Eugen Leitl <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Mizuno observed several days of heat after death at about 100 W. > Presumably > > the reaction was that big because he used a 100 g cathode. That is about > > 100 to 1000 times bigger than most cathodes today. > > What I meant by a giant effect is melting down of experimental setups, > as purportedly happened several times. > As far as I know, only one cathode melted, or vaporized. That was reported by Fleischmann and Pons. Several other explosions and out of control reactions have been reported: http://lenr-canr.org/?page_id=187#PhotosAccidents > 100 W in a small volume is a giant effect. Assuming you check for > hydrogen loading of metal matrix and it's under inert gas blanket > there's no chemical reaction that can produce such amounts of heat. > That is incorrect. A burning match the size of a cathode can produce 100 W. That is high power density. The issue is not power density, it is energy density. A match the size of a cathode burning at 100 W quickly runs out of fuel, within a minute. A cold fusion cathode producing 100 W may continue for hours, days, or weeks. The overall amount of energy produced has exceeded the limits of chemistry by a factor of 1,000 to 10,000 in some cases. The upper limit is not known. See chapter 1, p. 12: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf High power density by itself does not prove anything. The power density of impure radium is low but the heat continues for thousands of years so clearly it exceeds the limits of chemistry. This was observed by Mme. Curie and others in the late 19th century. They knew at once that this was not chemical effect. The only advantage to high power density from experimental point of view is that you can be sure it is real. There is no possibility of calorimetric error. Actually, with a good calorimeter you can always be sure of excess power above 1 W. In 1780 Lavoisier constructed a calorimeter that could measure this power level with confidence. By the 1840s J. P. Joule was making isoperibolic calorimeters sensitive enough to measure nearly any cold fusion result. The calorimeter used by Fleischmann was essentially the same as Joule's, except that Fleischmann used thermocouples instead of mercury thermometers. Fleischmann himself pointed this out. Cude and others have claimed that the calorimetry is questionable. This is nonsense. > Any investigator measuring anything like that would be instantly > convinced. I certainly would be. > If it continues for hours or days at any power level easily measured you would be crazy not to be convinced. It is surprising how many professional scientists do not understand the fact that a chemical reaction cannot produce megajoules per gram of fuel. - Jed
