If x-ray "warming" is taking place then we are at the very simple 'dead graduate student' test phase.. a dose of radiation capable of warming anything is surely lethal so just look into the lab and count the number of dead grad students lying on the floor, any number greater than 0 means a dramatic nuclear process in hand :(
-----Original Message----- From: H LV [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 5:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:New paper from Jiang in Chinese On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > H LV <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Notice the delayed rise in T4 at the beginning of the experiment. The >> >> rise in T4 after power is turned off might just be the delayed >> dissipation of heat from inside to the outside. > > > I do not think so. Look closely as the power is being reduced, at > around time 14:00, shortly before "Power off." (About 7 minutes > before.) T4 suddenly pops up, from 110°C up to around 120°C. > > Maybe that is just noise, but if it is real, it does not look like > delayed dissipation to me. > > Unless the configuration of the cell is changed, I do not see how the > dissipation could increase suddenly like that. By "changed" I mean for > example, suppose the MgO insulation is wrapped around and attached > with adhesive tape. Suppose you loosen the tape. The outside > temperature might change suddenly. I doubt anyone would make such > changes to the cell during a test. > > If there were heat left in the cell that had to be dissipated after > the power is turned off, I suppose the T4 curve would continue rising > at a steady pace for a while, then it would drop off. It would not > have leveled off after 13:20. It seems the temperature inside the cell > continued in a stable condition if we can believe that either T1 or T2 > was working correctly. So there was no large increase in the internal > temperature. > > Granted there was a sudden increase in temperature in T1 and T2. It > happens at time 14:20. I just drew some lines on the graph, and I > think that T1 and > T2 go up and reach a peak about 6 minutes before T4 suddenly > increased. T1 continues for 26 minutes at the higher temperature. > > I would not expect T4 to pop up like that in response to the increase > shown by T1 and T2. I would expect T4 to gradually rise in response to > that increase. Perhaps it might continue after T1 peaks, but it would > be a continual, gradual rise. That kind of slow rise is what T4 does > after the initial jump, followed by a gradual decay. Ok, but if there was so much more heat being produced in the reactor why is T1 dropping so quickly while T4 is gradually rising? Maybe the surface (see the diagram) on which the sensor was mounted was warmed by a burst of xrays. harry
