David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: This is an ongoing project I suppose. I will check the Oct 20 data again, > but I believe I got roughly the same amount of excess. That seems too good > to be true. >
That cannot be right. There was only one pulse on Oct. 20: one-third the input energy, yet the temperature rose 1.4 deg C. That has to indicate more anomalous heat. See Table 1. > What do you mean by considering that the reactor vessel is capturing 60% > of the heat? Are you referring to the idea that the water and reactor have > a combined capture of 100%? That would seem logical if the thermal > capacity of each is considered. > Yes. The heat capacity of SUS 316 stainless steel is listed in my paper. It 0.49 ~ 0.53 J/g °C. The reactor weighs 50.5 kg. The overall heat capacity of the reactor vessel is more than the water. They both come to the same temperature, so the reactor vessel holds ~60% of the heat, and the water ~40%. I estimated this when I wrote the paper. Some recent calibration data seems to bear it out, using more direct methods. I am not quite sure yet. - Jed
