Horace Heffner wrote:
How else could it work? It would run out of water. Very little fits
into the cell. You cannot do flow calorimetry without a flow. It
would be like trying to do it without measuring the temperature.
Obviously my question is are you sure that *precise magnitude* of flow
rate, 300 ml/min, 5 ml/sec, 18 liters per hour, was present at the
time of the heat after death observation?
Ah. I see. Dunno. Ask Krivit to put the video back on line, or ask Levi
or Rossi.
Anyway, I am sure they thought it was showing significant, stable excess
heat or they wouldn't put it in heat after death mode, would they? That
would be pointless. The reason people do this is to eliminate input from
the equation, to confirm that the output is not input accidentally
magnified. You wouldn't do it if the calorimetry did not already
indicate significant anomalous heat. That's why the "stored up heat"
hypothesis does not work with Fleischmann's boil off heat after death,
or in this instance. There is no storing up. It is producing more output
than input continuously up to the moment heat after death begins (for a
week, in Fleischmann's case). If they are "extracting heat" from the
metal as Catania claims, the metal would be way below absolute zero by
the time heat after death begins. I believe it is difficult to extract
heat from metal in that condition. Something about the Second Law.
When people such as Lonchampt turn off the power to blank cells in which
there is only electrical or electrochemical heating, the heat
immediately falls, according to Newton's law of cooling. It is readily
apparent. It does not look a bit like heat after death.
- Jed
