Harry, I can only say that my program has not calculated any significant excess power during all the trials that I attempted. My current belief is that the amount of infrared radiation compared to heat energy that escapes through the surface varies with time. Unfortunately, IR from the wires is not all captured by the glass envelop so a portion does not leave a heat trace behind. On occasions a deposit of material has been discovered on the Celani wire that likely changes the IR emissivity of that particular wire with time.
If less IR is released, then more direct conducted heat through the hydrogen is measured since the sum of these is known. I consider this behavior as a drift in the calibration which then appears to indicate more or in some cases less excess heat. In every program run that immediately follows an accurate calibration, I find very good correlation between the input power calculated by my curve fit and the actual known value. Now, if excess power were generated, it would likely depend upon temperature of the cell and its contents. This additional power pulse should impact the behavior of the temperature versus time curve that my program produces. More excess power should increase the slope of the curve when it happens while any absorption should do the reverse. So far, I have not seen clear evidence of this effect. Additional evidence that only a small amount of excess power is generated is demonstrated by the excellent quadratic curve fit that I obtain with a test run that uses well defined power steps. This very close curve fit has so far always been observed. My belief is that if much excess power were generated, it would certainly show up at the elevated power inputs more than at the lower power steps. If this actually were to occur the curve fit would be poor. I have simulated an escaping radiation system that appears to behave in a like manner. The forth order power radiation from the wire was made to vary in my simulation. A significant portion of this was captured within the simulation along with all of the conduction equivalent heat energy. At the outer glass equivalent test point, I noticed that it was easy to get an excellent quadratic curve fit with just a little distortion caused by the escaping forth order radiation effects. I was amazed that I could choose values for the radiation escape process that resulted in a curve fit which came close to the R^2 values that I typically observe. Much of this could be coincidence, but at least it appeared to come close to what I see. And, of course, as I adjusted the effective radiation, the calibration appeared to drift similar to what I think might be happening in the real testing. So Harry, my program seems to be capable of weeding out the behavior of the Celani replication device in real time provided the calibration does not drift too quickly. But you should also consider that it might not capture the excess power generation if it comes into existence in some very slow manner. Of course, the program would display any slowly rising excess power after the transient step response has settled down. This is very much like shooting at a moving target. It is apparent that a better method of capturing and measuring the excess power is required if we are to have confidence in our determination. The MFMP guys are testing a much improved calorimeter that everyone hopes will achieve that goal. This does not appear to be such an easy task, but they are working hard toward that end. After the calorimeter is completed and calibrated, I hope that we can gain confidence in any conclusions that are made. For now, there is a lot of speculation that needs to be proven one way or the other. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Sat, Feb 2, 2013 3:57 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP Dave, Have you identifided the difference (or error) in MFMP team's program that leads them to find excess power? Harry On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 12:54 AM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote: > The guys at MFMP are still experimenting on the Celani device. They have a > stainless steel version that is just now beginning to be tested and I have > my fingers crossed. A new calorimeter is also being perfected and it will > be capable of detecting excess power in a sensitive manner if any appears. > > My program suggests that the results are null at this time, but others may > not share that opinion. > > The MFMP guys are doing a wonderful job and we all should be appreciative of > their efforts, and I am confident that they will continue to perform a > great service for us. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Fri, Feb 1, 2013 10:56 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Simulation of Celani Replication by MFMP > > I'm not sure the MFMP have shown more than a null result -- I doubt it can > be taken as a negative result. Celani's P_xs was on the order of many > watts, if I remember correctly. It seems like he would have had to have > some pretty egregious instrument artifact to get those graphs that have been > circulating. Also possible is that MFMP have not succeeded in triggering > whatever Celani has been seeing. > > This is not to say that Celani has necessarily been seeing anything -- he > might or he might not be. > > Eric >
