Am 22.10.2011 16:32, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
This discussion about "close contact to the metal" and "chemogalvanic
or electroosmotic voltages" is blather. I am sorry to be harsh, but it
is irrelevant, evasive, nitpicking blather.
It is not.
Put 2 identical copper electrodes in water. Heat one, and the other not.
You get a voltage and a current between the electrodes.
(Thermal electroosmose)
When I was young I tried to make an chemothermical energy source from
this effect.
With Rossis setup there was unequally heated water, aluminim, brass,
nickel and chromenickel in contact.
If the thermolement has 1 Ohm inner resistance then you get an error of
1° C with a current of 40 µA.
The problem is, a current can flow from 1 thermoelement into the other,
because they where interconnectet.
You could pull the thermocouples out and throw them in the trash and
we would STILL be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN THERE WAS ANOMALOUS HEAT. The
thermocuples could be completely wrong in every respect -- the numbers
might be painted on the meter screen! -- but the result would still be
compelling. Forget about the thermocouples! Forget about using a steam
mixer instead of heat exchanger. None of that matters. Focus instead
on the fact that water flowed through the reactor replacing the entire
volume of water twice (approximately), and the reactor was radiating a
lot of heat for 4 hours. Yet it remained too hot to touch right to the
end. Without heat generation it would have fallen to room temperature
after 1 hour, never mind 4 hours. If you dispute that, you do not
understand elementary facts about nature that people have known for
thousands of years.
The problem is, the primary water flow is unknown. Rossi says 4g/s and
Lewan measured 0.9-2g.
All these unclear points, temperature instabilities and contradictions
say, there are unknown error sources in the measurement.
