Alain Sepeda <[email protected]> wrote: abour recent claim of coldfusion experiement in MIT IAP > > http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/02/04/lenr-researchers-reject-significance-of-swartzs-claim/ > > it seems the claims ils much less interesting that we heard. > > few minutes, few milliwatts, no change. >
Krivit uploaded this slide linked to the article: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2012/20120122Swartz-80mw.jpg I assume this figure is from Swartz. It does show ~80 mW. The power level is in line with previous results by Swartz. The duration is 7,000 seconds, or 116 minutes, which is a long time. Long enough to confirm the reaction is stable. I have not seen a description of the calorimetry in this experiment, so I cannot judge it. However, it can be difficult to measure ~80 mW with ordinary lab equipment. There are two problems: measuring differences less then ~100 mW, and below ~300 mW absolute power the response is sometimes non-linear (See Miles). In the hands of an expert such as Fleischmann or Storms it can be done. A good Seebeck calorimeter or a microcalorimeter can do it easily. I think we need a great deal more information on this calorimetry to evaluate this. It is much easier to evaluate higher power levels. Anything ranging from 10 to 100 W is easy to measure. Anything above 1 kW is impossible to miss. - Jed
