The term x-ray covers a wide range of em energies. The softest x-rays are stopped by air.
Harry On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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:hveeder...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, February 29, 2016 5:15 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:New paper from Jiang in Chinese > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> 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 > >
