On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Joshua Cude <joshua.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> The professors tested and calibrated this machine for 6 weeks. They would >>> have discovered that it has a large hidden thermal mass. >> >> >> They did. It takes 30 minutes to bring the temperature up to the level >> needed to deliver water at 100C. >> > > They reportedly had difficulty turning on the excess heat in that run. It > would never have risen to 100 deg C without excess heat > There could have been some chemical heat. What's your point? > My point about the calibrations may be unclear. When you calibrate a system > like this, turning on the electric heater only without hydrogen in the > nickel, and in various other tests, the presence of a large thermal mass > would be revealed. > I understood the point. But in the absence of hydrogen, the system would heat up more slowly than it did in test 2, and the rate it heats up there, with 1 kW input already indicates a large thermal mass. The fact that excess heat is claimed, and the gradient is still slow, emphasizes the thermal mass, it doesn't negate it. > > >> Whatever. My suspicions do not require any of that. Just some thermal mass >> inside that giant tin-foil phallus. >> > > That's funny! Phallus indeed. As I said, the calibration would reveal that. > People experienced in flow calorimetry would see it easily. > The warm-up period *does* reveal it. Anyone can see it easily. No one in the experiment ever mentions the system's heat capacity. They certainly don't deny it has a thermal mass, and don't seem to be aware of the relevance of its thermal mass to their measurements. If it didn't have a large thermal mass, the water would jump immediately to at least 70C when 1.2 kW was applied. But it doesn't. It heats up slowly. And it cools off slowly too after shut down. Thermal mass!