did not rossi already answer that question, by saying that the conductor inside were not so trivial... doped conductor he says...
we should be careful not to take unfounded assumption, then deduce false things from that... maybe is it more simple to start from the instruments and guess how it is made, than trying to guess how it is made to prove the instruments are wrong. anyway the main question is how with less power you can obtain something that bright more... that is qualitative, but less sensible to artifacts. 2014-10-13 8:30 GMT+02:00 Eric Walker <[email protected]>: > On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Robert Lynn < > [email protected]> wrote: > > ... eg if Ø20mm outer wall is at 1200°C (approx max given revised COP of >> around 2 from temp reading that is obviously in error due to non-melting of >> inconel, though could be significantly lower) >> > > I've taken a second look at the TIP report, and it's not clear where the > authors learned that the cables are Inconel. It is possible this was > speculation on their part when they saw the cables, and somehow this guess > was not reexamined and was reported as a fact. It seems there are certain > alloys that can sustain temperatures of up to 3000+ centigrade [1]. It > might be worthwhile to follow up with the authors on this point. > > Eric > > > [1] http://www.ultramet.com/refractory_metal_coatings.html > > >
