Thanks for the response. While I can use the becquerel and get the intended result, this is counter to the BIPM's definition<http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter2/2-2/table3.html> :
"The hertz is used only for periodic phenomena, and the becquerel is used only for stochastic processes in activity referred to a radionuclide." Indeed, this comment from the BIPM, itself, is incorrect as it should be: "The hertz is used only for cyclic phenomena, and the becquerel is used only for stochastic processes in activity referred to a radionuclide." There is no unit for strictly periodic phenomena which might be described as "regularly occurring events/sec". On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 6:19 AM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, according to the Calchemy/Unicalc guys, its not a bug, its a feature: > > The handling of 2pi depends on the version of Calchemy – it has changed > over the years. > > In the current code, a hert or cyde is defined as “2pi radians” (and > radians are dimensionless), which is actually the more “correct” of the > interpretations. > > So technically, the answer you have is actually right – you might just > misunderstand the question. > > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:31 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > >> BTW: To put this bug in perspective, I've been using the calchemy >> "Unicalc" very frequently ever since 1996 without any errors cropping up >> until this, and this one appears to be related not to units but to a >> peculiar case in dimensional analysis. >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:05 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> My units calculator inserted an erroneous 2pi constant into the >>> conversion. >>> >>> That's the first time its betrayed me. I'll report it to the authors. >>> Here's a link to the web version: >>> >>> http://www.testardi.com/rich/calchemy2/ >>> >>> So, yes, 13mm looks like the figure. Are there electrodes with any >>> dimensions in the range of 1.3cm? >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Arnaud Kodeck >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> James,**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> I’ve a problem with my HP calculator emulator which gives me 13.093 mm* >>>> *** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> d= v * t = v / f ( with v=1/f)**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> 5630/430E3 = 13.093E-3 m => 13.093 mm**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> Arnaud**** >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> *From:* James Bowery [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> *Sent:* jeudi 22 novembre 2012 22:21 >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:25 experiments completed with borax and nickels**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> It's hard to know where to begin here but let me just say this that >>>> given the speed of sound in >>>> nickel<http://www.olympus-ims.com/en/ndt-tutorials/thickness-gage/appendices-velocities/> >>>> :**** >>>> >>>> >>>> 5630m/s >>>> >>>> and 430kHz: >>>> >>>> 5630m/s;430kHz?mm >>>> >>>> ([5630 * meter] / second) * (430 * [kilo*hertz])^-1 ? milli*meter >>>> = 2.0838194 mm >>>> >>>> In other words, a 2mm electrode should exhibit resonance at ~430kHz.*** >>>> * >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> >>>> wrote:**** >>>> >>>> On the contrary James, at least two of us did look closely at this >>>> possibility [electrode acoustics]. **** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> My associate went to trouble to find and download a mpeg sound file of >>>> a bicycle bell of the same general size as Davey’s, and plugged it into a >>>> program for this kind of analysis – in fact it is dedicated bell analysis >>>> software that has proved very accurate for electrodes in the past. The >>>> natural acoustic of this hemisphere are nowhere close.**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> The main freq is 4,445.5 Hz, with some sub harmonics, the lowest being >>>> around 521/545 Hz, but those are so faint as to be discarded. Higher >>>> harmonics are barely above noise.**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> Thus, since the acoustics of the electrodes were off by two orders of >>>> magnitude over the signature sound, we did not think that electrode >>>> acoustics were in any way relevant as an alternative explanation, or >>>> otherwise worth pursuing.**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> Jones**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> *From:* James Bowery **** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> As I previously >>>> advised<http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg73144.html> >>>> :**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> "Look at the acoustics of the electrodes."**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> Since this advice seemed to make no impact on the discourse here at >>>> vortex-l, let me expand:**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> Acoustic resonance in the metallic electrodes does have a reasonable >>>> chance of bearing directly on the creation of the "nuclear active >>>> environment" hypothesized to exist. I don't think I need to expland on >>>> list the possibilities here.**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> Moreover, if one looks at the speed of sound in metals, the "430kHz >>>> LENR signature" regime corresponds to the thickness of the cathodes >>>> frequently reported as exhibiting the phenomena.**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> Need I say more?**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>> >>> >> >
