Joe Catania <zrosumg...@aol.com> wrote:
> When the power is cut the steam will still be produced according to thermal > inertia. Thermal inertia isn't heater input and it isn't fusion. > If it was thermal inertia the power would decline rapidly and total stored up energy would run out in a minute or so. You cannot store that much energy in this mass of metal. Anyway, let's drop that subject and go on to: > How can it be heat after death when you say there's no death. I don't > misunderstand, Rossi misspeaks. This is pointless if you're saying we must > assume there is fusion. > You are confused by the term "heat after death." It is cold fusion jargon, admittedly confusing. It means anomalous power that continues without input electricity. It does not mean the entire reaction "dies," that is, stops or slows down. On the contrary, most people do not cut the input power unless output is robust and stable, as it was in this case. Putting the cell into heat after death is a deliberate act. I don't recall the power level in this event. Pretty sure it was 12 kW like the others for this device. For some reason I cannot access the video showing the graph, which is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9Vyjlj8PLM Anyway, the reaction was stable in this instance. I have never heard of anyone putting a cell into heat after death when the heat is declining. That would be like taking you foot off the gas when the engine is stalling. (I mean with a manual shift!) We do not assume there is fusion. The fact that the reaction continues undiminished proves there is an anomalous source of heat other than the input electric power. No stored up energy can last as long as 15 minutes with a cell of this size at this power level. Heat storage and release is ruled out because there is not enough metal, the metal is not hot enough, and power does not decline following Newton's law of cooling. Chemical storage is ruled out because the reaction is exothermic the whole time. There is no endothermic storage phase. Since chemical and heat storage are ruled out, that leaves only nuclear energy, and fusion is the most likely candidate. This heat after death was only 15 minutes but some other events have continued far longer. I think it is ~50 days for a similar system, Arata's gas loaded cells. Granted that was a much lower power level with a far smaller sample of powder. > The presence or absence of fusion does not affect thermal inertia which is > sufficient to explain 15 minutes. > No, it isn't, but even it were, thermal inertia would produce a rapid decline in power, not a steady state. - Jed
