Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 11:41:40 -0800
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Violante and others are trying the engineering approach
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
>Another problem with this is that in order to bring the cathode surface to a
>place where the IR camera can detect heat, you pretty much have to clobber the
>experiment. >Plus you make it impossible to do ordinary calorimetry.
I would say that one “wind tunnel” type series experiments I
did was nothing more than 2 dozen small co-deposited wires with various
additives. Their test tubes were all placed in the
same water bath (in series for the same current, and zenors across the
electrodes in glass tubes for
the same net voltage across each so the power inside each were roughly the
same).
I then just compared them. I did
not start with absolute measures, just rough relative measures from the
mean. It allowed for rapid screening of
various additives. You don’t have to
have a micrometer to see which piece of spaghetti is the longest – just line
them up.
Dennis Cravens Yes very hard to do IR temp sensing in a wet cell electrolytic
system.Seems much easier in a dry gas system, which is a more useful result in
any case....
If your trying to measure heat generated in a substance....(Which in fact is
what your trying to measure) it strikes me that Calorimetry is probably the
hardest way to do it....
To stay in theme for this series of posts I'll take some liberties and
rephrase....
"A wind tunnel is useless unless you can stick the whole plane in
there..."The wright brothers tiny wind tunnel allowed them to measure the
parameters necessary to build a plane.
I'm trying to understand the best way to build a LENR wind tunnel, and while
eventually the goal is to have a macro system
that generates useful energy. The wind tunnel goal is to take data.... the
value of the wind tunnel is in the data that allows the end result ie the
flying plane....
If you agree that the goal is to find a repeatable reliable result then
quickly directly sensing the production of heat in the material under test is
much more useful than perfect calorimetry that takes hours to get a result....
The obsession with calorimetry seems to be more a byproduct of the early
history of this field than the best way to
explore process and material options?
I realize that I've shown up here as a newbe and immediately gored the sacred
cows and questioned the answers of some of the most respected
longest contributing members on this list. I do so with great respect for your
opinions and only want to explore why and how not insult or denigrate.So if
your at all put off by my responses, please accept my apology.
Paul
