On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Joshua Cude <[email protected]> wrote: > > Nope. When you put 800 W into something like this, a large fraction of it >>> radiates from the cell into the surroundings. >>> >> >> The cell is insulated. >> > > It is too hot to touch according to witnesses. > Which witnesses are those? I have not seen any mention of the temperature of the insulation, but maybe I missed it. But it's definitely not too hot to touch. Check the Krivit video from 9:22 to 10:00, Rossi repeatedly touches and presses it. At 9:50 he lays two fingers across the top with considerable pressure, and leaves them there for nearly 10 seconds, without any indication of discomfort, and without any comment about its temperature. It's not too hot to touch. I think you made that up. In the next moments he touches the hose, and lets go quickly with a comment about how hot it is. > The insulation means it takes longer to get hot on the outside; the > difference between the inside and the outside is greater; and more heat > transfers to the water. But there is still plenty being radiated out. > A little maybe, but without a temperature measurement, we don't know if it's plenty or oodles or scads. Rossi does all his calculations without taking account of losses through the insulation, so presumably he doesn't think they're significant. > > That isn't much with a large object that is too hot to touch. > But it is much for an object that appears to be at room temperature. > > >> And if you're claiming 50 - 75 % for any power, then at 5 kW, about 2.5 kW >> would have to radiate from the insulation. Are you claiming that? >> > > Dunno. Recovery rates change with temperature, flow rates and other > conditions. Actually, they usually get worse. Probably this is producing ~4 > kW and that makes the surface too hot to touch. If, as you believe, it is > only producing 800 W then the insulation isn't very good, is it? > Except it's not too hot to touch, so either the insulation is very good, or it's not producing 4 kW. > > > No. It doesn't. Whatever the fluid is, and regardless of the shape, it's >> gonna flow through. It does it as a liquid, and it does it as a steam-liquid >> mixture. There's a pump forcing it through. >> > > If the water was overflowing out of the top and down the hose, cold water > would be coming in to replace the boiling water and the temperature would > drop below boiling, as I said. Probably down to around 95 deg C. > That's ridiculous. Cold water is always coming in to replace the liquid water or the steam. It's pushed in at a steady rate by the pump. The cold water runs past the reactor and warms up. If the power is high enough, some of it changes phase, but always it gets pushed out by the inflowing cold water. > It is very difficult to maintain a flow calorimeter outlet temperature of > exactly 101 deg C unless the water is boiling, leaving as vapor, and only > the vapor touches the temperature sensor. > No. It is very easy to maintain the output of the ecat at exactly boiling temperature as long as the input power is above the value required to raise the water to boiling, and below the power required to boil it all. In the Krivit run, that range is between 600W and something over 4 kW. If the power is in that range, the output fluid must be a mixture of liquid and steam. What do you suggest would happen if the input power was 2 kW? That's more than enough to heat it all to boiling, and not enough to vaporize it all. In this case, the water would be "overflowing", as you call it, and so you think the temperature would drop. But then the water is removing less than 600 W from the reactor, If there is 2 kW input, it has to heat up, and then of course the water would get hotter, so its temperature wouldn't drop. To repeat if the input is between 600W and 4 kW (or so) the output must be a mixture of liquid and gas. It is not difficult, but rather dead easy, to arrange power in that range. > Rossi could tell it is overflowing by watching the temperature. When it > falls below 100 deg C, he increases anomalous heat. > Wait. How does he do this? You insisted earlier that he does not mess with the input power. > If not enough water comes in and it dries up, the temperature would rise > above 101 deg C, and he reduces it. > When and how does he do this. The assumption in all the recent demos is that the input power is constant. That's why it's measured at the beginning, and then left alone (ostensibly). He makes no claims about adjusting the reaction, and there is no evidence that he does. > He can control the strength of the anomalous heat. I do not know how he > does that. > Maybe telepathy. > Apparently he has enough control to keep the bottom portion filled with > boiling water but not overflowing. > Have you looked at the photos of the ecats without the insulation. The water flows past the reactor horizontally, and then it reaches the chimney after it passes through the reactor. There is always cold water entering the reactor on the input side. The reactor will never dry completely. If the power is high enough, the water will all vaporize before it leaves the reactor, so part of the reactor could be dry. That's when it would transfer heat to the steam, and the steam would get hotter. That never happens, so it is safe to conclude that the water is never all converted to steam. There will be self-powered ones with electric power generation within a year >>> or so. >>> >> >> And will that be used to power the CF car you predicted would be built >> before the year 2000? >> > > The only reason we did not have cold fusion powered cars by 2000 was > because of academic politics and irrational opposition by people like you. > Sorry about that. How do you know that won't work this time? > > I believe Mallove predicted that, not me. > Classy. Blame it on someone who can't defend himself. But it was in a paper authored by both of you, and the prediction used the plural first person: "We believe that before the year 2000 there will be cold fusion powered autmobiles, home heating systems, small compact electrical generating units, and aerospace applications. These technologies will revolutionaize the world as they speed the end of the Fossil Fuel Age." Mallove and Rothwell ca. 1994
