before. In the second paper you wrote: "GSVIT-1) We do not agree at all. The pump was not stopped during the test and, as Rothwell says, we are speaking about a differential temperature increase equal to +2.5°C. . . ." No one said the pump is stopped during the test. It runs all the time. If it were stopped, the test would fail because the heat from the reactor would no longer be collected. The pump power turns out to be about 4 W. > Suppose, for the sake of argument, that is true. And suppose that raises the temperature by about 6°C. (Obviously that cannot be true because nowhere do we see a 6°C elevation above ambient, but let us pretend it is true.) In that case, all of the excess heat calculations must begin at a baseline 6°C above ambient, because the pump is always left on. Therefore this has absolutely no impact on the excess heat measurement. - Jed
