I got it right first, and today, briefly, I believed Ekstrom. Then I returned to sanity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, May 27, 2013 2:12 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ekstrom critique of Levi et al.
For people not following the discussion, Ekström misunderstood the "e" (emissivity) ratio. He wrote: "The emissivity for stainless steel could have any value from 0.8 to 0.075 [2]. The lower value would obviously yield a much lower net power, in fact it could easily make COP=1." He has this backwards. The lower value would yield a much higher temperature, meaning higher power. The most conservative setting is 1. Not only did Ekström get this wrong, so did Cude (it goes without saying), some blogger named Motl, and Andrew. Andrew realized his mistake. Ekström, Cude and Motl will never admit they were wrong. - Jed
