speculation on the inconel, the photography are good for question, but theres too many uncertainties...
maybe the resistor is not at all inconel, and the inconel is only used for connecting wires, or they are not even the classic inconel but some variant... for the color, may main hypotheis is that the camera is over exposed. note also that modern camera have a spectrum which cover IR and UV unless a good filter is used. note also that if you follow Ed storms theory, UV or EUV may be emitted by hydrotons, or X-rays... in coherent bursts... saying the test is incoherent is the same behavior of people who debunked F&P on hot fusion theory, or like lewis on wrong assumption about their calorimeter , or like hansen on wrong assumption on current density, or the cowboys who debunked birds because no cows can fly. 2014-10-20 18:58 GMT+02:00 Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>: > Furthermore… > > If the grade of Inconel was 625 or 617 - either or which contains about ¼ > of the alloy as chromium, then the ppm “bleed” from these wires into an > alumina coating or paste could provide redish phosphorescent color. It > requires very little chrome for a ruby glow. > > We should know the grade of Inconel – in any reasonable scientific report. > That we do not is regrettable. > > ERGO – the “color temperature” issue is probably less of a valid concern > than the many other problems with this fiasco. > > Can’t resist this: As Mick sez about Ruby: "Who could hang a name on you? > when you change on every new day" Say, isn’t Rossi also a paler shade of > red? > > From: H Veeder > > Ø Other examples of light emitting bodies which* do not* follow the incand > escent temperature rule are phosphorescent and fluorescent bodies. > > Yup. And as far back as 1886 it was noticed that alumina, in one form, was > phosphorescent. > A paper by Crookes (the one of radiometer fame): > > "On the Crimson Line of Phosphorescent Alumina." 1886. > > Today with the benefit of 130 years we realize that the alumina tested > back then had slight chromium content – think ruby - and today the > message is that an aluminum paste– such as applied to Inconel wires > embedded in a alumina tube housing – containing trace chromium - can > provide overwhelming phosphorescent red coloration… and thus the tube is > not in keeping with an incandescent temperature determination. > > In short –this Levi report is miles away from being a scientific paper. The > details of fabrication of the tube are hidden, and the reddish glow does > not necessarily mean lower temperature if there is ruby phosphorescence > in a paste or coating. >
