Erratum: "luminosity" should read "photon flux"
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:16 AM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > So to continue this line of arithmetic, we have a factor of 10 gain to > explain. First of all let's get rid of the Stefan Boltzmann amplification > of error by taking the fourth root of 10: > > 10^(1/4) > = 1.7782794 > > That means if we're looking for error as the source of the gain, we have > to plausibly argue an error of 78% in the portion of the IR camera's > calibration for Wein's displacement proportionality. Note, it is a > proportionality -- a straight linear proportionality -- because we have > removed the Stefan Boltzmann fourth power from the equation. > > Wein's displacement is an approximation of the Plank curve most accurate > at higher frequencies -- where photons have higher energy. So if we're > looking for errors in power measurement, we need to be most concerned about > frequencies below the IR. The problem for those of us who want to find > error in the measure is that the peak is in the camera's physical sensor > bandwidth where we aren't extrapolating -- and the most likely source of > error is in an area of the spectrum that not only has lower luminosity but > lower energy per photon. > > Again, I've never seen one of these emotionally committed "skeptics" do so > much as the simple arithmetic to come up with the factor of 10 figure for > the November test let alone the "78%" that results from discounting Stefan > Boltzmann's sensitivity to error, let alone proceed from there to do the > arithmetic to estimate what appears to be an insignificant residual error > in the sensor's calibration software. > > That's why I laugh these people off. There's no point blather with people > who refuse to do arithmetic regarding the strongest argument of their > opponents. > > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:39 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I found the major error: >> >> The peak wavelength is in the infrared -- as it is with the sun -- and I >> intuitively thought that the fact that much of the surface was bright red >> thru yellow meant my picking dull red (700nm) was "conservative". This >> then fed via Wien's law proportionately into the fourth power of Stefan >> Boltzmann's law to produce the 2MW. >> >> This arose because I simply neglected to go to the next page after page 2 >> -- where Figure 3 shows the temperature as 793C or 1066K. >> >> Recalculating from the substitution for Th: >> >> q=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-Tc^4) >> q=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(1291304958736-Tc^4) ; subst(1066, Th) >> q=3084.152246988637*pi ; subst(289, Tc) >> q=9689W >> >> >> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:58 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I can't resist: >>> >>> What power level is required to get that device to barely enter the >>> visible wavelengths (700nm), again, assuming no losses other than black >>> body? >>> >>> again using http://www.ajdesigner.com/phpwien/wien_equation_t.php at >>> 700nm: >>> >>> blackbody temperature (T) = 4139.6692857143 kelvin >>> >>> q=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-Tc^4) >>> q=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(2.9367203218388994*10^14-Tc^4) ; >>> subst(4139.6692857143, Th) >>> q=705199.0585641474*pi >>> q=2.2154481E6W >>> >>> Yeah, Rossi had a really high frequency power supply pumping even >>> 1/10th of that into the E-Cat HT. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:40 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> One final erratum (hopefully): In the November run when the device >>>> overheated to visible wavelengths, the input power was 1kW (p2), not 360W. >>>> Therefore: >>>> >>>> 360=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-6975757441) >>>> 1000=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-6975757441) ; subst(1000, 360) >>>> >>>> Th=(59549289748750/pi+997533314063)^(1/4)/143^(1/4) ; solve(Th) >>>> Th=611.17587 Kelvin >>>> Th=338.026 Celsius >>>> >>>> using: http://www.ajdesigner.com/phpwien/wien_equation.php >>>> >>>> peak emission wavelength (λmax) = 4.741300568689E-6 meter >>>> >>>> Still deep into the infrared. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:59 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Erratum: I also left out the substitution step for room temperature: >>>>> >>>>> 360=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-6975757441) ; subst(289) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:53 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Erratum: Strike the "So, what..." >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:53 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> q=eps*s*(Th^4-Tc^4)*A >>>>>>> q=eps*(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r)*s*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r, >>>>>>> A) >>>>>>> q=5.6703*10^-8*eps*(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r)*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; >>>>>>> subst(5.6703e-8, s) >>>>>>> q=5.6703*10^-8*eps*(0.11*l*pi+0.00605*pi)*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(.055, >>>>>>> r) >>>>>>> q=2.40137205*10^-9*eps*pi*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(.33, l) >>>>>>> q=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(1, eps) >>>>>>> 360=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(360, q) >>>>>>> Th=(21437744309550/pi+997533314063)^(1/4)/143^(1/4) ; solve(Th) >>>>>>> Th=483.6006 Kelvin >>>>>>> Th=210.451 Celsius >>>>>>> >>>>>>> using: http://www.ajdesigner.com/phpwien/wien_equation.php >>>>>>> >>>>>>> peak emission wavelength (λmax) = 5.9920696955297E-6 meter >>>>>>> >>>>>>> or 6 micrometers >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is with no losses other than black body radiation (ie: no >>>>>>> convective losses). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is way into the infrared. The excursions into the visible >>>>>>> wavelength occurred with 360W. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, what >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected] >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There is value in pursuing reductio ad absurda when they engage >>>>>>>>> one of the strongest arguments that the demonstration is valid: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> That the power input could not conceivably have produced the >>>>>>>>> radiation wavelengths observed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You have mentioned that several times. Can you please post a more >>>>>>>> detailed discussion of that, with equations and examples? That would be >>>>>>>> helpful. Please post this in a new thread so I can find it easily. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You might also address the fact that the first device melted. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Jed >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
