I wrote:
> We are analyzing net-energy out vs. net energy in, and chemical energy (as >> potential) is part of the P-in in the calibration. >> > > Jack Cole said, "I'd be convinced with 1.5 (say 135W out vs. 90 in)." > That's power, not energy. He is using the term COP the same way HVAC people > do. > In other words, he would be satisfied with instantaneous power readings of 135 W out, 90 W in. If that happens anytime during the test, and it stays around for a while, he will consider that anomalous excess heat without taking into consideration potential chemical energy. I would also be satisfied with this. Cole and I are ignoring chemical potential energy. The upper limit to chemical energy is 43 kJ/g, for gasoline or paraffin. I do not recall how much Ni there is in Cole's cell. I think it was a few grams. Say, 10 g., or 430,000 J from paraffin. If he sees 135 W out, 90 W in, that's 45 W excess. If there were 10 g of paraffin in the cell plus a bunch of oxygen, that would last 955 s (16 min.). In real life it would explode. In real life, 10 g of most chemicals would not last 1 minute at that power level, so we don't need to worry about chemical fuel, as I said. - Jed
