Ekstrom's critique made me think about the output side more. I've been making a 
mistake about emissivity. 
P = s*e*T^4 (s=Boltzmann's constant, e = emissivity, T=temp in deg K).
At a measured temperature, if the actual emissivity is lower than the value 
used to calculate output power, then the actual output power will indeed be 
less than the calculated value.

Bottom line is that if the emissivity is actually 3 times lower than thought, 
then what was thought to be a COP=3 changes to a COP=1.

It wasn't Motl that had it backwards - it was I. Oh and also the guy who got 
deleted from Motl's blog (apologies but I don't remember who that was). And I 
remember Jed agreeing with me, so there's at least 3 of us who had it wrong.

Andrew


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jed Rothwell 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 11:20 AM
  Subject: [Vo]:Ekstrom critique of Levi et al.


  "Comments on the report 'Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a 
reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder' by Giuseppe Levi et 
al."


  Peter Ekström, Department of Physics, Lund University

  http://nuclearphysics.nuclear.lu.se/lpe/files/62739576.pdf


  This document stands as its own rebuttal.


  - ed

Reply via email to